Edwards Lifesciences has lost a key patent battle at the European Patent Office in its long-running dispute with Meril Life Sciences. The Board of Appeal revoked patent EP 4 151 181, which protects transcatheter heart-valve technology, effectively overturning a prior decision by the Opposition Division. This ruling marks a significant setback for the US medical devices company as the case moves to the UPC Court of Appeal.
Impact on UPC Proceedings
The revocation has direct consequences for the parallel UPC proceedings, which are currently under appeal, and removes the basis for the UPC injunction. A panel at the Paris central division previously upheld the patent in amended form and banned Meril from selling infringing products, with an exemption only for prosthetic heart valves over 30mm in diameter. Meril appealed that decision, and the UPC Court of Appeal scheduled an oral hearing for 13 May 2027. With the EPO’s decision, the foundation for that injunction has been removed.
Legal teams represented both companies in these proceedings. Edwards relied on patent attorneys Bernhard Thum and Jonas Weickert from Thum &Partner for the EPO opposition and the UPC proceedings. Meril was advised by Jonathan Stafford and Gregory Carty-Hornsby from Marks & Clerk during the EPO phase and has retained Hogan Lovells Cadwalader partner Andreas von Falck for the UPC Court of Appeal.
Rulings in the Dispute
Edwards has seen mixed results in parallel cases before the UPC. In July 2025, the Nordic-Baltic regional division upheld EP 3 769 722 in amended form without a successful appeal from Meril.
The case is one of the oldest and largest ongoing at the UPC. While Meril did not appeal the Nordic-Baltic ruling, the EPO decision on EP 4 151 181 changes the environment of the broader litigation, creating a new challenge for Edwards in its effort to protect its valve technology across Europe.
In late 2025, the UPC Court of Appeal upheld both the Paris central division’s decision to maintain Edwards’ EP 3 646 825 in amended form and the Munich local division’s injunction against Meril’s Octacore THV device, and in April 2025, the Munich local division also upheld EP 3 669 828 and found infringement by Meril’s Myval and Navigator delivery system. In April 2025, the Munich local division also upheld EP 3 669 828 and found infringement by Meril’s Myval and Navigator delivery system. Meril did not appeal.
The firm has also been representing Edwards together with UK firm Powell Gilbert in the UPC proceedings at the Paris central division and before the Court of Appeal.
