A PYMNTS Company

Medtronic Slapped With $382M Antitrust Verdict in Bundling Case

By  |  February 6, 2026

A federal jury in California has ordered Medtronic Inc. to pay more than $380 million in damages after finding that the medical device manufacturer monopolized the market for certain advanced electrosurgical devices, according to Reuters.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    The lawsuit was filed by competitor Applied Medical Resources Corp., which accused Medtronic of using restrictive contracting practices to shield its LigaSure surgical device from competition posed by Applied’s Voyant advanced bipolar system. The verdict marks a significant development in a closely watched dispute within the surgical technology sector.

    Medtronic said it strongly disagrees with the decision and intends to challenge it. “We remain confident that our business practices deliver the best product to our customers and at the value they expect,” the company said in a statement. “Surgeons choose Medtronic’s LigaSure device time and again because it outperforms Applied’s Voyant.” The company also stated it is disappointed with the jury’s verdict and plans to appeal, according to Reuters.

    Applied argued at trial that Medtronic structured its contracts with hospitals in ways that restricted access to competing products. Attorneys for Applied presented internal communications and strategic planning materials that they said showed deliberate efforts to slow the adoption of Voyant. According to Reuters, these materials included references to internal “war game” sessions in which company officials evaluated contract designs, bundling arrangements and potential financial penalties tied to hospitals that considered rival devices.

    During closing arguments, Joseph Re of Knobbe Martens, representing Applied, told jurors that the documents revealed a strategy focused on maintaining market dominance rather than competing through innovation or pricing. Applied also introduced a 2019 internal message in which a Medtronic executive referred to building an “ultimate gorilla” product portfolio. The plaintiff contended that this language reflected an effort to cement market control, according to Reuters.

    Medtronic rejected those allegations during the proceedings. The company maintained that hospitals and surgeons select LigaSure based on its clinical performance and reliability. Its legal team argued that bundled contracts and group purchasing agreements are lawful and provide cost efficiencies to healthcare providers.

    To bolster its claims, Applied pointed to sales trends in Europe and South Korea, where restrictions on bundling are reportedly stricter. In those markets, Applied said, Voyant gained traction more readily, which the company argued demonstrates that contractual practices in the United States hindered competition. Expert witnesses for Applied estimated that lost U.S. sales ranged from $275 million to $381 million. According to Reuters, Medtronic did not offer its own damages calculation during the trial.

    The verdict adds to ongoing scrutiny of contracting practices in the medical device industry and could have broader implications for how manufacturers structure agreements with hospitals and group purchasing organizations.

    Source: Reuters