`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
`- - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
` ARGENTUM :
`
` PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC, :
`
`Petitioner,
`
`: Patent No. 8,268,299
`
` v. :
`
` ALCON RESEARCH, LTD., :
`
`Patent Owner. :
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`- - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Friday, April 13, 2018
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`Deposition of:
`
`SOUMYAJIT MAJUMDAR,
`
`called for oral examination by counsel for the
`
`Petitioner, pursuant to notice, at the law offices
`
`of Williams & Connolly, LLP, 725 12th Street,
`
`Northwest, Washington, D.C. 20005, before
`
`Christina S. Hotsko, RPR, CRR, of Veritext Legal
`
`Solutions, a Notary Public in and for the District
`
`of Columbia, beginning at 8:42 a.m., when were
`
`present on behalf of the respective parties:
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`Exhibit 1045
`ARGENTUM
`IPR2017-01053
`888-391-3376
`
`000001
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`O n b e h a l f o f P e t i t i o n e r :
` M I C H A E L R . H O U S T O N , E S Q U I R E
` F o l e y & L a r d n e r , L L P
` 3 2 1 N o r t h C l a r k S t r e e t , S u i t e 2 8 0 0
` C h i c a g o , I l l i n o i s 6 0 6 5 4 - 5 3 1 3
` ( 3 1 2 ) 8 3 2 - 4 5 0 0
`
` T Y L E R L I U , J . D .
` A r g e n t u m P h a r m a c e u t i c a l s
` A s s o c i a t e G e n e r a l C o u n s e l
` 1 3 4 S p r i n g S t r e e t
` N e w Y o r k , N e w Y o r k 1 0 0 1 2
` ( 6 4 6 ) 4 0 5 - 6 3 0 0
`
`O n b e h a l f o f P a t e n t O w n e r :
` A L E X A N D E R Z O L A N , E S Q U I R E
` D A V I D M . K R I N S K Y , E S Q U I R E
` W i l l i a m s & C o n n o l l y , L L P
` 7 2 5 1 2 t h S t r e e t , N o r t h w e s t
` W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . 2 0 0 0 5
` ( 2 0 2 ) 4 3 4 - 5 0 0 0
`
`1
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`9
`
`1 0
`
`1 1
`
`1 2
`
`1 3
`1 4
`1 5
`1 6
`1 7
`1 8
`1 9
`2 0
`2 1
`2 2
`2 3
`2 4
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000002
`
`
`
` C O N T E N T S
`
`EXAMINATION BY: PAGE
`
` Counsel for Petitioner 04
`
`Page 3
`
`MAJUMDAR DEPOSITION EXHIBITS: * PAGE
`
`Exhibit 1041 USPTO Files 152
`
`Exhibit 1042 USPTO Files 152
`
`Exhibit 1043 Abstract 152
`
`Exhibit 1044 Abstract 152
`
` * (Exhibits attached to the transcript.)
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4 5 6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`000003
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`Whereupon,
`
` RUSSELL WERMERS,
`
`being first duly sworn or affirmed to testify to
`
`the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
`
`truth, was examined and testified as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
`
`BY MR. HOUSTON:
`
` Q. Good morning. Would we start by having
`
`you state your full name for the record, please.
`
` A. Sure. It's Soumyajit Majumdar. I'll
`
`spell it out. S-O-U-M-Y-A-J-I-T. Last name is
`
`Majumdar, M-A-J-U-M-D-A-R.
`
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Majumdar.
`
` A. Good morning.
`
` Q. My name is Michael Houston. I'm an
`
`attorney with Foley & Lardner representing the
`
`petitioner Argentum in this proceeding.
`
` Do you understand you're here today to
`
`sit for a deposition related to a declaration that
`
`you've submitted in this proceeding?
`
` A. I do.
`
` Q. Have you sat for a deposition previously?
`
` A. Yes.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000004
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
` Q. About how many times would you say you've
`
`been deposed?
`
` A. I don't recollect offhand, but quite a
`
`few.
`
` Q. Okay. So multiple times?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. So you're familiar with sort of the
`
`process and how this works?
`
` A. Sure.
`
` Q. Okay. So in that case I'll kind of skip
`
`some of the preliminary descriptions, since you're
`
`familiar with it. But if you have any questions
`
`or if I ask any questions today that are unclear
`
`to you, please speak up and let me know.
`
` A. Sure. You might as well go over it just
`
`to make sure we were on the same ground.
`
` Q. Well, the basic ground rules are that
`
`I'll be asking you a series of questions today and
`
`you'll be giving me your answers verbally so that
`
`the court reporter can take down the things you
`
`and I say.
`
` And I would ask that unless your counsel
`
`instructs you specifically not to answer, perhaps
`
`to a privilege issue or something, that you go
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000005
`
`
`
`ahead and answer my questions to the best of your
`
`ability, even if your counsel puts an objection on
`
`Page 6
`
`the record.
`
` Do you understand that?
`
` A. I do.
`
` Q. One of the things we'll be talking about
`
`today, one of the acronyms that I'm sure we'll be
`
`using is a POSA, P-O-S-A. You're familiar with
`
`that term, correct?
`
` A. I am.
`
` Q. And at the outset I thought I would just
`
`mention that my intention is to use the same
`
`definition of a POSA that you provide in your
`
`declaration, which is a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art as of the time of the priority date for
`
`the patent at issue here, which I believe is
`
`September 2006. Okay?
`
` A. Okay.
`
` Q. I'd like to start by talking about some
`
`of your own background and experience in this
`
`field. In particular, I'd like to know about your
`
`personal experience in developing self-preserved
`
`aqueous-based ophthalmic solutions.
`
` Can you tell me what work you've done in
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000006
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`that area in your professional background?
`
` A. Could you just repeat that question one
`
`more time, the last part?
`
` Q. I would just like to know what work
`
`you've done in your professional background
`
`related to developing self-preserved aqueous-based
`
`ophthalmic solutions.
`
` A. So when I was working with, first,
`
`Sandoz, and then Ciba and Novartis, there were
`
`quite a few formulations we were working on which
`
`had antibacterial agents. And they were by
`
`themselves having enough activity to ward off any
`
`microbial growth. So those were some of the
`
`formulations that I worked with that were
`
`self-preserved.
`
` MR. KRINSKY: Can we go off the record a
`
`second?
`
` (Discussion off the record.)
`
` THE WITNESS: And by -- so I'll continue?
`
`BY MR. HOUSTON:
`
` Q. Yes, please continue.
`
` A. Yeah. So by self-preserved, we are
`
`meaning which does not have a conventional
`
`preservative.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000007
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
` Q. Okay. So just to break that down a
`
`little bit, I think you said that while working
`
`for a number of companies, you worked on
`
`self-preserved ophthalmic solutions.
`
` A. While -- basically, I've been in Sandoz,
`
`which then merged with Ciba and became Novartis.
`
`So it's a series of -- the same series
`
`of companies.
`
` Q. I see what you're saying. Okay.
`
` Can you describe for me a little more
`
`detail about those self-preserved ophthalmic
`
`solutions that you worked on?
`
` A. It's been a long time, so I really don't
`
`know which agents. I can't remember which. But
`
`there were antibacterial agents in combinations
`
`with various polymers to enhance their activity.
`
`So -- but it's been -- I don't really remember
`
`offhand which ones.
`
` Q. About when was that work?
`
` A. Mostly it was once Sandoz merged with
`
`Ciba, so it was somewhere in the -- starting '95
`
`to '99, that area.
`
` Q. So going back at least to 1995 to '99,
`
`the concept of self-preserved ophthalmic solutions
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000008
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`was already known and being worked on in the
`
`industry?
`
` A. Oh, it was -- I mean, that's my personal
`
`experience. The self-preserved was -- concept was
`
`known, that if you -- there are some formulations
`
`which could be unpreserved, and they could be
`
`self-preserved because of the components in the
`
`formulation.
`
` Q. And so the formulations you worked on,
`
`they were self -- =you said they had an
`
`antimicrobial agent in them. Was it an
`
`antimicrobial agent that was not a conventional
`
`antimicrobial agent?
`
` A. This was -- the drug itself was being
`
`used to treat infections, so they are antibiotics,
`
`and they are at a high enough concentration to
`
`kill off any contamination. So it's not to
`
`preserve the formulation. The main purpose of the
`
`drug is to treat a disease. And in that process,
`
`it preserves the formulation also because of --
`
` Q. I see.
`
` A. -- its inherent activity.
`
` Q. So in that instance, the drug itself was
`
`sort of its own preservative against microbial
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000009
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`contamination?
`
` A. Yes. It by itself retards the growth.
`
` Q. I see.
`
` Have you worked -- in your professional
`
`background, have you worked on any formulations
`
`where you had to add a preservative package to a
`
`solution -- in other words, where the active
`
`ingredient itself was not self-preserving? Have
`
`you worked on any situations like that?
`
` MR. ZOLAN: Objection to form. Vague.
`
` THE WITNESS: So are you talking about
`
`ophthalmic formulations or any --
`
`BY MR. HOUSTON:
`
` Q. Yes, thank you for clarifying. Yes, I am
`
`talking about ophthalmic formulations.
`
` A. And solutions?
`
` Q. Yes.
`
` A. There are multiple, I mean, incidences
`
`where we are using preservatives. So whenever the
`
`components are not self-preserving, we would --
`
`and if it's going to be a multi-dose formulation.
`
`If it's a single-dose formulation, you don't need
`
`a preservative.
`
` If it's a multi-dose, I would be using
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000010
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`conventional or some preservative. If you mean by
`
`preservative package -- are you saying -- could
`
`you clarify on that?
`
` Q. Yeah. I guess what I'm just thinking
`
`of -- the first example you described for me was a
`
`situation where the active ingredient itself was
`
`active against microbes. And so I think you were
`
`explaining that that was sort of the main -- it
`
`was self-preserved in that aspect because the
`
`active ingredient itself had that property.
`
` What I was trying to get at is, have you
`
`worked on any other formulations where the active
`
`ingredient does not have this self-preservation
`
`quality and you had to, therefore, formulate or
`
`add in components specifically to achieve
`
`preservative efficacy?
`
` Do you have experience in that situation?
`
` A. There have been -- and again, coming to
`
`ophthalmic formulations or in general in
`
`parenteral formulations that I worked on, there
`
`are numbers of -- a number of cases where we have
`
`to include preservatives to maintain
`
`the preservative efficacy standards -- the
`
`sterility of the formulations so that they pass
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000011
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`the preservative efficacy standards.
`
` Q. And so do you have any experience in such
`
`cases where you were using non-traditional
`
`preservatives to achieve that as opposed to a
`
`conventional preservative agent?
`
` MR. ZOLAN: Objection to form. Vague.
`
` THE WITNESS: So in terms of ophthalmic
`
`formulations --
`
`BY MR. HOUSTON:
`
` Q. Yes.
`
` A. -- and solutions? Ophthalmic solutions?
`
` Q. Yes.
`
` A. I know I've used a lot of the
`
`conventional preservatives. But I don't remember
`
`if I've used any of the ones which are not
`
`conventional.
`
` Q. So, for example, you've never worked on
`
`an ophthalmic solution formulation that contains
`
`zinc as the preservative?
`
` A. Personally, I've not made any
`
`formulations with zinc as a preservative, as the
`
`primary preservative or mainly being used as a
`
`preservative in the composition.
`
` Q. What about a formulation that uses a
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000012
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
`borate-polyol complex as the preservative? Have
`
`you had any experience with those?
`
` A. By experience with those, in terms of
`
`actually making the formulations on my own?
`
` Q. Well, working on a project where such a
`
`product was being formulated. I -- I would
`
`anticipate perhaps as part of a team, typically,
`
`but you can tell me if that's incorrect.
`
` A. I know about the borate-polyol complexes,
`
`but I have not used it in -- as far as I know,
`
`remember, sitting here, I don't think I've used
`
`any of the borate-polyol complexes as the primary
`
`preservative agent.
`
` Q. The product that you mentioned earlier
`
`that you worked on developing right as Sandoz was
`
`merging into Ciba, if it's not confidential, can
`
`you tell me what that product was?
`
` A. That's what -- I don't really remember
`
`what, because there were multiple projects which
`
`could get assigned from Austria, and then we would
`
`start working with it and then they would change.
`
`So -- it's been some time, and I really don't
`
`remember which ones.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000013
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
` A. And it was -- again, we used to work as
`
`teams. So I was the team leader. And then there
`
`would be multiple products under my team members,
`
`and I would be leading them. So it's a little bit
`
`hazy right now.
`
` Q. Was that product ever commercialized?
`
` A. One of them was. It was -- actually, one
`
`or two of them were commercialized, but they
`
`were -- I don't think they were -- I don't know
`
`what was the preservative agent in the ones that
`
`actually went into the market.
`
` One was a lens cleaning tablet. And then
`
`another one was a SOLO-CARE solution for, again,
`
`cleaning lens. So I don't remember whether they
`
`were the ones with a self-care preserve system or
`
`they were just containing conventional
`
`preservatives.
`
` Q. Okay. So I'd like to ask you some
`
`questions about what a POSA would do when they're
`
`trying to work on developing a commercial
`
`ophthalmic solution that's self-preserved.
`
` Do you feel like you're qualified to
`
`testify about that topic?
`
` A. Oh, yes.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000014
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
` Q. Okay. When a POSA in 2006 set out to
`
`develop an aqueous self-preserved ophthalmic
`
`pharmaceutical product, what would their goals
`
`have been? Can we start at a high level and then
`
`perhaps we can drill down into some more detail?
`
` A. So aqueous ophthalmic pharmaceutical for
`
`humans?
`
` Q. I want to cover the subject matter of the
`
`'299 patent here.
`
` A. Okay. So you are talking about the broad
`
`objective of POSA wanting to develop a
`
`self-preserved formulation or trying to develop a
`
`formulation with a particular active ingredient in
`
`mind?
`
` Q. I think we can call it a
`
`pharmaceutical -- I mean, the title of the '29
`
`[sic] patent says it's a pharmaceutical
`
`composition.
`
` A. Okay.
`
` Q. Does that signify that there's typically
`
`going to be an active ingredient there, to call it
`
`a pharmaceutical composition?
`
` A. I mean, as a POSA, I would need a
`
`clarification. Not just a pharmaceutical
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000015
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`composition. I could go in all kinds of direction
`
`without really knowing where to land.
`
` Is it -- what is the active? What is the
`
`dose? What is the molecule -- the active that you
`
`want to incorporate into the pharmaceutical? Does
`
`it have toxic effects? What is the therapeutic
`
`index? What is its stability? Is it an ester?
`
`Is it a prodrug? Does it have permeability?
`
` There are all kinds of things that a POSA
`
`would like to know before he can start on a
`
`project.
`
` Q. Let's assume that it's travoprost. Are
`
`you familiar with that drug?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. So develop a travoprost formulation with
`
`the self -- which is a self-preserved.
`
` Q. Right. So I would just like to know at a
`
`high level what are the high-level concerns or
`
`issues or goals that a POSA is going to have to
`
`start to think about?
`
` A. What's -- so he has -- coming back to
`
`this, so the POSA is aware that there is a
`
`Travatan formulation already in the market which
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000016
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`is optimized?
`
` Q. Actually, thank you for asking. So
`
`that's why I had mentioned earlier, when we're
`
`talking about a POSA, I guess unless we
`
`specifically say otherwise, I want it to be just
`
`as of the priority date of the '299 patent, so
`
`meaning before the '299 patent is filed.
`
` So I think what you -- you said -- in
`
`your question, you mentioned Travatan. I don't
`
`know for sure if you meant Travatan or Travatan Z.
`
`But assuming you meant Travatan, I believe that
`
`was on the market as of 2006 and was known.
`
` MR. ZOLAN: Is that a question?
`
` MR. HOUSTON: I'm just trying to clarify
`
`the witness' question to me.
`
` THE WITNESS: Right. So it's a very -- I
`
`mean, the assignment to the POSA is not clear, so
`
`if -- in my mind. So the POSA would be looking at
`
`this formulation, which is already available in
`
`the market. And you are saying that, okay,
`
`make -- take the benzalkonium chloride out and
`
`replace it with some self-preserved system?
`
`BY MR. HOUSTON:
`
` Q. You know, I'm not necessarily trying to
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000017
`
`
`
`Page 18
`
`dictate that. I'm just trying to ask you what you
`
`think a POSA would do if they are asked to develop
`
`a self-preserved version of a travoprost
`
`ophthalmic solution. And I just -- you know,
`
`again, we can get into some details, but just at a
`
`high level what are the things they're concerned
`
`about?
`
` A. Well, at a very high level, the main
`
`factors that a POSA have to keep in mind is -- any
`
`formulation, or any ophthalmic formulation --
`
`safety, efficacy, stability.
`
` Q. Okay. For efficacy of a given
`
`formulation, was a POSA knowledgeable enough and
`
`capable enough to be able to test a given
`
`formulation for efficacy?
`
` A. A POSA is a hypothetical person who has
`
`multiple skills and is not one person. I mean, he
`
`has the skill himself --
`
` Q. Right.
`
` A. -- of all kind -- a full team.
`
` So he would be able to test. And in this
`
`case, since the assignment is for a formulation
`
`which is already known, for a pharmaceutical whose
`
`activity is already known and established,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000018
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`that's -- you just follow the formulation which
`
`has already -- and the dose which has already been
`
`established.
`
` Q. Is that enough, to just follow the
`
`formulation and dose to establish efficacy, or
`
`would efficacy tests for the new formulation
`
`that's being developed have to be conducted?
`
` A. So you have several layers of concepts in
`
`that question, which really we need to understand.
`
` You -- if a POSA is given the task of
`
`reformulating -- as you said, reformulating a
`
`currently available formulation -- to make sure
`
`that he or she doesn't fiddle or compromise the
`
`efficacy and safety and stability of the
`
`formulation, the POSA would make as little a
`
`change in the formulation as possible.
`
` Q. Okay. Let me try to circle back what I
`
`think my original question was and just -- which
`
`was just that, would a POSA have been able to
`
`conduct the tests to determine efficacy of their
`
`new solutions, whatever they're testing. Are they
`
`able to conduct efficacy tests?
`
` A. Those would be standard practice if
`
`needed. The pharmacologists would be there in
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000019
`
`
`
`their team and they would be able to guide it.
`
` Q. Another high-level goal you said a POSA
`
`would be concerned with was the safety of the
`
`Page 20
`
`product, right?
`
` A. Correct.
`
` Q. Okay. What things go into determining
`
`whether or not such a product would be safe?
`
` A. And again, ophthalmic formulations --
`
` Q. Yes. For this.
`
` A. -- and solutions put in the eyedrop --
`
`yeah, you do not want to cause -- there's always a
`
`tradeoff between risk and safety, so -- efficacy
`
`and safety, actually.
`
` So if it has a -- well, you should make
`
`sure that it does not contain any agents or it
`
`does not cause any reaction on the occular surface
`
`like -- which is not acceptable, it doesn't
`
`disrupt the corneal membrane or is not toxic to
`
`the corneal cells or the conjunctival cells.
`
` It doesn't -- basically it should not
`
`cause any harm to the biological tissues.
`
` Q. Would an aspect of product safety be
`
`avoiding particulates or precipitates in the
`
`solution or would that fall under some other
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000020
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`category? Or would that not be a concern at all
`
`of a POSA?
`
` A. If it's a solution, it cannot have --
`
`there are USP guidelines as to what the number of
`
`particles can be. So you don't want particulates
`
`in a solution formulation. So there should not
`
`be -- if there is precipitation occurring, that
`
`means a formulation is unstable. So that's a
`
`stability -- it's a physical stability issue, not
`
`a safety issue.
`
` And of course, why there is a limit on
`
`the particle size and -- if it's in suspension is
`
`because those particles can cause problems on the
`
`occular tissues.
`
` But if you are talking about a solution
`
`and then there are precipitation issues, then that
`
`means that the formulation is physically unstable
`
`and, in the long run, you could have efficacy --
`
`loss of activity or decreased efficacy.
`
` Q. Okay. Would a POSA be concerned with
`
`making sure the product stays sterile? And if so,
`
`would that fall under the category of a safety
`
`issue or a stability issue? Or something else?
`
` A. Are you talking about a multi-dose
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000021
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`formulation ophthalmic solution?
`
` Q. Yes.
`
` A. They -- both are involved, actually. It
`
`depends on which angle you're looking at it from.
`
`From a formulator's point of view, microbial
`
`stability or -- stability of the preservative is
`
`not being maintained.
`
` From an application point of view, if it
`
`has got contaminated, then there's a safety issue.
`
` So the whole purpose of maintaining
`
`sterility is to keep that formulation safe for
`
`use.
`
` Q. And a POSA would have been aware that the
`
`types and the amounts of preservative agents
`
`incorporated into the product would affect those
`
`preservation properties; is that right?
`
` A. A POSA would be aware how to preserve the
`
`ophthalmic solutions, if that is what you're
`
`meaning.
`
` Q. Well, I wanted to get a little more
`
`specific. They'd be aware of how to preserve
`
`it -- at least one way they would be aware of that
`
`is in adjusting the types and amounts of
`
`preservative agents in the formula; is that fair?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000022
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
` A. Yes. The preservatives which were known
`
`at that point of time, the POSA would be able to
`
`read the literature and know how to use them and
`
`test for preservative efficacy.
`
` Q. In the context of the ophthalmic product
`
`we've just been discussing, what would a POSA have
`
`understood the term "antimicrobial" to mean?
`
` A. Antimicrobial encompasses microorganisms.
`
`So antimicrobial means from a preservative which
`
`can act against bacteria or fungi microbes.
`
` Q. And I think you said a POSA would know
`
`how to carry out the tests needed to -- the
`
`experiments needed to test for preservation
`
`ability or preservation efficacy; is that right?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. So let's say a POSA is working on a given
`
`formulation and they test for preservative
`
`efficacy and that formulation does not pass the
`
`test. Okay?
`
` Are you with me so far?
`
` A. Which formulation? Any -- self-preserved
`
`or regular conventional preservative?
`
` Q. Yeah. My line of questioning right now
`
`-- I want to focus on what we've been talking
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000023
`
`
`
`about, so trying to develop a self-preserved --
`
` A. Okay.
`
` Q. -- ophthalmic solution formulation that
`
`Page 24
`
`contains travoprost.
`
` A. Okay.
`
` Q. Okay? And let's say they've conducted a
`
`test on a given formulation that doesn't pass the
`
`preservative efficacy test. Okay?
`
` A. Uh-huh.
`
` Q. One of the things a POSA would think to
`
`do in that situation would be to alter the
`
`concentration of whatever their preservative agent
`
`is, right?
`
` A. I need to understand where the POSA --
`
`what information the POSA is basing his first test
`
`on.
`
` Q. Okay. Can you help me understand -- I'm
`
`not sure I understand what you mean.
`
` A. Yeah. A person of ordinary skill is
`
`looking at the literature which is available to
`
`him, and he's trying to use the information to
`
`develop a self-preserved formulation. We are not
`
`talking about invention, correct? So he is trying
`
`to find out what the literature -- how the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000024
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`literature guides him towards a self-preserved
`
`formulation.
`
` So now, depending on what path he has
`
`chosen -- like, there could be multiple guidance
`
`out there in the literature at that point of time.
`
`So depending on what he has used as his base to
`
`start on the first experiment, only -- if I know
`
`that, I can answer that. Otherwise, there would
`
`be -- he would have based his first experiment on
`
`some data. So it's too -- that information is
`
`missing.
`
` So unless I have that information, then
`
`it's difficult to say why it's failing and, based
`
`on that, you would analyze that situation.
`
` Q. So let's say that the formulation that
`
`the POSA is experimenting with to begin with,
`
`they're trying to use zinc as their preservative
`
`agent. Okay?
`
` A. Okay.
`
` Q. And they conduct -- are the preservative
`
`efficacy tests standardized? Are there standard
`
`preservative efficacy tests that exist for this
`
`type of issue? For example, the USP27 I think
`
`I've seen reference to.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000025
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
` A. There are several compendial tests that
`
`are there.
`
` Q. So let's say a POSA makes up a
`
`formulation, puts zinc in it to try to act as the
`
`preservative, and it fails.
`
` Would one of the things a POSA would
`
`consider doing is changing the zinc concentration?
`
` A. And again, to bring it back to the
`
`example, so you have this -- you have this
`
`standard formulation. You have taken out
`
`benzalkonium chloride. And zinc -- I'm presuming
`
`in this case you have already got a reference,
`
`like Xia, which teaches you how to use zinc in the
`
`formulations. And you have examples which the
`
`POSA would look at the various options available
`
`and choose a formulation which best fits his
`
`situation and he would use that concentration of
`
`zinc.
`
` And based on that, even after doing that,
`
`there would be a -- I mean, the expectation would
`
`be that if -- like, in this case, if you match the
`
`formulation which -- I think formulation 8 was the
`
`closest to this travoprost formulation, Travatan
`
`formulation -- there is high expectation, and it
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000026
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`is that it is going to pass.
`
` If, counter-expectation, the formulation
`
`does not meet the preservative efficacy standards,
`
`there could be several approaches that he can
`
`take. And this is all under the hypothesis that
`
`for some reason the POSA has decided to go for
`
`zinc. Because there were other options that he
`
`could have looked at.
`
` Q. Okay. So let me back up because,
`
`actually, I don't want to get you hung up on the
`
`idea of it being zinc. And I know that's
`
`obviously a very hot topic in this particular
`
`proceeding.
`
` So we can even just talk more generally
`
`about the set of tests.
`
` What I'm trying to get at is, for a given
`
`formulation that a POSA is attempting to get to be
`
`self-preserved, if it -- if an initial formulation
`
`doesn't pass preservative efficacy, is at least
`
`one of the options a POSA is going to think about
`
`changing the concentration of the preservative
`
`that's being used?
`
` A. Actually, backing up even further and
`
`making it more general, the POSA's goal, like you
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000027
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`put it initially, would be to develop a
`
`self-preserved formulation, not bother about what
`
`is the active. You are trying to develop a
`
`self-preserving formulation.
`
` So he would look at various options which
`
`are out there. And then -- one of the ways is
`
`like what Dr. Xia did, build that system. And you
`
`try various concentrations of that new system and
`
`see which one works. And --
`
` Q. So -- yeah, so I think that's what I'm
`
`getting at. Why would a POSA try various
`
`concentrations? Is it because preservatives are
`
`known to have a concentration-dependent
`
`antimicrobial behavior?
`
` A. It depends, again, what is the molecule
`
`that you are looking at. Now, one thing is the
`
`POSA is looking at literature, which is all
`
`available. There is a distinction between
`
`inventing versus looking at the literature.
`
` Now, why I said there's a distinction is
`
`because there are some chemicals which will just
`
`act like boring holes into the microbes as a
`
`surfactant system and they kill it. So the
`
`microbes do not have any use for them, they do not
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`000028
`
`
`
`Page 29
`
`know how to deal with them. They just -- either
`
`the concentration is sufficient enough to not
`
`kill, and it's not at enough concentration to meet
`
`the preservative efficacy, And then, as you go on
`
`increasing the concentration, it will meet the
`
`preservative efficacy, and then if you go at too
`
`high a concentration, then it becomes toxic to the
`
`mammalian cells.
`
` But there are some -- you have to be
`
`cautious about some situations where -- like for
`
`zinc, which can actually be u