• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
412 results

No. 497 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 473 Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law; denying ...

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 497 (D.N.J. Mar. 28, 2025)
Motion for Judgment as a Matter of LawPartial
THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendant Janssen Products, LP’s (“Janssen”) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (“Rule 50 Motion”, ECF No. 473), Janssen’s Motion for a New Trial (“Rule 59 Motion”, ECF No. 474), and Relators Jessica Penelow and Christine Brancaccio’s (collectively, the “Relators”) Motion for Entry of Judgment (ECF No. 475).
The Court has carefully considered the parties’ submissions and decides the motions without oral argument pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78 and Local Civil Rule 78.1.
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Opinion, IT IS on this 28th day of March 2025, ORDERED as follows:
Case 3:12-cv-07758-ZNQ-JBD Document 497 Filed 03/28/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 31068 a. Janssen’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law is GRANTED with respect to Relators’ state law claims.
The Court will enter a FINAL JUDGMENT consistent with this Order.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 498 JUDGMENT is hereby entered for Relators and against Janssen with respect to Count I, Relators' ...

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 498 (D.N.J. Mar. 28, 2025)
Motion for Judgment
The Court has carefully considered the parties’ submissions and decides the motions without oral argument pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78 and Local Civil Rule 78.1.
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Opinion, IT IS on this 28th day of March, ORDERED as follows: 1.
JUDGMENT is hereby entered for Relators and against Janssen with respect to Count I, Relators’ claim under the federal False Claims Act for off-label promotion as follows: Case 3:12-cv-07758-ZNQ-JBD Document 498 Filed 03/28/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 31070 a. The United States is hereby awarded $360,014,208 in trebled damages.
The United States is hereby awarded $1,276,592,000 in statutory civil penalties, which consists of a $8,000 penalty for each of the 159,574 false claims the jury found Janssen caused to be submitted.
c. The United States shall be awarded post-judgment interest on all foregoing amounts from today’s rate at the prevailing statutory rate, calculated as the weekly average 1-year constant maturity (nominal) Treasury yield, as published by the Federal Reserve System each Monday for the preceding week.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 496 OPINION filed

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 496 (D.N.J. Mar. 28, 2025)
See Lucent Techs., Inc. v. Newbridge Networks Corp., 168 F. Supp. 2d 181, 257 (D. Del. 2001) (overturning the jury’s verdict and granting judgment as a matter of law on certain issues but nonetheless denying motion for a new trial ...
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 493 OPINION Filed

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 493 (D.N.J. Jan. 30, 2025)
This matter comes before the Court upon Defendant Janssen Products, LP’s (“Janssen”) Motion to Strike the testimony of Israel Shaked (“Shaked”) and Ian Dew (“Dew”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (“Rule 702”), (the “Motion”, ECF No. 402).
Shaked’s proposed testimony concerned the relationship between Janssen’s OL marketing scheme and prescription rates and the total damages related to Janssen’s alleged FCA and AKS violations.
(Id.) Similarly, in 2006, Relator Christine Brancaccio started working for Janssen as a sales representative and marketed Prezista and Intelence to providers in Long Island and Queens.
Case 3:12-cv-07758-ZNQ-JBD Document 493 Filed 01/30/25 Page 4 of 9 PageID: 31023 To satisfy the qualification requirement, an expert must possess “specialized knowledge regarding the area of testimony.” Betterbox Comm’ns Ltd. v. BB Techs., Inc., 300 F.3d 325, 327 (3d Cir. 2002) (quotation marks and citation omitted).
Finally, Janssen argues that Shaked’s method of calculating damages is flawed because he attributed a patient’s lifelong OL Prezista and Intelence prescriptions to the influenced physician who first prescribed the medication.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 494 ORDER denying 402 Motion to Strike the testimony of Israel Shaked and Ian Dew

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 494 (D.N.J. Jan. 30, 2025)
Motion to StrikeDenied
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., ex rel.
JESSICA PENELOW and CHRISTINE
This matter comes before the Court upon Defendant Janssen Products, LP’s (“Janssen”) Motion to Strike the testimony of Israel Shaked and Ian Dew pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, (ECF No. 402).
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Opinion, and for other good cause shown, IT IS on this 30th day of January 2025, ORDERED that Janssen’s Motion to Strike the testimony of Israel Shaked and Ian Dew (ECF No. 402) is DENIED.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 491

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 491 (D.N.J. Nov. 20, 2024)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 483

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 483 (D.N.J. Oct. 29, 2024)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 477

Document UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, 3:12-cv-07758, No. 477 (D.N.J. Oct. 10, 2024)

cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 3 4 5 ... >>