throbber
IN THE UNITED
`
`STATES DISTRICT
`
`COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
`
`Civil Action No. 114-cv-00667-JBS-KMW
`CONSOLIDATED 0449 05144
`and 03240
`
`00335
`
`06893
`
`SENJU PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD.
`LOMB
`BAUSCH
`INCORPORATED and
`PHARMA HOLDINGS CORP.
`BAUSCH
`LOMB
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`vs.
`
`LUPIN LTD.
`and LUPIN
`INC.
`PHARMACEUTICALS
`
`Defendants
`
`INNOPHARMA LICENSING INC.
`INNOPHARMA LICENSING LLC
`INC.
`INNOPHARMA LLC
`INNOPHARMA
`
`Defendants.
`
`Videotaped Deposition of
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES. D.PHIL.
`
`Washington D.C.
`
`February 22 2016
`
`Reported by Michele E. Eddy RPR CRR CLR
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`I www.littlereporting.com
`
`InnoPharma EX1061
`I P R2015-00903
`
`I P R2015-00902
`
`

`
`2
`
`February 22 2016
`
`904 a.m.
`
`Deposition of STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`held at
`
`the offices of Finnegan Henderson 901
`
`New York Avenue Northwest Washington D.C.
`
`pursuant
`
`to Notice before Michele E. Eddy
`
`Nationally Certified Realtime Reporter
`
`and Notary
`
`Public of
`
`the District of Columbia Commonwealth
`
`of Virginia and State of Maryland.
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`1
`
`2 3 4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Page 2
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS
`
`JESSICA M. LEBEIS ESQUIRE
`
`FINNEGAN HENDERSON
`
`FARABOW GARRETT
`
`DUNNER
`
`LLP
`
`303 Peachtree Street Northeast
`
`Atlanta Georgia
`404 653-6400
`
`30308
`
`jessica.lebeis@finnegan.com
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS LUPIN LTD. and LUPIN
`
`PHARMACEUTICALS
`
`INC.
`
`EMILY I. RAPALINO ESQUIRE
`
`GOODWIN
`
`PROCTER
`
`LLP
`
`Exchange Place
`
`53 State Street
`
`Boston Massachusetts
`617 570-1000
`
`02109
`
`erapalino@goodwinprocter.com
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 3
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`4
`
`ATTENDANCE Continued
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE INNOPHARMA DEFENDANTS
`
`H.
`
`JAMES ABE ESQUIRE
`
`ALSTON
`
`BIRD LLP
`
`333 South Hope Street
`
`Sixteenth Floor
`
`Los Angeles California 90071
`
`213 576-1000
`
`james.abe@alston.com
`
`- AND -
`
`JITENDRA DITTY MALIK PH.D.
`
`ALSTON
`
`BIRD LLP
`
`4721 Emperor Boulevard Suite 400
`
`Durham North Carolina 27703
`
`919 862-2200
`
`jitty.malik@alston.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT
`
`Jason Levin Videographer
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 4
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`5
`
`PAGE
`
`10
`
`303
`
`PAGE
`
`14
`
`87
`
`117
`
`129
`
`154
`
`184
`
`195
`
`203
`
`214
`
`EXAMINATION INDEX
`
`EXAMINATION BY MS. RAPALINO
`
`EXAMINATION BY MS.
`
`LEBEIS
`
`E X H I B I
`
`T
`
`S
`
`Attached to the Transcript
`
`DEPOSITION EXHIBIT
`
`Exhibit
`
`1 Responsive Expert Report of
`
`Stephen G. Davies D.Phil.
`
`Exhibit
`
`2 U.S. Patent Number 5558876
`
`Exhibit
`
`3 U.S. Patent Number 5603929
`
`Exhibit
`
`4 European Patent Application
`
`88114804.3
`
`Exhibit
`
`5
`
`International Publication
`
`Number WO 94/15597
`
`Exhibit
`
`6 U.S. Patent Number 5110493
`
`Exhibit
`
`7 U.S. Patent Number 5504113
`
`Exhibit
`
`8 U.S. Patent Number 6265444
`
`Exhibit
`
`9 U.S. Patent Number 5597560
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 5
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`EXHIBIT INDEX CONTINUED
`
`6
`
`DEPOSITION EXHIBIT
`
`Exhibit
`
`10 Excerpt of Remington
`
`The
`
`Science and Practice of
`
`Pharmacy
`
`20th Edition
`
`Exhibit
`
`11 Affidavit of Translation
`
`Exhibit
`
`12
`
`U.S. Patent Number 4910225
`
`Exhibit
`
`13 Article titled Comparing the
`
`PAGE
`
`229
`
`233
`
`247
`
`260
`
`Surface Chemical Properties and
`
`the Effect of Salts on the Cloud
`
`Point of a Conventional Nonionic
`
`Surfactant Octoxynol
`
`9 Triton
`
`X-100 and of
`
`Its Oligomer
`
`Tyloxapol Triton WR-1339
`
`Exhibit
`
`14 Article titled Acid Catalysed
`
`279
`
`Hydrolysis of Substituted
`Acetanilides - Part II
`PROL0332616-19
`
`Exhibit
`
`15 Article titled Kinetics of
`
`the
`
`286
`
`Hydrolysis of Anilides by D.D.
`
`Karve and B.W. Kelkar
`
`PROL0332620-626
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 I www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 6
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`EXHIBIT INDEX CONTINUED
`
`7
`
`DEPOSITION EXHIBIT
`
`Exhibit 16 Article titled Equilibrium
`
`PAGE
`
`287
`
`Formation of Anilides from
`
`Carboxylic Acids and Anilines
`
`in Aqueous Acidic Media by
`
`Ahmed M. Aman and R.S. Brown
`
`PROL0332635-44
`
`Exhibit
`
`17 Article titled Acid Hydrolysis
`
`288
`
`of Benzylpenicillin Anilides by
`
`E.F. Panarin and M.V. Solovskii
`
`PROL0332645-47
`
`Exhibit
`
`18 Article titled The
`
`289
`
`Acid-catalysed Hydrolysis of
`
`Acetanilide by J.W. Barnett
`
`and J. OConnor PROL0332648-50
`
`Exhibit
`
`19 Excerpt of
`
`Introduction to
`
`291
`
`Organic Chemistry Third
`
`Edition by Andrew Streitwieser
`
`Jr. and Clayton H. Heathcock
`
`PROL0332187-191
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 7
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`EXHIBIT INDEX CONTINUED
`
`8
`
`DEPOSITION EXHIBIT
`
`Exhibit 20 Article titled Selective
`
`PAGE
`
`296
`
`Aromatic Substitution within
`
`a Cyclodextrin Mixed Complex
`
`PROL0332298
`
`Exhibit 21 Article titled Measurement of
`
`297
`
`Chiral Amino Acid Discrimination
`
`by Cyclic Oligosaccharides
`
`A
`
`direct FAB mass spectrometric
`
`approach PROL0332299-300
`
`Exhibit
`
`22 Article titled Crystal
`
`298
`
`Structure of b-cyclodextrin -
`
`benzoic acid inclusion complex
`
`by Thammarat Aree and Narongsak
`
`Chaichit Received 20 August
`
`2002 Accepted 27 October 2002
`
`Carbohydrate Research 338 2003
`
`439-446 Science Direct
`
`PROL0333336-43
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 8
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`9
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER
`
`We are going on
`
`the record at 904 a.m. on February 22nd
`
`2016.
`
`This is DVD number
`
`1 of
`
`the video
`
`deposition of Stephen Davies in the matter
`
`of Senju Pharmaceutical Company Limited
`
`et al. versus Lupin Limited et al.
`
`filed in the United States District Court
`
`for the District of New Jersey Case Number
`
`114-cv-00667-JBSKMW consolidated
`
`cases.
`
`This deposition is being held at
`
`the
`
`offices of Finnegan
`
`located at 901 New
`
`York Avenue Northwest Washington D.C.
`
`My name is Jason Levin from the firm
`
`The Little Reporting Company with offices
`in New York and Im the videographer.
`
`The
`
`court
`
`reporter today is Michele Eddy also
`
`from The Little Reporting Company.
`
`Will counsel
`
`now please state their
`
`appearances
`
`for the record.
`
`MS. RAPALINO
`
`Emily Rapalino of
`
`Goodwin Procter
`
`on behalf of
`
`the Lupin
`
`defendants.
`
`DR. MALIK
`
`Jitendra Malik of
`
`the law
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 9
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`10
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`firm of Alston
`
`Bird. With me though not
`
`in the room right now will be James Abe
`
`representing InnoPharma defendants in
`
`connection with the litigation only.
`
`Per
`
`my e-mail with Senjus counsel we have an
`
`agreement
`
`that Dr. Davies will be produced
`
`separately in connection with the IPR.
`
`MS. LEBEIS
`
`Jessica Lebeis of
`
`Finnegan
`
`on behalf of plaintiffs Senju and
`
`Bausch
`
`Lomb.
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`having been duly sworn testified as
`
`follows
`
`EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL
`
`FOR THE LUPIN DEFENDANTS
`
`BY MS. RAPALINO
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Good morning Dr. Davies.
`
`Good morning.
`
`Youve been deposed before correct
`
`I have yes.
`
`So without belaboring it
`
`I would
`
`just
`
`like to go over
`
`the basic rules for the
`
`deposition.
`
`You understand that Ill
`
`be asking
`
`you questions
`
`today and youll be giving me
`
`answers and that your answers are under oath as
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 10
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`11
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`if
`
`you were testifying in court
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`We can
`
`take breaks
`
`from time to time.
`
`I would ask that
`
`if
`
`you need a break you ask
`
`for one but not while a question is pending.
`
`Is that
`
`fair
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`We should try not
`
`to talk over each
`
`other.
`
`We have a court reporter
`
`trying to take
`
`down what we say so we should just
`
`let each
`
`other
`
`finish before we begin to respond or ask
`
`the next question. Okay
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`If
`
`you dont understand one of my
`
`questions please ask me to clarify.
`
`If
`
`you
`
`answer a question Ill
`Is that fair
`
`understood it.
`
`assume that youve
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`Is there any reason that you cant
`
`testify completely and truthfully today
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`No.
`
`How did you prepare for todays
`
`deposition
`
`A
`
`I
`
`read through my reports and the
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 11
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`12
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`references therein.
`
`Q
`
`Did you review any materials besides
`
`the reports and the materials cited in those
`
`reports
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Not
`
`that
`
`I recall.
`
`Did you meet with anybody in
`
`preparation for your deposition
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`I met with Ms. Lebeis.
`
`Did you meet with anybody else
`
`I said hello to a couple of people
`
`but
`
`that was all.
`
`Q
`
`For how long did you meet with
`
`Ms. Lebeis in preparation for your deposition
`Ive been here for two days.
`
`We met
`
`A
`
`for about
`
`roughly six hours each day but both
`
`days a considerable amount of
`
`time was taken up
`
`on another matter.
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`And did you speak with anybody
`
`else in preparation for your deposition
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`No.
`
`Did you review any deposition
`
`testimony in this case
`
`A
`
`Yes.
`
`So Ive read the deposition
`
`testimony of Lawrence.
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 12
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`13
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`Q
`
`Have
`
`you reviewed
`
`any other
`
`deposition testimony in this case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Not
`
`that
`
`I recall no.
`
`Did you review any testimony in the
`
`parallel
`
`IPR proceedings
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Whats IPR
`
`Inter partes review.
`
`No I dont believe so.
`
`How many times have you -- have you
`spoken to any experts in this case
`No I havent
`
`no.
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`How many times have you testified at
`
`deposition
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`recall.
`
`A number.
`
`Has
`
`it been more than 100
`
`No.
`
`More than 50
`
`Oh its more than ten but
`
`I dont
`
`know the exact number.
`
`Q
`
`Every time youve testified as a
`
`deposition has that been as an expert witness
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`I believe so yes.
`
`Have you testified at trial
`
`I have yes.
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 13
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`14
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`How many times
`
`Between five and ten.
`
`Apart
`
`from those instances where
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`youve testified at deposition or at trial
`
`have there been other cases where youve
`
`submitted an expert report
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`There have yes.
`
`In how many cases have you submitted
`
`an expert report
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`I dont recall.
`
`A number of cases.
`
`About how many would you say
`
`Around ten.
`
`MS. RAPALINO
`
`Lets mark as Davies
`
`Exhibit
`
`1
`
`the Responsive Expert Report of
`
`Stephen G. Davies D.Phil.
`
`Exhibit 1 was marked for identification
`
`and attached to the deposition transcript.
`
`BY MS. RAPALINO
`
`Q
`
`Is this a copy of
`
`the first expert
`
`report you submitted in this case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes it
`
`is.
`
`If
`
`you would turn to page 41 of
`
`Exhibit 1.
`
`A
`
`Yes.
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`I www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 14
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`15
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`Q
`
`Is that your signature in the middle
`
`of
`
`the page
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`It
`
`is yes.
`
`And you signed this expert report on
`
`January 29th of 2016
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct
`
`yes.
`
`Does
`
`this report accurately summarize
`
`your opinions in this case
`
`A
`
`From the material considered at
`
`that
`
`time yes.
`
`Q
`
`Are there any corrections you want
`
`to
`
`make to the report as you sit here today
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I dont believe so no.
`
`Staying on page 41 of
`
`the expert
`
`report
`
`in paragraph 84 you list
`
`the cases
`
`in
`
`which you have testified as an expert
`
`in the
`
`last
`
`four years.
`
`Do you see that
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct
`
`yes.
`
`Were all of
`
`these cases
`
`listed in
`
`paragraph 84 pharmaceutical
`
`patent cases
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes they were.
`
`Lets talk about
`
`the first
`
`case
`
`Sunovion Pharmaceuticals
`
`Inc.
`
`v. Teva
`
`Pharmaceuticals
`
`USA.
`
`Did you testify on behalf
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 15
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`16
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`of
`
`the patentee in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did yes.
`
`And in the remaining cases
`
`the
`
`remaining five cases listed in paragraph 84
`
`did you also testify on behalf of
`
`the patentee
`
`in those cases
`
`A
`
`Depends on what you mean by on
`behalf of.
`
`I was
`
`retained by the patentee
`
`yes but
`
`I
`
`testified to help the court
`
`rather
`
`than on behalf of
`
`the patentee.
`
`Q
`
`In each of
`
`those cases did you
`
`testify that
`
`the patent was valid and
`
`infringed
`
`A
`
`Well
`
`involved in those particular cases.
`
`I gave evidence about what was
`Im not
`
`sure I ever stated the words you used.
`lets go one by one.
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`Lets --
`
`So in the Sunovion Pharmaceuticals
`
`case you
`
`said that you were retained by the Sunovion
`
`the patentee is that right
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct
`
`yes.
`
`What was the subject of your opinions
`
`in that case
`
`A
`
`It was mostly about chemistry and
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 16
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`17
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`there was
`
`some obviousness arguments as far as
`
`I
`
`remember.
`
`Q
`
`And did you testify in support or
`
`against
`
`those obviousness arguments
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection vague and
`
`ambiguous.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I
`
`testified that
`
`it was nonobvious.
`
`Do you remember what
`
`law firm
`
`retained you in the Sunovion case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I
`
`think it was Paul Hastings.
`
`Now you mentioned that
`
`the subject
`
`of your
`
`testimony in the Sunovion case was
`
`chemistry.
`
`Can you be any more specific than
`
`that What was the subject of
`
`the chemistry
`
`about which you testified
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`remember
`
`in each of
`
`these
`
`cases.
`
`I havent
`
`reviewed my reports in those.
`
`Q
`
`Lets go on to the second case
`
`AstraZeneca AB et al. versus Ranbaxy
`
`Pharmaceuticals
`
`Inc.
`
`In that case were you
`
`retained by the patentee AstraZeneca
`
`A
`
`I was yes.
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 17
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`18
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`Q
`
`What was the general subject of your
`
`testimony in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Mostly chemistry.
`
`Were the issues in that case related
`
`to synthetic chemistry
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`recall precisely but
`
`it
`
`would have been synthetic chemistry enantiomer
`
`separation medicinal chemistry.
`
`Q
`
`In the AstraZeneca AB et al. versus
`
`Hanmi USA Inc.
`
`case the third case listed in
`
`paragraph 84 were you also retained by the
`
`patentee AstraZeneca
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I was yes.
`
`What was the general subject of your
`
`testimony in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`case
`
`Chemistry.
`
`Was
`
`it synthetic chemistry in that
`
`A
`
`The answer
`
`is the same as last
`
`time.
`
`Synthetic chemistry resolution chemistry and
`
`medicinal chemistry.
`
`Q
`
`Just so were on the same page how
`
`do you define medicinal chemistry
`
`A
`
`Anything involved in the search for
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 18
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`19
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`novel pharmaceutical
`
`compounds that are of
`
`therapy to use.
`
`Q
`
`Then
`
`in the fourth case AstraZeneca
`
`AB et al. versus Dr. Reddys Laboratories
`
`Inc. were you also retained by the patentee
`
`AstraZeneca
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`What was the general subject of your
`
`testimony in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Chemistry.
`
`Would it
`
`be those same categories of
`
`chemistry synthetic chemistry enantiomer
`
`chemistry and medicinal chemistry
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`And then in the fifth case
`
`GlaxoSmithKline LLC versus Banner Pharmacaps
`
`Inc. were you retained by the patentee
`
`GlaxoSmithKline in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I was yes.
`
`What was the general subject of your
`
`testimony in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Chemistry.
`
`And again would it
`
`be those same
`
`three categories of synthetic chemistry
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 19
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`enantiomer chemistry and medicinal chemistry
`
`20
`
`A
`
`In broad. Other
`
`topics may have came
`up but thats the broad outline.
`
`Q
`
`What were the other topics that might
`
`have come up
`I dont
`
`A
`
`recall.
`
`Q
`
`So sitting here today the ones you
`
`recall are synthetic chemistry enantiomer
`
`chemistry and medicinal chemistry is that
`
`right
`
`A
`
`Thats true.
`
`I havent
`
`had time to
`
`review exactly what
`
`I did in each of
`
`these
`
`cases.
`
`In fact most of
`
`the cases
`
`I have
`
`nothing to review to look to remind myself.
`
`Q
`
`Then
`
`in the last case that you list
`
`here Gilead Sciences
`
`Inc. versus Teva
`
`Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. were you retained by
`
`the patentee Gilead Sciences
`
`Inc.
`
`in that
`
`case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I was yes.
`
`What was the general subject of your
`
`testimony in that case
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Chemistry.
`
`And was it
`
`the same three categories
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 20
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`weve been talking about synthetic chemistry
`
`enantiomer chemistry and medicinal chemistry
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes the prior testimony.
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`recall. Certainly synthetic
`
`chemistry.
`
`I cant
`
`recall whether
`
`it was
`
`enantiomer chemistry.
`
`And it would have been
`
`medicinal chemistry.
`
`Q
`
`Now in each of
`
`these cases
`
`listed in
`
`paragraph 84 you testified on behalf of
`
`the
`
`brand pharmaceutical
`
`company
`
`right
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection asked and
`
`answered.
`
`A
`
`I was retained by the patentee in
`
`each of cases but
`
`testified on behalf
`
`--
`
`to
`
`help the court.
`
`Q
`
`Were you being paid by the party that
`
`retained you in each of
`
`those cases
`
`A
`
`I was yes.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`Q
`
`Were you compensated by the court
`
`in
`
`connection
`
`--23A
`
`Actually I dont
`
`--
`
`that may not be
`
`24
`
`25
`
`true.
`
`Some of
`
`the cases
`
`I may have been paid
`
`by the lawyers.
`
`In fact all
`
`the cases
`
`I was
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 21
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`paid by the lawyers.
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`So you were paid by the
`
`lawyers representing the brand pharmaceutical
`
`company in each of
`
`those cases
`
`Thats correct.
`
`And you werent paid by the court
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`any of
`
`22
`
`in
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`10
`
`those cases--9A
`
`No.
`
`--
`
`Q
`
`for your
`
`testimony
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`No.
`
`Have you ever offered testimony that
`
`a patent
`
`is obvious
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it calls for a legal conclusion.
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`think Ive ever been involved
`
`in a case where I have come to that conclusion.
`
`Q
`
`So youve never
`
`testified that
`
`a
`
`patent
`
`is obvious
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I dont believe so.
`
`Have you ever
`
`testified that
`
`a patent
`
`was not
`
`infringed
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I dont believe so.
`
`Besides these six cases
`
`listed in
`
`paragraph 84 of your -- of Exhibit 1 how many
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 22
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`23
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`other cases have you offered testimony as an
`
`expert
`
`A
`
`I
`
`think I answered that previously.
`
`So its a number of cases.
`
`I
`
`forget how many.
`
`Q
`
`I
`
`think we said it was about
`
`ten.
`
`Is
`
`that right
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`Asked
`
`and answered.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Repeat
`
`the question.
`
`In about
`
`how many cases besides the
`
`six listed in paragraph 84 of your expert
`
`report have you offered testimony as an
`
`expert
`
`A
`
`Well
`
`Ive been in --
`
`Ive written
`
`reports as I
`
`think I said previously in a
`
`number of other cases.
`
`So its certainly more
`
`than ten.
`
`Q
`
`So apart
`
`from the six cases
`
`listed in
`
`paragraph 84 are there other cases
`
`in which
`
`youve testified as an expert prior to the last
`
`four years
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`About how many of
`
`those cases have
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 23
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`24
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`you testified in
`
`ten.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I dont recall but maybe another
`
`So were talking about about
`
`16 cases
`
`total
`
`that youve offered testimony as an
`
`expert
`
`is that right
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Testimony or reports.
`
`In each of
`
`those approximately 16
`
`cases
`
`in which youve offered an expert report
`
`or testified has the subject of your
`
`testimony
`
`been synthetic chemistry enantiomer chemistry
`
`or medicinal chemistry
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`Asked
`
`and answered.
`
`A
`
`Its been chemistry in general which
`
`has included those but other things have come
`
`up that
`
`if
`
`its within my expertise Ive
`
`given testimony about.
`
`Q
`
`Can you recall what other subjects in
`
`chemistry have come up apart
`
`from enantiomer
`
`chemistry synthetic chemistry and medicinal
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 24
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`25
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`chemistry that youve testified about before
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection asked and
`
`answered.
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`recall.
`
`Im a chemist so
`
`anything that comes up in the general
`
`field of
`
`chemistry in its broadest sense I may well
`
`have testified about.
`
`Q
`
`Now the issue of enantiomers or
`
`stereochemistry is not
`
`the subject of your
`
`opinions in this case correct
`Its not no.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`And the subject of synthetic
`
`chemistry is not
`
`the subject of your opinions
`
`in this case correct
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct.
`
`And medicinal chemistry as youve
`
`defined it
`
`is not
`
`the subject of your opinions
`
`in this case correct
`
`A
`
`Well medicinal chemistry is anything
`
`to do with particularly therapeutically useful
`
`compounds.
`
`Q
`
`And you havent
`
`testified in this
`
`case or you havent offered an opinion in this
`
`case about
`
`the search for novel pharmaceutical
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 25
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`compounds that are of
`
`therapeutic use right
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`A
`
`I would have to check
`
`through to see
`
`if
`
`thats true.
`
`I dont recall
`
`that
`
`I did but
`
`..
`
`Q
`
`So sitting here right now you dont
`
`recall an opinion youve offered about
`
`the
`
`search for novel pharmaceutical
`
`compounds that
`
`are of
`
`therapeutic use in this case right
`
`I dont believe I did no.
`A
`said Im a chemist
`
`in the broadest
`
`As
`
`Ive
`
`sense.
`
`Q
`
`If
`
`you turn to Appendix B of your
`expert report Exhibit 1 this is a copy of
`
`your curriculum vitae is that right
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Thats correct
`
`yes.
`
`Is it up-to-date
`
`It was up-to-date on the date at
`
`which I signed it
`
`--
`
`I signed the report which
`
`is the 29th of January.
`
`Q
`
`Are there --
`
`is there anything you
`
`would like to update thats happened
`
`over
`
`the
`
`last
`
`three weeks since youve signed the
`
`report
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 26
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`27
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`Not
`
`that
`
`I
`
`-- no.
`
`Now you received a BA in chemistry
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`in 1973 is that right
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct.
`
`Did you do any research during your
`
`studies for that degree
`
`A
`
`The BA in Oxford is a four-year
`
`course.
`
`The first
`
`three years are mostly
`
`theoretical
`
`and the fourth year
`
`is an entire
`
`research project.
`
`Q
`
`What was the subject of
`
`that year of
`
`research
`
`A
`
`The synthesis and chemical properties
`
`of benzene oxide and related compounds.
`
`Q
`
`Did you do any work on pharmaceutical
`
`formulations during your
`
`research for your BA
`
`degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`Did you do any research on compounds
`
`for ophthalmic
`
`use during your
`
`research for
`
`your BA degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`Did you do any research on
`
`nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug compounds
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 27
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`28
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`during your
`
`research for your BA degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`You got your D.Phil. degree in
`
`chemistry in 1975 is that right
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct
`
`yes.
`
`Did you do any research during the
`
`time you were studying for that degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did yes.
`
`What was the subject of
`
`that degree
`
`-- of
`
`that research
`
`A
`
`The synthesis and properties of
`
`a
`
`broad class of molecules containing the
`
`functional group epoxide.
`
`Q
`
`Did you do any work on pharmaceutical
`
`formulations during your
`
`research for your
`
`D.Phil. degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`Did you do any research on compounds
`
`for ophthalmic
`
`use during your
`
`research for
`
`your D.Phil. degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`Did you do any research on
`
`nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug compounds
`
`during your
`
`research for your D.Phil. degree
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 28
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`29
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`I did not
`
`no.
`
`You said that your area of
`
`research
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`during your studies for your D.Phil. degree was
`
`on a broad class of compounds containing the
`
`functional group epoxides is that right
`
`A
`
`Thats correct.
`
`Q
`
`-- what
`What does it
`a broad class of compounds
`Well
`A
`there are many compounds of
`
`do you mean by
`
`very different
`
`types that contain the epoxide
`
`functional group.
`
`Q
`
`And what properties of
`
`that class of
`
`compounds were you studying
`
`A
`
`Their physical properties and their
`
`chemical properties.
`
`Q
`
`Did you identify any physical or
`
`chemical properties shared by that class of
`
`compounds
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection.
`
`No
`
`foundation.
`
`Vague and ambiguous.
`
`A
`
`One
`
`thing we discovered was that you
`
`can predict
`
`the substitution pattern of
`
`the
`
`epoxide from the carbon 13 NMR chemical shift.
`
`Q
`
`I
`
`think my question was a little
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 29
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`30
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`different.
`
`Did you identify any physical
`
`properties shared by compounds within that
`
`class that you were studying
`
`MS. LEBEIS
`
`Same objections.
`
`A
`
`Well what we found was that each
`
`molecule that we made behaved differently.
`
`So
`
`for example the NMR --
`
`the reason we could
`
`identify them is they all had different NMR
`
`characteristics
`
`and their chemical
`
`reactions
`
`were different.
`
`Q
`
`Did you find that any --
`
`there were
`
`any properties shared amongst
`
`the molecules
`
`within the class
`
`MS. LEBEIS
`
`Same objections.
`
`A
`
`I dont
`
`think we
`
`came
`
`to that
`
`conclusion
`
`no.
`
`Q
`
`What makes you call
`
`those compounds a
`
`class when they have no shared properties
`
`A
`
`They all have the same functional
`
`group.
`
`Q
`
`Can compounds within the same class
`
`share common chemical
`
`reactions
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection vague and
`
`ambiguous.
`
`No
`
`foundation.
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 30
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`31
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`They can yes.
`
`Why is a particular moiety in a
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`compound called a functional group
`
`MS. LEBEIS
`
`Same objections.
`
`A
`
`Because it
`
`has --
`
`a functional group
`
`is a part of
`
`a molecule that has reactivity.
`
`Q
`
`And do the same functional groups on
`
`different
`
`compounds have -- sometimes have
`
`similar reactivity
`
`MS. LEBEIS
`
`Same objections.
`
`A
`
`They can have a particular
`
`type of
`
`reactivity but you --
`
`you have to look at a
`
`whole molecule in order to determine the
`
`precise reactivity that you might expect.
`
`Q
`
`You said the precise reactivity that
`
`you might expect.
`
`Why did you qualify it
`
`that
`
`way
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection to the extent
`
`it mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`A
`
`I could have said general
`
`reactivity.
`
`Its just at what
`
`level you want
`
`to try and
`
`predict
`
`a particular
`
`type of reactivity.
`
`Q
`
`Well general and precise are two
`
`different
`
`things right
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 31
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`32
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection vague and
`
`ambiguous.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`on which way youre using it.
`Depends
`Lets move on in your CV.
`
`So in 1980
`
`you got
`
`a D.Sc. degree is that right
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Thats correct
`
`yes.
`
`Did you do any research in connection
`
`with that degree
`
`A
`
`Its a research degree on chemistry
`
`of epoxides.
`
`Q
`
`Did you do any work on pharmaceutical
`
`formulations during that research
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`Did you do any work on compounds
`
`for
`
`ophthalmic
`
`use during that
`
`research for your
`
`D.Sc. degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`Did you do any research on
`
`nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug compounds
`
`during your
`
`research for the D.Sc. degree
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I did not no.
`
`What
`
`further work did you do on
`
`epoxides during your
`
`research for your D.Sc.
`
`degree
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055
`www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 32
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`33
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`MS. LEBEIS Objection no
`
`foundation.
`
`A
`
`Essentially very little.
`
`So the
`
`D.Sc.
`
`I moved to France and in the French
`
`system you have to have a French degree.
`
`So
`
`they allowed me to put
`
`in the research I
`
`published on epoxides during my U.K. degree for
`
`consideration of
`
`a D.Sc.
`
`in the University of
`
`Paris which they awarded me.
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`What year did you move to France
`
`1977.
`
`Did you do research during those
`
`three years from 1977
`
`to 1980
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`research
`
`I did yes.
`
`What was the subject of
`
`that
`
`A
`
`It was a mixture of
`
`things including
`
`we were looking at
`
`the reactions of a whole
`
`range of natural products
`
`including steroids
`
`alkaloids carbohydrates with transition metal
`
`reactants
`
`and then we were looking at general
`
`organometallic reactivity as well.
`
`Q
`
`Did any of
`
`that
`
`research relate to
`
`work on pharmaceutical
`
`formulations
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 33
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`No.
`
`34
`
`Did any of
`for ophthalmic use
`
`that work relate to work
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`on compounds
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`It did not no.
`
`If
`
`I refer to nonsteroidal
`
`anti-inflammatory drugs as NSAIDs will
`
`you
`
`understand what
`
`I mean
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`Did you do any work during that
`
`time
`
`period on NSAIDs
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Not
`
`that
`
`I recall.
`
`Your CV is not --
`
`the pages arent
`
`numbered but
`
`if
`
`you turn to what
`
`is the third
`
`page of your CV you list
`
`a number of companies
`
`that you founded or had a directorship in those
`
`companies
`
`is that right
`
`still
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I actually founded all of
`
`them.
`
`Okay.
`
`Are all of
`
`those companies
`
`in existence
`
`They are not no.
`
`How many of
`
`them are still
`
`in
`
`existence
`
`A
`
`Well maybe I better qualify in
`
`existence.
`
`Some of
`
`them have been sold or
`
`The Little Reporting Company
`646 650-5055 1 www.littlereporting.com
`
`Page 34
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`35
`
`STEPHEN G. DAVIES D.PHIL.
`
`taken over by other companies and therefore
`
`the company under
`
`the name here is not
`
`in
`
`existence.
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`How many of
`
`them are still
`
`in
`
`existence as an independent
`
`company
`
`A
`
`Scilnk Limited Summit Therapeutics
`
`Oxstem Limited.
`
`Q
`
`Are any others still
`
`in existence as
`
`independent
`
`companies
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I dont believe so.
`
`Did you have a role in any of
`
`these
`
`companies apart
`
`from founding them
`
`A
`
`Well often theyd be founded on my
`
`research work.
`
`And then for some or all of
`
`the
`
`time I would be involved in the research that
`
`was going on in those companies
`
`and I would be
`
`on the board as the director of
`
`the company or
`
`was chairman occasionally.
`
`Q
`
`About
`
`-- over
`
`the ye

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