Boston Scientific Closes $75M Purchase Of Advanced Biological Tissue Business
Less than two weeks after announcing a $75 million cash acquisition for Neovasc’s advanced biological tissue business, Boston Scientific said on Tuesday that it had closed the deal.
As part of the sale, Marlborough, Massachusetts-based Boston Scientific also bought a 15 percent stake in Neovasc. The company now owns nearly 12 million Neovasc common shares, which it purchased for 60 cents each.
Boston Scientific, one of Minnesota’s largest employers with over 7,100 in-state workers, said it would waste no time in integrating the manufacturing assets and biologic tissue capabilities it gained from Neovasc into its current operations.
“The vertically integrated operational capabilities resulting from this acquisition will strengthen our structural heart pipeline and immediately benefit our Lotus valve platform,” said Ed Mackey, executive vice president of operations at Boston Scientific, during the medical device company’s acquisition announcement on December 2.
The company’s “highly anticipated” Lotus Edge Heart Valve System received market approval in Europe in September.
Medical professionals, such as Ian Meredith of Melbourne-based hospital MonashHeart, have called the Lotus device a “unique and valuable” tool in treating aortic stenosis, a condition where the body’s largest artery, the aorta, is narrowed and blood flow is reduced.
Approval investigations for the Lotus device are still ongoing in the U.S. and Japan, although Mackey said the company is anticipating a late 2017 American launch.
Meanwhile, Boston Scientific believes the addition of British Columbia-based Neovasc’s operations and capabilities will help with the manufacture of Lotus valves, as well as with future heart valve technologies.
Patent infringement spat
In other news, Boston Scientific hit Nevro Corporation with a countersuit on Wednesday.
Redwood City, California-based Nevro was first to file a suit in late November, claiming Boston Scientific has infringed on patents related to two of the company’s spinal cord stimulation systems.
“Intellectual property is the basis for innovation in health sciences given the long development timelines, investment, and risk required to bring meaningful advances to market,” Nevro CEO Rami Elghandour said in prepared remarks at the time. “We are committed to ensuring continued innovation in health sciences by protecting our intellectual property.”
Boston Scientific’s countersuit arrives exactly two weeks after Nevro’s filing. Court documents form the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California state Boston Scientific’s claim that Nevro was the one who actually infringed. Furthermore, Boston Scientific states that one of the devices Nevro claims the company had infringed upon takes intellectual property that belongs to Boston Scientific.
Both companies are suing for unspecified damages and attorney’s fees, as well as preliminary and permanent injunctive relief after further infringement.