Replies to post #317937 on Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[marjac]

Bouf, those are all very good questions.

As to the question of standing, the answer is a Motion to Intervene pursuant to Rule 24, which allows a Third-Party to intervene in an action where the third-party has an "interest" in the action, and that interest is not being adequately being protected.

EPADI II's interest is set forth in the Amicus Brief, but includes their rights as shareholders, and the public interest in terms of the integrity of the court system, as well as the promotion of Vascepa in the USA. Our Rule 24 position is similar to that taken by public interest organizations intervening in environmental cases. The Rule 60 Motion will be accompanied by a Rule 24 Motion.

As to the question of why Amarin has not filed such a motion, I have some ideas, but I do not know the precise answer. But Amarin's non-filing dovetails nicely with the Rule 24 motion, as it is prime proof of the "interest not adequately being protected" prong of the Rule 24 Motion.