Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

12 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2025

Dec. 31, 2024

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

11. Commitments and Contingencies

Product Development Agreement

In February 2013, Scilex Pharma became a party to a product development agreement (as amended, the “Product Development Agreement”) with Itochu and Oishi (together, the “Developers”), pursuant to which the Developers will manufacture and supply lidocaine tape products, including ZTlido and

SP-103

(the “Products”), for Scilex Pharma. The Developers initially developed and have intellectual property rights relating to the Products. Pursuant to the Product Development Agreement, Scilex Pharma acquired an exclusive right to develop and commercialize the Products worldwide except for Japan. The Developers are responsible for sourcing and supplying lidocaine for development and commercialization purposes.

Pursuant to the Product Development Agreement, Scilex Pharma is required to make aggregate royalty payments between 25% and 35% to the Developers based on net profits. Scilex Pharma made royalty payments in the amount of $0.9 million and $2.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, Scilex Pharma had ending balances of accrued royalty payables of $3.8 million and $4.0 million, respectively. Total royalty expense recorded within cost of revenue was $0.7 million and $2.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Net profits are defined as net sales, less cost of goods and marketing expenses. Net sales are defined as total gross sales of any Product, less all applicable deductions, to the extent accrued, paid or allowed in the ordinary course of business with respect to the sale of such Product, and to the extent that they are in accordance with GAAP. If Scilex Pharma were to sublicense the licensed technologies, the Developers will receive the same proportion of any

sublicensing fees received therefrom. The Product Development Agreement will continue in full force and effect until October 2, 2028, the date that is ten years from the date of the first commercial sale of ZTlido. The Product Development Agreement will renew automatically for subsequent successive

one-year

renewal periods unless Scilex Pharma or the Developers terminate it upon

six-months’

written notice.

On February 16, 2017, Scilex Pharma entered into a Commercial Supply Agreement (as amended, the “Supply Agreement”) with the Developers to provide commercial supply of ZTlido and

SP-103

to Scilex Pharma. The Supply Agreement contains standard terms regarding term, termination, payment, product quality and supply. In addition, the agreement provides additional terms regarding the calculation and amount of marketing expenses that may be deducted from net sales for purposes of determining the amount of net profit under the Product Development Agreement.

Litigation

In the normal course of business, the Company may be named as a defendant in one or more lawsuits. Other than the following lawsuit, the Company is not a party to any outstanding material litigation and management is not aware of any legal proceedings that, individually or in the aggregate, are deemed to be material to the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

From time to time the Company may become involved in various legal proceedings, including those that may arise in the ordinary course of business.

ZTlido Patent Litigation

On June 22, 2022, the Company filed a complaint against Aveva Drug Delivery Systems, Inc. (“Aveva”), Apotex Corp., and Apotex, Inc. (together, “Apotex”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (the “ZTlido Patent Litigation”) alleging infringement of certain Orange Book listed patents covering ZTlido (the “ZTlido Patents”). The ZTlido Patent Litigation was initiated following the submission by Apotex, in accordance with the procedures set out in the Hatch-Waxman Act, of an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”). Apotex’s ANDA seeks approval to market a generic version of ZTlido prior to the expiration of the ZTlido Patents and alleges that the ZTlido Patents are invalid, unenforceable, and/or not infringed. The Company is seeking, among other relief, an order that the effective date of any FDA approval of Apotex’s ANDA be no earlier than the expiration of the asserted patents listed in the Orange Book, the latest of which expires on May 10, 2031, and such further and other relief as the court may deem appropriate. Apotex and Aveva were subject to an automatic

30-month

stay preventing them from selling a generic version of ZTlido during that time, which was extinguished by the U.S. District Court decision described below. However, to our knowledge, Aveva has not received FDA approval for any generic version of ZTlido. The two Apotex entities were dismissed from the litigation without prejudice, as they no longer had an interest in the generic product that Aveva seeks to market. Before trial, Aveva dropped its challenge to the validity and enforceability of the Company’s patents. Trial in the ZTlido Patent Litigation was held from July 8, 2024 to July 11, 2024. Final post-trial briefing was submitted by the parties on July 25, 2024, and the case was submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. On August 26, 2024, that court issued a decision finding that Aveva’s product does not infringe the Company’s ZTlido Patents. The Company is appealing that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and it filed a Notice of Appeal with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on September 25, 2024. Briefing is underway in that appeal.

Operating Leases

The Company leases administrative and research and development facilities under various

non-cancelable

lease agreements. Facility leases generally provide for periodic rent increases and may include options to extend. As of March 31, 2025, the Company’s leases have remaining lease terms of approximately 2.5 years. The terms of the Company’s leases, ranging from 3 to 5 years, include extension options that are not reasonably certain to be

exercised. Many of the Company’s leases are subject to variable lease payments. Variable lease payments are recognized in the period in which the obligations for those payments are incurred, are not included in the measurement of the

right-of-use

(“ROU”) assets or lease liabilities, and are immaterial.

As the Company’s leases do not provide an implicit rate, the Company uses its incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at the commencement date in determining the present value of lease payments. The Company calculates the associated lease liability and corresponding ROU asset upon lease commencement using a discount rate based on a credit-adjusted secured borrowing rate commensurate with the term of the lease. As of March 31, 2025, the Company has no

finance leases

Lease expense was $0.3 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, and was primarily comprised of operating lease costs. The lease expense included variable lease costs and sublease income, which were immaterial for the periods presented.

Supplemental quantitative information related to leases includes the following:


	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2025			2024
Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities:
Operating cash flows from operating leases (in thousands)	$	(227	)	$	(277	)
Weighted average remaining lease term in years - operating leases		2.5			3.4
Weighted average discount rate - operating leases		11.0	%		11.0	%

Approximate future minimum lease payments under operating leases were as follows (in thousands):


	Amount
2025 (Remainder of 2025)	$	689
2026		944
2027		724

Total lease payments		2,357
Less imputed interest		(290	)

Total lease liabilities		2,067
Less current portion of lease liability		740

Lease liability, net of current portion	$	1,327

11. Commitments and Contingencies

Product Development Agreement

In February 2013, Scilex Pharma became a party to a product development agreement (as amended, the “Product Development Agreement”) with Itochu and Oishi Koseido Co., Ltd. (“Oishi,” and together with Itochu, the “Developers”), pursuant to which the Developers will manufacture and supply lidocaine tape products, including ZTlido and

SP-103

Pursuant to the Product Development Agreement, Scilex Pharma is required to make aggregate royalty payments between 25% and 35% to the Developers based on net profits. For each of the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, Scilex Pharma made royalty payments in the amount of $8.3 million. As of December 31, 2024 and 2023, Scilex Pharma had ending balances of accrued royalty payables of $4.0 million and $2.4 million, respectively. Total royalty expense recorded within cost of revenue was $9.9 million and $8.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Net profits are defined as net sales, less cost of goods and marketing expenses. Net sales are defined as total gross sales of any Product, less all applicable deductions, to the extent accrued, paid or allowed in the ordinary course of business with respect to the sale of such Product, and to the extent that they are in accordance with GAAP. If Scilex Pharma were to sublicense the licensed technologies, the Developers will receive the same proportion of any sublicensing fees received therefrom. The Product Development Agreement will continue in full force and effect until October 2, 2028, the date that is ten years from the date of the first commercial sale of ZTlido. The Product Development Agreement will renew automatically for subsequent successive

one-year

renewal periods unless Scilex Pharma or the Developers terminate it upon six months’ written notice.

On February 16, 2017, Scilex Pharma entered into a Commercial Supply Agreement (as amended, the “Supply Agreement”) with the two Developers to provide commercial supply of ZTlido and

SP-103

Litigation

In the normal course of business, the Company may be named as a defendant in one or more lawsuits. Other than the following four lawsuits, the Company is not a party to any outstanding material litigation and management is not aware of any legal proceedings that, individually or in the aggregate, are deemed to be material to the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

From time to time the Company may become involved in various legal proceedings, including those that may arise in the ordinary course of business.

Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC and Hisamitsu America, Inc. Litigation

On February 23, 2021, the Company filed an action (the “OTC Action”) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC and Hisamitsu America, Inc., two manufacturers of

over-the-counter

(“OTC”) lidocaine patch products, alleging, among other things, false and deceptive advertising and unfair competition under the Lanham Act and California state laws by those companies regarding their respective OTC patch products. This lawsuit sought, among other relief, damages and an injunction enjoining the defendants from continuing to make false or misleading statements of fact about their

respective

OTC lidocaine

patch products. The defendants filed motions to dismiss, which narrowed slightly the Company’s claims, but which motions the court largely rejected. Discovery proceeded. On January 26 and February 2, 2024, Scilex Pharma entered into two separate settlement agreements and mutual releases with the two manufacturers that resolved the OTC Action. The terms of those agreements are confidential.

Former Employee Action

On March 12, 2021, Scilex Pharma and Sorrento (the “Plaintiffs”) filed an action (the “Former Employee Action”) in the Delaware Court of Chancery against the former President of Scilex Pharma, Anthony Mack, and Virpax Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Virpax”, and together with Mr. Mack, the “Defendants”), a company founded and then headed by Mr. Mack, alleging, among other things, breach by Mr. Mack of a restrictive covenant agreement with Sorrento related to his sale of his Scilex Pharma stock to Sorrento, tortious interference with that agreement by Virpax, breach of Mr. Mack’s fiduciary duties to Scilex Pharma, aiding and abetting of that breach by Virpax, and misappropriation of Scilex Pharma’s trade secrets by Mr. Mack and Virpax. Such lawsuit sought, among other relief, damages and various forms of injunctive relief. The case was tried from September 12, 2022 to September 14, 2022. On September 1, 2023, the court found in favor of the Plaintiffs on all but three counts deemed to have been waived. In its

95-page

opinion, the court instructed the parties to submit supplemental briefing on the appropriate remedy to implement its rulings. On October 18, 2023, the Plaintiffs submitted a supplemental brief on remedies. On November 29, 2023, Defendants submitted a supplemental brief on remedies. On December 21, 2023, the Plaintiffs submitted a supplemental reply brief on remedies. On February 26, 2024, the Company and Virpax entered into a term sheet regarding a mutual release and settlement agreement, pursuant to which the parties have agreed to resolve the ongoing disputes. On February 29, 2024, the Company and Virpax entered into a definitive settlement agreement, which provides for, among other things, that Virpax would be obligated to make the following payments to the Company to settle the Former Employee Action: (i) $3.5 million (the “Initial Payment”) by two business days after the Effective Date (as defined therein), which payment has been made; (ii) $2.5 million by July 1, 2024, which payment has been made on July 8, 2024 and (iii) to the extent any of the following drug candidates are ever sold, royalty payments of (a) 6% of annual Net Sales (as defined therein) of Epoladerm; (b) 6% of annual Net Sales of Probudur and (c) 6% of annual Net Sales of Envelta during the Royalty Term (as defined therein). The Company and Virpax provided mutual releases of all claims that existed as of the Effective Date, whether known or unknown, arising from any allegations set forth in the Former Employee Action. Plaintiffs’ release relates to claims against Virpax only, which does not affect its claims against Mr. Mack. Plaintiffs have not released Mr. Mack, and litigation against him remains ongoing. The court has requested additional oral argument on the topic of remedies against Mr. Mack, which argument occurred on November 15, 2024. The parties are awaiting a final judgment from the court.

ZTlido Patent Litigation

30-month

stay preventing them from selling a generic version of ZTlido during that time which was extinguished by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida decision described below. However, to our knowledge, Aveva has not received FDA approval for any generic version of ZTlido. The two Apotex entities were dismissed from the litigation without prejudice, as they no longer had an interest in the

generic product that Aveva seeks to market. Before trial, Aveva dropped its challenge to the validity and enforceability of the Company’s patents. Trial in the ZTlido Patent Litigation was held from July 8, 2024 to July 11, 2024. Final post-trial briefing was submitted by the parties on July 25, 2024, and the case was submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. On August 26, 2024, that court issued a decision finding that Aveva’s product does not infringe the Company’s ZTlido Patents. The Company is appealing that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and it filed a Notice of Appeal with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on September 25, 2024.

GLOPERBA Patent Litigation

On November 6, 2023, Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. (“Takeda”) filed a complaint against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (the “GLOPERBA Patent Litigation”) alleging that the Company’s filing with the FDA of an application for approval of a proposed revision to the product label for its GLOPERBA product infringed certain Orange Book listed patents covering Takeda’s colchicine product, Colcrys

(the “Colcrys Patents”). Takeda sought an order that the effective date of any FDA approval of the Company’s labeling revision be no earlier than the expiration date of the asserted patents listed in the Orange Book, and such further and other relief as the court may deem appropriate. The Company had previously accrued $0.5 million with respect to the GLOPERBA Patent Litigation. On March 7, 2024, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with Takeda to resolve the action and entered into a license agreement with Takeda pursuant to which Takeda granted a

non-exclusive

license to the Company and its affiliates of certain patents owned by Takeda. The terms of those agreements are confidential. The Settlement Agreement was subject to review by the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, neither of which objected during the review period. After the expiration of the review period, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware entered a final consent judgment on May 3, 2024.

Operating Leases

The Company leases administrative and research and development facilities under various

non-cancelable

lease agreements. Facility leases generally provide for periodic rent increases and may include options to extend. As of December 31, 2024, the Company’s leases have remaining lease terms of approximately 2.8 years. The terms of the Company’s leases, ranging from 3 to 5 years, include extension options that were not reasonably certain to be exercised. Many of the Company’s leases are subject to variable lease payments. Variable lease payments are recognized in the period in which the obligations for those payments are incurred, are not included in the measurement of the ROU assets or lease liabilities, and are immaterial. Additionally, the Company subleases certain properties to third parties. Sublease income is recognized on a straight-line basis and is immaterial.

finance leases

In April 2023, the Company modified the lease term

for its principal executive offices located in Palo Alto, California. The modification extended the lease term for an additional three years, with the lease term expiring in September 2027. As a result of the modification, the Company recognized additional ROU assets and corresponding lease liabilities of $2.5 million.

Lease expense was $1.0 million and $1.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and was primarily comprised of operating lease costs. The lease expense also included variable lease costs and sublease income, which were immaterial for the periods

presented.

Supplemental quantitative information related to leases includes the following:


	Year Ended December 31,
	2024			2023
Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities:
Operating cash flows from operating leases (in thousands)	$	(1,042	)	$	(1,021	)
Weighted average remaining lease term in years — operating leases		2.8			3.6
Weighted average discount rate — operating leases		11.0	%		11.1	%

Approximate future minimum lease payments under operating leases were as follows (in thousands):


Year Ended December 31,	Amount
2025	$	916
2026		944
2027		724

Total lease payments		2,584
Less imputed interest		(347	)

Total lease liabilities		2,237
Less current portion of lease liability		714

Lease liability, net of current portion	$	1,523