`
`
`BY E-MAIL
`
`
`
`May 14, 2021
`
`
`Weil, Gotshal &: Manges LLP
`
`
`767 Fifth Avenue
`New York, NY 10153-0119
`+1 212 310 8000 tel
`+1 212 310 8007 fax
`
`Jessica L. Falk
`+1 (212) 310-8511
`jessica.falk@weil.com
`
`Stephen J. McIntyre
`O’Melveny & Myers LLP
`400 South Hope Street
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`
`Re: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Novartis Pharma AG et al., 1:20-cv-05502-AJN
`
`Dear Counsel,
`
`I write on behalf of Plaintiff Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) in the above-
`
`captioned matter in response to your May 10, 2021 letter (the “May 10 letter”).
`
`
`I.
`
`Additional Custodian Proposal
`
`As an initial matter, Novartis’s attempts to compare its custodial request for
`Regeneron’s request for
`unavailing.
`
` to
` is
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`With that being said, in the spirit of compromise, Regeneron agrees to the proposal provided by
`Novartis in its May 10 letter with a few questions and conditions. Regeneron is willing to
`
`
`
`
`. Please
`
`
`,
`
`advise as to whether
`
`
`
`
`
`Novartis Exhibit 2058.001
`Regeneron v. Novartis, IPR2021-00816
`
`
`
`Stephen J. McIntyre
`May 14, 2021
`Page 2
`
`Weil, Gatahal & Manges LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`.
`
`As for Novaiiis's other proposed conditions, Regeneron is willing to sign onto a joint stipulation
`to the Court seeking a one-month extension to the deadline for substantial completion of document
`productions provided that all pa1ties-including Vetter-also consent to the following:
`
`1. All other remaining deadlines in the case schedule ai·e accordingly extended by one month per
`the below; and
`
`EVENT
`
`CURRENT DATE AMENDED DATE
`
`Deadline to Serve Intenogatories
`Deadline for Substantial Completion of Document
`Productions
`Deadline to Serve Requests for Admission
`Close of Fact Discove1y
`
`Opening Expe1t Repo1ts Due
`
`Production of Documents and Data Considered in
`Expe1ts ' Repo1t s
`
`Rebuttal Expe1i repo1is due
`Production of Documents and Data Considered in
`Expe1ts ' Repo1t s
`Reply Expe1i repo1is due
`Production of Documents and Data Considered in
`Expe1ts ' Repo1t s
`Close of Expert Discove1y
`
`Summa1y Judgment/Daubert Motions Due
`Summaiy Judgment/Daubert Oppositions Due
`Summaiy Judgment/Daubert Replies Due
`
`July 1, 2021
`
`August 2, 2021
`
`July 1, 2021
`
`August 2, 2021
`
`October 1, 2021
`November 1, 2021
`
`December 13, 2021
`
`November 1, 2021
`
`December 2, 2021
`Januaiy 13, 2021
`
`December 20, 2021
`
`Januaiy 20, 2021
`
`Febrnaiy 7, 2022
`
`March 10, 2022
`
`Febrnaiy 14, 2022
`
`March 17, 2022
`
`Mai·ch 14, 2022
`
`April 14, 2022
`
`Mai·ch 21, 2022
`
`April 21 , 2022
`
`April 14, 2022
`May 26, 2022
`July 7, 2022
`August 8, 2022
`
`May 16, 2022
`June 27, 2022
`August 8, 2022
`September 8, 2022
`
`2. All parties confom that they will n ot make a "document dump" of productions at or neai· the
`substantial completion deadline, and will instead make timely rolling productions.
`
`Novartis Exhibit 2058.002
`Regeneron v. Novartis, IPR2021-00816
`
`
`
`Stephen J. McIntyre
`May 14, 2021
`Page 3
`
`
`Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
`
`
`Regeneron also agrees to an ITC cross-use agreement for both the SDNY and NDNY actions.1 Regeneron
`has prepared a proposed ITC cross-use agreement for the SDNY action and will provide it to Defendants
`under separate cover.
`
`RFPs Relating to “Related Patents”
`
`II.
`
`Our understanding is that Novartis has agreed to
`
`
`III. RFPs to the Present
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Finally, with respect to the RFPs through the present, Novartis
`
`
`
`
`
`3 Accordingly, Regeneron seeks confirmation that
`.
`
`Novartis will
`
`First, Regeneron asked Novartis to confirm that Novartis will
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5 Similarly, Regeneron asked Novartis to confirm that it will
`
`6 As noted in Regeneron’s April 27, 2021 letter,7 this is the
`
`
`1
`Regeneron reiterates, however, that the ITC Protective Order bars Regeneron and Novartis from use of the
`confidential third-party information produced in the ITC action. Any use of third-party confidential information in
`the SDNY or NDNY actions will require the consent and/or subpoena of each third party.
`2
`McIntyre Letter to Falk (May 10, 2021), at 3.
`3
`March 19, 2021 Meet and Confer.
`4
`Falk Letter to McIntyre (Apr. 27, 2021), at 2.
`5
`See Plaintiff’s First Set of RFPs to the Novartis Defendants (Oct. 8, 2020).
`6
`Falk Letter to McIntyre (Apr. 27, 2021), at 2.
`7
`See id. n.3.
`
`Novartis Exhibit 2058.003
`Regeneron v. Novartis, IPR2021-00816
`
`
`
`Stephen J. McIntyre
`May 14, 2021
`Page 4
`
`
`Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
`
`
`.8
`
`
`
`Accordingly, Regeneron’s clarifying requests do not constitute “a brand-new demand,” nor would
`it add any extra burden on Novartis to collect and produce this information. Further, Novartis’s production
`of this information would promote parity as Novartis has asked Regeneron to produce the same. As
`previously stated, provided that Novartis confirm these two points, Regeneron and Novartis have reached
`agreement regarding the documents and information to be provided through the present.
`
`*
`
`We look forward to your response. Regeneron reserves all rights, including to seek relief from the
`
`*
`
`*
`
`Court.
`
`
`Sincerely,
`
`/s/ Jessica Falk
`Jessica L. Falk
`
`
`8
`Regeneron RFP No. 31 requests
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Novartis Exhibit 2058.004
`Regeneron v. Novartis, IPR2021-00816
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
