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

Filing 416

EXHIBIT re 381 MOTION To Enforce the Court's March 27, 2007 Order and to Compel Deposition Testimony under Rule 30(b)(6) Exhibit E by F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Hoffmann LaRoche Inc.. (Toms, Keith)

Download PDF
Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 416 Filed 04/20/2007 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION No.: 05-CV-12237WGY ) ) ) ) ) ) AMGEN INC., Plaintiff, v. F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD, ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GmbH, and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC. Defendants. Exhibit E in Support of Defendants' Motion to Enforce the Court's March 27, 2007 Order and to Compel Deposition Testimony Under Rule 30(b)(6) Roche is filing this document in the public record pursuant to paragraph 14 of the Protective Order. Amgen did not file a motion as to why the information is confidential trade secret material within the (4) Court day period of Roche's in camera submission, as required by paragraph 14. /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. (617) 443-9292 ktoms@bromsun.com Dated: April 20, 2007 Boston, Massachusetts 03099/00501 652289.2 C R C a A F D UvF D DP Document 416 ) Filed 04/20/2007 Page 2 of 5 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY 3/30/2007 Boone, Thomas Charles Exhibit E 1 2 3 4 5 MGEN INC. NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS 66 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 eported by: laintiff, s. Civil Action . HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD., a Swiss ) No. 05-12237 WGY Company, ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GmbH, German Company, and HOFFMANN-LA ) ROCHE, INC., a New Jersey orporation efendants. EPOSITION OF THOMAS CHARLES BOONE riday, March 30, 2007 - CONFIDENTIAL - Lynda L. Fenn, CSR, RPR SR No. 12566 1 p q n w e h s t a e t h M Y A M Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 416 Filed 04/20/2007 Page 3 of 5 3/30/2007 Boone, Thomas Charles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ere to give your personal knowledge and that's all e wants as well. R. JAGOE: I think its within the topic nd that could be resolved later, so we'll just take he testimony now. R. GAEDE: This is talking about the Okay. He has been He's rythropoietin application. xcluded from talking about erythropoietin. alking about other -- two examples of proteins that ere produced at Amgen. All right? nd your topics do not even ask bout -- do not even ask about the prosecution istory or the application -- the prosecution of hese patents, so it's entirely outside of the cope. Not even close. ou can explain to Judge Young how a uestion here in 1988 ties to a specific science as oticed in your topics. I'd like to hear the xplanation now. R. JAGOE: uestion? R. GAEDE: If we keep going down this ath we will adjourn this deposition and seek a rotective order. R. JAGOE: Are you instructing him not to Can you answer the pending 142 q T e d s v 1 t n h q a M I M M Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 416 Filed 04/20/2007 Page 4 of 5 3/30/2007 Boone, Thomas Charles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 nswer? R. GAEDE: uestion. R. JAGOE: All right. Then let's just No, he can answer the ave the question -- I understand your threat. R. GAEDE: otice. R. JAGOE: R. GAEDE: Okay. I understand. No, no. I'm putting you on And I find it -- I find it ery surprising that you are not even attempting to tay within the confines of good faith of those opics. R. JAGOE: I told you my understanding of he topic was that it was related to all recombinant xpression of glycoproteins other then EPO prior to 985 and I think we've established now that t-PA was uch a protein. R. GAEDE: The face of your topics as rafted by your firm says, "All efforts by Amgen," opic 3. Topic 4 says, "All efforts by Amgen." t says nothing in your topics about fforts by other parties. R. JAGOE: uestion? R. GAEDE: If you can. Can I have the answer to the 143 o C B p c k h E m 3 s f b 2 1 i A Q T M I D T Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 416 Filed 04/20/2007 Page 5 of 5 3/30/2007 Boone, Thomas Charles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 HE WITNESS: y the word "numerous." Y MR. JAGOE: I don't know what was meant y question is: Does Amgen have any nformation about numerous -- let me start again. oes Amgen have any information about ammalian cells capable of effecting glycosylation f expressed polypeptides that were known prior to 984 other than COS, Chinese hamster ovary cells and 93 cells? R. GAEDE: Objection; the question as hrased is argumentative. Counsel is reading from xhibit No. 20, a document from the prosecution istory, and therefore the question is outside the cope and also calls for a legal conclusion. HE WITNESS: I don't know what was the nowledge of other people at Amgen in this time rame regarding expression of proteins in mammalian ells. Y MR. JAGOE: n your current state of preparation as a 0(b)(6) witness, you can only identify CHO cells, OS cells and 293 cells as being used at Amgen to btain glycosylated polypeptides prior to 1985? hat's not true. Also made proteins in 153

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?