Cases

ORDER HAROLD L. MURPHY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This ease is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [25]. I. Background A. Plaintiffs Allegations 1. The Parties Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of Georgia and resides in Dalton, Whitfield County, Georgia. (Am. Compl. (Docket Entry No. 21) ¶ 3.)

ORDER HAROLD L. MURPHY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [10], I. Background A. Plaintiffs Allegations 1. The Parties Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of Georgia and resides in Dalton, Whitfield County, Georgia. (Compl. (Docket Entry No. 1) ¶ 3.)

Pamela K. Chen, United States District Judge Plaintiff Tyrieke Chandler ("Plaintiff" or "Chandler") brings this matter alleging that Defendants Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, and Janssen Research & Development, LLC (collectively "Defendants"), the manufacturers of antipsychotic prescription drug Risperdal ®, failed to warn Plaintiff of the injurious side effects of the drug, including gynecomastia, a medic

PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 5th day of July, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is: [S]hould summary judgment have been granted in Janssen's favor on statute of limitations grounds?

OPINION BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: Timothy Stange ("Stange"), plaintiff in the court below, and defendants, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Janssen"), Johnson & Johnson, and Janssen Research & Development, LLC, 1 have taken cross-appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Stange in the amount of $535,106.17. Stange,

OPINION BY BENDER, P.J.E.: Appellants/Cross-Appellees, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, *1238 and Janssen Research & Development, LLC (collectively referred to herein as "Janssen"), 1 appeal and App

OPINION BY STRASSBURGER, J.: Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and Johnson & Johnson Company (collectively, Janssen) 1 appeal from the judgment of $2.5 million entered on June 8, 2016, after a jury found in favor of Phillip Austin Pledger (Austin), and his mother, Ben

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHERYL H. LIPMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 159), filed October 12, 2016, Plaintiffs Response (ECF No. 178), filed November 9, 2016, and Defendant’s Reply (ECF. No. 183), filed November 23, 2016. In addition to arguments attacking the merits - of

OPINION BY PANELLA, J. In these consolidated appeals, Appellants, Ma.J.L. and M.L., A.H., Jr. and A.H., Daniel Brewer, D.A. and B.A., K.S. and Sarah LaBadie, Matthew Lanthier, Mitchell Lindberg, MiJ.L. and M.L., Erik Riggs, Scott Wisniewski, Nathan Zachar, Danny Woodcock, and Cortez Mullen, appeal from the judgments

Case: 20-1663 Document: 49-2 Page: 1 Filed: 04/13/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ JANSSEN ORTHO, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant ______________________ 2020-1663 ______________________ Appeal fr

Slip Op. 20-14 UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE JANSSEN ORTHO LLC, Plaintiff, Before: Jennifer Choe-Groves, Judge v. Court No. 13-00296 UNITED STATES, Defendant. OPINION [At the conclusion of a bench trial, holding that darunavir ethanolate is properly

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT IN RE: RISPERDAL LITIGATION : No. 75 EAL 2018 JONATHAN SAKSEK, : : Petitioner : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from : the Order of the Superior Court : v.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT IN RE: RISPERDAL LITIGATION : No. 75 EAL 2018 JONATHAN SAKSEK, : : Petitioner : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from : the Order of the Superior Court : v.

JOHN R. TUNHEIM, District Judge. The instant motions concern the cases of five plaintiffs (“Phase 1 Minnesota plaintiffs” or “plaintiffs”) whose actions have been consolidated with hundreds of other cases in this multidistrict litigation. Plaintiffs assert injuries resulting from the use of Levaquin, an antibiotic medication. Defendants have filed substantively identical joint motions for partial judgment on

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT A.Y. AND BILLIE ANN YOUNT : No. 95 EAL 2020 : : v. : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court : JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,

STARK, U.S District Judge MorphoSys, Inc. ("MorphoSys" or "Plaintiff") sued Janssen Biotech, Inc., Genmab US, Inc., and Genmab A/S (together, "Janssen" or "Defendants") for infringement of three patents on antibodies that bind to the CD38 protein. (D.I. 205) Pending before the Court are summary judgment motions filed by both sides. Janssen moves for summary judgment of (1) non-infringement of the "human" antibody claims (D.I. 384) a

J -A27012-18 2019 PA Super 217 T.M. AND BRENDA TINKHAM IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA APPELLANTS v. JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.; JOHNSON & JOHNSON; JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, LLC; No. 184 EDA 2018 EXCERPTA MEDICA, INC.; AND ELSEVIER INC., Appeal from the Judgment Entered December 4, 2017 In th

J-A19031-19 2019 PA Super 348 A.Y. AND BILLIE ANN YOUNT : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA v. : : JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., : JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JANSSEN : RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, LLC; : EXCERPTA MEDICA, INC., AND : ELSEVIER INC. : N

ORDER GRANTING JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND JOHNSON & JOHNSON’S MOTION TO DISMISS JON P. McCALLA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is Defendants Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson’s (“Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss, filed February 12, 2016. (ECF No. 18). For the following reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Court dismisses al

J-A18037-18 2018 PA Super 298 PHILLIP PLEDGER, BY BENITA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PLEDGER, AS GUARDIAN OF HIS : PENNSYLVANIA PERSON AND CONSERVATOR OF HIS : ESTATE, : : Appellee : : v. : :