Janssen Inc. v. Apotex Inc.

Janssen Inc. v. Apotex Inc.

The Court held Janssen's proposed blanket variance was overly broad and that documents not tendered in open court remain subject to the implied undertaking, requiring Janssen to seek relief; nevertheless the Court granted a limited variance permitting Janssen to use specified 'Conceded Evidence' from the within...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 FC 1746
Parties
Plaintiff: JANSSEN INC.; Plaintiff: JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA N.V.; Defendant: APOTEX INC.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement (patented Medicines (notice of Compliance) Regulations) and Motion to Vary Protective Order / Motion to Vary Protective and Confidentiality Order Under Rule 151; Related Summary Judgment Motions Pending in New Actions
Outcome
Motion granted in part; Confidentiality Order varied to permit use of specified evidence in Court files T-1121-22, T-1122-22, T-1248-22 and T-1249-22; no costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Implied Undertaking, Variation of Protective Order, Res Judicata, Abuse of Process, Notice of Allegation (noc) Proceedings
Source Language
english
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Evidence and Confidentiality Implied Undertaking Variation of Protective Order Res Judicata Abuse of Process +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JANSSEN INC.

Plaintiff

JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA N.V.

Plaintiff

APOTEX INC.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement (patented Medicines (notice of Compliance) Regulations) and Motion to Vary Protective Order / Motion to Vary Protective and Confidentiality Order Under Rule 151; Related Summary Judgment Motions Pending in New Actions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motion is procedurally defective for failure to seek relief from the implied undertaking
  2. 2 Whether the proposed variation of the Confidentiality Order is overly broad

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held Janssen's proposed blanket variance was overly broad and that documents not tendered in open court remain subject to the implied undertaking, requiring Janssen to seek relief; nevertheless the Court granted a limited variance permitting Janssen to use specified 'Conceded Evidence' from the within action in four identified related actions to support res judicata/abuse of process claims and awarded no costs.

Court Disposition

Motion granted in part; Confidentiality Order varied to permit use of specified evidence in Court files T-1121-22, T-1122-22, T-1248-22 and T-1249-22; no costs awarded.

Orders

  • The Protective and Confidentiality Order of March 22, 2021 is varied to allow use of the following evidence in Court actions T-1121-22, T-1122-22, T-1248-22 and T-1249-22: paragraphs 1-5, 21, 23, 26, 53-57, 60-62, 64, 69-70, 76-81 and 83-89 of Apotex’s Summary Trial Memorandum of Fact and Law; paragraphs 12-13 and...
  • No costs are awarded.