Irishman, will you please confirm when you forward a significant post like this one from HK so we know that it’s done and won’t have to wonder if anybody sent it. I know you’re use to doing it without notifying us but to avoid concern or duplication going forward I feel it would help. Thank you for your help and consideration.
HK, amazing work. This just makes me more angry that Amarin and it’s trial team did not have a good expert lined up to present the limitations of what teaching could be validly be drawn from the studies relied on by generics. My greatest fear is that the CTA will accept the notion that this should be viewed as a battle of the experts that AMRN lost.
But this may help Singer in the effort to show that the trial court’s conclusions about obviousness are not supported by the evidence. I think this is the best shot at reversal: showing weaknesses and flaws in the interpretation of prior art so that the CTA can conclude that the generics did not show by clear and convincing evidence that the invention is obvious.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
