Medtronic hit with antitrust suit over surgical staplers

Massachusetts-based medical equipment maker Lexington Medical claims Medtronic locks the door on its competition through exclusionary conduct.(CN) — Medtronic has been slapped with a federal antitrust suit, accusing the global medical device manufacturer of engaging in monopolistic practices to illegally shut out its competition.The 63-page claim was brought on Thursday by Lexington Medical, a Massachusetts-based company that specializes in the sale of laparoscopic universal handle staplers, which are designed to cut and seal tissue during minimally invasive surgical procedures.The company claims that, despite their AEON Endoscopic Stapling System performing better than Medtronic’s comparable products, Medtronic has been preventing them from breaking through thanks to their restrictive agreements with client hospitals.“This case is about a monopolist that wins through exclusionary conduct what it cannot win on the merits,” Lexington argues, claiming Medtronic maintains more than 90% share of the laparoscopic stapler market.To maintain its dominance over the market, Lexington claims Medtronic tries to stop hospitals from conducting trials of rival products, uses exclusionary bundling and forces clients into longterm agreements.“The result: Hospitals stay locked into Medtronic’s portfolio for years, at the cost of higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation,” Lexington argues.The company claims the scheme came to light through another federal antitrust case brought by Applied Medical Resources Corp.In that case, Medtronic was forced to pay $382 million in damages for its unlawful monopoly over blood-vessel sealing surgical devices. Documents cited by Lexington in its Thursday lawsuit purportedly show that Medtronic specifically instructed its sales force to “communicate violation” if a hospital begins competitor trials.“Another document describes seeking to ‘eliminate the competition from getting a window that would allow for a trial,’” Lexington says. And with many hospitals relying on Medtronic’s vast library of medical devices, it can further thwart competition with bundling, according to Lexington.“Medtronic touts that this strategy makes it ‘impossible’ for a rival to close deals,” argues Lexington. “Medtronic’s bundled agreements make discounts, rebates and pricing tiers contingent on a hospital’s purchases spanning multiple product categories, including staplers, monopolar devices, advanced bipolar devices, and other surgical products. The bundled discount is not a simple volume discount on staplers. It is a portfolio-wide mechanism to protect Medtronic’s stapling share from competition.”Years-long contracts make it hard for Medtronic’s clients to go anywhere else, Lexington claims. It points to various statements by company executives like Medtronic’s chief executive Geoff Martha, who said in 2025 that the company has “very tight contracts that have been tested over time.”“A Medtronic regional vice-president likewise boasts of customers being ‘locked down for years to come,’” Lexington claims.Because of this conduct, Lexington claims its own AEON stapler can’t adequately compete with Medtronic’s despite being better. Lexington argues that one head-to-head hospital trial rated its stapler as “clinically superior” to Medtronic’s in 89% of cases.“Lexington’s AEON staplers would win on the merits," Lexington claims. “Medtronic prevents that from happening through anticompetitive conduct.”Suing under Sherman Act violations and breaches of Massachusetts antitrust law, Lexington is seeking unspecified damages and a court order that enjoins Medtronic from “entering into exclusionary and predatory agreements.”Representatives for Medtronic didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Boston.It is far from Medtronic’s first antitrust rodeo. The Minnesota-based company lost its case against Applied Medical Resources Corp. earlier this year after a jury ruled Medtronic was unlawfully bundling its LigaSure device to protect its market share. In 2010, the now-defunct CareFusion Corporation likewise claimed in a lawsuit that Medtronic was unlawfully killing competition in the vertebral fracture treatment market. That case was dismissed later that year.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads