Edwards suffers setback at EPO in heart-valve dispute with Meril

In a preliminary opinion published at the beginning of the month the Board of Appeal had already indicated that none of the claim requests filed by Edwards Lifesciences appeared allowable, flagging a likely revocation. In the oral hearing on 23 October, the Board then confirmed this view, revoking EP 4 151 181. However a written decision with the reason for the revocation is not yet available in the EPO register.

EP 181 protects a transcatheter heart valve technology. Meril had filed the opposition after Edwards sued the Indian company at the UPC for infringement of the patent with its Octacor and Octapro heart-valve systems. The revocation has direct consequences for the parallel UPC proceedings, which are currently under appeal.

UPC appeal pending in Luxembourg

In October 2025, the Paris central division had upheld EP 181 in amended form. It found that Meril’s Octacor THV and Octapro THV devices infringed several claims of the amended patent. The panel under presiding judge Paolo Catallozzi banned Meril from selling the infringing products in UPC member states where the patent is in force. Only prosthetic heart valves in XL size exceeding 30mm in diameter were expemt due to public health interests.

Meril appealed the decision. The UPC Court of Appeal has scheduled the oral hearing for 13 May 2027 before the 1st panel under judge-rapporteur Peter Blok (case IDs: UPC_CoA_932/2025 and UPC_CoA_933/2025). However, with the EPO’s final revocation of EP 181, the basis for the UPC injunction has been removed.

A series of setbacks and successes

The decision adds to a long list of rulings in the dispute between Edwards and Meril, which centres on Meril’s transcatheter heart valves Myval, Octacor and Octapro as well as the Navigator delivery system. The case is one of the oldest and largest ongoing at the UPC.

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. 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 July 2025, the Nordic-Baltic regional division upheld EP 3 769 722 in amended form and found infringement. Meril did not appeal.

Representatives

Edwards relied on patent attorneys Bernhard Thum and Jonas Weickert from German firm Thum &Partner in the EPO opposition proceedings. 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.

Meril was advised in the EPO proceedings by UK patent attorneys Jonathan Stafford and Gregory Carty-Hornsby from Marks & Clerk, who have provided technical advice throughout the UPC proceedings. At the Court of Appeal, Hogan Lovells Cadwalader partners Andreas von Falck and Alexander Klicznik are leading the case for Meril and coordinating the dispute Europe-wide.