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

Filing 331

MOTION to Compel Production of Documents, and Deposition Testimony Under Rule 30(b)(6), Relating to Pegylation and Aranesp by F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Hoffmann LaRoche Inc..(Toms, Keith)

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

Doc. 331

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 331

Filed 03/23/2007

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS AMGEN INC., Plaintiff, v. F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GmbH and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CIVIL ACTION No.: 05-CV-12237WGY

DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND DEPOSITION TESTIMONY UNDER RULE 30(b)(6), RELATING TO PEGYLATION AND ARANESP® Defendants F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. (collectively "Roche") respectfully move pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and L.R. 37.1 for the Court to compel production of documents and 30(b)(6) testimony relating to Aranesp® and Amgen's pegylation of Aranesp® and "EPO products." Amgen has placed Aranesp® and the pegylation of Aranesp® directly at issue in this case by contending that Aranesp® is an "EPO product" covered by the patents-in-suit, but has refused to provide complete discovery relating to these relevant subjects. Thus, Roche respectfully requests that Amgen be required to produce: (1) A complete copy of its BLA for Aranesp® in the native format in which it was

submitted to the FDA pursuant to Roche's Requests for Production Nos. 24 and 25. (2) Documents relating to the pegylation of Aranesp® or the pegylation of any other

compounds which Amgen alleges are "EPO products" covered by the patents in suit pursuant to Roche's Requests for Production Nos. 19, 20, 31, 33-35, and 105-112.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 331

Filed 03/23/2007

Page 2 of 3

(3)

A knowledgeable 30(b)(6) witness to testify to Topic 5 of Roche's First 30(b)(6)

Notice of Deposition. (4) The documents of Thomas Boone related to pegylated Aranesp® or the

pegylation of any other compounds which Amgen alleges are "EPO products" covered by the patents in suit, pursuant to Roche's Requests for Production No. 35. (5) Any other documents related to Amgen's work on "PEG-EPO" including without

limitation Lab Notebooks #1938, # 2112 and #1041 that have not yet been produced, pursuant to Roche's Requests for Production Nos. 19, 20, 31, 33-35, and 105-112 and the Court's order of January 3, 2007. In support of this motion, Roche relies upon the accompanying memorandum and the declaration of Keith E. Toms.

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 that no agreement was reached.

2

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 331

Filed 03/23/2007

Page 3 of 3

Dated: March 23, 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 Lee Carl Bromberg (BBO# 058480) Julia Huston (BBO# 562160) Keith E. Toms (BBO# 663369) Nicole A. Rizzo (BBO# 663853) BROMBERG & SUNSTEIN LLP 125 Summer Street Boston, MA 02110 Tel. [phone] [e-mail] 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. [phone] 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) and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non registered participants on the above date. /s/ Keith E. Toms Keith E. Toms

3099/501 640874.1

3