Great point, Bouf. As you know, one of the great challenges is weaving through all of these complex facts and legal elements, to distill it down to a "three sentence elevator speech version.
1) Defendants intentionally cropped Kurbayashi Table 3 in their Proposed Findings of Fact, to disingenuously bolster the misleading testimony from their expert, Dr. Heinecke, that is completely the opposite of the stated Kurabayashi statistical analysis.
2) The Court’s decision is both tainted and erroneous, because the Court relied upon the cropped Table, which omitted material information from the Court, and was pasted directly into the Court's Opinion.
3) Because of Defendants’ egregious misconduct, the Court erroneously concluded that in “light of the statistically-significant differential effects reported between the EPA and control groups, a POSA would have attributed the reduction in Apo B to EPA.”
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
