Intuitive (Sunnyvale, California) maintains that it is not using its soft-tissue surgical robotics dominance to prevent third parties from servicing its EndoWrist instruments.
Yesterday, Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of U.S. District Court in Northern California denied Intuitive’s motion for judgment as a matter of law, rejecting the company’s argument that Glendale, Illinois–based Surgical Instrument Service Co. (SIS) had failed to show that obtaining authorization from Intuitive to service its surgical robotic tools was illusory.
Intuitive President Dave Rosa then resumed testifying. According to Law360, Rosa argued that the robotic surgery giant does not hold a monopoly because its da Vinci robotic systems compete with traditional and laparoscopic surgery options.
Today, Martínez-Olguín is scheduled to hold a hearing on whether to certify a separate antitrust lawsuit filed by health providers as class action. The health providers presently in the suit include Larkin Community Hospital, Franciscan Alliance, and King County Public Hospital District No. 1 (doing business as Valley Medical Center).
Filed in 2021, SIS’s lawsuit complaint accused Intuitive of using a monopoly in the multiport soft-tissue surgical robotics space to compel health providers to purchase new EndoWrist instruments due to programmed usage limits and contractual terms that prohibit third-party repairs.
According to SIS, it could service an EndoWrist at 55–70% of the cost of buying an EndoWrist from Intuitive. As a result, it could save health provider customers tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
SIS said in its complaint: “Unfortunately for health care providers and patients, Intuitive became aware of SIS’s repair program and its relationships with certain health care providers. Intuitive immediately embarked on a scorched-earth pressure campaign to put SIS out of the EndoWrist repair business. And it worked. Faced with coercive threats from the monopoly provider of robotic surgical systems to effectively disable their expensive surgical robots, all of the health care providers backed out of SIS’s EndoWrist repair program.”
SIS seeks damages and injunctive relief from the court.
Intuitive responded that SIS’s repairs relied on another company’s circuit board to alter the EndoWrist in a way the FDA did not clear.
The response to the complaint said: “The resulting inferior and unlawful products — still bearing Intuitive’s trademarks — carry significant risk not only to Intuitive customers but also to the patients on whom they are used to operate.”
Intuitive argued that its EndoWrist use limits exist for a good reason: “Consistent with industry standards and best practices, and as required by the FDA, Intuitive has conducted rigorous testing and identified maximum use limits for EndoWrists. The maximum use limits, built into the EndoWrists, [ensure] that instruments perform safely and reliably. Once the limit is reached, the instrument will no longer be operational, requiring that it be replaced to avoid putting patients at risk.”
