Alright Zip I admit that you should be on the 3 judge panel. No question that those questions would be ideal to give Amarin the correct verdict - overturn.
Unfortunately I am not as confident in the judges that those questions will be asked. They will probably go off on some tangent and poof the 15 min will be gone.
1) Do we want to incentivize developing overlooked breakthroughs? 2) If generics think so lightly of pharma investigation, testing, and marketing, why don't they attempt their own?
Zip-you're correct the 1st questions will be whether a prima facie of obviousness is found. But the "wording" of the questions will be different. example: to generics: obviousness
1. How does Mori have relevance to show obviousness of vascepa, since the pop in Mori was under 500 trigs, while vascepa patents pop is over 500 trig.
2. Isn't it true that all medicines treating pop over 500 trigs, at the time of vascepa patents was known to raise ldl?
sec. consideration:
3. Is there any case law to support negating one sec. conc. against the other?
4. Hasn't the court neglected to follow the graham factors?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
