`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________
`
`
`APOTEX CORP.
`APOTEX, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`ALLERGAN, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,642,556
`_____________________
`
`Inter Partes Review Case No. Unassigned
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF ERNING XIA, PH.D
`
`
`
`
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1 
`I. 
`II.  My Background and Qualifications ................................................................ 3 
`III.  Summary of Opinions ..................................................................................... 5 
`IV.  List of Documents I Considered in Formulating My Opinions ................... 13 
`V. 
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ............................................................... 15 
`VI.  The '556 Patent Specification ....................................................................... 16 
`VII.  Claim Construction ....................................................................................... 17 
`VIII.  State of the Art Before September 15, 2003 ................................................. 23 
`IX.  Summary Chart of Analysis Over the Art .................................................... 43 
`X. 
`The Basis of my Analysis with Respect to Anticipation .............................. 44 
`A.  Ground 1: The '979 Patent Discloses Every Limitation of
`Claims 1-20 ......................................................................................... 45 
`XI.  The Basis of my Analysis with Respect to Obviousness ............................. 96 
`A.  Ground 2: The '607 Patent, as it Incorporates the '979 Patent,
`and Sall Provide a Reason to Arrive at the Invention of
`Claims 1-10, 12, 13, and 15-17 with a Reasonable
`Expectation of Success ........................................................................ 98 
`B.  Ground 3: The '607 Patent, as it Incorporates the '979 Patent,
`Sall, and the '586 Patent Provide a Reason to Arrive at the
`Invention of Claim 14 with a Reasonable Expectation of
`Success ..............................................................................................156 
`C.  Ground 4: The '607 Patent, as it Incorporates the '979 Patent,
`Sall, and Acheampong Provide a Reason to Arrive at the
`Invention of Claims 11, 18, and 20 with a Reasonable
`Expectation of Success ......................................................................166 
`D.  Ground 5: The '607 Patent, as it Incorporates the '979 Patent,
`Sall, the '586 patent, and Acheampong Provide a Reason to
`Arrive at the Invention of Claim 19 with a Reasonable
`Expectation of Success ......................................................................173 
`Secondary Considerations of Non-obviousness ................................173 
`1. 
`No Unexpectedly Superior Results ........................................ 175 
`2. 
`No Long-Felt, Unmet Need ................................................... 186 
`3. 
`No Failure of Others .............................................................. 189 
`
`E. 
`
`
`
`
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`No Industry Praise .................................................................. 189 
`4. 
`Commercial Success .............................................................. 191 
`5. 
`Other Objective Evidence ...................................................... 193 
`6. 
`XII.  Conclusion .................................................................................................. 193 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`I, Erning Xia, Ph.D, hereby declare as follows.
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`1.
`
`I am over the age of eighteen (18) and otherwise competent to make
`
`this declaration.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained as an expert witness on behalf of APOTEX, CORP.,
`
`and APOTEX, INC. ("APOTEX") for the above-captioned inter partes review (IPR). I
`
`am being compensated for my time in connection with this IPR at my standard
`
`consulting rate, which is $400 per hour.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that the petition for inter partes review involves U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,642,556 ("the '556 patent"), APO1001, which resulted from U.S.
`
`Patent Application No. 13/967,189 ("the '189 application"), which is a continuation
`
`of U.S. Patent Application No. 13/961,808 ("the '808 application"), filed August 7,
`
`2013, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 11/897,177 ("the '177
`
`application"), filed August 28, 2007, now U.S. Patent No. 8,618,064, which is a
`
`continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 10/927,857 ("the '857 application"),
`
`filed August 27, 2004. I also understand that the '556 patent claims priority to U.S.
`
`Provisional Patent Application No. 60/503,137, filed on September 15, 2003. The
`
`'556 patent names Andrew Acheampong, Diane D. Tang-Liu, James N. Chang, and
`
`David F. Power as the inventors. The '556 patent issued on February 4, 2014, from
`
`the '189 application. I understand that, according to the United States Patent and
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Trademark Office ("USPTO") records, the '556 patent is currently assigned to
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`Allergan, Inc. ("the patentee"). The patentee is referred to herein as "Allergan."
`
`4.
`
`I understand that the '556 patent is directed generally to the field of
`
`ophthalmic drug delivery and formulation, and more specifically to methods and
`
`compositions for treating an eye of a human or animal having dry eye disease (also
`
`referred to as keratoconjunctivitis sicca). APO1001, 1, Abstract; APO1002, 11,
`
`6:25-27; APO1003, 4, 5:10-12. I also understand that the compositions of the '556
`
`patent contain several components, including 0.05% cyclosporine1 A ("CsA") and
`
`1.25% castor oil. APO1001, 11, 15:65 to 16:10.
`
`5.
`
`In preparing this Declaration, I have reviewed the '556 patent and each
`
`of the documents cited herein, in light of general knowledge in the art. In
`
`formulating my opinions, I have relied upon my experience, education, and
`
`knowledge in the relevant art. In formulating my opinions, I have also considered
`
`the viewpoint of a person of ordinary skill in the art ("POSA") (i.e., a person of
`
`
`1 This declaration uses the term "cyclosporine." However, several prior art
`
`references that are quoted in this declaration use the term "cyclosporin." It was
`
`known in the art that both terms are used interchangeably and encompass the same
`
`class of compounds. See APO1003, 2, 1:11-13.
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`ordinary skill in the field of drug delivery and formulation, defined further below
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`in Section V) prior to September 15, 2003.
`
`II. My Background and Qualifications
`6.
`I am an expert in the field of topical ophthalmic drug formulation, and
`
`I have been an expert in this field since prior to 2003. I am presently employed by
`
`Fulcrum International Technologies, Inc. I obtained a Bachelor of Science degree
`
`in Pharmacy from Nanjing College of Pharmacy in 1982, a Master of Science
`
`degree in Biopharmaceuticals from China Pharmaceutical University in 1985, and
`
`a Ph.D. in Pharmaceutics from the University of Iowa in 1995.
`
`7.
`
`I was an Assistant Professor and Research Associate for the College
`
`of Pharmacy at the China Pharmaceutical University from August 1985 to
`
`December 1987, a Research Associate at Illinois State University from January
`
`1988 to December 1989, and a Research and Teaching Assistant for the University
`
`of Iowa College of Pharmacy from 1990 to 1995. After receiving my Ph.D. in
`
`Pharmaceutics, I held the positions of Senior Formulation Process Scientist and
`
`Principal Formulation Process Scientist with Bausch & Lomb in Rochester, NY
`
`from 1995-1999 and 1999-2001, respectively. I subsequently held the positions of
`
`Senior Principal Formulation Process Scientist from 2001-2004, Research Fellow
`
`from 2004-2005, and Site Leader/Research Fellow from 2006-2008 at Bausch &
`
`Lomb.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`8.
`
`I served as Program Director and Research Fellow at Valeant
`
`Pharmaceuticals in Rochester, NY from 2009-2013. I currently hold the position of
`
`Distinguished Research Fellow and Chief Technology Officer ("CTO") at Fulcrum
`
`International Technologies, Inc. ("Fulcrum") and have served in this position since
`
`September of 2013.
`
`9. My curriculum vitae is provided as APO1006.
`
`10.
`
`I have experience formulating topical ophthalmic products for treating
`
`dry eye, including products that decrease the evaporation of natural tears and
`
`products that increase tear production. While serving as CTO at Fulcrum, I helped
`
`develop a water-soluble based nutritional product for eye fatigue called 7-Hours™.
`
`Previously, I led Vision Care research initiatives as Program Director at Valeant
`
`Pharmaceuticals and dry eye initiatives and dry eye portfolio management as a
`
`Research Fellow at Bausch & Lomb in Rochester, NY. Also, while at Bausch &
`
`Lomb, my colleagues and I often consulted with physicians to determine the
`
`current ophthalmic needs in the market, and then made efforts to meet those needs.
`
`11.
`
`I have received several honors in my career, including the Bausch &
`
`Lomb In Focus Recognition in 2010, the Bausch & Lomb CSO Innovation Award
`
`in 2007, the National Award for Science Spectrum Trailblazer in 2005, and the
`
`National Emerald Award for Career Achievement in Industry in 2004.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`12. During my nearly 30 years of experience in topical ophthalmic drug
`
`formulation, I have authored or co-authored 36 scientific articles. I am also a
`
`named inventor on 106 U.S. patents and patent applications. Each publication,
`
`patent, and patent application is listed in my curriculum vitae, APO1006.
`
`13. Accordingly, I am an expert in the field of topical ophthalmic drug
`
`formulation. My full background is detailed in my curriculum vitae. APO1006.
`
`III. Summary of Opinions
`14.
`In this declaration, I consider the topical ophthalmic emulsions of the
`
`'556 patent in relation to the state of the art before September 15, 2003. The prior
`
`art references that I considered when comparing the claims of the '556 patent to the
`
`state of the art include, but are not limited to, U.S. Patent Nos. 5,981,607 ("the '607
`
`patent") (APO1002), 5,474,979 ("the '979 patent") (APO1003), and 5,578,586
`
`("the '586 patent") (APO1031), a Phase Three study published by Sall, et al.
`
`("Sall") (APO1004), and a systemic blood distribution study published by
`
`Acheampong, et al ("Acheampong") (APO1017). I also considered the file history
`
`of the '556 patent (APO1019), as well as Declarations of Drs. Rhett M. Schiffman
`
`(APO1019, 2575-99 and 2630-2743) and Mayassa Attar (APO1019, 2601-18), and
`
`the data and references cited therein. I understand that Allergan submitted the
`
`Schiffman and Attar Declarations to the United States Patent and Trademark
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Office to support the purported patentability of the '556 patent claims. A summary
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`of my opinions follows.
`
`15. Claims 1-20 of the '556 patent are directed to topical ophthalmic
`
`emulsions for treating the eye of a human, including treating dry eye disease,
`
`where the emulsion comprises several components known in the art, including
`
`0.05%2 cyclosporine A ("CsA") and 1.25% castor oil. APO1001, 11-12, 15:65 to
`
`18:16.
`
`16. Claims 1-20 are anticipated by the prior art. The emulsions claimed in
`
`the '556 patent contain 0.05% CsA, 1.25% castor oil, and the same excipients at
`
`identical concentrations as those taught in the art. See, e.g., APO1001, 11, 15:65 to
`
`16:45; APO1003, 3, 4:33-43. The '979 patent discloses working examples of
`
`topical ophthalmic castor oil in water emulsions containing CsA, including one
`
`containing 0.05% CsA with 0.625% castor oil, and one containing 0.1% CsA with
`
`1.25% castor oil, with the remaining ingredients being identical to those in the
`
`claimed emulsions. APO1003, 3, 4:33-43. Also, the emulsions disclosed in the '979
`
`patent were developed to treat dry eye disease, and cyclosporine A was known to
`
`increase tear production. APO1003, 2, 1:37-39 and 4, 5:10-14.
`
`
`2 Percent values refer to % by weight throughout this declaration unless
`
`otherwise indicated.
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`17. A POSA would have understood that the '979 patent discloses a small
`
`group of four CsA concentrations and four castor oil concentrations. APO1003, 3,
`
`4:33-43. Based on the disclosures in the '979 patent, I agree with Allergan's
`
`statement that "one of ordinary skill in the art 'would readily envisage'" emulsions
`
`containing 0.05% CsA and 1.25% castor oil. APO1019, 951. Also, it is an inherent
`
`property of the prior art emulsions containing 0.05% CsA that substantially no
`
`detectable blood concentration of CsA results from treatment. See APO1004, 7;
`
`APO1017, 6. Furthermore, relative efficacy, emulsion break down time, and
`
`occurrence of adverse events and side effects as compared to a second emulsion
`
`are inherent features of the claimed topical ophthalmic emulsion. Therefore, the
`
`'979 patent discloses each and every limitation of claims 1-20 of the '556 patent,
`
`either expressly or inherently, arranged as claimed.
`
`18. Furthermore, the
`
`'979 patent explicitly discloses five working
`
`examples that include each component and concentration of the claimed emulsions,
`
`and a preferred weight ratio of CsA to castor oil, between which the claimed
`
`formulation falls. See APO1003, 3, 3:16-20 and 4:33-43. Thus, the disclosure of
`
`the '979 patent would have allowed a POSA to make and use the claimed topical
`
`ophthalmic emulsions without the need for undue experimentation.
`
`19. Claims 1-20 would also have been obvious in view of the prior art. A
`
`POSA would have had a reason to modify the emulsions taught in the '607 patent,
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`as it incorporates the '979 patent, based on the teachings in Sall to arrive at the
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`emulsions of claims 1-10, 12, 13, and 15-17 because the '607 and '979 patents
`
`disclose safe, stable, and comfortable topical ophthalmic emulsions that are
`
`effective in treating dry eye disease, and Sall teaches the advantages of
`
`administering castor oil emulsions containing 0.05% CsA. APO1003, 3, 4:33-43
`
`and 4, 5:10-12; APO1004, 1, Abstract. Also, a POSA seeking to maximize safety
`
`would want to utilize the lowest efficacious dose of a drug, and Sall indicates that
`
`CsA is at the top of its dose-response curve at a concentration of 0.05%. See
`
`APO1004, 1, Abstract. Furthermore, the working examples in the '607 and '979
`
`patents contain the same components and concentrations as the emulsions of the
`
`'556 patent. APO1003, 3, 4:33-43.
`
`20. A POSA would have understood that both CsA and castor oil were
`
`useful agents to treat dry eye disease. APO1002, 11, 6:25-28; APO1003, 4, 5:10-
`
`12; APO1004, 1. Sall reported that castor oil in water emulsions containing 0.05%
`
`CsA were safe and efficacious. APO1004, 1. Both the '607 patent and Sall teach
`
`the importance of castor oil and how increasing its concentration can increase the
`
`emulsion's residence time on the eye surface. APO1002, 8, Fig. 7; APO1004, 8.
`
`The '607 and '979 patents taught several working examples, including emulsions
`
`containing 1.25% castor oil and CsA, that were for the treatment of dry eye
`
`disease. APO1002, 11, 6:1-11 and 6:25-28; APO1003, 3, 4:33-43 and 4, 5:10-12.
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Also, the '979 patent taught that compositions containing CsA increased tear
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`production in the eye. APO1003, 2, 1:37-39. Furthermore, based on the teachings
`
`in Sall, a POSA would have recognized the 0.05% CsA emulsion had "an overall
`
`efficacy substantially equal to" and had "at least as much therapeutic effectiveness
`
`as" an emulsion containing 0.1% CsA, and resulted in fewer adverse events and
`
`side effects as compared to an emulsion containing 0.1% CsA. APO1004, 5-6.
`
`21. Therefore, based on the disclosures in the prior art, I agree with
`
`Allergan's statement that emulsions containing 0.05% CsA and 1.25% castor oil
`
`"would have been obvious[.]" APO1019, 951. I also agree with Allergan's
`
`statement that "in making this selection (0.05% cyclosporin and 1.250% castor oil)
`
`there would have been a reasonable expectation of success" because the '979 and
`
`'607 patents provide working examples of emulsions that are effective in treating
`
`dry eye that contain every component and concentration of the claimed emulsions.
`
`APO1019, 951; APO1003, 3, 4:33-43. There would have also been a reasonable
`
`expectation of success because Sall discloses that 0.05% and 0.1% CsA emulsions
`
`have statistically equivalent efficacies and that 0.05% CsA emulsions result in
`
`fewer adverse events and side effects than emulsions containing 0.1% CsA.
`
`APO1004, 5-6.
`
`22. Also, a POSA would have understood that quicker emulsion break
`
`down time following administration to the eye results in reduced vision distortion.
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`See APO1031, 4, 6:35-42. A POSA seeking to reduce emulsion break down time
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`after application to the eye would have had a reason to combine the teachings of
`
`the '586 patent with the emulsions taught in the '607 patent, the '979 patent, and
`
`Sall because the '586 patent recognized the importance of emulsion break down
`
`time and provided methods to optimize it. APO1031, 4, 6:33-55, 11, 20:24-30. The
`
`'586 patent teaches the advantages of a meta-stable ophthalmic emulsion that is
`
`"sufficiently stable to provide a uniform dose to the eye but is relatively unstable
`
`and rapidly differentiates upon contact with the eye[.]" APO1031, 4, 6:53-55.
`
`According to the '586 patent, a meta-stable emulsion can be optimized by
`
`decreasing the surfactant to oil ratio – for example, by increasing the oil
`
`concentration while maintaining a constant surfactant concentration – to a level
`
`that retains the storage stability, but results in a quicker emulsion break down time
`
`after application to the eye. APO1031, 4, 6:53-55 and 11, 20:24-30. Therefore, a
`
`POSA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in arriving at the
`
`emulsion of claim 14, because the '586 patent teaches how increasing the oil
`
`concentration while keeping the surfactant concentration constant will reduce the
`
`emulsion break down time, thereby reducing vision distortion.
`
`23. Furthermore, a POSA seeking to maximize the safety of the topical
`
`ophthalmic emulsions would have had a reason to further combine the teachings of
`
`Acheampong with the '607 patent, the '979 patent, and Sall because Acheampong
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`tested blood levels of CsA at numerous time points following administration to the
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`eye. See APO1017, 6. Acheampong and Sall indicated that topical ophthalmic
`
`emulsions containing 0.05% CsA resulted in no detectable concentration of CsA in
`
`the blood at any time point following administration to the eye, including at both
`
`trough and peak time points. APO1004, 7; APO1017, 6. Therefore, a POSA would
`
`have had a reasonable expectation of success in arriving at the emulsions of claims
`
`11 and 18-20, because both Sall and Acheampong taught that 0.05% CsA
`
`emulsions resulted in substantially no detectable concentration of CsA in the blood
`
`at any time following treatment.
`
`24.
`
`In addition, I disagree with the arguments Allergan presented in the
`
`file history of the '556 patent and the conclusions Drs. Schiffman and Attar drew
`
`regarding secondary considerations of non-obviousness, which allegedly included
`
`unexpectedly superior results, long-felt need, failure of others, and industry praise.
`
`25. First, the data presented in the Schiffman and Attar Declarations do
`
`not support the declarants' conclusions that the ophthalmic emulsions claimed in
`
`the '556 patent provided unexpectedly superior results over the closest prior art.
`
`Instead, a closer look at Allergan's data in the Schiffman and Attar declarations
`
`shows that, at best, the formulations as claimed in the '556 patent exhibited
`
`properties that were comparable to – not superior to – the closest prior art, and
`
`were not unexpected. Furthermore, the data presented in the Schiffman and Attar
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`declarations are missing key information. The omissions and uncertainties
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`surrounding these data render them unreliable, and no reasonable scientific
`
`conclusions can be drawn from the data.
`
`26. Second, I disagree with Dr. Schiffman's assertion that there was a
`
`long-felt, unmet need for the ophthalmic emulsions claimed in the '556 patent
`
`before September 15, 2003. Dr. Schiffman does not provide any evidence of a
`
`long-felt, unmet need before this date. Moreover, even if a long-felt, unmet need
`
`did exist, the need would have been satisfied by disclosures in the prior art before
`
`September 15, 2003.
`
`27. Third, I disagree with Dr. Schiffman's opinions that other companies
`
`have tried and "failed" to produce formulations as claimed in the '556 patent. Dr.
`
`Schiffman does not provide any evidence that other companies tried to develop
`
`ophthalmic emulsions but "failed" due to technical reasons and not due to
`
`commercial or business reasons.
`
`28. Finally, I have reviewed the documents cited in Dr. Schiffman’s
`
`second declaration, and I disagree that the documents show industry praise unique
`
`to Restasis. Instead, the documents provide quotations from certain individual
`
`physicians who describe their general approval of treating patients with topical
`
`cyclosporine A and other anti-inflammatory medications. Dr. Schiffman's
`
`documents further show that the same physicians' preferred treatment for dry eye
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`patients is a combination of topical cyclosporine A and other dry eye treatments,
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`such as topical steroids or other anti-inflammatory therapies.
`
`IV. List of Documents I Considered in Formulating My Opinions
`29.
`In formulating my opinions, I have considered all the references and
`
`documents cited herein, including those listed below.
`
`Apotex
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`Acheampong, A., et al., "Methods of Providing Therapeutic Effects
`Using Cyclosporin Components," U.S. Patent No. 8,642,556 (filed
`on August 14, 2013; issued on February 4, 2014)
`Ding, S., et al., "Emulsion Eye Drop For Alleviation of Dry Eye
`Related Symptoms in Dry Eye Patients and/or Contact Lens
`Wearers," U.S. Patent No. 5,981,607 (filed on January 20, 1998;
`issued on November 9, 1999)
`Ding, S., et al. "Nonirritating Emulsions For Sensitive Tissue," U.S.
`Patent No. 5,474,979 (filed on May 17, 1994; issued December 12,
`1995)
`Sall, K., et al., "Two Multicenter, Randomized Studies of the
`Efficacy and Safety of Cyclosporine Ophthalmic Emulsion in
`Moderate to Severe Dry Eye Disease," Ophthalmology 107: 631-639
`(2000)
`1006 Curriculum Vitae of Erning Xia, Ph.D.
`1009 Coles, W.H. and Jaros, P.A., "Dynamics of ocular surface pH," Brit.
`J. Ophthalmol. 68: 549-552 (1984)
`1010 Declaration of Harry C. Boghigian
`"CTFA Becomes the Personal Care Products Council," available at
`http://www.personalcarecouncil.org/ctfa-becomes-personal-care-
`products-council (last accessed Jan. 29, 2015)
`Kunert, K., et al., "Analysis of topical Cyclosporine Treatment of
`Patients With Dry Eye Syndrome," Arch Ophthalmol 118: 1489-
`1496 (2000)
`Turner, K., et al., "Interleukin-6 Levels in the Conjunctival
`Epithelium of Patients with Dry Eye Disease Treated with
`Cyclosporine Opthalmic Emulsion," Cornea 19: 492-496 (2000)
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1013
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`Apotex
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1027
`
`Acheampong, A., et al., "Cyclosporine Distribution Into The
`Conjunctiva, Cornea, Lacrimal Gland, And Systemic Blood
`Following Topical Dosing Of Cyclosporine To Rabbit, Dog, And
`Human Eyes," in Lacrimal Gland, Tear Film, And Dry Eye
`Syndromes 2 - Basic Science and Clinical Relevance,Plenum Press,
`New York New York, Chapter 144, pp. 1001-1004 (1998)
`Small, D., et al., "Blood Concentrations of Cyclosporin A During
`Long-Term Treatment With Cyclosporin A Ophthalmic Emulsions in
`Patients With Moderate to Severe Dry Eye Disease," Journal of
`Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics 18: 411-418 (2002)
`1019 USPN 8,642,556 File History
`Murphy, R., "The Once and Future Treatment Of Dry Eye," Review
`of Optometry January 2000 Cover Focus, available at
`http://legacy.revoptom.com/archive/FEATURES/ro0200f6.htm
`6 (last accessed January 5, 2015)
`Inatomi, T., et al., "Expression of Secretory Mucin Genes by Human
`Conjunctival Epithelia," Invest Ophthalmol 37: 1684-1692 (1996)
`Solomon, A., et al., "Doxycycline Inhibition of Interleukin-1 in the
`Corneal Epithelium," Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41: 2544-2557
`(2000)
`Stevenson, D., et al., "Efficacy and Safety of Cyclosporin A
`Ophthalmic Emulsion in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Dry
`Eye Disease," Ophthalmology 107: 967-974 (2000)
`"Personal Care Production Council," available at
`http://www.personalcarecouncil.org/ (last accessed Jan. 29, 2015)
`Chidambaram, N. and Burgess, D.J., "Effect of Nonionic Surfactant
`on Transport of Surface-Active and Non-Surface-Active Model
`Drugs and Emulsion Stability in Triphasic Systems," AAP Pharmsci
`2: 1-11 (2000)
`Pflugfelder, S.C., et al., "The Diagnosis and Management of Dry
`Eye-A Twenty-five-Year Review," Cornea 19: 644-679 (2000)
`Glonek, T., et al., "Dry Eye Treatment Process And Solution," U.S.
`Patent No. 5,578,586 (filed on February 4, 1994; issued on
`November 26, 1996)
`Rowe, E.L., "Effect of Emulsifer Concentration and Type on the
`Particle Size Distribution of Emulsions," Journal of Pharmaceutical
`Science 54: 262-264 (1965)
`
`1028
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`- 14 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Apotex
`Exhibit #
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`Description
`
`1033
`
`1041
`
`1058
`
`1059
`
`Goto, E. et al., "Low-concentration Homogenized Castor Oil Eye
`Drops for Noninflamed Obstructive Meibomian Gland Dysfunction,"
`Ophthalmology 109: 2030-2035 (2002)
`Chanana, G., and Sheth, B., "Particle Size Reduction of Emulsions
`by Formulation Design-II: Effect of Oil and Surfactant
`Concentration," PDA J. Pharm. Sci. & Tech., 49: 71-76 (1995)
`Food and Drug Administration, Orange Book: Approved Drug
`Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, patent and
`exclusivity data for RESTASIS® (last accessed Jan. 12, 2015)
`Maïssa, C., et al., " Effect of Castor Oil Emulsion Eyedrops on Tear
`Film Composition and Stability," Contact Lens & Anterior Eye 33:
`76-82 (2010)
`
`V.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`30.
`
`I understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art ("POSA") is a
`
`hypothetical person who is presumed to be aware of all pertinent art, thinks along
`
`conventional wisdom in the art, and is a person of ordinary creativity. With respect
`
`to the subject matter of the '556 patent, a POSA would typically have had (i) an
`
`M.D. or a Ph.D. in chemistry, biochemistry, pharmaceutics, or in a related field in
`
`the biological or chemical sciences, and have at least about two years of experience
`
`in the formulation of topical ophthalmics or (ii) a Master's degree in chemistry,
`
`biochemistry, pharmaceutics, or in a related field in the biological or chemical
`
`sciences, and have at least about five years of experience in formulation of topical
`
`ophthalmics.
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`31. A POSA typically would work as part of a multidisciplinary team and
`
`draw upon not only his or her own skills, but also take advantage of certain
`
`specialized skills of others in the team to solve a given problem. For example, a
`
`clinician having experience in treating dry eye may be part of the team. As of the
`
`September 2003 earliest possible priority date of the '556 patent, the state of the art
`
`included the teachings provided by the references discussed in each of the
`
`unpatentability grounds set forth below. Additionally, a POSA would have been
`
`aware of other important information and references relating to dry eye, its causes,
`
`and useful treatments.
`
`VI. The '556 Patent Specification
`32.
`I understand that this declaration is being submitted together with a
`
`petition for inter partes review of claims 1-20 of the '556 patent.
`
`33.
`
`I have considered the disclosure of the '556 patent in light of general
`
`knowledge in the art and the teachings of the scientific literature before the earliest
`
`possible priority date of the '556 patent, which I understand to be September 15,
`
`2003. I have also reviewed the file history of the '556 patent. APO1019.
`
`34. The '556 patent is directed generally to the field of ophthalmic drug
`
`delivery and formulation, and more specifically to methods and compositions for
`
`treating an eye of a human or animal. APO1001, 1, Abstract. The '556 patent is
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`also directed to methods of providing desired therapeutic effects to humans or
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`animals using compositions containing cyclosporine. APO1001, 4, 1:18-20.
`
`35. The
`
`'556 patent specification acknowledges
`
`that
`
`the use of
`
`cyclosporine A ("CsA") and CsA derivatives to treat ophthalmic conditions was
`
`previously known in the art. APO1001, 4, 1:26-57. The '556 patent specification
`
`further acknowledges that CsA oil-in-water emulsions had previously been
`
`clinically tested, including emulsions with castor oil. APO1001, 4, 1:53-57.
`
`VII. Claim Construction
`36.
`I understand that terms of the claims are to be given their broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation in light of the language of the claims and specification of
`
`the '556 patent.
`
`37. "Buffer." Claims 4, 6, and 9 recite that the topical ophthalmic
`
`emulsion comprises a "buffer." A POSA would understand that a buffer is
`
`commonly used to control and adjust the pH of a solution or formulation. See
`
`APO1001, 10, 13:4-6. Also, the '556 specification states that "[a]lthough buffer
`
`components are not required, . . . suitable buffer components, for example, and
`
`without limitation, phosphates, citrates, acetates, borates and the like and mixtures
`
`thereof, may be employed to maintain a suitable pH[.]" APO1001, 10, 13:10-14
`
`(emphasis added). Thus, a POSA would understand that the suitable buffers are not
`
`limited to phosphates, citrates, acetates, and borates.
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`APOTEX 1005
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review of USPN 8,642,556
`Declaration of Erning Xia, Ph.D (APO1005)
`
`38. The '556 specification further states that "[t]he pH of the emulsions
`
`can be adjusted in a conventional manner using sodium hydroxide . . . to a
`
`physiological pH level." APO1001, 10, 13:4-6. Also, claims 5 and 10 of the '556
`
`patent explicitly require that "the buffer is sodium hydroxide." APO1001, 11,
`
`16:20-21 and 16:36-37. Therefore, a POSA would understand that the patentee
`
`intended the term "buffer" to encom