In May 2007, the New York State Attorney General issued a subpoena seeking information relating to the marketing and safety of PROCRIT®. The Company has responded to these requests. In September 2005, the Company received a subpoena from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Massachusetts, seeking docu- ments related to sales and marketing of eight drugs to Omnicare, Inc., (Omnicare) a manager of pharmaceutical benefits for long- term care facilities. The Company’s subsidiaries involved responded to the subpoena. Several employees of the Company’s pharmaceuti- cal subsidiaries were subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury in connection with this investigation. In April 2009, the Company was served with the complaints in two civil qui tam cases related to marketing of prescription drugs to Omnicare. On January 15, 2010, the government filed a complaint intervening in the cases. The complaint asserts claims under the federal False Claims Act and a related state law claim in connection with the marketing of several drugs to Omnicare. The complaints allege that Johnson & Johnson provided Omnicare with rebates and other alleged kickbacks, and in so doing, caused Omnicare to file false claims with Medicaid and other government programs. Subsequently, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Virginia, and Kentucky, and the States of California and Indiana intervened in the action. The Company’s motion to dis- miss the government’s and relators’ complaints, the government’s and relators’ oppositions, and the Company’s reply brief have been filed. A hearing on the Company’s motion to dismiss was held on October 7, 2010. The court has not ruled on the motion. In April 2007, the Company received two subpoenas from the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Delaware. The sub- poenas seek documents and information relating to nominal pricing agreements. For purposes of the subpoenas, nominal pricing agree- ments are defined as agreements under which the Company agreed to provide a pharmaceutical product for less than ten percent of the Average Manufacturer Price for the product. The Company responded to these requests. In March 2008, the Company received a letter request from the Attorney General of the State of Michigan. The request seeks documents and information relating to nominal price transactions. The Company responded to the request. In June 2008, the Company received a subpoena from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts relating to the marketing of biliary stents by the Company’s Cordis subsidiary. Cordis is cooperating in responding to the subpoena. A False Claims Act complaint was filed in Dallas relating to similar issues. The U.S. Department of Justice and several states have declined to intervene at this time. A motion to dismiss the Texas qui tam case is pending. In November 2005, a lawsuit was filed under seal against the Company, along with codefendants McKesson Corporation and Omnicare, Inc., by a former employee in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, United States ex rel. Scott Bartz v. Ortho McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., et al. After investi- gation, the United States declined to intervene. The case was subse- quently unsealed, and the Company was served with the operative complaint on January 3, 2011. The complaint alleges that Defen- dants engaged in various improper transactions that were allegedly designed to report false prescription drug prices to the federal gov- ernment in order to reduce the Company’s Medicaid rebate obliga- tions. The complaint further alleges that the Company improperly retaliated against the Plaintiff for having raised these allegations internally. The complaint alleges a variety of causes of action under the federal False Claims Act and corresponding state and local statutes. The Company has not yet responded to the complaint, but anticipates filing a motion to dismiss. In April 2009, the Company received a HIPPA subpoena from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts (Boston) seek- ing information regarding the Company’s financial relationship with several psychiatrists. The Company has responded to this request. In April 2009, Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc. (OCD) received a grand jury subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, requesting documents and information for the period beginning September 1, 2000 through the present, pertaining to an investigation of alleged violations of the antitrust laws in the blood reagents industry. The Company complied with the subpoena. In November 2010, the Antitrust Division provided notice that it has closed its investigation. In the weeks following the public announce- ment that OCD had received a subpoena from the Antitrust Division, multiple class action complaints were filed. The various cases were consolidated for pre-trial purposes in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In May 2009, the New Jersey Attorney General issued a sub- poena to DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., seeking information regarding the financial interest of clinical investigators who performed clinical studies for DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. and DePuy Spine, Inc. DePuy Orthopaedics has responded to these requests. In May 2010, the Company received a letter from the United States House of Representatives’ Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (Committee) requesting information and documents regarding the April 2010 recall of various infants’ and children’s liquid products by McNeil Consumer Healthcare Division of McNEIL-PPC, Inc. (McNeil Consumer Healthcare). The Company produced documents and other information in response to these requests. In May 2010, the Committee conducted a public hearing. Thereafter, the Company received additional information requests from the Committee, including requests regarding the recall of certain Motrin products by McNeil Consumer Healthcare. The Company produced documents and other information in response to these requests. The Committee held another public hearing on September 30, 2010, and the Company continues to cooperate fully with the Committee’s ongoing information requests. In February 2006, the Company received a subpoena from the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) requesting docu- ments relating to the participation by several Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries in the United Nations Iraq Oil for Food Program. The subsidiaries are cooperating with the SEC and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). In February 2007, the Company voluntarily disclosed to the DOJ and the SEC that subsidiaries outside the United States are believed to have made improper payments in connection with the sale of medical devices in two small-market countries, which payments may fall within the jurisdiction of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). In the course of continuing dialogues with the agencies, other issues potentially rising to the level of FCPA violations in additional markets have been brought to the attention of the agencies by the Company. The Company has provided and will continue to provide additional information to the DOJ and SEC, and will cooperate with the agencies’ reviews of these matters. Law enforcement agencies of a number of other countries are also pursuing investigations of matters voluntarily disclosed by the Company to the DOJ and SEC. Discussions are underway in an effort to resolve these matters, and the Iraq Oil for Food matter referenced above, but whether agreement can be reached, and on what terms, is uncertain. JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2010 ANNUAL REPORT 70