ResMed, Fisher & Paykel File Suits Against Each Other

Sleep rivals claim each other violated patents; ResMed suit impacts three FP masks, FP suit impacts four ResMed devices.

In what appears to be turning into a trend for the sleep therapy industry, sleep equipment manufacturers filed more patent infringement suits this week. Sleep giant ResMed and the smaller Fisher & Paykel have both traded suits alleging each other has violated their patents.

The week’s volley began on Aug. 15 with Fisher & Paykel, which flied a suit alleging ResMed’s AirSense 10 CPAP and AirCurve 10 bi-level device, as well as its ClimateLineAir heated air tubing and Swift mask line infringe 11 of the company’s patents.

“Fisher & Paykel Healthcare has invested substantial resources in the research and development of its technologies over the past 45 years,” Lewis Gradon, Fisher & Paykel’s CEO and managing director Healthcare, said in a public statement at the time of the filing. “The company has protected that investment through the development of a significant portfolio of more than 1,400 issued and pending patents, and takes infringement of its intellectual property rights very seriously.”
However, citing documents filed with the U.S. District Court for Central California, Morningstar reported that Fisher & Paykel shortly thereafter moved to withdraw the suit on Aug. 16, while reserving the right to sue again.

ResMed then returned fire on Aug. 17, filing legal actions with the U.S. International Trade Commission, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California in San Diego, as well as courts in New Zealand and Germany, alleging patent infringement by Fisher & Paykel Healthcare.   

In the ITC, ResMed is seeking an injunction banning importation of Fisher & Paykel’s Simplus full face mask, Eson nasal mask and Eson 2 nasal mask. In the U.S. District Court, ResMed is alleging that the Simplus full face mask, Eson nasal mask and Eson 2 nasal mask infringe ResMed's patents relating to modular mask systems, headgear design, and cushion design.

ResMed also asked the San Diego court to invalidate the patents that Fisher & Paykel had asserted against ResMed, earlier this week, and to declare that ResMed does not infringe those patents.

ResMed also initiated preliminary injunction proceedings in Germany, and a suit in New Zealand, to stop alleged infringement in those countries. In the German proceedings, the District Court in Munich has already entered two preliminary injunctions to stop the sale of Simplus, Eson and Eson 2 masks in Germany. In New Zealand, ResMed is asking an Auckland court to stop Fisher & Paykel from manufacturing and exporting infringing masks from that country. 

“We remain steadfast in our commitment to defend our intellectual property wherever necessary to ensure patients receive the high-quality care they deserve,” said ResMed global general counsel and chief administrative officer David Pendarvis. “We are confident that when the courts hear all the evidence, ResMed will prevail on its case and defeat any claims asserted by Fisher & Paykel.”

Fisher & Paykel released a statement that the company intended to vigorously defend the recent allegations, that it had been offering sleep solutions for longer than 20 years, and it had built a patent portfolio during that time.

“We also respect the valid intellectual property rights of others, and we are confident in our position with respect to ResMed’s patents given the rigorous clearance we conduct before any product is released to market,” Fisher & Paykel’s Gradon added.

About the Author

David Kopf is the Publisher HME Business, DME Pharmacy and Mobility Management magazines. He was Executive Editor of HME Business and DME Pharmacy from 2008 to 2023. Follow him on LinkedIn at and on Twitter at @postacutenews.

HME Business Podcast