Editing Openai/69668f73-ea68-800d-ac56-44a64b19dae4 (section)

==== Most patent cases that produce ideological patterning are about: ====
* How broad patent rights should be (eligibility, scope)
* Whether patents should block competition
* Whether patentees are abusing monopoly power

Hikma v. Amarin is structurally different.

It is not really about:
* Expanding patent scope
* Extending monopoly duration
* Blocking generic entry per se

It is about:

: 

That does not sit comfortably inside the usual “pro-patent vs anti-patent” frame.

Instead it sits inside:
* Procedural fairness
* Truthfulness in regulatory representations
* Whether pleading standards can be weaponized to immunize bad faith conduct
* Whether courts should ignore real-world market behavior in favor of formal labels

Those are not partisan axes.