Mark Barry, M.D. has filed two separate suits against SeaSpine and Alphatec alleging several counts of patent infringement for his spine patents.
Spine Doc Sues SeaSpine and Alphatec Over Spine Patents
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary#alphatec#seaspine#markbarry
Dr. Barry filed the lawsuits in June 2021. The lawsuit against SeaSpine names SeaSpine Holdings Corp., SeaSpine Orthopedics Corp., and SeaSpine, Inc. The lawsuit against Alphatec names Alphatec Spine, Inc. and Alphatec Holdings, Inc.
The lawsuits involve United States patent numbers 7,670,358; 8,361,121; 9,339,301; 9,668,787; and 9,668,788. The patents are separately entitled “System and Method for Aligning Vertebrae in the Amelioration of Aberrant Spinal Column Deviation Conditions.”
The complaint against SeaSpine focuses on SeaSpine’s Daytona™ Deformity System, the Daytona® Small Stature Spinal System, and “any other SeaSpine instruments manufactured, sold, distributed, loaned, consigned, or otherwise used to derotate en bloc multiple levels of vertebrae.”
The complaint against Alphatec focuses on Alphatec’s Zodiac® Deformity System, Arsenal Deformity Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis System, and “any other Alphatec instruments manufactured, sold, distributed, loaned, consigned, or otherwise used to derotate en bloc multiple levels of vertebrae.”
In both cases, Dr. Barry has requested a jury trial. He is seeking compensatory damages, treble damages, costs and interest on the compensatory damages, and attorneys’ fees.
At the time of this article, neither SeaSpine nor Alphatec has filed a response.
This is not the first time Dr. Barry has waged a legal battle against a medical technology company over his spine patents. In 2017, Dr. Barry separately sued Globus Medical, Inc. and various DePuy companies alleging patent infringement. Globus and Dr. Barry later settled. The DePuy case is still pending.
In 2014, Dr. Barry sued Medtronic plc alleging patent infringement. The case involved two of the patents at issue in the current litigation, patents 7,670,358 and 8,361,121.
At trial, Dr. Barry prevailed against Medtronic and was awarded more than $20 million. For OTW’s coverage of Dr. Barry’s previous victory over Medtronic, see “Barry’s Medtronic Award Upped 20% Due to ‘Reckless’ Copying,” “Spine Doc Wins $20.3 Million Against Medtronic,” and “Medtronic Patent Suit Offers Marking Lesson for Surgeons.”
React:
Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.