Amarin accrues a liability for legal contingencies when it believes that it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and that it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss. Amarin reviews these accruals and adjusts them to reflect ongoing negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other relevant information. To the extent new information is obtained and Amarin’s views on the probable outcomes of claims, suits, assessments, investigations or legal proceedings change, changes in Amarin’s accrued liabilities would be recorded in the period in which such determination is made. For the matters referenced below, the amount of liability is not probable nor can the amount be reasonably estimated; therefore, accruals have not been made. In addition, in accordance with the relevant authoritative guidance, for matters in which the likelihood of material loss is at least reasonably possible, Amarin provides disclosure of the possible loss or range of loss. If a reasonable estimate cannot be made, however, Amarin will provide disclosure to that effect.

On March 30, 2020, the Nevada Court, ruled in favor of two generics companies, Hikma and Dr. Reddy’s, in Amarin’s patent litigation related to its ANDAs that sought U.S. FDA approval for sale of generic versions of VASCEPA for the original indication of VASCEPA as an adjunct to diet to reduce TG levels in adult patients with severe (>500 mg/dL) hypertriglyceridemia. On September 3, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or the Federal Circuit, upheld the March ruling by the Nevada Court in favor of the two generics companies. On October 2, 2020, the Company filed a combined petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc. On November 4, 2020, the Company’s rehearing and en banc petitions were denied. On February 11, 2021, Amarin filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court to ask the Court to hear the Company’s appeal in this litigation, which was denied on June 18, 2021.

On May 22, 2020 and August 10, 2020, Hikma and Dr. Reddy’s, respectively, received U.S. FDA approval to market its generic versions of VASCEPA. During the ANDA litigation, the Company reached agreements with Teva and Apotex, under which they received royalty-free license agreements to promote a generic version of icosapent ethyl in the U.S. under certain circumstances, one

of which circumstances was achieved when the Federal Circuit upheld the ruling by the Nevada Court and Hikma launched its generic version of icosapent ethyl. On September 11, 2020, and June 30, 2021, Teva and Apotex, respectively, received U.S. FDA approval to market their respective generic versions of icosapent ethyl. In November 2020, Hikma announced the price and launched its generic version of icosapent ethyl. In June 2021, Dr. Reddy’s announced the price and launched its generic version of icosapent ethyl. In January 2022, Apotex announced the price and launched its generic version of icosapent ethyl. In September 2022, Teva announced the price and launched its generic version of icosapent ethyl for the 0.5-gram capsule and the 1.0 gram capsule in January 2023. All generic versions of icosapent ethyl as approved by the U.S. FDA pertains to the MARINE indication of VASCEPA, lowering of TG levels in patients with very high TG (>500 mg/dL). Current generic competition, together with past and on-going litigation related to such generic versions of icosapent ethyl are applicable to the U.S. only. The Company did not seek, nor is VAZKEPA approved in Europe for lowering of TG levels in patients with very high TG (>500 mg/dL).

The active pharmaceutical ingredient in VASCEPA is difficult and time consuming to manufacture, often requires considerable advanced planning and long-term financial commitment, including to manufacturing infrastructure such as dedicated facilities, to ensure sufficient capacity is available when needed. The Company has invested over a decade of resources and expenses to develop with individual members of its third-party, active pharmaceutical ingredient supply chain the technical knowhow, manufacturing processes and related regulatory approvals that have helped enable the Company’s suppliers to supply the Company’s need for clinical and commercial supply globally.

In November 2020, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Hikma in the United States District Court in Delaware. The complaint alleged that Hikma induced the infringement of VASCEPA-related CV risk reduction U.S. Patent Nos. 9,700,537 (Composition for preventing the occurrence of cardiovascular event in multiple risk patient), 8,642,077 (Stable pharmaceutical composition and methods of using same), and 10,568,861 (Methods of reducing the risk of a cardiovascular event in a subject at risk for cardiovascular disease) by making, selling, offering to sell and importing generic icosapent ethyl capsules in or into the United States.

In January 2021, the Company expanded the scope of the VASCEPA CV risk reduction patent infringement lawsuit against Hikma to include a health care insurance provider in the United States, Health Net LLC, or Health Net. Through insurance coverage and economic incentives the Company alleged that Health Net has actively induced pharmacies to dispense, and patients to use, Hikma generic icosapent ethyl capsules in infringement of the related patents. In the complaint, the Company sought remedies including a permanent injunction against the unlawful inducement by Hikma and Health Net of infringing uses of the Hikma generic product, i.e., uses to reduce cardiovascular risk as detailed in the patents, and monetary damages in an amount sufficient to compensate the Company for such infringement. On January 4, 2022, the district court hearing the case granted Hikma's motion to dismiss. On October 13, 2022, the district court granted final judgement on the aspect of the litigation relating to the Company and Hikma. The Company has appealed the decision of the district court. On December 26, 2022, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with Health Net that resolved the litigation relating to the Company and Health Net. The Company will continue to consider its legal options against parties similarly situated to Health Net and Hikma and acting in concert with either by making or selling any drug product or component thereof covered by the subject patents, or inducing others to do the same.

As has been a practice in the generic pharmaceutical industry, on April 27, 2021 and February 21, 2023, Dr. Reddy’s and Hikma, respectively, filed complaints against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Civil action No. 21-cv-10309 and No. 23-cv-01016, alleging various antitrust violations stemming from alleged anticompetitive practices related to the supply of active pharmaceutical ingredient of VASCEPA. The DRL complaints also includes a related state law tortious interference claim. Damages sought include recovery for alleged economic harm to Dr. Reddy’s and to Hikma respectively, treble damages, other costs and fees and injunctive relief against the alleged violative activities. Amarin believes it has valid defenses and will vigorously defend against the claims. Such litigation can be lengthy, costly and could materially affect and disrupt our business.

In March 2021, Amarin received a civil investigative demand, or CID, from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and a subpoena from the New York Attorney General with respect to information on the same antitrust topic covered in the Dr. Reddy's litigation. Similarly, in June 2020, the Company received a CID from the U.S. Department of Justice, or the DOJ, informing Amarin that the DOJ is investigating whether aspects of its promotional speaker programs and copayment waiver program during the period from January 1, 2015 to the present violated the U.S. Anti-Kickback Statute and the U.S. Civil False Claims Act, in relation to the sale and marketing of VASCEPA by the Company and its previous co-marketing partner, Kowa Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. Amarin is cooperating with the government agencies regarding these two investigations, or the Investigations, and concluded document production and interrogatory responses in mid-2023. We cannot predict when these investigations will be resolved, the outcome of the investigations or their potential impact on the Company’s business.

Amarin is named as a defendant in six antitrust class action lawsuits in the District Court for the District of New Jersey, as displayed in the table below. Each of the six antitrust class action lawsuits allege Amarin and its co-defendant suppliers violated state and federal antitrust laws by monopolizing and engaging in a conspiracy to restrain trade in the icosapent ethyl drug and API markets.


Lawsuits	Civil Action #	Direct/Indirect Purchasers
Uniformed Fire Officers Association Family Protection Plan Local 854	21-12061	Indirect Purchaser
Uniformed Fire Officers Association for Retired Fire Officers Family Protection Plan	21-12061	Indirect Purchaser
The International Union of Operating Engineers Locals 137, 137A, 137B, 137C, 137R	21-12416	Indirect Purchaser
KPH Healthcare Services, Inc.	21-12747	Direct Purchaser
Local 464A United Food and Commercial Workers Union Welfare Service Benefit Fund	21-13009	Indirect Purchaser
Teamsters Health & Welfare Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity	21-13406	Indirect Purchaser

Such antitrust litigation and antitrust investigations can be lengthy, costly and could materially affect and disrupt the Company’s business. The Company cannot predict when these matters will be resolved, their outcome or their potential impact on the Company’s business. If a government determines that Amarin has violated antitrust law, the Company could be subject to significant civil fines and penalties.

The Company intends to vigorously enforce its intellectual property rights relating to VASCEPA, but cannot predict the outcome of these lawsuits or any subsequently filed lawsuits.

On October 21, 2021, a purported investor in the Company's publicly traded securities filed a putative class action lawsuit against Amarin Corporation plc, the former chief executive officer and the former chief financial officer in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Vincent Dang v. Amarin Corporation plc, John F. Thero and Michael W. Kalb, No. 1:21-cv-19212 (D.N.J. Oct. 21, 2021). A subsequent case, Dorfman v. Amarin Corporation plc, et al., No. 3:21-cv-19911 (D.N.J. filed Nov. 10, 2021), was filed in November 2021. In December 2021, several Amarin shareholders moved to consolidate the cases and appoint a lead plaintiff and lead counsel pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. The complaints in these actions are nearly identical and allege that the Company misled investors by allegedly downplaying the risk associated with the Company's ANDA litigation described above and the risk that certain of the Company's patents related to the MARINE indication would be invalidated. Based on these allegations, plaintiff alleges that he purchased securities at an inflated share price and brings claims under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 seeking unspecified monetary damages and attorneys' fees and costs. In October 2022, the court consolidated the cases and appointed a lead plaintiff for the putative class. On January 13, 2023, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint that also named the former general counsel, and again alleged that the Company made false statements regarding the ANDA Litigation as well as about the REDUCE-IT indication and VASCEPA’s financial prospects resulting from REDUCE-IT. All Defendants have moved to dismiss the amended complaint and the motion remains pending. The Company believes it has valid defenses and will vigorously defend against the claims but cannot predict the outcome. The Company is unable to reasonably estimate the loss exposure, if any, associated with these claims.

On March 29, 2023, purported investors in the Company’s publicly traded securities filed a derivative lawsuit, naming as defendants the Company’s former general counsel, the Company’s trial counsel for the ANDA litigation, and the Company as nominal defendant, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, captioned Anne Abramson, John Lissandrello, Georgette Appiano, and Andrew Bondarowicz v. Amarin Corporation plc, Covington & Burling, LLP, Joseph T. Kennedy, and John Does A-Z, No. MON-L-000984-23 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. Mar. 29, 2023). The complaint alleged that the defendants failed to exercise appropriate diligence and due care in their conduct of the ANDA litigation. Based on those allegations, the complaint alleged that the defendants committed legal malpractice and sought monetary damages and attorneys’ fees and costs. On April 8, 2023, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this case without prejudice.

On March 31, 2023, the Company’s former chief executive officer, Karim Mikhail, filed a complaint against the Company and certain of its affiliates in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division – Somerset County, captioned Mikhail v. Amarin Corporation, plc (Docket No. SOM-L-000366-23), concerning Mr. Mikhail’s alleged “constructive termination” from the Company. The complaint seeks unspecified damages arising from claims for breaches of his employment agreement, Executive Severance and Change of Control Plan, and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. On April 3, 2023, the case moved to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Civ. No. 3:23-cv-01856). On June 30, 2023, all defendants moved to dismiss this case without prejudice. The Company believes it has valid defenses and will vigorously defend against the claims but cannot predict the outcome. The Company is unable to reasonably estimate the loss exposure, if any, associated with these claims.

In addition to the above, in the ordinary course of business, the Company is from time to time involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings, and threats of litigation relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements and other matters.

The Company currently has long-term supply agreements with multiple API suppliers and encapsulators. The Company is relying on these suppliers to meet current and potential future global demand for VASCEPA. Certain supply agreements require annual minimum volume commitments by the Company and certain volume shortfalls may require payments for such shortfalls.

These agreements include requirements for the suppliers to meet certain product specifications and qualify their materials and facilities with applicable regulatory authorities including the U.S. FDA. The Company has incurred certain costs associated with the qualification of product produced by these suppliers.

The Company continues to negotiate with contract suppliers to align its supply arrangements with current and future global demand which may result in additional costs to the Company. As of the date of filing this Annual Report, the Company has a total of approximately $37.0 million in future contractual purchase obligations without consideration to ongoing discussions with other suppliers. In addition, the Company has total obligations of $186.5 million contingent on either certain suppliers obtaining regulatory approval in Europe or pricing reimbursement in certain European countries not occurring by June 30, 2024.

During 2023, the Company determined that it was probable that the Company would not be able to obtain pricing reimbursement in certain countries outlined within renegotiated supply agreements by June 30, 2024. The Company's reasonable estimate of the liability is a range between $8.0 million and $15.8 million, with no amount within that range a better estimate than any other amount; accordingly, an $8.0 million provision was recognized in cost of goods sold - restructuring inventory on the consolidated statement of operations. The ultimate resolution of the matter could result in up to an additional $7.8 million of the amount accrued.

On March 26, 2021, the EC approved the marketing authorization application for VAZKEPA. Under the 2004 share repurchase agreement with Laxdale upon receipt of pricing approval in Europe for the first indication for VASCEPA (or first indication of any product containing intellectual property acquired from Laxdale in 2004), the Company was obligated to make an aggregate stock or cash payment to the former shareholders of Laxdale (at the sole option of each of such former shareholders) of £7.5 million. On July 13, 2022 in connection with the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, or NICE's, final guidance for reimbursement of VAZKEPA and use across the National Health Service, or NHS, in England and Wales, representing receipt of marketing approval in Europe for the first indication for VAZKEPA, the Company became obligated to make the aggregate milestone payment of £7.5 million to Laxdale’s former shareholders (in either stock or cash at the election of each shareholder). As of December 31, 2023, the Company has settled the first European indication approval milestone through issuance of stock and cash payments based on the respective shareholder's election.

Also under the Laxdale agreement, upon receipt of a marketing approval in Europe for a further indication of VASCEPA (or further indication of any other product acquired from Laxdale in 2004), the Company must make an aggregate stock or cash payment (at the sole option of each of such former shareholder) of £5.0 million (approximately $6.4 million as of December 31, 2023) for the potential market approval.

The Company has no provision for any of these obligations, except the $8.0 million provision noted above, since the amounts are either not paid or payable as of December 31, 2023.