Philips Healthcare (NYSE:PHG) plans to go another round with Zoll Medical Corp. (NSDQ:ZOLL) over automated external defibrillators, suing Zoll in Washington state over a new string of allegedly infringed patents.
Philips wants a jury to issue an injunction to keep Zoll from selling its AED Plus and AED Pro devices, as well as compensation for lost sales and legal fees.
The Netherlands-based device maker first sued Zoll over AED patents in June 2010, claiming infringement of a string of 15 patents related to the devices.
Zoll responded by counter-suing over 5 of its own patents a month later, accusing Philips’ HeartStart MRx, HeartStart
XL, and HeartStart AED lines of infringement.
External defibrillators are big business for both companies. Each has touted lucrative contracts from the U.S government to supply the devices, which are used to shock the heart back to beating after a heart attack.
Zoll announced an important reimbursement win last month from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which said it wouldn’t limit reimbursement for the company’s flagship LifeVest wearable defibrillator.
The news sent Zoll shares up 30%, recouping some of the value lost when the reimbursement review was initiated.
Zoll pulled in some $111 million in 2011 in rental revenues from the LifeVest, a 57% jump compared to $70.7 million during 2010. The device is prescribed by doctors for patients who lease the product, typically for between 2 to 3 months, according to regulatory filings.
Zoll spokeswoman Diane Egan told MassDevice that the company does not comment on pending legal matters.
The Carlsbad, Calif.-based company resolved a licensing dispute in which Biomet subsidiary Cross Medical Products claimed that Alphatec breached a 2003 license agreement by failing to make royalty payments. Alphatec also settled a lawsuit filed against Biomet Inc. over alleged patent infringement.
Under the terms of the settlement, Alphatec will make an initial payment of $5 million and 13 additional payments of $1 million each made quarterly beginning August 1, 2012. The companies also exchanged covenants not to sue one another for patent infringement relating to products already on the market as of Dec. 30, 2011.
Neither parties admitted any liability in connection with the settlement. Read more
UCSF appeals InSite’s patent win
The University of Calif., San Francisco, appealed InSite Vision Inc.’s (OTC:INSV) patent win in which a panel of US Patent & Trademark Office judges ruled in favor of InSite’s AzaSite bacterial eye infection treatment.
The school claimed in 2009 that the inventions covered by the patents, "Topical treatment or prevention of ocular infections," were made by a former employee of the university "alone and without collaboration with InSite Vision." Read more