Momoney, I do not think the panel will matter. They will rule the weighing was wrong. I look at it like this. Who out there, lawyers on this board or lawyers who were following the case for firms like Jeffries thought AMRN would lose? None that I am aware of. Now, what is the take of attorney's on this board or others we have heard from in the investment community as well as professors of law. All point to the mistake(problem) with the way secondary considerations were handled. Throw in Kurabayashi on unexpected benefit as a factual mistake that all agree is in the record for the judges to review and I don't see how you get them to say the ruling stands.
I mean if it stands, can someone explain to me how objective indicia are to be evaluated? If as Singer said and a company like AMRN brought 2 Objective Indicia as proof of non-obviousness and not more because they don't want to hurt their case, does the defense get to bring up the lack of proof for other criteria? Do we get to evaluate each one, like on a scale...say 1 to 10 where one is weak and 10 is strong? From a practical point of view, this would invite a wide open divergence in outcomes in patent law where the Federal Circuit was created to stop that.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
