Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00705-CFD Document141—7 Filed 04/01/2005 Page1of2
1
1
2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT
3 DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
4
)
5 IN RE PE CORPORATION SECURITIES )
1..1T1GA·r1oN >
6 5 )
Master File No. 3:00CV-705 (CFD) )
'7 )
8
9 Videotaped deposition of HAROLD VARMUS
10 held at 430 East 67th Street, New York, New _
11 York, on Wednesday, September 15, 2004,
' 12 commencing at 9:03 a.m. , before Peter Ledwith,
13 Legal Video Specialist, and James W. Johnson,
14 Registered Professional Reporter and a Notary
15 Public of the State of New York.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
_ 25
SPHERION DEPOSITION SERVICES
(212) 490-3430

Case 3 :00-cv-00705-CFD Document 141 -7 Filed 04/01 /2005 Page 2 of 2
42 44
1 Varmus 1 Varmus
2 effort" 2 Q. Why were you anxious that you needed to
3 What were your reasons for believing 3 receive clarity on those two points?
4 that, or for not wanting to acknowledge that, 4 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form.
5 Celera could put the human genome sequence together 5 A. I would say I'm -- "anxious" could be
6 without the public effort? 6 interpreted in two ways.
7 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form. 7 I think I was eager that we become clear
8 A. Well, as I mentioned before, I had my 8 about those issues, because if we were to have a
9 doubts about whether the assembly of a shotgun 9 conversation we'd like to know that, I think we'd
10 sequencing effort would allow correct assembly 10 want to enter that conversation, as you would any
11 without using the public sequence, which, of ll negotiation, with a clear understanding of what a "
12 course, was deposited in public databases, so it 12 collaboration would, how that would benefit The
13 was readily available to Celera. 13 Human Genome Project and what would be the reason
14 Q. What were the differences in the method 14 that we as a group would consider sufficient to
15 used by Celera and that being used by The Human 15 terminate the discussions.
16 Genome Project? The layman's brief version. 16 Q. At this time, do you recall if it was
17 A. Well, the major difference was that 17 your belief that only Celera really stood to gain
18 Celera was sequencing randomly, just grabbing 18 from a collaboration and not The Human Genome
19 pieces of DNA out of the entire genome and 19 Project?
20 sequencing them in the hopes that by sequencing 20 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form of the
21 enough that they would be able to assemble the 21 question.
22 whole sequence by looking at overlapping sequences, 22 A. I don't understand the question.
23 whereas The Human Genome Project had begun with an 23 Q. Was it your belief at this time that the
24 extensive effort to map the genome, to isolate 24 only side which really stood to gain from a
25 pieces of large pieces of the genome and sequencing 25 potential collaboration was Celera and not The
43 45
1 Varmus 1 Varmus
2 them in their entirety and assembling the sequence 2 Human Genome Project?
3 based on a scaffold of, an intellectual scaffold, 3 A. No.
4 if you will, of] of sequence that had already been 4 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form of the
5 mapped to chromosomes and -— with clones being 5 question.
6 mapped in relation to each other. 6 A. Both sides would have something to gain,
7 Now, that information, of course, was in 7 just solely on, just restricting our attention to
8 public databases and was accessible to 8 the public relations issues. Both sides were
9 investigators anywhere, private or public sector. 9 certainly suffering hom the way in which the
10 Q. Did you ever change your opinion that in 10 pursuit of the genome was being portrayed in the
1 1 fact they couldn’t put their sequence together l 1 press.
12 without the public effort? 12 Q. If we can go down to the next e-mail, it
13 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form. 13 appears to be an e-mail from Eric Lander to Francis
14 A. It's still an arguable issue, and it's 14 Collins, and to you as well, and it starts out,
15 been argued in scientific joumals right up until 15 "Dear Francis and Harold."
16 last year. 16 If you could go to the third paragraph,
17 Q. But you haven't changed your opinion? 17 it starts out with the sentence, "It would be good
18 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form. 18 for us to discuss these notes soon and then to have
19 A. I remain skeptical. 19 me circulate them to Celera before our call on
20 Q. It says, the next paragraph starts out, 20 Saturday."
21 "After our talk last night I am especially anxious 21 Do you recall what notes Eric Lander was
22 that today we achieve clarity on two points: The 22 referring to in this particular sentence?
23 reasons the collaboration would be in our interests 23 MR. REGAN: Objection to the form.
24 and the reasons we would have to reject it." 24 A. Well, I would assume ·- all right, I
25 A. Mm hmm. 25 can't ~- I can't be sure, but I would assume that
12 (Pages 42 to 45)
SPHERION DEPOSITION SERVICES
(212) 490-3430