throbber
10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
` ARGENTUM PHARMACEUTICALS LLC
` Petitioner
` v.
` CIPLA LTD.
` Patent Owner
` Patent No. 8,168,620
` IPR2017-00807
`
` Deposition of MAUREEN D. DONOVAN, PH.D., at
` the offices of Foley & Lardner, 321 North
` Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois, before
` Donna M. Kazaitis, IL-CSR, RPR, and CRR,
` commencing at the hour of 9:00 a.m. on
` Tuesday, October 24, 2017.
`
`____________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`CIP2159
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals v. Cipla Ltd.
`IPR2017-00807
`
`1
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 2
`
`APPEARANCES:
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
` FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
` BY: MICHAEL R. HOUSTON, PH.D., ESQ.
` 321 North Clark Street
` Suite 2800
` Chicago, Illinois 60654-5313
` 312.832.4378
` mhouston@foley.com
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
` STERNE KESSLER GOLDSTEIN FOX
` BY: UMA N. EVERETT, ESQ.
` DEBORAH STERLING, PH.D., ESQ.
` 1100 New York Avenue, NW
` Washington, DC 20005
` 202.371.2600
` ueverett@skgf.com
` dsterlin@skgf.com
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`2
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX
` PAGE
`MAUREEN D. DONOVAN, PH.D.
` Examination by Ms. Everett 5
` Examination by Mr. Houston 132
`
` EXHIBITS
` PAGE
`Exhibit CIP2014 12/13/16 depo transcript, 6
` (Meda v. Apotex)
`Exhibit CIP2016 Expert Reply Report of 115
` Maureen D. Donovan, Ph.D.,
` (Meda v. Apotex)
`Exhibit CIP2019 12/14/16 trial transcript, 7
` (Meda v. Apotex)
`Exhibit CIP2020 12/15/16 trial transcript, 8
` (Meda v. Apotex)
`Exhibit CIP2030 Expert Report of 108
` Ramprakash Govindarajan, Ph.D.
`Exhibit 1002 Prosecution History 127
`Exhibit 1004 Declaration of Maureen D. 15
` Donovan, Ph.D.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`3
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 4
`
` EXHIBITS (Continued)
` PAGE
`Exhibit 1007 U.S. Patent 5,164,194, 86
` Hettche reference
`Exhibit 1008 PDR, Astelin 88
`Exhibit 1046 Imitrex label 60
`Exhibit 1048 "Efficacy of daily 67
` hypertonic saline nasal
` irrigation among patients
` with sinusitis: A
` randomized controlled
` trial," 2002
`Exhibit 1049 The Merck Index, 1989 67
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`4
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`(Witness sworn.)
` MAUREEN DONOVAN, PH.D.,
`having been first duly sworn, was examined and
`testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MS. EVERETT:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Donovan.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. You may recall I took your deposition
`about this time last year in the Apotex case?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So I know that you're familiar with
`the rules of the deposition, but before we go
`forward I'm just going to remind you just some
`basics.
` We obviously have a court reporter
`here today. She'll be taking down what we say.
`So I just ask that we not speak over one another.
` A. That's fine.
` Q. And if you don't understand a question
`that I ask, I would ask that you ask me to clarify
`it for the record; otherwise, I will assume you
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`5
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`understood.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Is there any reason you can't testify
`truthfully today?
` A. No.
` Q. Could you please state your full name
`for the record.
` A. Maureen Donovan.
` Q. What is your current employer?
` A. I am employed by the University of
`Iowa.
` Q. And I just mentioned I took your
`deposition last year and you were an expert
`witness in the Meda Pharmaceuticals and Cipla
`versus Apotex case; is that correct?
` A. Yes, I was.
` Q. I'm going to hand to you what's
`already been marked as CIP2014. (Document
`tendered to the witness.)
` If you can take a moment to go
`through this to confirm for me that this was your
`deposition testimony from that case, I would
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`6
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`appreciate it.
` A. Yes. With a quick review, it
`essentially looks like my deposition testimony
`from that case.
` Q. Okay. Thank you. I'm just going to
`put that to the side.
` Then we also met at trial for the
`Apotex case. Do you recall?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I'm going to hand to you what's been
`previously marked as CIP2019. (Document tendered
`to the witness.)
` Can you please go through that to
`whatever detail you need to confirm that is your
`trial testimony on Wednesday, December 14th. And
`I know you testified for a two-day period, so I
`have your second day as well and we can go through
`that in a moment.
` A. Okay. There's also Dr. Schleimer's
`testimony included in this. If that was
`intentional or not, I don't know.
` Q. And I just want you to focus on the
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`7
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`part that's yours, where you begin testifying.
` A. Okay. I see my direct testimony.
` Q. It starts on Page 72, either you can
`look at Page 72 or Page 228. Is that accurate?
` A. Yes. The only part in here is my
`direct testimony; correct?
` Q. Yes.
` A. Okay.
` Q. This is your accurate testimony from
`trial last year?
` A. You know, I'd have to read every word
`of it, but I'm going to accept that this is the
`official court recording of that testimony.
` Q. And you have no reason to doubt that
`it is actually your testimony?
` A. No, I don't.
` Q. Thank you. You can put that one to
`the side.
` I'm going to hand to you what has
`been previously marked as CIP2020. (Document
`tendered to the witness.)
` Dr. Donovan, if you can go through
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`8
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 9
`this and confirm to me that this is the remainder
`of your trial testimony, I would appreciate that.
` A. It appears to be the remainder of my
`testimony, yes.
` Q. And you have no reason to doubt that
`it's not correct.
` A. No.
` Q. Dr. Donovan, when did you become
`involved -- strike that.
` You currently have been retained by
`Argentum in connection with this IPR; is that
`accurate?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. When were you retained by Argentum?
` A. Sometime earlier this year.
` Q. When were you first contacted?
` A. Again, sometime earlier this year.
` Q. January, February?
` A. Probably.
` Q. Who contacted you?
` A. Somebody from Argentum, and I don't
`remember exactly who.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`9
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` Q. Was it Mr. Houston?
` A. No, it was not Mr. Houston in the
`initial contact.
` Q. Was it someone from the company
`Argentum?
` A. Yes, it was somebody from Argentum.
` Q. Was it Tyler Liu?
` A. I don't remember. That could very
`well be.
` Q. Do you have an agreement with
`Argentum?
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. Who pays your -- strike that.
` Who do you send your invoices to
`for the IPR?
` A. They are sent to Argentum.
` Q. And who pays your invoices?
` A. I don't know that I really recall the
`way the check looked, but I am going to assume
`that it was an Argentum check.
` Q. Did you discuss your involvement in
`this IPR with Apotex or counsel for Apotex?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`10
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 11
` A. I consulted with counsel for Apotex
`before I took on the engagement for Argentum.
` Q. Who did you consult?
` A. I talked to one of the attorneys that
`was involved in the case. So I talked to Kevin
`Warner about it.
` Q. Without revealing, if you're able to
`answer without revealing any privileged
`communication, did Mr. Warner in that phone
`call -- strike that.
` How many times did you talk to
`Mr. Warner?
` A. I don't remember exactly. I think it
`may have been two times.
` Q. Okay. In the first -- what was the
`subject of your communication in the first call?
` A. I called to ask whether I was in
`conflict if I would take on this additional case.
` Q. Did he respond to you on that call?
` A. I don't recall what he said on that
`call.
` Q. You said there may have been a second
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`11
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`communication with Mr. Warner?
` A. I think the second communication
`confirmed that there wasn't a belief that I would
`be in conflict if I took on this case.
` Q. Do you recall when you had those
`conversations with Mr. Warner?
` A. It was before I signed my agreement
`with Argentum.
` Q. Are you aware of any communications
`between Argentum or counsel for Argentum and
`Apotex or counsel for Apotex?
` A. I have no basis to be aware of that.
` Q. Did Mr. Warner tell you he would speak
`to Argentum?
` A. I don't recall who he had intended to
`speak to or that he even told me.
` Q. After Mr. Warner confirmed it would
`not be a conflict, who did you speak to next that
`was connected with Argentum?
` A. I don't remember whether -- I must
`have spoken to -- I think most of my communication
`with Argentum was actually via email, and I think
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`12
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 13
`I confirmed with them that I was willing to take
`on this matter. And shortly thereafter I started
`having conversations with the attorneys at Foley.
` Q. So when you confirmed you were willing
`to take on the matter, did you speak with someone
`at Argentum or were you speaking with counsel from
`Foley & Lardner?
` A. I don't recall.
` Q. Do you recall whether these
`conversations happened in 2016 or 2017?
` A. They happened in 2017.
` Q. Did you meet Mr. Liu at the Apotex
`trial?
` A. Not to my recollection.
` Q. Have you ever met Mr. Liu?
` A. I don't recall meeting him.
` Q. Have you ever met anyone else at
`Argentum?
` A. No, not that I recall.
` Q. Have you ever communicated with anyone
`else at Argentum?
` A. Outside of if they were copied on an
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`13
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`email.
` Q. Did anyone from Argentum or Argentum's
`counsel tell you they were going to speak with
`someone from Apotex?
` A. I don't recall that.
` Q. Do you know what steps Mr. Warner took
`or you took to confirm it was not a conflict for
`you to represent Argentum in this IPR?
` A. Again, the steps I took was to call
`the counsel I had worked with in representing
`Apotex. I don't know what steps they took to
`confirm that I was not in conflict.
` Q. Do you recall how long the timeframe
`was between the first and second conversation?
` A. It wasn't long, probably less than a
`week, but I don't remember the number of days or
`hours.
` Q. Who is your agreement -- strike that.
` You said you had an agreement that
`covers your representation -- strike that.
` You said you have an agreement that
`covers your engagement in this IPR; is that
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`14
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Who is that with?
` A. Again, that's with Argentum.
` Q. Is it directly with Argentum?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. Do you know who signed that agreement?
` A. Again, I don't recall, but I think it
`was Mr. Liu or Dr. Liu, but I don't recall if
`there's other signatures or if I'm mistaken on who
`actually signed it.
` Q. Do you have a copy of that agreement?
` A. I do.
` Q. I'm going to hand to you your
`declaration which is Exhibit 1004. (Document
`tendered to the witness.)
` Is this your declaration,
`Dr. Donovan?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. Did you prepare this document?
` A. I prepared it in collaboration with
`counsel, yes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`15
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 16
` Q. And you did your best to make sure it
`was truthful and accurate?
` A. Yes, I did.
` Q. On the last page that is your
`signature?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. And you signed it on February 2, 2017?
` A. Yes, I did.
` Q. So is it fair to say you spoke to
`Argentum and to Kevin Warner before February 2,
`2017?
` A. That's certainly my expectation.
` Q. Now that you've seen this, the date
`you signed, does it refresh your recollection on
`when you may have had the conversation with
`Mr. Warner?
` A. Not specifically, except it would have
`been before this.
` Q. Do you recall whether it was
`immediately after the trial in December 2016?
` A. It wasn't that close to after the
`trial, no.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`16
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 17
` Q. Now, I'm going to ask you to turn to
`Paragraph 12 of your declaration. It is the
`paragraph under "Summary of Opinions."
` A. Okay.
` Q. In there the first sentence says
`"Based on my investigation and analysis and for
`the reasons set forth below, it is my opinion that
`Claims 1, 4 through 6, 24 through 26, and 29 of
`the '620 Patent would have been obvious to a
`person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`the alleged invention," and then you go on to cite
`some references; is that accurate?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What investigation and analysis did
`you take specifically for your declaration in the
`IPR?
` A. Again, for this declaration I was told
`that I should, that essentially effective --
` MR. HOUSTON: I'm going to caution the
`witness to not reveal the substance of
`communications with attorneys, please.
` THE WITNESS: Okay. That the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`17
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 18
`effective date of this was about 2002 and that I
`should evaluate or that I should understand the
`state of the art, what a POSA would know in 2002,
`and then evaluate and form my opinion about the
`specific claims of the '620 Patent.
`BY MS. EVERETT:
` Q. Did you undertake any additional
`investigation or analysis over and above what you
`had done for your expert opinion in the Apotex
`trial?
` A. You know, I don't really recall what
`the overlap may have been. Certainly obviously
`there would have been overlap. There's a number
`of similar articles that I relied on for this.
`But, you know, I took on the appropriate amount of
`looking at previous, previous to 2002 materials,
`that were relevant to the claims in the '620
`Patent.
` Q. Did you go back to the materials you
`had prepared for the Apotex case to prepare your
`materials for your opinion in this IPR?
` A. I believe that most of those materials
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`18
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 19
`are confidential. So no, I did not look at those.
` Q. Including the opinions that you
`presented in open court?
` A. I have seen those or I've seen a
`couple of versions of those again, but only what
`is available publicly or what was available as a
`part of this case. So I did not review anything
`that was submitted, anything that was used in the
`prior case.
` Q. So I just want to make sure we're on
`the same page. When you say I've seen those and
`I've seen a couple versions of those, what are you
`referring to?
` A. I've seen -- and I don't recall
`exactly which of my reports were provided to me by
`current counsel in this matter, but I have
`reviewed at least two of the reports that were
`filed in the previous matter as part of this
`matter because they were provided to me by current
`counsel.
` Q. So I just want to make sure I
`understand. So in the Apotex IPR you submitted --
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`19
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A. In the Apotex IPR?
` Q. In the Apotex litigation. Excuse me.
` A. Okay.
` Q. In the Apotex litigation you submitted
`expert reports.
` A. Yes, I remember submitting expert
`reports.
` Q. You submitted I think three rounds of
`expert reports. And are you saying that counsel
`for Argentum provided you those, at least some of
`the expert reports you prepared in Apotex, to
`prepare your opinion for the Argentum IPR?
` A. Not to prepare my opinion, no. I've
`seen them in preparation for this deposition, but
`I did not refer to those in the preparation of my
`declaration.
` Q. And you were provided your expert
`reports by counsel for Argentum?
` A. That's who they arrived from, yes.
` Q. Do you know how counsel for Argentum
`had copies of your expert reports from the Apotex
`case?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`20
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A. I believe in --
` THE WITNESS: Is that privileged?
` MR. HOUSTON: Well, if it's something
`that you learned, that we told you. I think you
`can answer that question if you know.
` THE WITNESS: Okay. I think in
`conversation I learned that you had, or whomever
`you're representing, had filed them with the court
`in this IPR matter and then they were able to be
`provided to me.
`BY MS. EVERETT:
` Q. Did you in connection with your IPR
`declaration search for any additional prior art?
` A. I know that I looked at some standard
`textbooks and I probably read some additional art
`or some new art that I had not been as familiar
`with as part of the preparation for this.
` Q. And so I just want to -- one point you
`made earlier about some of these information being
`confidential. You also testified at trial; is
`that correct?
` A. Yes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`21
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 22
` Q. And you know you testified publicly at
`trial?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And that the information that you
`provided or any witness provided at trial was
`public.
` A. Correct.
` Q. Are you aware of that?
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. Did you refer back to your trial
`testimony or the testimony of anyone else in the
`Apotex trial in preparation for your declaration
`for the IPR?
` A. No, I did not.
` Q. A moment ago you testified that you
`looked at some standard textbooks and you probably
`read some additional art.
` Did you search for that art or was
`that provided to you?
` A. I don't recall. I think it's probably
`a combination.
` Q. What type of art did you search for?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`22
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 23
` A. Again, my search is, when I start, is
`typically in the realm of texts or treatises that
`were published around the time of the effective
`date or prior to that to understand what had been
`written as sort of general instructions to
`formulators regarding particular formulations or
`substances.
` I may have looked to become -- may
`have looked at physical properties of the
`compounds that were being described in various
`pieces of the art.
` Q. Anything else?
` A. That's all I can recall.
` Q. I'm going to have you turn to
`Paragraph 20 of your declaration. You can just
`take a moment to read that, and I have a few
`questions for you.
` A. Okay.
` Q. At the bottom of page -- sorry. Tell
`me when you're ready.
` A. That's fine, that's fine.
` Q. At the bottom of Page 7, and this
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`23
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 24
`would be your numbers, I know there's two sets of
`numbers, but your numbers, there's a sentence
`"Nasal sprays contain a solution and/or a
`suspension of the active ingredient in a vehicle
`which may include a mixture of excipients such as
`preservatives, buffers, emulsifiers, solubilizing
`agents, viscosity modifiers, humectants, and
`others."
` A. That's what it says.
` Q. Every nasal spray does not necessarily
`contain each one of these excipients you listed;
`is that accurate?
` A. That's accurate. Every nasal spray is
`probably, has some components that are listed but
`doesn't necessarily have all of the components
`that are listed.
` Q. So a formulator would have to make a
`decision and a choice of what to include or what
`not to include?
` A. Typically, yes.
` Q. And they would do that because they
`are aiming for sort of an end product and they
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`24
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 25
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`would want a spray that achieves certain
`characteristics?
` A. Well, formulators have multiple goals
`for why they might combine materials to prepare a
`formulation. So depending on what those goals are
`drives often times what's included in that
`formulation.
` Q. Then your next sentence says "A nasal
`spray must be formulated so that" and then you
`have three characteristics and I want to take each
`of them one by one.
` The first one is "the spray pump
`can reliably deliver the same amount of active
`ingredients with each actuation."
` A. That's what it says, yes.
` Q. And why is that important?
` A. Because the dose that's administered
`is a reflection of the formulation and the device
`that it's contained in. And so we rely on the
`device to be able to reproducibly emit a
`particular volume so that we know that the dose
`being emitted is the dose that was designed in the
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`25
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 26
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`formulation to be administered.
` Q. And the formulation itself could
`effect the amount of active ingredient that's
`delivered to each actuation; is that correct?
` A. Can you reask that, please?
` Q. Sure. Are there certain properties of
`the formulation that could affect whether
`the -- strike that.
` So is it fair to say -- to give
`point 1 a shorthand we can call that dose
`uniformity?
` A. It certainly is a component of dose
`uniformity, yes.
` Q. So for dose uniformity, a moment ago
`you were talking about the spray, the qualities of
`the device. Do you recall that?
` A. I mentioned something about the device
`and the formulation acting together to determine
`the dose, yes.
` Q. And the formulation could potentially
`on its own affect whether the dose is uniform; is
`that accurate?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`26
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 27
` A. Well, again, it's the combination of
`the formulation and the device that's emitting
`that formulation that determine the dose that's
`emitted.
` Q. Right. So the device is because the
`dose is administered through the device, is
`that --
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. But the formulation itself has
`to have some sort of uniformity before it is
`sprayed through the device; is that accurate?
` A. I'm not sure that that's accurate in
`all cases, but it depends on the device design.
` Q. What do you mean "it depends on the
`device design"?
` A. There are likely devices that are
`designed to do things with whatever is intended to
`be sprayed such that they have some influence on
`the uniformity or combination or something, but
`there are more technically developed devices that
`do a number of things that perhaps the simplistic
`devices that we're most familiar with as consumers
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`27
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 28
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`don't necessarily do.
` Q. You are opining on the '620 Patent; is
`that correct?
` A. For this declaration, yes, I am
`opining on the '620 Patent.
` Q. And that's a formulation patent?
` A. I don't usually participate in
`qualifying a patent using adjectives. That's out
`of my realm.
` Q. You didn't opine on or see any claims
`directed to a device?
` A. I guess I'd have to take a look at the
`'620 Patent to determine that.
` Q. Actually, I'm going to have you look
`back to your own declaration, Page 6, where you
`describe the '620 Patent.
` A. Okay.
` Q. You can tell me when you've had a
`chance to review.
` A. All right.
` Q. Does this refresh your recollection
`that the '620 Patent is about a pharmaceutical
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`28
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 29
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`formulation?
` A. Not specifically. I would still like
`to take a look at the '620 Patent and then have
`you help me understand what you mean by
`formulation patent.
` Q. Do you see Paragraph 18 where you say
`"a pharmaceutical formulation comprising"?
` A. Well, that's a repetition of Claim 1.
`But I think there are more than one claims in the
`'620 Patent.
` Q. You don't talk about devices anywhere
`in your description of the '620 Patent; do you?
` A. In Paragraphs 18 and 19, no.
` Q. 16 through -- strike that.
` A. Or 16 through 19, no.
` Q. In your entire section in your
`description of the '620 Patent, you don't talk
`about a device; do you?
` A. I don't point out anything specific
`about devices in Paragraphs 16 through 19.
` Q. So I'd like to go back to 20 and focus
`on formulation, the effects of formulation.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`29
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 30
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A. So Paragraph 20? Page 20?
` Q. Paragraph 20, where we were.
` A. Okay.
` Q. So for dose uniformity, there are a
`number of factors that affect whether the
`formulation is uniform; is that true?
` MR. HOUSTON: Objection, beyond the
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the
`question, please?
`BY MS. EVERETT:
` Q. I'll rephrase it.
` So in Section 1 we said for
`shorthand we can talk about dose uniformity.
` A. Well, in Section 1 I think -- why
`don't you read back to me what I said about that
`last statement?
` Q. Can you be more specific about what
`you would like read back?
` A. I said something in response about
`dose uniformity when we were talking about point
`number 1 previously and I'd like to be reminded of
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`30
`
`

`

`10/24/2017
`
`Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Cipla Ltd.
`
`Maureen D. Donovan
`
`Page 31
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`what I said.
` (The record was read back as
` requested.)
` THE WITNESS: I said it was a
`complement of dose uniformity.
`BY MS. EVERETT:
` Q. And you referred to the device and the

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