`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`HORIZON PHARMA USA, INC. and NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS
`(IRELAND) DESIGNATED ACTIVITY COMPANY.
`
`Patent Owner
`____________________________
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00272
`U.S. Patent No. 9,393,208
`____________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF BRYAN D. BEEL
`IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`BRYAN D. BEEL
`
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1055
`PAGE 1
`
`
`
`I, Bryan D. Beel, declare as follows:
`1.
`I am senior counsel in the patent litigation group at Perkins Coie LLP.
`
`2.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Oregon. I
`
`am also admitted to practice before the United States Courts of Appeals for the
`
`Fourth Circuit and Federal Circuit. I am admitted to practice before the United
`
`States District Court for the District of Oregon, and the Supreme Court of Oregon.
`
`3. My State of Oregon Bar membership number is OR 073408.
`
`4.
`
`I have been practicing law for more than eleven years, including
`
`litigating patent cases, specifically focused on pharmaceutical patent cases, for the
`
`last eight years.
`
`5. More generally, I have represented the Petitioner and/or its various
`
`related entities in litigating significant pharmaceutical patent cases, such as the
`
`following patent cases:
`
`•
`
`AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd., Civil Action No. 3:12-
`
`cv-01378-MLC-TJB (U.S. District Court for the District of New
`
`Jersey);
`
`•
`
`•
`
`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);
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1055
`PAGE 2
`
`
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`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);
`
`Novartis AG v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 16-cv-00289-LPS (U.S.
`
`District Court for the District of Delaware);
`
`Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 16-cv-04921-SRC-
`
`CLW (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey);
`
`Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 17-cv-00389-
`
`RGA (U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware);
`
`Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 17-cv-54-IMK
`
`(U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia); and
`
`Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., Civil Action No.
`
`1:18-cv-01043-LPS (U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware).
`
`6.
`
`I have never been disbarred, suspended, 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 or administrative body 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. 9,393,208 (“the ’208 patent”) and its prosecution history, I am
`
`familiar with the technology at issue and Vimovo, the pharmaceutical product for
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1055
`PAGE 3
`
`
`
`which the ’208 patent is listed by Horizon Medicines LLC 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 nearly five years 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.), and Horizon Pharma, Inc. v.
`
`Mylan Pharms. Inc., No. 16-cv-04921-SRC-CLW (D.N.J.), 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
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct 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 1055
`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 and
`
`IPR2017-01995.
`
`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: January 31, 2019
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Bryan D. Beel
`Bryan D. Beel
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1055
`PAGE 5
`
`