InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

gozips

01/02/21 6:45 PM

#317866 RE: Bouf #317853

Bouf, with all due respect, I do get the gist of sentiment...yet Du is a dumb and/or corrupt bunny. Her inability to correctly evaluate the statistical insignificance of Mori, plus her utter disregard of the patent office examination of Kurabayashi leads me to believe she is either dumb, corrupt or both. Political sentiment has no place in evaluating scientific research. Seventy pages of bullshit is seventy pages of bullshit.
Add to this the Rule 36 throw down in the Appeal, and I do wonder about the integrity of the court system.
icon url

Meowza

01/02/21 7:44 PM

#317878 RE: Bouf #317853

Our federal judges have very good staff and this one is not a dumb bunny

The problem is the HW law and how it has been interpreted

very good

how it has been interpreted


it is very hard to make a public health argument against generics generally

an open bottle of GV makes a good argument against generics. And yes our judges were inept and awful, do you have any legal training?
icon url

Biobillionair

01/02/21 8:26 PM

#317884 RE: Bouf #317853

Bouf-

I have to disagree this was a fraud on the court.



You practice law in England. In US:

More Than Fraud: Proving Fraud on the Court Stephen Van Doran, J.D. Candidate 2019
Cite as: More Than Fraud: Proving Fraud on the Court, 10 ST. JOHN’S BANKR. RESEARCH LIBR. NO. 24 (2018).
Introduction
In all adversarial proceedings, litigants have a duty of full disclosure and honesty with the court.1 Typically, where a party obtains a judgment through fraudulent conduct, the only way to overturn that judgment is through a motion to vacate pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3).2
A final judgment can also be overturned by a motion, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d)(3), as incorporated into the Bankruptcy Rules by Rule 9024, to vacate a
where “the integrity of the judicial process ha[s] been fraudulently subverted” and does not include fraudulent conduct that only affects a party to the action.3 Fraud on the court is typically limited to the most egregious conduct that implicates an officer of the court.4 Courts must further



Hikma attorneys perpetrated fraud on the court. https://www.stjohns.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/18_vandoren_memo_24.pdf

Footnote 4:
“or the fabrication of evidence by a party in which an attorney is implicated”

Justice in Nevada with rule 60. Please carefully reread the evidence Bouf...

BB