Beleaguered Medical Device Manufacturer Boston Scientific Announces Job Cuts

Things are just not going well for Natick, MA-based device manufacturer Boston Scientific. Yesterday, the company announced that it lost $1.1 billion in the fourth quarter this year. The losses mainly stem from the company’s $1.73 billion settlement earlier this month with Johnson & Johnson ending a seven year patent dispute over drug-coated cardiovascular stents. Also, Boston Scientifics’ ill-advised purchase of medical device rival Guidant for $27 billion several years ago hasn’t helped matters.

The company said that it would cut as many as 1,300 jobs or 8 to 10 percent of its workforce to reduce operating expenses. Boston Scientifics’ decision to eliminate jobs follows similar moves made by several of its competitors last year. For example, last spring Medtronic, the largest device firm in the world, said it would eliminate at least 1,500 workers. In August, Minnesota rival St. Jude Medical eliminated 200 positions.

Device makers have seen their sales squeezed by safety recalls of top-selling products and cost cutting measures at hospitals because of the economic downturn. Also, new data suggest that drug-coated stents may not offer the benefits (over bare-metal stents) as previously thought. In fact, some physicians are beginning to reconsider the advantages of stents as compared with other surgical or pharmacologic interventions for certain cardiac patients.

While layoffs at medical devices manufacturers don’t come close to the massive layoffs in the pharmaceutical sector, don’t be surprised if other device manufacturers announce layoffs later this year.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 

Johnson & Johnson Settles Its Trademark Dispute With the Red Cross

You may recall that last August, Johnson & Johnson sued the Red Cross for inappropriate use of its symbol —the red cross—that has universally become associated with the non-profit relief agency. that they reached a settlement in the dispute over the mark. Not surprisingly, a settlement was reached shortly after a judge threw out much of J &J’s trademark claim against the Red Cross. Of course, as it typically in these cases, the terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

J & J brought the suit against the Red Cross, because, starting in 2004, the Red Cross started licensing the symbol to other companies for use on commercial items sold in stores as part of the organization’s fund-raising program. J& J argued that the organization had promised not to engage in certain commercial activity—a part of the original trademark agreement that was struck between the drugmaker and relief agency almost 100 years ago. However, the judge presiding over the case ruled that Congressional charter gave the Red Cross the right to use the symbol even for business purposes.

Although J & J looked incredibly avaricious and took a PR hit by suing the Red Cross for trademark infringement, the company claimed that it had the right to vigorously protect its trademarks—after all, business is business. However, as several patent and trademark attorneys have repeatedly told me, it is advisable to settle or reach an agreement before any case goes to trial—you just never know what a judge is going to rule even if you think that you have a rock-solid claim! I guess J & J needs to hire some new attorneys!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!