Replies to post #337892 on Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Tal10]

So the dumb bitch took the easy way out.

[gozips]

Sorry, team LB/BB/HK/Marjac. Corrupt power is nigh impossible to beat, especially in their own sandbox. Thanks for an honest effort.

[scxj]

LB,
Thanks for posting and all of us appreciate the effort. If nothing else comes from it, at least the cropped documents and all the other evidence is available for the SCOTUS judge's to view..
Thanks again.

[Rob777]

Marjac and the whole team -Thank you so much for all your work and the wonderful motions. Truth is important and this will help in the long run. All of you should be very proud.

[hayward]

I told you the only way judge DU would look at the case is if she was forced to

Michael

[Meowza]

I have a few thoughts. All of them my own opinion, as a layman, commenting on the appearance of public documents.

Briefly lay scanning her order I noticed a few tidbits that were, well, different. First, she seems to dismiss:

Not until after publication of the Judgment, did anyone learn that this Court mistakenly

when she questions:

it offers little explanation why it never sought to intervene before entry of judgment

Duh?

And it's obnoxious she has more regard for Hikma's litigation than Amarin's patented innovation:

vacating its judgment would substantially prejudice Defendants, as it would nullify the years of work they put into ultimately prevailing in this case

Finally, speaking as a layman going by Du's wordage, she seems to suggest that "parallel" and "sequential" meanings in law are the opposite of how every other field uses those basic English terms:

privity can exist between corporations and their shareholders, see Headwaters Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 399 F.3d 1047, 1053 (9th Cir. 2005), that general principle does not apply here, where EPADI is effectively seeking a judicial determination that Amarin’s patents-in-suit are valid. Instead, the more applicable principle is that “parallel legal interests alone, identical or otherwise, are not sufficient to establish privity[.]”

...if anyone in EPADI owns the corporation that owns the patents, that's sequential not parallel, as those terms are commonly understood. But again maybe the law (according to Du) uses "parallel" contrary to every other area of life I've experienced.

Again all of the above is my own opinion, as a layman.

[alm2]

Louieblouiie/marjac /hindukush/ Jason et al
We all feared Standing was the easy way out And it has been taken.... and the shallowness of the reasoning for denial speaks volumes as to the embarrassment of the Nevada court

-but let us all be clear what this team effort has achieved is immeasurable-

The right has been clearly set out for all to see and

I hope that all of you who were so closely involved will feel rewarded not by the failure of this motion through standing but by virtue of the fact that you have so clearly demonstrated the gross error of the Du courts decision as to obviousness

Success has been achieved by your exposure of where the truth actually lies - and this may well have been the cause of the shake up we are now seeing in Amarin

The legal battle continues - infringement proceedings face no issue of standing for Amarin and the battle there has only just begun

And who knows what influence on the SC the motion may have exerted ...for surely the documentation you created will be considered in the mill

My heartfelt thanks to you all for your sublime endeavours
Alm

[Babr]

It is very scary and sad , and indeed a rude awakening for some of us to learn how poorly courts are run ,verdicts are reached,and ‘justice’ is served in arguably one of the greatest countries of our modern times.

[Invest83838]

As Expected, Judge Du

found a technicality to ensure

her politically biased ruling stands

She is a soldier for a certain Party

and they will probably reward her efforts

by bumping her up the Court System Chain

Too Bad for little nothing of a company Amarin

and its "fish oil" product (as she put it)

[ralphey]

AS I previously indicated - being new to this legal arena I see two parallel path occurring - there is the scientific reasoning and then their is the legal reasoning - if you cant defeat something by science you defeat it by legal process - which often seems to rely on a judges opinion - truly makes the US legla system looks like a third world keystone cops enterprise ... but I will patiently await this to play out once in the hands of judges who understand and realize their role in society is not to enforce a party line but to seek truth - they are few and far between ....

[sts66]

Why did the Rule 24 doc contain these words:

EPADI concedes it lacks any ownership interest in Amarin’s patents

EPADI is a group of shareholders of AMRN stock, and we own the company - don't we own the patents as well, in a manner of speaking? Don't we have economic interest in in every asset AMRN has?

The timeliness excuse was lame - marjac filed within the legally allowed timeline. Not surprised one bit by this, her ruling that the EPADI was asking for impermissible new evidence to be introduced would have resulted in rejection even if all other conditions were met - this was my biggest worry from the start - Covington's failure to point out Heinecke's double speak and outright lies during the trial doomed us.