Court / venue

D. New Jersey

2 tracked cases.

Court overview

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.N.J.) is a federal court operating within the Third Circuit, with courthouses located in Camden, Newark, and Trenton, New Jersey. The D.N.J. has become an increasingly significant venue for patent litigation. In 2024, it was the fifth most popular patent venue nationally, marking its highest ranking since 2018. The district has notably surpassed the District of Delaware as the primary hub for pharmaceutical patent litigation, handling 51% of Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) cases in 2024, compared to Delaware's 42%. Overall, in 2024, 232 patent cases were filed in New Jersey, representing a 77% year-over-year increase and the highest number since 2015.

The D.N.J. has a growing reputation as a favorable venue for patentees, particularly in pharmaceutical patent disputes. In 2023, the patentee win rate in New Jersey reached 21%, the highest in a decade, although it decreased to 2% in 2024. In contrast, Delaware's patentee win rate was 3% in both years. This shift is partly attributed to Delaware's standing orders requiring disclosure of third-party litigation funding, prompting many companies to file in New Jersey to maintain financial confidentiality. The D.N.J. is not considered a "rocket docket" in the same vein as the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), which averages 11 months from filing to trial for all civil cases. In fact, New Jersey has been characterized as one of the "Top 5 Slowest Districts for Patent Litigation" in some analyses regarding time-to-trial. While patent venue challenges under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) are strictly enforced, Federal Circuit law governs the analysis, not the regional circuit law.

The District of New Jersey has adopted specific Local Patent Rules (L. Pat. R.), which became effective on January 1, 2009, and are outlined in Local Civil Rule 9.3. These rules aim to define case theories early, streamline discovery costs, and enhance the Markman hearing process, especially in Hatch-Waxman Act cases. The L. Pat. R. mandate early and detailed disclosures regarding infringement and invalidity contentions, claim construction, and opinions of counsel, requiring parties to have completed significant preparatory work before initiating litigation. Notably, in October 2025, the court issued Standing Order 2025-04 specifically addressing "Schedule A" cases (often involving numerous defendants in IP infringement), imposing strict limits on joinder, requiring personal jurisdictional showings beyond mere online sales into New Jersey, and setting high standards for motions to seal.

Among the tracked cases, BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. v. Zydus Lifesciences Ltd is an active ANDA litigation filed in February 2026. The complaint alleges patent infringement related to Zydus's Abbreviated New Drug Application for a generic version of the drug VOXZOGO®. A second tracked case, BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. v. Unknown Defendant, is also active ANDA litigation. Recently, in April 2026, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves of the U.S. Court of International Trade was assigned numerous Hatch-Waxman patent cases in the D.N.J., sitting by designation. Her new case management procedures, including requirements for narrowing asserted claims and prior art, and a general limit of construing a maximum of 10 disputed claim terms, are expected to influence the strategic landscape for pharmaceutical patent litigation in the district.

Prominent judges on the bench, as listed on the court's website, include Chief Judge Renée Marie Bumb, and District Judges Madeline Cox Arleo, Claire C. Cecchi, Stanley R. Chesler, Katharine S. Hayden, Brian R. Martinotti, and Kevin McNulty. Magistrate Judge Stacey D. Adams has recently overseen patent cases, including a transfer motion ruling in April 2026 that emphasized strict enforcement of patent venue challenges under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Judge Brian R. Martinotti has also been involved in patent litigation, affirming decisions related to stays in cases with concurrent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings.

Judges

No judge data recorded for the 2 cases in this court yet. Cases picked up via the patent-ingest cron sometimes land without a presiding judge; the field fills in when structured docket data arrives.

Cases (2)