marj-I think he meant if amrn "loses" the underlying case, not that if amrn is granted a preliminary injunction it loses.
In any event you answered his ultimate question, that if AMRN wins the pre-injunction and the "loses" the case , amrn IS responsible for Hikma's damages.
Marjac... amarin will be well advised to let some weeks run of downward scripts to show that the extent of switching to gv goes way beyond the high trig prescriptions lost to gv in the Du trial - such will demonstrate significant financial loss projections to Amarin and justify an injunction Conversely as to a bond if injunction granted Hikma can only ever assert a loss equating to in effect profit on 10 percent of V sales - the only market they can sell into -without infringing - such would be small beer compared with the huge benefit of an injunction which could run for years until the trial - the injunctive proceedings can rely on the present state of the law- the Gsk v Teva case is current law Amarin needs play this very cleverly -many legal ways to skin cats - and in Fish and singer they have very capable strategist lawyers But I hope you press on with the proceedings in Nevada also - it will raise the whole profile of the injustice caused in Du court - and it may succeed - when financial assistance is required I and many many others will support this action - it may yet be the case that Amarin will themselves pursue this route ... what’s to be lost that isn’t already lost ?? Alm
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
