throbber
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
`
`JAY M. STEWART, MD - REDIRECT
`
` 1358
`
`would find in the specification that says any one of these
`
`regimens should be used or called out to be used with DME or
`
`diabetic retinopathy?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No.
`
`When it came to your testimony that you provided here
`
`in court today, did you assume that you had to find an example
`
`in order to find enablement or written description?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No, I didn't.
`
`Let's go back, then, to the press release, which was
`
`DTX 3198. And let's go to the second page of the exhibit.
`
`And let's call up the description of the VEGF
`
`Trap-Eye in Phase II development paragraph.
`
`Now, I believe you indicated that what was written on
`
`the page for the first indication that involved an eight-week
`
`dosing regimen was what? 2 milligrams every eight weeks after
`
`three monthly loading doses?
`
`A.
`
`The first one was 2 milligram monthly and then
`
`2 milligram every eight weeks after three monthly loading doses
`
`was the second option.
`
`Q.
`
`Now, even if there's no express recitation of the
`
`number five there, does the prn dosing regimen permit dosing
`
`that would include five monthly loading doses in the context of
`
`this regimen?
`
`A.
`
`You could happen upon a scenario where five loading
`
`doses are given through the course of using a prn approach.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3
`
`3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1220
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`JAY M. STEWART, MD - REDIRECT
`
` 1359
`
`Q.
`
`And would that prn regimen also permit, then, those
`
`five loading doses being followed by an eight-week dosing
`
`regimen?
`
`A.
`
`It could be if that's how circumstances played out
`
`for that particular patient.
`
`MS. MAZZOCHI: Nothing further, Your Honor. Thank
`
`you.
`
`doctor?
`
`THE COURT: Recross?
`
`MR. GREGORY: Nothing further, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: Any exhibits we need to tidy up with the
`
`MR. GREGORY: None from us, sir.
`
`THE COURT: Are the stack that was in the binder part
`
`of the record, or are you satisfied just --
`
`MR. GREGORY: We are satisfied. We don't need to
`
`move them into evidence.
`
`THE COURT: All right. Understood.
`
`Any other exhibits from defense standpoint, then.
`
`MS. MAZZOCHI: Your Honor, because so many of what
`
`was in the stack I've never seen before, let me -- can I just
`
`have -- to see if I need to put them in the record for this
`
`witness just to make sure that the Court has context and
`
`completeness. But, otherwise, we don't have anything further.
`
`But we'll clean that up tomorrow morning if that's all right.
`
`THE COURT: Understood.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1221
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1360
`
`MS. MAZZOCHI: Thank you.
`
`THE COURT: Doctor, thank you. You can step down.
`
`You can leave all the documents up there. Someone will tidy
`
`those up. Thank you, sir.
`
`If I could ask counsel to grab whatever's up here,
`
`whomever it belongs to.
`
`While we're doing that, Mylan may call its next
`
`witness.
`
`If everyone has finished rotating and whatnot,
`
`Counsel, you may call your next witness.
`
`MR. SALMEN: Thank you, Your Honor. Heinz Salmen on
`
`behalf of defendants Mylan and Biocon. We call Dr. Gregory
`
`MacMichael as our next witness.
`
`THE COURT: Doctor, if you would come all the way to
`
`the front.
`
`You may proceed, Counsel.
`
`MR. SALMEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD, DEFENDANTS' WITNESS, SWORN
`
`DIRECT EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. SALMEN:
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Good afternoon, Dr. MacMichael.
`
`Good afternoon.
`
`Would you please introduce yourself to the Court.
`
`THE WITNESS: Your Honor, my name is Greg MacMichael.
`
`THE COURT: Good afternoon, sir.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1222
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1361
`
`BY MR. SALMEN:
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, are you here testifying on behalf of
`
`Mylan and Biocon?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I am.
`
`And did you prepare a set of demonstrative slides to
`
`assist with your testimony today?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`Okay.
`
`If we could pull up DDX 8 on the screen.
`
`And I believe you've been provided a binder and a
`
`printout of these slides. Dr. MacMichael, are these the slides
`
`that you prepared?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, they are.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, where are you from?
`
`I'm from New Jersey.
`
`And turning to your demonstrative slide, DDX 2, on
`
`the screen, will you please provide the Court with a summary of
`
`your educational background.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. I went to Penn State to get a bachelor's degree
`
`in microbiology. Subsequent to that, I went to North Carolina
`
`State University to get a master's degree in microbiology and
`
`biochemistry focusing on the use of -- I went to North Carolina
`
`State to get my master's degree in microbiology and
`
`biochemistry with a focus on the use of bacteria to break down
`
`hazardous wastes and degrade oil spills.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1223
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1362
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What was your doctoral thesis in?
`
`Yes. I got my PhD in microbiology and biochemistry
`
`at Mississippi State University, again working on the use of
`
`bacteria for the cleanup of hazardous waste and oil spills.
`
`Q.
`
`After receiving your doctorate from Mississippi State
`
`University in 1984, where did you begin your career?
`
`A.
`
`Yeah. My first job after college was working at a
`
`company called Techne.
`
`Q.
`
`And will you please summarize for the Court your
`
`professional experience at Techne.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. At Techne I was working with an individual
`
`named Norman Burney, who also was a famous innovator. And
`
`together we worked on the development of bioreactors for
`
`growing up animal cells to produce therapeutic proteins.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`How many years were you at Techne?
`
`Six years.
`
`After your six years at Techne, where did you
`
`continue your career?
`
`A.
`
`I moved over to Centocor and was the assistant
`
`director of cell culture research and development.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What was the focus of your work at Centocor?
`
`It was focused on developing high-cell-density,
`
`high-volumetric productivity processes for making monoclonal
`
`antibodies.
`
`Q.
`
`Will you please explain to the Court what a
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1224
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1363
`
`monoclonal antibody is.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. As you're developing a therapeutic, you will
`
`basically genetically modify numerous cells, and then you will
`
`look to see which one was the highest level of productivity.
`
`You will then pick that specific clone that was obtained from
`
`that one cell, and thus the term "monoclonal antibody."
`
`Q.
`
`Did you have any notable achievements during your
`
`time at Centocor?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`And can you describe for the Court, please.
`
`Yes. I developed the high-density upstream processes
`
`for Centoxin, the first monoclonal ever approved, Remicade, and
`
`ReoPro.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`sepsis.
`
`And were those FDA-approved medications?
`
`They were all FDA-approved medications.
`
`And what type of drug product is Centoxin?
`
`Centoxin is a immunoglobulin M for the treatment of
`
`Q.
`
`What were your primary contributions to the
`
`development of Centoxin?
`
`A.
`
`Developing the high cell density processes, doing the
`
`tech transfer into manufacturing, and supporting the
`
`manufacturing efforts.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What type of drug product is Remicade?
`
`Remicade is an IgG monoclonal antibody for the
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1225
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1364
`
`treatment of autoimmune disorder.
`
`Q.
`
`What were your primary contributions to the
`
`development of the Remicade product?
`
`A.
`
`Again, developing high cell density, high volumetric
`
`productivity processes for the manufacturing of Remicade.
`
`Q.
`
`And turning to the ReoPro product, what type of drug
`
`product is ReoPro?
`
`A.
`
`ReoPro is a subclass of a monoclonal. It's a
`
`fragment, called Fab -- fragment of an antibody is called a
`
`Fab -- and it was actually a fusion protein. It was part
`
`human, part mouse.
`
`Q.
`
`Can you describe to the Court what your primary
`
`contributions were to the development of ReoPro?
`
`A.
`
`Again, my focus was on the upstream processes to
`
`develop high productivity to be able to meet market demand.
`
`Q.
`
`After your time at Centocor, I see you moved on to
`
`Chiron. Why did you make the move to Chiron?
`
`A.
`
`Yes. My supervisor, the head of development at
`
`Centocor, moved over to Chiron to be the senior vice president
`
`of development and manufacturing. He asked if I would join him
`
`at Chiron, and I became the director of production in vaccines
`
`development in St. Louis.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What was the focus of your work at Chiron?
`
`It was developing subunit vaccines in a cell line
`
`called Chinese hamster ovarian cells.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3
`
`3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1226
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1365
`
`Q.
`
`Will you please explain to the Court what a Chinese
`
`hamster ovarian, or CHO, cell is.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. In the production of various therapeutic
`
`proteins, they use animal cells. A Chinese hamster ovarian
`
`cell was proved to be a very robust cell line, reached high
`
`levels of cell density and productivity, and also had more
`
`favorable what we call glycosylation patterns.
`
`Q.
`
`Can you expand on that? What is a glycosylation
`
`pattern?
`
`A.
`
`Yes. Inside each of our cells, there's a whole set
`
`of machinery that synthesizes proteins. And after the primary
`
`protein is synthesized, the cells then can further -- what's
`
`called posttranslational modification. They can modify those
`
`cells by putting sugars on those cells to change the
`
`performance in the bloodstream.
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, did you invent the glycosylation
`
`pattern for the proteins you were working on?
`
`A.
`
`No. Every cell in the human body has the ability to
`
`glycosylate proteins.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`And what notable achievements did you have at Chiron?
`
`At Chiron we produced -- we developed multiple
`
`vaccines, but one of most interest would be hepatitis B vaccine
`
`where I led the global team, which included a clinical,
`
`regulatory, and manufacturing and development, and basically
`
`developed a new formulation for that vaccine.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1227
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1366
`
`Q.
`
`Let me follow up on that, Dr. MacMichael. Were you
`
`overseeing the formulation activities during that development?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I was.
`
`After Chiron, I see you moved over to Eli Lilly in
`
`1997. Why did you make the move to Lilly?
`
`A.
`
`Yes. Eli Lilly was trying to develop a product
`
`called Xigris, activated protein C produced in HEK293 cell
`
`line, but they lacked the internal experience of how to grow
`
`those cells at high cell density. So they recruited me in to
`
`help them develop the process.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`What was your title at Lilly?
`
`Senior director of development.
`
`What type of drug products were you working on at
`
`Lilly? What was your focus?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`The focus was on therapeutic proteins.
`
`Will you please describe to the Court some of your
`
`notable achievements at Lilly.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. Probably the two more notable achievements was
`
`the successful development and registration of Xigris,
`
`activated protein C for the treatment of sepsis; and
`
`additionally the development of truncated parathyroid hormone,
`
`known as Forteo, for the treatment of osteoporosis.
`
`Q.
`
`Were those drugs approved by any regulatory
`
`authorities?
`
`A.
`
`They were approved by the FDA and the EMA.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1228
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1367
`
`Q.
`
`I see you continued your career at Wyeth. What was
`
`your title at Wyeth?
`
`A.
`
`At Wyeth I was vice president of vaccines
`
`development.
`
`Q.
`
`And I see you have a couple drug names listed here on
`
`Slide 3 of DDX 8. What are those drugs that you were referring
`
`to?
`
`A.
`
`They're probably two of my more notable
`
`accomplishments while at Wyeth. Prevnar 13 is a pneumococcal
`
`vaccine that vaccinates against 13 different types of
`
`pneumococcal pneumonia.
`
`Q.
`
`Let me ask a follow-up to that, Dr. MacMichael. What
`
`was your contribution to the development of the Prevnar 13
`
`formulation?
`
`A.
`
`Yes. I had responsibilities from cell line
`
`development through upstream process development, purification
`
`and final formulation and the development of the analytical --
`
`of the assays required for in process and release testing.
`
`Q.
`
`Did you contribute to the stable formulation for the
`
`Prevnar 13?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes.
`
`And how did you achieve a stable formulation in
`
`Prevnar 13?
`
`A.
`
`Yes. Initially, we found that, heading into Phase I
`
`clinical trials, the vials -- just vibration in the
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1229
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1368
`
`refrigerators was sufficient agitation to cause some undesired
`
`aggregation. We addressed that by adding Pluronic -- by adding
`
`polysorbate 80 to prevent the aggregation.
`
`Q.
`
`The second product on your list at Wyeth is FluMist.
`
`What type of drug product is FluMist?
`
`A.
`
`FluMist is a more advanced version of the annual flu
`
`vaccine that many of us get. The difference with FluMist is
`
`it's -- actually, the virus is not inactivated; so it elicits a
`
`better immune response. It's sprayed up the nose, and it
`
`cannot grow in the lungs. So it gets a very good immune
`
`response protecting the recipient against the flu.
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, what was the general time frame for
`
`your work on the Prevnar 13 and FluMist formulation?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`2002 through 2008.
`
`I see you next were the senior vice president of
`
`development and manufacturing at Cook Pharmica in 2008.
`
`What was the focus of your work at Cook?
`
`A.
`
`Cook was a contract development and manufacturing
`
`organization. That is, we didn't have our own products; we
`
`developed and manufactured the products for our clients.
`
`Q.
`
`And then in 2010 you moved on to Novartis as global
`
`head of biologics. What was the focus of your work at
`
`Novartis?
`
`A.
`
`My focus at Novartis was the development activities
`
`required to bring the biologic pipeline in Novartis, which
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1230
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1369
`
`included cell line development, upstream process development,
`
`purification, final formulation development, and the analytics
`
`required for all of those activities.
`
`Q.
`
`Thank you, Dr. MacMichael.
`
`If we turn to Slide 4 of DDX 8, can you describe to
`
`the Court what you have illustrated here on Slide 4.
`
`A.
`
`This is a summary of some of the products that we
`
`touched on. These are eight products that I successfully
`
`developed and supported the registration and the interactions
`
`with the FDA and EMA.
`
`Q.
`
`Let me ask about that, Dr. MacMichael. In your over
`
`30 years of industry experience, did you gain experience on the
`
`regulatory side of product development?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`Can you describe that experience briefly.
`
`Yes. To bring these types of molecules successfully
`
`forward, you have numerous interactions with the FDA and the
`
`EMA. It also requires an understanding of how to construct the
`
`various submissions that are required for successful
`
`registration.
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, are you still active in the
`
`pharmaceutical industry?
`
`A.
`
`Yes, I am. I founded my own consultancy called
`
`CMC Bioservices.
`
`Q.
`
`And what types of companies do you generally consult
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1231
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1370
`
`for?
`
`A.
`
`I consult in the pharmaceutical industry everything
`
`from a large pharma company down to small startups.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What technical areas do you generally consult in?
`
`My focus is on therapeutic proteins, vaccines, and
`
`cell and gene therapies, from development of cell lines all the
`
`way down through the final drug product.
`
`Q.
`
`Last question on your background Dr. MacMichael.
`
`Using your own words, how would you describe your areas of
`
`expertise?
`
`A.
`
`Yeah. My expertise -- CMC stands for chemistry
`
`manufacturing control is the term we used for doing process
`
`development and manufacturing. My expertise starts with cell
`
`line development, and the cell lines that produce therapeutic
`
`proteins are put down in vials called cell banks. We do a cell
`
`line selection for the highest producer.
`
`Subsequent to that, we develop across the upstream
`
`process, grow the cells up, and produce the desired protein.
`
`We then need to purify it. And then subsequent to having it
`
`purified in what we call bulk. It is then formulated into the
`
`final vial.
`
`So in many ways, I have responsibilities from vial to
`
`vial, is one way to put it.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Is that vial to vial illustrated on Slide 6 of DDX 8?
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6
`
`W h e e l i n g , W V
`
`2 6 0 0 3
`
`3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1232
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1371
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, I see you've cited DTX 7087, pages 1
`
`through 6. There's a copy of it in your binder, but we could
`
`also show that on the screen for you.
`
`Is this a copy of your current CV?
`
`A.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`MR. SALMEN: Your Honor, we move to admit DTX 7087
`
`into evidence.
`
`THE COURT: Any objection?
`
`MR. BERL: No objection.
`
`THE COURT: Without objection, so admitted.
`
`(DTX 7087 was admitted.)
`
`MR. SALMEN: And at this time, Your Honor, we proffer
`
`Dr. Gregory MacMichael as an expert in the formulation and
`
`development of therapeutic proteins.
`
`THE COURT: Any voir dire or objection?
`
`MR. BERL: No, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: Without objection then, motion granted.
`
`The doctor is deemed so qualified.
`
`You may proceed, Counsel.
`
`MR. SALMEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`BY MR. SALMEN:
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, if we turn to Slide 7 of your slide
`
`presentation, DDX 8, let's talk about the opinions that you
`
`plan to provide to the Court today.
`
`If I could first direct your attention to PTX 2, we
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1233
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1372
`
`have the first page of PTX 2 here on Slide 8.
`
`What is PTX 2?
`
`PTX 2 is the '865 patent.
`
`And did you review and analyze the '865 patent,
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`PTX 2, in forming your opinions?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`And let's also put DTX 0030 on the screen.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, did you review and consider the
`
`document known as the prosecution history for the '865 patent
`
`in forming your opinions?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`Turning to slide -- back to Slide 8 of DDX 8,
`
`Dr. MacMichael, before we go through your opinions, let's just
`
`set the stage a little.
`
`Did you conduct your analysis in this case from the
`
`perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes.
`
`And if we look at Slide 8, top callout, citing
`
`DDX 2679, pages 19 to 20, MacMichael opening report, is this
`
`the definition for the person of ordinary skill in the art that
`
`you applied in forming your opinions?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`And I'll read that definition into the record for
`
`you, Dr. MacMichael.
`
`"A POSA during the relevant time period would have a
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1234
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1373
`
`fairly high level of education and skill. Here, a POSA would
`
`have at least a PhD in chemistry, chemical engineering,
`
`biochemistry, pharmacology, or a related field, along with one
`
`to two years of experience in the development and manufacture
`
`of formulations of therapeutic proteins or a lower degree with
`
`more practical industrial experience. A POSA would have access
`
`to biologists, biochemists, physicians, pharmaceutical
`
`formulators, and the like with knowledge and experience in
`
`fields such as drug discovery and development and the treatment
`
`of ophthalmologic conditions."
`
`Dr. MacMichael, is this the definition of a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art that you applied in forming your
`
`opinions?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, did Dr. Trout also offer for a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, he did.
`
`Do you have Dr. Trout's definition illustrated at the
`
`bottom right-hand side of Slide 8 of DTX 8, citing DTX 2251,
`
`page 11?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`How did Dr. Trout's definition compare to yours?
`
`Relatively similar. Dr. Trout just had a master's
`
`degree where I had suggested a PhD for the POSA. Other than
`
`that, the two definitions were relatively similar.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1235
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1374
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, would your opinions regarding the
`
`'865 patent change at all if the Court were to adopt
`
`Dr. Trout's definition?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No, they would not.
`
`Now, let's move on to our second foundational point,
`
`Dr. MacMichael. Turning to Slide 9 of DDX 8, are you aware
`
`that the Court issued a claim construction order regarding
`
`certain terms of the '865 patent that are relevant to your
`
`opinions?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I am.
`
`And if we look here on Slide 9, we have the Court's
`
`claim construction order marked for identification at DTX 6439
`
`here at page 20. I'll read this for you, Dr. MacMichael.
`
`"The Court adopts Mylan's definition of 'cosolvent.'
`
`It is an organic substance added to the primary solvent to
`
`increase the solubility of the solute, here a VEGF antagonist."
`
`Dr. MacMichael, is this the construction of the claim
`
`term "cosolvent" that you applied to your analysis regarding
`
`infringement and validity of the '865 patent?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`If we turn to Slide 10, please.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, will you explain to the Court what
`
`you have illustrated here in the bubble at the center of
`
`Slide 10, DDX 8, citing DTX 6439, page 20.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. I took the Court's construction for an organic
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1236
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1375
`
`cosolvent and edited Claim 1. And as you see in the
`
`highlighted yellow -- excuse me -- red is the insertion of the
`
`Court's construct.
`
`Q.
`
`And, Dr. MacMichael, is that the version of Claim 1
`
`that you applied in your analysis regarding the infringement
`
`inquiry?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`If we turn to Slide 11, please, of DDX 11.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, will you please summarize for the
`
`Court the opinions you plan to offer today regarding the
`
`alleged infringement of the '865 patent against Mylan and
`
`Biocon's Yesafili product.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. Applying the Court's claim construction order,
`
`Yesafili does not infringe on the asserted Claims 4, 7, 9, 11,
`
`and 14 through 17 of the '865 patent.
`
`Q.
`
`And did you form an opinion regarding whether
`
`polysorbate 20 at 0.03 percent in Yesafili is an organic
`
`cosolvent?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`And what was your conclusion?
`
`My conclusion is that polysorbate 20 at 0.03 percent
`
`in Yesafili is not an organic cosolvent.
`
`Q.
`
`And did you form an opinion regarding whether
`
`polysorbate 20 at 0.03 percent in Yesafili is increasing
`
`solubility of the solute aflibercept in the Yesafili product?
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1237
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1376
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes, I did evaluate.
`
`And what was your conclusion in that regard?
`
`My conclusion was that polysorbate 20 at 0.03 percent
`
`in Yesafili does not increase solubility of the solute
`
`aflibercept.
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, I understand that you were unable to
`
`attend Dr. Trout's testimony in person. Were you nonetheless
`
`able to review Dr. Trout's trial testimony as well as his
`
`associated demonstratives?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I was.
`
`Was there any portion of Dr. Trout's testimony that
`
`you want to respond to specifically during your testimony
`
`today?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`There's two points where I believe we disagree.
`
`Can you explain to the Court those two points of
`
`Dr. Trout's testimony that you would like to respond to.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`First point, please.
`
`The first point, Dr. Trout defined inhibiting
`
`aggregation as equal to increasing solubility.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Do you agree or disagree with that testimony?
`
`I disagree.
`
`And your second point, Dr. MacMichael?
`
`The second point where I differ is reducing
`
`insolubility is equivalent to increasing solubility. I
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1238
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1377
`
`disagree.
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, I would next like to talk about some
`
`of the technology relevant to your opinions in this case. If
`
`we could turn to Slide 13. Here on Slide 13 of DDX 8 we have
`
`DTX 5172, the Bontempo reference. Dr. MacMichael, did you
`
`review and consider the Bontempo reference in forming your
`
`opinion?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`Will you please explain to the Court the information
`
`you have identified here in Slide 13 from Bontempo that's
`
`relevant to your opinions and testimony in this case.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. I pulled a list of potential buffers that could
`
`be used in a protein formulation.
`
`Q.
`
`And that information -- does that information come
`
`from page 7 of DTX 5172, Bontempo?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, it does.
`
`If we turn to the next slide, Slide 14 -- actually,
`
`I'm sorry. I forgot to ask a question.
`
`Could we go back one.
`
`Dr. MacMichael, can you please explain the relevance
`
`of the information that you provided in the parentheticals
`
`following each of the listed buffers?
`
`A.
`
`Yeah. The parentheticals are showing the pH ranges
`
`where each of these buffers would -- each one of these moieties
`
`would be effective as a buffer.
`
`C i n d y L . K n e c h t , R M R / C R R / C B C / C C P
`
`P O B o x 3 2 6 W h e e l i n g , W V 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 4 . 2 3 4 . 3 9 6 8
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Exhibit 2003 Page 1239
`Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. IPR2023-00884
`
`

`

` 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
`
`GREGORY MACMICHAEL, PhD - DIRECT
`
` 1378
`
`Q.
`
`And, for example, if we look at succinate, what would
`
`be the buffering range for that buffer?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A pH of 3.2 to 6.6.
`
`And for citrate, what would be the known buffering
`
`range for a citrate buffer?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`2.1 to 6.2.
`
`For histidine, what would be the known buffering
`
`range for a histidine buffer?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`5.5 to 6.5.
`
`If we turn to Slide 14, please, of DDX 8.
`
`Here, Dr. MacMichael, we have Exhibit DTX 5196. This
`
`is the Strickley reference. Dr. MacMichael, did you review and
`
`rely on the Strickley reference?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, I did.
`
`And please explain to the Court the teaching in
`
`Strickley that you have highlighted here on Slide 14 from
`
`page 2 of DTX 5196.
`
`A.
`
`Yes. I pulled out Strickley's definition of a
`
`cosolvent.
`
`Q.
`
`And is that identified in the yellow highlighted
`
`language there?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`I'll read that for you, Dr. MacMichael.
`
`"Cosolvents are mixtures of miscible solvents and are
`
`oft

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