Johnson and Johnson 2014 Annual Report Download - page 75

In September 2011, Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Inc. and McNeil Consumer Healthcare Division of Johnson &
Johnson Inc. received a Notice of Civil Claim filed by Nick Field in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada (the
BC Civil Claim). The BC Civil Claim is a putative class action brought on behalf of persons who reside in British Columbia
and who purchased during the period between September 20, 2001 and in or about December 2010 one or more various
McNeil infants’ or children’s over-the-counter medicines that were manufactured at the Fort Washington facility. The BC
Civil Claim alleges that the defendants violated the BC Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, and other
Canadian statutes and common laws, by selling medicines that were allegedly not safe and/or effective or did not comply
with Canadian Good Manufacturing Practices. The class certification hearing is scheduled for October 2015.
In August 2014, United States Customs and Border Protection issued a Penalty Notice against Janssen Ortho LLC
(Janssen Ortho), assessing penalties for the alleged improper classification of darunavir ethanolate (PREZISTA®)in
connection with its importation into the United States. In October 2014, Janssen Ortho submitted a Petition for Relief in
response to the Penalty Notice.
Johnson & Johnson or its subsidiaries are also parties to a number of proceedings brought under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund, and comparable state, local or
foreign laws in which the primary relief sought is the cost of past and/or future remediation.
Shareholder Derivative Action
In September 2011, two shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey by Donovan Spamer and The George Leon Family Trust naming current and former directors of Johnson &
Johnson as defendants and Johnson & Johnson as the nominal defendant. These lawsuits allege that the defendants
breached their fiduciary duties in their decisions with respect to the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer during
the period from 2008 through 2011, and that the defendants made misleading statements in the Company’s annual proxy
statements. Both of these lawsuits were voluntarily dismissed without prejudice, but a similar lawsuit, The George Leon
Family Trust v. Coleman, was refiled in July 2012. That lawsuit sought a variety of relief, including monetary damages,
injunctive relief, and corporate governance reforms. In June 2013, the Board of Directors of Johnson & Johnson (the
Board) received a report prepared by special, independent counsel to the Board, which investigated the allegations
contained in the derivative actions filed by Donovan Spamer and by The George Leon Family Trust, and in several
shareholder demand letters that the Board received in 2011 and 2012 raising similar issues. The report recommended
that Johnson & Johnson reject the shareholder demands and take whatever steps are necessary or appropriate to secure
dismissal of the derivative litigation. The Board unanimously adopted the report’s recommendations.
In September 2013, Johnson & Johnson moved to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment in The George
Leon Family Trust v. Coleman, based upon the Board’s determination. In October 2013, the plaintiff in the Leon litigation
filed an amended complaint and Johnson & Johnson moved to dismiss the amended complaint or, in the alternative, for
summary judgment, based upon the Board’s determination. In June 2014, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of
Johnson & Johnson.
Johnson & Johnson 2014 Annual Report •65