Free Redacted Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

l Case 1 :04-cv-OO171-GIVIS Document 69-3 Filed O9/28/2005 Page 1 of 2
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius np ’
| at rats venu. Morgan Lewis
Nt-twYork,NY1Ui?8—0O50 COUNSELORS AT LAW
Tet: 212.309.600tJ
Fax: 212.309.500t
I mwv.me:gantewis.com
Thomas J. Puppa
212-309-2118
l tpupps@mcrgarii¤wie.c0m
I September 13, 2005
i VIA FACSIMILE
John M. Bems, Esq.
Merchant & Gould
n 3200 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
l Minneapolis, NN 55402
Re: Glaxo Group Limited v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceutical
Industries Limited, Civil Action No. 04-1 71 ··KA}
I Dear John:
! I am writing regarding the issues we discussed on the phone yesterday, namely: Pharmascience
discovery, Teva’s documents, depositions, and the discovery schedule.
As I explained, we have made no progress with our efforts to get discovery &om Pharmascience
in Cmada. They have refused to cooperate and now have raised the Business Records Act to
avoid producing any documents. We request that Novopharm new seek return ot] or access to,
all documents that were created by Pharmascience, or its predecessor, Pangeo, in support oi] or
i at the request of, Novopharm. The Business Records Act should not be a factor for Novopharm.
Also, since these are documents that ultimately led to the Teva ANDA product, Novopharm
n should take whatever steps are necessary to recover them.
With respect to discovery of Teva there are still many discovery requests that are outstanding,
either from Glaxo’s document requests or the requests made during the depositions. Indeed,
I many ofthe documents that have been ordered produced by Judge Jordan have still not been
supplied. This lack of documentation has seriously impacted Glaxo’s ability to progress the
case.

n Case 1 :O4—cv—OO171-Gl\/IS Document 69-3 Filed O9/28/2005 Page 2 of 2
Morgan Lewis
I ]OhnM_BcmS!ESq_ coensztuu rr asv
September 13, 2005
I Page 2
l in addition, Glaxo would like to take the depositions of Subrata Mazumder, Real Duteau,
Angelique Masucci, and Annette Mattiuz. As we discussed, we would propose that Subrata
Mazumder be deposed on October 7, 2005, and that Real Duteau be deposed on October I4,
2005. Please let me know the availability of those two witnesses on those dates. Also, please let
me know the availebiiities of the other two witnesses for depositions in October.
Finally, with respect to the discovery schedule, we are fast approaching the time when expert
I reports will be due and very little substantive discovery has been completed. While we could
argue why this is so, I believe it would be in both of our interests to jointly request e 2 to 3
month extension ofthe discovery deadlines. Please let me know your position with regards to an
extension.
i Very truly yours,

I Thomas J. Puppet

Case 1:04-cv-00171-GMS

Document 69-3

Filed 09/28/2005

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-00171-GMS

Document 69-3

Filed 09/28/2005

Page 2 of 2