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

Filing 721

MOTION for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Support of Opposition to Amgen's Motion for Summary Judgment of Infringement of '422 Claim 1, '933 Claim 3, and '698 Claim 6 by F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Hoffmann LaRoche Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Defendants' Surreply in Support of Opposition to Amgen's Motion for Summary Judgment of Infringement of '422 Claim 1, '933 Claim 3, and '698 Claim 6#2 Affidavit Declaration of Keith E. Toms in Support of Defendants' Surreply#3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Toms Declaration#4 Exhibit Exhibit B to Toms Declaration#5 Exhibit Exhibit C to Toms Declaration)(Toms, Keith)

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

Doc. 721

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 721

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 1 of 2

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 FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO AMGEN'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF INFRINGEMENT OF `422 CLAIM 1, `933 CLAIM 3, AND `698 CLAIM 6 Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(B)(3), Defendants F. Hoffmann-La Roche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. ("Roche") seek leave to file the attached surreply in support of their Opposition to Amgen's Motion for Summary Judgment of Infringement of `422 Claim 1, `933 Claim 3, and `698 Claim 6 (Docket No. 588). As grounds for this motion, Roche states that Amgen's reply distorts the issues and raises new points that Roche has not yet had an opportunity to address. Furthermore, Amgen had the benefit of the Court's July 3, 2007, Memorandum and Order on claim construction in styling its reply. Roche believes that the attached sur-reply will assist the Court in ruling on the pending motion because it clarifies the issues and responds to the new points raised in Amgen's reply.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 721

Filed 07/13/2007

Page 2 of 2

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 could be reached. Dated: July 13, 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) Timothy M. Murphy (BBO# 551926) 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] @bromsun.com 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) Christopher T. Jagoe (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

2