HD, as I have stated previously, I have no problem with anyone who disagrees with my position, or my actions. I understand with the Appeal in limbo, my actions might be considered controversial. I even acknowledge that the Judicial Council may very well agree with you and reject the Complaint, nothing to see here.
But if they do, it will be due to the politics of protecting one of their own, and possibly protecting Judge Du as someone they are grooming for a higher position. (Vomit). It will not be due to the merits, because on the merits, Judge Du directly violated Canon 3A(6), and derivatively violated Canon 2A.
You conclude that my Complaint is "pure bullshit", and "does not have any merit." It is your conclusions themselves that are "pure bullshit" and do "not have any merit."
By voicing your conclusions the way you did, you are directly calling into question my personal integrity and professional judgment, because only lawyers without integrity and lacking in professional judgment would file bullshit unmeritorious complaints, especially against a judge.
By reaching your unmeritorious conclusions, you are demonstrating an abject failure to understand Canon 3A(6), an abject failure to understand the Comment to Canon 3A(6), an abject failure to understand the heightened scrutiny to which a judge's comments are subjected, and an abject failure to understand the facts.
When, thanks to the heroic lizzy, I saw Judge Du's quote, the first thing that popped into my mind was, "Fish oil? She thinks it's fish oil? It's just fish oil to her?" If that's her view, then it is no surprise that she ruled against Amarin, because mere fish oil is not patent worthy.
Yet when looking at the evidence, specifically the exhibits attached to my Complaint, no reasonable person who presided over that trial could possibly conclude that she was tutored on "the benefits of fish oil." And if after being presented with that evidence, Vascepa is just fish oil to her, then her impartiality needs to be called into question.
You disagree. But many, many more people familiar with the facts agree with me. To prove a Canon 3A(6) violation I need only establish that the comment could denigrate the public's perception of Judge Du's impartiality, even if there are those such as yourself who do not share that view.
You have zero, and I do mean zero basis to so arrogantly and smugly conclude that the Complaint is bullshit and does not have any merit. I have just explained to you why the Complaint is not bullshit and does have merit, even if it does not ultimately succeed, and even if you stubbornly continue with your refusal to acknowledge the applicable legal standard as applied to Judge Du's position and comment.
This is about accountability and transparency, something severely lacking recently when it comes to Amarin. Judges are subject to heightened scrutiny when commenting publicly.
For the reasons stated above and in my Complaint, Judge Du's reckless glib comment violates Canon 3A(6). A process exists for holding judges accountable for such transgressions. There are not a lot of ways in which a judge can be held accountable. I took the opportunity to do so here, and would do so again.
You might disagree, but just because you personally disagree, does not mean that my Complaint is bullshit or does not have any merit. If you continue to pursue that line of thought, you will continue to look foolish, putting the entirety of your credibility into doubt. Also, let me know the next time you take real action to help Amarin shareholders beyond simply commenting on a message board.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
