Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 1 of 286
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
ELAN PHARMA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, Plaintiff, v. ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE, INC., Defendant.
) Case No. 06-438-GMS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
EXHIBIT 8 PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS AND DEFENDANT'S OB AND COUNTERDESIGNATIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS AND PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS AND COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS Plaintiff Elan Pharma International Limited ("Elan") makes the following deposition designations for its case. Deposition Designations Elan may present the following witnesses by deposition for its case: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Patrick Soon Shiong (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-A.) Neil Desai (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-B.) Michael Hawkins (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-C.) Ulagaraj Selvaraj (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-D.) Herbert Lee (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-E.)
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 2 of 286
6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.
Leslie Louie (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-F.) Lianjun Shi (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-G.) Dewey H. Barich (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-H.) Johnson Tai Wong (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-I.) Edmund A. C. Crouch (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-J.) Mansoor M. Amiji (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-K.) Michael Hamrell (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-L) William J. Davis (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-M) Kathryn Melody (page/line designations attached as Exhibit 8-N
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 3 of 286
Responses and Objections Defendant Abraxis makes the following objections and counter-designations to Elan's designations of deposition testimony, and Elan makes the following responses and objections:
1.
Patrick Soon Shiong (objections, counter-designations, and responses
attached as Exhibit 8-AA). 2. Exhibit 8-BB). 3. Michael Hawkins (objections, counter-designations, and responses Neil Desai (objections, counter-designations, and responses attached as
attached as Exhibit 8-CC). 4. Ulagaraj Selvaraj (objections, counter-designations, and responses
attached as Exhibit 8-DD). 5. Exhibit 8-EE). 6. Exhibit 8-FF). 7. Exhibit 8-GG). 8. Dewey H. Barich (objections, counter-designations, and responses Lianjun Shi (objections, counter-designations, and responses attached as Leslie Louie (objections, counter-designations, and responses attached as Herbert Lee (objections, counter-designations, and responses attached as
attached as Exhibit 8-HH). 9. Johnson Tai Wong ((objections, counter-designations, and responses
attached as Exhibit 8-II).
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 4 of 286
10.
Edmund A. C. Crouch (objections, counter-designations, and responses
attached as Exhibit 8-JJ). 11. Mansoor M. Amiji (objections, counter-designations, and responses
attached as Exhibit 8-KK). 12. as Exhibit 8-LL. 13. as Exhibit 8-MM). William J. Davis (objections, counter-designations, and responses attached Michael Hamrell (objections, counter-designations, and responses attached
Elan's General Objections to Abraxis's Counter-Designations Plaintiff Elan Pharma International Ltd ("Elan") objects to Abraxis's counterdesignations as far exceeding the "fairness" requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4) (providing that "[i]f only part of a deposition is offered in evidence by the party, an adverse party may require the offeror to introduce any other part which ought in fairness to be considered with the part introduced" (emphasis added)), and Federal Rule of Evidence 106 (providing "[w]hen a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part . . . or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it" (emphasis added)). Abraxis' counter-designations far exceed any rational interpretation of the Third
Circuit's "rule of completeness." See U.S. v. Noble, 251 Fed. Appx. 792, 798 (3d Cir. 2007) ("We have interpreted [Federal Rule of Evidence 106] to mean that the remainder of a writing is required to be read `if it is necessary to (1) explain the admitted portion, (2) place the admitted
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 5 of 286
portion in context, (3) avoid misleading the trier of fact, or (4) insure a fair and impartial understanding.'" (citing U.S. v. Soures, 736 F.2d 87, 91 (3d Cir. 1984))). Evidence of Abraxis' excessive counter-designations, far exceeding any fairness or completeness justification, is apparent based on the sheer volume of deposition testimony Abraxis counter-designated. For example, Abraxis offers 500 lines of counter-designated
testimony as "completeness" for these 4 lines of testimony designated by Elan:
Q - When you had finished lyophilizing the samples, where did you take them to? A - I told Dr. Berkland that the samples he requested are ready.
See Exhibit 8-GG, Abraxis' Objections and Counter-Designations of Deposition Testimony, Witness: Lianjun Shi (Abraxis' counter designations to Elan's designations of 103:21:23 and 103:25-104:1.)1 The same 500 lines of counter-designated testimony are offered against
numerous portions of Dr. Shi's deposition. Overall, Elan designated 428 lines from Dr. Lianjun Shi's deposition. Abraxis counter-designated 742 lines of Dr. Shi's deposition testimony almost double Elan's designations. Abraxis' over designation of deposition testimony is also evidenced by Abraxis' cherry-picking virtually every statement in the deposition that could, arguably, be remotely related to Elan's designated portions, even counter designating deposition testimony from as far
Abraxis made the following counter-designations to this testimony: 50:24-25; 51:2-6; 53:3-54:2; 54:5-55:11; 56:10-24; 57:25-58:2; 58:4-7; 58:9-17; 58:19-23: 58:25-59:1; 61:3-11; 61:13; 62:10-13; 62:15; 62:21-23; 62:25; 73:1-3; 73:5-7; 73-9; 77:21-78:9; 78:11-12; 78:14 79:10-12; 80:7-8; 80:15-81:13; 81:15-18; 81:23-82:1; 92:1-6; 92:8-14; 92:16-93:2; 93:21-25; 94:1-18; 94:20-95:19; 96:9-97:16; 97:18-98:16; 98:18-23; 98:25-99:8; 100:4-101:23; 102:1-5; 102:7-16; 102:18-103:2; 103:4-8; 109:22-110:2; 110:4-110:13; 110:15; 111:2-3; 111:5-112:2; 112:4-8; 114:9-11; 114:13-25; 115:3-8; 115:10-116:8; 116:10-13; 116:15; 122:6-10; 122:12-16; 124:19-22; 124:24; 125:20-126:2; 126:4-6; 126:8-13; 127:25-128:1; 128:3-13; 128:15-16; 129:9-11; 129:13-17; 129:19; 157:19-21; 157:23.
{00220714;V1}
1
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 6 of 286
away as 283 pages.
See Exhibit 8-AA, Abraxis' Objections and Counter-Designations of
Deposition Testimony, Witness: Patrick Soon-Shiong, Abraxis' counter designation of lines 18:22-23 and 8:25-19:22 against Elan's designations at 302:2-15 (The testimony on page 302 is not "redirect" testimony.) Elan objects to Abraxis' efforts to introduce deposition testimony that is neither explanatory nor relevant to Elan's designated portions. See Soures, 736 F.2d at 91 ("The Rule does not require introduction of portions of a statement that are neither explanatory of nor relevant to the passages that have been admitted."). Elan further objects to Abraxis' attempts to admit inadmissible testimony under the guise of the "rule of completeness." See Phoenix Associates III v. Stone, 60 F.3d 95, 103 (2d Cir. 1995 ("Rule 106 `does not compel admission of otherwise inadmissible hearsay evidence.'" (citing U.S. Football League v. Nat'l Football League, 842 F.2d 1335, 1375-76 (2d Cir. 1988))). Finally, Elan objects to Abraxis' counter designations as a transparent effort to prevent Elan from presenting its case without undue interruption or distractions as permitted by common law and Federal Rule of Evidence 611(b). See Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Jersey, Inc., 199 F.R.D. 487, 490 (E.D.N.Y. 2001).
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 7 of 286
RESPONSE TO ELAN'S GENERAL OBJECTIONS TO ABRAXIS'S COUNTER DESIGNATIONS Abraxis's Response: Elan correctly states that a counter designation is proper "`if it is necessary to (1) explain the admitted portion, (2) place the admitted portion in context, (3) avoid misleading the trier of fact, or (4) insure a fair and impartial understanding,'" but then proceeds to ignore that standard in objecting to Abraxis's counter designations. That is, Elan does not dispute that Abraxis's counter designations are necessary to (1) explain the admitted portion, (2) place the admitted portion in context, (3) avoid misleading the trier of fact, or (4) insure a fair and impartial understanding. Instead, Elan argues that Abraxis's counter designations should be rejected because of their "volume" and because they are "far away" from Elan's designations. But the "volume" and location of counter designations are not factors in determining the "fairness" of presenting counter designations at the same time as affirmative designations. Elan's "volume" objection misses the mark. Elan takes the example of Abraxis's Lianjun Shi designations and misconstrues them as 500 lines "offered against" four lines of testimony.1 Rather, Abraxis's counter designations were made on a topic-by-topic basis, and Elan admits these same designations are offered by Abraxis against "numerous portions of Dr. Shi's deposition" on the same topic.2 Thus, Abraxis's counter designations are a set of testimony that completes the set of testimony designated by
In this example, Elan asked Dr. Shi about one experimental step in a procedure he performed without referencing all of the steps of the procedure he performed. If any of this testimony is to be played to the jury, fairness requires Dr. Shi's complete testimony regarding the procedure. Note, too, that the necessary counter designations for the Shi deposition were by far and away the most voluminous of Abraxis's counter designations. The amount of testimony counter designated by Abraxis was increased by Elan's deposition practice of repeatedly asking the same questions throughout the deposition in the hopes of eventually obtaining an answer that better suited its purposes.
2
1
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 8 of 286
Elan, and should be shown to the jury as such at the same time as Elan's selected testimony to avoid misleading the jury and insure a fair and impartial understanding of the designated deposition testimony in context. Elan's objection that the location of Abraxis's counter designations during the depositions renders them unfair is similarly unfounded. The location of a counter designation does not determine whether it should be played at the same time for completeness. While Elan apparently disputes the degree of relevance of Abraxis's counter designations, it admits that Abraxis's designations are relevant. Any specific questions of fairness or completeness should be brought to the Court's attention and addressed case-by-case, not decided en masse based on the red herrings of volume or location without reference to the specific designations and counter designations. Moreover, Abraxis's counter designations are expressly permitted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(6), which states if only part of a deposition is offered "any party may itself introduce any other parts." While Elan objects to the timing of the presentation of Abraxis's counter designations, it cannot block their admission. The cases cited by Elan do not hold that the sheer volume or location of counter designations can render them unfair to present at the same time. In U.S. v. Noble, the Third Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to admit the remainder of "stream-of-consciousness" prison letters that did not explain or put into context the portions admitted. 251 Fed. Appx. 792, 799 (3d Cir. 2007). In U.S. v. Soures, the Third Circuit held that the district court had properly excluded some excerpts from a witness's second day of grand jury testimony only after careful review of the substance of the testimony and concluding it was not necessary. 736 F.2d 87, 91 (3d. Cir.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 9 of 286
1984). Neither case holds that volume or location are factors under F.R.C.P. 32(a)(6) or F.R.E. 106. Here, of course, Elan has not disputed relevance. Nor could it. Elan's reliance on Phoenix Associates III v. Stone, 60 F.3d 95, 103 (2d Cir. 1995) is also not well considered. It would be unfair to introduce portions of testimony designated by Elan that are incomplete and misleading while excluding explanatory testimony based on other evidentiary objections. As the D.C. Circuit has stated: Rule 106 can adequately fulfill its function only by permitting the admission of some otherwise inadmissible evidence when the court finds in fairness that the proffered evidence should be considered contemporaneously. A contrary construction raises the specter of distorted and misleading trials, and creates difficulties for both litigants and the trial court. U.S. v. Sutton, 801 F.2d 1346, 1368 (D.C. Cir. 1986); see also U.S. v. Le Fevour, 798 F.2d 977, 981 (7th Cir. 1986) ("If otherwise inadmissible evidence is necessary to correct a misleading impression, then either it is admissible for this limited purpose by force of Rule 106...or, if it is inadmissible (maybe because of privilege), the misleading evidence must be excluded too.").
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 10 of 286
ELAN'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS GENERAL OBJECTIONS TO ABRAXIS'S COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS A. Elan generally objects that Abraxis's counter-designations violate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4) and Federal Rule of Evidence 106. Abraxis mischaracterizes Elan's general objections as pertaining only to the volume and location of Abraxis's counter-designations. To the contrary, Elan objects that Abraxis's counter-designations violate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4) and Federal Rule of Evidence 106. The volume and location of Abraxis's counter-
designations are merely emblematic of that violation. Rule 32(a)(4) provides that "[i]f only part of a deposition is offered in evidence by the party, an adverse party may require the offeror to introduce any other part which ought in fairness to be considered with the part introduced." Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(4) (emphasis added). Similarly, Rule 106 provides that "[w]hen a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part . . . or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it." Fed. R. Evid. 106 (emphasis added). Thus, both Rule 32(a)(4) and Rule 106 contemplate that an adverse party may interrupt or distract from its opponent's case only if fairness so demands. See Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Jersey, Inc., 199 F.R.D. 487, 490 (E.D.N.Y. 2001). Abraxis's counter-designations are not justified by any fairness considerations. Rather, Abraxis's counter-designations: · · · ·
{00220714;V1}
are irrelevant to Elan's designated portion of testimony; do not explain Elan's designated portion of testimony; do not place Elan's designated portion of testimony in context; do not correct misleading evidence; and
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 11 of 286
·
do not ensure a fair and impartial understanding of Elan's designated portion of testimony.
As such, they are not permitted under the rules. See U.S. v. Noble, 251 Fed. Appx. 792, 798 (3d Cir. 2007); U.S. v. Sources, 736 F.2d 87,91 (3d Cir. 1984). Moreover, contrary to Abraxis's assertion otherwise, Elan does not seek an en masse decision as to the fairness of Abraxis's counter-designations. Elan lodged specific objections to each Elan's general
improper designation pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence.
objections merely provide an explanation as to the reasons why Elan was compelled to lodge so many specific objections. B. Abraxis's counter-designations are almost uniformly irrelevant to Elan's designated portion of testimony. That Abraxis's counter-designations violate Rules 32(a)(4) and 106 can be easily demonstrated. For example, Elan designated the following testimony: Q: A: When you finished lyophilizing the samples, where did you take them? I told Dr. Berkland that the samples he requested are ready.
In response to this simple exchange, Abraxis counter-designated 500 lines of testimony, including the following representative testimony.1 Q: Okay, so your testimony earlier, when you spoke of disposing something in the waste glass box, you threw out the vials? Yeah . . . The glass vials? Yeah, I clean it. Clean it, yeah.
A. Q: A:
1
See Exh. 8-GG, Abraxis's Objections and Counter-Designations of Deposition Testimony, Witness Lianjun Shi (Abraxis's counter to Elan's designations of 103:21-23, 103:25-104:1.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 12 of 286
Q: A: Q: A:
And threw them out? Right. And is it your testimony today that you don't know the location of the cardboard packaging around the vials? I can't remember. I just remember I read this paper.
************************************************************************ Q: Maybe I'm not being clear. Do you know the condition that the bottles of Abraxane-- A: Q: A: Q: A: Uh-huh --were stored before you received them? No. Do you know how Dr. Berkland stored the vials before you received them? No.
************************************************************************ Q: Did you do any testing to establish the purity of the second set of samples? A: Q: A: I didn't do that. That's--that was not my job. Are you aware whether Dr. Berkland did any purity testing on the second set of samples? No idea. I didn't know that.
************************************************************* **************
Most, if not all, of Abraxis's counter-designations--including those to Elan's designated portions of testimony from other deponents--are in a similar vein to those above, and are wholly irrelevant to the designation. As such, they have nothing to do with fairness, and should be stricken.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 13 of 286
C.
Abraxis should not be permitted to convert its improper counterdesignations to affirmative designations at this late date. Abraxis's defense of its counter-designations reveals a fundamental lack
of understanding of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence. In its response to Elan's general objections, Abraxis states the following: Moreover, Abraxis's counter-designations are expressly permitted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(6), which states if only part of a deposition is offered, any party may introduce other parts. While Elan objects to the timing of the presentation of Abraxis's counter-designations, it cannot block their admission. See Response at p. 2. As a threshold matter, there is no Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(6). Moreover, to the extent that Abraxis seeks to counter-designate testimony in response to Elan's designations, such testimony is only admissible pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4) and Federal Rule of Evidence 106, which address the contemporaneous admission of testimony. If Abraxis wanted to affirmatively designate testimony to present during its case, then it was required to timely do so. Indeed, Elan provided Abraxis with its general objections in ample time for Abraxis to revise its affirmative deposition designations and counter-designations prior to the parties' submission of the Joint Pre-Trial Order. With only weeks to trial, Abraxis should not now be permitted to convert its improper counter-designations into additional affirmative deposition designations. Such a conversion would unfairly prejudice Elan, who would be forced to take time away from pressing trial preparation matters to prepare counterdesignations to Abraxis's "converted" counter-designations.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 14 of 286
D.
Conclusion Abraxis's response is nothing more than a red herring designed to divert
the Court's attention from the substantive issues raised by Elan's objections. As such, it should be disregarded by the Court. Elan requests that the Court sustain Elan's general and specific objections and, as warranted, strike Abraxis's counter-designations that are improper under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4) and Federal Rule of Evidence 106.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 15 of 286
EXHIBIT 8-A TO PRETRIAL ORDER Plaintiff's Designation of Deposition Testimony Witness: Patrick Soon Shiong
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 16 of 286
Deposition Designations: Patrick Soon Shiong BEGIN (page:line) 7:10 36:17 37:7 59:17 59:21 79:3 79:20 85:15 86:9 86:14 86:19 93:1 93:13 93:18 121:6 121:9 121:18 123:11 124:9 215:12 215:21 216:16 217:4 223:20 224:8 226:24 230:5 234:8 235:3 235:13 235:17 237:18 237:25 238:22 239:23 241:7 264:18 302:2 306:4 306:21 309:14 310:4 338:25 END (page:line) 7:13 37:4 37:15 59:19 59:21 79:15 79:22 86:7 86:12 86:17 86:20 93:11 93:16 93:18 121:7 121:15 122:1 123:14 124:24 215:13 216:13 216:23 217:25 223:24 224:14 228:4 230:13 234:13 235:6 235:15 235:17 238:23 238:20 239:14 239:25 241:12 264:22 302:15 306:14 307:7 309:19 310:6 340:10
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 17 of 286
EXHIBIT 8-AA TO PRETRIAL ORDER Abraxis's Objections and Counter-Designations of Deposition Testimony Witness: Patrick Soon-Shiong
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 18 of 286
DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS, OBJECTIONS, COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS, AND OBJECTIONS THERETO PATRICK SOON-SHIONG Elan Designations 36:17-37:4 Abraxis Objections Ruling Abraxis CounterDesignations 45:7-10; 45:12-21; 74:11-18 · · Elan's Response Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 8 and 37 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (45:7-10, 45:12-21) (FRE 403) - cumulative Depo. Obj. at 45:25 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." Ruling
· · ·
37:7-37:15
37:16-19; 37:2138:5; 38:9-18; 41:13-17; 42:21-22; 42:23-43:5; 45:710; 45:12-21; 47:69; 47:12-24; 59:1719; 59:21; 65:866:11; 80:21-81:6; 82:6-9; 82:11-19; 82:21-83:6; 83:8; 218:9-219:4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 4, 5, 8, 10, 22, 28, 43, 45, and 181 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Objection at 38:6 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." Objection at 38:19-20 - "Move to strike the nonresponsvie portion."
· ·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 19 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · · · ·
Elan's Response (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion (42:21-43:5). (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (42:21-43:5) (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (47:6-9, 47:12-24) Proffered testimony found 45 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Confusion - Counterdesignated portion is a question asked by opposing counsel without deponent's response (41:13-17). (FRE 611) - Vague and ambiguous - Counter-designated portion is a question asked by opposing counsel without deponent's response. (41:13-17) (FRE 402) - Relevance - Counterdesignated portion is a question asked by opposing counsel without deponent's response. (41:13-17). (FRE 403) - cumulative (FRE 401) - Relevance - Proffered testimony concerns identification of an exhibit not referenced in the designated portion against which offered. (59:17-19, 59:21)
Ruling
·
·
·
· ·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 20 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · · · · ·
Elan's Response Depo. Obj. at 66:12 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." (FRE 802) - Hearsay within Hearsay (66:5-11) (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (80:21-81:6) Depo. Obj. at 81:7 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion; improper legal opinion (218:9219:4)
Ruling
86:9-86:12 86:14-86:17 86:19-86:20
Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 37:7-37:15
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Testimony found 48, 43, 41, 39, 27, 20, 5 and 3 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Proffered testimony found 132 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Objection at 38:6 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." Objection at 38:19-20 - "Move to strike the nonresponsvie portion."
·
· ·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 21 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · · · · ·
Elan's Response (FRE 701) Improper lay opinion (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion (42:21-43:5). (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (42:21-43:5) (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (47:6-9, 47:12-24) Proffered testimony found 45 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Confusion - Counterdesignated portion is a question asked by opposing counsel without deponent's response (41:13-17). (FRE 611) - Vague and ambiguous - Counter-designated portion is a question asked by opposing counsel without deponent's response. (41:13-17) (FRE 402) - Relevance - Counterdesignated portion is a question asked by opposing counsel without deponent's response. (41:13-17). (FRE 403) - cumulative (FRE 401) - Relevance - Proffered testimony concerns identification of an exhibit not referenced in the
Ruling
·
·
·
· ·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 22 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response designated portion against which offered. (59:17-19, 59:21) Depo. Obj. at 66:12 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." (FRE 802) - Hearsay within Hearsay (66:5-11) (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion. (80:21-81:6) Depo. Obj. at 81:7 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." (FRE 701) - Improper lay opinion; improper legal opinion (218:9219:4)
Ruling
· · · · ·
93:1-93:11 93:13-93:16 93:18-93:18
88:14-89:19; 90:812; 91:3-13; 91:2022; 91:24-92:7; 92:9-11; 93:1-6; 93:20-95:25; 97:1823; 137:9-138:1
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 4, 3 and 2 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Cumulative Counter-designation of the same portion of the testimony against which its s proffered does not further the "rule of completeness" or fairness. (93:1-6) Proffered testimony found 4 pages after designated testimony does
· ·
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 23 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response not further fairness or completeness.
Ruling
121:9-121:15
120:12-14; 120:16; 120:19-121:5; 278:16-279:2; 282:16-17; 282:19283:13; 284:17285:25
· · ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative Proffered testimony found 156, 160 and 163 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
121:18-122:1
Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 121:9-121:15
· · ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative Proffered testimony found 156, 160 and 163 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
124:9-124:24
123:15-22; 123:24124:2; 124:4-7
· · ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative
216:16216:23
Vague and ambiguous, (FRE 403) (216:22-23;
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 24 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections 217:4-6)
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response Probative value of testimony regarding Abraxis' knowledge of patent-in-suit outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect. Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion. Probative value of testimony regarding Abraxis' knowledge of patent-in-suit outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect. Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 24 and 25 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Depo. Obj. at 243:9 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie." Depo. Obj. at 242:7 - "Move to strike as nonresponsvie."
Ruling
217:4-217:25
Vague and ambiguous, (FRE 403) (216:22-23; 217:4-6)
· ·
217:4-217:25
241:13-18; 241:21242:6; 242:12-16; 242:20-243:8
· ·
· ·
224:8-224:14
218:9-219:4; 230:14-231:2
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 6 pages before designated testimony does
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 25 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response not further fairness or completeness. Proffered testimony found 6 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
Ruling
·
226:24-228:4
218:9-219:4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 8 pagers before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
230:5-230:13
Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 226:24-228:4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 11 pagers before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
234:8-234:13
Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 226:24-228:4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 15 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 26 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response Proffered testimony is not relevant to designated portion.
Ruling
235:3-235:6
Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 226:24-228:4 235:19-236:5; 236:17-19; 236:23237:4; 237:6-17
· · · · · · · · · ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative
235:17235:17
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative
237:18238:23
Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 235:17-235:17 Same counterdesignations as for Elan designation 235:17-235:17 239:15-22
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative
237:25238:20
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative
238:22239:14
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 27 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · · · · · ·
Elan's Response (FRE 403) Cumulative
Ruling
239:23239:25
240:1-241:6
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 403) Cumulative
264:18264:22
263:15-264:17; 264:25-265:17
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 801) - Hearsay within Hearsay Depo. Obj. at 265:18 - "Move to strike a[s] nonresponsvie."
302:2-302:15
18:22-23; 18:2519:22; 140:19141:14; 300:22301:11; 301:18-24; 303:14-15; 303:18; 303:20-25
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 161 and 283 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) Cumulative
·
338:25340:10
Irrelevant, FRE 403
·
(FRE 104(b)) conditional relevancy; reserved for Elan's rebuttal case
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 28 of 286
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 29 of 286
EXHIBIT 8-B TO PRETRIAL ORDER Plaintiff's Designation of Deposition Testimony Witness: Neil Desai
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 30 of 286
Deposition Designations: Neil Desai BEGIN (page:line) 9:3 11:17 12:10 14:21 16:23 17:19 26:5 26:21 28:24 31:19 33:20 39:2 39:9 41:21 42:15 43:01 45:14 46:13 46:20 48:11 50:6 50:10 50:19 51:5 52:12 53:10 54:14 56:9 56:20 82:14 82:25 103:14 103:21 105:7 105:13 106:11 106:22 107:10 107:13 108:7 108:18 108:25 110:2 111:23 112:22 113:1 113:5 121:25 122:15 128:16
{00220714;V1}
END (page:line) 9:6 11:18 12:11 16:3 17:11 17:23 26:8 26:24 29:2 31:19 34:4 39:5 39:15 41:24 42:23 43:21 45:19 46:15 47:16 48:19 50:8 50:10 50:23 51:7 52:22 53:19 55:02 56:18 56:21 82:16 83:13 103:15 104:01 105:11 105:13 106:14 106:24 107:11 107:13 108:12 108:22 109:7 110:21 111:25 112:24 113:3 113:9 122:07 123:04 129:2
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 31 of 286
133:17 136:11 147:2 148:1 148:9 148:16 149:14 150:3 151:16 152:23 153:9 156:7 156:15 157:5 157:13 158:11 158:17 164:12 179:2 179:9 179:18 180:3 184:20 185:12 187:21 188:7 188:16 193:10 194:20 195:11 196:9 197:7 197:17 198:7 198:23 201:2 203:8 203:13 203:20 204:9 209:2 212:14 213:17 219:5 221:11 223:4 223:14 224:9 226:3 227:6 228:15 228:19 230:12 231:5
{00220714;V1}
133:20 136:11 147:6 148:4 148:14 148:22 149:17 150:6 151:21 153:5 153:11 156:9 156:16 157:8 157:23 158:15 158:20 164:19 179:7 179:16 179:19 180:7 185:10 185:13 187:24 188:14 188:16 193:16 195:9 195:25 196:11 197:16 197:23 198:9 199:2 201:9 203:10 203:19 204:2 204:16 209:7 212:23 213:23 219:12 222:8 223:5 224:7 224:18 227:4 227:17 228:17 228:19 231:2 231:7
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 32 of 286
238:9 239:7 259:7 260:21 261:7 261:18 263:2 265:25 271:11 271:17 275:5 276:3 276:20 277:1 277:11 277:20 278:1 308:10
238:12 239:10 259:10 260:25 261:15 261:25 263:10 266:6 271:13 271:20 275:19 276:12 276:22 277:9 277:18 277:24 278:12 308:20
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 33 of 286
EXHIBIT 8-BB TO PRETRIAL ORDER
Abraxis's Objections and Counter-Designations of Deposition Testimony Witness: Neil Desai
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 34 of 286
DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS, OBJECTIONS, COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS, AND OBJECTIONS THERETO NEIL DESAI Elan Designations 14:21-16:3 Abraxis Objections Ruling Abraxis CounterDesignations 53:20-54:7 · · Elan's Response Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 39 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Ruling
·
16:23-17:11
16:4-22
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 403) - Needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
·
26:5-26:8
26:2-4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 35 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response testimony.
Ruling
33:20-34:4
33:14-19
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
46:13-46:15
47:21-48:3; 48:5-7; 48:20-25; 291:24292:21; 292:23-25
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 802) - Hearsay within Hearsay (48:20-25) Depo. Obj. at 292:22 - (FRE 611(a)) - Leading the witness
· ·
46:20-47:16
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 46:13-46:15
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 36 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · ·
Elan's Response (FRE 802) - Hearsay within Hearsay (48:20-25) Depo. Obj. at 292:22 - (FRE 611(a)) - Leading the witness
Ruling
48:11-48:19
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 46:13-46:15
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 802) - Hearsay within Hearsay (48:20-25) Depo. Obj. at 292:22 - (FRE 611(a)) - Leading the witness
· ·
50:10-50:10
293:2-294:2; 294:45
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Depo. Obj. at 294:3 - (FRE 611(a)) - Leading the witness.
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 37 of 286
Elan Designations 51:5-51:7
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations 294:11-295:1; 295:4-15 · ·
Elan's Response Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
Ruling
52:12-52:22
53:20-54:7
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
108:7-108:12
108:13-17
·
(FRE 403) Cumulative - counter designated testimony 108:7-12 is already designated by Elan. (FRE 802) - Hearsay within Hearsay (108:12-17) (FRE 611(a)) - Assumes Facts not in evidence (FRE 602) - Lack of Foundation Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated
· · · · ·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 38 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response testimony.
Ruling
108:18108:22
108:7-17
· · · ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. (FRE 801) - Hearsay within Hearsay 108:12-17 (FRE 611(a)) - Assumes Facts not in evidence (FRE 602) - Lack of Foundation
108:25-109:7
262:1-11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 154 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
110:2-110:21
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 108:25-109:7
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 39 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response further explain designated testimony. · Proffered testimony found 153 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
Ruling
111:23111:25
111:8-16; 112:8-21
·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context.
113:5-113:9
262:1-9
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 149 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Confusing - Proffered portion only includes an incomplete answer
·
·
121:25122:07
irrelevant, FRE 403?
·
Probative value of Abraxis' selection of which data to provide
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 40 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response
FDA during approval process and which images to withhold outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
Ruling
·
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
128:16-129:2
127:22-128:1; 128:8-15; 129:1517; 129:19-24; 133:6-16
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 602) - Lack of Personal Knowledge Proffered testimony found 4 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
· ·
147:2-147:6
FRE 403, subject to motion in limine
·
Motion in limine will be addressed in Elan's response to Abraxis' motion in limine. Evidence that FDA does not accept Abraxis' representation that paclitaxel in Abraxane amorphous make the existence of a fact of
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 41 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response
consequence to the determination of the action more likely.
Ruling
·
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
148:1-148:4
FRE 403, subject to motion in limine
·
Motion in limine will be addressed in Elan's response to Abraxis' motion in limine. Evidence that FDA does not accept Abraxis' representation that paclitaxel in Abraxane amorphous make the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely. Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
·
·
148:9-148:14
FRE 403, subject to motion in limine
·
Motion in limine will be addressed in Elan's response to Abraxis' motion in limine. Evidence that FDA does not accept Abraxis' representation that paclitaxel in Abraxane amorphous make the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely.
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 42 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
Ruling
148:16148:22
FRE 403, subject to motion in limine
·
Motion in limine will be addressed in Elan's response to Abraxis' motion in limine. Evidence that FDA does not accept Abraxis' representation that paclitaxel in Abraxane amorphous make the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely. Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
·
·
158:17158:20
168:15-21; 168:2324; 169:4-14; 169:15-16; 169:19; 169:23-25; 176:711; 177:6-12
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 10 and 18 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 403) - Confusion - proffered
·
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 43 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response portion omits question and only designates answer (169:4-5)
Ruling
179:9-179:16 179:18179:19
176:7-11; 177:6-12
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
180:3-180:7
179:21-180:1; 296:2-297:2; 300:622
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
·
184:20185:10
irrelevant, confusing, FRE 402 and 403
·
Evidence that Abraxis hired former Elan consultant during its development of Abraxane makes the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 44 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
Ruling
184:20185:10
183:3-184:9; 184:15-19
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
185:12185:13
irrelevant, confusing, FRE 402 and 403
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 184:20-185:10
·
Evidence that Abraxis hired former Elan consultant during its development of Abraxane makes the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely. Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
·
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
187:21-
irrelevant,
·
Evidence that Abraxis hired
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 45 of 286
Elan Designations 187:24
Abraxis Objections confusing, FRE 402 and 403
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response former Elan consultant during its development of Abraxane makes the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely. ·
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
Ruling
187:21187:24
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 184:20-185:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 4 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
·
188:7-188:14
irrelevant, confusing, FRE 402 and 403
·
Evidence that Abraxis hired former Elan consultant during its development of Abraxane makes the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely.
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 46 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · ·
Elan's Response
Ruling
188:7-188:14
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 184:20-185:10
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 5 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
·
188:16188:16
irrelevant, FRE 403, vague, ambiguous
·
Evidence that Abraxis hired former Elan consultant during its development of Abraxane makes the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more likely.
·
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion.
Probative value of this evidence outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
·
193:10193:16
193:17-22; 194:1218; 198:10-12; 199:3-18
·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 47 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 5 and 6 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
Ruling
·
194:20-195:9
compound, vague, ambiguous (195:2-9)
·
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion.
194:20-195:9
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 193:10-193:16
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 4 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
195:11195:25
compound, vague, ambiguous (195:11-13)
·
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 48 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response
Ruling
195:11195:25
193:17-22; 194:1218; 196:1-8; 198:10-12; 199:318; 296:13-297:14; 297:21-24; 300:622
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 4 pages after designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Misleading. Only answer is designated without question for context. (297:21-24) Depo. Obj. at 297:20 - (FRE 611(a)) Leading the witness (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
·
·
· ·
196:9-196:11
193:17-22; 194:1218; 195:21-196:8; 198:10-12; 199:318; 296:13-297:14; 297:21-24; 300:622
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 49 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response Proffered testimony found 3 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Misleading. Only answer is designated without question for context. (297:21-24) Depo. Obj. at 297:20 - (FRE 611(a) Leading the witness (FRE 403) - Cumulative Counter designated testimony 195:21-25 is already designated by Elan. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
Ruling
·
· ·
·
197:17197:23
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 196:9-196:11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 3 and 4 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 50 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
Ruling
198:7-198:9
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 196:9-196:11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 3, 4 and 5 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
·
·
198:23-199:2
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 196:9-196:11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 3, 4 and 5 pages before designated
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 51 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response testimony does not further fairness or completeness. · (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
Ruling
201:2-201:9
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 196:9-196:11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 3, 6, 7 and 8 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
·
·
203:8-203:10
vague, ambiguous
193:17-22; 194:1218; 195:21-196:8; 198:10-12; 199:318; 201:10-15; 201:18-202:21; 203:1-7; 296:13-
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 52 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations 297:14; 297:21-24; 300:6-22 ·
Elan's Response Proffered testimony found 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Misleading. Only answer is designated without question for context. (297:21-24) Depo. Obj. at 297:20 - (FRE 611(a)) Leading the witness (FRE 403) - Cumulative Counter designated testimony 195:21-25 is already designated by Elan. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
Ruling
·
· ·
·
203:13203:19
vague, ambiguous (203:13-14)
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 203:8-203:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 10 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 53 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response
Ruling
203:20-204:2
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 203:8-203:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 10 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
204:9-204:16
193:17-22; 194:1218; 195:21-196:8; 198:10-12; 199:318; 201:10-15; 201:18-202:21; 203:1-7; 204:3-8; 204:17-23; 296:13297:14; 297:21-24; 300:6-22
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 5, 6, 9 and 11 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Misleading. Only answer is designated without question for context. (297:21-24) Depo. Obj. at 297:20 - (FRE 611(a)) Leading the witness
·
·
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 54 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response (FRE 403) - Cumulative Counter designated testimony 195:21-25 is already designated by Elan. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (300:6-22) is offered against unrelated testimony.
Ruling
·
219:5-219:12
195:21-196:8; 198:10-12; 198:1822; 219:16-220:3;
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 21 and 24 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 28 (198:18-22) is offered against testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 28 (198:10-12) is offered against testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29.
·
·
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 55 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 28 is offered against testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29 (195:21-196:8). (FRE 403) - Cumulative Counter designated testimony 195:21-25 is already designated by Elan.
Ruling
·
221:11-222:8
195:21-196:8; 198:10-12; 198:1822; 219:16-220:3; 296:13-297:14; 297:21-24; 300:622
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 23 and 26 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 28 (198:18-22) is offered against testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29. (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 28 (198:10-12) is offered against testimony regarding deposition
·
·
·
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 56 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations · ·
Elan's Response exhibit 29. (FRE 602, 701) - Lack of Personal Knowledge; Speculation (FRE 403) - Proffered testimony regarding deposition exhibit 28 (195:21-196:8) is offered against testimony regarding deposition exhibit 29. (FRE 403) - Misleading. Only answer is designated without question for context. (297:21-24) Depo. Obj. at 297:20 - (FRE 611(a) Leading the witness (FRE 403) - Cumulative Counter designated testimony 195:21-25 is already designated by Elan.
Ruling
·
· ·
223:14-224:7
vague, ambiguous (224:4-7)
294:7-295:1; 295:515
·
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion. Depo. Obj. at 295:2 - (FRE 611(a)) - Assumes Facts not in evidence; leading the witness
·
224:9-224:18
vague, ambiguous
Same counterdesignation as for
·
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 57 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections (224:9-11)
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations Elan designation 223:14-224:7 ·
Elan's Response designated portion. Depo. Obj. at 295:2 - (FRE 611(a)) - Assumes Facts not in evidence; leading the witness
Ruling
226:3-227:4
227:18-22; 228:9; 294:7-295:1; 295:515
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. (FRE 403) - Needless presentation of cumulative evidence. (FRE 403) - Confusion Designated portion is not complete; answer at 228:9 is given without question for context.
· ·
227:6-227:17
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 226:3-227:4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
228:15-
vague, ambiguous
228:21-229:4
·
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 58 of 286
Elan Designations 228:17
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response designated portion. ·
Ruling
228:19228:19
vague, ambiguous
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 228:15-228:17 111:8-16; 112:8-21
Prior designated testimony provides clarity and context to designated portion.
230:12-231:2
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony found 118 and 119 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
·
259:7-259:10
262:1-11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
260:21260:25
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation
·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 59 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations 259:7-259:10 ·
Elan's Response Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
Ruling
261:7-261:15
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 259:7-259:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
261:18261:25
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 259:7-259:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
263:2-263:10
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 259:7-259:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
265:25-266:6
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' representations to FDA outweighs
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 60 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
Ruling
265:25-266:6
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 259:7-259:10
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 3 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
271:11271:13
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' representations to FDA outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
271:11271:13
274:23-275:4
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 61 of 286
Elan Designations 271:17271:20
Abraxis Objections FRE 403
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response Probative value of Abraxis' representations to FDA outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
Ruling
271:17271:20
262:1-11
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony. Proffered testimony found 9 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
·
275:5-275:19
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' FDA submissions and Abraxis' cryoTEM images outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
275:5-275:19
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 271:17-271:20
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 62 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations ·
Elan's Response Proffered testimony found 13 pages before designated testimony does not further fairness or completeness.
Ruling
276:3-276:12
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' FDA submissions and Abraxis' cryoTEM images outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
276:3-276:12
276:13; 276:15-19; 276:23-25
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated testimony.
276:20276:22
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' cryoTEM images outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
276:20276:22
Same counterdesignation as for Elan designation 276:3-276:12
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 63 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response further explain designated testimony.
Ruling
277:11277:18
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' cryoTEM images outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
277:20277:24
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' cryoTEM images outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
278:1-278:12
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' FDA submissions outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
308:10308:20
FRE 403
·
Probative value of Abraxis' FDA submissions outweighs prejudicial, confusing, or misleading effect.
308:10308:20
309:25-310:22
· ·
Designated testimony does not need explanation or context. Proffered testimony does not further explain designated
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 64 of 286
Elan Designations
Abraxis Objections
Ruling
Abraxis CounterDesignations
Elan's Response testimony.
Ruling
9:3 - 9:6 197:7 197:16 209:2 - 209:7 Irrelevant · FRE 104(b) conditional relevancy, reserved for Elan's defense of counterclaims Designated testimony does not need explanation or context
212:14 212:23 31:19 - 31:19 Irrelevant, FRE 403, question fragment Irrelevant, FRE 403, question fragment
212:7 - 212:13
·
136:11 136:11
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 65 of 286
EXHIBIT 8-C TO PRETRIAL ORDER Plaintiff's Designation of Deposition Testimony Witness: Michael Hawkins
{00220714;V1}
Case 1:06-cv-00438-GMS
Document 595
Filed 05/30/2008
Page 66 of 286
Deposition Designations: Michael Hawkins (July 6, 2007) BEGIN (page:line) 9:18 10:2 47:5 48:16 49:14 70:13 73:5 79:20 104:17 104:21 108:20 109:9 112:15 112:23 113:15 114:14 115:25 117.5 117:25 119:5 125:24 126:9 127:8 127:24 128:18 134:24 141:15 142:18 143:4 182:5 183:7 185:22 186:17 188
Free Exhibit to a Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware
| File Size: | 668.2 kB |
| Pages: | 286 |
| Date: | May 30, 2008 |
| File Format: | |
| State: | Delaware |
| Category: | District Court of Delaware |
| Author: | unknown |
| Word Count: | 9,470 Words, 65,863 Characters |
| Page Size: | Letter (8 1/2" x 11") |
| URL |
https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/36850/595.pdf |
| Download Exhibit to a Document - District Court of Delaware ( 668.2 kB) |
Preview Exhibit to a Document - District Court of Delaware
Popular Searches
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms