throbber
CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`----------------------------------------x
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`WOCKHARDT BIO AG, TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS
`USA, INC., AUROBINDO PHARMA U.S.A., INC.,
` Petitioners,
` -against- Case IPR2015-01340
`ASTRAZENECA AB, Patent RE44,186
` Patent Owner.
`----------------------------------------x
`
` DEPOSITION OF: R. DeFOREST McDUFF, Ph.D.
` Tuesday, November 29, 2016
` New York, New York
` 9:06 a.m. - 3:09 p.m.
`
` Reported in stenotype by:
` Rich Germosen, CCR, CRCR, CRR, RMR, CCRR
` NCRA, NJ and CA Certified Realtime Reporter
` NCRA Realtime Systems Administrator
`
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 1 of 200
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2220
`Mylan v. AstraZeneca
`IPR2015-01340
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`2
`
` Deposition of R. DeFOREST McDUFF, Ph.D., taken in
`the above-entitled matter before RICH GERMOSEN,
`Certified Court Reporter, (License No. 30XI00184700),
`Certified Realtime Court Reporter-NJ, (License No.
`30XR00016800), California Certified Realtime Reporter,
`NCRA Registered Merit Reporter, NCRA Certified Realtime
`Reporter, NCRA Realtime Systems Administrator, taken at
`the offices of WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C.,
`1301 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10019,
`on Tuesday, November 29, 2016, commencing at 9:06 a.m.
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 2 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
`3
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, PC
`BY: JAD A. MILLS, ESQ.
`701 Fifth Avenue, #5100
`Seattle, Washington 98104
`(206) 883.2554 / (206) 883.2699 (FAX)
`jmills@wsgr.com
`Attorneys for the Petitioner,
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`
`McCARTER & ENGLISH
`BY: DANIEL M. SILVER, ESQ.
`Renaissance Centre
`405 North King Street,
`8th Floor
`Wilmington, Delaware 19801
`(302) 984.6331 / (302) 691.1260 (FAX)
`dsilver@mccarter.com
`Attorneys for the Patent Owner
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 3 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S: (CONT'D.)
`
`4
`
`FINNEGAN HENDERSON FARABOW GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`BY: KASSANDRA M. OFFICER, ESQ.
`901 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20001-4413
`(202) 408.4000 / (202) 408.4400 (FAX)
`kassandra.officer@finnegan.com
`Attorneys for the Patent Owner
`
`CARLSON CASPERS VANDENBURGH LINDQUIST & SCHUMAN, PA
`BY: GARY J. SPEIER, ESQ., (via telephone)
`225 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
`(612) 436.9643
`gspeier@carlsoncaspers.com
`Attorneys for Teva Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc.
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 4 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`5
`
` I N D E X
`WITNESS EXAMINATION
`R. DeFOREST McDUFF, Ph.D.
` BY MR. SILVER 7,114
` BY MR. MILLS 163
`
`AFTERNOON SESSION 114
`
` E X H I B I T S
`DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 2218, excerpt of 140
` September 21, 2016 bench
` trial
`
`Exhibit 2219, multipage 143
` document entitled CVS
` Caremark value formulary
` effective as of 10/01/2016,
` not Bates stamped
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 5 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`6
`
`PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND/OR INFORMATION
` Page Line
` (none)
`
`DIRECTION TO WITNESS NOT TO ANSWER
` Page Line
` (none)
`
`QUESTIONS MARKED FOR LATER RULING
` Page Line
` (none)
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 6 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`7
`
`--------------------------------------------------
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` 9:06 a.m.
` New York, New York
`--------------------------------------------------
` (Whereupon, the court reporter
`administered the oath to the witness.)
`
`R. D e F O R E S T M c D U F F, Ph.D.,
`conducting business at Intensity Corporation, 420
`Boylston Street, 5th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts
`02116, having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was
`examined and testified as follows:
`EXAMINATION BY MR. SILVER:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. McDuff.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. How are you doing today?
` A. I'm doing well. Thank you.
` Q. So we just met a minute ago. My name
`is Dan Silver. I'm with the law firm of McCarter &
`English and Kassandra Officer is here with me.
`She's with the law firm of Finnegan Henderson, and
`we represent AstraZeneca.
` I assume you know why you're here
`today?
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 7 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And what is your understanding
`as to why you're here?
` A. To answer questions about the
`opinions I'm providing in this proceeding.
` Q. Okay. And I see from your CV, which
`we'll talk about in a minute, it looks like you've
`been deposed several times. Is that fair?
` A. Yes, I believe between 20 and 25
`times.
` Q. Okay. So you're generally familiar
`with how depositions proceed and the ground rules
`associated with depositions?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Is it okay with you if we skip
`the spiel at the outset about making sure we don't
`talk over each other or let me know if you need a
`break, that sort of thing?
` A. It's up to you, but that's fine with
`me.
` Q. Okay. If you have any questions for
`me, feel free to ask as we go, okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. When you serve as an expert, do you
`review all pertinent information in reaching your
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 8 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`conclusions, and let me clarify. As a general
`matter, when you serve as an expert, do you review
`all pertinent information in reaching your
`conclusions?
` A. I certainly review information to the
`extent I feel it's necessary to provide opinions in
`a particular case.
` Q. Do you -- so you make a determination
`at the outset what information you think is going to
`be pertinent to reach your conclusions and that's
`the information that you review?
` A. I wouldn't describe it that way.
` Q. Well, let's be more specific.
` In the context of this case, do you
`feel that you reviewed all pertinent information in
`reaching your conclusions?
` A. Yes, I would generally -- generally
`agree to the extent that information was available.
` Q. Let's take a look at your declaration
`which has been marked as exhibit 1060A.
` MR. SILVER: And, Jad, I'll note for
`the record I don't recall the specifics under the
`protective order, but because we're going to be
`discussing confidential information here, you know,
`I'd like to designate the deposition pursuant to the
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 9 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`protective order.
` MR. MILLS: You want to do a blanket
`designation or might there be certain portions?
` MR. SILVER: I suspect we would be
`able to quickly identify which portions we'd want to
`keep confidential, but until we do that, I'd like to
`just do a blanket designation.
` MR. MILLS: Is there any way that we
`could do -- perhaps we could mark the transcript at
`a point where we're going on where we think it's
`confidential just so that we're not making the whole
`thing confidential?
` MR. SILVER: Yeah, we'll do our best.
` MR. MILLS: Okay.
` MR. SILVER: Okay. Thanks.
`BY MR. SILVER:
` Q. So, Dr. McDuff, I've handed you what
`has been marked as exhibit 1060A.
` A. (Reviews.)
` Q. If you could review that for me. Can
`you tell me if this is a true and correct copy of
`your November 7 declaration in this matter?
` A. It appears to be, although I would
`point out that it does not include my CV or
`supporting attachments.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 10 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
` Q. Those would be exhibits, I think,
`1061 and 1062; is that right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So with that exception, you'd
`agree that this is a true and correct copy of your
`declaration?
` A. It appears to be, yes.
` Q. Okay. If we turn to page 27, under
`the heading: List of Exhibits, you have
`approximately three pages of exhibits listed here.
` Are these the totality of the
`materials that you reviewed in forming the opinions
`set forth in your declaration?
` A. No. This is the set of exhibits that
`is cited in my declaration or corresponding
`attachments. I reviewed additional information as
`well.
` Q. What else did you review?
` A. Well, for example, the Meyer
`declaration is not here in the list of exhibits, yet
`I did review the Meyer declaration. I reviewed
`underlying sources cited by Dr. Meyer. I
`reviewed --
` Q. Sorry, let me stop you.
` If you turn to page 28 and you look
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 11 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`at exhibit 2059A, that's the declaration of
`Christine Meyer. Is that the declaration to which
`you're referring?
` A. Yes. Thank you. I did not see that
`on first pass.
` To continue my previous answer, I
`examined the sources cited by Dr. Meyer and was
`provided with all or nearly all of the exhibits that
`have been put forth in the petition to my
`understanding by the patent holder.
` Q. Okay. Anything else that doesn't
`fall into those categories that you reviewed?
` A. Yes, certainly I have reviewed a wide
`range of academic literature relating to
`pharmaceuticals in my past experience and past work
`which do support my opinions here to some degree. I
`reviewed information in learning generally about the
`subject matter in the case, such as going to
`websites of the drugs discussed in my declaration,
`going to websites about diabetes, things of that
`nature. Those are some of the items that come to
`mind.
` Q. Anything else that you can think of
`sitting here today?
` A. Nothing else comes to mind sitting
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 12 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`here.
` Q. Okay. Do me a favor, turn to
`paragraph eight of your declaration, which is on
`page four, and take a look at the second sentence
`there. It says: The entirety of my declaration,
`including exhibits EX 1061 CV and EX 1062,
`attachments and reference materials, supplies the
`basis for my analysis and conclusions.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So what I'm trying to
`determine is if other than the things we've just
`talked about, general background information or
`maybe some of the references cited by Dr. Meyer, you
`looked at anything in forming the basis -- in
`forming your opinions that isn't identified in the
`declaration or in the list of exhibits?
` A. I believe I've already answered that.
`I'm happy to give it another try if you'd like.
` Q. I'm just asking you with specific
`reference to the statement you make in the second
`sentence of paragraph eight, is that a correct
`statement subject to the discussion we've had
`already?
` A. As indicated in paragraph eight,
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 13 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`those exhibits and the referenced materials supply
`the basis for my analysis and conclusions. In
`addition, as we've discussed, I've also reviewed
`additional information that go towards my general
`understanding and the development of my opinions.
` Q. Okay. We'll talk more about the
`preparation of your declaration in a second, but for
`now, I'd like to know whether you gathered the
`information that you reviewed in authoring this
`declaration or if it was provided to you by Mylan's
`counsel or some combination of both?
` A. Some combination of both.
` Q. Okay. Is there anything that you
`would have liked to have reviewed that you didn't
`have access to?
` A. Yes, a few items come to mind.
` Q. Did Mylan's counsel decline to
`provide you with anything that you would have liked
`to review?
` A. Not to my knowledge. What I was
`referring to is information that I understand was
`not provided by AstraZeneca in this case. For
`example, on discounts and information on early
`prescriptions and sales in the market. Those are
`some of the items that come to mind.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 14 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
` Q. Okay. But as far as you're
`concerned, either you were able to gather all of the
`information that was available to you, or if you
`wanted something from Mylan and they had access to
`it, they provided it to you?
` MR. MILLS: Objection. Form.
` A. I would say it like this, I gathered
`information to the extent I thought it was relevant
`and I was provided information from counsel. In
`addition, if I asked for information from counsel
`and they had access to that information, I was
`provided that as well.
` Q. Thank you.
` Are you aware of the existence of a
`parallel district court proceeding involving the
`'186 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Did you review the entirety of the
`record in that proceeding?
` A. Not the entirety of it, no.
` Q. Did you review the entirety of the
`record generated in that proceeding on the issue of
`commercial success?
` A. Not the entirety of the record, no.
` Q. Just to be clear, you didn't review
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 15 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`the entirety of the record in that proceeding as it
`pertains to the issue of commercial success?
` A. Not the entirety of the record, no.
` Q. Okay. Is it fair to say that you
`selected portions of the record that would be
`favorable to Mylan?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. Let's take a look at page 27
`again. Take a look at exhibit -- the listing for
`exhibit 1029. That's the cross-examination of
`Dr. Christine Meyer; right?
` A. I see that, yes.
` Q. Okay. Did you look at her direct
`examination testimony?
` A. I don't recall doing so, although I
`do believe that transcript contained the
`cross-examination of Mr. Hofmann as well.
` Q. It's your recollection that exhibit
`1029 contains the cross-examination of Dr. Hofmann
`as well?
` MR. MILLS: Objection.
` A. I would have to go back and look to
`be sure.
` Q. Okay. But suffice it to say, you
`didn't review the direct examination of Dr. Meyer in
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 16 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`the district court trial; right?
` A. I don't recall doing so.
` Q. Fair enough.
` Did you look at Dr. Meyer's expert
`report from the district court proceeding?
` A. No, nor am I aware of that report
`being available here.
` Q. We talked earlier about you gathering
`some exhibits and counsel providing some of the
`exhibits to you. How did you come across exhibit
`1029? Is that something you obtained yourself or
`did you get that from Mylan?
` A. I believe that was provided by
`counsel for Mylan.
` Q. Do you recall if you asked for
`Dr. Meyer's direct testimony?
` A. Sitting here, I don't recall one way
`or the other.
` Q. Okay. Earlier when we talked about
`reviewing pertinent information, would you have
`considered Dr. Meyer's direct testimony at trial to
`be pertinent?
` A. I would not view it as necessary in
`light of having Dr. Meyer's declaration and opinions
`that she's providing in this hearing, as well as
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 17 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`reviewing her cross-examination on similar topics
`previously.
` Q. But because you didn't look at her
`direct testimony, you don't know what's there;
`right?
` A. I have a general idea of what is
`there. I expect it to be similar to the opinions
`that she's providing here, yet not specifically.
` Q. Okay. If you look at the line item
`for exhibit number 1035, that's the reply expert
`report of Ivan T. Hofmann; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Did Mylan's counsel provide you with
`that document?
` A. I believe so, yes.
` Q. And Mr. Hofmann was the defendant's
`expert on the issue of commercial success in the
`district court litigation; correct?
` A. I believe so, yes.
` Q. Did you look at Mr. Hofmann's
`testimony from the trial in the district court
`litigation?
` A. His cross-examination, yes.
` Q. Okay. Is that listed in your list of
`exhibits here?
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 18 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
` A. Well, I don't believe I cite to it
`specifically, which is why it's not listed here in
`the list of exhibits. As I indicated, I have some
`recollection that it may be included in exhibit
`1029, yet I would have to look to be sure.
` Q. But are you certain that you looked
`at it?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You didn't look at Dr. Meyer's report
`from the district court litigation, did you?
` A. No, nor am I aware of that being
`available in this hearing.
` Q. Did you ask for it?
` A. I don't believe so, nor do I view
`that as necessary in light of having her declaration
`which provides her opinions here.
` Q. Yet you thought it was appropriate to
`review Mr. Hofmann's expert report from the district
`court litigation; is that right?
` A. It was one piece of information that
`I reviewed in part to obtain information that was
`not available elsewhere.
` Q. So is it fair to say that you
`reviewed a greater portion of the district court
`record that is favorable to Mylan than is favorable
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 19 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`20
`
`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
`
`to AstraZeneca?
` MR. MILLS: Objection. Form.
` A. I wouldn't put it that way, no.
` Q. Well, it's fair to say that you did
`not consider AstraZeneca's affirmative evidence on
`the issue of commercial success in the district
`court litigation; correct?
` MR. MILLS: Objection.
` A. I think I've answered this a number
`of times now, but to repeat, I did not review
`Dr. Meyer's affirmative report in the district court
`litigation, nor did I feel it was necessary to do so
`in light of having her declaration in this
`proceeding which provided her opinions here.
` Q. Okay. You didn't review her direct
`examination testimony to the best of your
`recollection either?
` A. I don't recall reviewing her direct
`testimony, yet I did review her trial demonstratives
`and Mr. Hofmann's trial demonstratives.
` Q. Okay. Let's take a look at
`Dr. Meyer's August 2, 2016 declaration which has
`been marked as exhibit 2059A.
` A. (Reviews.)
` Q. Here is a copy for each of you.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 20 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`21
`
`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
`
` Does that appear to you to be a true
`and correct copy of Dr. Meyer's declaration in this
`proceeding?
` A. Based on my brief review here, it
`appears to be.
` Q. Okay. Please turn to table one which
`is page 34 of 61.
` A. I'm there.
` Q. Okay. You don't dispute the FDA
`approval dates for each of these respective DPP-4
`inhibitors approved for sale in the United States,
`do you?
` A. No, not sitting here.
` Q. Thanks.
` Please turn to table 2A. Oh, wait.
`One question.
` When were the Nesina family of
`products approved by the FDA?
` MR. MILLS: Objection. Scope.
` A. I've not independently evaluated
`that. I don't recall doing so.
` Q. But you have no reason to dispute
`what's set forth in table one of Dr. Meyer's
`declaration which suggests that they were approved
`on January 25, 2013; correct?
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 21 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
` A. I see that here in table one.
`Sitting here, I have no reason to dispute it, yet I
`can't confirm it for you either.
` Q. You had roughly three months from the
`time you received Dr. Meyer's declaration to
`formulate your responsive declaration; correct?
` A. I don't recall the exact timing.
` Q. Okay. Did you look at table one in
`the context of preparing your responsive
`declaration?
` A. Yes.
` Q. At the time you looked at table one,
`did you have any reason to dispute what was set
`forth in table one?
` A. I don't recall.
` Q. That's fine.
` Let's turn to table 2A. Table 2A is
`labeled: Total dispense prescriptions for Onglyza
`family products August 2009 through October 2015.
`Do you agree?
` A. I see that, yes.
` Q. Do you dispute any of the figures
`presented by Dr. Meyer in table 2A?
` A. Not sitting here, no.
` Q. Okay. So, for example, if we look at
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 22 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`the far right-hand column, the Onglyza family total
`for 2010, it says in the year 2010 there were
`678,307 total dispensed prescriptions.
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. And you don't dispute that number;
`correct?
` A. Not sitting here, no.
` Q. And if we look at, for instance,
`2012, Dr. Meyer reports 2,809,002 prescriptions for
`the Onglyza family products.
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. And sitting here today, you don't
`dispute that number, do you?
` A. Not sitting here, no.
` Q. Let's turn to table three. Table
`three is labeled: Sales dollars of Onglyza family
`products August 2009 through September 2015.
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. Okay. Do you dispute any of the
`figures presented by Dr. Meyer in table three?
` A. Sitting here, I don't dispute the
`calculations, yet as described in my declaration, I
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 23 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`do dispute the interpretation of these as earned
`revenues.
` Q. And we'll talk about your opinions a
`little bit more later and you'll have an opportunity
`with your counsel on redirect.
` So for present purposes, I would ask
`just to focus on the questions that I'm asking. And
`right now I'm just asking about the figures as
`they're presented here in table three, and I think
`you said you don't dispute them; is that right?
` MR. MILLS: Objection. Form.
` A. I would give the same answer as my
`previous one. I don't dispute the calculations, yet
`I do dispute the interpretation.
` Q. And, like I said, we'll talk about
`that more later.
` So, for instance, you don't dispute
`that the sales of Onglyza have grown from
`approximately $150 million in 2010 to approximately
`580 million in 2014? Again, just limited to the
`figures and not the interpretation or the
`significance of the figures, you don't dispute those
`figures; correct?
` A. Well, I dispute the characterization
`in your question, which is that these are sales of
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 24 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`Onglyza. These are gross sales. They're not earned
`revenues and they wouldn't typically be described as
`the overall sales figure not in terms of what is
`earned and actually booked, but in terms of the
`calculations sitting here, I don't dispute them.
` Q. Let's make it clean. I think you
`said these are gross sales figures?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And so you don't dispute that
`the reported gross sales for Onglyza increased from
`approximately 150 million in 2010 to approximately
`$580 million in 2014; right?
` A. Well, again, subject to the
`interpretation caveats before, I don't dispute the
`calculations.
` Q. Okay. So if you look on the second
`page of table three, you don't dispute in the far
`right-hand column that total reported gross sales
`for the Onglyza and Kombiglyze family of products
`from August 2009 through September 2015 are in
`excess of $3.5 billion; correct?
` A. As a matter of calculation, I don't
`have any disputes to that calculation sitting here,
`yet those are not earned revenues as explained in my
`declaration.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 25 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
` MR. MILLS: Should we go ahead and --
` MR. SILVER: Yeah, let's see who is
`on the line.
` MR. MILLS: Hello. Could you please
`identify yourself?
` MR. SPEIER: This is Gary Speier from
`the Carlson Caspers firm. I'm going to put you on
`mute.
` MR. SILVER: For the record, who do
`they represent?
` COURT REPORTER: Teva.
`BY MR. SILVER:
` Q. Dr. McDuff, the date in table three
`comes from a company called IMS; correct?
` A. IMS Health, and I believe they
`recently had a name change, although I don't recall
`what it is sitting here.
` Q. Okay. Let's refer to them as IMS
`today because we'll be talking about them a lot, if
`that's okay with you?
` A. That's fine with me.
` Q. And IMS data is something that
`economists looking at pharmaceutical products
`typically rely on as a data point; right?
` A. It depends on one's purpose whether
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 26 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`that would be a good data source, but economists do
`rely on that data source from time to time.
` Q. And I think you rely in this case on
`IMS data, don't you?
` A. For certain calculations, yes.
` Q. This data that's reported by IMS I
`think we said is gross sales; is that right?
` A. For table three, that's correct.
` Q. Does IMS provide net sales data?
` A. Not to my knowledge. That
`information is typically reported and held by the
`companies, but not reported by IMS.
` Q. And so if you're trying to look at
`multiple pharmaceutical products in context, one way
`to do it would be to gather the available
`information from IMS to enable you to do an apples
`to apples comparison; correct?
` A. One could think about doing so. I
`did not see Dr. Meyer do so. As I point out in my
`declaration, she did not compare sales of Onglyza
`Kombiglyze to sales of any other drug, gross sales
`or net sales.
` Q. So I'm going to ask you again just
`for the present purposes focus on answering my
`questions. Your declarations are already in
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 27 of 200
`
`

`
`CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`McDuff, Ph.D., R. DeForest Case IPR2015-01340
`November 29, 2016
`
`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
`
`evidence. Your counsel will have an opportunity to

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