X
<

Edwards Lifesciences Gains Ground on Approvals, Analyst Ratings

PART:
1 2 3
Part 3
Edwards Lifesciences Gains Ground on Approvals, Analyst Ratings PART 3 OF 3

Edwards Lifesciences Wins a Patent Case against Neovasc

Patent case against Neovasc

On June 16, 2017, a German court awarded “co-entitlement” rights to Edwards Lifesciences’ (EW) subsidiary CardiAQ Valve to the Tiara European patent application of Neovasc. The patent case was filed by CardiAQ, which claimed ownership rights to Neovasc’s patent application in Europe for its Tiara mitral valve replacement technology. Edwards Lifesciences had acquired CardiAQ in 2014, and the lawsuit was pending at the time.

Neovasc stock fell ~6% following the judgment. However, Edwards Lifesciences witnessed a rise in its stock price. Such events also impact ETFs such as the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO), which holds ~0.12% of its total holdings in EW.

Edwards Lifesciences Wins a Patent Case against Neovasc

Interested in BDX? Don't miss the next report.

Receive e-mail alerts for new research on BDX

Success! You are now receiving e-mail alerts for new research. A temporary password for your new Market Realist account has been sent to your e-mail address.

Success! has been added to your Ticker Alerts.

Success! has been added to your Ticker Alerts. Subscriptions can be managed in your user profile.

Other major players in the medical device industry such as Boston Scientific (BSX), Becton, Dickison & Company (BDX), and Medtronic (MDT) are also exposed to litigation risk and are involved in a number of patent lawsuits. Litigation risk is an inherent characteristic of this industry.

Neovasc-Edwards lawsuit status

Edwards Lifesciences’ (EW) has received ~$112 million in total damages in three separate judgments related to the same case. In May 2016, a jury awarded $70 million to CardiAQ. In November 2016, a Massachusetts federal judge enhanced the damages and added $21 million. In January, a $21 million judgment was added by a Boston federal judge. However, Neovasc has defended its position and claims the case in Germany is without merit.

Neovasc said in a June 16 statement, “Pending the outcome of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Neovasc, in consultation with its European and North American legal advisors, will vigorously defend its position that the case in Germany is without merit and will explore all options regarding the appellate process.”

Neovasc is pursuing an expedited appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are scheduled for August, and a ruling is expected by the end of the year.

X

Please select a profession that best describes you: