Insulet Corporation v. EOFlow, Co., Ltd. Et al. (D. Mass. 23-cv-11780).

Insulet sued EOFlow, Flex, Ltd., Flextronics Corp., and related companies and individuals, accusing them of infringing three patents relating to wearable insulin pumps.  Insulet developed and gained approval for its pump design, called the “Omnipod System,” in 2005.  It says that no other company had been able to successfully develop a non-infringing model until 2-16, when EOFlow hired former Insulet executives and key employees (several of whom are named as individual defendants), and that shortly thereafter arrived at a new design that was substantially the same as the Omnipod System.  Insulet further alleges that EOFlow entered into a joint development agreement with Flex, who as Insulet’s manufacturer possessed every detail of the manufacture of the Omnipod System, including trade secret and proprietary information relating thereto.  EOFlow’s competing product, the “EOPatch,” completed development in 2018.  Insulet says that the designs are so similar that many of the actual components of each are interchangeable with the other.  Insulet says that it only became aware of this similarity in 2023 when EOFlow applied for expedited approval of the EOPatch based on its being “substantially equivalent” to another device already on the market, which Insulet believes to be its Omnipod. Insulet says that Medtronic announced its intention to acquire EOFlow for $738 million based on the imminent approval of the EOPatch.  Along with the patent claims, Insulet asserts misappropriation of trade secrets under the DTSA, breach of contract, false designation of origin, trade dress dilution, and unfair competition.

Insulet then moved for a temporary restraining order seeking to prevent the dissemination of its trade secrets to Medtronic in connection with the anticipated acquisition of EOFlow.  Judge Saylor granted this motion, entering a TRO that prohibits the EOFlow defendants from further disclosing product or manufacturing information related to either the Omnipod or EOPatch products to any third party, including Medtronics, other than to Medtronics personnel who have direct responsibility for monitoring or participating in the litigation, and then only on an “Attorney’s Eyes Only” basis.

Judge Saylor further granted Insulet’s motion for expedited production of documents relating to the design and manufacture of the EOPatch product and to Flex’s agreements with EOFlow and/or the named individuals, ordering certain categories of documents be produced within seven days.  This information will be used in connection with Insulet’s motion for a preliminary injunction, which has not yet been decided.