Free Notice to Take Deposition - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00457-SLR Document 75 Filed 07/25/2008 Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
X
CANCER RESEARCH )
TECHOLOGY LIMITED and )
SCHERING CORPORATION, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) c.A. N0. 07-457 (SLR)
)
V. )
BARR LABORATORIES, INC., and )
BARR PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., )
Defendants. g
)
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION PURSUANT TO FED R. CIV. P. 30(b)(6)
OF SCHERING CORPORATION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on August 12, 2008, commencing at 9:30 a.m. at
the offices of Winston & Strawn LLP, 35 West Wacker Drive, Chicago, illinois 60601,
Defendant Barr Laboratories, Inc. and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Barr") will take a deposition
upon oral examination of Plaintiff Schering Corporation (“Schering") pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The oral examination will be conducted before a court
reporter, notary public, or other person authorized by law to administer oaths. The oral
examination will be recorded by stenographie and videographic means, and will continue from
day to day until completed. All counsel of record are invited to attend the deposition and
examine the deponents in accordance with the Rules.
No later than tive business days prior to the scheduled deposition. date, Schering is
requested to designate in writing to Barr the names of the persons who will testify on their
behali specifying the matters as to which that person will testiir.

Case 1:07-cv-00457-SLR Document 75 Filed 07/25/2008 Page 2 of 4
Barr serves this Notice without waiver of their objections to the deficiencies in
Plaintiff s document production and other discovery responses concerning the subject matter of
the instant Notice, and reserves the right to continue this deposition as necessary in light of any
subsequent document production by Plaintiff.
TOPICS FOR EXAMINATION
l. The factual bases for Schering’s contentions of the commercial success of any
compound, including temczolomide, allegedly claimed in U.S. Patent No. 5,260,291 (“the ‘29l
patent”), including financial information related to sales, research and development costs, profits,
and marketing expenditures.
2. The factual bases for Schering’s contentions of any praise by those in the industry
of any compound allegedly claimed in the ‘29l patent, including temozolomide.
3. The factual bases for Scheringds contentions of any unexpected results of any
compound allegedly claimed in the ‘29l patent, including temozolomide.
4. The factual bases for Scbering’s contentions of any long—felt need for any
compound allegedly claimed in the ‘29l patent, including temozolornide.
5. The factual bases for Schering’s contentions of any copying of any compound
allegedly claimed in the ‘29l patent, including temozolomide.
E 6. The factual bases for Schering’s contentions of any initial skepticism as to any
compound allegedly claimed in the ‘29l patent, including temozolomide.
7. The factual bases for Schering’s contentions relating to any secondary
consideration or objective indicia of nomobviousness of the ‘29l patent upon which Schering
relies.
E 2

Case 1:07-cv-00457-SLR Document 75 Filed 07/25/2008 Page 3 of 4
8. The existence and identity of individuals or companies that tiled any certifications
pursuant to 2l U.S.C. § 355(j)(2)(A)(vii)(IV) or served any Notice pursuant to 2l U.S.C. §
355(j)(2)(B), which relate to the subject matter allegedly claimed in the ‘29l patent, including,
but not limited to, the FDA approved product Temodar®.
9. Communications with any counsel, including communications seeking or
receiving the advice of counsel, relating to the prosecution ofthe applications leading to the ‘29l
patent.
10. The factual bases for when the ‘29l patent and its applications were first enabled
under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and l12, and how they were enabled, including identitication of the
source(s) of information that disclosed the utility of the claimed invention.
ll. The existence and identity of licenses, assignments, and royalties related to the
‘29l patent and/or any compound or product allegedly claimed bythe ‘291 patent including, but
not limited to Temodar®.
12. SCl'l€1‘l11g’S participation in the prosecution of any and all patent applications that
led to the issuance of the ‘291 patent.
13. The due diligence or investigation performed in initially deciding whether to
invest inthe research, development, marketing, or commercialization of any compound allegedly
claimed in the ‘291 patent, including but not limited to temozolomide and the product
Temodar®.
14- The marketing of Ternodar®, including but not limited to marketing plans,
promotional materials, sales and sales forecasts for Temodar® in the United States and
elsewhere, pricing of Temodar®, and Temodar®’s costs and expenses in connection with
3

Case 1:07-cv-00457-SLR Document 75 Filed 07/25/2008 Page 4 ot 4
developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, producing, packaging, marketing and -selling
Temociar®.
15. The Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation relating to the marketing of
Temodar®, as referenced in the DOJ Press Release dated August 29, 2006 at
BARR_TEMOm022575—022578, and any correspondence with the DOJ and/or FDA relating to
any investigation, warning letters, or Notices of Violation relating to Temodar®.
Dated: July 25, 2008 BARR LABORATORIES, INC. and BARR
PI-IARI\/IACBUTICALS, INC.
By: S ‘ _
John C. Phillips, Jr. (ti 10)
Brian E. Faman (#4089)
PHILLIPS, GOLDMAN & SPENCE, P.A.
1200 North Broom St.
‘ Wilmington, DE l9806
Tele: (302) 655-4200
Fax: (302) 655-4210
George C. Lombardi (admitted pro hac vice)
Taras A. Gracey (admitted pro hac vice) A
Ivan M. Pouliaos (admitted pro hac vice)
Julie Mano Johnson (admitted pro hac vice)
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
35 West Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 6060l
Tele: (312) 558-5600
Fax: (312) 558-5700
Attorneys for Defendants Barr Laboratories,
Inc. and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
I 4