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

Filing 816

MOTION in Limine to Preclude Amgen from Offering Expert Opinions Based on Statements Made During Prior Legal Proceedings by Witnesses Who Will Not Testify at Trial in this Case by F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Hoffmann LaRoche Inc..(Toms, Keith)

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

Doc. 816

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 816

Filed 08/14/2007

Page 1 of 3

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.

DEFENDANTS' MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE AMGEN FROM OFFERING EXPERT OPINIONS BASED ON STATEMENTS MADE DURING PRIOR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS BY WITNESSES WHO WILL NOT TESTIFY AT TRIAL IN THIS CASE Defendants F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd, Roche Diagnostics GmbH and HoffmannLa Roche Inc. (collectively "Roche") submit this motion in limine to preclude Amgen's experts from offering opinions at trial based on statements -- such as declarations, deposition testimony and trial testimony -- made during prior legal proceedings by witnesses who will not testify at trial in this case. Such statements, made outside of this court, would be inadmissible hearsay and do not qualify as evidence "of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field" as required by Federal Rule of Evidence 703. Therefore, they are not a proper basis for expert testimony in this case. Roche respectfully requests that the Court preclude Amgen from offering expert opinion testimony based on statements made during prior legal proceedings by witnesses

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 816

Filed 08/14/2007

Page 2 of 3

who will not testify at trial in this case. This information is inadmissible hearsay and does not qualify as evidence "of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field" as required to serve as the basis for an expert opinion under Federal Rule of Evidence 703. 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: August 14, 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) Kregg T. Brooks (BBO# 667348) 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) Christopher T. Jagoe (pro hac vice) KAYE SCHOLER LLP 425 Park Avenue New York, New York 10022 Tel. [phone]

2

Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY

Document 816

Filed 08/14/2007

Page 3 of 3

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
03099/00501 723853.1

3