Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. · ¶22

The District Court granted Hikma’s motion to dismiss, explaining that none of Hikma’s statements constituted active steps to encourage infringing Amarin’s method-of-use patents for the CV indication. 578 F. Supp. 3d, at 645–648. The Federal Circuit reversed. It held (as all agree here) that Hikma’s label, standing alone, does not induce infringement. See 104 F. 4th, at 1379; Brief for Respondents 40–41. But the court found it “at least plausible that a physician could read” the label, website, and press releases “as an instruction or encouragement to prescribe [Hikma’s generic] for any of the approved uses of icosapent ethyl.” 104 F. 4th, at 1378–1380 (emphasis deleted).

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.