`16529
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`GENENTECH, INC. and CITY OF HOPE,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`C.A. No. 18-cv-924-CFC
`
`v.
`
`AMGEN INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`OF U.S. PATENT NOS. 6,627,196, 7,371,379, AND 10,160,811
`
`WHEREAS Plaintiffs Genentech, Inc. and City of Hope have sued Defendant Amgen Inc.
`
`for infringement of, among other things, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,627,196 (“the ’196 patent”),
`
`7,371,379 (“the ’379 patent”), and 10,160,811 (“the ’811 patent”);
`
`WHEREAS the parties initially identified the term “an initial dose” in claims 11 and 22
`
`of the ’196 patent, claims 11 and 21 of the ’379 patent, and claims 6 and 7 of the ’811 patent as a
`
`claim term for construction in this case;
`
`
`
`
`
`WHEREAS, in these circumstances, Plaintiffs believe there is no ripe claim construction
`
`dispute for the Court to resolve with respect to the term “an initial dose” in claims 11 and 22 of
`
`the ’196 patent, claims 11 and 21 of the ’379 patent, and claims 6 and 7 of the ’811 patent (which
`
`was briefed in the Revised Joint Claim Construction Brief (D.I. 121) at pages 3-33) as a claim
`
`term for construction in this case;
`
`NOW THEREFORE, subject to the approval of the Court, it is hereby stipulated and
`
`agreed by the Parties that, for purposes of this case, the term “an initial dose” in claims 11 and 22
`
`PUBLIC VERSION FILED:
`APRIL 24, 2019
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-00924-CFC-SRF Document 151 Filed 04/24/19 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:
`16530
`
`of the ’196 patent, claims 11 and 21 of the ’379 patent, and claims 6 and 7 of the ’811 patent as a
`
`claim term for construction in this case shall mean “the first dose of the claimed antibody given
`
`to the patient as part of a treatment regimen.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
`
`/s/ Daniel M. Silver
`Michael P. Kelly (#2295)
`Daniel M. Silver (#4758)
`Alexandra M. Joyce (#6423)
`Renaissance Centre
`405 North King Street, 8th Floor
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`(302) 984-6300
`mkelly@mccarter.com
`dsilver@mccarter.com
`ajoyce@mccarter.com
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`William F. Lee
`Lisa J. Pirozzolo
`Emily R. Whelan
`Kevin S. Prussia
`Andrew J. Danford
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
`60 State Street
`Boston, MA 02109
`(617) 526-6000
`william.lee@wilmerhale.com
`lisa.pirozzolo@wilmerhale.com
`emily.whelan@wilmerhale.com
`kevin.prussia@wilmerhale.com
`andrew.danford@wilmerhale.com
`
`SMITH KATZENSTEIN & JENKINS LLP
`
`/s/ Eve H. Ormerod
`Neal C. Belgam (#2721)
`Eve H. Ormerod (#5369)
`1000 West Street, Suite 1501
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`(302) 652-8400
`nbelgam@skjlaw.com
`eormerod@skjlaw.com
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`Michelle Rhyu
`Susan Krumplitsch
`Daniel Knauss
`COOLEY LLP
`3175 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1130
`(650) 843-5287
`skrumplitsch@cooley.com
`mrhyu@cooley.com
`dknauss@cooley.com
`
`Orion Armon
`COOLEY LLP
`380 Interlocken Crescent, Suite 900
`Broomfield, CO 80021-8023
`(720) 566-4119
`oarmon@cooley.com
`
` 2 -
`
`
`
`-
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-00924-CFC-SRF Document 151 Filed 04/24/19 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
`16531
`
`
`Robert J. Gunther Jr.
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
`HALE AND DORR LLP
`7 World Trade Center
`250 Greenwich Street
`New York, NY 10007
`(212) 230-8800
`robert.gunther@wilmerhale.com
`
`Daralyn J. Durie
`Adam R. Brausa
`DURIE TANGRI LLP
`217 Leidesdorff St.
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`(415) 362-6666
`ddurie@durietangri.com
`abrausa@durietangri.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs Genentech, Inc. and
`City of Hope
`
`Dated: April 17, 2019
`
`
`Eamonn Gardner
`COOLEY LLP
`4401 Eastgate Mall
`San Diego, CA 92121-1909
`(858) 550-6086
`egardner@cooley.com
`
`Nancy Gettel
`Thomas Lavery, IV
`AMGEN INC.
`One Amgen Center Drive
`Thousand Oaks, CA 91320-1799
`(805) 447-1000
`ngettel@amgen.com
`tlavery@amgen.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Amgen Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SO ORDERED this ________ day of _______________________, 2019.
`
`_________________________________
` United States District Judge
`
` 3 -
`
`
`
`-
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
