`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:20-cv-00337-JRG
`
`
`
`
`SEAGEN, INC.,
`
` Plaintiff
`v.
`DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD.,
` Defendant,
`
`ASTRAZENECA
`PHARMACEUTICALS LP and
`ASTRAZENECA UK LTD,
`
` Intervenor-Defendants.
`
`
`MINUTES FOR PRETRIAL CONFERENCE – DAY 1
`HELD BEFORE U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE RODNEY GILSTRAP
`February 24, 2022
`
`
`OPEN: 08:58 AM
`
`
`
`
`
`ADJOURN: 03:44 PM
`
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF:
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT:
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR INTERVENORS:
`
`LAW CLERK:
`
`COURT REPORTER:
`
`COURTROOM DEPUTY:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`See attached
`
`See attached.
`
`See attached
`
`Jim Lomeo
`
`Shawn McRoberts, RMR, CRR
`
`Andrea Brunson, CP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TIME
`08:58 AM Court opened.
`08:59 AM Court called for announcements from counsel.
`
`MINUTES
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-00337-JRG Document 331 Filed 02/24/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 12229
`
`MINUTES
`TIME
`09:00 AM Court provided instructions and housekeeping matters to the parties. A second day of
`pretrial conference will be held tomorrow, February 25, 2022. Case is scheduled for
`jury selection and trial on Monday, April 4, 2022. Trial will begin following
`empanelment of jury. Eight jurors will be selected. Peremptory strikes: Four per side.
`Counsel will be given 30 minutes per side for voir dire. The parties will be given 11-
`1/2 hours per side for the jury trial portion. Opening will be 30 minutes per side.
`Closings will be 40 minutes per side. Court to be notified by 10:00 PM each night of
`disputes/objections not resolved through meet and confer efforts. Three (3) jointly
`prepared three-ring binders with disputed information are to be submitted to the Court
`by 7:00 AM the following day. The Court will be available in chambers by 7:30 AM
`every morning to take up any housekeeping matters or late-arriving disputes that might
`come up during trial. Deposition-clip objections and/or disputes are to be taken up by
`the Court the day before the day such deposition is to be used. Court encouraged the
`parties to utilize the meet and confer process during the course of the trial to resolve
`disputes. It is the Court’s intention to bring the jury in every morning at 8:30 AM.
`Lunch will be brought in daily for the jurors. Rule 50(a) motions will be heard by the
`Court after all the evidence is in and Plaintiff rests any rebuttal case. Court will hold
`an informal charge conference (off the record) after the close of evidence. Formal
`charge conference will follow thereafter and on the record. Court instructed counsel
`not to refer to individuals by their first names, and to advise their respective witnesses
`re: same. Counsel instructed counsel to refer to the Court’s Standing Order re: the
`sealing of the courtroom re: confidential or highly sensitive testimony. Court instructed
`the parties to follow the instructions from Deputy Clerk in Charge, Mrs. Kecia
`Clendening re: receipt, review and return of the Juror Questionnaires. Parties to be
`prepared every morning of trial to read into the record those exhibits used prior day.
`Twelve juror notebooks to be delivered to chambers no later than 12:00 noon on
`Monday, March 28, 2022. Notebooks to contain: Complete copies of each patent-in-
`suit (single-sided); claim construction chart (single-sided); page for each witness with
`a head and shoulder photograph, name and ruled lines for notetaking; three-hole punch
`notepad for further notes and a non-clicking pen. Each witness page should be tabbed
`for easy navigation. A reminder that expert witnesses are confined to the four corners
`of their report.
`09:21 AM Court provided additional instructions and information re: public health protocols and
`provisions to be implemented during jury selection and trial.
`09:28 AM Court proceeded with hearing argument re: disputed dispositive motions:
`09:29 AM
`[SEALED] Defendant Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited and Intervenor-Defendants’
`AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP and AstraZeneca UK Ltd.’s Motion for Summary
`Judgment of Anticipation (Dkt. No. 255).
`09:29 AM Mr. Berl presented argument for AstraZeneca Intervenor-Defendants.
`09:51 AM Responsive argument by Mr. Chivvis for the Plaintiff.
`10:11 AM Rebuttal argument presented by Mr. Berl for AstraZeneca Intervenor-Defendants.
`10:16 AM Additional responsive argument by Mr. Chivvis for the Plaintiff.
`10:17 AM Court DENIED Dkt. No. 255.
`10:18 AM Court heard argument re: [SEALED] Seagen’s Motion to Strike Portions of the Expert
`Reports of John M. Lambert (Dkt. No. 252).
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-00337-JRG Document 331 Filed 02/24/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 12230
`
`MINUTES
`TIME
`10:18 AM Mr. Chivvis presented argument for the Plaintiff.
`10:39 AM Responsive argument by Ms. Kayali for AstraZeneca Intervenor-Defendants.
`10:51 AM Rebuttal argument presented by Mr. Chivvis for the Plaintiff.
`10:54 AM Court GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART Dkt. No. 252 with additional
`explanation as set forth in the record.
`10:58 AM Recess.
`11:12 AM Court reconvened.
`11:12 AM Court heard argument re: [SEALED] Seagen’s Motion to Strike the Second Expert
`Report of David Manspeizer and Any Reliance Thereon by DSC Witnesses (Dkt. No.
`253).
`11:13 AM Mr. Jacobs for the Plaintiff submitted argument upon its briefing.
`11:13 AM Responsive argument by Mr. Kressel for Daiichi Defendant.
`11:16 AM Court GRANTED Dkt. No. 253 to include additional instruction and exclusion as set
`forth in the record.
`11:18 AM Court heard argument re: [SEALED] Seagen’s Renewed Motion for Sanctions (Dkt.
`No. 267).
`11:18 AM Mr. Jacobs presented argument for the Plaintiff.
`11:24 AM Responsive argument by Mr. Ratliff for Daiichi Defendant.
`11:33 AM Rebuttal argument presented by Mr. Jacobs for the Plaintiff.
`11:34 AM Additional responsive argument by Mr. Ratliff for Daiichi Defendant.
`11:35 AM Court GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART Dkt. No. 267 with instructions
`set forth in the record.
`11:38 AM Court heard argument re: [SEALED] Daiichi Sankyo Company Limited’s Motion for
`Sanctions Against Seagen, Inc. for Violations of the Court’s Discovery Order and
`Protective Order (Dkt. No. 308) and [SEALED] Plaintiff Seagen’s Motion for Leave to
`Use Certain Documents Produced by Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. in Co-Pending
`Proceeding (Dkt. No. 262).
`11:38 AM Mr. Ratliff presented argument for the Daiichi Defendant.
`11:46 AM Responsive argument by Mr. Jacobs for the Plaintiff.
`11:50 AM Rebuttal argument presented by Mr. Ratliff for the Daiichi Defendant.
`11:53 AM Court DENIED Dkt. No. 308 and DENIED as moot Dkt. No. 262.
`11:56 AM Conclusion of argument re: dispositive motions.
`11:56 AM Recess for lunch.
`01:39 PM
`Court reconvened.
`01:39 PM
`Court to take-up MILs.
`01:39 PM
`Court acknowledged the parties’ meet and confer efforts during the lunch recess. Court
`GRANTED by agreement reflected in Dkt. No. 315 and Dkt. No. 325.
`01:42 PM Ms. Gao recited into the record parties’ agreement re: disputed MILS.
`
`3
`
`
`
`01:49 PM
`01:49 PM
`
`01:49 PM
`01:55 PM
`
`02:05 PM
`02:10 PM
`
`Case 2:20-cv-00337-JRG Document 331 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 12231
`
`TIME
`01:43 PM
`
`01:55 PM
`01:56 PM
`02:04 PM
`
`MINUTES
`Plaintiff’s MIL 3: GRANTED by agreement.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 4: DENIED as moot.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 7: GRANTED to the extent recited into the record.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 8: GRANTED to the extent and agreement recited into the record.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 10: DENIED as moot
`Defendants’ MIL 10: Withdrawn by agreement of the parties.
`Defendants’ MIL 14: GRANTED by agreement of the parties.
`Court proceeded to hear argument re: parties’ remaining objections to MILs.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 1: No argument presented.
`Court ruling:
`Plaintiff’s MIL 1: DENIED
`Plaintiff’s MIL 2: Argument presented.
`Court ruling:
`Plaintiff’s MIL 2: DENIED with instructions and guidance provided and set forth in
`the record.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 5: DENIED as moot per the parties’ agreement
`Plaintiff’s MIL 6: Argument presented.
`Court ruling:
`Plaintiff’s MIL 6: DENIED.
`Plaintiff’s MIL 9: Argument presented.
`Court ruling:
`Plaintiff’s MIL 9: GRANTED with instructions and limitations set forth in the record.
`02:12 PM Defendants’ MIL 1, 2, 3 and 4: Argument presented.
`02:47 PM
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 1: GRANTED to include instructions and limitations set forth in the
`record.
`Defendants’ MIL 2: DENIED with instructions and limitations set forth in the record.
`Defendants’ MIL 3: GRANTED with instructions and limitations set forth in the record.
`Defendants’ MIL 4: DENIED.
`02:59 PM Defendants’ MIL 5: Argument presented.
`03:01 PM
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 5: GRANTED with instructions set forth in the record.
`03:03 PM Defendants’ MIL 6 and MIL 7: Argument presented.
`03:10 PM
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 6 and MIL 7: GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART to
`include instructions set forth in the record.
`03:12 PM Defendants’ MIL 8: Argument presented.
`03:17 PM
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 8: DENIED.
`03:18 PM Defendants’ MIL 9: Argument presented.
`03:20 PM
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 9: GRANTED and mutual to both sides.
`03:24 PM Defendants’ MIL 11: DENIED as moot.
`03:24 PM Defendants’ MIL 12: Argument presented.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-00337-JRG Document 331 Filed 02/24/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 12232
`
`TIME
`03:31 PM
`
`MINUTES
`
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 12: DENIED-IN-PART and GRANTED-IN-PART with instructions
`set forth in the record.
`03:35 PM Defendants’ MIL 13: Argument presented.
`03:36 PM
`Court ruling:
`Defendants’ MIL 13: DENIED with instructions set forth in the record.
`03:38 PM Defendants’ MIL 15 and MIL 16: DENIED as moot.
`03:38 PM
`Conclusion of argument re: MILs.
`03:41 PM
`Court instructed the parties to continue their meet and confer efforts re: outstanding
`exhibit disputes for pre-admission. A second day of pretrial conference will begin at
`9:00 AM tomorrow. Court instructed the parties to file a joint report by 10:00 PM
`tonight re: remaining exhibit disputes.
`Court adjourned.
`
`03:44 PM
`
`
`
`5
`
`