XML 30 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.20.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies FDA Warning Letter On December 29, 2015, the FDA issued a Warning Letter alleging certain violations of FDA regulations applicable to medical device manufacturers at our Munich, Germany and Arvada, Colorado facilities. The FDA inspected the Munich facility from August 24, 2015 to August 27, 2015 and the Arvada facility from August 24, 2015 to September 1, 2015. On August 27, 2015, the FDA issued a Form 483 identifying two observed non-conformities with certain regulatory requirements at the Munich facility. We did not receive a Form 483 in connection with the FDA’s inspection of the Arvada facility. Following the receipt of the Form 483, we provided written responses to the FDA describing corrective and preventive actions that were underway or to be taken to address the FDA’s observations at the Munich facility. The Warning Letter responded in part to our responses and identified other alleged violations related to the manufacture of our 3T Heater-Cooler device that were not previously included in the Form 483. The Warning Letter further stated that our 3T devices and other devices we manufactured at our Munich facility were subject to refusal of admission into the U.S. until resolution of the issues set forth by the FDA in the Warning Letter. The FDA had informed us that the import alert was limited to the 3T devices, but that the agency reserved the right to expand the scope of the import alert if future circumstances warranted such action. The Warning Letter did not request that existing users cease using the 3T device, and manufacturing and shipment of all of our products other than the 3T device were unaffected by the import limitation. To help clarify these issues for current customers, we issued an informational Customer Letter in January 2016 and that same month agreed with the FDA on a process for shipping 3T devices to existing U.S. users pursuant to a certificate of medical necessity program. Finally, the Warning Letter stated that premarket approval applications for Class III devices to which certain Quality System regulation deviations identified in the Warning Letter were reasonably related would not be approved until the violations had been corrected; however, this restriction applied only to the Munich and Arvada facilities, which do not manufacture or design devices subject to Class III premarket approval. On February 25, 2020, LivaNova received clearance for K191402, a 510(k) for the 3T devices that addressed issues contained in the 2015 Warning Letter along with design changes that further mitigate the potential risk of aerosolization. Concurrent with this clearance, (1) 3T devices manufactured in accordance with K191402 will not be subjected to the import alert and (2) LivaNova initiated a correction to distribute the updated Operating Instructions cleared under K191402. We continue to work diligently to remediate the FDA’s inspectional observations for the Munich facility, as well as the additional issues identified in the Warning Letter. We take these matters seriously and intend to respond timely and fully to the FDA’s requests. CDC and FDA Safety Communications and Company Field Safety Notice On October 13, 2016, the CDC and the FDA separately released safety notifications regarding the 3T devices. The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (“MMWR”) and Health Advisory Notice (“HAN”) reported that tests conducted by the CDC and its affiliates indicate that there appears to be genetic similarity between both patient and 3T device strains of the non-tuberculous mycobacterium (“NTM”) bacteria M. chimaera isolated in hospitals in Iowa and Pennsylvania. Citing the geographic separation between the two hospitals referenced in the investigation, the report asserts that 3T devices manufactured prior to August 18, 2014 could have been contaminated during the manufacturing process. The CDC’s HAN and FDA’s Safety Communication, issued contemporaneously with the MMWR report, each assess certain risks associated with 3T devices and provide guidance for providers and patients. The CDC notification states that the decision to use the 3T device during a surgical operation is to be taken by the surgeon based on a risk approach and on patient need. Both the CDC’s and FDA’s communications confirm that 3T devices are critical medical devices and enable doctors to perform life-saving cardiac surgery procedures. Also on October 13, 2016, concurrent with the CDC’s HAN and FDA’s Safety Communication, we issued a Field Safety Notice Update for U.S. users of 3T devices to proactively and voluntarily contact facilities to aid in implementation of the CDC and FDA recommendations. In the fourth quarter of 2016, we initiated a program to provide existing 3T device users with a new loaner 3T device at no charge pending regulatory approval and implementation of additional risk mitigation strategies worldwide, including a vacuum canister and internal sealing upgrade program and a deep disinfection service. This loaner program is available on a global basis. We anticipate that this program will continue until we are able to address customer needs through a broader solution that includes implementation of the risk mitigation strategies described above. We are currently implementing the vacuum and sealing upgrade program in as many countries as possible until all devices are upgraded. On October 11, 2018, after review of information provided by us, the FDA concluded that we could commence the vacuum and sealing upgrade program in the U.S., and on February 25, 2020, LivaNova received clearance for K191402, a 510(k) for the 3T devices that addressed issues contained in the 2015 Warning Letter along with design changes that further mitigate the potential risk of aerosolization. Furthermore, we continue to offer a no-charge deep disinfection service (deep cleaning service) for 3T device users as we receive the required regulatory approvals. The deep disinfection service was rolled out in Europe in the second half of 2015, and on April 12, 2018, the FDA agreed to allow us to move forward with the deep cleaning service in the U.S. thereby adding to the growing list of countries around the world in which we offer this service. On December 31, 2016, we recognized a liability for our product remediation plan related to our 3T device. We concluded that it was probable that a liability had been incurred upon management’s approval of the plan and the commitments made by management to various regulatory authorities globally in November and December 2016, and furthermore, the cost associated with the plan was reasonably estimable. At September 30, 2020, the product remediation liability was $1.7 million. Refer to “Note 5. Product Remediation Liability” for additional information. Litigation Product Liability The Company is currently involved in litigation involving our 3T device. The litigation includes a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, federal multi-district litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, various U.S. state court cases and cases in jurisdictions outside the U.S. The class action, filed in February 2016, consists of all Pennsylvania residents who underwent open heart surgery at WellSpan York Hospital and Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center between 2011 and 2015 and who currently are asymptomatic for NTM infection. Members of the class seek declaratory relief that the 3T devices are defective and unsafe for intended uses, medical monitoring, damages, and attorneys’ fees. On March 29, 2019, we announced a settlement framework that provides for a comprehensive resolution of the personal injury cases pending in the multi-district litigation in U.S. federal court, the related class action pending in federal court, as well as certain cases in state courts across the United States. The agreement, which makes no admission of liability, is subject to certain conditions, including acceptance of the settlement by individual claimants and provides for a total payment of up to $225 million to resolve the claims covered by the settlement. Per the agreed-upon terms, the first payment of $135 million was paid into a qualified settlement fund in July 2019 and the second payment of $90 million was paid in January 2020. Cases covered by the settlement are being dismissed as amounts are disbursed to individual plaintiffs from the qualified settlement fund. Cases in state courts in the U.S. and in jurisdictions outside the U.S. continue to progress. As of October 29, 2020, including the cases encompassed in the settlement framework described above that have not yet been dismissed, we are aware of approximately 85 filed and unfiled claims worldwide, with the majority of the claims in various federal or state courts throughout the United States. This includes cases that have settled but have not yet been dismissed. The complaints generally seek damages and other relief based on theories of strict liability, negligence, breach of express and implied warranties, failure to warn, design and manufacturing defect, fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation or concealment, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection statutes. At September 30, 2020, the provision for these matters was $46.3 million. While the amount accrued represents our best estimate, the actual liability for resolution of these matters may vary from our estimate. The changes in the litigation provision liability during the nine months ended September 30, 2020 are as follows (in thousands):
|  | Litigation Provision Liability
Total litigation provision liability at December 31, 2019 |  | $ | 170,404 |
Payments |  | (128,128) |
Adjustments |  | 3,970 |
FX and other |  | 54 |
Total litigation provision liability at September 30, 2020 |  | 46,300 |
Less current portion of litigation liability at September 30, 2020 |  | 34,790 |
Long-term portion of litigation provision liability at September 30, 2020 |  | $ | 11,510 |
Environmental Liability Our subsidiary, Sorin S.p.A. (“Sorin”) was created as a result of a spin-off (the “Sorin spin-off”) from SNIA S.p.A. (“SNIA”) in January 2004. SNIA subsequently became insolvent and the Italian Ministry of the Environment and the Protection of Land and Sea (the “Italian Ministry of the Environment”), sought compensation from SNIA for remediation costs relating to the environmental damage at chemical sites previously operated by SNIA’s other subsidiaries. In September 2011 and July 2014, the Bankruptcy Court of Udine and the Bankruptcy Court of Milan, respectively, held (in proceedings to which we are not parties) that the Italian Ministry of the Environment and other Italian government agencies (the “Public Administrations”) were not creditors of either SNIA or its subsidiaries in connection with their claims in the Italian insolvency proceedings. The Public Administrations appealed and in January 2016, the Court of Udine rejected the appeal. The Public Administrations has appealed that decision to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the Bankruptcy Court of Milan’s decision has been appealed. In January 2012, SNIA filed a civil action against Sorin in the Civil Court of Milan asserting joint liability of a parent and a spun-off company. The Public Administrations intervened in the proceeding, with a claim for environmental damages of approximately $4 billion. On April 1, 2016, the Court of Milan dismissed all legal actions of SNIA and of the Public Administrations further requiring the Public Administrations to pay Sorin approximately €292,000 (approximately $342,000 as of September 30, 2020) for legal fees. The Public Administrations appealed the 2016 Decision to the Court of Appeal of Milan, and on March 5, 2019, the Court of Appeal issued a partial decision on the merits declaring Sorin/LivaNova jointly liable with SNIA for SNIA’s environmental liabilities in an amount up to the fair value of the net worth received by Sorin because of the Sorin spin-off, an estimated €572.1 million (approximately $669.1 million as of September 30, 2020). Additionally the Court issued a separate order, staying the proceeding until a panel of three experts can assess the environmental damages, the costs of clean-up, and the costs that the Public Administrations has already borne for the clean-up of the sites to allow the Court to decide on the second claim of the Public Administration against LivaNova, (i.e., to refund the Public Administrations for the SNIA environmental liabilities). Both LivaNova and the Public Administrations have appealed the decision to the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione). We have not recognized an expense in connection with this matter because any potential loss is not currently probable or reasonably estimable. In addition, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of potential loss, if any, that may result from this matter. Patent Litigation On May 11, 2018, Neuro and Cardiac Technologies LLC (“NCT”), a non-practicing entity, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas asserting that the VNS Therapy System, when used with the SenTiva Model 1000 generator, infringes the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,076,307 owned by NCT. The complaint requests damages that include a royalty, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees. On September 13, 2018, we petitioned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “Patent Office”) for an inter partes review (“IPR”) of the validity of the ‘307 patent, and on May 18, 2020, the Patent Office issued a Final Written Decision determining that all challenged claims are unpatentable. NCT is appealing the Final Written Decision. On March 24, 2020, we were granted our request for an ex parte reexamination of the ‘307 patent, and in August, the Patent Office issued a Non-Final Rejection of all of the ‘307 claims. The Court has stayed the litigation pending the outcome of the IPR appeal proceeding. We have not recognized an expense in connection with this matter because any potential loss is not currently probable or reasonably estimable. In addition, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of potential loss, if any, that may result from this matter. Contract Litigation On November 25, 2019, LivaNova received notice of a lawsuit initiated by former members of Caisson Interventional, LLC (“Caisson”), a subsidiary of the Company acquired in 2017. The lawsuit, Todd J. Mortier, as Member Representative of the former Members of Caisson Interventional, LLC v. LivaNova USA, Inc., is currently pending in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. The complaint alleges (i) breach of contract, (ii) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and (iii) unjust enrichment in connection with the Company’s operation of Caisson’s Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement (“TMVR”) program and the Company’s November 20, 2019 announcement that it was ending the TMVR program at the end of 2019. The lawsuit seeks damages arising out of the 2017 acquisition agreement, including various regulatory milestone payments. We intend to vigorously defend this claim. The Company has not recognized an expense related to this matter because any potential loss is not currently probable or reasonably estimable. In addition, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of potential loss, if any, that may result from this matter. Tax Litigation In a tax audit report received on October 30, 2009, the Regional Internal Revenue Office of Lombardy (the “Internal Revenue Office”) informed Sorin Group Italia S.r.l. that, among several issues, it was disallowing in part a tax-deductible write down of the investment in the U.S. company, Cobe Cardiovascular Inc., which Sorin Group Italia S.r.l. recognized in 2002 and deducted in five equal installments, beginning in 2002. In December 2009, the Internal Revenue Office issued notices of assessment for 2004. In December 2010 and October 2011, the Internal Revenue Office issued notices of assessment for 2005 and 2006, respectively. We challenged all three notices of assessment (for 2004, 2005 and 2006) before the relevant Provincial Tax Courts. The total amount of losses in dispute was €62.6 million (approximately $73.2 million as of September 30, 2020). On May 31, 2019, we filed an application to settle the litigation according to law N. 136/2018 and paid the required settlement balance of €1.9 million. As per law N. 136/2018, the Italian Revenue Agency reviewed the settlement and accepted the application by default on July 31, 2020. We recognized a benefit of €5.4 million, approximately $6.5 million, during the third quarter of 2020 as compared to the previously recognized reserve for an uncertain tax position of €15.5 million. The difference of €10.1 million (approximately $11.8 million as of September 30, 2020) was a fully valued deferred tax asset for net operating losses, the reversal of which does not impact the condensed consolidated statement of income (loss). Other Matters Additionally, we are the subject of various pending or threatened legal actions and proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of our business. These matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes that are not predictable and that may not be known for extended periods of time. Since the outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, the costs associated with them could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated net income, financial position or liquidity.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121559207&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121559207&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration