throbber
Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS,
`
`|NC., WOCKHARDT
`
`BIO AG and TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA,
`
`INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ASTRAZENECA AB,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`|PR2015-01340
`
`Patent RE44,186
`
`CROSS-EXAMINATION OF ANN E. WEBER, Ph D.
`
`Washington, D.C
`
`October 27, 2016
`
`&
`
`8~Om\IO~U1-I>0OI\)
`
`4 4
`
`_\ N
`
`_\ 0)
`
`E _
`
`\ U1
`
`_\ O~
`
`_\ \I
`
`4 ®
`
`_\ *0
`
`I\) O
`
`I\) 4
`
`I\) Ix)
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLC I Worldwide Court Repo
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`rting
`
`MYLAN - EXHIBIT 1073
`
`Mylan et al. V. AstraZeneca
`
`IPR2015-01340
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 2
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`Cross-Examination of ANN E. WEBER,
`
`Ph.D., a witness herein, called for examination by
`
`counsel for Petitioners in the above-entitled
`
`matter, was taken on Thursday, October 27, 2016,
`
`commencing at 8:07 a.m. at the law offices of
`
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, 1700 K Street,
`
`N.W., Fifth Floor, Washington, D.C. 20006
`
`before Cappy Hallock, Registered Professional
`
`Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter, Certified
`
`Livenote Reporter and Notary Public in and for the
`
`District of Columbia.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLC I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`On behalf of Petitioner Mylan
`
`Pharmaceuticals,
`
`Inc:
`
`DOUGLAS H. GARSTEN, ESQUIRE
`
`Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati
`
`12235 El Camino Real, Suite 200
`
`San Diego, California 92130
`
`858-350-2300 (P)
`
`858-350-2399 (F)
`
`dcarsten@wsgr.com
`
`i
`
`2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
`
`RICHARD TORGZON, ESQUIRE
`
`DAVID KNAPP, ESQUIRE
`
`Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati
`
`1700 K Street NW, 5th Floor
`
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`
`202-973-8800 (P)
`
`202-973-8899 (F)
`
`rtorczon@wsgr.com
`
`dknapp@wsgr.com
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 4
`
`A P P E A R A N 0 E 3 (Continued)
`
`On behalf of Petitioner Teva Pharmaceuticals
`
`USA,
`
`Inc.
`
`GARY J. SPEIER, ESQUIRE
`
`Carlson Caspers Vandenburgh Lindquist &
`
`Schuman, P.A.
`
`226 South Sixth Street, Suite 4200
`
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
`
`612-36-9600 (P)
`
`612-436-9605 (F)
`
`gspeier@car|soncaspers.com
`
`On behalf of Patent Owner AstraZeneca AB:
`
`JOHN D. LIVINGSTONE, ESQUIRE
`
`M. DAVID WEINGARTEN, ESQUIRE
`
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett
`
`& Dunner, LLP
`
`271 17th Street NW, Suite 1400
`
`Atlanta, Georgia 30363
`
`404-653-6400 (P)
`
`404-653-6444 (F)
`
`john.|ivingstone@finnegan.com
`
`david.weingarten@finnegan.com
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 5
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`C 0 N T E N T S
`
`Deposition of ANN E. WEBER, Ph.D.
`
`October 27, 2016
`
`EXAMINATION BY:
`
`By Mr. Carsten
`
`By Mr. Livingstone
`
`-000-
`
`E X H I B I T S
`
`PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
`
`Mylan
`
`Description
`
`Exhibit 1001 U.S. Reissued Patent Number
`
`RE44,186
`
`Exhibit 1007 2-Cyanopyrrolidides as
`
`Potent, Stable Inhibitors of
`
`Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV
`
`Exhibit 1010 Hanessian reference
`
`///
`
`///
`
`///
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 6
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`E X H I B I T S (Continued)
`
`PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
`
`AstraZeneca
`
`Description
`
`Exhibit 2056 8-3-16 Weber Declaration
`
`Exhibit 2161 Article: Discovery of
`
`JANUVIA (Sitag|iptin) ...
`
`Thornberry and Weber
`
`Exhibit 2096 Article: Dipeptidy|-
`
`peptidase IV hydrolyses ...
`
`Mentlein, Gallwitz and Schmidt
`
`Exhibit 2013 U.S. Patent No. 6,166,063
`
`Exhibit 2151 Article: Pyrrolidides:
`
`64
`
`synthesis and structure-activity
`
`relationship ... Augustyns
`
`Exhibit 2007 Article:
`
`The Unique
`
`Properties of Dipeptidy|-
`
`peptidase IV ... Augustyns
`
`Exhibit 2001 Article: 4-Cyanothiazolidides
`
`76
`
`as Very Potent, Stable ...
`
`Ashworth
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 7
`
`E X H I B I T S (Continued)
`
`PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
`
`AstraZeneca
`
`Description
`
`Exhibit 2210 Curriculum Vitae
`
`Page
`
`107
`
`Exhibit 2098 Article: Dipeptidyl Piptidase
`
`114
`
`IV Inhibitors for the Treatment
`
`of ... Weber
`
`i
`
`2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 8
`
`P R 0 G E E D I N G S
`
`WHEREUPON,
`
`ANN E. WEBER, Ph.D.,
`
`A Witness called for examination, having
`
`been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
`
`as follows:
`
`BY MR. CARSTEN:
`
`EXAMINATION
`
`Good morning, Dr. Weber.
`
`Good morning.
`
`It's very nice to see you again.
`
`Nice to see you.
`
`So we met before.
`
`Yes, we have.
`
`I had the great pleasure of conducting
`
`your cross examination at trial
`
`in a district
`
`court action pertaining to saxagliptin.
`
`Now, when we
`
`last had occasion to talk
`
`we were talking about
`
`invalidity of a particular
`
`patent, correct,
`
`the RE'186 patent?
`
`A
`
`Correct.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 9
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`Q
`
`And we were discussing it in the
`
`context of an opinion or series of opinions by
`
`Dr. Powers, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Correct.
`
`You understand that today we are going
`
`to be talking also about the validity or
`
`invalidity of the RE'186 patent,
`
`right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`But this time we will be focused on a
`
`slightly different set of opinions relating to the
`
`alleged invalidity of that patent,
`
`right?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's my understanding.
`
`And those are the ones that have been
`
`tendered by Dr. Rotella, correct?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`You understand that you took an oath
`
`here today to tell the truth, correct?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`And there is no reason you would have
`
`any difficulty in testifying completely and
`
`accurately and truthfully today;
`
`is that fair?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 10
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0OI\)
`
`MR. LIVINGSTONE:
`
`I don't want to
`
`interrupt the examination. Did you take an oath?
`
`THE WITNESS: Yes.
`
`MR. LIVINGSTONE:
`
`Sorry.
`
`I was over
`
`here writing something down.
`
`My apologies.
`
`It's
`
`early morning.
`
`0
`
`Dr. Weber,
`
`I have tons of materials
`
`here.
`
`So, as you know, Dr. Rotella had a
`
`declaration that had a bunch of exhibits,
`
`right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`And you had a declaration that had a
`
`bunch of exhibits;
`
`is that fair?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`There were exhibits, yes.
`
`Sure.
`
`I have done my
`
`level best to have at
`
`our fingertips, should you need them,
`
`the lion's
`
`share of the exhibits.
`
`If for some reason there
`
`is something else that you want to look at that
`
`I
`
`don't have here,
`
`just ask and we can take a quick
`
`break and I can get whatever you need to look at
`
`printed.
`
`This isn't designed to be a memory test.
`
`It's not designed to trick you in any way.
`
`If you
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 11
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`need to see something in order to fully and
`
`completely answer a question,
`
`just feel free to
`
`ask. Okay?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay.
`
`What
`
`I would like to do as the first
`
`order of business,
`
`though,
`
`is put your declaration
`
`in front of you.
`
`MR. CARSTEN: This has been marked
`
`previously as AstraZeneca Exhibit 2056.
`
`(Previously marked AstraZeneca Exhibit
`
`No. 2056, first referral.)
`
`BY MR. CARSTEN:
`
`Q
`
`If
`
`I could trouble you to look at that
`
`document and make sure it is accurate to the best
`
`of your knowledge.
`
`A
`
`0
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes,
`
`this looks like my report.
`
`Okay.
`
`It's a declaration, correct?
`
`Excuse me, my declaration.
`
`And your declaration,
`
`if you turn
`
`to -- there are two series of pages at the bottom.
`
`There is a set that actually has the page number
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 12
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`of the document,
`
`so I,
`
`II, and then 1, 2,
`
`et cetera.
`
`And there is another series that says
`
`Page X of 129.
`
`We might have some difficulties
`
`here.
`
`I will do my best to make clear which I
`
`am
`
`referring to.
`
`If you turn to Page 126 of the
`
`document.
`
`It's the last page.
`
`It's also 129 of
`
`129.
`
`So 126 of 129 -- no, 129 of 129.
`
`Yup,
`
`the very last page.
`
`Yes.
`
`And that's your signature?
`
`It
`
`is.
`
`Okay, and you say,
`
`"In signing this
`
`declaration," reading from Paragraph 1265,
`
`"I
`
`understand that the declaration will be filed as
`
`evidence in a contested case before the Patent
`
`Trial and Appeal Board of the United States
`
`Patent & Trademark Office."
`
`Have I
`
`read that correctly?
`
`Yes.
`
`And you say,
`
`"I acknowledge I may be
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 13
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`subject to cross-examination in the case, and that
`
`cross-examination will
`
`take place within the
`
`United States." Correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Correct.
`
`And, "If cross-examination is required
`
`of me,
`
`I will appear for cross-examination within
`
`the United States during the time allotted for
`
`cross-examination." Correct?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Correct.
`
`And then Paragraph 264 says,
`
`"I
`
`declare under penalty of perjury that the
`
`foregoing is true and correct." Right?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Correct.
`
`Are there any corrections you would
`
`like to make to this declaration?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`No.
`
`To the best of your knowledge,
`
`it is
`
`truthful and accurate?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Yes.
`
`Let's turn to some of the legal
`
`standards that you were asked to apply in this
`
`document.
`
`So I'm looking at, starting at Page 14
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLC I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 14
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`of 129.
`
`And there there is a Section V called
`
`Legal Standards.
`
`Do you see that?
`
`I do.
`
`You said that you've relied upon
`
`A
`
`0
`
`AstraZeneca's counsel for the applicable legal
`
`standards governing your analysis and opinions,
`
`right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`That's correct.
`
`And if you turn to the following page,
`
`Paragraph 41,
`
`there you say,
`
`"I understand that
`
`for a prima facie case of obviousness, structural
`
`similarity between the claimed compound and the
`
`prior art compound is not enough.
`
`The prior art
`
`must also have suggested making the specific
`
`modifications necessary to achieve the claimed
`
`invention."
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Have I
`
`read that correctly?
`
`You have.
`
`Is that the legal standard that you
`
`were directed by AstraZeneca's counsel
`
`to apply in
`
`this case?
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 15
`
`That
`
`is part of the legal standard,
`
`0
`
`And you did use that
`
`legal standard in
`
`forming your opinions with respect to the opinions
`
`you have tendered in this case?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`I did.
`
`The next paragraph, Paragraph 42 says,
`
`"I understand that a 'lead' compound is one that
`
`is most promising to modify and that selection of
`
`a lead compound is guided by all of the compound's
`
`pertinent properties."
`
`I have read that correctly?
`
`You have.
`
`Is that a legal standard that you were
`
`A
`
`0
`
`asked to rely upon by AstraZeneca's counsel?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes,
`
`it is.
`
`And is that a -- is that a legal
`
`standard that you did apply in forming your
`
`opinions in this case?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`I did.
`
`On the Paragraph 40, which bridges the
`
`two pages we have been discussing here, Pages 14
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 16
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`of 129 and 15 of 129,
`
`the bridging sentence says,
`
`"I have been told by AstraZeneca's counsel
`
`to
`
`assume the ‘time of the invention’ mentioned above
`
`to be no later than October 2000 "
`
`Is that an instruction that you
`
`received from AstraZeneca's counsel with respect
`
`to your opinions in this matter?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`It
`
`is.
`
`You further say,
`
`"My opinion would not
`
`differ, however,
`
`if the filing date of February
`
`16, 2001 applied." Correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`You didn't do any independent analysis
`
`to determine what the appropriate date to frame
`
`your analysis was.
`
`Instead you rather relied
`
`solely upon what AstraZeneca's counsel
`
`told you;
`
`is that correct?
`
`dates.
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`I relied on these
`
`So you didn't
`
`look at provisional
`
`applications, et cetera,
`
`to determine when
`
`saxagliptin compound was first included in any of
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 17
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`those preliminary applications and so forth,
`
`correct?
`
`A
`
`I'm aware of the preliminary
`
`applications, and I certainly had access to them,
`
`but
`
`I did not do that particular analysis.
`
`0
`
`Okay.
`
`We will come back from time to time
`
`over the course of the day to Exhibit 2056, your
`
`declaration.
`
`I put it in front of you early, sort
`
`the first thing out of the gate,
`
`so you would have
`
`it handy in the event you wanted to look at it for
`
`any purpose over the course of the day as well.
`
`Okay?
`
`Okay.
`
`MR. CARSTEN:
`
`So I would like to hand
`
`to you what has been marked as Exhibit 1001.
`
`(Previously marked Mylan Exhibit No.
`
`1001, first referral.)
`
`MR. CARSTEN:
`
`I have copies for you as
`
`MR. LIVINGSTONE:
`
`Thank you.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 18
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-I>0OI\)
`
`BY MR. CARSTEN:
`
`Q
`
`I hope and trust this is a document
`
`that
`
`looks familiar to you.
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Yes,
`
`it does.
`
`This is the re-issue '186 patent;
`
`is
`
`that correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Yes,
`
`that's correct.
`
`Okay.
`
`And you considered this document and
`
`reviewed it carefully in connection with rendering
`
`your opinions in this case;
`
`is that fair?
`
`A
`
`Yes,
`
`I considered this document and
`
`reviewed it in the case.
`
`0
`
`A
`
`You reviewed it carefully.
`
`Yes,
`
`I
`
`read it and I
`
`reviewed it.
`
`I
`
`guess it depends on what you mean by carefully.
`
`0
`
`Well --
`
`But yes,
`
`I
`
`read it.
`
`You're tendering opinions --
`
`Yes.
`
`-- relating to the validity of the
`
`claims of the patent, correct?
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 19
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`You wouldn't do that
`
`if you hadn't
`
`read the document carefully,
`
`I presume;
`
`is that
`
`fair?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`If that's your definition, yes.
`
`Let's turn to Column 88,
`
`if we could.
`
`That's towards the back.
`
`It's in the claims
`
`section.
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Now,
`
`if we
`
`look at -- have you got
`
`I do.
`
`Now,
`
`if you look at claim 8 there are
`
`one,
`
`two,
`
`three,
`
`four,
`
`five, six,
`
`seven, eight
`
`different compounds identified in claim 8 plus
`
`pharmaceutically acceptable salts;
`
`is that
`
`correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`Now, with respect to the first
`
`compound depicted under claim 8,
`
`so that's Column
`
`88 starting around Lines 45 to 52 or so.
`
`Have you
`
`got that compound?
`
`A
`
`I have.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLC I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 20
`
`Q
`
`In this patent there's no data
`
`presented for this compound relating to potency
`
`against DPP-4, correct?
`
`I would have to go back and just --
`
`Feel free.
`
`-- glance.
`
`Sure.
`
`I believe that
`
`is correct. Again,
`
`A
`
`0 A Q A
`
`there is likely,
`
`for example, mass spec data.
`
`There may be -- so if you're referring to
`
`biological data --
`
`Q
`
`The question was there is no data
`
`relating to potency of that compound as the DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`And by potency you understand I'm
`
`referring to in vitro data;
`
`is that correct?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`I would assume that
`
`you are referring to an I050 or a Ki at DPP-4
`
`enzyme.
`
`0
`
`And those would be in vitro measures
`
`of potency?
`
`A
`
`Ki and I050 are in vitro measures of
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0OI\)
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLO I Worldwide 0ourt Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 21
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`potency.
`
`0
`
`With respect to the compound we have
`
`been discussing,
`
`the first one under claim 8 in
`
`Column 88,
`
`there is no data presented relating to
`
`activity in any in vivo studies;
`
`is that correct?
`
`A
`
`Actually,
`
`let me just -- can I
`
`just
`
`have a minute to check something?
`
`0
`
`Absolutely. Again, as I said,
`
`it's
`
`not
`
`intended to be a memory contest.
`
`Feel free.
`
`A
`
`So that
`
`is correct.
`
`There is no
`
`in vivo data.
`
`0
`
`Okay.
`
`And there is no information presented
`
`here in the patent relating to the activity of any
`
`metabolites of that compound against DPP-4,
`
`correct?
`
`A
`
`I
`
`think there would be not enough
`
`information in the patent to definitively say that
`
`there was no metabolite of this particular
`
`compound that may have been covered by the patent.
`
`Q
`
`I'm asking about whether there is any
`
`data presented relating to data --
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 22
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-i>0Ol\)
`
`A
`
`If you are referring to in vitro
`
`potency data,
`
`then that would be correct.
`
`0
`
`And if I'm describing in vivo activity
`
`of a metabolite of that compound,
`
`that
`
`is also
`
`correct,
`
`right?
`
`A
`
`That would be correct.
`
`There is no in
`
`vivo data for any potential metabolite of that
`
`compound.
`
`0
`
`Okay.
`
`And there is no data provided
`
`regarding the interaction of this compound with
`
`the DPP-4 enzyme in the patent, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`And there is no data relating to the
`
`safety of this compound, correct?
`
`A
`
`There is no safety data in the patent,
`
`that
`
`is correct.
`
`0
`
`There is no efficacy data relating to
`
`this compound in the patent, correct?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`There is no efficacy
`
`data for that compound in the patent.
`
`Q
`
`And this compound,
`
`to your knowledge,
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 23
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`was never advanced to any clinical trials,
`
`correct?
`
`A
`
`I'm not aware of any clinical trials
`
`that were conducted with that compound.
`
`0
`
`And this compound was never FDA
`
`approved, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`So under your analysis in this case,
`
`and we will get to some of this a little later,
`
`but this compound would be a failure, exhibit a
`
`failure of others in connection with your work in
`
`this case, correct?
`
`A
`
`So this compound by virtue of the fact
`
`that
`
`it was not FDA approved, and that was the
`
`standard I used for failure of others, yes,
`
`this
`
`would be a failure.
`
`0
`
`So just to be clear,
`
`the standard you
`
`applied for your assessment of failure of others
`
`was FDA approval, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`And was that a legal standard that you
`
`were asked to apply by AstraZeneca's counsel
`
`in
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 24
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`connection with forming your opinions in this
`
`case?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`A
`
`That -- can I have a minute, please?
`
`Sure.
`
`So the legal standard that
`
`I was asked
`
`to apply,
`
`this is for the objective evidence of
`
`obviousness, was the failure of others in the
`
`prior art to fill -- to fill the need.
`
`And so the
`
`standard I applied was whether the compounds were
`
`in the prior art and whether they were able to
`
`fill the need for a diabetes medication in the
`
`United States.
`
`So that was FDA approval of
`
`compounds that were in the prior art prior to
`
`that,
`
`to the date of October 2000.
`
`Q
`
`And that
`
`legal standard that you just
`
`described, was that provided to you by Astra's
`
`counsel?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Yes. Yes,
`
`it was.
`
`So they are the ones that selected the
`
`threshold question or the litmus test of FDA
`
`approval as indicative of failure or nonfailure;
`
`is that fair?
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 25
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`A
`
`Well,
`
`they provided me with the
`
`understanding that the failure of others in the
`
`prior art to fill the need.
`
`And so if you were
`
`talking about,
`
`if I was talking about filling the
`
`need for a compound to treat diabetes in the U.S.,
`
`then that would be FDA approval.
`
`0
`
`Now, as of the priority date there had
`
`been no FDA approved DPP-4 treatment for diabetes;
`
`is that fair?
`
`A
`
`There were no FDA approved -- FDA
`
`approved DPP-4 inhibitors for the treatment of
`
`type 2 diabetes as of the priority date?
`
`0
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Yes,
`
`that
`
`is correct.
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`In fact,
`
`the first FDA approved
`
`diabetes treatment was sitagliptin;
`
`is that
`
`correct?
`
`A
`
`If you are referring to the first FDA
`
`approved DPP-4 inhibitor for the treatment of
`
`type 2 diabetes and not a compound in the prior
`
`art, yes,
`
`the first one to be approved was
`
`sitagliptin that wasn't
`
`in the prior art.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 26
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`And sitagliptin is your compound?
`
`Sitagliptin is Merck's compound, and I
`
`did work on that, yes.
`
`0
`
`Your
`
`team won what
`
`I
`
`think you
`
`referred to at trial as the Nobel Prize of
`
`medicinal chemistry for your work on sitagliptin,
`
`correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Yes, we did.
`
`You are a member of the Medicinal
`
`Chemistry Hall of Fame in part because of your
`
`work on sitagliptin?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`I would imagine, yes.
`
`By any measure you would consider
`
`sitagliptin a success?
`
`A
`
`So if you're referring to sitagliptin
`
`as a success because it is FDA approved, yes.
`
`It
`
`would be a success.
`
`0
`
`Well, even taking it away from that
`
`framework, you yourself, you consider sitagliptin
`
`to be a success in your career, don't you?
`
`A
`
`Well,
`
`I would consider sitagliptin to
`
`be a compound that
`
`I worked on that achieved FDA
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 27
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`approval and is being used to treat patients with
`
`type 2 diabetes.
`
`0
`
`You are aware that it's the biggest
`
`selling of the four FDA approved gliptin
`
`compounds, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`And you are aware that it's the
`
`biggest selling of the ten worldwide approved
`
`gliptin compounds, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`Let me just ask.
`
`Is there any way in
`
`which you think sitagliptin is not successful?
`
`A
`
`Not
`
`if you are referring to success in
`
`the marketplace or success in treating patients
`
`with type 2 diabetes, but no.
`
`No.
`
`0
`
`Now, vildagliptin, you are aware of
`
`the compound vildagliptin, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`I
`
`am.
`
`I don't want to quibble with you about
`
`terminology here.
`
`I understand that the compound
`
`that
`
`is now known as vildagliptin is a prior art
`
`compound to saxagliptin;
`
`is that correct?
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 28
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`Now,
`
`I
`
`recognize that at the time,
`
`October 2000, Vildagliptin was not known commonly
`
`as vildagliptin but rather the structure of the
`
`compound itself was known at that point, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`Okay.
`
`Vildagliptin, under your standard in
`
`this case,
`
`is a failure, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`Now, Vildagliptin is approved in
`
`Europe for treatment of type 2 diabetes as a DPP-4
`
`inhibitor, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Vildagliptin is approved in Europe.
`
`Okay.
`
`Going back to the patent, you were
`
`talking about Exhibit 1001. We were talking about
`
`the compounds
`
`listed under claim 8.
`
`We had just
`
`finished discussing the first compound under
`
`claim 8.
`
`I would like to ask the same series of
`
`questions with regard to the second compound.
`
`So with respect to the second
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 29
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`compound,
`
`the one that has the cyclobutane ring in
`
`it, do you have that, Dr. Weber?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`I do.
`
`Is there any data presented in the
`
`specification of the RE'186 patent pertaining to
`
`potency data for that compound against DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`No.
`
`There is no specific IC50 or Ki
`
`for this compound.
`
`0
`
`Is there any data presented with
`
`respect to that second compound under claim 8 with
`
`respect to in vivo data against DPP-4 or type 2
`
`diabetes?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`No in vivo data
`
`presented in the patent.
`
`Q
`
`And there is no data presented
`
`regarding activity of a metabolite of that
`
`compound against DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`And there is no data about the safety
`
`of that compound?
`
`A
`
`No data about the safety of the
`
`compound in the patent.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 30
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`0
`
`No data about the efficacy of the
`
`compound in the patent?
`
`A
`
`No data about the efficacy in the
`
`patent.
`
`0
`
`To your knowledge,
`
`it's never advanced
`
`to clinical trials?
`
`A
`
`To the best of my knowledge,
`
`this
`
`compound has not advanced to clinical trials.
`
`0
`
`A
`
`0
`
`And it is not FDA approved?
`
`It
`
`is not FDA approved.
`
`And under your analysis in this case
`
`that compound is also a failure?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`Okay.
`
`With respect to the third compound
`
`under claim 8,
`
`the one at the bottom of Column 88
`
`that has got the cyclohexyl group, do you see
`
`that?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`I do.
`
`There is no data in the patent
`
`pertaining to in vitro activity against DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`No I050 or Ki.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 31
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`Q
`
`And no data presented relating to
`
`in vivo activity of that compound?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`No in vivo activity.
`
`No information provided relating to
`
`interaction of that compound with the DPP-4
`
`enzyme?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`No information provided regarding
`
`activity of a metabolite of that compound against
`
`DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`No information about metabolites of
`
`this compound.
`
`0
`
`No information provided relating to
`
`safety of this compound in the patent?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`No information on safety.
`
`No information about efficacy of this
`
`compound in the patent?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`No efficacy data.
`
`Under your analysis in this case that
`
`compound is also a failure, correct?
`
`A
`
`This compound was not approved by the
`
`FDA and is a failure.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 32
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`Okay.
`
`There are five compounds at the top of
`
`Column 89 which is also part of claim 8, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`Okay.
`
`Now, one of the five compounds is
`
`saxagliptin;
`
`is that correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`With respect to the four compounds
`
`that are not saxagliptin,
`
`I'm just going to ask
`
`the same series of questions for expediency sake.
`
`With respect to those four compounds,
`
`is there any data presented in the specification
`
`of the RE'186 patent relating to in vivo -- excuse
`
`me,
`
`in vitro activity against DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`There is no specific in vitro data
`
`presented.
`
`0
`
`With respect to the four compounds
`
`that are not saxagliptin on the top of Column 89,
`
`is there any in vivo activity information
`
`presented in the specification?
`
`A
`
`There is no data regarding in vivo
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 33
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`activity.
`
`0
`
`With respect to those four compounds
`
`at the top of Column 89,
`
`is there any information
`
`in the patent relating to activity of any
`
`metabolites of these compounds against DPP-4?
`
`A
`
`No,
`
`there is no information on
`
`metabolites.
`
`Q
`
`Is there any data in the patent with
`
`respect to those four compounds at the top of
`
`Column 89, not
`
`including saxagliptin,
`
`regarding
`
`interaction with the DPP-4 enzyme of those
`
`compounds?
`
`A
`
`No data on interaction with the
`
`enzyme.
`
`0
`
`With respect to the four compounds at
`
`the top of Column 89, not
`
`including saxagliptin,
`
`is there any data on the safety of those
`
`compounds?
`
`A
`
`There is no data on the safety of
`
`these compounds.
`
`0
`
`With respect to the four compounds at
`
`the top of Column 89, not
`
`including saxagliptin,
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLC I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 34
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`is there any information in the patent about the
`
`efficacy of those compounds?
`
`A
`
`No,
`
`there is no efficacy information
`
`in the patent on these compounds.
`
`0
`
`Are you aware that any of the four
`
`compounds at the top of Column 89, not
`
`including
`
`saxagliptin, were ever advanced to clinical
`
`trials?
`
`A
`
`My understanding is that these
`
`compounds were not advanced to clinical trials.
`
`0
`
`And are any of the four compounds we
`
`have been discussing FDA approved?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`No, none of these are FDA approved.
`
`And under your analysis in this case
`
`the four compounds at the top of Column 89, not
`
`including saxagliptin, are failures, correct?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`These would be
`
`failures.
`
`0
`
`With respect to claim 10, Column 89,
`
`have you got that, Dr. Weber?
`
`A
`
`I do.
`
`Okay.
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLC I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 35
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`There are a group of compounds
`
`identified here with respect to variations in R1.
`
`Do you see that?
`
`I do.
`
`But, generally speaking,
`
`there are
`
`A
`
`0
`
`two,
`
`if you will have it, classes of compounds
`
`identified here, and the difference between the
`
`two classes of compounds is the location of the
`
`cyclopropane ring on that five-membered ring
`
`containing a nitrogen.
`
`Do you see that?
`
`I do see that, yes.
`
`And is my loose terminology, would you
`
`A
`
`0
`
`agree with that,
`
`that the difference between those
`
`two sets of compounds has to do with the location
`
`of the cyclopropane ring in that area of the
`
`molecule?
`
`A
`
`Yes.
`
`These two structures differ by
`
`the location of the cyclopropyl
`
`ring.
`
`0
`
`And the one on top has a
`
`4,5-cyclopropane ring where the one on the bottom
`
`has a 3,4-cyclopropane ring?
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 36
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`A
`
`Actually that doesn't
`
`look to be
`
`numbered that way in this particular patent.
`
`But
`
`in general
`
`the terminology we have been using on
`
`the case, yes.
`
`This is the 4,5- -- the upper one
`
`is the 4,5- and the lower one is the 3,4-.
`
`0
`
`Thank you.
`
`Now, with respect to the class of
`
`compounds at the bottom, what we have called the
`
`3,4-cyclopropane compounds,
`
`there is no data in
`
`the patent relating to in vitro activity of that
`
`class of compounds relating to DPP-4, correct?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`There is no specific
`
`in vitro data on these compounds.
`
`0
`
`A
`
`compounds.
`
`No Ki, no I050?
`
`No Ki, no I050 on any of these
`
`0
`
`With respect to -- with respect to
`
`in vivo data,
`
`there is no in vivo data on these
`
`compounds in the patent?
`
`A
`
`That's right.
`
`No in vivo data in the
`
`patent on these compounds.
`
`0
`
`And there is no information relating
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 37
`
`i
`
`O~O®\lO~U1-l>0Ol\)
`
`to potential activity of potential metabolite of
`
`any of these compounds in the patent?
`
`A
`
`That's correct, no metabolite
`
`information for these compounds.
`
`0
`
`And there is no data provided in the
`
`patent relating to interaction of any of those
`
`compounds with the DPP-4 enzyme, correct?
`
`A
`
`0
`
`That's correct.
`
`And there is no data relating to
`
`safety of those compounds?
`
`A
`
`That's correct.
`
`No safety data on
`
`these compounds in the patent.
`
`0
`
`No efficacy data in the patent about
`
`these compounds?
`
`A
`
`There is no efficacy data in the
`
`patent on these compounds.
`
`0
`
`Under your analysis those compounds
`
`would be a failure, correct?
`
`A
`
`None of these are FDA approved,
`
`thus a
`
`failure.
`
`0
`
`Let's talk about saxagliptin for a
`
`moment.
`
`In terms of the saxagliptin molecule,
`
`GregoryEdwards, LLG I Worldwide Court Reporting
`GregoryEdwards.com I 866-4Team GE
`
`

`
`Ann E. Weber, Ph.D. - October 27, 2016
`
`Page 38
`
`i
`
`O~O®\IO~U1-I>0Ol\)
`
`there is no data in the patent relating to in vivo
`
`activity of saxagliptin against DPP-4,
`
`is there?
`
`A
`
`No,
`
`there is no in vivo data on
`
`saxagliptin in the patent.
`
`Q
`
`And there is no information in the
`
`patent relating to in vivo activity of
`
`saxagliptin, correct?
`
`A
`
`That
`
`is correct.
`
`No in vivo data on
`
`saxagliptin is reported in the patent.
`
`Q
`
`And there is no

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