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

Filing 1238

BRIEF by Amgen Inc. BENCH MEMORANDUM TO PRECLUDE ROCHE FROM ARGUING OR PRESENTING EVIDENCE THAT MIRCERA DOES NOT CONTAIN HUMAN ERYTHROPOIETIN. (Gottfried, Michael)

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

Doc. 1238

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 1238

Filed 10/02/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

AMGEN INC., 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.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No.: 1:05-cv-12237 WGY

AMGEN'S BENCH MEMORANDUM TO PRECLUDE ROCHE FROM ARGUING OR PRESENTING EVIDENCE THAT MIRCERA DOES NOT CONTAIN "HUMAN ERYTHROPOIETIN" Both the law of the case doctrine and Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) bar Roche from arguing or presenting evidence to the Jury during the infringement phase that MIRCERAŽ does not contain "human erythropoietin." On August 28, 2007, the Court adjudicated that as a matter of law that MIRCERAŽ meets this limitation.1 Roche's opening statement graphics served last night at 5:00 p.m. show that Roche is planning to present argument and evidence that MIRCERA does not factually comprise "human erythropoietin. In the alternative, if Roche is permitted to contest the undisputed fact that MIRCERA contains a protein that is human erythropoietin, Amgen should be permitted to inform the Jury of the Court's adjudication to the contrary.

1

August 28, 2007 Order. 1
PLAINTIFF'S BENCH MEMO RE HUMAN ERYTHROPOIETIN CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-12237 WGY

MPK 133098-1.041925.0023

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 1238

Filed 10/02/2007

Page 2 of 4

The Court's adjudication that Roche's MIRCERAŽ meets this limitation is the law of the case.2 Further, Rule 56(d) specifies that where there has been a partial adjudication of "facts that appear without substantial controversy . . . . Upon the trial of the actions, the fact so specified shall be deemed established, and the trial shall be conducted accordingly."3 The Court's adjudication that MIRCERAŽ comprises "human erythropoietin" is factually established in this case and the trial should be conducted accordingly. The Court has construed "human erythropoietin" to mean "a protein having the amino acid sequence of human EPO, such as the amino acid sequence of EPO isolated from human urine ."4 Thus, the Court determined as a matter of law that the MIRCERAŽ composition comprises a protein having the amino acid sequence of human EPO. Roche's graphics for its opening argument show that it is plainly intending to argue that MIRCERA does not comprise human EPO, i.e., a protein having the amino acid sequence of human EPO. Roche is precluded from contradicting the Court's factual determination as a matter of law that MIRCERAŽ comprises "human erythropoietin." Thus, the trial should be conducted such that Roche may not present any argument, evidence, or witness testimony that MIRCERAŽ does not contain "human erythropoietin," including the argument (1) that MIRCERAŽ has a different amino acid sequence than human erythropoietin or (2) that MIRCERAŽ does not comprise a protein, or (3) that MIRCERAŽ does not contain a protein having the amino acid sequence of human EPO.

United States v. Medina, 219 Fed. Appx. 20, 21-22 (1st Cir. 2007) (Under the relevant branch of the law of the case doctrine, "a legal decision made at one stage of a civil or criminal proceeding . . . remain[s] the law of that case throughout the litigation, unless and until the decision is modified or overruled by a higher court.") (citing United States v. Moran, 393 F. 3d 1, 7 (1st Cir. 2004)). 3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) (emphasis added). 4 Amgen Inc., v. F.Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., 494 F. Supp. 2d 54, 64 (D. Mass. 2007) (the Court's Claim Construction Order). See also id. (confirming that "human erythropoietin" is "open" and contemplates that additional molecules may be attached).
MPK 133098-1.041925.0023

2

2

PLAINTIFF'S BENCH MEMO RE HUMAN ERYTHROPOIETIN CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-12237 WGY

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 1238

Filed 10/02/2007

Page 3 of 4

If Roche is permitted to present evidence that MIRCERA does not contain a protein having the amino acid sequence of natural EPO, Amgen should be permitted to inform the Jury of the Court's adjudication to the contrary. DATED: 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 91320-1789 [phone] October 2, 2007 Respectfully Submitted, AMGEN INC., /s/ Michael R. Gottfried D. Dennis Allegretti (BBO# 545511) Michael R. Gottfried (BBO# 542156) Patricia R. Rich (BBO# 640578) DUANE MORRIS LLP 470 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02210 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Lloyd R. Day, Jr. (pro hac vice) DAY CASEBEER MADRID & BATCHELDER LLP 20300 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Suite 400 Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] William G. Gaede III (pro hac vice) McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY 3150 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Kevin M. Flowers (pro hac vice) MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 233 South Wacker Drive 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone]

MPK 133098-1.041925.0023

3

PLAINTIFF'S BENCH MEMO RE HUMAN ERYTHROPOIETIN CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-12237 WGY

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 1238

Filed 10/02/2007

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this document filed through the Electronic Case Filing (ECF) system will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non registered participants on the above date. /s/ Michael R. Gottfried Michael R. Gottfried

-1MPK 133098-1.041925.0023