InvestorsHub Logo

anfla

06/30/20 9:12 PM

#283869 RE: IgnoranceIsBliss #283868

Only a single claim in a single patent needs to survive

rafunrafun

06/30/20 9:53 PM

#283874 RE: IgnoranceIsBliss #283868

HDG brought that up... but I stand corrected if I misunderstood.

HinduKush

07/01/20 10:11 AM

#283919 RE: IgnoranceIsBliss #283868

TTE
I believe like you that this should have been the primary argument from the gitgo. If one delves into all the prior and present art as a POSA, I believe we find that for the TG> 500 mg/dl population and the TG >200 mg/dl population in general, there is clear unequivocal evidence that EPA and not DHA 1) Lowers TG 2) Does so without raising LDL and actually lowers LDL 3) Lowers ApoB. The clearest evidence for this was first published in the MARINE trial. What MARINE and later ANCHOR did was also to show that the 4G dose was critical in obtaining all 3 effects and NOT the 2 g dose. A further key advantage is that perhpas only Kurabayashi can be served up by the generics in counterpoint, but we all know that Kurabayashi was a flawed statistical analysis wherein an intergroup comparison of EPA vs. DHA was NOT performed and showed if perfomed NS difference. That much was in the trial, and added to further when Du cut copied pasted the table, without the p values showing the exact analysis chosen, which added to her scientific transgressions exposing her incomptetence in assessment. All of this IS in the trial and brief documentation, so it is clearly admissible. Finally there were publications and Amarin in house data documenting the unique TG/LDL/ApopB lowering by EPA in the 2006-2008 era, so this goes to written desription presence and finally R-IT offers the nexus to infringement claims on indication and R-IT clearly shows the TG/LDL/ApoB lowering by EPA in a 8000+ patient placebo controlled trial. Finally the JELIS investigators pulished their lipid findings after MARINE came out and well after the preliminary trial (Yokoyama Lancet 2007).
We should now delve into the evidential trial papers and briefs admitted by Amrn in this regard to see if this ApoB data can be used as a "clear factual error" entry (ie Kurabayshi Du mistake) to enable discussion of the ApoB relevance to the patents integrity.
Welcome all thoughts legal, medical or otherwise...
HK
https://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2020/7/1/uvpvmr-it_apob.png
https://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2020/7/1/zjfsscomplete_lipids_reduce-it_suppplementary_index_NEJM_2019.png