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

Filing 1127

MOTION for Leave to File A Declaration in Support of Its Opposition to Defendant Roche's Motion to Preclude the Deposition Testimony of Dr. Edward Everett Harlow by Amgen Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Gottfried, Michael)

Download PDF
Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD et al Doc. 1127 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1127 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE ) LTD., a Swiss Company, ROCHE ) DIAGNOSTICS GmbH, a German ) Company and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE ) INC., a New Jersey Corporation, ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________) AMGEN INC., Civil Action No.: 05-12237 WGY PLAINTIFF AMGEN INC.'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT ROCHE'S MOTION TO PRECLUDE THE DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF DR. EDWARD EVERETT HARLOW Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1127 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 2 of 4 Plaintiff Amgen Inc. respectfully moves for leave to file a supplemental declaration in support of its opposition to Defendant's Motion to Preclude the Deposition Testimony of Dr. Edward Everett Harlow. Amgen Inc.'s proposed declaration is attached hereto as Exhibit A and includes Amgen's proposed designations for Harlow. In support of this motion, Amgen states that its proposed supplemental declaration is concise, and will be of assistance to the Court. The proposed designations will assist the Court in assessing their relevance. As those designations in the attached Exhibit 1 make clear, the proffered testimony of Roche's expert, Dr. Harlow, is relevant to Roche's invalidity allegations made before the jury in this case. As set forth in Amgen Inc.'s Opposition to Roche's Motion to Preclude the Deposition Testimony of Dr. Edward Everett Harlow (D.N. 1104), Dr. Harlow's statements are admissions of Roche and as such should be admitted into evidence. Further, the parties are at an impasse because Roche refuses to provide counters or objections to Amgen's designations of Dr. Harlow until the underlying motions are ruled on and Amgen therefore respectfully requests the Court to rule on the underlying motions so that Amgen can submit Harlow's designated transcript to the Court in a timely fashion. 1 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1127 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 3 of 4 Dated: September 24, 2007 Respectfully Submitted, AMGEN INC., By its attorneys, Of Counsel: STUART L. WATT WENDY A. WHITEFORD MONIQUE L. CORDRAY DARRELL G. DOTSON KIMBERLIN L. MORLEY ERICA S. OLSON AMGEN INC. One Amgen Center Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91320-1889 (805) 447-5000 /s/ Michael R. Gottfried_______________________ D.DENNIS ALLEGRETTI (BBO#545511) MICHAEL R.GOTTFRIED (BBO#542156) DUANE MORRIS LLP 470 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02210 Telephone: (857) 488-4200 Facsimile: (857) 488-4201 LLOYD R. DAY, JR DAY CASEBEER MADRID & BATCHELDER LLP 20300 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Suite 400 Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone: (408) 873-0110 Facsimile: (408) 873-0220 WILLIAM GAEDE III McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY 3150 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 813-5000 Facsimile: (650) 813-5100 KEVIN M. FLOWERS MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 233 South Wacker Drive 6300 Sears Tower Chicago IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 474-6300 Facsimile: (312) 474-0448 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 1127 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7.1 I certify that counsel for the parties have conferred in an attempt to resolve or narrow the issues presented by this motion and no agreement was reached. /s/ Michael R. Gottfried Michael R. Gottfried 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 and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-registered participants on September 24, 2007. /s/ Michael R. Gottfried Michael R. Gottfried

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?