XML 25 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.21.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2021
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | 9. Commitments and Contingencies Royalty Payments Pursuant to the terms of its 2006 license agreement with the Ipsen Group, the Company is required to make royalty payments of two percent of net sales of NUPLAZID. This obligation terminated in October 2021. License and Merger Agreements The Company has entered into various collaboration, licensing and merger agreements which provide the Company with rights to certain know-how, technology and patent rights. The agreements generally include upfront license fees, development and commercial milestone payments upon achievement of certain clinical and commercial development and annual net sales milestones, as well as royalties calculated as a percentage of product revenues, with rates that vary by agreement. The Company incurred $5.0 million in milestone payments for the nine months ended September 30, 2021. As of September 30, 2021, the Company may be required to make milestone payments up to $2.2 billion in the aggregate. In August 2018, the Company entered into a license agreement with Neuren and obtained exclusive North American rights to develop and commercialize trofinetide for Rett syndrome and other indications. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid Neuren an upfront license fee of $10.0 million and it may be required to pay up to an additional $455.0 million in milestone payments based on the achievement of certain development and annual net sales milestones. In addition, the Company may be required to pay Neuren tiered, escalating, double-digit percentage royalties based on net sales. The license agreement was accounted for as an asset acquisition and the upfront cash payment of $10.0 million was expensed to research and development in the third quarter of 2018 as there is no alternative use for the asset. In March 2020, the Company entered into a license agreement and research collaboration with Vanderbilt University and obtained exclusive worldwide rights to develop and commercialize novel drug candidates targeting positive allosteric modulators of the muscarinic M1 receptor (the M1 PAM program) with the potential to treat a range of central nervous system disorders. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid Vanderbilt University an upfront license fee of $10.0 million and may be required to pay up to $515.0 million in milestone payments based on the achievement of certain clinical development and commercial and annual net sales milestones. In addition, the Company may be required to pay Vanderbilt University tiered royalties based on net sales. Furthermore, the Company is required to spend a minimum annual amount in development and the pursuit of regulatory approval for the M1 PAM compounds over the first three years of the license agreement. Such amounts are not material to the Company. The license agreement was accounted for as an asset acquisition and the upfront cash payment of $10.0 million was expensed to research and development in the first quarter of 2020 as there is no future alternative use for the assets. In August 2020, the Company entered into the Merger Agreement with CerSci. The lead development program is a unique Reactive Species Decomposition Accelerant, a non-opioid mechanism focused on interrupting pathways that sensitize neurons to pain. The portfolio contains additional preclinical stage programs, including brain penetrant compounds, with potential for symptomatic and disease modifying treatment utility in neurodegenerative diseases. The Company incurred an aggregate of $52.8 million in upfront consideration and transaction costs, of which, $44.3 million was paid through the issuance of approximately 1.2 million shares of the Company’s common stock. In addition, under the terms of the Merger Agreement, the Company may be required to pay CerSci’s former equity holders up to $887.0 million in cash upon the achievement of certain development, commercialization and sales milestones, in addition to tiered cash royalties in the mid-single digits based on annual net sales. As substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired was concentrated in the in-process research and development intangible assets acquired, the Company concluded that this transaction did not meet the definition of a business combination pursuant to FASB Accounting Standard Codification Topic 805, Business Combinations. As such, the transaction was accounted for as an asset acquisition and the upfront consideration of $45.7 million was expensed to research and development in the third quarter of 2020 as there is no future alternative use for the assets. Corporate Credit Card Program In connection with the Company’s credit card program, the Company established a letter of credit for $2.0 million, which has automatic annual extensions and is fully secured by restricted cash. Fleet Program In connection with the Company’s fleet program, the Company established a letter of credit for $0.4 million, which has automatic annual extensions and is fully secured by restricted cash. Legal Proceedings Between July 19 and August 3, 2018, following negative publicity about NUPLAZID, three purported company stockholders filed putative securities class action complaints (captioned Staublein v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 18-cv-01647, Stone v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 18-cv-01672, and Barglow v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 18-cv-01812) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the Company and certain of its current and former executive officers. Thereafter, several putative lead plaintiffs filed motions to consolidate the cases and to appoint a lead plaintiff. On January 3, 2019, the Court consolidated the cases under the caption In re Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 18-cv-01647, and took the lead plaintiff motions under submission. On February 26, 2019, the Court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel. Lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on April 15, 2019. The consolidated complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and prospects by failing to disclose that adverse events and safety concerns regarding NUPLAZID threatened initial and continuing FDA approval, and by failing to disclose that the Company engaged in business practices likely to attract regulatory scrutiny. The consolidated complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint on June 7, 2019. On June 1, 2020, the Court granted the motion in part and gave lead plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. On July 16, 2020, lead plaintiff filed the amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on August 28, 2020. Lead plaintiff opposed the motion on September 15, 2020. Defendants’ reply in support of the motion to dismiss was filed on November 11, 2020. On March 29, 2021, the Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss with leave to amend. On April 16, 2021, lead plaintiff filed a third amended complaint. Defendants’ filed a motion to dismiss the third amended complaint on May 31, 2021. The lead plaintiff opposed the motion on July 12, 2021. Defendants’ reply in support of its motion is due on August 11, 2021. The motion is set to be heard on November 18, 2021. On February 7, 2020, a purported company stockholder filed a derivative complaint (captioned Barney v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0238) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the Company’s directors and certain of its current and former executive officers. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment arising from allegations similar to those in the federal securities class action described above. On September 9, 2020, the Court substituted plaintiffs and re-captioned the case Shumacher v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0238. On June 23, 2020, a second derivative complaint (captioned Lazarus v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0843) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. On September 9, 2020, the Court transferred the Lazarus case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and re-captioned the case Lazarus v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-1774. On January 15, 2021, the Court consolidated the cases under the name In re ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Case No. 20-cv-0238, appointed lead counsel for the plaintiffs, and designated the complaint in the Shumacher case as the operative complaint. The consolidated case is stayed until the defendants in the federal securities class action answer, or the federal securities class action is dismissed with prejudice and all appeals are exhausted, or any party to the stipulation to stay gives 15 days’ written notice that it no longer consents to the voluntary stay. On July 24, 2020, the Company filed complaints against (i) Aurobindo Pharma Limited and its affiliate Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. and (ii) Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and its affiliate Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and on July 30, 2020, the Company filed complaints against (i) Hetero Labs Limited and its affiliates Hetero Labs Limited Unit-V and Hetero USA Inc., (ii) MSN Laboratories Private Ltd. and its affiliate MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and (iii) Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. and its affiliate Cadila Healthcare Limited. These complaints, which were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, allege infringement of certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. The cases have been assigned to the Honorable Richard G. Andrews. On September 1, 2020, Aurobindo filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On September 22, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Aurobindo’s counterclaims. On August 31, 2020, Teva filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On September 21, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Teva’s counterclaims. On October 5, 2020, Hetero filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On October 26, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Hetero’s counterclaims. On September 30, 2020, MSN filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On November 5, 2020, the Company filed its first amended complaint against MSN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On November 19, 2020, MSN filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On December 10, 2020, the Company filed its answer to MSN’s counterclaims. On November 2, 2020, Zydus filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On November 23, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Zydus’s counterclaims. On December 8, 2020, the parties’ joint proposed scheduling order was entered by Judge Andrews. On April 7, 2021, the Company filed its first amended complaints against Hetero and Teva and its second amended complaint against MSN, to include an additional Orange Book-listed patent covering NUPLAZID. On April 8, 2021, the Company filed its first amended complaint against Zydus and on April 9, 2021, the Company filed its first amended complaint against Aurobindo. On April 20, 2021, MSN filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company’s second amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On April 21, 2021, Teva filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company’s first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On April 22, 2021, Zydus filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company’s first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On April 22, 2021, Aurobindo filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company’s first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On May 11, 2021, the Company filed its answer to MSN’s counterclaims. On May 12, the Company filed its answer to Teva’s counterclaims. On May 13, the Company filed its answer to Zydus’s counterclaims and its answer to Aurobindo’s counterclaims. A joint trial in the matters is scheduled for May 15, 2023. The Company entered into an agreement effective April 22, 2021 with Hetero settling all claims and counterclaims in the litigation. The agreement allows Hetero to launch its generic pimavanserin product on July 27, 2038, subject to certain triggers for earlier launch. The Hetero case was dismissed by joint agreement on May 3, 2021. On April 19, 2021, a purported Company stockholder filed a putative securities class action complaint (captioned Marechal v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 21-cv-0762) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the Company and certain of its current executive officers. The complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and prospects by failing to disclose that the materials submitted in support of its supplemental New Drug Application (sNDA) seeking approval of pimavanserin for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with dementia-related psychosis contained statistical and design deficiencies and that the FDA was unlikely to approve the sNDA in its current form. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. On June 21, 2021, five motions for lead plaintiff and lead counsel were filed. Thereafter, four of the five movants either withdrew their motions or filed statements of non-opposition. On September 29, 2021, the Court issued an order designating lead plaintiff and lead counsel. Management currently believes that none of the foregoing claims or actions pending against the Company as of September 30, 2021 is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, liquidity, financial position, or results of operations. Given the unpredictability inherent in litigation, however, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these matters. The Company is unable to estimate possible losses or ranges of losses that may result from these matters, and therefore it has not accrued any amounts in connection with these matters other than attorneys’ fees incurred to date.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration