throbber
·1· · · · Q.· ·You may answer.
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·It cites it because of a small study of
`
`·3· ·short duration.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Because Miner did not use as primary
`
`·5· ·endpoints endoscopically documented gastric ulcers,
`
`·6· ·correct?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·So, again, if you look at page 6 of the
`
`·8· ·Citizen Petition, HZ168830, it states no endoscopic
`
`·9· ·assessment was performed.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Miner was a pH-measuring study, right?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·I think that's what was stated here, and I
`
`12· ·believe that's also what's stated on Exhibit 7,
`
`13· ·which is the Miner publication.· Under "Aim" it
`
`14· ·says, "To evaluate gastric acid suppression of three
`
`15· ·doses of esomeprazole in PN 400 compared with EC
`
`16· ·esomeprazole 20-milligrams.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·So Miner 2010 did not endoscopically
`
`18· ·document gastric ulcers, correct?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·That's what is stated in the paper, as
`
`20· ·well as in the Citizen Petition.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·So we're getting close.· So looking here
`
`22· ·again at this paragraph, the first full paragraph on
`
`23· ·HZ16880 of Horizon Citizen Petition, the only data,
`
`24· ·experimental data and the only study here of
`
`25· ·substance is the Miner 2010 study as cited in
`
`[Note, Claim of Confidentiality Withdrawn]
`
`Page 1
`
`Dr. Reddy's Exh. 1066
`
`

`

`·1· ·Footnote 12, correct?
`
`·2· · · · · · ·MR. RODRIGUEZ:· Object to form.
`
`·3· ·BY MR. SHELHOFF:
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·You may answer.
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·So what we've described was the Miner
`
`·6· ·study, and then we stated that the Miner study was
`
`·7· ·then chosen for VIMOVO to be tested in Phase III
`
`·8· ·gastric protection endoscopy study of six-month
`
`·9· ·treatment duration.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Any of the percentages or data or numbers
`
`11· ·mentioned in the first paragraph at page HZ618830
`
`12· ·come from the Miner 2010 study, correct?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·That's what we talked about previously,
`
`14· ·the Table 1 is comparable to Table 3 in the Miner
`
`15· ·study, with the exception of the typographical error
`
`16· ·in the one column.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·And the Miner study was the product of
`
`18· ·Pozen, correct?· Pozen and -- I should be more --
`
`19· ·the Miner study was the joint product of AstraZeneca
`
`20· ·and Pozen, correct?
`
`21· · · · · · ·MR. RODRIGUEZ:· Object to form.
`
`22· · · · A.· ·Yeah, I can't speak to that.· What I can
`
`23· ·speak to, if you look at the publication, the first
`
`24· ·author is Miner from the Oklahoma Foundation for
`
`25· ·Digestive Research.
`
`[Note, Claim of Confidentiality Withdrawn]
`
`Page 2
`
`Dr. Reddy's Exh. 1066
`
`

`

`·1· · · · · · ·MR. RODRIGUEZ:· Object to form.· Outside
`
`·2· ·the scope.
`
`·3· ·BY MR. SHELHOFF:
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Go ahead.
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Yeah, I don't want to speculate what the
`
`·6· ·term "coordinated" means.· I think the document
`
`·7· ·refers to sequential release.
`
`·8· · · · · · ·MR. RODRIGUEZ:· I'd like to take a short
`
`·9· ·break.
`
`10· · · · · · ·MR. SHELHOFF:· Sure.
`
`11· · · · · · · · · (Recess taken 1:39 p.m. to 2:02 p.m.)
`
`12· ·BY MR. SHELHOFF:
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·I think before the break we stopped at --
`
`14· ·the document reads, open quote, "sequential
`
`15· ·release," close quote.
`
`16· · · · · · ·All right.· So when the document reads
`
`17· ·"sequential release," what does it mean in Horizon's
`
`18· ·Citizen Petition with respect to VIMOVO?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·So can you just show me the page and where
`
`20· ·you're looking at sequential release?
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·If you'll look at page HZ168829, and
`
`22· ·that's page 5, internal page of Horizon's
`
`23· ·petition --
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·-- so here, Section (B)(1), you mention
`
`[Note, Claim of Confidentiality Withdrawn]
`
`Page 3
`
`Dr. Reddy's Exh. 1066
`
`

`

`·1· ·that -- it mentions "sequential release."
`
`·2· · · · · · ·And just to remind you, you can look at
`
`·3· ·the whole petition if you need to answer this
`
`·4· ·question; not only this section, but the whole
`
`·5· ·Horizon Citizen Petition, the whole document.
`
`·6· · · · · · ·And the question is, what does the
`
`·7· ·sequential release mean in Horizon's Citizen
`
`·8· ·Petition with respect to VIMOVO?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· So just to clarify, it's what's
`
`10· ·described here, is "VIMOVO's sequential delivery
`
`11· ·mechanism," and then what it means is probably --
`
`12· ·well, what it means is described above there in --
`
`13· ·under section 2, "VIMOVO," and the second paragraph
`
`14· ·of that where it states, "VIMOVO is specifically
`
`15· ·formulated to allow esomeprazole, a proton pump
`
`16· ·inhibitor, to achieve its gastroprotective impact
`
`17· ·before naproxen is released into the system."
`
`18· · · · · · ·And then at the last sentence of that
`
`19· ·paragraph it's, "VIMOVO's design is intended to
`
`20· ·produce a sequential delivery of gastroprotective
`
`21· ·esomeprazole before systemic (or local) exposure to
`
`22· ·naproxen."
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·So is VIMOVO specifically formulated to
`
`24· ·allow esomeprazole's release prior to any release of
`
`25· ·naproxen from the enterically coated core of VIMOVO?
`
`[Note, Claim of Confidentiality Withdrawn]
`
`Page 4
`
`Dr. Reddy's Exh. 1066
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket