Zimmer sues Stryker as second patent battle looms
Medical device companies Stryker and Zimmer will face off in another patent battle, this time surrounding technology used to dispose of surgical fluid waste.
In a complaint filed at the US District Court for the District of Delaware yesterday, August 8, Zimmer, alongside its subsidiary Dornoch Medical, accused Stryker of infringing its patent, US number RE44,920.
The lawsuit comes just months after both companies faced off at the US Supreme Court in a dispute about how enhanced damages should be calculated for victorious parties in patent lawsuits.
The patent in the latest case, called “High volume liquid waste collection and disposal system”, is directed to waste management solutions for operating rooms and is used in Zimmer’s products including its Transposal UltrafleX.
According to Zimmer, Stryker has “made, used, sold, imported, and/or offered for sale” products in the US including the Neptune 2 and Neptune 3 waste management systems, both of which infringe the ‘920 patent.
“Stryker and Stryker Sales actively induce infringement of the patent by designing the Neptune 2 and Neptune 3 systems such that they infringe the patent and by directing, promoting, and encouraging the use of its Neptune 2 and Neptune 3 systems by third parties,” Zimmer claimed in its complaint.
The Neptune 2 System, according to Zimmer, is “intended to be used in the operating room, pathology, surgical centres, and doctor’s offices to collect and dispose of surgical fluid waste as well as collect smoke generated from electrocautery or laser devices”.
The complaint adds that both companies are “direct and active competitors” in the “two-competitor field of fluid waste management”.
Zimmer is seeking a trial by jury, an injunction preventing Stryker from further infringement as well as damages and attorneys’ fees.
The complaint comes following both companies’ appearance at the Supreme Court in June when the court ruled that the two-part test for determining whether infringement has been wilful was too rigid.
Under the two-part system, courts first assess whether a patentee can show by “clear and convincing” evidence that an infringer’s actions are objectively unreasonable.
Once answered in the affirmative, the court conducts a de novo review of the infringer’s defence. If the defence is deemed insufficient, the damages award can be tripled.
Stryker secured a $210 million award in 2013 after the US District Court for the Western District of Michigan ruled that Zimmer had wilfully infringed Stryker’s patented surgical wand, used to clean wounds during orthopedic procedures.
But the award was reduced to $70 million after the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said Zimmer’s defence was reasonable.
Stryker then appealed against the ruling to the Supreme Court, which vacated the decision.
