Print Page  Close Window
STEREOTAXIS, INC. filed this Form S-1/A on 06/17/2004
Entire Document
 << Previous Page | Next Page >>
Table of Contents

secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and divert the attention of management and key personnel from our business operations. We also generally seek confidentiality agreements from third parties that receive our confidential data or materials.

       Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining patent protection and trade secret protection of our technologies and products as well as successfully defending these patents against third-party challenges. Some of our technology was co-developed with third parties and these third parties may claim rights in our intellectual property. We may also be liable for patent infringement by third parties whose products we use or combine with ours and for which we have no right to indemnification. In addition, many countries, including certain European countries, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties in some circumstances (for example, the patent owner has failed to “work” the invention in that country, or the third party has patented improvements). Many countries also limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of the patent. We will only be able to protect our technologies from unauthorized use by third parties to the extent that valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets cover them. We expect to face expensive and time-consuming infringement actions, validity challenges and other intellectual property claims and proceedings, which are frequent in the medical device industry, and which divert management’s attention from our business. There are other risks associated with our patent portfolio and other intellectual property. Please refer to “Risk Factors” for a more complete description of these risks.

       University of Virginia. We have exclusively licensed six patents related to the field of magnetically guiding an element through the body and viewing it for medical use from the University of Virginia Patent Foundation. The UVA patents address earlier versions of our system which we do not believe are essential to the protection of our current business activities, although one of these patents could be construed to cover some of our current activities. To date, we have paid a five percent royalty on sales of products covered by this patent and our business model assumes continued payment of this royalty to UVA. However, we have become aware of prior art that caused us to question the validity of this patent, and as a result, we have initiated a re-examination of the patent in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. If this reexamination finds the patent partially or completely invalid, our royalty obligations under the license agreement could be reduced or eliminated. We believe that our other patents would be sufficient to protect our technology in that event.


       The markets for medical devices are intensely competitive and are characterized by rapid technological advances, frequent new product introductions, evolving industry standards and price erosion.

       We consider our primary competition to be existing manual catheter-based interventional techniques and surgical procedures. To our knowledge, we are the only company that has commercialized remote, digital and direct control of the working tip of catheters and guidewires for interventional use. Our success depends in part on convincing hospitals and physicians to convert existing interventional procedures to computer-assisted procedures.

       We expect to face competition from companies that are developing new approaches and products for use in interventional procedures, including robotic approaches that may be directly competitive with our technology. Many of these companies have an established presence in the field of interventional cardiology, including the major imaging, capital equipment and disposables companies that are currently selling products in the cath lab. We also face competition from


 << Previous Page | Next Page >>