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

Filing 447

MOTION to Strike Roche's Non-Infringement, Invalidity, and Inequitable Conduct Allegations Disclosed after the Close of Fact Discovery or, in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to Supplement Amgen's Expert Reports and Motion for Protective Order to Postpone Depositions of Certain Witnesses by Amgen Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Gottfried, Michael)

Download PDF
Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD et al Doc. 447 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 447 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No.: 05-12237 WGY 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., PLAINTIFF AMGEN INC.'S MOTION TO STRIKE ROCHE'S NON-INFRINGEMENT, INVALIDITY, AND INEQUITABLE CONDUCT ALLEGATIONS DISCLOSED AFTER THE CLOSE OF FACT DISCOVERY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUPPLEMENT AMGEN'S EXPERT REPORTS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER TO POSTPONE DEPOSITIONS OF CERTAIN WITNESSES Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 37(a) and L.R. 37.1, Plaintiff Amgen, Inc. ("Amgen") respectfully submits this Motion to Strike Roche's Non-Infringement, Invalidity, and Inequitable Conduct Allegations Disclosed After the Close of Fact Discovery or, in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to Supplement Amgen's Expert Reports and Motion for Protective Order to Postpone Depositions of Certain Witnesses. The grounds for this motion are set forth in the accompanying Memorandum in Support of Amgen Inc.'s Motion to Strike Roche's Non-Infringement, Invalidity, and Inequitable Conduct Allegations Disclosed After the Close of Fact Discovery or, in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to Supplement Amgen's Expert Reports and Motion for Protective Order to Postpone Depositions of Certain Witnesses as well as in the accompanying Declaration of Mario Moore. 682169v1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 447 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 2 of 3 May 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 91320-1789 Telephone: (805) 447-5000 /s/ Michael R. Gottfried D. DENNIS ALLEGRETTI (BBO#545511) MICHAEL R. GOTTFRIED (BBO#542156) PATRICIA R. RICH (BB#640578) DUANE MORRIS LLP 470 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02210 Telephone: (857) 488-4200 Facsimile: (857) 488-4201 LLOYD R. DAY, JR. (pro hac vice) 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 (pro hac vice) McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY 3150 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 813-5000 Facsimile: (650) 813-5100 KEVIN M. FLOWERS (pro hac vice) MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 233 South Wacker Drive 6300 Sears Tower Chicago IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 474-6300 Facsimile: (312) 474-0448 682169v1 2 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 447 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7.1 I hereby certify that counsel for the Plaintiff has attempted to confer with counsel for the Defendants, F. Hoffman-LaRoche Ltd., Hoffman LaRoche Inc. and Roche Diagnostics GmbH, in an attempt to resolve or narrow the issues presented by this motion and that no agreement could be 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 May 24, 2007. /s/ Michael R. Gottfried Michael R. Gottfried 682169v1 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?