Appeals court throws out $106m ruling, ending Colibri’s heart valve patent case against Medtronic
Medtronic has successfully overturned a massive $106.5 million patent verdict after a US appeals court ruled its rival, Colibri Heart Valve, could not use the doctrine of equivalents to press its infringement claim.
In a stunning win for the medtech titan, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled on 18 July 2025 that Colibri’s legal manoeuvre was invalid due to the way it had altered its patent application during the approval process. The decision effectively ends a high-stakes dispute that had revolved around the method Medtronic uses to guide surgeons in implanting artificial heart valves.
Jones Day led the legal team for Medtronic, with seasoned appellate partner Greg Castanias at the helm. He was supported by patent litigation specialist Jennifer Swize and associates Joe Farley and Kelly Holt Rodriguez. Additional representation came from DLA Piper’s trial lawyers Mark D. Fowler and Stanley Joseph Panikowski.
The legal battle began when Colibri alleged that Medtronic’s valve implantation method infringed on its patented process. Originally, Colibri applied to protect two methods—one requiring the valve to be pushed from a sheath, and another where the sheath was retracted. However, after the US patent examiner rejected the retraction method over inadequate written support, Colibri dropped it.
Despite this, Colibri returned years later with a fresh argument. At trial, it abandoned claims of literal infringement and instead leaned solely on the doctrine of equivalents—a legal doctrine allowing for protection of methods that are “substantially the same” as those patented. It claimed that Medtronic’s mixed method, involving both pushing and retracting, was close enough to constitute infringement.
Embed from Getty ImagesThe Federal Circuit disagreed. The court determined that because Colibri had explicitly removed the retraction method from its patent application during prosecution, it could not now argue that same method—or anything substantially similar—was protected under the doctrine of equivalents.
In a strongly worded decision, the court reversed the district court’s prior refusal to grant judgment as a matter of law, effectively clearing Medtronic of all infringement claims.
The ruling is a major blow to Colibri, a Colorado-based company that had hoped to collect damages of over $100 million. Its legal team was led by Jeffrey A. Lamken of MoloLamken in Washington DC, supported by appellate litigators Michael Gregory Pattillo Jr, Catherine Martinez, and associate Walter H. Hawes IV. Bartlit Beck partners Steven Derringer, Meg E. Fasulo, Matthew R. Ford, and Katherine E. Rhoades, as well as Denver-based John Hughes and Taylor James Kelson, also represented Colibri.
This victory marks the second major appellate win in as many days for Jones Day. Just 24 hours earlier, the same lead partner, Greg Castanias, had successfully overturned a $20 million trademark and design patent infringement verdict for four apparel companies accused by Cozy Comfort of copying their wearable blankets and hooded sweatshirts.
For Medtronic, the reversal is more than just financial—it clears the company’s name and preserves the integrity of its heart valve guidance methods. For Colibri, it marks the collapse of a long-running legal fight that now ends in defeat, with no damages and no further claim.
.jpg){kind=link}
