Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies License and revenue share agreements Revenue share agreements The Company is party to revenue share agreements with certain past and present members of its scientific advisory board under which these advisors agreed to participate on a scientific advisory board and to assist with the development of the Company’s personalized implant products and related intellectual property. These agreements provide that the Company will pay the advisor a specified percentage of the Company’s net revenue, ranging from 0.1% to 1.33%, with respect to the Company’s products on which the advisor made a technical contribution or, in some cases, products covered by one or more claims of one or more Company patents on which the advisor is a named inventor. The specific percentage is determined by reference to product classifications set forth in the agreement and is often tiered based on the level of net revenue collected by the Company on such product sales. The Company’s payment obligations under these agreements typically expire a fixed number of years after expiration or termination of the agreement or a fixed number of years after the first sale of a product, but in some cases expire on a product-by-product basis or expiration of the last to expire of the Company’s patents where the advisor is a named inventor that claims the applicable product. The Company incurred aggregate revenue share expense including all amounts payable under the Company’s scientific advisory board revenue share agreements of $0.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2023, representing 2.3% of product revenue and $0.6 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022, representing 4.0% of product revenue. Revenue share expense is included in research and development. Other obligations In the ordinary course of business, the Company is a party to certain non-cancellable contractual obligations typically related to product royalty and research and development. The Company accrues a liability for such matters when it is probable that future expenditures will be made and such expenditures can be reasonably estimated. There have been no contingent liabilities requiring accrual at March 31, 2023 or December 31, 2022. Legal proceedings In the ordinary course of the Company's business, the Company is subject to routine risk of litigation, claims and administrative proceedings on a variety of matters, including patent infringement, product liability, securities-related claims, and other claims in the United States and in other countries where the Company sells its products. In the case of matters below in which the Company is a defendant, adverse outcomes of these lawsuits could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition or results of operations. The Company is presently unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits or to reasonably estimate a range of potential losses, if any, related to the lawsuits. Legal costs associated with legal proceedings are accrued as incurred. Settlement and License Agreement with Medacta On August 29, 2019, the Company filed a lawsuit against Medacta USA, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Company amended its complaint on December 23, 2019, and again on October 14, 2020, adding Medacta International SA (Medacta USA, Inc.’s parent company) as a defendant (Medacta USA, Inc. and Medacta International SA are referred to, together, as “Medacta”). The Company is seeking damages for Medacta’s infringement of certain of the Company’s patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems, alleging that Medacta’s multiple lines of patient-specific instruments, as well as the implant components used in conjunction with them, infringe four of the Company’s patents. The accused product lines include Medacta patient-specific instrument and implant systems for knee and shoulder replacement procedures. On January 6, 2020, Medacta filed its answer to the Company's complaint, denying that its patient-specific instrument and implant systems infringe the patents asserted by the Company. Medacta’s answer also alleges the affirmative defense that the Company's asserted patents are invalid. On January 21, 2021, Medacta International SA filed a partial motion to dismiss; on February 16, 2021, the Company filed its opposition to the motion; and on March 2, 2021, Medacta International SA filed its reply. On March 4, 2021, the court issued its opinion on claim construction, ruling in the Company’s favor on the construction of all of the disputed terms. On June 3, 2022, the court denied Medacta International SA’s motion to dismiss. On September 8, 2022, the parties notified the court that an agreement in principle to settle the case had been reached. The trial schedule and case deadlines were canceled, pending the parties’ preparation of and agreement to a definitive settlement agreement. On October 20, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against Medacta Germany GmbH and Medacta International SA (together, “Medacta Europe”) in the Regional Court of Düsseldorf ("German Court"). We are seeking damages for Medacta Europe’s infringement of one of our German patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems through Medacta Europe’s sales of multiple lines of PSI, as well as the implant components used in conjunction with them, in Germany. The accused product lines include Medacta Europe’s patient-specific instrument and implant systems for knee, hip, and shoulder replacement procedures. Medacta Europe filed its statement of defense on January 31, 2022. The Company filed its reply to Medacta’s statement of defense on April 28, 2022. As of July 28, 2022, the Company delivered security deposits in the amount of EUR 146,000 to the German Court in order to maintain the action. On September 1, 2022, an oral hearing on infringement and liability was held. On September 9, 2022, the parties notified the court that an agreement in principle to settle the case had been reached, and the issuance of further rulings by the court was delayed, pending the parties’ preparation of and agreement to a definitive settlement agreement. On November 8, 2022, the Company entered into a non-exclusive, fully paid up, worldwide settlement and license agreement with Medacta, resolving the matters described in the two preceding paragraphs. Under the terms of this agreement, the Company granted a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to Medacta to use patient-specific instrument technology covered by the Company's patents and patent applications with off-the-shelf implants for the knee and shoulder. This license does not extend to patient-specific implants. This license agreement provided for a single lump-sum payment by Medacta to the Company upon entering into the license agreement, which was paid in the fourth quarter of 2022. Litigation with Osteoplastics On March 20, 2020, Osteoplastics LLC ("Osteoplastics"), filed a lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, and Osteoplastics amended its complaint on April 2, 2020. Osteoplastics alleges that the Company’s proprietary software, including the Company’s iFit software platform, and the Company’s use of its proprietary software for designing and manufacturing medical devices, including implants, infringes seven patents owned by Osteoplastics. On June 15, 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss Osteoplastics’ complaint, and on October 21, 2020, the court denied the motion. On November 2, 2020, the Company filed its answer to the amended complaint, denying that it infringes the patents asserted by Osteoplastics. The Company’s answer also alleges the affirmative defense that Osteoplastics’ asserted patents are invalid. Trial is currently set to begin on July 24, 2023. Litigation against DePuy On April 30, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against DePuy Synthes, Inc., DePuy Synthes Products, Inc., and DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc. (collectively, “DePuy”) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, seeking damages for DePuy’s infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems. The complaint alleges that DePuy’s multiple lines of PSI, as well as the implant components used in conjunction with them, infringe seven of the Company's patents. The accused product lines include DePuy’s patient-specific instrument and implant systems for knee and shoulder replacement procedures. On October 25, 2021, DePuy filed a partial motion to dismiss. On November 15, 2021, the Company filed an amended complaint. On December 6, 2021, DePuy filed a second partial motion to dismiss. The Company opposed the partial motion to dismiss on December 20, 2021, and DePuy filed a reply in support of its partial motion to dismiss on December 27, 2021. On February 14, 2022, the court denied DePuy's partial motion to dismiss. On February 28, 2022, DePuy filed its answer to the Company's amended complaint, denying that its patient-specific instrument and implant systems infringe the patents asserted by the Company. A claim construction hearing was held on February 6, 2023. Discovery in the lawsuit is ongoing. Litigation against Exactech On June 3, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against Exactech, Inc. (“Exactech”) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida seeking damages for Exactech’s infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems. The complaint alleges that Exactech’s line of patient-specific instruments for use with its ankle implant systems, as well as the ankle implant components used in conjunction with them, infringe five of the Company's patents. Discovery in the lawsuit is ongoing. Litigation against Bodycad Laboratories On June 3, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against Bodycad Laboratories, Inc., Bodycad USA Corp. (together, “Bodycad”), and Exactech (collectively, “Defendants”), in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida seeking damages for Defendants’ infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems. The complaint alleges that Defendants’ line of patient-specific surgical systems for unicondylar knee replacement surgery and Bodycad’s line of patient-specific surgical systems for knee osteotomy surgery infringe six of the Company's patents. On August 2, 2021, Exactech filed its answer to the complaint, denying that it infringed our asserted patents and also alleging that our asserted patents are invalid. On August 20, 2021, Bodycad filed a motion to dismiss and for a more definite statement. On September 10, 2021, the Company filed an amended complaint that continued to accuse the same products of infringing six of the Company's patents. On September 24, 2021, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and the Company opposed the motion to dismiss on October 15, 2021. On March 30, 2022, the court denied Defendants motion to dismiss. Discovery in the lawsuit is ongoing. On February 9, 2023, the parties entered into a settlement and license agreement that resolves the patent infringement dispute filed by the Company in June of 2021. The parties agreed to an undisclosed amount for the dismissal of all patent litigation between the companies along with a release and license to certain Company patents related to patient-specific instrumentation and knee implants. Litigation against Aetna On May 8, 2020, the Company and an individual plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Aetna, Inc. and Aetna Life Insurance Company (together, “Aetna”) in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts seeking damages for Aetna’s improper denial of coverage for personalized knee implants under its health plans and the ones it administers. The Company amended its complaint on August 13, 2020, alleging that Aetna violated its duties under state and federal law, including the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. On March 31, 2021, the court dismissed the Company’s claims against Aetna, but allowed the individual plaintiff’s claims to survive. The individual plaintiff settled his claims against Aetna in October 2021 and the Company subsequently filed a notice of appeal. The Company filed its appeal brief on April 15, 2022. Aetna filed its response to our appeal brief on June 15, 2022. The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments from the parties on the appeal briefs on November 8, 2022. On January 23, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit revived the Company's trade libel claims against Aetna, finding that Aetna’s policy claims that the Company's knee implants are “experimental” and “investigational” can plausibly be considered actionable product disparagement, and that the district court had erred in dismissing these claims. The court found that the Company has plausibly claimed that Aetna's policy decision caused orthopedic surgeons to stop prescribing its knee replacement implants. The court also revived the Company's related claims for unfair trade practice and interference with advantageous relations. The court issued a scheduling order on March 2, 2023 and discovery in the lawsuit has commenced. The Company intends to continue pursuing these claims against Aetna, and expects to incur additional legal expenses in 2023 (and potentially thereafter) in connection with doing so. The Company is seeking an award of monetary damages and equitable relief. The Company is not presently able to predict the ultimate outcome of this matter or to reasonably estimate a range of potential damages the Company may be awarded, if successful. Indemnification In the normal course of business, the Company enters into contracts and agreements that contain a variety of representations and warranties and provide for general indemnifications. The Company’s exposure under these agreements is unknown because it involves claims that may be made against the Company in the future, but have not yet been made. To date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to defend any action related to its indemnification obligations. However, the Company may record charges in the future as a result of these indemnification obligations. In accordance with its bylaws, the Company has indemnification obligations to its officers and directors for certain events or occurrences, subject to certain limits, while they are serving at the Company’s request in such capacity. There have been no claims to date and the Company has a director and officer insurance policy that would be expected to enable it to recover a portion of any amounts paid for future claims.

The Company is party to revenue share agreements with certain past and present members of its scientific advisory board under which these advisors agreed to participate on a scientific advisory board and to assist with the development of the Company’s personalized implant products and related intellectual property. These agreements provide that the Company will pay the advisor a specified percentage of the Company’s net revenue, ranging from 0.1% to 1.33%, with respect to the Company’s products on which the advisor made a technical contribution or, in some cases, products covered by one or more claims of one or more Company patents on which the advisor is a named inventor. The specific percentage is determined by reference to product classifications set forth in the agreement and is often tiered based on the level of net revenue collected by the Company on such product sales. The Company’s payment obligations under these agreements typically expire a fixed number of years after expiration or termination of the agreement or a fixed number of years after the first sale of a product, but in some cases expire on a product-by-product basis or expiration of the last to expire of the Company’s patents where the advisor is a named inventor that claims the applicable product.

The Company incurred aggregate revenue share expense including all amounts payable under the Company’s scientific advisory board revenue share agreements of $0.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2023, representing 2.3% of product revenue and $0.6 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022, representing 4.0% of product revenue. Revenue share expense is included in research and development.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is a party to certain non-cancellable contractual obligations typically related to product royalty and research and development. The Company accrues a liability for such matters when it is probable that future expenditures will be made and such expenditures can be reasonably estimated. There have been no contingent liabilities requiring accrual at March 31, 2023 or December 31, 2022.

In the ordinary course of the Company's business, the Company is subject to routine risk of litigation, claims and administrative proceedings on a variety of matters, including patent infringement, product liability, securities-related claims, and other claims in the United States and in other countries where the Company sells its products. In the case of matters below in which the Company is a defendant, adverse outcomes of these lawsuits could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition or results of operations. The Company is presently unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits or to reasonably estimate a range of potential losses, if any, related to the lawsuits. Legal costs associated with legal proceedings are accrued as incurred.

On August 29, 2019, the Company filed a lawsuit against Medacta USA, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Company amended its complaint on December 23, 2019, and again on October 14, 2020, adding Medacta International SA (Medacta USA, Inc.’s parent company) as a defendant (Medacta USA, Inc. and Medacta International SA are referred to, together, as “Medacta”). The Company is seeking damages for Medacta’s infringement of certain of the Company’s patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems, alleging that Medacta’s multiple lines of patient-specific instruments, as well as the implant components used in conjunction with them, infringe four of the Company’s patents. The accused product lines include Medacta patient-specific instrument and implant systems for knee and shoulder replacement procedures. On January 6, 2020, Medacta filed its answer to the Company's complaint, denying that its patient-specific instrument and implant systems infringe the patents asserted by the Company. Medacta’s answer also alleges the affirmative defense that the Company's asserted patents are invalid. On January 21, 2021, Medacta International SA filed a partial motion to dismiss; on February 16, 2021, the Company filed its opposition to the motion; and on March 2, 2021, Medacta International SA filed its reply. On March 4, 2021, the court issued its opinion on claim construction, ruling in the Company’s favor on the construction of all of the disputed terms. On June 3, 2022, the

On October 20, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against Medacta Germany GmbH and Medacta International SA (together, “Medacta Europe”) in the Regional Court of Düsseldorf ("German Court"). We are seeking damages for Medacta Europe’s infringement of one of our German patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems through Medacta Europe’s sales of multiple lines of PSI, as well as the implant components used in conjunction with them, in Germany. The accused product lines include Medacta Europe’s patient-specific instrument and implant systems for knee, hip, and shoulder replacement procedures. Medacta Europe filed its statement of defense on January 31, 2022. The Company filed its reply to Medacta’s statement of defense on April 28, 2022. As of July 28, 2022, the Company delivered security deposits in the amount of EUR 146,000 to the German Court in order to maintain the action. On September 1, 2022, an oral hearing on infringement and liability was held. On September 9, 2022, the parties notified the court that an agreement in principle to settle the case had been reached, and the issuance of further rulings by the court was delayed, pending the parties’ preparation of and agreement to a definitive settlement agreement.

On November 8, 2022, the Company entered into a non-exclusive, fully paid up, worldwide settlement and license agreement with Medacta, resolving the matters described in the two preceding paragraphs. Under the terms of this agreement, the Company granted a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to Medacta to use patient-specific instrument technology covered by the Company's patents and patent applications with off-the-shelf implants for the knee and shoulder. This license does not extend to patient-specific implants. This license agreement provided for a single lump-sum payment by Medacta to the Company upon entering into the license agreement, which was paid in the fourth quarter of 2022.

On March 20, 2020, Osteoplastics LLC ("Osteoplastics"), filed a lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, and Osteoplastics amended its complaint on April 2, 2020. Osteoplastics alleges that the Company’s proprietary software, including the Company’s iFit software platform, and the Company’s use of its proprietary software for designing and manufacturing medical devices, including implants, infringes seven patents owned by Osteoplastics. On June 15, 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss Osteoplastics’ complaint, and on October 21, 2020, the court denied the motion. On November 2, 2020, the Company filed its answer to the amended complaint, denying that it infringes the patents asserted by Osteoplastics. The Company’s answer also alleges the affirmative defense that Osteoplastics’ asserted patents are invalid. Trial is currently set to begin on July 24, 2023.

On April 30, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against DePuy Synthes, Inc., DePuy Synthes Products, Inc., and DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc. (collectively, “DePuy”) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, seeking damages for DePuy’s infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems. The complaint alleges that DePuy’s multiple lines of PSI, as well as the implant components used in conjunction with them, infringe seven of the Company's patents. The accused product lines include DePuy’s patient-specific instrument and implant systems for knee and shoulder replacement procedures. On October 25, 2021, DePuy filed a partial motion to dismiss. On November 15, 2021, the Company filed an amended complaint. On December 6, 2021, DePuy filed a second partial motion to dismiss. The Company opposed the partial motion to dismiss on December 20, 2021, and DePuy filed a reply in support of its partial motion to dismiss on December 27, 2021. On February 14, 2022, the court denied DePuy's partial motion to dismiss. On February 28, 2022, DePuy filed its answer to the Company's amended complaint, denying that its patient-specific instrument and implant systems infringe the patents asserted by the Company. A claim construction hearing was held on February 6, 2023. Discovery in the lawsuit is ongoing.

On June 3, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against Exactech, Inc. (“Exactech”) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida seeking damages for Exactech’s infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems. The complaint alleges that Exactech’s line of patient-specific instruments for use with its ankle implant systems, as well as the ankle implant

On June 3, 2021, the Company filed a lawsuit against Bodycad Laboratories, Inc., Bodycad USA Corp. (together, “Bodycad”), and Exactech (collectively, “Defendants”), in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida seeking damages for Defendants’ infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to patient-specific instrument and implant systems. The complaint alleges that Defendants’ line of patient-specific surgical systems for unicondylar knee replacement surgery and Bodycad’s line of patient-specific surgical systems for knee osteotomy surgery infringe six of the Company's patents. On August 2, 2021, Exactech filed its answer to the complaint, denying that it infringed our asserted patents and also alleging that our asserted patents are invalid. On August 20, 2021, Bodycad filed a motion to dismiss and for a more definite statement. On September 10, 2021, the Company filed an amended complaint that continued to accuse the same products of infringing six of the Company's patents. On September 24, 2021, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and the Company opposed the motion to dismiss on October 15, 2021. On March 30, 2022, the court denied Defendants motion to dismiss. Discovery in the lawsuit is ongoing. On February 9, 2023, the parties entered into a settlement and license agreement that resolves the patent infringement dispute filed by the Company in June of 2021. The parties agreed to an undisclosed amount for the dismissal of all patent litigation between the companies along with a release and license to certain Company patents related to patient-specific instrumentation and knee implants.

On May 8, 2020, the Company and an individual plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Aetna, Inc. and Aetna Life Insurance Company (together, “Aetna”) in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts seeking damages for Aetna’s improper denial of coverage for personalized knee implants under its health plans and the ones it administers. The Company amended its complaint on August 13, 2020, alleging that Aetna violated its duties under state and federal law, including the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. On March 31, 2021, the court dismissed the Company’s claims against Aetna, but allowed the individual plaintiff’s claims to survive. The individual plaintiff settled his claims against Aetna in October 2021 and the Company subsequently filed a notice of appeal. The Company filed its appeal brief on April 15, 2022. Aetna filed its response to our appeal brief on June 15, 2022. The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments from the parties on the appeal briefs on November 8, 2022.

On January 23, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit revived the Company's trade libel claims against Aetna, finding that Aetna’s policy claims that the Company's knee implants are “experimental” and “investigational” can plausibly be considered actionable product disparagement, and that the district court had erred in dismissing these claims. The court found that the Company has plausibly claimed that Aetna's policy decision caused orthopedic surgeons to stop prescribing its knee replacement implants. The court also revived the Company's related claims for unfair trade practice and interference with advantageous relations. The court issued a scheduling order on March 2, 2023 and discovery in the lawsuit has commenced. The Company intends to continue pursuing these claims against Aetna, and expects to incur additional legal expenses in 2023 (and potentially thereafter) in connection with doing so. The Company is seeking an award of monetary damages and equitable relief. The Company is not presently able to predict the ultimate outcome of this matter or to reasonably estimate a range of potential damages the Company may be awarded, if successful.

In the normal course of business, the Company enters into contracts and agreements that contain a variety of representations and warranties and provide for general indemnifications. The Company’s exposure under these agreements is unknown because it involves claims that may be made against the Company in the future, but have not yet been made. To date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to defend any action related to its indemnification obligations. However, the Company may record charges in the future as a result of these indemnification obligations. In accordance with its bylaws, the Company has indemnification obligations to its officers and directors for certain events or occurrences, subject to certain limits, while they are serving at the Company’s request in such capacity. There have been no claims to date and the Company has a director and officer insurance policy that would be expected to enable it to recover a portion of any amounts paid for future claims.