Apotex inc. v. Janssen inc. et al., 2023 FC 216 (Abiraterone*)
Justice Southcott - 2023-02-14
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
This decision relates to motions brought by the Defendants, together, Janssen, in three actions under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. In each action, the Plaintiff or Plaintiffs (Apotex Inc. [Apotex] in Court File T-607-21 [the Apotex Action]; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. [together, DRL] in Court File T-1168-21 [the DRL Action]; and Pharmascience Inc. [PMS] in Court File T-732-22 [the PMS Action]) claim damages for lost sales of abiraterone acetate against the Defendants. ... For the reasons explained in greater detail below, each of the motions is granted in part. Based on the applicable test and considering the discretionary factors under Rule 233, I find that Janssen should receive most, but not all, of the documentary production it requests in each action. I also find that Janssen has not satisfied the test under Rule 238, applicable to a motion for non-party discovery, as it has failed to demonstrate that it would be unfair not to allow it an opportunity to conduct such discoveries.
Decision relates to:
- T-1168-21 - DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES LTD. et al v. JANSSEN INC, et al
- T-607-21 - Apotex Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et Al.
- T-732-22 - PHARMASCIENCE INC. v. Janssen Inc. et Al.