In a closely watched case with industry-wide implications, a federal jury in California has ordered Johnson & Johnson MedTech to pay $442.2 million in damages. The verdict follows an antitrust lawsuit filed by Innovative Health, a company focused on reprocessing FDA-cleared electrophysiology catheters—an area that has seen growing interest from hospitals aiming to balance clinical outcomes with cost savings.
Filed back in 2019, the lawsuit alleged that Johnson & Johnson—through its electrophysiology arm, Biosense Webster (now under J&J MedTech)—used its dominant market position to discourage hospitals from using reprocessed catheters. According to the complaint, J&J threatened to withhold clinical support from healthcare providers who opted for reprocessed over new catheters supplied by the company.
The jury sided with Innovative Health in May 2025, initially awarding $147 million in damages. That figure was subsequently tripled under the Sherman Antitrust Act by U.S. District Judge James V. Selna, with interest bringing the final amount to $442.2 million.
It’s one of the largest antitrust awards the MedTech sector has ever seen—and it sends a clear warning. The verdict signals that tactics designed to undermine the adoption of safe, cost-effective reprocessed devices will face serious legal consequences. The Association of Medical Device Reprocessors (AMDR) described the ruling as “seismic,” saying it affirms the legitimacy and importance of reprocessing in modern hospital supply chains.
For hospital administrators and procurement teams, the case offers more than just headlines—it’s a wake-up call. Legal and industry experts are now advising healthcare providers to carefully review supplier contracts, monitor software updates that could limit device compatibility, and document any pressure related to vendor loyalty. The ultimate objective: protect clinical autonomy and ensure hospitals retain the freedom to choose technologies based on value and patient outcomes—not vendor threats.
Johnson & Johnson has publicly disagreed with the decision and confirmed it will appeal. Still, the company has stated that it will comply with the current court orders as the legal process continues. A failed appeal could bring more than just financial implications—it might prompt J&J to rethink how it approaches competitive strategy, customer engagement, and commercial ethics.
Beyond the courtroom, this ruling could reshape industry behavior. For reprocessors like Innovative Health, the win is more than symbolic—it represents a broader recognition of their role in an increasingly value-conscious healthcare environment. The key message is resonant: fair competition, innovation, and sustainability are foundational principles that can no longer be sidelined.
Even as the appeals process unfolds, this case is already leaving its mark. The precedent is now on record—and it may well serve as a reference point for future disputes in the MedTech space.
###