8/17/2021
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 3
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 1
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` --------------------
` New World Medical, Inc.,
` Petitioner
` v.
` MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.,
` Patent Owner
` --------------------
` Case Nos. IPR2020-01573; IPR2020-01711;
` IPR2021-00017; IPR2021-00065; IPR2021-00066
`U.S. Patent Nos. 9,107,729; 9,358,155; 9,820,885;
` 10,123,905, 9,999,544
` --------------------
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF GARRY CONDON, M.D.
` Volume 1
`
` I N D E X
` Volume 1
` Tuesday, August 17, 2021
` WITNESS PAGE
` Called by the Petitioner:
` EXAMINATION BY MR. TUCKER................... 7
`
` E X H I B I T S
` (Attached to transcript)
` GARRY CONDON, M.D. DEPOSITION EXHIBITS PAGE
`Condon Exhibit 1 Petitioner's Notice of 9
` Deposition of Garry P.
` Condon, M.D.
`Condon Exhibit 2 Declaration of Garry P. 11
` Condon, M.D., in Support of
` Patent Owner's Response
` U.S. Patent No. 9,107,729
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2019-0001 through 171
`Condon Exhibit 3 United States Patent 14
` No. US 9,107,729 B2
`Condon Exhibit 4 Gonioscopic Trabeculotomy, 22
` First Results
` Manuel Quintana
` Petitioner New World Medical
` Exhibit 1004, Page 1 through 9
`Condon Exhibit 5 Amendment Accompanying Notice 35
` of Appeal
` Application No. 13/159,356
`
`Page 4
`
` E X H I B I T S, CON'T
` (Attached to transcript)
` GARRY CONDON, M.D. DEPOSITION EXHIBITS PAGE
`Condon Exhibit 6 Black's Medical Dictionary - 71
` Page 519 - "Section"
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2023-0001 through 3
`Condon Exhibit 7 Dorland's Medical Dictionary 78
` - Page 605 - "Section"
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2023-0001 through 3
`Condon Exhibit 8 Clinical Research - 88
` Symposium: Microsurgery of
` the Outflow Channels
` Bernard Becker, MD, et al.
`Condon Exhibit 9 Histologic Evaluation of 131
` Microsurgical Glaucoma
` Techniques
` Symposium: Microsurgery of
` the Outflow Channels
` William H. Spencer, MD
`Condon Exhibit 10 Declaration of Garry P. 172
` Condon, M.D., In Support of
` Patent Owner's Response
` Case IPR2020-01711, U.S.
` Patent No. 9,358,155
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2019-0001 through 169
`Condon Exhibit 11 Declaration of Garry P. 172
` Condon, M.D., In Support of
` Patent Owner Response
` Case IPR2021-00066
` U.S. Patent No. 9,999,544
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2019-0001 through 145
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`
`7 8
`
`9
`10
`11
`
`12
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`20
`
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`21
`22
`
`DATE TAKEN: Tuesday, August 17, 2021
`TIME: 9:04 a.m. - 4:13 p.m.
` Eastern Daylight Time
`PLACE: Embassy Suites by Hilton Sarasota
` 202 North Tamiami Trial
` Sarasota, Florida 34236
`
` Examination of the witness taken before:
` SUSAN D. WASILEWSKI, RPR, CRR, CMRS, CRC, FPR
` ~ Realtime Systems Administrator ~
`
`____________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`Page 2
`
` APPEARANCES
`Counsel for Petitioner, New World Medical, Inc.:
` CALFEE, HALTER & GRISWOLD LLP
` BY: TODD R. TUCKER, ESQUIRE
` ttucker@calfee.com
` 1405 Calfee Building
` Cleveland, Ohio 44114
` Phone: (216) 622-8200
`
` NEW WORLD MEDICAL
` BY: DAVID KLANN, ESQUIRE
` dklann@newworldmedical.com
` 10763 Edison Court
` Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
` Phone: (800) 832-5327
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner, MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.:
` WILEY REIN LLP
` BY: TERESA SUMMERS, ESQUIRE
` tsummers@wiley.law
` LAWRENCE M. SUNG, Ph.D., ESQUIRE
` lsung@wiley.law
` 1776 K Street NW
` Washington, DC 20006
` Phone: (202) 719-4181
`
`Also Present:
` LAJUANA PRUITT, Videographer
`
`1
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`67
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`1 (Pages 1 to 4)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 1 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 5
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` E X H I B I T S, CON'T
` (Attached to transcript)
` GARRY CONDON, M.D. DEPOSITION EXHIBITS PAGE
`Condon Exhibit 12 Declaration of Garry P. 172
` Condon, M.D., In Support of
` Patent Owner's Response
` Case IPR2021-00017
` U.S. Patent No. 9,820,885
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2019-0001 through 148
`Condon Exhibit 13 Declaration of Garry P. 172
` Condon, M.D., In Support of
` Patent Owner's Response
` Case IPR2021-00065
` U.S. Patent No. 10,123,905
` Patent Owner Exhibit
` 2019-0001 through 122
`Condon Exhibit 14 Article - Technique of 182
` goniocurettage: A potentia
` treatment for advanced
` chronic open angle glaucoma
` Philipp C. Jacobi, et al.
` Petitioner New World Medical
` Exhibit 1007, Page 1 through 6
`
`Page 6
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is Tape Number 1 to
` the videotaped deposition of Garry Condon, taken
` by the petitioner, in the matter of New World
` Medical Group vs. MicroSurgical Technology, Cause
` Number IPR202-017 -- 01573.
` This deposition is being held at 202 North
` Tamiani Trail in Sarasota, Florida, on
` August 17th, the year 2021, at approximately
` 9:04 a.m.
` My name is Lajuana Pruitt. I'm your legal
` videographer from Digital Evidence Group. Our
` court reporter is Susan Wasilewski, also with
` Digital Evidence Group.
` Will counsel please introduce themselves
` beginning with Petitioner?
` MR. TUCKER: Todd Tucker from Calfee, Halter
` & Griswold in Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioner.
` Along with me is David Klann, General Counsel of
` New World Medical.
` MS. SUMMERS: Teresa Summers of Wiley Rein
` representing MicroSurgical Technology and the
` Regents of the University of California and the
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 7
` witness, and with me is Lawrence Sung, also of
` Wiley Rein.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the court reporter
` please swear the witness.
` THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, I didn't hear.
` THE COURT REPORTER: Would you raise your
` right hand?
` Do you solemnly swear or affirm the
` testimony you're about to give will be the truth,
` the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
` THE WITNESS: I do.
` THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you.
` GARRY CONDON, called as a witness by the
` Petitioner, having been first duly sworn, testified
` as follows:
` EXAMINATION
` BY MR. TUCKER:
` Q. All right. Good morning, Dr. Condon.
` Again, I'm Todd Tucker, and I'm going to be doing
` the depo today and tomorrow. I'd like to go over
` kind of some housekeeping beforehand just so we're
` all on the same page.
`
`Page 8
`
` Have you been deposed before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How many times?
` A. Once that I recall.
` Q. Okay. As an expert witness or a fact
` witness?
` A. Expert witness.
` Q. Okay. What type of case was it, if you
` don't mind?
` A. It was a -- it's actually an ongoing case.
` It's a patent infringement case in California.
` Q. Okay. Well, since you've gone through the
` process before, hopefully we won't need to go
` through a lot of ground rules.
` Just the big ones are, I'm going to ask
` questions, you're going to give answers. Please
` give a verbal answer. It's hard for the reporter to
` take a nod of the head or a shake of the head.
` Let's try not to talk over each other, and
` if you don't -- if you don't understand one of my
` questions, just let me know that you don't
` understand and we can discuss what -- what you're --
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`2 (Pages 5 to 8)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 2 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 9
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` what you don't know is going on.
` So with that, do you know a Dr. Manuel
` Quintana?
` A. I do not.
` Q. Okay. Have you ever communicated with him?
` A. I have not.
` Q. I'd like to start with maybe getting your
` understanding -- actually, I made one housekeeping
` error.
` This is actually the official notice of
` deposition, which we will mark as Condon 1, that --
` I'm not sure if you saw this, but this is the paper
` we have to give to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
` that this deposition is going.
` (Condon Exhibit 1 was marked for
` identification.)
` A. Okay.
` Q. So that's just pure housekeeping, but that's
` got to be Exhibit 1. Susan's going to take charge
` of the exhibits, so just leave them over by her and
` we'll go from there.
` I'd like to get, again, some -- some
`
`Page 10
`
` definitions.
` Before we do that, how long have you been a
` physician, sir?
` A. 40 -- around 40 years.
` Q. Okay. And you're an ophthalmologist?
` A. Correct.
` Q. And what sort of certifications do you have?
` A. I'm certified by the American Board of
` Ophthalmology. I'm also boarded in Canada. Those
` are the primary certifications. I've had fellowship
` training in ophthalmology as well.
` Q. Now, you were retained by MicroSurgical as
` their testifying expert in this case, correct?
` A. Well, I was retained by Wiley --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- specifically.
` Q. Okay. And just at a high level, you --
` there's five patents and five IPRs, and you've
` looked at those patents?
` A. Yes, I have.
` Q. Okay. And you issued opinions in each of
` those five IPRs, right?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay. The -- the five separate declarations
` are pretty lengthy. We'll ultimately probably get
` them all introduced as evidence because I don't feel
` like carrying them home back to Cleveland.
` What we'll do is we'll start with -- as
` Condon Exhibit 2, here is your declaration for
` what's the '729 patent. You understand we go by the
` last three numbers?
` A. Right.
` Q. Okay. This is going to be Exhibit 2, the
` '729.
` (Condon Exhibit 2 was marked for
` identification.)
` MR. TUCKER: Do you want --
` MS. SUMMERS: Sure.
` MR. TUCKER: You just feel like you have to
` do this still. It's such a -- it's such a
` remnant from a different era because I know
` you've got them on your computer.
` BY MR. TUCKER:
` Q. Okay. Let's -- that -- you know, that's
`
`Page 12
` your -- that's your full declaration including your
` CV. Feel free to look at it, whatever you need to.
` Again, I'd like to get into some definitions.
` As an ophthalmologist with 40-plus years
` experience, what does the term "incise" mean to you?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. Well, it depends on the application at hand.
` I mean, I'm not sure I can give you a broad
` definition of "incise" without having some situation
` that you're referring to.
` Q. Okay. So the '729 patent generally refers
` to devices and methods for treating open-angle
` glaucoma, right?
` A. Right, I would agree.
` Q. Okay. So maybe we put it that way. In the
` context of the '729 patent, what would --
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. -- how would you define "incise" as an
` expert?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; scope.
` A. In a particular instance in this '729 --
` Q. No. Just -- I just want --
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`3 (Pages 9 to 12)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 3 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 13
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` A. -- or a particular --
` Q. Just a general definition for glaucoma
` procedures, how would you define "incise"?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection to form.
` A. Well, "incise" is making an incision.
` Q. And so would you agree that that would mean
` making a cut?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; scope.
` A. It can result -- it could result in a cut,
` but in a specific location, I'd have to give you a
` more precise application of that term as it's
` addressed in the -- in the patents or my
` declaration.
` Q. Okay. Does the term "goniectomy" have a
` particular meaning to you as a physician?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. Again, in a particular instance or a
` particular eye, I could provide a more clearcut
` description. Are you referring specifically to a
` particular case here?
` MR. TUCKER: We'll just -- this will be
` Condon 3.
`
`Page 14
`
` (Condon Exhibit 3 was marked for
` identification.)
` BY MR. TUCKER:
` Q. Okay. So the court reporter has handed you
` Condon Exhibit 3, which is US Patent 9,107,729, and
` it's kind of common parlance in patent cases that we
` just refer to the patent as the last three numbers.
` A. Right.
` Q. So I'm going to refer to it as the '729, and
` we'll know we're talking about Exhibit 3. Is that
` fair?
` A. Right.
` Q. Okay. If you turn to Column 1 of Exhibit 3
` and go down to about Line -- go to -- go to Line --
` start on Line 35 and read to -- read as far as you
` need, but maybe around 40 or so, and then I'm going
` to ask you a question about what the patent is
` referring to as a goniectomy.
` A. So "...3A-3D show various steps in a method
` for manufacturing a needle cutter of the present
` invention."
` "Figure 4 is a side view of a distal portion
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 15
` of a needle cutter device of the present invention
` being used to cut a strip of tissue of approximately
` width W."
` Q. Okay. Okay. We're -- you're actually --
` that's Column 3. I'm sorry. Can you go back to
` Column 1?
` A. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
` Q. So 1 is on the left-hand side. Do you see
` where it says: One surgical procedure wherein a
` strip of tissue of a known width is removed from an
` anatomical location --
` A. I do.
` Q. -- within the body of a patient is a
` ophthalmologic procedure used to treat glaucoma.
` So there. And then the next sentence says:
` This ophthalmologic procedure is sometimes referred
` to as a goniectomy.
` So can you -- can you tell me your
` understanding of -- within the frame of this patent,
` what a goniectomy is?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; scope.
` A. I'm not entirely sure what the meaning of
`
`Page 16
` the term in this -- in this patent document is. If
` you gave me a specific clinical picture, I might be
` able to give you a better description of what it is
` in my mind.
` Q. Okay. Is it -- is it fair to say a
` goniectomy is a surgical procedure wherein a strip
` of a tissue of a known width is removed from an
` anatomical location within the body of a patient
` used to treat glaucoma?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; beyond the scope.
` A. Again, this is a very general term or a
` broad-based definition that I would want put in a
` more direct context.
` Q. What more direct context would you need to
` give a general definition of goniectomy?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I'm not -- I'm not entirely sure of the
` method that -- or specific method suggested to
` create this goniectomy. So can you give me a more
` clinical --
` Q. Yeah. Let me -- let me --
` A. -- picture of a patient?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`4 (Pages 13 to 16)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 4 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 17
` Q. Sorry to interrupt. Let me give you a --
` maybe come at it a different way.
` Is a result of a goniectomy a strip of
` tissue is removed from the glaucoma patient's
` trabecular meshwork?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; scope.
` A. I would say in some cases, that that could
` constitute a goniectomy if there was a defined
` portion of tissue removed.
` Q. What do you mean by "defined portion of
` tissue removed"?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. Well, in the context of the patents and my
` declaration, a defined portion of tissue removed
` would be something that's a piece of meshwork that
` is completely isolated from the canal in one piece.
` MR. TUCKER: Let's maybe take like a minute
` break and we'll go off for a second.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Okay. We're going off
` the record. The time is 9:18 a.m.
` (Recess from 9:18 a.m. until 9:22 a.m.)
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record.
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 19
` being performed, I would have to disagree.
` Q. If you were going to try to replicate the
` procedure that Quintana describes in his article,
` and you didn't have, you know, a patient to do it
` on --
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. -- how -- like, how would you do that? How
` would you do that in the lab?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I think that's pretty hypothetical for me.
` I've never attempted to do it in the lab, and so I'd
` have to think long and hard about exactly what I
` might need or want to do. I mean, that's beyond,
` again, what I was asked to consider.
` Q. Do you know what a corneal rim is?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. Do I know what a corneal rim is? In what
` scenario or situation?
` Q. So I'm trying to -- I don't fully understand
` what it is as well, but my understanding is
` sometimes for training purposes with, like, MST's
` device or New World's device, what's the -- a
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Page 18
`
` The time is 9:22 a.m.
` A. So I wasn't asked to give expert testimony
` on the specifics of the patents, per se. I can talk
` to you about goniectomy in the realm of prior art
` like Quintana in a more specific clinical
` environment.
` What the patent -- what you're asking me to
` do here is not what I was asked to do, which is to
` form general definitions of certain terms and
` whatnot in these --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- patents.
` Q. Understood. Does Quintana disclose a
` goniectomy?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. So with specific reference to Quintana and
` based on what I just said about my understanding of
` goniectomy, that Quintana does not disclose a
` goniectomy. Within the context of his article,
` within the title of his article, within what he
` describes in his article, and to my understanding,
` any suggestion by Dr. Netland that the goniectomy is
`
`Page 20
` physician who is learning to become an
` ophthalmologist will learn some of the techniques
` and practice them on what's called a corneal rim.
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. Does that sound familiar to you?
` A. I believe I know what you're referring to,
` but, again, I can't speak to how I would
` hypothetically consider what I would need, use, or
` attempt to replicate anything here.
` Q. So just so -- so I can understand, what is a
` corneal rim to you?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. Well, if you're referring to a living
` patient, it's very different than a dead patient's
` eye.
` Q. Yeah, right, dead patient's eye -- (garbled
` audio) --
` A. Okay. So if we're talking about a dead
` patient's eye, it's a portion of a patient -- a dead
` patient's eye.
` Q. If someone was trying to replicate
` Quintana's procedure, not a living patient, could
`
`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 2021
`
`5 (Pages 17 to 20)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 5 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 23
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 21
` you -- could you use a corneal rim as the medium to
` try to replicate the procedure?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I don't know that I can answer that. I've
` never tried to apply anything Quintana writes about
` to a corneal rim.
` Q. Okay. Have you tried to perform what
` Dr. Quintana discloses on an enucleated eye?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. Any -- I have not tried to perform what
` Quintana describes on an enucleated eye.
` Q. Do you -- do you think -- given your 40-plus
` years as an ophthalmologist, do you -- do you think
` that a physician could use a corneal rim to attempt
` to replicate Quintana's procedure?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; scope.
` A. Again, Quintana never discusses how he might
` use a corneal rim, what the limitations might be.
` And so I just cannot hypothetically tell you what
` Quintana would or not be able to -- would or
` wouldn't be able to do with a corneal rim --
` Q. Okay.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` copies of it.
` BY MR. TUCKER:
` Q. So, Dr. Condon, have you seen Exhibit 4
` before?
` A. I have.
` Q. Okay. Would you turn to Page -- I'm going
` to go off the actual page number, so 266. And do
` you see Figure 1?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And those are -- those are two
` needles being illustrated in Figure 1, right?
` A. I guess.
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I mean, I see two needles.
` Q. Okay. One is -- according to Figure 1, it
` says: "Schematic drawing comparing the tangential
` approach to the perpendicular approach as in classic
` goniotomy or goniotrabeculotomy."
` Do you see where that is?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Which needle is tangential in this figure,
` and which needle is perpendicular?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Page 22
`
` A. -- with his particular technique.
` Q. Would a -- would a corneal rim be an
` acceptable medium to attempt to replicate Quintana's
` procedure?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.
` Q. Okay.
` MR. TUCKER: One second.
` A. Just to be clear, I've only been an
` ophthalmologist for 35.
` Q. Oh, I'm sorry.
` A. MD for 40.
` Q. I don't want to be --
` MR. TUCKER: Okay. This is going to be
` Exhibit 4.
` (Condon Exhibit 4 was marked for
` identification.)
` MR. TUCKER: This is a reprint of
` Gonioscopic Trabeculotomy, First Results by
` Manuel Quintana. I didn't recognize -- I've
` never seen it with the green on it, so I
` didn't -- I didn't recognize it. I have my own
`
`Page 24
`
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. In the schematic, the needle on the right is
` the one that's suggesting the tangential approach.
` Q. Okay. Would you mind, if you could maybe
` label that as tangential for the record so that we
` all know what we're talking about?
` A. Just put it right on mine?
` Q. Yeah, because that -- your exhibit is the
` official -- official copy.
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; mischaracterizes
` the testimony.
` A. (Indicating.)
` Q. And I'm going to go -- maybe keep Quintana
` in front of you, but you may want to get to your
` declaration, and I'm going to go to Paragraph 22 of
` your declaration.
` Are you there?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Do you see where it says: "In my
` opinion, a POSA would have understood the Quintana
` trabeculotome, other than its needle tip bend, to be
` the same as an unbent standard hypodermic needle,
`
`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 2021
`
`6 (Pages 21 to 24)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 6 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 27
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 25
` the tip of which has a single bevel with a sharp
` point and sides"?
` A. I see that.
` Q. Okay. So first off, just so -- we've always
` got to -- especially early in the depo, we've got to
` do this housekeeping to make sure we've got terms.
` A. Right.
` Q. Do you understand that P-O-S-A --
` A. You can just use POSA.
` Q. POSA? Okay. POSA is a person of skill --
` person of ordinary skill in the art?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay. So if you look at the tangential
` needle in Figure 1 of Quintana and reference this
` passage from 22, is it your testimony that the
` tangential needle there in Figure 1 is a single
` bevel with a sharp point and sides?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. That's what I've said in this paragraph.
` The tip -- I'm sorry. The -- other than any needle
` tip bend, to be the same as an unbent standard
` hypodermic needle with a single bevel and a sharp
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` want to parse out what you've said here.
` A. Okay.
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. So -- all right. So I'm going to say that
` it's represented, like, basically, a very -- like, a
` dot.
` Q. Is -- okay. That's the tip. Okay.
` A. That's the tip.
` Q. The -- is the -- the sharp point plus the
` sides, that's what you're referring to as the single
` bevel?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` Q. Do you see in Paragraph 22 where it says:
` Has a single bevel with a sharp point and sides?
` A. So the -- the bevel begins proximally and
` ends at the tip, if that's what you're saying. The
` bevel begins at the very proximal portion of the
` lumen.
` Q. And --
` A. And ends at the tip.
` Q. Okay. And can you show me on Figure 1 where
` the proximal portion starts?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Page 26
`
` point --
` Q. Okay. So in the --
` A. -- and sides.
` Q. -- figure, could you perhaps -- do you agree
` with me, like, where I'm pointing, that's one side?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. So where you're pointing would be one side
` of the lumen --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- within that beveled zone.
` Q. Okay. And the -- I guess let's take a step
` back because it's a little -- could you -- could you
` draw a box around what you think the -- what you
` mean by the tip -- the tip of which has a single
` bevel, can you give me the whole area that is the
` tip on that needle in Figure 1?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; mischaracterizes
` the testimony.
` A. I don't know that I can give you an exact
` idea in this, you know, photocopied schematic
` drawing.
` Q. An approximation is fine. I just kind of
`
`Page 28
`
` A. Of the bevel?
` Q. Of the bevel, yeah.
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; scope.
` A. So my understanding is that the bevel would
` extend from the proximal opening of the lumen onto
` the -- onto the tip, up to the tip.
` Q. Okay. So just so we understand if -- and
` we'll label this. Approximately there is the
` proximal portion of the bevel, somewhere in there?
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Yes. Where the dot is there.
` Q. I'm going to draw a line off that dot --
` A. That's fine.
` Q. -- so we can -- could you just write what --
` a proximal portion of the bevel so we have this
` labeled?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; mischaracterizes
` the testimony.
` A. (Indicating.)
` Q. And then the sharp point is where, sir?
` A. At 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 2021
`
`7 (Pages 25 to 28)
`202-232-0646
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1041, p. 7 of 90
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Tech., Inc., IPR2020-01573
`
`

`

`8/17/2021
`
`Garry Condon, M.D.
`Page 31
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v. MicroSurgical Technology, Inc.
`Page 29
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. At the end of the needle.
` Q. Okay. Can you draw a line to there and also
` label that with your term "sharp" -- yeah.
` A. Point.
` Q. Point.
` A. Correct.
` MS. SUMMERS: Mischaracterizes the
` testimony.
` Q. Okay. So then kind of the area between --
` strike that.
` The portions that are between the point and
` the proximal portion of the bevel are what you call
` the sides, correct?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I think it's fair to say that I would call
` this the side and this a side --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- on each side of the lumen.
` Q. Okay. Could you maybe do a line and say a
` side and a side, just because we're not -- the
` transcript is not going to get the -- your hand
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` Q. Do the -- do the sides contact the
` trabecular meshwork --
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` Q. -- as they're producing the spreading
` effect?
` MS. SUMMERS: Same objection.
` A. In the context of Quintana, the answer is
` no. I think the -- it's merely the tip of the
` needle that is used to enter the trabecular meshwork
` without any additional entry.
` Q. Okay. So the side --
` A. We're talking a microscopic tip in a
` microscopic location, the very tip of which is
` capable of entering the canal without involving the
` sides.
` Q. Okay. But let's go back to Paragraph 22
` because I want to make sure we have this clear.
` Again, do you see the statement where it says: The
` tip of which has a single bevel with a sharp point
` and sides?
` A. Uh-huh.
` Q. In your mind, is there a difference between
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Page 30
`
` motion there.
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. (Indicating.)
` Q. Then maybe could you label the one opposite
` as well, too?
` A. (Indicating.)
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` Q. And is it fair to say your -- your opinion
` is that the sharp point and the beveled sides act as
` a single blade in Quintana to create a slit-like
` incision in the trabecular meshwork?
` MS. SUMMERS: Objection; form.
` A. I would characterize the tip as being the
` active or critical part of the device