`Sent:
`To:
`Cc:
`Subject:
`
`Stephen Quake [quake@stanford.edu]
`Tuesday, April 08, 2008 10:15 AM
`Joe DeRisi
`Christina Fan
`Re: solex run
`
`roche also wants
`we will bring the drive! the calibration thing is indeed challenging -
`you to blow a run on titration. a number of people are simply using real time per, but i
`think digital is more precise - we are doing a bunch of side by side tests to verify.
`it's commercially available from fluidigm if you want to ask hhmi to pop for an instrument
`for you.
`
`christina fan is the contact person for the solexa run.
`
`best,
`
`steve
`
`On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Joe DeRisi <joe@derisilab.ucsf.edu> wrote:
`> Hi Steve,
`> Yes, we have reagents in stock for your Solexa run. Sharon, Charles,
`> and Alex (the folks in my lab that have been working with Richard to
`> get the 454 run on) will be the ones to get your run on here. Is
`> Richard the guy that will be interacting with us for the Solexa?
`> Planning ahead, the person in your lab that comes up to do the Solexa
`> run should bring up a lTb portable hard drive. Anything smaller will
`> not be able to fit the data. We can store the data during the run on
`> the local machine, but it must be removed to make room for the next.
`>
`I have been following this 454 run from the sidelines, and I thought
`>only the Solexa was plagued with problems! Fortunately, the computer
`> has never crashed on us during a Solexa run, as this would be a total
`> disaster. Plenty of other strange things have happened, but not a
`> crash.
`> The idea of using digital PCR to pre-check the Solexa library is
`> great. As you may know, the worst thing about the Solexa is the fact
`> that it is nearly impossible to tell by simple methods how many
`> clusters per unit mass a given library will yield before actually
`>doing the cluster generation step. Illumina's answer is to blow a flow
`> cell and do a serial dilution in separate lanes to determine the
`> optimal concentration. Not a great solution, in my opinion. dPCR, on
`> the other hand, might be the ticket.
`they are an
`> Thanks for tolerating the folks from my lab -
`> enthusiastic bunch and want to learn as much as the can about the
`>process. As you can imagine, there is also a lot of nuance to pulling
`> off a successful Solexa run.
`>
`>
`> -j
`>
`>
`>
`> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Stephen Quake <quake@stanford.edu> wrote:
`> > joe
`> >
`> > we are gearing up for a full solexa run around may 1. do you have
`> > reagents in stock that we could use?
`> >
`> > your 454 sample is running right now. unfortunately the computer
`> > crashed just as the run began (this has been a lingering problem
`> > with
`the system) and it looks like it will be challenging to get
`> > sequence data out.
`there is a small chance we will get something
`> > useful, so we are letting the run proceed tonight. but chances are
`
`STANFORD EXHIBIT 2120
`SEQUENOM v. STANFORD
`CASE IPR2013-00390
`
`
`
`so it goes ...
`
`run it again next week.
`
`steve
`
`>>we will have to
`> >
`> >
`> >
`> >
`> > -----------------------
`> > Stephen Quake
`> > Professor of Bioengineering
`> > Stanford University
`> >
`> > PLEASE REPLY TO: quake@stanford.edu
`> >
`>
`
`Stephen Quake
`Professor of Bioengineering
`Stanford University
`
`PLEASE REPLY TO: quake@stanford.edu
`<?xml version="l.O" eneoding="UTF-8"?>
`<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN"
`"http://www.apple.eom/DTDs/PropertyList-l.O.dtd">
`<plist version="l.O">
`<diet>
`<key>date-sent</key>
`<real>1207674878</real>
`<key>flags</key>
`<integer>8590195713</integer>
`<key>original-mailbox</key>
`<string>imap://h.ehristina.fan@imap.gmail.eom/%5BGmail%5D/All%20Mail</string>
`<key>remote-id</key>
`<string>3862</string>
`<key>subjeet</key>
`<string>Re: solex run</string>
`</diet>
`</plist>
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
