throbber

`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________________
`
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`POZEN INC. and HORIZON PHARMA USA, INC.,
`Patent Owners
`________________________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698
`________________________
`
`Inter Partes Review IPR2017-01995
`________________________
`
`
`DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S.
`PATENT NO. 9,220,698
`
`
`
`
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 1
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`Page
`
`
`Introduction ..................................................................................................... 5
`I.
`II. Qualifications and Background ...................................................................... 5
`A.
`Education and Experience .................................................................... 5
`B.
`Bases for Opinions ............................................................................... 8
`C.
`Retention and Compensation ............................................................... 8
`III. Legal Standards .............................................................................................. 8
`IV. Definition of a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSA) ........................ 10
`V.
`Summary of Opinions ................................................................................... 11
`VI. Background on Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics ......................... 12
`VII. U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698 [Ex. 1001] .......................................................... 21
`A.
`The ’698 Patent Specification ............................................................ 22
`B.
`The Challenged Claims ...................................................................... 33
`VIII. Claim Construction ....................................................................................... 36
`A.
`Legal Standard .................................................................................... 36
`B.
`The Term “Target” Means “With The Goal of Obtaining” ............... 37
`IX. The Prior Art ................................................................................................. 42
`A.
`Prior Art References Disclosed A Combined Dosage Form
`With Naproxen and Esomeprazole ..................................................... 42
`(a) U.S. Patent No. 8,557,285 (“’285 Patent”) [Ex. 1005] ............ 43
`(b) U.S. Patent No. 6,926,907 (“’907 Patent”) [Ex. 1004] ............ 45
`(c) Goldstein [Ex. 1011] ................................................................ 47
`(d) Hochberg [Ex. 1012] ................................................................ 48
`(e) Hassan-Alin [Ex. 1016] ........................................................... 50
`Prior art references disclosed the target pharmacokinetics of
`naproxen ............................................................................................. 52
`(a) EC-Naprosyn label [Ex. 1009] ................................................. 52
`
`B.
`
`2
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 2
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`C.
`
`(b) Khosravan [Ex. 1017] .............................................................. 53
`(c)
`Jung [Ex. 1018] ........................................................................ 54
`(d) Davies [Ex. 1019] .................................................................... 55
`Prior Art References Disclosed The Target Pharmacokinetics
`of, and Pharmacodynamic Response To, Esomeprazole ................... 56
`(a) Howden 2005 [Ex. 1006] ......................................................... 56
`(b) Zegerid label [Ex. 1010] .......................................................... 57
`Esomeprazole is a Component of Omeprazole .................................. 59
`D.
`X. All Claims of the ’698 Patent Are Unpatentable .......................................... 60
`A.
`The ’285 Patent Anticipated the Claims of the ’698 Patent ............... 60
`(a) The ’285 Patent anticipated independent claim 1 .................... 60
`1.
`The ’285 patent taught a combined dosage form of
`naproxen and esomeprazole and its twice daily
`administration. ............................................................... 62
`The PK/PD elements are inherent in the twice-
`daily administration of the dosage forms disclosed
`in the ’285 patent. .......................................................... 63
`(b) Dependent claim 2 was anticipated ......................................... 66
`(c) Dependent claims 3 and 4 were anticipated............................. 66
`(d) Dependent claims 5-7 were anticipated ................................... 67
`B. Ground 2: U.S. Patent No. 8,557,285 Rendered Obvious the
`Claims of the ’698 Patent ................................................................... 69
`(a) The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of
`the claimed unit dose form would have been obvious ............. 69
`(b) Dependent claim 2 would have been obvious ......................... 71
`(c) Dependent claims 3 and 4 would have been obvious .............. 72
`(d) Dependent claims 5-7 would have been obvious .................... 73
`
`2.
`
`3
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 3
`
`

`

`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`C. Ground 3: U.S. Patent No. 8,557,285, in View of Howden 2005
`and the EC-Naprosyn Label, Rendered Obvious the Claims of
`the ’698 Patent .................................................................................... 75
`(a)
`Independent claim 1 would have been obvious ....................... 75
`1.
`The prior art provided motivation to target (i.e.,
`have the goal of obtaining) the PK and PD
`elements. ........................................................................ 76
`The prior art provided a reasonable expectation of
`success in setting the PK and PD elements as
`targets. ............................................................................ 88
`(b) Dependent claim 2 would have been obvious ......................... 90
`(c) Dependent claims 3-4 would have been obvious .................... 90
`(d) Dependent claims 5-7 would have been obvious .................... 92
`There Are No Unexpected Results Arising From The Claimed
`Method. ............................................................................................... 94
`
`D.
`
`2.
`
`4
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 4
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`I, Michael Mayersohn, Ph.D., do hereby declare:
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`1. My name is Michael Mayersohn. I have been retained by Mylan
`
`Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Mylan”) in the matter set forth in the caption above. I
`
`understand that Mylan is petitioning for inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims 1-7
`
`of U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698 to Ault et al. (“the ’698 patent”) [Ex. 1001]. I submit
`
`this expert declaration in support of Mylan’s IPR petition for the ’698 patent.
`
`II.
`
`Qualifications and Background
`
`A. Education and Experience
`I am Professor Emeritus of Pharmaceutical Sciences in the College of
`2.
`
`Pharmacy at the University of Arizona, in Tucson, Arizona.
`
`3.
`
`I earned my Bachelor of Science degree in Pharmacy from the
`
`College of Pharmaceutical Sciences at Columbia University, in New York, in 1966.
`
`I earned a Ph.D. in Pharmaceutics from the State University of New York at
`
`Buffalo, in 1970. From 1971 until 1976, I was an assistant and then an associate
`
`professor in the Faculty of Pharmacy at the University of Toronto. In 1976, I
`
`joined the faculty of the University of Arizona, as an associate professor in the
`
`College of Pharmacy. In 1983, I became a professor in the University of Arizona
`
`College of Pharmacy, and am currently a Professor Emeritus there.
`
`5
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 5
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`4. My research, training, and experience are all in the area of
`
`pharmaceutical
`
`sciences generally, and
`
`specifically
`
`in
`
`the areas of
`
`pharmacokinetics, pharmaceutics, biopharmaceutics, and pharmacodynamics. My
`
`research has involved pharmaceutical formulation development and evaluation,
`
`including examining the relationship between the physical-chemical characteristics
`
`of a drug and its dosage form; the fate and performance of that drug in the body;
`
`and the design of rational drug dosing regimens based upon analytical,
`
`mathematical, and clinical data. My extensive research in these areas includes in
`
`vitro experimentation and in situ and in vivo studies in animals and humans,
`
`including evaluating and analyzing immediate-release and extended-release solid
`
`oral dosage forms. I have also conducted theoretical, or in silico, analyses and
`
`simulations of drug behavior in the body.
`
`5.
`
`I am the author of numerous book chapters related to drug absorption
`
`and pharmacokinetics, and over 160 original scientific peer-reviewed articles in the
`
`pharmaceutical sciences, many relating to biopharmaceutics and pharmacokinetics,
`
`and about 15 professional and educational publications. I have published over 160
`
`abstracts of research studies that were presented at international and national
`
`scientific or professional meetings.
`
`6.
`
`I have received several professional awards for my research, and I
`
`have been elected a fellow of several professional organizations, including the
`
`6
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 6
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`Academy of Pharmaceutical Sciences (American Pharmaceutical Association), the
`
`American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists, and the American College of
`
`Clinical Pharmacology. Fellowship elections are recognition by my scientific
`
`peers of my valuable contributions to my field.
`
`7.
`
`Between 1995 and 1998, I was a member of the U.S. Food and Drug
`
`Administration’s (“FDA”) Generic Drug Advisory Committee (currently the
`
`Pharmaceutical Sciences Advisory Committee).
`
` This Committee reviews,
`
`comments on, and provides direction to FDA on issues of drug bioavailability and
`
`bioequivalence;
`
`this work
`
`then forms
`
`the regulatory standards for
`
`the
`
`pharmaceutical industry through, for example, issuance of FDA Guidances.
`
`8.
`
`I was a member of the Dissolution and Bioavailability Expert
`
`Committee of the United States Pharmacopeia for a 5-year term. I also served as
`
`Vice Chair of the same expert committee, renamed the Biopharmaceutics
`
`Committee of the United States Pharmacopeia, for an additional 5-year term. The
`
`Committee sets the official standards for dissolution and bioavailability metrics
`
`that are applied throughout the pharmaceutical industry.
`
`9.
`
`I have been the director and principal instructor of a one-week course,
`
`“Principles of Pharmacokinetics and Toxicokinetics for the Industrial Scientist,”
`
`which has been given in Tucson, Arizona, for 15 years, with over 750 scientists
`
`having attended. In the past, I gave a version of this course on-site to many
`
`7
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 7
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`companies
`
`in
`
`the pharmaceutical
`
`industry
`
`as
`
`“Selected Topics
`
`in
`
`Pharmacokinetics,” and over the years about 1,000 scientists attended. I also gave
`
`a short course on the same topic sponsored by the American Chemical Society at
`
`their annual meetings.
`
`10. A copy of my curriculum vitae, which lists my publications and
`
`describes my qualifications in detail, is attached as Attachment A.
`
`B. Bases for Opinions
`In forming my opinions set forth in this declaration, I have considered
`11.
`
`and relied upon my education, background, and decades of experience in the field
`
`of pharmaceutical sciences, including pharmaceutics and formulation science,
`
`biopharmaceutics, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. I have also relied
`
`on the materials listed in Attachment B.
`
`C. Retention and Compensation
`I am being compensated for my consulting work on this case at my
`12.
`
`usual rate of $800.00 per hour plus expenses. My compensation in this proceeding
`
`is not dependent on its outcome.
`
`III.
`
`Legal Standards
`
`13. Counsel has informed me that certain legal principles should guide me
`
`in my analysis. Counsel has informed me that Mylan carries the burden of proving
`
`8
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 8
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence, which means Mylan must
`
`show that unpatentability is more likely than not.
`
`14. Counsel has informed me that the question of whether the claims of a
`
`patent are anticipated by, or obvious in view of, the prior art is to be considered
`
`from the perspective of the person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”). Counsel
`
`has further informed me that the answer to this question is ascertained as of the
`
`time the invention was made.
`
`15. Counsel has informed me that performing an obviousness analysis
`
`involves ascertaining, as of the time the invention was made, the scope and content
`
`of the prior art, the level of skill of the POSA, the differences between the claimed
`
`invention and the scope and content of the prior art, and whether there are
`
`additional factors present that may argue against a conclusion of obviousness (i.e.,
`
`“secondary considerations”), such as unexpected results attributable to the
`
`invention, or whether the invention met a long-felt but unmet need.
`
`16. Counsel has informed me that an invention may be found obvious:
`
`When there is a design need or market pressure to solve a
`problem and there are a finite number of identified,
`predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good
`reason to pursue the known options within his or her
`technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it
`is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary
`skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a
`
`9
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 9
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`combination was obvious to try might show that it was
`obvious under § 103.
`
`17. Counsel has informed me that a prior art reference anticipates a
`
`claimed invention if the prior art reference disclosed each of the claimed elements
`
`of the invention. A prior art reference not expressly disclosing a claim element
`
`may still anticipate the claimed invention if the missing element is necessarily
`
`present, or inherent, in the single anticipating reference. The missing element, or
`
`characteristic, is inherent in the anticipating reference if the characteristic is a
`
`natural result flowing from the reference’s explicit disclosure.
`
`18. Counsel has informed me that if a patent claims a composition in
`
`terms of a function, property, or characteristic, and the composition itself is in the
`
`prior art, then the claim may be anticipated or obvious in view of the prior art
`
`reference disclosing the composition.
`
`IV.
`
`Definition of a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSA)
`
`19. The field of art involves the knowledge of a medical doctor and that
`
`of a pharmacologist or pharmacokineticist with experience in dosage form design
`
`and evaluation. Thus, the hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art is a
`
`collaboration between a pharmacologist or pharmacokineticist having a Ph.D.
`
`degree or equivalent training, or a M.S. degree with at least 2 years of some
`
`experience in dosage form design and in in vitro and in vivo evaluation of dosage
`
`10
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 10
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`form performance, and a medical doctor having at least 2 years of practical
`
`experience treating patients in the gastroenterology field.
`
`20.
`
`I am offering my analysis from the perspective of the pharmacologist
`
`or pharmacokineticist described above.
`
`V.
`
`Summary of Opinions
`
`21. First, a POSA would have understood
`
`that
`
`the
`
`targeted
`
`pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) values recited in claims 1 and 2
`
`of the ’698 patent are the natural result of administering the pharmaceutical
`
`composition disclosed and claimed in U.S. Patent No. 8,557,285 (“’285 patent”).
`
`A POSA would have also understood that the targeted PK and PD values recited in
`
`claims 1 and 2 of the ’698 patent are a function, property, or characteristic of the
`
`pharmaceutical composition disclosed and claimed in the ’285 patent.
`
`22.
`
`Second, it would have been routine for a POSA to make and test the
`
`pharmaceutical composition disclosed and claimed in the ’285 patent as containing
`
`500 mg naproxen and 20 mg esomeprazole. A POSA would have measured and
`
`obtained the PK and PD values resulting from administration of the composition
`
`described and claimed in the ’285 patent by routine testing and recording methods.
`
`23. Third, a POSA would have been motivated to target the claimed PK
`
`and PD values recited in the claims of the ’698 patent because these values were
`
`known to be in the therapeutically effective ranges for naproxen and a proton pump
`
`11
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 11
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`inhibitor, such as esomeprazole. Further, a POSA would have had a reasonable
`
`expectation of success in targeting the claimed PK and PD values because a skilled
`
`artisan would routinely target PK and PD values associated with marketed drugs
`
`known to be effective.
`
`24. Fourth, all elements recited in the ’698 patent’s dependent claims
`
`were disclosed in the ’285 patent, as well as other prior art.
`
`VI.
`
`Background on Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics
`
`25.
`
`“Pharmacokinetics” (PK) describes the body processes associated
`
`with drug movement
`
`into (absorption or
`
`input), within (distribution or
`
`translocation) and out of (metabolism and excretion) the body. These processes
`
`are often referred to by the mnemonic ADME, which stands for Absorption,
`
`Distribution, Metabolism and Excretion. Ex. 1021 at 5. While pharmacology is
`
`often described as studying the “effect of the drug on the body,” PK is often
`
`described as the opposite: studying the “effect of the body on the drug.” The two
`
`areas of study are, however, inextricably connected.
`
`26.
`
`“Pharmacodynamics” (PD) describes how the concentration of a drug
`
`at its site of action is related to the magnitude of the clinical effect observed.
`
`Pharmacodynamics studies the relationship between a drug’s biochemical and
`
`physiological effects and its mechanism of action. Ex. 1021 at 9.
`
`12
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 12
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`27. While the science of pharmacology tends to be qualitative, the science
`
`of pharmacodynamics is quantitative, describing the course of a pharmacological
`
`or clinical effect over time. The PD properties of a drug are often studied in
`
`combination with its PK properties. These two properties are then used to develop
`
`PK/PD models of the drug, in both individuals and populations of patients. See
`
`generally Ex. 1022. One of the most basic skills for a clinical pharmacologist or
`
`pharmacokineticist is the ability to test a drug and gather the PK/PD data that
`
`describe the drug’s behavior.
`
`28. The diagram below depicts the relationship between pharmacokinetics
`
`and pharmacodynamics:
`
`Ex. 1022 at 6.
`
`Figure A
`
`13
`
`
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 13
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`29. As shown, PK/PD events overlap.
`
` The driving force for
`
`pharmacodynamic (i.e., clinical or toxic) events following drug dosing is generally
`
`the concentration of drug in the blood (or plasma). In other words, the PD effects
`
`of a drug are driven by its concentration in the plasma, and the time course of the
`
`PD effects is driven or controlled by the PK properties of the drug and its dosage
`
`form. Ex. 1021 at 5-8. Because of this, it is worthwhile to be able to describe the
`
`plasma concentration-time profile of a drug after administering it to a patient. A
`
`stylized single-dose plasma concentration-time profile resulting from oral dosing is
`
`depicted below.
`
`
`
`Figure B
`
`See, e.g., Ex. 1022 at 21 (displaying exemplary curve with identified parameters).
`
`30. To develop a single-dose plasma concentration-time profile, the
`
`clinical pharmacologist or pharmacokineticist will, after administering a drug (e.g.,
`
`14
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 14
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`administering orally), take frequent blood samples for a time sufficient to
`
`characterize the entire profile. The blood samples, or a fluid derived from blood
`
`(e.g., plasma or serum), are treated and submitted to an analytical procedure from
`
`which one can obtain a quantitative value for the concentration of the drug (and/or
`
`metabolites of that drug) in the blood sample. The resulting concentration-time
`
`profile can be plotted and analyzed, by using either a computer-based method to
`
`obtain a mathematical model that best describes the data, or a model-independent
`
`method. Either way, one obtains estimates of the values of the PK parameters for
`
`the drug.
`
`31. Following a single oral dose of a drug, the plasma concentration-time
`
`profile can be used to estimate the Cmax (maximum plasma drug concentration
`
`achieved), the Tmax (time after dosing corresponding to the Cmax), the t½ (half-life of
`
`the drug in the body), and the AUC (extent of absorption or total exposure to the
`
`drug, as measured by the total area under the plasma concentration vs time curve)
`
`from time zero to time infinity. The AUC is a function of the amount of drug that
`
`gets absorbed into the systemic circulation. The figure above is that of a
`
`characteristic plasma concentration-time curve for an immediate-release dosage
`
`form, i.e., one designed not to delay release and subsequent absorption.
`
`32. Often, a POSA will want to depict graphically the PK profile of a
`
`dosage form established in a study of multiple subjects. Placing the profile for
`
`15
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 15
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`each subject on a single graph may, however, be cumbersome and confusing. It is
`
`therefore common for a POSA to prepare an average plasma concentration-time
`
`profile by plotting the average plasma concentrations over all subjects at each
`
`sample time. Such a graph provides a useful indication of the PK behavior of the
`
`dosage form across multiple subjects. A graph of this type is similar to the one
`
`included in ¶ 29, but derives its data from a population (as described), rather than
`
`an individual.
`
`33. The drug’s dosage form and its formulation affect the shape of the
`
`plasma concentration-time curve. In other words, immediate-release solid drug
`
`dosage forms will result in a relatively high Cmax that occurs a short time after
`
`dosing (i.e., small Tmax). In contrast, a “delayed-release” solid drug dosage form
`
`will have a Tmax typically occurring later than that of an immediate-release dosage
`
`form. Delayed release often is accomplished by coating a solid dosage form with
`
`an enteric (or other polymer) layer, which is designed not to dissolve and release
`
`the drug until the dosage form reaches the relatively higher pH of the small
`
`intestine. For an enteric-coated dosage form, the delay in absorption can be quite
`
`prolonged, governed by the nature and characteristics of the enteric coating, the
`
`time needed for gastric emptying to occur, and the presence of food in the stomach.
`
`34. Some single unit dosage forms, like Vimovo®, provide “pulsatile”
`
`release; i.e., multiple drug releases occurring at different times after ingestion, for
`
`16
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 16
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`either the same drug or different drugs. This design, sometimes referred to as
`
`“repeat action,” was well known in the art. A repeat action is commonly achieved
`
`by having an inner core of one drug (the second, or “repeat” dose) covered by an
`
`enteric coating that delays release. An exemplary repeat-action dosage form,
`
`comprising delayed-release naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole, is
`
`shown below.
`
`Naproxen
`
`Enteric Coating
`Esomeprazole
`
`
`
`Figure C
`
`35. The initial dose (or the other drug dose) that covers the enteric coating
`
`provides the immediate release. An illustration of a plasma concentration-time
`
`profile for a unit dose, repeat-action tablet is below.
`
`17
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 17
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`
`
`Figure D
`
`36. The solid line represents the total drug plasma concentration for a
`
`repeat action or pulsatile dose form. Thus, the drug concentration first rises from
`
`immediate release of drug A1 from the outer coating of the tablet. Total drug
`
`concentration then declines until release of drug A2 (second pulse of A) or B (first
`
`pulse of new drug—as with the dosage form shown in Figure C above) from the
`
`enteric-coated inner core. The dashed line concentration shown as A2 or B is
`
`added to the A1 concentration curve to produce the total drug concentration-time
`
`solid line. Note that for a pulsatile dosage form, one would see the A1 drug
`
`concentration line continue to decrease according to the descending dashed line;
`
`and some time later, concentrations from the other drug, B, will rise and decline
`
`(second dashed line), with plasma concentrations for drug B being delayed relative
`
`to plasma concentrations for drug A.
`
`18
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 18
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`37. Many times, it is useful to characterize the pharmacokinetics of a drug
`
`and its dosage form after multiple oral dosing. With multiple dosing, a drug
`
`accumulates in the body until a maximum plasma concentration is achieved, such
`
`that the concentration-time profile repeats after every dosing interval. When this
`
`occurs, commonly after about 4 or 5 half-lives, a so-called “steady state” has been
`
`obtained. This is a fluctuating steady state in which the drug concentrations repeat
`
`but rise and fall periodically. A true steady state involves constant drug
`
`concentrations with time, occurring when the rate of drug entry into the body
`
`equals the rate of elimination of drug from the body. A stylized plasma
`
`concentration-time profile, showing the rise from initial dosing to a fluctuating
`
`steady state, is depicted below. Cmax, Tmax, and AUC(0-t)
`
`1 are added as illustrated.
`
`
`1 “AUC(0-t)” refers to the area under the curve from time zero to an arbitrary time, t.
`
`19
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 19
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`Cmax
`
`AUC(t)
`
`Tmax
`
`
`
`Ex. 1022 at 43.
`
`Figure E
`
`38. The concentration-time profile can be analyzed once steady state has
`
`been achieved. Both Cmax and Tmax will have the same meaning as for single
`
`dosing, but the total area under the curve (AUC) is measured for a defined interval
`
`(often the dosing interval τ (“tau”) (AUCτ)). Two other parameters that may be
`
`calculated at steady state include the minimum plasma concentration, Cmin, often
`
`occurring just before the next dose, and the average steady state plasma
`
`concentration, Cave. The latter value is not the average of Cmax and Cmin, but rather
`
`is calculated as a time-averaged concentration, AUCτ/τ, the units of which are
`
`20
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 20
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`concentration. For example, if the dosage interval is 24 hours, Cave will refer to the
`
`area under the curve for the 24-hour dosing period, divided by 24, i.e., AUC24/24.
`
`39. During a dosing interval at steady state, one can characterize different
`
`dosage forms of a given drug by the PK parameters. For example, an immediate-
`
`release product may have a rapidly-achieved Cmax and a low Cmin, depending upon
`
`the dosing interval (the longer the interval, the lower the Cmin; the shorter the
`
`interval, the greater the Cmin).
`
`VII.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698 [Ex. 1001]
`
`40. U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698 (“’698 patent”) issued on December 29,
`
`2015, and is entitled “Method for Delivering A Pharmaceutical Composition to a
`
`Patient in Need Thereof.” See Ex. 1001 at [54]. The ’698 patent issued from U.S.
`
`Patent Application No. 12/553,107, filed on September 3, 2009, which claims
`
`priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/095,584, filed on September
`
`9, 2008. Id. at [21], [22], [60].
`
`41. The ’698 patent names as joint inventors Brian Ault, Mark Sostek,
`
`Everardus Orlemans, and John Plachetka. See id. at [75]. The ’698 patent is
`
`assigned on its face to Pozen Inc. and Horizon Pharma USA, Inc. Id. at [73].
`
`42. The ’698 patent contains seven claims, of which claim 1 is the only
`
`independent claim. Claims 2–7 depend from, and further limit, the subject matter
`
`recited in claim 1. Id. at 52:25-53:29.
`
`21
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 21
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`
`43. As issued, the ’698 patent contains several errors in at least its claims.
`
`The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a Certificate of
`
`Correction for the ’698 patent, addressing some of those errors, on April 19, 2016.
`
`The USPTO issued a second Certificate of Correction on July 12, 2016.
`
`Throughout this declaration, I address the claims as corrected.
`
`A. The ’698 Patent Specification
`44. The ’698 patent relates to methods for treating a patient having
`
`osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis, with a unit dose form
`
`containing 500 mg of enteric-coated naproxen and 20 mg of immediate-release
`
`esomeprazole to target a range of PK and PD values for naproxen and
`
`esomeprazole. Ex. 1001 at 52:25-67. The ’698 patent refers to an exemplary
`
`dosage form, having 500 mg naproxen and 20 mg esomeprazole, as “PN400/E20,”
`
`Ex. 1001 at 26:44-45, or “PN400,” Ex. 1001 at 46:43-44. The ’698 patent
`
`describes the results of treating a patient population with PN400/E20, and the
`
`claims recite the reported PK/PD values. See, e.g., Ex. 1001 at cols. 35-49, Tbls. 6,
`
`8, 11, 13, 16-17; 52:25-67 (claim 1).
`
`45. The ’698 patent describes and claimed PK parameters for the dosage
`
`forms that were well-known to a POSA, including “Cmax,” “Tmax,” and “AUC,”
`
`each of which is described and explained above. See, e.g., Ex. 1001 at 52:25-67
`
`(claim 1). The ’698 patent also reports these PK parameters as the average (mean)
`
`22
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE 22
`
`

`

`
`
`EXHIBIT 1003 – DECLARATION OF MICHAEL MAYERSOHN, PH.D.
`
`or median values plus or minus a variation. Id. The ’698 patent also describes and
`
`claims the variation in these parameters as coefficients of variation (e.g., claiming
`
`±20% variation), which reflects the variability inherent in biological and analytical
`
`processes both within a patient, across multiple measurements, and between
`
`patients in a population. Id. The percentage coefficient of variation (%CV) is
`
`calculated as the standard deviation (SD) divided by the mean or average value,
`
`multiplied by 100. Ex. 1001 at 5:55-56.
`
`46. The ’698 patent acknowledges that NSAIDs were known to increase
`
`the risk of gastrointestinal injury, such as ulcers, when used long-term. Ex. 1001 at
`
`1:19-24. A POSA would have known, and the ’698 patent states, that stomach acid
`
`was “[a] major factor contributing to the development of gastrointestinal lesions”
`
`in these circumstances. Id. at 1:24-25. The ’698 patent also states that strategies
`
`were known “to reduce the gastrointestinal risk associated with taking NSAIDs by
`
`administering agents that inhibit stomach acid secretion, such as, for example,
`
`proton pump inhibitors with the NSAID.” Id. at 1:27-30.
`
`47. The ’698 patent specifically identifies U.S. Patent No. 6,926,907
`
`(“’907 patent”) [Ex. 1004], as directed to a drug dosage form that includes a proton
`
`pump inhibitor (“PPI”), that is “effective in improving NSAID tolerability through
`
`dosages of esomeprazole and naproxen that produce the desired pharmacodynamic
`
`response and pharmacokinetic values.” Id. at 1:34-37.
`
`23
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1003 PAGE

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