Medical Devices

Intellectual Property Counseling and Prosecution

Key Contacts


  • For a publicly traded medical device company, we successfully obtained a patent term extension for a transplant device and have filed requests for patent term extension for two other transplant devices. For the same client, we have served as a key counselor for more than 20 years, including developing a portfolio of more than 100 US patents.
  • Represented a medical device startup in the evaluation and licensing of technology to a large hospital system, including alignment of the technology with the IP portfolio and risk assessment of the product under development.
  • Provide ongoing IP diligence related to potential acquisitions and investments for ZOLL Medical Corporation, a medical device and software company.
  • Offer strategic patent advice to Columbia University and manage the worldwide prosecution for about 2,300 patent applications for Columbia’s Morningside and Medical Center campuses, including prosecuting applications in a wide variety of high-tech, medical device and pharmaceutical areas.
  • Obtained a complete victory for ZOLL Medical Corporation by securing a voluntary dismissal with prejudice of a patent infringement case seeking damages and injunctive relief involving ZOLL’s defibrillators and monitoring devices.
  • Ongoing representation of Medtronic for over 15 years in various litigation, appellate, transactional, and investigative matters, including winning Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures in the Supreme Court, obtaining multiple victories before the Federal Circuit, and getting a jury verdict against Globus Medical in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
  • Obtained a complete victory for a publicly traded medical technology company when the court granted summary judgment of non-infringement in one of its most important competitor litigations.
  • Prevented institution of three IPRs filed against key patents held by a large medical device company directed to endovascular stent grafts.
  • Successfully represented Becton Dickinson against a key competitor in a global multi-patent litigation, including in the District of Delaware, and in several concurrent IPRs challenging the asserted patents targeting core portfolio products, resulting in a favorable settlement for the client.
  • Obtained a reversal of a Patent Examiner’s rejection in an ex parte appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for claims directed to core technology for Brixton Biosciences.
  • Represented Smith & Nephew in IPRs challenging patents relating to knee implants and suture anchors, obtaining a favorable final written decision and Smith & Nephew successfully settled a related district court case after the final written decision.


Unless you are an existing client, before communicating with WilmerHale by e-mail (or otherwise), please read the Disclaimer referenced by this link.(The Disclaimer is also accessible from the opening of this website). As noted therein, until you have received from us a written statement that we represent you in a particular manner (an "engagement letter") you should not send to us any confidential information about any such matter. After we have undertaken representation of you concerning a matter, you will be our client, and we may thereafter exchange confidential information freely.

Thank you for your interest in WilmerHale.