Edwards Secures Preliminary Injunction Against Medtronic

| Printer friendly version

On April 11, 2014, according to a press release, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware issued a preliminary injunction barring Medtronic, Inc. from selling its CoreValve TAVI product to most new customers in the U.S.  This ruling is the latest installment in a patent dispute between Medtronic and Edwards Lifesciences Corp. involving transcatheter heart valve technology.  According to Bloomberg, this developing market is expected to reach $3 billion a year.  In 2011, Edwards received FDA approval for its Sapien transcatheter aortic valve, which was the first approved transcatheter aortic valve in the U.S. until the CoreValve system was approved in January 2014.

In 2010, a jury found that the CoreValve device infringed Edwards’ U.S. Pat. No. 5,411,552 to Andersen et al. (the “Andersen patent”) and awarded Edwards $73 million in damages.  The verdict was upheld on on appeal, and last October the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review that decision. In December 2011, Edwards filed an application for patent term extension on the Andersen patent. Edwards’ petition noted that the patent was due to expire on May 2, 2012, and requested an extension of 1,757 days based on the FDA regulatory review period of the Sapien valve, such that the new requested extended expiration date would be February 22, 2017. The USPTO has not yet made a final determination of the length of the patent term extension, but has granted multiple interim patent term extensions, the latest of which extends the Andersen patent’s term until May 2, 2015.

A NASDAQ article states that although the court believed that “CoreValve ‘is a safer device’ and produces ‘better outcomes with a lower risk of death,’” patients’ needs must be balanced against the public interest in enforcing patent rights.  The article states, however, that Medtronic will still be allowed to sell the CoreValve for patients who are not candidates for Edwards devices.  The injunction is scheduled to go into effect seven business days from the April 11th ruling.  Medtronic has already filed a Notice of Appeal.

Allyson Brown
Allyson Brown is an associate in our Orange County office. She specializes in intellectual property law, with an emphasis on patent prosecution and litigation related to medical devices and biotechnology. During law school, she served as an Articles Editor for the Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law.
Click here to read full bio
View all posts published by Allyson Brown »

Leave a Reply

By using this blog, you agree and understand that no information is being provided in the context of any attorney-client relationship. You further agree and understand that nothing herein is intended to be legal advice. This blog is solely informational in nature, and is not intended as, and should not be used as, a substitute for competent legal advice from a retained and licensed attorney in your state. Knobbe Martens LLP makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the information in this blog. Knobbe Martens LLP will not be liable for any injury or damages relating to your use of, or access to, any such information. Knobbe Martens LLP undertakes no obligation to correct or update information on this blog, which may be incorrect or become incorrect or out of date over time. Knobbe Martens LLP reserves the right to alter or delete content or information on the blog at any time. This blog contains links and references to other websites and publications that you may find of interest. Knobbe Martens LLP does not control, promote, endorse or otherwise have any affiliation with any other websites or publications unless those websites or publications expressly state such an affiliation. Knobbe Martens LLP further has no responsibility for, and makes no representations regarding, the content, accuracy or any other aspect of the information in such websites or publications.