International Medical Devices, Inc. v. Cornell (Fed. Cir., argued Mar. 5, 2026, Nos. 25-1580, 25-1605)
I've been reading about trade secrets lately and came across this recent oral argument before the court - focused on the classic tradeoff between patents and trade secrets. A jury found a group of defendants misappropriated four trade secrets belonging to Dr. James Elist, a Beverly Hills urologist who developed the Penuma cosmetic penile implant. The defendants argue that the three design-concept secrets were all disclosed in prior patents and that the fourth, an instrument list, was never secret at all. The case was argued before Judges Dyk, Taranto, and Reyna, and questioning at oral argument focused primarily on whether the prior patent disclosures foreclosed trade secret protection as a matter of law under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA).
The technology at issue is a subcutaneous cosmetic penile implant, a silicone sleeve placed between the skin and "Buck's fascia" to enhance girth and length. The Penuma is apparently the only FDA-cleared device of this kind. It differs from therapeutic penile implants (used to treat erectile dysfunction) in both location and function: therapeutic implants are placed inside the corpus cavernosum, the erectile tissue deep within the penis, and substitute for blood flow to produce rigidity. A cosmetic implant sits on top of those structures, closer to the skin, and must accommodate the penis's natural changes in size and shape during erection without migrating or eroding through the skin.