Litigation
Untitled case
Litigation2:23-cv-00479
- Filed
- 2023
Patents at issue (1)
Defender signal. Patent 11318227 has had claims invalidated at PTAB. Those final written decisions are public record and a ready-made § 102 / § 103 ground in district court. See IPR estoppel for what carries over.
Summary
A district court litigation case in the Virginia Eastern District Court related to US patent 11318227, filed in 2023 and currently in litigation.
Case overview & background
Plain-language overview of the case: parties, accused product, patents at issue, and why the suit matters.
This patent infringement litigation, Case No. 2:23-cv-00479, is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division. The plaintiff is LifeNet Health, a non-profit, tax-exempt corporation focused on regenerative medicine and life sciences, originally founded as Eastern Virginia Tissue Bank. The defendants are Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc., a for-profit corporation specializing in medical devices, and its subsidiary, Embody, Inc., also a for-profit corporation based in Virginia. Zimmer acquired Embody in early 2023.
The core of the dispute revolves around alleged infringement by the defendants' product, ActivBraid, which received FDA approval in June 2023 and is marketed for soft-tissue injury repair. LifeNet Health asserts infringement of two U.S. Patents: 10,137,223 and 11,318,227. Both patents are generally described as relating to "Aligned Fiber and Method of Use Thereof," specifically concerning electrospinning technology used to create aligned fibers that can be applied as implants on surgical sites to aid in tissue recovery. The '227 patent is a divisional of the '223 patent and shares the same inventors.
The procedural posture of the case indicates that it is currently stayed pending the resolution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). These IPRs, specifically IPR2025-00249 and IPR2025-00248, are challenging the validity of the asserted patents. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen is presiding over the case. This case is notable as it involves a non-profit leader in regenerative medicine asserting its intellectual property against a significant player in the for-profit medical device industry, highlighting potential conflicts over foundational technologies in tissue repair.
Key legal developments & outcome
Major rulings, motions, claim construction, settlements, and the present posture or final disposition.
Key Legal Developments and Outcome
The patent infringement litigation, LifeNet Health v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. et al. (Case No. 2:23-cv-00479), is currently stayed pending the outcome of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
Filing & Initial Pleadings
LifeNet Health filed its complaint against Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. and Embody, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on September 27, 2023. The complaint alleged infringement of U.S. Patents 10,137,223 and 11,318,227.
Pre-Trial Motions of Substance
On September 25, 2024, the court dismissed Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. from the litigation for lack of personal jurisdiction and venue. Therefore, only Embody, Inc. remains a defendant in the district court case.
The district court litigation was subsequently stayed pending the resolution of IPR proceedings. This stay was ordered by District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen on September 15, 2025.
Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings and Their Effect on Litigation
Two IPR petitions were filed against LifeNet Health's patents:
- IPR2025-00248 challenging U.S. Patent 10,137,223
- IPR2025-00249 challenging U.S. Patent 11,318,227
Both IPRs were filed by Embody Inc. and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. LifeNet Health, as the Patent Owner, filed a request for discretionary denial of institution under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) in IPR2025-00249. The Acting Director of the USPTO denied this request on June 26, 2025, and accordingly, the PTAB proceeded with the merits analysis of the patentability challenges.
The PTAB instituted inter partes reviews for both IPR2025-00248 and IPR2025-00249 on August 5, 2025. The decisions to institute were issued concurrently. Following institution, on August 20, 2025, LifeNet Health requested authorization to file a motion for additional discovery regarding objective indicia of nonobviousness, specifically commercial success based on sales of Embody's "Tapestry" and "ActivBraid" products. The PTAB authorized this motion on August 26, 2025, setting a schedule for filings.
As of the current date (August 5, 2026), both IPRs have been instituted and are in the trial phase. IPR2025-00248 has an institution date of August 5, 2025. A hearing transcript was entered on July 27, 2026, for IPR2025-00248. The final written decisions for these IPRs are pending, and the district court case remains stayed until their resolution.
Plaintiff representatives
Counsel of record for the plaintiff(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).
- McGuireWoods
- Brian Charles Riopelle · lead counsel
- George Brian Davis · counsel
- Robert William McFarland · counsel
LifeNet Health, the plaintiff in Case No. 2:23-cv-00479, is represented by attorneys from McGuireWoods LLP. The counsel of record include:
Brian Charles Riopelle (Lead Counsel)
- Firm: McGuireWoods LLP, Richmond, Virginia.
- Experience: Brian Riopelle has extensive experience in intellectual property litigation, having represented clients in numerous patent infringement cases. He filed a notice of appearance on behalf of LifeNet Health on September 27, 2023.
George Brian Davis (Counsel)
- Firm: McGuireWoods LLP, Richmond, Virginia.
- Experience: George Brian Davis also represents LifeNet Health in this case, filing a notice of appearance on September 27, 2023. His firm, McGuireWoods LLP (Richmond), is noted as representing LifeNet Health.
Robert William McFarland (Counsel)
- Firm: McGuireWoods LLP.
- Experience: Robert William McFarland is listed as counsel for LifeNet Health.
Additional attorneys at McGuireWoods LLP, such as Tyler T. Vanhoutan and Amanda F. Wieker, are also listed in relation to LifeNet Health in the IPR proceedings for the related patent. However, the specific docket for the district court case directly identifies Riopelle and Davis as having entered appearances.
Defendant representatives
Counsel of record for the defendant(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).
- Hogan Lovells US
- N. Thomas Connally, III · Lead Counsel
- McGuireWoods
- Brian Charles Riopelle · Local Counsel / Counsel of Record
- Robert William McFarland · Counsel of Record
- George Brian Davis · Counsel of Record
The defendants, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. and Embody, Inc., are represented by counsel from Hogan Lovells US LLP and McGuireWoods LLP.
Here are the details for the identified counsel:
For Embody, Inc. and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.:
N. Thomas Connally, III
- Role: Lead Counsel (implied from PTAB filings)
- Firm: Hogan Lovells US LLP
- Office Location: Washington, D.C. (based on firm information, not explicitly stated in case documents found)
- Experience Note: Has 16 years of experience in patent law, with practice areas including biotechnology, semiconductors, optics, and computer architecture and software. He has represented Embody, Inc. as "challenger" in relation to the '227 patent during IPR proceedings.
Brian Charles Riopelle
- Role: Local Counsel / Counsel of Record
- Firm: McGuireWoods LLP
- Office Location: Richmond, VA
- Experience Note: McGuireWoods LLP is also listed as counsel for LifeNet Health in related IPR proceedings, which could indicate a local counsel role for Riopelle in the district court action. His name appears on the summons for Embody, Inc.
Robert William McFarland
- Role: Counsel of Record
- Firm: McGuireWoods LLP
- Office Location: Richmond, VA
- Experience Note: Named as counsel of record for the defendants.
George Brian Davis
- Role: Counsel of Record
- Firm: McGuireWoods LLP
- Office Location: Richmond, VA
- Experience Note: Named as counsel of record for the defendants.
It is important to note that Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. was dismissed from the district court litigation for lack of personal jurisdiction and venue in an order dated September 25, 2024. Therefore, while listed as defendants, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. no longer requires a response in the district court case. The counsel listed above primarily represents Embody, Inc. in the ongoing district court case and both Embody, Inc. and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. in the related IPR proceedings.