Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD et al

Filing 1080

NOTICE by F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Hoffmann LaRoche Inc. re #1079 Declaration of Filing with Clerks Office of Exhibits to the Declaration of Krista M. Rycroft in Support of Defendants' Offer of Proof Regarding the Testimony of Michael Sofocleous (Toms, Keith)

Download PDF
Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD et al Doc. 1080 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1080 Filed 09/14/2007 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS AMGEN INC., Plaintiff, vs. F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD; ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GmbH; and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION No.: 05-CV-12237WGY NOTICE OF FILING WITH CLERK'S OFFICE OF EXHIBITS TO THE DECLARATION OF KRISTA M. RYCROFT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' OFFER OF PROOF REGARDING THE TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL SOFOCLEOUS Pursuant to CMF/ECF Administrative Procedures Rule M(6) notice is hereby given that the exhibits listed below have been conventionally filed with the Court and are available in paper form only. The original documents are maintained in the case file in the Clerk's Office. Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Curriculum Vitae of Michael Sofocleous (Trial Ex. PIP). Manual of Patent Examining Procedure ("MPEP") (5th ed. Rev. 13, Nov. 1989) (Trial Ex. PKB). MPEP (8th ed. Rev. 5, Aug. 2006) (Trial Ex. PKD). January 3, 1994 IDS submitted in the file history of Amgen's `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.951-977). MPEP § 609 (8th ed. Aug. 2001) (Trial Ex. PKC at 600-116-136). "Guidelines for Reexamination of Cases in view of In Re Portola Packaging," 1223 OG 124 (June 1999) (Trial Ex. PZG). MPEP § 609 (5th ed. Rev. 14, Nov. 1992) (Trial Ex. PLX). GAO/RCED-89-120BR, Biotechnology: Backlog of Patent Applications (April 1989) (Trial Ex. POZ). Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1080 Filed 09/14/2007 Page 2 of 3 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Petition to Make Special in the file history for Amgen's `868 Patent (Trial Ex. 2012.179-180). Declaration Accompanying a Petition to Make Special in the file history for the `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.126-132). Written decision on a Petition to Make Special in the file history of the `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.169). Protest of Inventorship in the file history for the `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.796-801). Office action in the file history for the `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.907-918). Examiner Interview Summary Record in the file history of the `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.449). Decision on Motions from Interference No. 102,096 (Trial Ex. BYJ). Declaration for Patent Application in the file history of the `868 patent (Trial Ex. 2012.112). 2 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1080 Filed 09/14/2007 Page 3 of 3 Dated: September 14, 2007 Boston, Massachusetts Respectfully submitted, F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD, ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GMBH, and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC. By their Attorneys /s/ Keith E. Toms Leora Ben-Ami (pro hac vice) Mark S. Popofsky (pro hac vice) Patricia A. Carson (pro hac vice) Thomas F. Fleming (pro hac vice) Howard S. Suh (pro hac vice) Peter Fratangelo (BBO# 639775) Vladimir Drozdoff (pro hac vice) David L. Cousineau (pro hac vice) KAYE SCHOLER LLP 425 Park Avenue New York, New York 10022 Tel. (212) 836-8000 Lee Carl Bromberg (BBO# 058480) Robert L. Kann (BBO# 258025) Julia Huston (BBO# 562160) Keith E. Toms (BBO# 663369) Nicole A. Rizzo (BBO# 663853) Kregg T. Brooks (BBO# 667348) BROMBERG & SUNSTEIN LLP 125 Summer Street Boston, MA 02110 Tel. (617) 443-9292 ktoms@bromsun.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this document filed through the ECF system will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Pursuant to agreement of counsel dated September 9, 2007, paper copies will not be sent to those indicated as non registered participants. /s/ Keith E. Toms Keith E. Toms 3099/501 739786.1 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?