I suggest disregarding the commercial success portion of that AI analysis. Judge Du, IMO, was correct in discussing the "secondary consideration" of commercial success. Amarin's commercial success has been using Vascepa to reduce risk of various aspects of CVD, I am not aware of commercial success derived from reducing high serum triglycerides. The claims of the 6 patents are directed to the latter, not the former. It is well settled that evidence of commercial success should be commensurate with scope or breadth of patent claim language to be persuasive of patentability.
We should have filed the main content of the shareholder Petition for Certiorari with the federal agencies in the first place. Why? Because FDA, SEC, FTC, DOJ are not subject to the shareholder standing argument. Until I asked Chrome "How does the FDA handle the question of fraud in connection with an NDA or ANDA" some months ago, I was not aware that the FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations existed. Nor did I know that FDA had peublished guidelines that told the world how it handled questions of applicants' fraud in connection with submitted documents, even after approval of those documents. By then, marjac was busy with his every day practice of law, and had no interest in proceeding further once S.Ct. denied certiorari. My own 5 page letter (with 3 pounds of paper documents) submitted to the agencies followed. More later---.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
