Replies to post #276141 on Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Meowza]

More squirming? Anyway, back to your precious dog metaphor--replace the following:

"Your Akita Inu" with "Amarin's Vascepa"
"Mutt" with "Fish Oil"
"Puppy Eyes" with "Measurable and Substantial Benefit in a Large Patient Population and the Willingness of Companies to Risk It All to Deliver Same"
"Dog Breeder" with "Federal Judge"
and finally
"Sales Fraud" with (???)

...and you can begin to see the magnitude of Judge Du's errors.

[marjac]

All together you do not have any proof that her comment ("the benefits of fish oil") was negative, other than your (laymen) view/thinking about "fish oil".

By Jove HD, I think you've got it! You nailed it. You exactly nailed it. The only thing needed to sustain a Canon 3A(6) violation is that her remark gives rise to the "laymen" view questioning her impartiality. It is not necessary to prove her comment was negative or what she actually intended. Just laymen perception.

So now (perhaps unwittingly) you have admitted that Judge Du violated Canon 3A(6). I only wish I had used the term "laymen" in my filing, given that the term so perfectly encapsulates her violation of Canon 3A(6), as well as Canon 2A.

I know this is quite difficult for you to acknowledge, given your admiration of Judge Du, and the great wisdom you feel she exemplified in her decision. But you have finally come around. There may be hope for you yet. Be well this Memorial Day, my friend!