One thing I found particularly encouraging in the judges' comments today was an understanding of exactly what Hikma was doing: trying to get a big share of the 75 percent of the Vascepa market that is protected by patents. Once judges get a whiff of a big injustice, I've noticed that they are much more apt to view the law in a way that favors the aggrieved party. Even the lower court judge seemed to get this. I don't know if any of you remember the oral arguments before him, but at one point he complained that it seemed like the system was set up to violate Amarin's patents and that somebody must be to blame. It's just that he chose to blame the insurance company and to let Hikma off the hook.
And yes, the lower court judge can dismiss the case again. But the appeals panel, which would be the same judges as today, could restore it again. I've seen that happen.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
