COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2021
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Leases At the inception of a contractual arrangement, the Company determines whether the contract contains a lease by assessing whether there is an identified asset and whether the contract conveys the right to control the use of the identified asset in exchange for consideration over a period of time. If both criteria are met, the Company calculates the associated lease liability and corresponding right-of-use asset upon lease commencement using a discount rate based on a borrowing rate commensurate with the term of the lease. The Company records lease liabilities within current liabilities or long-term liabilities based upon the length of time associated with the lease payments. The Company records its operating lease right-of-use assets as long-term assets. As of September 30, 2021, the Company has recorded a lease liability of $320 and corresponding right-of-use-asset of $324 on its condensed consolidated balance sheet. Legal Proceedings From time to time, we are involved in various legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. K2M - Alleged Patent Infringement On January 20, 2017, K2M, Inc. filed suit against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (K2M, Inc. v. OrthoPediatrics Corp. et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-0061) seeking unspecified damages for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,532,816. The complaint was amended on August 21, 2017 to add, among other things, a claim of patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent No. 9,655,664. These patents relate to certain instruments used in our RESPONSE™ spine systems, which represent a portion of our total scoliosis portfolio. We denied these claims and responded with counterclaims seeking declaratory relief that the patents in question are both invalid and not infringed. On November 19, 2019, K2M amended its complaint to add two (2) additional issued patents, to add claims of patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent Nos. 10,285,735 and 10,292,736 (both issued in May 2019). Like before, these newly issued K2M patents relate to certain instruments used in our RESPONSE spine systems, and we denied these claims and responded with counterclaims seeking declaratory relief that the patents in question are both invalid and not infringed. On June 29, 2021, the parties settled the matter, and subsequently filed a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice concerning all claims and counterclaims, which the Court subsequently granted and ordered. The Company previously accrued for the related expense during the fourth quarter of 2020. No material modifications were made to the accrual during 2021, and the payment made during the second quarter 2021 satisfies all liabilities associated with this matter. IMED Surgical - Software Ownership Dispute On October 16, 2020, the Company, its wholly-owned subsidiary, Orthex, LLC (“Orthex”), the Company’s largest investor, Squadron Capital, LLC (“Squadron”), and certain other defendants, were named in a lawsuit filed by IMED Surgical, LLC, a New Jersey company (the “Plaintiff”), in Broward County, Florida Circuit Court. In the lawsuit, the Plaintiff claims, among other things, that it is the rightful owner of certain patented point-and-click planning software being used by the Company, Orthex and Squadron (specifically, U.S. Patent No. 10,258,377 (titled “Point and click alignment method for orthopedic surgeons, and surgical and clinical accessories and devices,” issued on April 16, 2019) (hereinafter, the “’377 Patent”). In June 2019, the Company purchased all the issued and outstanding units of membership interests in Orthex, and all the issued and outstanding shares of stock of Vilex in Tennessee, Inc. (“Vilex”) for $60,000 in total consideration. Vilex and Orthex are primarily manufacturers of foot and ankle surgical implants, including cannulated screws, fusion devices, surgical staples and bone plates, as well as the Orthex Hexapod technology, a system of rings, struts, implants, hardware accessories, and the Point & Click Software used to treat congenital deformities and limb length discrepancies. On December 31, 2019, the Company divested substantially all of the assets relating to Vilex's adult product offerings to a wholly-owned subsidiary of Squadron, in exchange for a $25,000 reduction in a term note owed to Squadron in connection with the initial acquisition. As part of the sale, the Company also executed an exclusive license arrangement with Squadron providing for perpetual access to certain intellectual property, including the ‘377 Patent. According to the lawsuit, the other defendants, who are unrelated to the Company, assigned the ‘377 Patent to Orthex in violation of certain agreements with the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff, among other things, requests that the defendants be ordered to convey and assign to Plaintiff all of their rights, title and interests in and to the ’377 Patent and seeks certain compensatory, consequential and unjust enrichment damages from Orthex and the unrelated defendants. On May 13, 2021, the Court ordered the lawsuit stayed pending arbitration. To the extent the Plaintiff desires to further pursue the matter, it must first do so through a separate arbitration proceeding. The Plaintiff has not yet initiated an arbitration proceeding. In connection with the stay order, the Court also ordered the Company, Orthex and Squadron to give notice to the Plaintiff before any attempt to dispose, assign, sell or otherwise encumber the ‘377 Patent. The Company, Orthex and Squadron have filed an appeal of this component of the order and are awaiting a ruling. Although we believe the IMED lawsuit is without merit and will vigorously defend the claims asserted against us, if pursued by the Plaintiff, arbitration and litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and an adverse resolution of such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Barry - Alleged Patent Infringement On December 30, 2020, Dr. Mark Barry filed suit against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Barry v. OrthoPediatrics Corp. et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01786) seeking unspecified damages for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,670,358; 8,361,121; 9,339,301; 9,668,787; and 9,668,788, which relate to systems and methods concerning derotation of spinal bodies to correct spinal deformities. On March 19, 2021, the parties reached a final settlement, which included the Company entering into a license agreement with Dr. Barry. The license agreement was recorded by the Company in the amount of $2,858, which will be amortized over a period of up to 8 years based upon the number of cases utilizing the related spinal deformity system in a given period. The balance of the amount otherwise paid to Dr. Barry had been previously accrued for during the fourth quarter of 2020 in anticipation of this final settlement. Wishbone Medical, Inc. – Patent Infringement Litigation On October 30, 2020, OrthoPediatrics, along with its wholly-owned subsidiary, Orthex, LLC, filed a lawsuit in federal district court (N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division, Case No. 3:20-cv-00929) against Wishbone Medical, Inc. and Nick A. Deeter (collectively “Wishbone”), claiming infringement of ’377 Patent, unfair competition, false advertising, breach of contract, defamation per se, tortious interference with contractual relationships, and tortious interference with prospective contractual relationships. In early January 2021, OrthoPediatrics amended its lawsuit by adding a declaratory judgment claim of infringement of the ‘377 Patent against Wishbone. Thereafter, in January 2021, Wishbone filed a motion to dismiss all OrthoPediatrics’ causes of action. In late August 2021, the Court denied Wishbone's motion to dismiss with respect to OrthoPediatrics’ infringement and breach of contract claims and dismissed OrthoPediatrics remaining causes of action. In late September 2021, Wishbone filed its answer and counterclaims, in part, seeking declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the ‘377 Patent, and alleging OrthoPediatrics patent infringement claim(s) against Wishbone was made in bad faith. In mid-October 2021, OrthoPediatrics filed its answer to Wishbone’s counterclaims, denying all of them. Although we believe Wishbone’s counterclaims are without merit and will vigorously defend the claims asserted against us, litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and an adverse resolution of this proceeding could have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Royalties As of September 30, 2021, we are contracted to pay royalties to individuals and entities that provide research and development services, which range from 0.5% to 20% of sales. We have products in development that have milestone payments and royalty commitments. In any development project, there are significant variables that will affect the amount and timing of these payments and as of September 30, 2021, we have not been able to determine the amount and timing of payments. We do not anticipate these future payments will have a material impact on our financial results. Purchase Obligations As a result of entering into a license agreement for the exclusive distribution of the 7D Surgical FLASHTM Navigation platform, the Company has agreed to a minimum purchase commitment for the first twelve months of that agreement. As of September 30, 2021, the remaining purchase commitment under the agreement was $3,800.

At the inception of a contractual arrangement, the Company determines whether the contract contains a lease by assessing whether there is an identified asset and whether the contract conveys the right to control the use of the identified asset in exchange for consideration over a period of time. If both criteria are met, the Company calculates the associated lease liability and corresponding right-of-use asset upon lease commencement using a discount rate based on a borrowing rate commensurate with the term of the lease.

On January 20, 2017, K2M, Inc. filed suit against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (K2M, Inc. v. OrthoPediatrics Corp. et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-0061) seeking unspecified damages for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,532,816. The complaint was amended on August 21, 2017 to add, among other things, a claim of patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent No. 9,655,664. These patents relate to certain instruments used in our RESPONSE™ spine systems, which represent a portion of our total scoliosis portfolio. We denied these claims and responded with counterclaims seeking declaratory relief that the patents in question are both invalid and not infringed. On November 19, 2019, K2M amended its complaint to add two (2) additional issued patents, to add claims of patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent Nos. 10,285,735 and 10,292,736 (both issued in May 2019). Like before, these newly issued K2M patents relate to certain instruments used in our RESPONSE spine systems, and we denied these claims and responded with counterclaims seeking declaratory relief that the patents in question are both invalid and not infringed. On June 29, 2021, the parties settled the matter, and subsequently filed a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice concerning all claims and counterclaims, which the Court subsequently granted and ordered. The Company previously accrued for the related expense during the fourth quarter of 2020. No material modifications were made to the accrual during 2021, and the payment made during the second quarter 2021 satisfies all liabilities associated with this matter.

On October 16, 2020, the Company, its wholly-owned subsidiary, Orthex, LLC (“Orthex”), the Company’s largest investor, Squadron Capital, LLC (“Squadron”), and certain other defendants, were named in a lawsuit filed by IMED Surgical, LLC, a New Jersey company (the “Plaintiff”), in Broward County, Florida Circuit Court. In the lawsuit, the Plaintiff claims, among other things, that it is the rightful owner of certain patented point-and-click planning software being used by the Company, Orthex and Squadron (specifically, U.S. Patent No. 10,258,377 (titled “Point and click alignment method for orthopedic surgeons, and surgical and clinical accessories and devices,” issued on April 16, 2019) (hereinafter, the “’377 Patent”).

implants, including cannulated screws, fusion devices, surgical staples and bone plates, as well as the Orthex Hexapod technology, a system of rings, struts, implants, hardware accessories, and the Point & Click Software used to treat congenital deformities and limb length discrepancies. On December 31, 2019, the Company divested substantially all of the assets relating to Vilex's adult product offerings to a wholly-owned subsidiary of Squadron, in exchange for a $25,000 reduction in a term note owed to Squadron in connection with the initial acquisition. As part of the sale, the Company also executed an exclusive license arrangement with Squadron providing for perpetual access to certain intellectual property, including the ‘377 Patent. According to the lawsuit, the other defendants, who are unrelated to the Company, assigned the ‘377 Patent to Orthex in violation of certain agreements with the Plaintiff.

On May 13, 2021, the Court ordered the lawsuit stayed pending arbitration. To the extent the Plaintiff desires to further pursue the matter, it must first do so through a separate arbitration proceeding. The Plaintiff has not yet initiated an arbitration proceeding. In connection with the stay order, the Court also ordered the Company, Orthex and Squadron to give notice to the Plaintiff before any attempt to dispose,

Although we believe the IMED lawsuit is without merit and will vigorously defend the claims asserted against us, if pursued by the Plaintiff, arbitration and litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and an adverse resolution of such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition.

On December 30, 2020, Dr. Mark Barry filed suit against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Barry v. OrthoPediatrics Corp. et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01786) seeking unspecified damages for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,670,358; 8,361,121; 9,339,301; 9,668,787; and 9,668,788, which relate to systems and methods concerning derotation of spinal bodies to correct spinal deformities. On March 19, 2021, the parties reached a final settlement, which included the Company entering into a license agreement with Dr. Barry. The license agreement was recorded by the Company in the amount of $2,858, which will be amortized over a period of up to 8 years based upon the number of cases utilizing the related spinal deformity system in a given period. The balance of the amount otherwise paid to Dr. Barry had been previously accrued for during the fourth quarter of 2020 in anticipation of this final settlement.

On October 30, 2020, OrthoPediatrics, along with its wholly-owned subsidiary, Orthex, LLC, filed a lawsuit in federal district court (N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division, Case No. 3:20-cv-00929) against Wishbone Medical, Inc. and Nick A. Deeter (collectively “Wishbone”), claiming infringement of ’377 Patent, unfair competition, false advertising, breach of contract, defamation per se, tortious interference with contractual relationships, and tortious interference with prospective contractual relationships. In early January 2021, OrthoPediatrics amended its lawsuit by adding a declaratory judgment claim of infringement of the ‘377 Patent against Wishbone.

Thereafter, in January 2021, Wishbone filed a motion to dismiss all OrthoPediatrics’ causes of action. In late August 2021, the Court denied Wishbone's motion to dismiss with respect to OrthoPediatrics’ infringement and breach of contract claims and dismissed OrthoPediatrics remaining causes of action. In late September 2021, Wishbone filed its answer and counterclaims, in part, seeking declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the ‘377 Patent, and alleging OrthoPediatrics patent infringement claim(s) against Wishbone was made in bad faith. In mid-October 2021, OrthoPediatrics filed its answer to Wishbone’s counterclaims, denying all of them. Although we believe Wishbone’s counterclaims are without merit and will vigorously defend the claims asserted against us, litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and an adverse resolution of this proceeding could have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition.

We have products in development that have milestone payments and royalty commitments. In any development project, there are significant variables that will affect the amount and timing of these payments and as of September 30, 2021, we have not been able to determine the amount and timing of payments. We do not anticipate these future payments will have a material impact on our financial results.