Possibly, depending upon whether the shareholder meets the required elements. It is very possible that in most cases the Intervention would fail on the "adequate representation" prong, but here, Amarin has clearly chosen not to go the Rule 60 route.
The one interesting point of law in Defendants' response, comes from the Ericsson case where the Federal Circuit held that because Intervention is a procedural issue, as compared to a substantive patent issue, it is governed by the Circuit law of the District Court presiding over the original case.
So our Nevada case is governed by 9th Circuit law, while any Intervention in the current Delaware infringement case, would be governed by 3rd Circuit law. Intervention analysis is not patent specific.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
