Fred Khosravi and AccessClosure (C)

Richard  Hamermesh; Lauren  Barley

Supplement | HBS Case Collection | January 2014

Fred Khosravi and AccessClosure (C)

Abstract

On September 11, 2013, the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied St. Jude's request to rehear an appeal on the "double patenting" ruling for the '439 patent. Further, it removed the injunction threat that was hanging over the company. The future looked bright for AccessClosure as 2013 drew to a close. The company expected 2014 revenues of more than $100 million with a gross margin of greater than 70%. It was also anticipating FDA approval on a significant product improvement within the next several months.

Keywords: medical devices; vascular closure device; patent litigation; Patenting; Biotechnology Industry; Biomedical Research; biotechnology; biotech; Technological Innovation; Patents; Health Care and Treatment; Biotechnology Industry; United States;

Language: English

Format: Print

1 pages

Purchase

Citation:

Hamermesh, Richard, and Lauren Barley. "Fred Khosravi and AccessClosure (C)." Harvard Business School Supplement 814-074, January 2014.

The case is set in March 2019, and tells the story of the founding of the Dementia Discovery Fund (DDF). The idea for the fund began in 2015, when then-Prime Minister David Cameron spoke about the importance of making breakthroughs in dementia research, and pledged money from the UK government for research. This in turn led to the search for a venture capital (VC) firm that could lead manage a fund, and the selection of SV Health to do that, including having Kate Bingham as a managing partner. The case describes the social and scientific needs for more dementia research, as well as the fundraising and initial team building of the fund. After the fund grows beyond the expected size, the case describes the hiring of a CEO, and asks what the next investment for the fund should be: a start-up that might soon be able to launch clinical trials, or an early-stage company with promising new research?

It is early 2018, and Emily Park, managing director of impact for the Abreu Family Office, is meeting the next day with Tomás and Maria Abreu to discuss the various ways in which the Abreus can allocate a planned $100 million to make a meaningful difference in cancer patients’ lives. Park has spent the past few months working on this project and has uncovered a multitude of options, from supporting high-performing disease-focused organizations through venture philanthropy; to investing in a fund or directly into ventures and possibly earning a good return on investment in the process; to helping address system-wide issues such as the better organization and funding of clinical trials. As she prepares to present her findings to the Abreus, she wonders which one(s) will spark their interest as the way to have the most meaningful impact, and what implications their ultimate decision will have on the Family Office in terms of its capital outlays, structure, staffing, and many other categories.

Faculty & Research

Fred Khosravi and AccessClosure (C)

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author