Commitments and Contingencies | 9. Commitments and Contingencies Collaboration, License and Merger Agreements The Company has entered into various collaboration, licensing and merger agreements which provide the Company with rights to certain know-how, technology and patent rights. The agreements generally include upfront license fees, development and commercial milestone payments upon achievement of certain clinical and commercial development and annual net sales milestones, as well as royalties calculated as a percentage of product revenues, with rates that vary by agreement. As of March 31, 2022, the Company may be required to make milestone payments up to $ 3.1 billion in the aggregate. In August 2018, the Company entered into a license agreement with Neuren and obtained exclusive North American rights to develop and commercialize trofinetide for Rett syndrome and other indications. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid Neuren an upfront license fee of $ 10.0 million and it may be required to pay up to an additional $ 455.0 million in milestone payments based on the achievement of certain development and annual net sales milestones. In addition, the Company may be required to pay Neuren tiered, escalating, double-digit percentage royalties based on net sales. The license agreement was accounted for as an asset acquisition and the upfront cash payment of $ 10.0 million was expensed to research and development in the third quarter of 2018 as there is no alternative use for the asset. In March 2020, the Company entered into a license agreement and research collaboration with Vanderbilt University and obtained exclusive worldwide rights to develop and commercialize novel drug candidates targeting positive allosteric modulators of the muscarinic M1 receptor (the M1 PAM program) with the potential to treat a range of central nervous system disorders. Under the terms of the agreement , the Company paid Vanderbilt University an upfront license fee of $ 10.0 million and may be required to pay up to $ 515.0 million in milestone payments based on the achievement of certain clinical development and commercial and annual net sales milestones. In addition, the Company may be required to pay Vanderbilt University tiered royalties based on net sales. Furthermore, the Company is required to spend a minimum annual amount in development and the pursuit of regulatory approval for the M1 PAM compounds over the first three years of the license agreement. Such amounts are not material to the Company. The license agreement was accounted for as an asset acquisition and the upfront cash payment of $ 10.0 million was expensed to research and development in the first quarter of 2020 as there is no future alternative use for the assets. In August 2020, the Company entered into the Merger Agreement with CerSci. The lead development program is a unique Reactive Species Decomposition Accelerant, a non-opioid mechanism focused on interrupting pathways that sensitize neurons to pain. The portfolio contains additional preclinical stage programs, including brain penetrant compounds, with potential for symptomatic and disease modifying treatment utility in neurodegenerative diseases. The Company incurred an aggregate of $ 52.8 million in upfront consideration and transaction costs, of which, $ 44.3 million was paid through the issuance of approximately 1.2 million shares of the Company’s common stock. In addition, under the terms of the Merger Agreement, the Company may be required to pay CerSci’s former equity holders up to $ 887.0 million in cash upon the achievement of certain development, commercialization and sales milestones, in addition to tiered cash royalties in the mid-single digits based on annual net sales. As substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired was concentrated in the in-process research and development intangible assets acquired, the Company concluded that this transaction did not meet the definition of a business combination pursuant to FASB Accounting Standard Codification Topic 805, Business Combinations. As such, the transaction was accounted for as an asset acquisition and the upfront consideration of $ 45.7 million was expensed to research and development in the third quarter of 2020 as there is no future alternative use for the assets. In January 2022, the Company entered a license and collaboration agreement with Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. (Stoke) to discover, develop and commercialize novel RNA-based medicines for potential treatment of severe and rare genetic neurodevelopmental diseases of the CNS. The collaboration includes SYNGAP1 syndrome, Rett syndrome (MECP2), and an undisclosed neurodevelopmental target. For the SYNGAP1 program, the two companies will jointly share global research, development and commercialization responsibilities and share 50/50 in all worldwide costs and future profits. In addition, Stoke is eligible to receive potential development, regulatory, first commercial sales and sales milestones. For the MECP2 program and the undisclosed neurodevelopmental program, the Company acquired an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize MECP2 program and the undisclosed neurodevelopmental program. Stoke will lead research and pre-clinical development activities, while the Company will lead clinical development and commercialization activities. The Company will fund research and pre-clinical development activities related to these two targets and Stoke is eligible to receive potential development, regulatory, first commercial sales and sales milestones as well as tiered royalty payments on worldwide sales starting in the mid-single digit range and escalating to the mid-teens based on revenue levels. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid Stoke a $ 60.0 million upfront payment which was accounted for as an asset acquisition and was expensed to research and development in the first quarter of 2022 as there is no alternative use for the asset. The Company may be required to pay up to an additional $ 907.5 million in milestones as well as royalties on future sales. Corporate Credit Card Program In connection with the Company’s credit card program, the Company established a letter of credit for $ 2.0 million, which has automatic annual extensions and is fully secured by restricted cash. Fleet Program In connection with the Company’s fleet program, the Company established a letter of credit for $ 0.4 million, which has automatic annual extensions and is fully secured by restricted cash. Legal Proceedings On February 7, 2020, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a derivative complaint (captioned Barney v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0238) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the Company’s directors and certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers. The complaint asserted claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment arising from allegations similar to those in the related federal securities class action (captioned In re Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 18-cv-01647). On September 9, 2020, the Court substituted plaintiffs and re-captioned the case Shumacher v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0238. On June 23, 2020, a second derivative complaint (captioned Lazarus v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0843) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. On September 9, 2020, the Court transferred the Lazarus case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and re-captioned the case Lazarus v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-1774. On January 15, 2021, the Court consolidated the Shumacher and Lazarus cases under the name In re ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Case No. 20-cv-0238, appointed lead counsel for the plaintiffs, and designated the complaint in the Shumacher case as the operative complaint. The consolidated derivative case was stayed until the defendants in the related federal securities class action filed an answer, or the federal securities class action was dismissed with prejudice and all appeals were exhausted, or any party to the stipulation to stay gave 15 days’ written notice that it no longer consents to the voluntary stay. The federal securities class action was dismissed with prejudice on January 3, 2022, and the deadline to appeal that dismissal expired on February 2, 2022. On March 21, 2022, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the derivative action. On July 24, 2020, the Company filed complaints against (i) Aurobindo Pharma Limited and its affiliate Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. and (ii) Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and its affiliate Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and on July 30, 2020, the Company filed complaints against (i) Hetero Labs Limited and its affiliates Hetero Labs Limited Unit-V and Hetero USA Inc., (ii) MSN Laboratories Private Ltd. and its affiliate MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and (iii) Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. and its affiliate Cadila Healthcare Limited. These complaints, which were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, allege infringement of certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. The cases have been assigned to the Honorable Richard G. Andrews. On September 1, 2020, Aurobindo filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On September 22, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Aurobindo’s counterclaims. On August 31, 2020, Teva filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On September 21, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Teva’s counterclaims. On October 5, 2020, Hetero filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On October 26, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Hetero’s counterclaims. On September 30, 2020, MSN filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On November 5, 2020, the Company filed its first amended complaint against MSN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On November 19, 2020, MSN filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the Company’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On December 10, 2020, the Company filed its answer to MSN’s counterclaims. On November 2, 2020, Zydus filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On November 23, 2020, the Company filed its answer to Zydus’s counterclaims. On December 8, 2020, the parties’ joint proposed scheduling order was entered by Judge Andrews. On April 7, 2021, the Company filed its first amended complaints against Hetero and Teva and its second amended complaint against MSN, to include an additional Orange Book-listed patent covering NUPLAZID. On April 8, 2021, the Company filed its first amended complaint against Zydus and on April 9, 2021, the Company filed its first amended complaint against Aurobindo. On April 20, 2021, MSN filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company ’s second amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the Company ’s Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On April 21, 2021, Teva filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to Company ’s first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On April 22, 2021, Zydus filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to Company ’s first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity . On April 22, 2021, Aurobindo filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company ’s first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On May 11, 2021, the Company filed its answer to MSN’s counterclaims. On May 12, the Company filed its answer to Teva’s counterclaims. On May 13, the Company filed its answer to Zydus’s counterclaims and its answer to Aurobindo’s counterclaims. A joint trial in the matters is scheduled for May 15, 2023. The Company entered into an agreement effective April 22, 2021 with Hetero settling all claims and counterclaims in the litigation. The agreement allows Hetero to launch its generic pimavanserin product on July 27, 2038, subject to certain triggers for earlier launch. The Hetero case was dismissed by joint agreement on May 3, 2021. On August 27, 2021, the Company filed its second amended complaint against Zydus to include an additional Orange Book-listed patent covering NUPLAZID. On September 10, 2021, Zydus filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to the Company ’s second amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. Also on September 10, 2021, the parties filed their Joint Claim Construction Chart. On October 1, 2021, the Company filed its answer to Zydus’s counterclaims. On November 30, 2021, the Company filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss two of its Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID against Teva, which was ordered by the Court on December 1, 2021. On January 28, 2022, the parties filed their Joint Claim Construction Brief and Appendix. On February 23, 2022, the Court heard oral argument on claim construction. On April 6, 2022, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion construing several terms at issue, adopting the Company’s construction on two terms, Defendants’ construction on two terms, and one agreed-upon construction. On February 28, 2022, the Company filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss one patent against MSN, which was ordered by the Court on March 1, 2022. On March 10, 2022, the Company filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss one patent against Teva, which was ordered by the Court on March 10, 2022. On March 22, 2022, the Company filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss seven patents against Aurobindo, which was ordered by the Court on March 22, 2022. On March 30, 2022, the Company filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss two patents against Zydus, which was ordered by the Court on March 31, 2022. On April 19, 2021, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a putative securities class action complaint (captioned Marechal v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 21-cv-0762) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the Company and certain of the Company’s current executive officers. The complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and prospects by failing to disclose that the materials submitted in support of its sNDA seeking approval of pimavanserin for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with dementia-related psychosis contained statistical and design deficiencies and that the FDA was unlikely to approve the sNDA in its current form. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. On June 21, 2021, five motions for lead plaintiff and lead counsel were filed. Thereafter, four of the five movants either withdrew their motions or filed statements of non-opposition. On September 29, 2021, the Court issued an order designating lead plaintiff and lead counsel. On December 10, 2021, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on February 15, 2022. Lead plaintiff filed an opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss on April 18, 2022. Defendants’ reply is due June 2, 2022, and a hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss is scheduled for June 9, 2022. Management currently believes that none of the foregoing claims or other actions pending against the Company as of March 31, 2022 is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, liquidity, financial position, or results of operations. Given the unpredictability inherent in litigation, however, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these matters. The Company is unable to estimate possible losses or ranges of losses that may result from these matters, and therefore it has not accrued any amounts in connection with these matters other than attorneys’ fees incurred to date. |