`
`
`
`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 Owner
`____________________________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01995
`U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698
`____________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF ROBERT D. SWANSON
`IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`ROBERT D. SWANSON
`
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1049 PAGE 1
`
`
`
`I, Robert D. Swanson, declare as follows:
`1.
`I am an associate in the patent litigation group at Perkins Coie LLP.
`
`2.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of California.
`
`I am also admitted to practice before the United States Courts of Appeals for the
`
`Federal Circuit.
`
`3. My State of California Bar membership number is CA 295159.
`
`4.
`
`I have been practicing law for more than two years, not including
`
`clerkships with Judge Whyte and Judge Koh on the United States District Court for
`
`the Northern District of California and Chief Judge Prost of the United States
`
`Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. During my time in practice, I have
`
`focused on litigating patent cases, specifically pharmaceutical patent cases.
`
`5. More generally, I have represented the Petitioner and/or its various
`
`related entities in litigating significant pharmaceutical patent cases, such as the
`
`following infringement cases:
`
`• Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Civil
`
`Action No. 1:14-cv-01278 (U.S. District Court for the District of
`
`Delaware);
`
`• Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Civil Action No. 17-
`
`1575 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit);
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1049 PAGE 2
`
`
`
`•
`
`Yeda Research and Development Co. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
`
`Civil Action Nos. 17-1594, 17-1595, 17-1596 (U.S. Court of Appeals
`
`for the Federal Circuit);
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 13-cv-04022-MLC-
`
`DEA (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey);
`
`Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 15-cv-03327-SRC-
`
`CLW (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey);
`
`BTG Int’l Ltd. v. Actavis Labs. FL, Inc., Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-
`
`05909-KM-JBC (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey);
`
`Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 16-cv-04921-SRC-
`
`CLW (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey); and
`
`Pozen Inc. v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs. Inc., No. 17-2473 (consolidated)
`
`(U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit).
`
`6.
`
`I have never been disbarred, sanctioned or cited for contempt by any
`
`court or administrative body. I am not currently suspended in any bar or by any
`
`court or administrative body.
`
`7.
`
`I have never had a court deny my application for admission to
`
`practice.
`
`8.
`
`I am familiar with the subject matter of this proceeding. In addition to
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,220,698 (“the ’698 patent”) and its prosecution history, I am
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1049 PAGE 3
`
`
`
`familiar with the technology at issue and Vimovo, the pharmaceutical product for
`
`which the ’698 patent is listed by Horizon Pharma USA, Inc. in FDA’s publication,
`
`Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly
`
`referred to as the “Orange Book.” I have been litigating issues surrounding
`
`Vimovo for more than one year in Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc.,
`
`Civil Action No. 13-cv-04022-MLC-DEA (D.N.J.), Horizon Pharma, Inc. v.
`
`Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 15-cv-03327-SRC-CLW (D.N.J.), Horizon Pharma, Inc.
`
`v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 16-cv-04921-SRC-CLW (D.N.J.), and Pozen Inc. v.
`
`Dr. Reddy’s Labs. Inc., No. 17-2473 (consolidated) (Fed. Cir.), on behalf of Mylan
`
`Pharmaceuticals Inc., Mylan Laboratories Ltd., and Mylan Inc.
`
`9.
`
`In connection with my work on the Vimovo litigation, I have become
`
`familiar with the prior art references that are the subject of this proceeding.
`
`10. Given my familiarity with the underlying facts and my litigation
`
`experience with the Federal Rules of Evidence, I have experience and expertise
`
`important to representing Mylan’s interests in this matter.
`
`11.
`
`I have read and will comply with Office Patent Trial Practice guide
`
`and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of 37 C.F.R.
`
`12.
`
`I agree to be subject to the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R.§§ 11.101 et. seq. and
`
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1049 PAGE 4
`
`
`
`13.
`
`I have previously applied for, and been granted, admission pro hac
`
`vice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office in IPR2016-01332.
`
`14.
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my own
`
`knowledge are true and that all statements made on information and belief are
`
`believed to be true; and further that these statements are made with the knowledge
`
`that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine, imprisonment, or
`
`both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`
`
`Dated: April 2, 2018
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Robert D. Swanson
`Robert D. Swanson
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1049 PAGE 5
`
`