Replies to post #324669 on Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Number sleven]

Marjac, Thanks. Not much time between no and Feb 23. The narrow timeframe really has my interest. During the time the court wants to discuss GSK had a valid OB patent and Teva was still marketing as if they didn't. Not sure what the court is trying to accomplish.
Sleven,

[HDGabor]

You are a lawyer, I am not, so you should know everything better than me ...

Usually there is briefing, but due to this being a narrow issue, maybe it has already been briefed.

Maybe?

The February hearing will focus only on the period from Jan. 8, 2008, when the Glaxo patent was reissued, through April 30, 2011, when the Food and Drug Administration ordered Teva to amend its label. All other issues are “sufficiently briefed,” the court order said.

"More likely" it has already been briefed.

As to the granting of a 3 judge re-hearing instead of a full court en banc, there can be any number of reasons, and it would be speculative surmise exactly why this was their decision.

More likely the "any number of reasons" and "speculative" could be limited to procedural reason(s) like not enough judges for en banc (5 were disqualified) ... however more likely the reason is one and only: the original panel decided to rehear it, did not give a relief.

We do have a Patton, but he is waging war on the Rule 60 front at the moment.

Don Quixote de la Mancha? Together with released Sancho Panza?