We are back to the same 3 companies again, Johnson and Johnson, Boston Scientific and Abbott, same questions over “patents” and more legal expenses to pass along to consumers in the price of a stent. If these 3 could settle their differences and make some donations for charity instead of all these legal battles, that would really be nice.
These “legally patented” stents are so expensive for hospitals to stock and have available, that many hospitals stock them on “consignment” in other words they are on the shelf and the hospital does not pay until it is implanted. Take a clue here folks and think about how the ridiculous court battles continue to run this expense right up the flagpole.
Anyway I read about billions of dollars at stake and millions spent, and yet an idea to save lives and check for recalls goes nowhere, so is the interest in making money or is there any interest with involving patient safety here too? BD
Tags for Use in Healthcare – Medical Stents, Medications - One Scan Away From Safety Information in Real Time
Johnson & Johnson isn't the only party appealing a Delaware judge's ruling that four of its patents are invalid, as Boston Scientific Corp. cross-appeals despite winning the case's last round.
Boston Scientific Corp. (NYSE:BSX) may have won the most recent round in its stent patents war with Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ), but that didn't stop the Natick, Mass.-based devices giant from cross-appealing a Delaware judge's ruling.
The patents in question are at the heart of complicated legal wrangling involving Boston Scientific, its New Brunswick, N.J.-based rival and competitor/partner Abbott (NYSE:ABT). The dispute centers around Boston Scientific's Promus stent, a private-label version of Abbott's Xience V stent, and the JNJ subsidiary Cordis Corp.'s Cypher.