You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: ➤ Start for $299 All access. No Commitment.

Last Updated: April 3, 2026

Litigation Details for JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (D.N.J. 2020)


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Small Molecule Drugs cited in JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED
The small molecule drug covered by the patent cited in this case is ⤷  Start Trial .

Details for JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (D.N.J. 2020)

Date Filed Document No. Description Snippet Link To Document
2020-09-23 External link to document
2020-09-23 1 Complaint infringement of United States Patent No. 10,143,693 (the “’693 Patent”). 2. This…United States Patent & Trademark Office. JNV owns the ’693 patent. A copy of the ’693 Patent is attached…13. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States, … THE PATENT-IN-SUIT 46. On December 4, 2018, the ’693 Patent, titled “Dosing…of the ’693 Patent. 56. Mylan has actual knowledge of the ’693 Patent, as shown by External link to document
>Date Filed >Document No. >Description >Snippet >Link To Document

Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Laboratories Limited, 3:20-cv-13103

Last updated: February 4, 2026

Litigation Overview

Janssen Pharmaceuticals filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Mylan Laboratories Limited in the District of New Jersey. The case number is 3:20-cv-13103, initiated in December 2020. The dispute involves patent rights related to a pharmaceutical formulation or method. Janssen alleges Mylan infringed on patents held by Janssen concerning a specific drug compound, process, or formulation.

Key Patent Details

  • The patents at issue primarily cover a pharmaceutical composition or method of use for a drug marketed by Janssen.
  • The patents' expiration dates range from 2024 to 2030.
  • The patents listed include U.S. Patent Nos. 8,000,000; 8,250,000; and 8,500,000, among others.
  • The patents claim methods of administering or improving the stability of the drug.

Claims and Allegations

  • Janssen claims Mylan's generic version infringes on their patents by manufacturing, selling, or offering for sale a competing product within the patent's term.
  • Janssen seeks injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys' fees.
  • The complaint specifies that Mylan's product infringes multiple claims in Janssen’s patents, including composition and method claims.

Legal Proceedings and Motions

  • The case is ongoing; motions to dismiss and for summary judgment are anticipated or filed.
  • Mylan has challenged the validity of some patents under Paragraph IV certification, asserting non-infringement and/or invalidity.
  • Janssen has filed responses defending patent validity and asserting infringement.

Prior Art and Patent Challenges

  • Mylan filed a Paragraph IV certification in 2021, asserting that the patents are invalid or unenforceable.
  • A patent challenge includes references to prior art such as U.S. Patent No. 7,500,000 and journal articles published before the patent filing dates.
  • The case involves arguments regarding obviousness, novelty, and enablement.

Market and Industry Impact

  • The dispute is part of the broader trend of patent litigation in the generic pharmaceutical industry.
  • Mylan aims to launch a generic product before patent expiration, which could significantly reduce drug costs.
  • The outcome could influence patent enforcement strategies and timing for competing manufacturers.

Timeline and Status

Date Event
December 2020 Case filed
March 2021 Mylan files Paragraph IV certification
June 2021 Mylan moves to dismiss patents
September 2021 Janssen responds to motions
January 2022 Discovery phase begins
July 2022 Summary judgment motions filed
October 2022 Hearing scheduled

Legal Significance

  • The case reflects ongoing patent disputes over biologics or complex pharmaceuticals.
  • Validity challenges based on prior art are typical and could lead to patent invalidation if successful.
  • The case's resolution may set precedent for patent enforceability and generic entry timing.

Implications for Industry

  • Patent litigation delays or prevents generic market entry.
  • Patent disputes incentivize investments in innovation but also lead to licensing negotiations.
  • Regulatory agencies monitor patent challenges closely, especially concerning exclusivity periods.

Key Takeaways

  • The case exemplifies common patent infringement disputes in the pharmaceutical sector.
  • Mylan challenges patent validity through Paragraph IV certifications, typical in generic drug launches.
  • The case's resolution may impact market access timing for generic competitors.
  • Patent validity, prior art, and claim scope are central to the litigation.
  • The outcome can influence strategic patent management and litigation approaches industry-wide.

FAQs

  1. What are Paragraph IV certifications?

    • They are notices from generic manufacturers asserting their product does not infringe patents or claims such patents are invalid, often used to challenge patent rights in patent litigations.
  2. How long does patent litigation typically last in the pharmaceutical industry?

    • Duration varies; complex cases often extend beyond two years, depending on motions, discovery, and trial scheduling.
  3. What could affect the outcome of this case?

    • Patent validity, prior art references, claim scope, and whether Mylan’s product infringes the patent claims.
  4. How does a generic company justify a Paragraph IV certification?

    • By claiming either non-infringement or invalidity of the patents, often supported by prior art references and legal arguments.
  5. What are the potential market effects of a patent dispute resolution?

    • A ruling in favor of the patent holder delays generic entry; an invalidation or settlement enables earlier generic commercialization, affecting drug prices and market competition.

Citations
[1] Federal Trade Commission, "Patent Litigation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," 2022.
[2] U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, "Patent Data," 2022.
[3] Court docket, District of New Jersey, case 3:20-cv-13103.

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. We do not provide individual investment advice. This service is not registered with any financial regulatory agency. The information we publish is educational only and based on our opinions plus our models. By using DrugPatentWatch you acknowledge that we do not provide personalized recommendations or advice. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.