throbber
LIFEPORT SCIENCES LLC v.
`ENDOLOGIX, INC
`
`Page 1
` 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
` FOR DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
` 2
` C.A. NO. 12-1791 (GMS)
` 3
`
` 4 LIFEPORT SCIENCES LLC,
`
` 5
` Plaintiff,
` 6
` vs.
` 7
` ENDOLOGIX, INC,
` 8
`
` 9 Defendant.
` _________________________________________/
`10
`
`11
` Southeast Financial Center
`12 Suite 3900
` 200 South Biscayne Boulevard
`13 Miami, Florida 33131
` Wednesday, July 8, 2015
`14 8:54 a.m. - 2:54 p.m.
`
`15
` C O N F I D E N T I A L
`16
`
`17 VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF GEORGE L. GOICOECHEA, M.D.
`
`18
`
`19
` Taken before Darline M. West,
`20
` Registered Professional Reporter, Notary Public
`21
` in and for the State of Florida At Large,
`22
` pursuant to Notice of Taking Deposition filed
`23
` by the Defendant in the above cause.
`24
`
`25 - - -
`
`GEORGE L. GOICOECHEA, M.D. - CONFIDENTIAL
`July 8, 2015
`Page 3
`
` 1 I N D E X
`
` 2 WITNESS: PAGE:
`
` 3 GEORGE L. GOICOECHEA, M.D.
`
` 4 DIRECT EXAMINATION 5
` BY MR. MURTHY:
` 5
` CERTIFICATE OF OATH 193
` 6
` REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 194
` 7
`
` 8
` - - -
` 9
` E X H I B I T S
`10
` - - -
`11
`
`12 Description Page
`
`13 Goicoechea Deposition Brochure bearing 62
` Exhibit 1 Bates numbers LIFE
`14 0754146 through 75162
`
`15 Goicoechea Deposition Dr. Cragg's patent 79
` Exhibit 2
`16
` Goicoechea Deposition U.S. Patent 82
`17 Exhibit 3 No. 5,575,817 to
` Martin
`18
` Goicoechea Deposition Structures of 104
`19 Exhibit 4 inducers
`
`20 Goicoechea Deposition U.S. Patent 5,226,913 118
` Exhibit 5 to Pinchuk
`21
` Goicoechea Deposition U.S. Patent 171
`22 Exhibit 6 No. 6,117,167
`
`23 Goicoechea Deposition U.S. Patent 172
` Exhibit 7 No. 6,117,167
`24
` Goicoechea Deposition Letter 187
`25 Exhibit 8
`
`Page 2
`
`Page 4
`
` 1 APPEARANCES:
`
` 2 On behalf of the Plaintiff:
`
` 3 DECHERT LLP
` Cira Centre, 2929 Arch Street
` 4 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
` Phone: 215.994.4000
` 5 E-mail: kevin.flannery@dechert.com
` By: KEVIN M. FLANNERY, ESQ.
` 6
`
` 7 On behalf of the Defendant:
`
` 8 K&L GATES
` 70 West Madison Street, Suite 3100
` 9 Chicago, Illinois 60602
` Phone: 312.372.1121
`10 E-mail: sanjay.murthy@klgates.com
` katie.hoffee@klgates.com
`11 By: SANJAY K. MURTHY, ESQ.
` and KATHERINE HOFFEE, ESQ.
`12
`
`13
` ALSO PRESENT:
`14
` RICHARD HILLSTEAD, PH.D., FAHA - Technical
`15 expert on behalf of the Defendant.
`
`16
` - - -
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` 1 P R O C E E D I N G S
` 2 - - -
` 3 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: We are now on the
` 4 video record. The time is 8:54 a.m. on
` 5 Wednesday, the 8th day of July, 2015. We
` 6 are here for the videotaped deposition of
` 7 Dr. George Goicoechea, taken at 200 South
` 8 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 3900, Miami,
` 9 Florida, and it's taken in Case No. 12-1791,
`10 LifePort Sciences, LLC, versus Endologix,
`11 Inc.
`12 The court reporter is Darline West.
`13 The videographer is Sean Maguire, both of
`14 Barkley Court Reporters.
`15 Will counsel and all present please
`16 introduce yourselves. And the court
`17 reporter will swear the witness.
`18 MR. MURTHY: Sanjay Murthy of K&L Gates
`19 on behalf of Endologix, Inc., and with me is
`20 my colleague, Katherine Hoffee, and our
`21 technical expert, Richard Hillstead.
`22 MR. FLANNERY: Kevin Flannery of
`23 Dechert for Dr. Goicoechea as well as the
`24 plaintiff.
`25 THE COURT REPORTER: Doctor, would you
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`Barkley Court Reporters
`
`(1) Pages 1 - 4
`
`001
`
`

`
`LIFEPORT SCIENCES LLC v.
`ENDOLOGIX, INC
`
`GEORGE L. GOICOECHEA, M.D. - CONFIDENTIAL
`July 8, 2015
`Page 139
`
`Page 137
`
` 1 A. Yes.
` 2 Q. Okay. Now, is one of the reasons why each
` 3 company had designed their own introducers for
` 4 deploying their products is because the products were
` 5 designed differently?
` 6 A. Yes. 'Cause that depends on the product,
` 7 the -- how the product is designed. Not all the
` 8 products are similar. And so you need different ways
` 9 to -- to adapt your product with -- the system to
`10 your product.
`11 Q. Now, at the time that you saw Dr. Cragg's
`12 original stent design, do you recall whether or not
`13 he was using a -- a helical designed stent? Do you
`14 know what --
`15 A. No.
`16 Q. Do you know what -- what I'm referring to
`17 when I say a helical stent?
`18 A. It goes like this, right?
`19 Q. Right.
`20 A. No, I don't -- I don't recall that.
`21 Q. Do you recall whether or not there were
`22 designs that existed that had -- that were nonhelical
`23 stents?
`24 A. No.
`25 Q. Did you have any involvement in the design
`
` 1 of those weird guys that -- you know, that combines
` 2 one thing with the other. But he did have a
` 3 tremendous amount of know-how in engineering now. He
` 4 might not be able to say I need to do this this way
` 5 or the other way. That was John. But he was very
` 6 good at judging exactly what it is that he wanted to
` 7 have in that device, you know.
` 8 Q. Do you know or can you identify any
` 9 advantages of using a design -- a stent design that
`10 is helical as opposed to one that's non-helical?
`11 A. No. This is a matter of -- of doing some
`12 testing and -- and all that. I -- I haven't done
`13 that or I haven't seen that.
`14 Q. Okay. Do you know if choosing a helical
`15 versus a nonhelical design is just a matter of design
`16 choice?
`17 MR. FLANNERY: Object to form.
`18 THE WITNESS: I believe so. I believe
`19 so, yes. You see some -- some of the
`20 manufacturers use a -- a -- not helical.
`21 They use one -- one by one by one and so on
`22 and so forth to prevent it from kinking, you
`23 know. So -- and that's -- that's a very
`24 well-established thing that everybody's
`25 using nowadays, you know.
`
`Page 138
`
`Page 140
`
` 1 of the stent that's described in your '906 patent,
` 2 the actual stent cage itself?
` 3 A. No.
` 4 Q. Do you recall who was involved in the
` 5 design of that?
` 6 A. John Hudson.
` 7 Q. Was Dr. Cragg involved at all?
` 8 A. Not so much in the bifurcation. Because
` 9 Cragg was in Minneapolis, and, you know,
`10 communication was open. But we were going back and
`11 forth with Dr. Mialhe, who was actually giving us
`12 most of the feedback, what he interpreted to have --
`13 what he liked to have on that device, since he was
`14 going to be the first one to implant them anyway. So
`15 he was very active in development of the product, you
`16 know.
`17 Q. But did Dr. Mialhe actually have
`18 involvement in -- in designing the stent cage itself?
`19 A. Yes.
`20 Q. Okay. Was Dr. Mialhe -- did he have any
`21 sort of engineering background?
`22 A. Yes.
`23 Q. Do you recall what it was?
`24 A. I think he had an engineering degree as
`25 well as being a doctor. He's -- you know, he was one
`
` 1 BY MR. MURTHY:
` 2 Q. And there were certainly -- although maybe
` 3 not in a wide amount of devices available in the AAA
` 4 space, people had been designing stents for a long
` 5 time before MinTec was created in 1993; isn't that
` 6 true?
` 7 A. But not -- for that particular application,
` 8 I never seen -- I never seen anyone. I -- when I saw
` 9 Cragg at that meeting that he made a presentation on
`10 that, that's how I came aware of it, you know, then
`11 it -- the light came up and say, wow, this is the
`12 future.
`13 Q. I'm taking us away from the world of AAA,
`14 though, Dr. Goicoechea.
`15 People have been designing stents for the
`16 treatment of stenosis, as one example, for many
`17 years?
`18 A. Coronaries.
`19 Q. For many years before MinTec was created?
`20 A. Yes. Palmaz started in the 1980s. You
`21 know, the first angioplasty catheter came out of
`22 Switzerland from Gruentzig. And then came out the --
`23 then came the invent of the -- of the stent for
`24 the -- except the nitinol stent. The self-expanding
`25 stent is not good for that application. Because you
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`Barkley Court Reporters
`
`(35) Pages 137 - 140
`
`002
`
`

`
`LIFEPORT SCIENCES LLC v.
`ENDOLOGIX, INC
`
`GEORGE L. GOICOECHEA, M.D. - CONFIDENTIAL
`July 8, 2015
`Page 143
`
`Page 141
`
` 1 need something that as a radial force to keep it
` 2 open, you know, and strong, you know. So -- but the
` 3 usefulness of nitinol comes in the small calibers,
` 4 you know, the carotids, you know, down below the
` 5 knee, et cetera.
` 6 Q. And the below-the-knee application, that
` 7 was what Dr. Cragg was already working on before
` 8 MinTec was created, right?
` 9 A. The what?
`10 Q. The below-the-knee applications, that was
`11 what Dr. Cragg was previously doing before MinTec was
`12 created?
`13 A. Yes. That's what you can see by, you know,
`14 the data. And that's when I saw him making a
`15 presentation in Canary Islands, when I met him.
`16 Q. And sort of getting back to my original
`17 question.
`18 People had been designing stents for
`19 multiple, different applications for many years
`20 before MinTec was founded in 1993?
`21 A. I -- I guess so. Not all the stents are
`22 created equal. So, I mean, the word "stent" is one
`23 word. But there are many different kinds of stents,
`24 you know, esophageal, tracheal stents, biliary
`25 stents, you know, you name it. Each one of them has
`
` 1 BY MR. MURTHY:
` 2 Q. Well, I -- I think that a jury's going to
` 3 have to decide that question, Dr. Goicoechea.
` 4 A. You see what I mean?
` 5 Q. Yeah. No. I do see what you mean.
` 6 So, to that point, Dr. Goicoechea --
` 7 A. I think the patents apply to specific
` 8 things, I believe. Not to -- not to a general -- a
` 9 general subject, no? I don't know.
`10 Q. Well, Dr. Goicoechea, let me ask you a
`11 question. You understand that, having gone through
`12 the patenting process now multiple times, that
`13 sometimes the patent office doesn't have all of the
`14 relevant information at its disposal to evaluate a
`15 patent? Do you understand that?
`16 A. Yes, I do.
`17 Q. Okay. And you understand sometimes the
`18 examiner might not have the best prior art in front
`19 of him or her?
`20 A. Right. But today with computers and all of
`21 that, it should be a little easier than it used to be
`22 in the past, you know.
`23 Q. You would think. But you'd be surprised.
`24 A. You'd be surprised, no?
`25 Q. We talked about the -- the stent structure
`
`Page 142
`
`Page 144
`
` 1 a different configuration. Each one of them, I
` 2 guess, is protected by their own patents or whatever
` 3 it is, you know. I don't know, you know.
` 4 Q. Sure.
` 5 A. You know, I was not into this -- in that
` 6 market. So I was not knowledgeable.
` 7 Q. Sure. And to that point, not only had
` 8 people been designing a whole bunch of different
` 9 types of stents for many, many years prior to MinTec
`10 being founded, but people had been patenting stents
`11 for many, many years before MinTec was founded,
`12 correct?
`13 A. I guess so. I -- I...
`14 Q. And along with that process of patenting,
`15 people had come up with a whole bunch of different
`16 ways of constructing a stent; isn't that true?
`17 MR. FLANNERY: Object to the form.
`18 THE WITNESS: I imagine they did. The
`19 question is whether -- why do they have a
`20 patent if this thing is common knowledge?
`21 So if you -- if all the stents were common
`22 to the public beforehand, why would they
`23 issue all these patents? Somebody must have
`24 forgot to do proper research, no?
`25
`
` 1 itself. Now I have a more detailed question.
` 2 Stents sometimes have hoops in them? You
` 3 know what I'm talking about, the little hoops that
` 4 connect one segment to another?
` 5 A. Right. Right.
` 6 Q. Is the placement of the hoops a matter of
` 7 design choice?
` 8 MR. FLANNERY: Object to the form.
` 9 Also calls for a legal conclusion and expert
`10 testimony.
`11 THE WITNESS: It has to be. Because
`12 for the application you have to have, you
`13 know -- I guess when you're doing research,
`14 you do several options, you know, to see
`15 which is the one that makes the criteria at
`16 the end, you know.
`17 BY MR. MURTHY:
`18 Q. And that's routine engineering that's
`19 performed at any company, right?
`20 A. Yes.
`21 MR. FLANNERY: Same objections.
`22 BY MR. MURTHY:
`23 Q. Dr. Goicoechea, you mentioned before that
`24 you had been deposed and you understood that there
`25 was some dispute that had arisen.
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`Barkley Court Reporters
`
`(36) Pages 141 - 144
`
`003

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