Synthes, Inc. v. Emerge Med., Inc.

Decision Date05 June 2014
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 11–1566.
Citation25 F.Supp.3d 617
PartiesSYNTHES, INC., Synthes USA HQ, Inc., Synthes USA, LLC, Synthes USA Sales, LLC, and Synthes USA Products, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. EMERGE MEDICAL, INC., John P. Marotta, Zachary W. Stassen, Eric Brown, and Charles Q. Powell, Defendants. Emerge Medical, Inc., Counterclaim–Plaintiff, v. Synthes, Inc., Synthes UUS HQ, Inc. Synthes USA, LLC, Synthes USA Sales, LLC, and Synthes USA Products, LLC, Counterclaim–Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

25 F.Supp.3d 617

SYNTHES, INC., Synthes USA HQ, Inc., Synthes USA, LLC, Synthes USA Sales, LLC, and Synthes USA Products, LLC, Plaintiffs,
v.
EMERGE MEDICAL, INC., John P. Marotta, Zachary W. Stassen, Eric Brown, and Charles Q. Powell, Defendants.

Emerge Medical, Inc., Counterclaim–Plaintiff,
v.
Synthes, Inc., Synthes UUS HQ, Inc.
Synthes USA, LLC, Synthes USA Sales, LLC, and Synthes USA Products, LLC, Counterclaim–Defendants.

Civil Action No. 11–1566.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

Signed June 5, 2014


Motions granted in part and denied in part.

[25 F.Supp.3d 628]

Anthony B. Haller, Kevin M. Passerini, Michael P. Broadhurst, Rosemary McKenna, Blank Rome LLP, Philadelphia, PA, Edward N. Cahn, Blank Rome, LLP, Allentown, PA, for Plaintiffs.

Alex G. Romain, Daniel Dockery, Enu Mainigi, Jennifer Wicht, Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, DC, Andrew C.S. Efaw, Sean G. Saxon, Wheeler Trigg & O'Donnell LLP, Denver, CO, Anne R. Myers, Eileen Monaghan Ficaro, Gregory F. Brown, Irina Volk Rabovetsky, Anna M. Darpino, Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck LLP, Blue Bell, PA, David P. Helwig, Marks O'Neill O'Brien & Courtney, Pittsburgh, PA, Benjamin J. Tursi, Marks O'Neill O'Brien Doherty & Kelly PC, Philadelphia, PA, John P. McShea, McShea Law Firm PC, Philadelphia, PA, for Defendants.


MEMORANDUM

BUCKWALTER, District Judge.
TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR CROSS–MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO LIABILITY

I.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

630
A.

Persons Relevant to the Suit

631
1.

The Parties

631
2.

Other Relevant Individuals

633
B.

Background of the Key Players' Employment With Synthes

634
1.

Defendant Marotta's Employment With Synthes

634
2.

Defendant Brown's Employment With Synthes

636
3.

Powell's Employment With Synthes

637
4.

Trafka's Employment with Synthes and Magnum Tool

639
C.

Written Obligations of the Parties and Other Individuals

640
1.

Synthes Written Obligations

640
a.

Contractual Obligations

640
b.

Employment Policies and Obligations

645
2.

Emerge's Written Contracts and Policies

645
3.

Vendors' Written Contractual Obligations to Synthes

646
4.

SIMS and Customers' Written Contractual Obligations to Synthes

647
D.

The Formation of Emerge Prior to April 15, 2010

647
1.

Brief Background of Emerge

647
2.

Detailed Timeline of Emerge–Related Activities Prior to April 15, 2010

648
3.

Emerge's Business Plans and Investor Materials (Pre–April 2010)

652
a.

The Private Placement Memorandum

652
b.

Investor Presentations

653
c.

Additional Statements Regarding Emerge's Business Model

653
4.

Emerge's Finding of Investors and Raising Money

653
5.

Early Design and Development of Emerge Product

654
E.

Emerge's Use of Synthes Products and Information

655
1.

Acquisition and Use of Synthes Product

655
2.

Acquisition, Use, and Disclosure of Synthes's Confidential and Proprietary Information

655
a.

Information Related to Synthes's Manufacturing Costs

655
b.

Information Related to Synthes' External Fixation and LCP Products

656
c.

Information Related to Synthes's Critical Features, Dimensions, and Tolerances

656
d.

Information Related to Synthes's Engineering Specifications

657
e.

Information Related to Synthes's Cortical and Cancellous Screws

657
f.

Information Related to Synthes's Usage Data in Emerge's Early Accounts

658
g.

Information Related to Synthes's Cannulated Screw Comparison Chart

658
h.

Synthes Documents Marotta Emailed to His Personal Email Address

658
i.

Marotta's & Powell's Retention of Synthes's Emails

659
j.

Information Related to Synthes's Strategic Business Acquisition Discussions

659
F.

Emerge Obtains FDA Clearance

659
G.

Emerge's Pilot Customers

660
1.

Banner Health

660
2.

AOSH/USPI

661
3.

Catholic Healthcare West

662
4.

Other System–Wide Sales and Early Targets

662
H.

Emerge's Sales Process, Strategy, Implementation, and Commingling of Product

662
I.

Cardinal Health

664
J.

Procedural History

665


II.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

665


III.

DISCUSSION

666
A.

Claim Against Marotta for Breach of Fiduciary Duty (Count I)

666
1.

Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Breach of Fiduciary Duty

668
2.

Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Breach of Fiduciary Duty

670
B.

Claim of Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty Against Emerge

674
C.

Claim Against Marotta for Breach of Contract Under the Non– Competition and Non–Disclosure Agreements (Count II)

678
1.

The Assignment Provision of the Non–Disclosure Agreement

678
2.

The Non–Competition and Non–Solicitation Provisions of the RM NCA

684
a.

Breach of the Non–Competition Provision

685
b.

Breach of the Non–Solicitation of Customers Provision

689
c.

Breach of the Non–Solicitation of Employees Provision

691
3.

Sales Consultant Non–Competition Provision

693
4.

Return of Property Provision and Confidentiality and Non– Disclosure Provisions in the RM NCA and NDA

698
a.

Small Fragment Set

699
b.

Synthes Product in Marotta's Garage

701
c.

Synthes Emails

703
D.

Misappropriation

704
1.

Whether the Items at Issue Constituted Trade Secrets

705
a.

Synthes Information Regarding Manufacturing Costs and Usage Data

705
b.

Product Design Information

707
2.

Whether Emerge Misappropriated Synthes's Trade Secrets

710
a.

Information Regarding Manufacturing Costs and Usage Data

710
b.

Synthes Product Drawings and Information Related to External Fixation Products

712
c.

Synthes Product Drawings and Information Related to Critical Features, Dimensions, and Tolerances for Screws Emerge Developed and Screws Emerge Identified as Additional Product Offerings

712
d.

Synthes Engineering Specifications and Information Related to Products Emerge Designed and Identified as Additional Product Offerings

713
e.

Drawings and Information Related to Synthes Cortical and Cancellous Screws and Product Emerge Identified as Additional Product Offerings

714
f.

Strategic Business Planning Information Related to Companies Affiliated with Prospective Emerge Investors and Advisors

715
3.

Conclusion as to Misappropriation

715
E.

False Advertising Under the Lanham Act

715
F.

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

718
G.

Trespass to Chattels

721
H.

Fraud

723
I.

Tortious Interference With Contract

727
1.

Tortious Interference with Marotta's Contracts With Synthes

727
a.

Whether Emerge Had Knowledge of Marotta's Contractual Agreements with Synthes

728
b.

Whether Emerge Did Anything to Induce Marotta to Breach Either His NDA, His RM NCA, or His SC NCA With Synthes

729
2.

Tortious Interference with Powell's Non–Compete Agreement With Synthes

731
3.

Tortious Interference With Brown's Agreements With Synthes

733
4.

Tortious Interference With Synthes's Contractual Relationships With Any of Its Customers or Vendors

734
a.

Tortious Interference With Vendors

734
b.

Tortious Interference with Customers

735
5.

Marotta's Tortious Interference With Synthes's Contractual Relations With Other Synthes Employees

735
J.

Civil Conspiracy

735


IV.

CONCLUSION

737

[25 F.Supp.3d 630]

Currently pending before the Court are the Cross-motions for Summary Judgment of Plaintiffs Synthes, Inc., Synthes USA HQ, Inc., Synthes USA, LLC, Synthes USA Sales, LLC, and Synthes USA Products, LLC (collectively “Synthes”) and Defendants Emerge Medical, Inc., John P. Marotta, and Charles Q. Powell (collectively “Defendants”). For the following reasons, Synthes's Motion is granted in part and denied in part and Defendants' Motion is granted in part and denied in part.

I. STATEMENT OF FACTS 1

The factual history of this case, while not particularly long in a temporal sense,

[25 F.Supp.3d 631]

contains numerous discrete events and actions that give rise to the multitude of claims at issue. As the parties have already engaged in lengthy motion practice, as well as a preliminary injunction hearing, the general facts are well-known to both the parties and the Court. While the Court declines to recite every fact set forth by the parties, the Court will engage in a somewhat detailed summary in order to encompass the facts pertinent to resolution of the motions at issue.2

A. Persons Relevant to the Suit
1. The Parties

Synthes, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Pennsylvania, and is the parent company of the other Plaintiffs, which are also Delaware entities with their principal places of business in Pennsylvania. (Plaintiffs' Statement of Undisputed Facts (“PSUF”) ¶ 1; Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Statement (“DRPS”) ¶ 1.) Synthes has been described as a global leader in the highly competitive orthopedic device market. (PSUF ¶ 2; DRPS ¶ 2.) Its sales and marketing plan depends exclusively upon the preferences of orthopedic surgeons to influence the purchasing decisions of the hospitals and surgical centers where orthopedic surgeons practice. (PSUF ¶ 5;DRPS ¶ 5.)

Emerge Medical, Inc. (“Emerge”) is a Colorado corporation formed on January 13, 2010, under the name Emerge Surgical, Inc. (PSUF ¶ 7; DRPS ¶ 7.) On June 23, 2010, Emerge Surgical, Inc. officially changed its name to Emerge Medical, Inc. (PSUF ¶ 8; DRPS ¶ 8.) Emerge competes with Synthes and was formed to produce and sell Generic Device Fixation Hardware “similar, but not identical to” that which Synthes also produces and sells. (PSUF ¶¶ 9–10; DRPS ¶¶ 9–10.) According to Emerge, it has “devised a new approach to the sales of [drill bits, guide wires, and screws] providing the American public with a like-numbered product that is similar to” drill bits, guide wires, and cannulated screws sold by Synthes. (PSUF ¶ 11; DRPS ¶ 11.) As of July 2012, Emerge sold only “drill bits, guide wires, and screws.” (PSUF ¶ 12; DRPS ¶ 12.) Emerge's drill bits, guide...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Synthes, Inc. v. Emerge Med., Inc., Civil Action No. 11–1566.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 5 d4 Junho d4 2014
    ...25 F.Supp.3d 617SYNTHES, INC., Synthes USA HQ, Inc., Synthes USA, LLC, Synthes USA Sales, LLC, and Synthes USA Products, LLC, Plaintiffsv.EMERGE MEDICAL, INC., John P. Marotta, Zachary W. Stassen, Eric Brown, and Charles Q. Powell, Defendants.Emerge Medical, Inc., Counterclaim–Plaintiffv.Sy......
  • Kivett v. Neopharma, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 27 d4 Maio d4 2021
  • Arnold's Office Furniture LLC v. Borden
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 22 d2 Fevereiro d2 2022
    ... ... law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 ... U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A factual dispute is ... motions pending.” Synthes, Inc. v. Emerge Med., ... Inc., 25 F.Supp.3d 617, 666 ... ...
  • Arnold's Office Furniture LLC v. Borden
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 22 d2 Fevereiro d2 2022
    ... ... law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 ... U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A factual dispute is ... motions pending.” Synthes, Inc. v. Emerge Med., ... Inc., 25 F.Supp.3d 617, 666 ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT