throbber
9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 1
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`****************************************************
`NEW WORLD MEDICAL, INC.,
`
` Petitioner, Case IPR2020-01711
` US Patent No. 9,358,155
` -vs-
`
`MICROSURGICAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
`****************************************************
`NEW WORLD MEDICAL, INC.,
`
` Petitioner, Case IPR2021-00017
` US Patent No. 9,820,885
` -vs-
`
`MICROSURGICAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
`****************************************************
`NEW WORLD MEDICAL, INC.,
`
` Petitioner, Case IPR2021-00066
` US Patent No. 9,999,544
` -vs-
`
`THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
`****************************************************
`
`VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF PETER NETLAND, M.D., Ph.D.
`
` 9:00 a.m. to 2:19 p.m.
` September 30, 2021
` Charlottesville, Virginia
`
`Job No. 46230/37039
`
` REPORTED BY: Kimberly A. Adderley, RPR, RMR
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0001
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 2
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`****************************************************
`NEW WORLD MEDICAL, INC.,
`
` Petitioner, Case IPR2021-00065
` US Patent No.10,123,905
` -vs-
`
`MICROSURGICAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
`****************************************************
`NEW WORLD MEDICAL, INC.,
`
` Petitioner, Case IPR2020-01573
` US Patent No. 9,107,729
` -vs-
`
`MICROSURGICAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
`****************************************************
`
`VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF PETER NETLAND, M.D., Ph.D.
`
` 9:00 a.m. to 2:19 p.m.
`
` September 30, 2021
`
` Charlottesville, Virginia
`
`Job No. 46230/37039
`
` REPORTED BY: Kimberly A. Adderley, RPR, RMR
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0002
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 3
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Videotaped deposition of PETER NETLAND, M.D.,
`
`Ph.D., taken and transcribed on behalf of the Patent
`
`Owners, by and before Kimberly A. Adderley, RPR,
`
`RMR, Notary Public in and for the Commonwealth of
`
`Virginia at large, pursuant to 37 CFR 42.53 and the
`
`Board's authorization, and by Notice to Take
`
`Deposition; commencing at 9:16 a.m., September 30,
`
`2021, at Courtyard by Marriott, 1201 West Main
`
`Street, Charlottesville, Virginia.
`
` APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
`
` CALFEE, HALTER & GRISWOLD, LLP
`
` The Calfee Building
`
` 1405 East Sixth Street
`
` Cleveland, Ohio 44114
`
` (216) 622-8551
`
` ttucker@calfee.com
`
` BY: TODD R. TUCKER, ESQUIRE
`
` Counsel for the Petitioner
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0003
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 4
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL CONT'D:
`
` WILEY REIN, LLP
`
` 1776 K Street, NW
`
` Washington, D.C. 20006
`
` (202) 719-7000
`
` tsummers@wiley.law
`
` BY: TERESA M. SUMMERS, ESQUIRE
`
` JASMINE ZHU, ESQUIRE
`
` Counsel for the Patent Owners
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`
`David J. Klann, General Counsel
`New World Medical, Inc.
`
`Orson Braithwaite, Videographer
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0004
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 5
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` I N D E X
`
` WITNESS:
`
` PETER NETLAND, M.D., Ph.D.
`
` Examination by Ms. Summers................9
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
` NETLAND PAGE
`
` 1 - Copy of Notes made on notepad 213
`
` PETITIONER'S PAGE
`
` 1003 - Declaration of Dr. Peter Netland 11
`
` 1004 - Documenta Ophthalmologica 105
` Proceedings Series 43
`
` 1030 - Reply Declaration of 9
` Dr. Peter Netland
`
` 1031 - Video 93
`
` 1032 - Video 93
`
` 1033 - Video 93
`
` 1035 - Symposium: Microsurgery of the 206
` Outflow Channels
` Clinical Research
`
` 1036 - Symposium: Microsurgery of the 208
` Outflow Channels
` Histologic Evaluation of
` Microsurgical Glaucoma Techniques
`
` 1037 - ModifIed Goniotomy for 210
` Inflammatory Glaucoma
`
` 1038 - Stripping of Descemet's Membrane 211
` in Cataract Extraction
`
` * * * * *
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0005
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 6
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`PATENT OWNER'S PAGE
`
` 2020-0001 - Sworn Affidavit of 194
` Manuel Quintana, M.D.
`
` * * * * *
`
` (Petitioner's Exhibits and Patent Owner's
`
` Exhibits premarked by Counsel)
`
` * * * * *
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0006
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 7
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(9:16 a.m., September 30, 2021)
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S:
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. We
`
` are going on the record at 9:16 a.m. on
`
` September 30th, 2021. This deposition is the
`
` continuation of Dr. Peter Netland, Volume
`
` III.
`
` Will the court reporter please swear in
`
` the witness.
`
` THE STENOGRAPHER: Sir, if you will
`
` raise your right hand for me, I'm going to
`
` swear you in.
`
` Do you swear or affirm that any
`
` testimony you are about to give shall be the
`
` truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
`
` truth?
`
` DR. NETLAND: I swear.
`
` THE STENOGRAPHER: Thank you.
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Please introduce
`
` yourself.
`
` MS. SUMMERS: My name is Teresa
`
` Summers, I'm with Wiley Rein, and I represent
`
` the patent owners in these proceedings,
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0007
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 8
`
` Microsurgical Technology and The Regents of
`
` The University of California. And with me is
`
` Jasmine Zhu, also from Wiley Rein.
`
` MR. TUCKER: Todd Tucker, from Calfee,
`
` Halter & Griswold, Cleveland, Ohio, for
`
` petitioner New World Medical, Inc. With me
`
` is the general counsel of New World Medical,
`
` Inc., David Klann.
`
` Also, just so we have on the record, I
`
` believe the ground rules for today, by
`
` agreement of counsel, is 6 hours of
`
` examination, followed by a potential 30
`
` minutes of redirect, and this is a deposition
`
` to focus on the supplemental reply
`
` declarations of Dr. Netland.
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you. You may
`
` begin.
`
` THE STENOGRAPHER: He's been sworn.
`
` MS. SUMMERS: Oh, he has.
`
` * * * * *
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0008
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 9
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` PETER NETLAND, M.D., Ph.D.,
`
` was sworn and testified as follows:
`
` E X A M I N A T I O N
`
`BY MS. SUMMERS:
`
` Q. All right. Dr. Netland, in advance of
`
` this deposition, I put in front of you several
`
` exhibits that are premarked. Do you see those
`
` exhibits in front of you?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Okay. Now I'm just going to do a
`
` little housekeeping, which is to read off the
`
` exhibit numbers for the --
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. -- record, just so the record has it
`
` indicated what is in front of you right now.
`
` So, in the small stack that you are
`
` touching, that is all of your reply declarations
`
` in each of the various 5 IPRs. And they have been
`
` prenumbered with exhibit numbers submitted in each
`
` of those IPRs, and those exhibit numbers are shown
`
` down in the right hand bottom of every page. Do
`
` you see that?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Okay. So then during the course of
`
` this deposition, we can refer to these as either
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0009
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 10
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` the reply declaration for the 1573 IPR or for the
`
` 729 patent, and so forth and so on. Are you
`
` comfortable with that?
`
` A. Yes. I have one question about --
`
` Q. Sure.
`
` A. So, all of these have the same exhibit
`
` number?
`
` Q. Correct.
`
` A. Does that mean that all of these are
`
` one exhibit?
`
` Q. So, each one, if you look at the
`
` caption, you will see that it says the IPR that it
`
` relates to --
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. -- and the patent number.
`
` A. I'm aware of that.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. But the exhibit numbers are all the
`
` same.
`
` Q. That is correct.
`
` A. So, this is one exhibit and we will
`
` refer to the different documents by the IPR
`
` number, patent number on it?
`
` Q. You are correct, yes.
`
` A. Okay.
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0010
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 11
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q. And then in the tall stack, it's the
`
` very same situation, except that it is for your
`
` opening declaration in each of the various IPRs.
`
` And just take a moment to familiarize yourself.
`
` A. Yes. And confirmation, the same
`
` question, it's the same exhibit number and we will
`
` refer to them by the patent number or case number.
`
` Q. That is correct.
`
` A. Okay.
`
` Q. And that's -- you are comfortable
`
` proceeding --
`
` A. I'm comfortable with --
`
` Q. -- that way?
`
` A. -- that.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. Thanks.
`
` Q. So, I know that you have been deposed
`
` before; correct?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. And we patent owners in these five IPRs
`
` took your deposition previously for these cases;
`
` correct?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Okay. And are you familiar with the
`
` ground rules for deposition, do you recall them,
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0011
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 12
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` or would you like me --
`
` A. Yes. I would like them to be reviewed
`
` though.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. Yeah.
`
` Q. No problem whatsoever. All right. So,
`
` you understand you are under oath today and you
`
` must answer accurately and truthfully; correct?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. We need a verbal answer.
`
` A. Yeah. I said it too softly, I'm sorry.
`
` I affirmatively responded yes.
`
` Q. All right. Great.
`
` A. Uh-huh.
`
` Q. And that was my next reminder, is that
`
` we need verbal answers and to please speak loudly
`
` enough for the record. Thank you very much.
`
` And during the course of this
`
` deposition, your counsel may object to some of my
`
` questions. And that's fine, but you must still
`
` continue to answer the question unless he
`
` instructs you specifically not to answer that
`
` question. Okay?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. And every now and then we will take a
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0012
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 13
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` break, roughly every hour. But if you at any time
`
` feel like you need a short break, just speak up
`
` and we will accommodate you.
`
` A. Yes. Thank you.
`
` Q. Also, if you do not understand my
`
` question, just feel free to ask me to repeat it
`
` and I will be happy to try to clarify. And I will
`
` do the same for you with your answers, so that we
`
` make sure we are under a common understanding.
`
` Okay?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Okay. So, now, with respect to your
`
` various reply declarations, would you agree with
`
` me that they are essentially identical?
`
` A. They are -- I would say that they are
`
` very similar.
`
` Q. Okay. And what are like the
`
` differences amongst them?
`
` A. Well, they refer to different patent
`
` numbers, the patents that have claims that are
`
` relevant to this.
`
` Q. Right.
`
` A. To this experiment.
`
` Q. And in terms of the substance or the
`
` material aspects, they are -- it's the same
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0013
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 14
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` throughout every declaration; right?
`
` A. The substance, the content is similar
`
` and identical in some sections.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. Uh-huh.
`
` Q. Thank you. All right. So, we are
`
` going to refer to, predominantly to the reply
`
` declaration in the 1573 IPR which relates to the
`
` patent number ending in 729. All right. Do you
`
` have that in front of you?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. So, I'm going to ask you some
`
` questions, but if you need to refresh your memory
`
` and look at your declaration, you have got them
`
` all there, so you can feel comfortable to do so.
`
` So, in your reply declaration, you have
`
` various -- you have a section in there that talks
`
` about the materials you considered in forming your
`
` opinions in your reply declarations. Do you
`
` recall reviewing specific materials?
`
` A. Let me get on the section you're
`
` referring to. Are you referring to introduction
`
` section four?
`
` Q. Yeah.
`
` A. I ask because, to clarify, there were
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0014
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 15
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` different materials. There's a new reference and,
`
` you know, that was referred to. And then there
`
` were some other references to referrals. So, I'm
`
` just trying to clarify where we are, you know,
`
` which ones.
`
` Q. Sure, no problem.
`
` A. Yeah.
`
` Q. What were some of the new references
`
` that you have --
`
` A. Just the Arora reference.
`
` Q. The Arora?
`
` A. Which was an experimental method
`
` reference which, yeah, it was relevant to this in
`
` the sense that it provided a precedent or a
`
` literature validation of the method.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. That was used to do these.
`
` Q. All right.
`
` A. So, yeah.
`
` Q. Did you read patent owner's response to
`
` the petition?
`
` A. I did review it. And I read it to the
`
` extent I could. It's a lot of material.
`
` Q. Did you rely on any statements in that
`
` document in forming your opinion for your reply
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0015
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 16
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` declaration?
`
` A. I didn't focus on that. This is a
`
` pretty tightly focused set experiment that
`
` focusing on removal of tissue from the trabecular
`
` meshwork and cutting tissue and so forth. So, I
`
` looked at there were some materials that were not
`
` directly relevant, in the responses that were not
`
` directly relevant to this set of -- this
`
` experiment.
`
` Q. And did you read the Board
`
` institution's decision in each of the IPRs?
`
` A. The Board institution? No, I may not
`
` have seen that. I have materials, I don't know if
`
` I reviewed that. I don't recall on that one.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. Uh-huh.
`
` Q. So, a moment ago you mentioned some
`
` experiments; is that right?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. All right. So, in your declaration you
`
` describe in some detail three experiments; is that
`
` correct?
`
` A. Right. That's a good way to look at
`
` it. I think it's -- it could be categorized as
`
` one experiment with three different samples as
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0016
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 17
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` well. It's really one test, one experiment
`
` with -- I think of it as one experiment with three
`
` different samples.
`
` Q. And did you --
`
` A. There were four technically, but the
`
` first sample we were just setting it up and had a
`
` none -- no video set up on an old microscope at --
`
` I'm just going to clarify a little bit of the
`
` background so you understand what happened.
`
` Q. Please.
`
` A. We set up, you know, the microscope,
`
` and it was in the Old Medical School here, no
`
` video. And we needed to capture the information,
`
` so we went to the surgery center and used our
`
` normal setup for human goniotomy, and that had a
`
` video and also adequate optics to capture images
`
` so that we could document the last three samples
`
` that were used in this one experiment.
`
` The experiment was essentially the same
`
` methodology for all, all the samples that were
`
` used, but there were four different samples. The
`
` first one was mentioned, it really wasn't recorded
`
` because we couldn't. But we moved to a location
`
` where we could record -- we had a video setup that
`
` didn't work, et cetera, et cetera, so we moved to
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0017
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 18
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` a location where we could record the sample
`
` treatments that we did.
`
` Q. All right. We are going to circle back
`
` to that. The first experiment that you did that
`
` wasn't actually videoed --
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. -- we will circle back --
`
` A. Yes. Sure.
`
` Q. -- to that in just a moment. But thank
`
` you for that clarification.
`
` All right. So, when did you perform
`
` these four -- this experiment on four samples?
`
` A. I would have to look at my calendar to
`
` verify the date. And I'm happy to do that. I
`
` don't recall from memory the exact date, but I'm
`
` glad to check that if you would like.
`
` Q. Sure. That would be -- yeah, that's
`
` fine.
`
` A. It will take me a minute.
`
` (Witness looking on his cellphone)
`
` A. Okay. We are getting warmer.
`
` August 13th. And I would include the 12th as
`
` well. August 12th and 13th. I was setting up
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0018
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 19
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` some things on the 12th, receiving materials and
`
` setting some things up.
`
` Q. Okay. You can put your device away
`
` now.
`
` A. Okay. Thank you.
`
` MR. TUCKER: And what year was that,
`
` you want to give that?
`
` THE WITNESS: Oh, sorry. 2021.
`
` August 13th, 2021. And I will show you, I'm
`
` just looking at my calendar, that's all.
`
`BY MS. SUMMERS:
`
` Q. Sure.
`
` A. No other notes.
`
` Q. I trust you.
`
` A. Thank you.
`
` Q. Okay. So, on August 12th of this year,
`
` you set up your facilities?
`
` A. Received some materials. There -- you
`
` know, things had to be shipped in to do the
`
` testing and I had to receive some materials, which
`
` came in, I think, on the 12th. Once we were
`
` confirmed that we had the materials, we could go,
`
` plan a go on the next day. And then we went ahead
`
` and did the testing on the next day. So, we had
`
` to organize a little bit in the sense that we
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0019
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 20
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` didn't have all the materials on site. Obviously
`
` human tissue, you know, it has to be shipped in.
`
` And so, we had to gather that and really couldn't
`
` really go ahead with the experiments until we had
`
` all the essential materials, which mainly was the
`
` human tissue. So, that arrived the day before.
`
` Q. Okay. And you mentioned "we" in those
`
` statements.
`
` A. Right.
`
` Q. Who was all --
`
` A. So, there were really several people
`
` involved, but the only people -- we have a
`
` research coordinator, and so she received the
`
` materials and helped us to -- helped me and helped
`
` us to, you know, coordinate the facility here at
`
` the Old Medical School. That's research based
`
` that we control, that I control, I guess you could
`
` say. So, we set up the -- you know, planned, did
`
` a little advance planning and set things up and
`
` got the materials and so forth. And so, my team
`
` that does clinical research is a group of about
`
` five people. But, the only person directly
`
` involved in this was the head of that, Ashton
`
` Leone, A-S-H-T-E-O-N-E, Leone L-E-O-N-E. She
`
` received the materials and coordinated and helped
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0020
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 21
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` us to get organized but had no direct involvement
`
` with any of the experiments. And then the two
`
` people that were there the next day to do the
`
` experiments was myself and then Kyle. And I've
`
` got to get the spelling of the last name correct,
`
` so may I ask Todd?
`
` MR. TUCKER: It's Deighan, D-E-I --
`
` THE WITNESS: G-H.
`
` MR. TUCKER: G-H-A-N.
`
` THE WITNESS: A-N. Okay. Right. SO,
`
` I just want to make sure we get it correct
`
` for the record. So, Kyle and I did the
`
` experiments. Kyle had no direct involvement,
`
` was in a purely supportive role. He does not
`
` have -- I would say it's fair to say, I don't
`
` think he would object if I said that he
`
` doesn't have medical knowledge. You know,
`
` he's a very knowledgeable person, but doesn't
`
` have medical knowledge. But he was very
`
` supportive. You know, I had to video and set
`
` things up and bring things from place to
`
` place and organize and so forth. So, in
`
` terms of support, there was some support
`
` needed and Kyle was on site to help with
`
` that. But, I actually did the entire thing
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0021
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 22
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` myself.
`
`BY MS. SUMMERS:
`
` Q. Was anyone else with you other than
`
` Kyle?
`
` A. No. I have many trainees and people
`
` around, but I did it all myself. I thought it was
`
` important to do it.
`
` Q. Was anyone else observing the
`
` experiments you performed?
`
` A. No. And that's one of the reasons
`
` we -- that I felt it was important to video
`
` capture the images, yeah. So...
`
` Q. And on the first day when you were
`
` receiving the materials, who all was involved in
`
` that?
`
` A. Really I guess there was a third
`
` person, perhaps. Ruth Jolly, perhaps. She's now
`
` retired and her replacement is Stephanie
`
` Kandetzki. If you would like, I can spell the
`
` names. But perhaps she received some phone calls.
`
` But then Ashton would have been the only other
`
` person. So, I think my administrative assistant
`
` may have been involved in some coordination of
`
` phone calls. I don't recall. I know she set
`
` up -- she coordinated the visit a little bit with
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0022
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 23
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Kyle. But I don't recall. So, she's the only
`
` other person that could have been involved with
`
` any aspect of this. So, her name is Ruth Jolly,
`
` J-O-L-L-Y. And the other person is Stephanie
`
` Kandetzki, who was phasing in and becoming her
`
` replacement. And it's K-A-N-D-E-T-Z-K-I,
`
` Kandetzki. So, those are the only people that
`
` would have been involved.
`
` Q. Okay.
`
` A. Administrative and technical support.
`
` Q. And Kyle, the Kyle you mentioned who
`
` was there during the course of each of the four
`
` experiments, he is your attorney in this case; is
`
` that correct?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. And Ashtone?
`
` A. Ashton, right.
`
` Q. Ashton.
`
` A. Ashton, uh-huh, leone. She's an
`
` employee for our group. So, I supervise her and
`
` she coordinates a lot of our clinical research.
`
` And, you know, these kinds of experiments and so
`
` forth, we have a lot of regulations and rules and
`
` policies about doing experimental work. So, she's
`
` responsible for coordinating our clinical trials,
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0023
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 24
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` making sure that we are in compliance, and is
`
` involved in virtually all use of experimental
`
` equipment and supplies and experiments done on
`
` site.
`
` Q. And where were these experiments
`
` performed?
`
` A. So, the first one where we were
`
` essentially just seeing if it -- seeing how it
`
` worked and setting it up and trialing and
`
` understanding how the model worked, was in the Old
`
` Medical School here at UVA in a clinical research
`
` space, which is departmental space in our
`
` department. We realized we had to get a little
`
` bit better equipment from the initial testing to
`
` try to make sure that we could observe and see the
`
` things and then, more importantly, record. So we
`
` moved to Monticello Surgery Center, which is our
`
` main UVA-owned surgery center, formerly a
`
` physician-owned surgery center, now this year sold
`
` to UVA, so it's a UVA facility on 29 North. So,
`
` it's called Monticello Surgery Center.
`
` So, the actual samples were evaluated
`
` and the testing done in Monticello Surgery Center.
`
` And the advantage of that move to move out there
`
` was mainly the microscope recording equipment.
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0024
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 25
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` The microscope is a Zeiss Lumera, which is the top
`
` of the line, best microscope possible. And I
`
` think that's reflected in the quality of the
`
` video. The video is quite clear, it's sharp, it
`
` has high resolution, and it's digitally recorded.
`
` And that's possible, the quality of the optics
`
` with the Zeiss Lumera is essentially top of the
`
` line, highest quality available. So, that's --
`
` that was important to try to get some good optics,
`
` good recording equipment, because we found quite
`
` quickly, just from seeing it, that the equipment
`
` was the limitation and the thing that was
`
` inadequate in the first sample. We just
`
` couldn't -- you know, the testing went fine, but
`
` we couldn't record it properly. The actual video
`
` recorder, you know, old, not working, not digital
`
` even.
`
` The lab that we have here is used for
`
` clinical research, but it's also used for training
`
` trainees, the one for the first sample. So, we
`
` don't really have state-of-the-art equipment there
`
` and good video capture equipment. The purpose is
`
` really for education and to train people. So,
`
` it's not set up really to do proper recording.
`
` So, we did the last three samples in a
`
`Reported by Kimberly A Adderley
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2032-0025
`
`

`

`9/30/2021
`
`New World Medical, Inc. v Microsurgical Technology, Inc., et al.
`Peter Netland, M.D. Ph.D. Vol III
`
`Page 26
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` place where we could properly record and have the
`
` highest quality equipment possible.
`
` Q. Okay. We -- thank you for that
`
` detailed explanation. We are going to circle back
`
` to some of the things. I took notes on your
`
` statements, we will circle back to those. But,
`
` first I'm just going to ask you a couple further
`
` background questions about the experiments
`
` generally. So, all right, so you said that you
`
` first performed the experiments on August 13th,
`
` and you did set up on the 12th. And on what,
`
` roughly what date did you first consider
`
` performing the experiments?
`
` A. I don't know the exact date. Again, I
`
` can try to hone in on it by looking at my calendar
`
` again, but it was between the time of the
`
` responses to when we did the experiments. And I
`
` think my recollect would be it was about a month
`
` or so before the actual experiments

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