XML 31 R21.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.24.1.u1

Legal Matters | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2024
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Legal Matters | Legal Matters HETLIOZ®. Between April 2018 and March 2021, the Company filed numerous Hatch-Waxman lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (Delaware District Court) against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (Teva), MSN Pharmaceuticals Inc. and MSN Laboratories Private Limited (MSN) and Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. (Apotex, and collectively with Teva and MSN, the HETLIOZ® Defendants) asserting that U.S. Patent Nos. RE46,604 (‘604 Patent), 9,060,995, 9,539,234, 9,549,913, 9,730,910 (‘910 Patent), 9,844,241, 10,071,977, 10,149,829 (‘829 Patent), 10,376,487 (‘487 Patent), 10,449,176, 10,610,510, 10,610,511, 10,829,465, and 10,611,744 will be infringed by the HETLIOZ® Defendants’ generic versions of HETLIOZ® for which they were seeking FDA approval. As initially disclosed in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 14, 2022, in January 2022, the Company entered into a license agreement with MSN and Impax Laboratories LLC (Impax) resolving the lawsuits against MSN (the MSN/Impax License Agreement). The MSN/Impax License Agreement grants MSN and Impax a non-exclusive license to manufacture and commercialize MSN’s generic version of HETLIOZ® in the U.S. effective as of March 13, 2035, unless prior to that date the Company obtains pediatric exclusivity for HETLIOZ®, in which case the license will be effective as of July 27, 2035. The MSN/Impax License Agreement also provides that MSN and Impax may launch a generic version of HETLIOZ® earlier under certain limited circumstances. In January 2023, MSN and its commercial partner, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., informed the Company of their belief that such circumstances have occurred and have since launched their generic version. The Company disagrees with this position and continues to aggressively defend its legal rights to exclusivity for HETLIOZ®. The consolidated lawsuits against the remaining HETLIOZ® Defendants were tried in March 2022. In December 2022, the Delaware District Court ruled that Teva and Apotex did not infringe the ‘604 Patent, and that the asserted claims of the ‘604, ‘910, ‘829 and ‘487 Patents were invalid. In December 2022, the Company appealed the Delaware District Court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) and an oral argument for the appeal was held in March 2023. In May 2023, a three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed the Delaware District Court’s ruling, and in June 2023, the Company requested a rehearing or rehearing en banc from the Federal Circuit. In August 2023, the Federal Circuit denied the Company’s petition for a rehearing. In January 2024, the Company filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Federal Circuit’s decision. In April 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the Company’s petition for a writ of certiorari. In December 2022, the Company filed patent infringement lawsuits, including Hatch-Waxman Act claims, against each of Teva and Apotex in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (NJ District Court) asserting that U.S. Patent No. 11,285,129, a method of administration patent that was not litigated in the Delaware District Court cases (‘129 Patent), will be infringed by Teva’s and Apotex’ generic versions of HETLIOZ®, each of which was approved by the FDA. The Company asked the NJ District Court to, among other things, order that the effective date of the FDA’s approval of Teva’s and Apotex’ generic versions of HETLIOZ® be a date that is no earlier than the expiration of the ‘129 Patent, or such later date that the NJ District Court may determine, and enjoin each of Teva and Apotex from the commercial manufacture, use, import, offer for sale and/or sale of their generic versions of HETLIOZ® until the expiration of the ‘129 Patent, or such later date that the NJ District Court may determine. In February 2023, the case was transferred to the Delaware District Court, where the Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In January 2023, the Company filed a lawsuit in the NJ District Court against Teva challenging Teva’s advertising and marketing practices related to its at risk launch of its generic version of HETLIOZ® for the single indication of Non-24. The Company believes that Teva’s advertising and marketing practices related to its generic version of HETLIOZ® promote its product for uses beyond the limited labeling that Teva sought, and the FDA approved. The Company seeks to, among other things, enjoin Teva from engaging in false and misleading advertising and recover monetary damages. In December 2023, the case was transferred to the Delaware District Court. The Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In January 2023, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (DC District Court) against the FDA challenging the FDA’s approval of Teva’s Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) for its generic version of HETLIOZ® capsules under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), and FDA regulations. Under the FDCA, every ANDA must contain information to show that the labeling proposed for the generic drug is the same as the labeling approved for the listed drug. The labeling and packaging for HETLIOZ® includes Braille, but Teva’s generic version does not. On this basis, the Company believes that Teva’s approved labeling does not comply with applicable requirements. The Company has asked the DC District Court to, among other things, vacate the FDA’s approval of Teva’s ANDA, declare that the approval of the ANDA was unlawful, arbitrary, and capricious and compel the FDA to order Teva to recall its generic HETLIOZ® product. In February 2023, Teva intervened in the lawsuit as a defendant. In September 2023, the Company amended its lawsuit to request that the DC District Court set aside the FDA’s July 2023 denial of the Company’s citizen petition, originally filed with the FDA in January 2023. In April 2024, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment. The Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In September 2023, the Company filed a lawsuit in the DC District Court against the FDA challenging the FDA’s approval of MSN’s ANDA for its generic version of HETLIOZ® capsules under the APA, the FDCA, and FDA regulations. The Company believes that MSN’s underlying approval data, particularly its bioequivalence studies, are faulty. On this basis, the Company has asked the DC District Court to, among other things, vacate the FDA’s approval of MSN’s ANDA, declare that the approval of the ANDA was unlawful, arbitrary, and capricious and compel the FDA to order MSN to recall its generic HETLIOZ® product. In December 2023, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment. In January 2024, the FDA opposed the Company’s motion and moved to waive the administrative record, following which the court held an oral argument on the cross-motions. The DC District Court issued an order compelling the FDA to serve the administrative record and has set deadlines for further proceedings. In April 2024, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment. The Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In April 2024, the Company filed a lawsuit in the Delaware District Court against MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc., MSN Laboratories Private Limited, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Impax Laboratories LLC alleging claims for false advertising in violation of the Lanham Act and unfair competition under several state laws as well as claims for breach of express representation and fraudulent inducement of a license agreement. The Company’s lawsuit remains pending. Other Matters. From April 2022 to February 2024, the Company filed fourteen lawsuits in the DC District Court against the FDA to compel the FDA to produce records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) regarding, among other matters: the FDA’s denial of the Company’s supplemental New Drug Application (sNDA) for HETLIOZ® in the treatment of jet lag disorder; cases in which the FDA waived its putative requirement of a 9-month non-rodent toxicity study before drugs can be tested on human patients for extended durations; communications external to and within the FDA relating to tradipitant, HETLIOZ® and Fanapt®; a warning letter that the FDA sent to the Company concerning its webpages for HETLIOZ® and Fanapt®; the FDA’s removal of a clinical trials design presentation from its website; discipline reviews relating to the FDA’s evaluations of the Company’s sNDA for HETLIOZ® and a third-party sNDA for jet lag; internal standard operating procedures or guidance relating to the FDA’s processing of incoming FOIA requests; and bioequivalence and other study reports submitted relating to the FDA’s consideration of tasimelteon ANDAs. Four of these lawsuits were resolved in the Company’s favor in June 2023, August 2023, January 2024 and April 2024, respectively, one is pending resolution and the other nine remain outstanding. The FDA has failed to respond and provide the requested documents within the statutory timeframe with respect to each of these ten outstanding requests. The Company has asked the DC District Court to, among other things, compel the FDA to comply with its obligations and declare that its lack of compliance violates FOIA. In April 2022, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (MD District Court) against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Administrator of CMS challenging CMS’ rule broadly interpreting the defined terms “line extension” and “new formulation” under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (ACA), which went into effect in January 2022 (the Rule). The Company believes that the Rule is unlawful and contrary to the intent of Congress when it passed the ACA. Under the Rule, certain of the Company’s products would be treated as line extensions and new formulations subject to enhanced rebates, despite the statutory text and CMS’ own long-standing practice, under which such products would not constitute line extensions or new formulations. In March 2023, the MD District Court ruled that CMS’ interpretation of the terms was reasonable and consistent with Congress’ intent. In April 2023, the Company appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (Fourth Circuit). In January 2024, the Fourth Circuit held an oral argument. In April 2024, the Fourth Circuit ruled against the Company. The Company is currently evaluating future options with respect to this litigation. In May 2022, the Company filed a lawsuit in the DC District Court against the FDA challenging the FDA’s denial of Fast Track designation for tradipitant. In October 2021, the Company submitted to the FDA a request for Fast Track designation for tradipitant under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA). The FDAMA provides for expedited development and review of drugs that receive Fast Track designation from the FDA. Under the FDAMA, the FDA must designate a drug as a Fast Track product if it both (1) is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and (2) demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. Although Fast Track designation is non-discretionary when the criteria are satisfied, the FDA denied the Company’s request for Fast Track designation. The Company does not believe that the FDA based its decision on the relevant criteria. Therefore, among other reasons, the Company maintains that the FDA’s denial is unlawful. The Company has asked the DC District Court to, among other things, set aside and vacate the FDA’s denial. An oral argument was held in January 2023. In August 2023, the DC District Court ruled against the Company. In September 2023, the Company appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where the Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In September 2022, the Company filed a lawsuit in the DC District Court against the FDA to compel the FDA to comply with two separate non-discretionary obligations under the FDCA and its implementing regulations: an obligation to publish a notice of an opportunity for a hearing on the Company’s sNDA for HETLIOZ® in the treatment of jet lag disorder in the Federal Register within 180 days of the filing of the sNDA, and a separate obligation to publish the same notice within 60 days of the request for a hearing. The FDA published the notice of an opportunity for a hearing on October 11, 2022. The Company has asked the DC District Court to, among other things, compel the FDA to comply with its obligations and declare that its lack of compliance violates the FDCA and the FDA regulations. In January 2024, the DC District Court held an oral argument on dispositive cross-motions, following which the DC District Court granted in part the Company’s motion for summary judgment. The DC District Court ruled that the FDA violated the statute and ordered the FDA to either finally resolve the Company’s application or commence a hearing on or before March 5, 2024. In March 2024, the Company and the FDA filed a consent motion for entry of final judgment in the Company’s favor on its Administrative Procedure Act claim for the FDA’s unreasonable delay in resolving the hearing request. In May 2023, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (Federal Claims Court) against the federal government for the uncompensated taking and misuse of the Company’s trade secrets and confidential information. The Company believes that the FDA violated the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause by improperly providing confidential details from the Company’s drug master files for HETLIOZ® and Fanapt® to generic drug manufacturers during the FDA’s review of the manufacturers’ ANDAs. The Company has asked the Federal Claims Court to, among other things, declare that the FDA’s disclosure of the Company’s confidential commercial information constitutes a taking for purposes of the Fifth Amendment and award just compensation. The federal government filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which the Company opposed. In January 2024, the Federal Claims Court held an oral argument on the motion to dismiss, following which the Federal Claims Court issued a decision denying in part the government’s motion, allowing the Company’s takings claim to proceed. The Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In February 2024, the Company filed a lawsuit in the DC District Court against the FDA to compel the FDA to comply with its statutory obligations under the FDCA and its implementing regulations, and to challenge the FDA’s complete response letter and 60-day filing regulations, which the Company believes do not absolve the FDA of its statutory responsibilities. Under the FDCA, the FDA has an obligation to either approve the Company’s sNDA for HETLIOZ® in the treatment of insomnia characterized by difficulties with sleep initiation within 180 days of the filing of the sNDA or give the Company a notice of an opportunity for a hearing. The Company submitted the sNDA on May 4, 2023. The Company has asked the DC District Court to, among other things, compel the FDA to comply with its obligations, declare that its lack of compliance violates the FDCA and the FDA regulations and declare the FDA’s complete response letter and 60-day filing regulations unlawful. The Company’s lawsuit remains pending. In March 2024, the Company filed a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit seeking review of the FDA’s final order refusing to hold a hearing or to approve Vanda’s sNDA for HETLIOZ® in the treatment of jet lag disorder. Under the FDCA, the FDA has an obligation to either approve an sNDA or to hold a hearing on the application’s approvability. The Company’s petition asks the DC Circuit to set aside the FDA’s order refusing to hold a hearing and refusing approval. The Company’s petition remains pending. On April 22, 2024, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against the members of the Company’s board of directors and the Rights Agent, along with the Company as nominal defendant (collectively, the Defendants), captioned Steamfitters Local 449 Pension Fund v. Mihael H. Polymeropoulos, et al., CA No. 2024-0416-KSJM. The lawsuit contends, among other things, that the members of the Company’s board of directors breached their fiduciary duties in instituting the Rights Agreement. See Note 15, Subsequent Events, for additional details on the Rights Agent and Rights Agreement. The lawsuit seeks relief declaring, in part, that provisions of the Rights Agreement be deemed unenforceable and seeks to enjoin the use of such provisions as well as damages, costs, and other remedies, and also seeks to enjoin for 30 days the Company’s 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the Annual Meeting) to be held on May 17, 2024. At a hearing on May 7, 2024, the Delaware Chancery Court denied the plaintiff’s request to enjoin the Annual Meeting. A trial in the case is expected to be set later this year. The Defendants believe the claims are without merit and intend to vigorously defend the matter. The Company does not anticipate that this litigation will have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations or financial condition. However, this lawsuit is subject to inherent uncertainties, the actual cost may be significant, and the Company may not prevail. The Company believes it is entitled to coverage under its relevant insurance policies, subject to a retention, but coverage could be denied or prove to be insufficient.

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 legal proceedings, legal contingencies, litigation, regulatory and environmental matters and other contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//450/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LegalMattersAndContingenciesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration