| Commitments and Contingencies | Note 15. 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. With this 510(k) clearance, all actions to remediate the FDA’s inspectional observations in the Warning Letter are complete, and at this time, LivaNova is awaiting the FDA’s close-out inspection. 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 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. In April 2017, we obtained CE Mark in Europe for the design change of the 3T device, and in October 2018, the FDA concluded that we could commence the vacuum canister and internal sealing upgrade program in the U.S. 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 are in the process of completing and closing out all recall activities with the FDA. While our vacuum canister and internal sealing upgrade program and deep cleaning service in the U.S. are substantially complete, these services will continue as a servicing option outside of the U.S. 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 December 31, 2020, the product remediation liability was $1.1 million. Refer to “Note 8. Product Remediation Liability” for additional information. Saluggia Site Hazardous Substances LivaNova Site Management S.r.l. (“LSM”), formerly a subsidiary of Sorin, one of the companies that merged into LivaNova PLC in 2015, manages site services for the campus in Saluggia, Italy. In addition to a LivaNova manufacturing facility, the Saluggia campus is also the location of manufacturing facilities of third parties, a cafeteria for workers, and storage facilities for hazardous substances and equipment previously used in a nuclear research center, later turned nuclear medicine business, between the 1960s and the late 1990s. Pursuant to authorization from the Italian government, LSM has, and continues to, perform ordinary maintenance, secure the facilities, monitor air and water quality and file applicable reports with the competent environmental authorities. During 2020, LSM received correspondence from ISIN (a sub-body of the Italian Ministry of Economic Development) requesting that within five years, LSM demonstrate the financial capacity to meet its obligations under Italian law to clean and dismantle any contaminated buildings and equipment as well as to deliver hazardous substances to a national repository. This repository will be built by the Italian government at a location and time yet to be determined. ISIN subsequently published Technical Guide n. 30, which identifies the technical criteria, and general safety and protection requirements for the design, construction, operation and dismantling of temporary storage facilities for the hazardous substances. Most recently, in January 2021, a list of 67 potential sites for the national repository was published. There is no legal obligation to begin any work or deliver the hazardous substances, as the performance of these obligations is contingent on the construction of the as-yet unbuilt national repository. However, as a result of the above correspondence and publication from ISIN and the publication of potential sites for the national repository, some of the substantial uncertainties regarding the obligation became more certain. In connection with developing the plan required by ISIN, we retained a third party specialist to assist in the estimation of the potential costs. Based on the aforementioned factors, the Company concluded its obligation to clean, dismantle, and deliver any hazardous substances to a national repository, is probable and reasonably estimable as of December 31, 2020. Accordingly, in the fourth quarter of 2020, we recognized a $42.2 million provision for this matter. The liability as of December 31, 2020 is $43.0 million which represents the low end of the estimated range of loss of $43.0 million to $55.0 million. 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 March 1, 2021, 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 number 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. In the fourth quarter of 2018, we recognized a $294.1 million provision for these matters. In the fourth quarter of 2019, we recorded an additional liability of $33.2 million due to additional information obtained, including but not limited to: the nature and quantity of filed and unfiled claims; certain settlement discussions with plaintiffs’ counsel; and the current stage of litigation in our remaining filed and unfiled claims. At December 31, 2020, the provision was $36.5 million. While the amount accrued represents our best estimate for those filed and unfiled claims that are both probable and estimable, the actual liability for resolution of these matters may vary from our estimate. Changes in the carrying amount of the litigation provision liability are as follows (in thousands): Total litigation provision liability at December 31, 2018 $ 294,061 Payments (156,928) Adjustments 33,233 FX and other 38 Total litigation provision liability at December 31, 2019 170,404 Payments (138,178) Adjustments 3,906 FX and other 358 Total litigation provision liability at December 31, 2020 36,490 Less current portion of litigation provision liability at December 31, 2020 28,612 Long-term portion of litigation provision liability at December 31, 2020 $ 7,878 In 2019, we recovered $33.8 million from our insurance carriers under our product liability insurance policies related to the litigation involving our 3T device. The insurance recovery was recorded in litigation provision, net on the consolidated statements of income (loss) during 2019. Environmental Liability Sorin was created as a result of a spin-off (the “Sorin spin-off”) from SNIA in January 2004, and in October 2015, Sorin was merged into LivaNova. 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 in an aggregate amount of approximately $4 billion 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 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 have also appealed that decision to the Supreme Court. In addition, 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. 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 $358,000 as of December 31, 2020) for legal fees. The Public Administrations appealed the 2016 Decision to the Court of Appeal of Milan. 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 $701.9 million as of December 31, 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 Administrations against LivaNova, (i.e., to refund the Public Administration for the SNIA environmental liabilities). In the interim, we are appealing the decision to the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione). In 2011, Caffaro, a SNIA subsidiary, sold its Brescia chemical business to Caffaro Brescia, a third party belonging to the Todisco group, and as part of the acquisition, Caffaro Brescia agreed to secure hydraulic barriers at the site and maintain existing environmental security measures. In September 2020, Caffaro Brescia declared it was withdrawing from its agreement to maintain the environmental measures. In January 2021, we (in addition to Caffaro Brescia, and other non-LivaNova entities) received an administrative order (“Order”) from the Italian Ministry of the Environment requiring us to ensure the maintenance of the environmental measures and to guarantee that such works remain fully operational, the annual management and maintenance for which is estimated at approximately €1 million per year. LivaNova’s receipt of the Order appears to be based on the aforementioned Court of Appeals decision regarding our alleged joint liability with SNIA for SNIA’s environmental liabilities. Our response, dated February 16, 2021, disputes the grounds upon which the Order is based. We have not recognized an expense in connection with these related matters matter because any potential loss is not currently probable or reasonably estimable. 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 December, the Patent Office issued a Non-Final Rejection of all the ‘307 claims. NCT is appealing. 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. 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. 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. |
