Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies *Leases* Capital Leases We entered into direct financing transactions with the State of Rhode Island and received proceeds from the issuance of industrial revenue bonds totaling $5,000,000 to finance the construction of our pilot manufacturing facility in Rhode Island. The related lease agreements are structured such that lease payments fully fund all semiannual interest payments and annual principal payments through maturity in August 2014. The interest rate for the remaining bond series is 9.5%. The bond contains certain restrictive covenants which limit, among other things, the payment of cash dividends and the sale of the related assets. The outstanding principal was approximately $179,000 at September 30, 2013 and $331,000 at December 31, 2012. Operating Leases We lease various real properties under operating leases that generally require us to pay taxes, insurance, maintenance, and minimum lease payments. Some of our leases have options to renew. Operating Leases — California In September 2010, we entered into a two-year sublease agreement with Caliper Life Sciences, Inc., for office and research space in a facility located in Mountain View, California. In June 2012, the sublease term was extended to and expired on September 30, 2013. We paid approximately $1,081,000 in aggregate as rent over the term of the lease. In December 2010, we entered into a commercial lease agreement with BMR-Gateway Boulevard LLC (BMR), as landlord, for office and research space at BMR’s Pacific Research Center in Newark, California. The initial term of the lease is approximately eleven and one-half years and includes escalating rent payments which we recognize as lease operating expense on a straight-line basis. We will pay approximately $17,869,000 in aggregate as rent over the term of the lease to BMR. Deferred rent for this facility was approximately $1,432,000 as of September 30, 2013, and approximately $1,389,000 as of December 31, 2012. In March 2013, we entered into a commercial lease agreement with Prologis, L.P. (Prologis), as landlord, for office and research space in Sunnyvale, California. The facility is for operations that support our clinical development activities. The initial term of the lease is ten years and includes escalating rent payments which we recognize as lease operating expense on a straight-line basis. We will pay approximately $3,497,000 in aggregate rent over the term of the lease. As part of the lease, Prologis has agreed to provide us financial allowances to build initial tenant improvements, subject to customary terms and conditions relating to landlord-funded tenant improvements. The tenant improvements are recorded as leasehold improvement assets and amortized over the term of the lease. The financial allowances are treated as a lease incentive and recorded as deferred rent which is amortized as reductions to lease expense over the lease term. Deferred rent for this facility was approximately $389,000 as of September 30, 2013. Operating Leases — Rhode Island We entered into a fifteen-year lease agreement for a scientific and administrative facility (SAF) in Rhode Island in connection with a sale and leaseback arrangement in 1997. The lease term expired on June 30, 2013. For the year 2013, we paid approximately $1,165,000 in operating lease payments and operating expenses net of sub-tenant income. Operating Leases — United Kingdom In January 2011, we amended the existing lease agreements of our wholly-owned subsidiary, Stem Cell Sciences (U.K.) Ltd, effectively reducing our leased office and lab space. The lease by its terms was extended to September 30, 2013. In October 2013, we signed a new three-year lease agreement for the leased space and expect to pay rent of approximately GBP 53,000 per annum. StemCells, Inc. is the guarantor of Stem Cell Sciences (U.K.) Ltd’s obligations under the existing lease. With the exception of the operating leases discussed above, we have not entered into any significant off balance sheet financial arrangements and have not established any special purpose entities. We have not guaranteed any debts or commitments of other entities or entered into any options on non-financial assets. *Contingencies* In July 2006, we filed suit against Neuralstem, Inc. in the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland, alleging that Neuralstem’s activities violate claims in four of the patents we exclusively licensed from NeuroSpheres Holdings Ltd. and NeuroSpheres Ltd. (NeuroSpheres), specifically U.S. Patent No. 6,294,346 (claiming the use of human neural stem cells for drug screening), U.S. Patent No. 7,101,709 (claiming the use of human neural stem cells for screening biological agents), U.S. Patent No. 5,851,832 (claiming methods for proliferating human neural stem cells), and U.S. Patent No. 6,497,872 (claiming methods for transplanting human neural stem cells). In May 2008, we filed a second patent infringement suit against Neuralstem and its two founders, Karl Johe and Richard Garr. In this suit, which we filed in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California, we allege that Neuralstem’s activities infringe claims in two patents we exclusively license from NeuroSpheres, specifically U.S. Patent No. 7,361,505 (claiming composition of matter of human neural stem cells derived from any source material) and U.S. Patent No. 7,115,418 (claiming methods for proliferating human neural stem cells). In addition, we allege various state law causes of action against Neuralstem arising out of its repeated derogatory statements to the public about our patent portfolio. Also in May 2008, Neuralstem filed suit against us and NeuroSpheres in the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland seeking a declaratory judgment that the ‘505 and ‘418 patents are either invalid or are not infringed by Neuralstem and that Neuralstem has not violated California state law. In August 2008, the California court transferred our lawsuit against Neuralstem to Maryland for resolution on the merits. In July 2009, the Maryland District Court granted our motion to consolidate these two cases with the litigation we initiated against Neuralstem in 2006. Discovery is ongoing in these cases and we anticipate a trial date in 2014. In October, 2013, we acquired from NeuroSpheres a patent portfolio consisting of the patents we licensed from NeuroSpheres on an exclusive worldwide basis, including the six patents that are the subject of our patent infringement litigation against Neuralstem. As consideration for the patents, we will issue 139,548 shares of unregistered common stock to NeuroSpheres. In connection with the patent acquisition, all preexisting agreements were terminated. The acquisition relieves us from further milestone and royalty payments to NeuroSpheres.

Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies

Leases

Capital Leases

We entered into direct financing transactions with the State of Rhode Island and received proceeds from the issuance of industrial revenue bonds totaling $5,000,000 to finance the construction of our pilot manufacturing facility in Rhode Island. The related lease agreements are structured such that lease payments fully fund all semiannual interest payments and annual principal payments through maturity in August 2014. The interest rate for the remaining bond series is 9.5%. The bond contains certain restrictive covenants which limit, among other things, the payment of cash dividends and the sale of the related assets. The outstanding principal was approximately $179,000 at September 30, 2013 and $331,000 at December 31, 2012.

Operating Leases

We lease various real properties under operating leases that generally require us to pay taxes, insurance, maintenance, and minimum lease payments. Some of our leases have options to renew.

Operating Leases — California

In September 2010, we entered into a two-year sublease agreement with Caliper Life Sciences, Inc., for office and research space in a facility located in Mountain View, California. In June 2012, the sublease term was extended to and expired on September 30, 2013. We paid approximately $1,081,000 in aggregate as rent over the term of the lease.

In December 2010, we entered into a commercial lease agreement with BMR-Gateway Boulevard LLC (BMR), as landlord, for office and research space at BMR’s Pacific Research Center in Newark, California. The initial term of the lease is approximately eleven and one-half years and includes escalating rent payments which we recognize as lease operating expense on a straight-line basis. We will pay approximately $17,869,000 in aggregate as rent over the term of the lease to BMR. Deferred rent for this facility was approximately $1,432,000 as of September 30, 2013, and approximately $1,389,000 as of December 31, 2012.

In March 2013, we entered into a commercial lease agreement with Prologis, L.P. (Prologis), as landlord, for office and research space in Sunnyvale, California. The facility is for operations that support our clinical development activities. The initial term of the lease is ten years and includes escalating rent payments which we recognize as lease operating expense on a straight-line basis. We will pay approximately $3,497,000 in aggregate rent over the term of the lease. As part of the lease, Prologis has agreed to provide us financial allowances to build initial tenant improvements, subject to customary terms and conditions relating to landlord-funded tenant improvements. The tenant improvements are recorded as leasehold improvement assets and amortized over the term of the lease. The financial allowances are treated as a lease incentive and recorded as deferred rent which is amortized as reductions to lease expense over the lease term. Deferred rent for this facility was approximately $389,000 as of September 30, 2013.

Operating Leases — Rhode Island

We entered into a fifteen-year lease agreement for a scientific and administrative facility (SAF) in Rhode Island in connection with a sale and leaseback arrangement in 1997. The lease term expired on June 30, 2013. For the year 2013, we paid approximately $1,165,000 in operating lease payments and operating expenses net of sub-tenant income.

Operating Leases — United Kingdom

In January 2011, we amended the existing lease agreements of our wholly-owned subsidiary, Stem Cell Sciences (U.K.) Ltd, effectively reducing our leased office and lab space. The lease by its terms was extended to September 30, 2013. In October 2013, we signed a new three-year lease agreement for the leased space and expect to pay rent of approximately GBP 53,000 per annum. StemCells, Inc. is the guarantor of Stem Cell Sciences (U.K.) Ltd’s obligations under the existing lease.

With the exception of the operating leases discussed above, we have not entered into any significant off balance sheet financial arrangements and have not established any special purpose entities. We have not guaranteed any debts or commitments of other entities or entered into any options on non-financial assets.

Contingencies

In July 2006, we filed suit against Neuralstem, Inc. in the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland, alleging that Neuralstem’s activities violate claims in four of the patents we exclusively licensed from NeuroSpheres Holdings Ltd. and NeuroSpheres Ltd. (NeuroSpheres), specifically U.S. Patent No. 6,294,346 (claiming the use of human neural stem cells for drug screening), U.S. Patent No. 7,101,709 (claiming the use of human neural stem cells for screening biological agents), U.S. Patent No. 5,851,832 (claiming methods for proliferating human neural stem cells), and U.S. Patent No. 6,497,872 (claiming methods for transplanting human neural stem cells). In May 2008, we filed a second patent infringement suit against Neuralstem and its two founders, Karl Johe and Richard Garr. In this suit, which we filed in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California, we allege that Neuralstem’s activities infringe claims in two patents we exclusively license from NeuroSpheres, specifically U.S. Patent No. 7,361,505 (claiming composition of matter of human neural stem cells derived from any source material) and U.S. Patent No. 7,115,418 (claiming methods for proliferating human neural stem cells). In addition, we allege various state law causes of action against Neuralstem arising out of its repeated derogatory statements to the public about our patent portfolio. Also in May 2008, Neuralstem filed suit against us and NeuroSpheres in the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland seeking a declaratory judgment that the ‘505 and ‘418 patents are either invalid or are not infringed by Neuralstem and that Neuralstem has not violated California state law. In August 2008, the California court transferred our lawsuit against Neuralstem to Maryland for resolution on the merits. In July 2009, the Maryland District Court granted our motion to consolidate these two cases with the litigation we initiated against Neuralstem in 2006. Discovery is ongoing in these cases and we anticipate a trial date in 2014.

In October, 2013, we acquired from NeuroSpheres a patent portfolio consisting of the patents we licensed from NeuroSpheres on an exclusive worldwide basis, including the six patents that are the subject of our patent infringement litigation against Neuralstem. As consideration for the patents, we will issue 139,548 shares of unregistered common stock to NeuroSpheres. In connection with the patent acquisition, all preexisting agreements were terminated. The acquisition relieves us from further milestone and royalty payments to NeuroSpheres.