Free Verdict Sheet - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-ev—00833-KAJ Document 295 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 1 of 4
IN 'l`I·II`}1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR'I`
FOR TI-IE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
PIIARMACIA & U PJOIIN COMPANY, LLC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) C.A. No. 04-833-KA]
)
SICOR INC. and SICOR )
PII/\RMACI£U'1`ICALS, INC., )
)
Defendants. )
JOINT PROPOSED VERDICT FORM
Pursuant to I).Del. LR 51.1(c) plaintiff Pharmacia & Upjohn Co., LLC submits the
joint proposed verdict Ibrms that has been agreed to bythe parties for each phase of thc trial.
MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARS1-IT & TUNNIELL LLP
/s/ Maryeffan Norefkct (#3208)
jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
Manyellen Noreika (#3208)
1201 N. Market Street
P.O. Box 1347
Wilmington, DE 19899
(302) 65 8-9200
Attorneys f or Plaintiff
Pharmacia & Upjohn Co., LLC
OF COUNSEL:
Daniel A. Boehncn
Joshua R. Rich
McDONNIELL BOEIINIQN I-IULBERT & BERGI-IOFF LLP
300 S. Wacker I)rivc
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 913-0001
October I2, 2006

Case 1:04-ev—00833-KAJ Document 295 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 2 of 4
JURY VERDICT FORM - PHASE 1
VALIDITY
l . Do you find that Sicor proved by clear and convincing evidence that the following
claims of the ‘285 patent are invalid for lack of written description in accordance with the legal
requirements set forth in the C0urt’s instructions?
a. With respect to Claim 9
ANSWER; Yes _ or No __ ____
(fer Sicor) (for Pharmacia)
b. With respect to Claim 13
ANSWER: Yes _ or No _
(for Sicor) (for Pharmacia)
2. Do you [ind that Sicor proved by clear and convincing evidence that the following
claims ofthe ‘285 patent are invalid for obviousness in accordance with the legal requirements set
forth in the Court’s instructions?
c. With respect to Claim 9
ANSWER: Yes____ or No _______ __________
(for Sicor) (for Pharmacia)
cl. With respect to Claim I3
ANSWER: Yes___ or No ____________
(for Sicor) (for Pharmacia)
FZ>?éj§é§{ _—_””
2

Case 1:04-ev—00833-KAJ Document 295 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 3 of 4
JURY VERDICT FORM — PHASE 2
WILLFUI, lNFRINGEMEN'[`
3. Do you find that Pharmacia has proved by clear and convincing evidence that the
Sicor willfully iniringed one or more claims of the ‘28S patent in accordance with the legal
requirements set forth in the Court’s instructions?
ANSWER: Yes_____ or No ________
(for Pharmacia) (for Sieor)
l}AMAGl+ZS
4. What is the amount of damages to which Pharmacia is entitled for its infringement
ofone or more ofthe claims ofthe ‘285 patent in accordance with the legal requirements set forth
in the Court’s instructions?
ANSWER: __________
F __?*
3

Case 1:04-ev—00833-KAJ Document 295 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 4 of 4
CER'l`lFICA'l`E OF SERVICE
I, Maryellcn Norcika, hereby certify that on October I2, 2006 I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk ofthe Court using CM/ECP, which will send notification ofsueh iiling(s)
to the following:
Steven J. Balick
John G. Day, Esquire
ASI-IBY & GEDDIES
and that I also caused copies to be served upon the following in the manner indicated:
BY HAND
Steven J. Balick
John G. Day
AS1-IBY & GEDDES
222 Delaware Avenue
Wilmington, DE 19801
BY EMAIL
Reid I., Ashinoff
David R. Baum
SONN1;`§NSCI·Il£1N N/\'I`I··I & ROSENTI IAL LLP
1221 Avenue ofthe Americas
New York, NY 10020
Jordan Sigale
SONNENSCI-IEIN NATI1 Sc ROSENT1-IAL LLP
8000 Sears Tower
Chicago, IL 60606
/s/' Magyellcn Norcika g/#3208;
Maryellen Noreika (#3208)
[email protected]