Janssen Inc. v. The Minister of Health
Other action filed 26 Jul 2023 in the Canada Federal Court of Appeal and closed 21 Nov 2023, with CA3113837C asserted. Recorded basis of termination: appeal dismissed.
Case record
- Patent involved
- CA3113837C
- Application no.
- CA3113837
- Case no.
- A-192-23
- Verdict cause
- Other action
- Court
- Canada Federal Court of Appeal
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- None recorded
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- Other
- Filed – Closed
- 26 Jul 2023 – 21 Nov 2023
- Duration
- 118 days
- Basis of termination
- Appeal Dismissed
- Products & marks
- SAFE AND EFFECTIVE METHOD OF TREATING ULCERATIVE COLITIS WITH ANTI-IL12/IL23 ANTIBODY
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Safe and effective method of treating ulcerative colitis with Anti-il12/il23 antibody
Described are methods and compositions for clinical proven safe and effective treatment of ulcerative colitis, particularly moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis in patients who have had an inadequate response to or are intolerant of a conventional or existing therapy by intravenous and/or subcutaneous administration of an anti-IL-12/IL-23p40 antibody.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 12 Jul 2022
- Earliest priority
- 24 Sep 2018
- Est. expiry
- 24 Sep 2039
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- JEWEL JOHANNS · KATHERINE LI · COLLEEN MARANO · RICHARD STRAUSS · HONGYAN ZHANG · OMONIYI ADEDOKUN · CHRISTOPHER O’BRIEN · KIMBERLY SHIELDS-TUTTLE
- Classification
- A61K39/395C07K14/54
Parties of record
Janssen Inc.
- Core tech
- A61K39/395C07K14/54
- Counsel
- Jordana Sanft · Sana Halwani
- Firm
- Lenczner Slaght LLP
The Minister of Health
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Elizabeth Koudys · James Schneider · Leah Bowes
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jordana Sanft | Janssen Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Sana Halwani | Janssen Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Elizabeth Koudys | The Minister of Health | Defendant |
| James Schneider | The Minister of Health | Defendant |
| Leah Bowes | The Minister of Health | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“We are not convinced that there was anything unreasonable in OSIP’s analysis in this regard. We also do not agree with Janssen’s argument that subsection 4(7) of the Regulations should be read to permit it to update the patent list by adding reference to an additional SNDS. Subsection 4(7) provides that a first person “must keep the information on the list up to date”; this subsection does not permit adding a patent to the list. We see nothing in the patent list in this case that would have engaged this provision. The information on the patent list was up to date. Janssen cannot, under the guide of keeping the information on the patent list up to date, add a different SNDS to an existing patent list. [6] It follows from the foregoing that we find no reviewable error in the Federal Court’s conclusion that OSIP’s refusal to add the patent list against SNDS 224739 was reasonable. [7] We will dismiss this appeal with costs.”
Case A-192-23 · Canada Federal Court of Appeal · closed 21 November 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case A-192-23?
A-192-23 is a patent other action brought by Janssen Inc. against The Minister of Health, filed on 26 Jul 2023 in the Canada Federal Court of Appeal. The case closed on 21 November 2023.
Which patent was asserted in A-192-23?
CA3113837C (“Safe and effective method of treating ulcerative colitis with Anti-il12/il23 antibody”), assigned to JANSSEN BIOTECH, INC., currently active. The record also lists SAFE AND EFFECTIVE METHOD OF TREATING ULCERATIVE COLITIS WITH ANTI-IL12/IL23 ANTIBODY.
How was case A-192-23 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is appeal dismissed. The termination text reads: “We are not convinced that there was anything unreasonable in OSIP’s analysis in this regard. We also do not agree with Janssen’s argument that subsection 4(7) of the Regulations should be read to permit it to update the patent list by adding reference to an additional SNDS. Subsection 4(7) provides that a first person “must keep the information on the list up to date”; this subsection does not permit adding a patent to the list. We see nothing in the patent list in this case that would have engaged this provision. The information on the patent list was up to date. Janssen cannot, under the gu
How long did case A-192-23 take?
118 calendar days, from filing on 26 Jul 2023 to closure on 21 November 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in A-192-23?
Jordana Sanft and Sana Halwani are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Janssen. Elizabeth Koudys, James Schneider and Leah Bowes appear for defendant The Minister of Health.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case A-192-23 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.