Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves Takes Over Several DNJ Hatch-Waxman Cases

What You Need to Know

Key takeaway #1

A CIT judge in a major ANDA venue: A Court of International Trade judge sitting by designation has taken over Hatch-Waxman cases involving 10 drugs in the District of New Jersey.

Key takeaway #2

New claim narrowing for NJ: Her model ANDA scheduling order imposes claim and prior art narrowing not previously required in NJ, with no summary judgment in ANDA cases — potentially affecting forum selection vis-à-vis Delaware.

The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) is having a big year. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s affirmance of the CIT tariff ruling may be at the top of the headlines, the CIT is also making its mark on Hatch-Waxman pharmaceutical litigation. In late April 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (DNJ) reassigned numerous Hatch-Waxman patent infringement cases involving 10 different drugs to Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves of the CIT, sitting by designation in the District of New Jersey. The cases currently assigned to Judge Choe-Groves relate to several different drug products, including LYNPARZA® (olaparib), RADICAVA ORS® (edaravone), NEXLETOL®/NEXLIZET® (bempedoic acid), ZEJULA® (niraparib), QULIPTA® (atogepant), UBRELVY® (ubrogepant), CREXONT® (carbidopa and levodopa), EVRYSDI® (risdiplam), SUFLAVE® (polyethylene glycol 3350, sodium sulfate, potassium chloride, magnesium sulfate, and sodium chloride for oral solution), and CAPLYTA® (lumateperone).

The assignment is notable in the Hatch-Waxman context. The District of New Jersey remains one of the principal venues for abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) litigation, along with the District of Delaware. Visiting judges have been previously deployed in other busy patent dockets, especially in Delaware. In fact, Judge Choe-Groves has sat by designation in Delaware since 2023, where she has been assigned 55 cases to date, including two new assignments in May 2026. She also previously sat by designation in three cases in the District of Idaho. Judge Choe-Groves is not the first visiting judge to sit by designation in patent cases in the District of New Jersey, as Judge Joshua D. Wolson of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was assigned to a patent case in the district in 2025 and Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg, also of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, was assigned four Hatch-Waxman cases in the district in 2019.  However, Judge Choe-Groves is the only visiting judge currently handling patent cases in the district and is carrying a much more substantial Hatch-Waxman caseload than prior visiting judges in the district.

Judge Choe-Groves’s New Jersey standing order and model ANDA scheduling order provide an initial picture of how the cases she has been assigned in New Jersey may be managed. Interestingly, like some Delaware judges, her model ANDA scheduling order requires standard narrowing of asserted claims and prior art, requirements not previously imposed in New Jersey, which has followed local patent rules specific to Hatch-Waxman litigation that were first set in 2011. Under Judge Choe-Groves’s case narrowing protocol, which appears to follow the scheme set by Judge Colm Connolly in Delaware, plaintiffs are generally limited at the outset to 10 claims per patent and 32 total claims, and defendants are generally limited to 12 prior art references per patent and 30 total references. After claim construction, those limits narrow further to five claims per patent and 16 total claims, and six prior art references per patent and 20 total references. The standing order further states that Judge Choe-Groves will generally construe “a maximum of 10 claims” in a patent case, though in context this limitation likely refers to 10 disputed claim terms rather than 10 patent claims. Consistent with Judge Connolly’s practice in Delaware, the model ANDA scheduling order also provides that the court will not entertain summary judgment motions in ANDA cases.  The standing order further states that some proceedings may occur by videoconference, and some in-person hearings may be held at the CIT in New York.

The takeaway is practical. Parties with DNJ Hatch-Waxman matters now assigned to Judge Choe-Groves should review her standing order and model ANDA scheduling order carefully and watch for any case-specific procedures entered in reassigned cases. New Jersey’s Hatch-Waxman-specific local rules currently have early contentions deadlines but no deadlines for case narrowing by the patentee, making it an attractive district for patentees with large portfolios of patents to file suit. Litigants should watch closely to see how closely Judge Choe-Groves applies her standing order on case narrowing, which may set new precedent for New Jersey and change its overall attractiveness for this category of Hatch-Waxman suits over neighboring Delaware.