Santarus (SNTS) 10-Q 7 Nov 13 2013 Q3 Quarterly report Financial data

Document_and_Entity_Informatio

Document and Entity Information	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013	Oct. 31, 2013
Document Information [Line Items]	'	'
Document Type	'10-Q	'
Amendment Flag	'false	'
Document Period End Date	30-Sep-13	'
Document Fiscal Year Focus	'2013	'
Document Fiscal Period Focus	'Q3	'
Trading Symbol	'SNTS	'
Entity Registrant Name	'SANTARUS INC	'
Entity Central Index Key	'0001172480	'
Current Fiscal Year End Date	'--12-31	'
Entity Filer Category	'Accelerated Filer	'
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding	'	67,128,949

Consolidated_Balance_Sheets

Consolidated Balance Sheets (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified
Current assets:	'	'
Cash and cash equivalents	$121,138	$49,772
Short-term investments	47,581	44,964
Accounts receivable, net	43,576	31,024
Inventories, net	11,882	9,897
Deferred tax assets	35,899	'
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	7,821	6,678
Total current assets	267,897	142,335
Long-term restricted cash	750	950
Property and equipment, net	1,197	945
Intangible assets, net	18,502	16,254
Goodwill	2,913	2,913
Long-term deferred tax assets	19,556	'
Other assets	861	352
Total assets	311,676	163,749
Current liabilities:	'	'
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	52,662	45,824
Allowance for product returns	24,165	20,574
Total current liabilities	76,827	66,398
Deferred revenue	1,103	1,639
Long-term debt	'	9,876
Other long-term liabilities	4,764	2,884
Commitments and contingencies	'	'
Stockholders' equity:	'	'
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012; no shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012	'	'
Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 200,000,000 and 100,000,000 shares authorized at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively; 66,984,705 and 63,583,492 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively	7	6
Additional paid-in capital	392,054	368,594
Accumulated other comprehensive income	4	3
Accumulated deficit	-163,083	-285,651
Total stockholders' equity	228,982	82,952
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity	$311,676	$163,749

Consolidated_Balance_Sheets_Pa

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Parenthetical) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Preferred stock, par value	$0.00	$0.00
Preferred stock, shares authorized	10,000,000	10,000,000
Preferred stock, shares issued	'	'
Preferred stock, shares outstanding	'	'
Common stock, par value	$0.00	$0.00
Common stock, shares authorized	200,000,000	100,000,000
Common stock, shares issued	66,984,705	63,583,492
Common stock, shares outstanding	66,984,705	63,583,492

Consolidated_Statements_of_Ope

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Revenues:	'	'	'	'
Product sales, net	$98,073	$53,687	$265,086	$145,124
Royalty revenue	721	983	2,510	2,618
Total revenues	98,794	54,670	267,596	147,742
Costs and expenses:	'	'	'	'
Cost of product sales	6,032	3,276	16,145	10,463
License fees and royalties	20,918	14,849	63,701	43,544
Research and development	6,824	6,177	19,978	18,089
Selling, general and administrative	35,487	21,133	99,692	61,567
Total costs and expenses	69,261	45,435	199,516	133,663
Income from operations	29,533	9,235	68,080	14,079
Other income (expense):	'	'	'	'
Interest income	9	11	34	13
Interest expense	-61	-81	-214	-259
Total other income (expense)	-52	-70	-180	-246
Income before income taxes	29,481	9,165	67,900	13,833
Income tax (benefit) expense	-838	181	-54,668	774
Net income	30,319	8,984	122,568	13,059
Net income per share:	'	'	'	'
Basic	$0.46	$0.14	$1.88	$0.21
Diluted	$0.38	$0.13	$1.57	$0.19
Weighted average shares outstanding used to calculate net income per share:	'	'	'	'
Basic	66,567,180	62,992,473	65,321,156	62,496,446
Diluted	79,388,362	69,723,094	77,954,236	67,906,620
Comprehensive income	$30,325	$8,987	$122,569	$13,056

Consolidated_Statements_of_Cas

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (USD $)	9 Months Ended
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Operating activities	'	'
Net income	$122,568	$13,059
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:	'	'
Depreciation and amortization	5,099	4,605
(Gain) loss on contingent consideration	561	-25
Stock-based compensation	10,099	4,897
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation	-758	'
Issuance of common stock for technology license agreement	'	3,698
Deferred income taxes	-55,455	'
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:	'	'
Accounts receivable, net	-12,552	-3,065
Inventories, net	-1,985	-2,499
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	-366	-3,069
Other assets	-509	'
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	8,216	2,993
Allowance for product returns	3,591	3,585
Deferred revenue	-536	-396
Net cash provided by operating activities	77,973	23,783
Investing activities	'	'
Purchases of short-term investments	-66,961	-41,925
Sales and maturities of short-term investments	64,365	5,414
Long-term restricted cash	200	-950
Purchases of property and equipment	-573	-187
Acquisition of intangible assets	-7,000	'
Net cash paid for business combination	'	-2,519
Net cash used in investing activities	-9,969	-40,167
Financing activities	'	'
Payment on credit facility	-10,000	'
Payment of commitment fee on credit facility	'	-175
Exercise of stock options	11,910	2,041
Issuance of common stock, net	694	393
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation	758	'
Net cash provided by financing activities	3,362	2,259
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	71,366	-14,125
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the period	49,772	54,244
Cash and cash equivalents at end of the period	$121,138	$40,119

Organization_and_Business

Organization and Business	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Organization and Business	'
	1. Organization and Business
	Santarus, Inc. (“Santarus” or the “Company”) is a specialty biopharmaceutical company focused on acquiring, developing and commercializing proprietary products that address the needs of patients treated by physician specialists. Santarus was incorporated on December 6, 1996 as a California corporation and did not commence significant business activities until late 1998. On July 9, 2002, the Company reincorporated in the State of Delaware.

Basis_of_Presentation

Basis of Presentation	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Basis of Presentation	'
	2. Basis of Presentation
	The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) related to the preparation of interim financial statements and the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission related to a quarterly report on Form 10-Q. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2012 has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements at that date but does not include all information and disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The interim consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments which, in the opinion of management, are necessary for a fair presentation of the financial condition and results of operations for the periods presented. Except as otherwise disclosed, all such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature.
	Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any future periods. For further information, please see the consolidated financial statements and related disclosures included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
	The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as well as disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. Estimates also affect the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Principles_of_Consolidation

Principles of Consolidation	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Principles of Consolidation	'
	3. Principles of Consolidation
	The unaudited interim consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of Santarus, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Covella Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Covella”). The Company does not have any interest in variable interest entities. All material intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

Revenue_Recognition

Revenue Recognition	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Revenue Recognition	'
	4. Revenue Recognition
	The Company recognizes revenue when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, title has passed, the price is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured.
	Product Sales, Net. The Company sells its commercial products primarily to pharmaceutical wholesale distributors. The Company is obligated to accept from customers products that are returned within six months of their expiration date or up to 12 months beyond their expiration date. The shelf life of the Company’s products from the date of manufacture is as follows: Uceris® (budesonide) extended release tablets (36 months); Zegerid® (omeprazole/sodium bicarbonate) capsules and powder for oral suspension (36 months); Glumetza® (metformin hydrochloride extended release tablets) (36 to 48 months); Cycloset® (bromocriptine mesylate) tablets (18 months); and Fenoglide® (fenofibrate) tablets (36 months). The Company authorizes returns for expired or damaged products in accordance with its return goods policy and procedures. The Company issues credit to the customer for expired or damaged returned product. The Company rarely exchanges product from inventory for returned product. At the time of sale, the Company records its estimates for product returns as a reduction to revenue at full sales value with a corresponding increase in the allowance for product returns liability. Actual returns are recorded as a reduction to the allowance for product returns liability at sales value with a corresponding decrease in accounts receivable for credit issued to the customer.
	The Company recognizes product sales net of estimated allowances for product returns, estimated rebates in connection with contracts relating to managed care, Medicare, patient coupons and voucher programs, and estimated chargebacks from distributors, wholesaler fees and prompt payment and other discounts. The Company establishes allowances for estimated product returns, rebates and chargebacks based primarily on the following qualitative and quantitative factors:
		•	the number of and specific contractual terms of agreements with customers;
		•	estimated levels of inventory in the distribution channel;
		•	estimated remaining shelf life of products;
		•	analysis of prescription data gathered by a third-party prescription data provider;
		•	direct communication with customers;
		•	historical product returns, rebates and chargebacks;
		•	anticipated introduction of competitive products or generics;
		•	anticipated pricing strategy changes by the Company and/or its competitors; and
		•	the impact of state and federal regulations.
	In its analyses, the Company utilizes prescription data purchased from a third-party data provider to develop estimates of historical inventory channel pull-through. The Company utilizes a separate analysis which compares historical product shipments less returns to estimated historical prescriptions written. Based on that analysis, the Company develops an estimate of the quantity of product in the distribution channel which may be subject to various product return, rebate and chargeback exposures.
	The Company’s estimates of product returns, rebates and chargebacks require its most subjective and complex judgment due to the need to make estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. If actual future payments for returns, rebates, chargebacks and other discounts vary from the estimates the Company made at the time of sale, its financial position, results of operations and cash flows would be impacted.
	The Company’s allowance for product returns was $24.2 million as of September 30, 2013 and $20.6 million as of December 31, 2012. The Company recognizes product sales at the time title passes to its customers, and the Company provides for an estimate of future product returns at that time based upon historical product returns trends, analysis of product expiration dating and estimated inventory levels in the distribution channel, review of returns trends for similar products, if available, and the other factors discussed above. Due to the lengthy shelf life of the Company’s products and the terms of the Company’s returns policy, there may be a significant time lag between the date the Company determines the estimated allowance and when the Company receives the product return and issues credit to a customer. Therefore, the amount of returns processed against the allowance in a particular year generally has no direct correlation to the product sales in the same year, and the Company may record adjustments to its estimated allowance over several periods, which can result in a net increase or a net decrease in its operating results in those periods.
	The Company has been tracking its Zegerid product returns history by individual production batches from the time of its first commercial product launch of Zegerid powder for oral suspension 20 mg in late 2004. The Company launched Cycloset in November 2010 and began distributing Fenoglide in December 2011. Under a commercialization agreement with Depomed, Inc. (“Depomed”), the Company began distributing and recording product sales for Glumetza in September 2011. The Company has provided for an estimate of product returns based upon a review of the Company’s product returns history and returns trends for similar products, taking into consideration the effect of a product’s shelf life on its returns history. The Company launched Uceris in February 2013 and recognizes product sales when title has passed to customers. Based on the Company’s historical experience with its Zegerid and Glumetza products, the Company has the ability to develop a reasonable estimate of Uceris product returns, taking into consideration the similar shelf lives and distribution channels of these products.
	The Company’s allowance for rebates, chargebacks and other discounts was $23.0 million as of September 30, 2013 and $17.2 million as of December 31, 2012. These allowances reflect an estimate of the Company’s liability for rebates due to managed care organizations under specific contracts, rebates due to various organizations in connection with Medicare contracts, patient coupons and voucher programs, chargebacks due to various organizations purchasing the Company’s products through federal contracts and/or group purchasing agreements, and other rebates and customer discounts due in connection with wholesaler fees and prompt payment and other discounts. The Company estimates its liability for rebates and chargebacks at each reporting period based on a combination of the qualitative and quantitative assumptions listed above. In each reporting period, the Company evaluates its outstanding contracts and applies the contractual discounts to the invoiced price of wholesaler shipments recognized. Although the total invoiced price of shipments to wholesalers for the reporting period and the contractual terms are known during the reporting period, the Company projects the ultimate disposition of the sale (e.g. future utilization rates of cash payors, managed care, Medicare or other contracted organizations). This estimate is based on historical trends adjusted for anticipated changes based on specific contractual terms of new agreements with customers, anticipated pricing strategy changes by the Company and/or its competitors and the other qualitative and quantitative factors described above. There may be a significant time lag between the date the Company determines the estimated allowance and when the Company makes the contractual payment or issues credit to a customer. Due to this time lag, the Company records adjustments to its estimated allowance over several periods, which can result in a net increase or a net decrease in its operating results in those periods.
	In late June 2010, the Company began selling an authorized generic version of its prescription Zegerid capsules under a distribution and supply agreement with Prasco, LLC (“Prasco”). Prasco has agreed to purchase all of its authorized generic product requirements from the Company and pays a specified invoice supply price for such products. The Company recognizes revenue from shipments to Prasco at the invoice supply price and the related cost of product sales when title transfers, which is generally at the time of shipment. The Company is also entitled to receive a significant percentage of the gross margin on sales of the authorized generic products by Prasco, which the Company recognizes as an addition to product sales, net when Prasco reports to the Company the gross margin from the ultimate sale of the products. Any adjustments to the gross margin related to Prasco’s estimated sales discounts and other deductions are recognized in the period Prasco reports the amounts to the Company.
	Promotion, Royalty and Other License Revenue. The Company analyzes each element of its promotion and licensing agreements to determine the appropriate revenue recognition. Prior to January 1, 2011, the Company recognized revenue on upfront payments over the period of significant involvement under the related agreements unless the fee was in exchange for products delivered or services rendered that represent the culmination of a separate earnings process and no further performance obligation existed under the contract. The Company follows the authoritative guidance for revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables materially modified or entered into after December 31, 2010. Under this guidance, the Company identifies the deliverables included within the agreement and evaluates which deliverables represent separate units of accounting. Upfront license fees are generally recognized upon delivery of the license if the facts and circumstances dictate that the license has standalone value from any undelivered items, the relative selling price allocation of the license is equal to or exceeds the upfront license fees, persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the Company’s price to the partner is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Upfront license fees are deferred if facts and circumstances dictate that the license does not have standalone value. The determination of the length of the period over which to defer revenue is subject to judgment and estimation and can have an impact on the amount of revenue recognized in a given period.
	Effective January 1, 2011, the Company adopted prospectively, the authoritative guidance that offers an alternative method of revenue recognition for milestone payments. Under the milestone method guidance, the Company recognizes payment that is contingent upon the achievement of a substantive milestone, as defined in the guidance, in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. Other milestones that do not fall under the definition of a milestone under the milestone method are recognized under the authoritative guidance concerning revenue recognition. Sales milestones, royalties and promotion fees are based on sales and/or gross margin information, which may include estimates of sales discounts and other deductions, received from the relevant alliance agreement partner. Sales milestones, royalties and promotion fees are recognized as revenue when earned under the agreements, and any adjustments related to estimated sales discounts and other deductions are recognized in the period the alliance agreement partner reports the amounts to the Company.

StockBased_Compensation

Stock-Based Compensation	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Stock-Based Compensation	'
	5. Stock-Based Compensation
	For the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 and the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, the Company recognized approximately $4.2 million, $1.8 million, $10.1 million and $4.9 million of total stock-based compensation, respectively. In March 2013, the Company granted options to purchase an aggregate of 2,591,870 shares of its common stock in connection with annual option grants to all eligible employees. These stock options vest over a four-year period from the date of grant. As of September 30, 2013, total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock options and employee stock purchase plan rights was approximately $35.0 million, and the weighted average period over which it was expected to be recognized was 2.9 years.

Income_Taxes

Income Taxes	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Income Taxes	'
	6. Income Taxes
	The Company provides for income taxes under the liability method. This approach requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of differences between the tax basis of assets or liabilities and their carrying amounts in the financial statements. The Company provides a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that these items will expire before the Company is able to realize their benefit. The Company calculates the valuation allowance in accordance with the authoritative guidance relating to income taxes, which requires an assessment of both positive and negative evidence regarding the realizability of these deferred tax assets, when measuring the need for a valuation allowance. Significant judgment is required in determining any valuation allowance against deferred tax assets. As of December 31, 2012, due to a history of operating losses and other key operating factors, including uncertainty regarding the pending U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approval to market and commercialize Uceris, the Company concluded that a full valuation allowance was necessary to offset all of its deferred tax assets. As of June 30, 2013, the Company concluded that it was more likely than not that its deferred tax assets would be realized through future taxable income. This conclusion was based on the Company’s sustained profitability for 2011, 2012 and the six months ended June 30, 2013, assessment of sales trends for each of the Company’s products including Uceris, which the Company commercially launched in February 2013, and projections of positive future earnings. The release of the valuation allowance resulted in an income tax benefit of $54.9 million, which was recorded as a discrete item in the three months ended June 30, 2013. The release of the valuation allowance will not affect the amount of cash paid for income taxes. The Company reassesses its ability to realize the deferred tax benefits on a quarterly basis. If it is more likely than not that the Company will not realize the deferred tax benefits, then all or a portion of the valuation allowance may need to be re-established, which would result in a charge to tax expense.
	The Company follows the authoritative guidance relating to accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. This guidance clarifies the recognition threshold and measurement attributes for financial statement disclosure of tax positions taken or expected to be taken on a tax return. The impact of an uncertain income tax position on the income tax return must be recognized at the largest amount that is more likely than not to be sustained upon audit by the relevant taxing authority. An uncertain tax position will not be recognized if it has less than a 50% likelihood of being sustained.

Net_Income_Per_Share

Net Income Per Share	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Net Income Per Share	'
	7. Net Income Per Share
	Basic income per share is calculated by dividing the net income by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period, without consideration for common stock equivalents. Diluted income per share is computed by dividing the net income by the weighted average number of common share equivalents outstanding for the period determined using the treasury-stock method. For purposes of this calculation, common stock subject to repurchase by the Company, contingently issuable shares, options and warrants are considered to be common stock equivalents and are only included in the calculation of diluted income per share when their effect is dilutive. Potentially dilutive securities totaling approximately 3.0 million shares and 3.1 million shares for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 and 2.2 million shares and 6.8 million shares for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively, were excluded from the calculation of diluted income per share because of their anti-dilutive effect.
		Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
		September 30,				September 30,
		2013		2012		2013		2012
	Numerator:
	Net income (in thousands)	$	30,319	$	8,984	$	122,568	$	13,059
	Denominator:
	Weighted average common shares outstanding for basic net income per share		66,567,180		62,992,473		65,321,156		62,496,446
	Net effect of dilutive common stock equivalents		12,821,182		6,730,621		12,633,080		5,410,174
	Denominator for diluted net income per share		79,388,362		69,723,094		77,954,236		67,906,620
	Net income per share
	Basic	$	0.46	$	0.14	$	1.88	$	0.21
	Diluted	$	0.38	$	0.13	$	1.57	$	0.19

Segment_Reporting

Segment Reporting	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Segment Reporting	'
	8. Segment Reporting
	Management has determined that the Company operates in one business segment which is the acquisition, development and commercialization of pharmaceutical products.

AvailableforSale_Securities

Available-for-Sale Securities	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Available-for-Sale Securities	'
	9. Available-for-Sale Securities
	The Company has classified its debt securities as available-for-sale and, accordingly, carries these investments at fair value, and unrealized holding gains or losses on these securities are carried as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. The cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums or accretion of discounts to maturity, and such amortization or accretion is included in interest income. Realized gains and losses and declines in value judged to be other-than-temporary on available-for-sale securities are included in interest income. The cost of securities sold is based on the specific identification method.
	All available-for-sale securities held as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 have contractual maturities within one year and are included in short-term investments in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. There were no material gross realized gains or losses on sales of available-for-sale securities for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012. The following is a summary of the Company’s available-for-sale investment securities as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 (in thousands):
		Amortized		Market		Unrealized
		Cost		Value		Gain
	September 30, 2013:
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	$	47,577	$	47,581	$	4
	December 31, 2012:
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	$	44,961	$	44,964	$	3

Fair_Value_Measurements

Fair Value Measurements	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Fair Value Measurements	'
	10. Fair Value Measurements
	The carrying values of the Company’s financial instruments, including cash, cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities and the Company’s revolving credit facility approximate fair value due to the relative short-term nature of these instruments.
	The authoritative guidance for fair value measurements establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value. These tiers include: Level 1, defined as observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets; Level 2, defined as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either directly or indirectly observable; and Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop its own assumptions.
	The Company obtains the fair value of its Level 2 financial instruments from its investment managers, who obtain these fair values from professional pricing sources. The professional pricing sources determine fair value using pricing models whereby all significant observable inputs, including maturity dates, issue dates, settlement dates, reported trades, broker-dealer quotes, issue spreads, benchmark securities or other market related data, are observable or can be derived from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the financial instrument. The Company validates the fair values of its Level 2 financial instruments provided by its investment managers by comparing these fair values to a third-party data source.
	The Company’s assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):
		Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
		Quoted		Significant			Significant		Total
		Prices in		Other			Unobservable
		Active		Observable			Inputs
		Markets		Inputs			(Level 3)
		for		(Level 2)
		Identical
		Assets
		(Level 1)
	September 30, 2013:
	Assets
	Money market funds	$	121,063	$	—		$	—	$	121,063
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities		—		48,406			—		48,406
	Deferred compensation plan assets		947		—			—		947
		$	122,010	$	48,406		$	—	$	170,416
	Liabilities
	Contingent consideration	$	—	$	—		$	2,761	$	2,761
	Deferred compensation plan liabilities		947		—			—		947
		$	947	$	—		$	2,761	$	3,708
	December 31, 2012:
	Assets
	Money market funds	$	48,522	$	—		$	—	$	48,522
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities		—		47,164			—		47,164
	Deferred compensation plan assets		169		—			—		169
		$	48,691	$	47,164		$	—	$	95,855
	Liabilities
	Contingent consideration	$	—	$	—		$	2,200	$	2,200
	Deferred compensation plan liabilities		169		—			—		169
		$	169	$	—		$	2,200	$	2,369
	The following table provides a summary of changes in fair value of the Company’s Level 3 liabilities for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 (in thousands):
		Three Months  Ended					Nine Months Ended
		September 30,					September 30,
		2013		2012			2013		2012
	Contingent Consideration:
	Beginning balance	$	2,642	$	2,342		$	2,200	$	2,054
	Change in fair value recorded in operating expenses		119		(313	)		561		(25	)
	Ending balance	$	2,761	$	2,029		$	2,761	$	2,029
	Level 3 liabilities include contingent milestone and royalty obligations the Company may pay related to the acquisition of Covella in September 2010. The fair value of the contingent consideration has been determined using a probability-weighted discounted cash flow model. The key assumptions in applying this approach are the discount rate and the probability assigned to the milestone or royalty being achieved. Management remeasures the fair value of the contingent consideration at each reporting period, with any change in its fair value resulting from either the passage of time or events occurring after the acquisition date, such as changes in the estimated probability or timing of achieving the milestone or royalty, being recorded in the current period’s statement of operations.

Balance_Sheet_Details

Balance Sheet Details	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Balance Sheet Details	'
	11. Balance Sheet Details
	Inventories, net consist of the following (in thousands):
		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
	Raw materials	$	2,239		$	1,533
	Finished goods		10,748			9,968
			12,987			11,501
	Allowance for excess and obsolete inventory		(1,105	)		(1,604	)
		$	11,882		$	9,897
	Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market (net realizable value). Cost is determined by the first-in, first-out method. Inventories consist of finished goods and raw materials used in the manufacture of the Company’s commercial products. The Company provides reserves for potentially excess, dated or obsolete inventories based on an analysis of inventory on hand and on firm purchase commitments, compared to forecasts of future sales.
	Accounts payable and accrued liabilities consist of the following (in thousands):
		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
	Accounts payable	$	7,019		$	6,873
	Accrued compensation and benefits		8,580			9,183
	Accrued rebates		15,083			11,693
	Accrued license fees and royalties		11,949			7,181
	Accrued research and development expenses		3,875			3,441
	Accrued legal fees		1,625			1,953
	Income taxes payable		—			950
	Other accrued liabilities		4,531			4,550
		$	52,662		$	45,824

LongTerm_Debt

Long-Term Debt	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Long-Term Debt	'
	12. Long-Term Debt
	In July 2006, the Company entered into a loan agreement with Comerica Bank (“Comerica”), which was most recently amended in February 2012, pursuant to which the Company may request advances in an aggregate outstanding amount not to exceed $35.0 million. Pursuant to the February 2012 amendment, the revolving loan bears interest, as selected by the Company, at either the variable rate of interest, per annum, most recently announced by Comerica as its “prime rate” or the LIBOR rate plus 2.25%. In December 2008, the Company drew down $10.0 million under the loan agreement. In August 2013, the Company repaid the $10.0 million and as of September 30, 2013, the Company had no outstanding balance under the loan agreement. Interest payments on advances made under the amended loan agreement are due and payable in arrears on a monthly basis during the term of the amended loan agreement. Amounts borrowed under the loan agreement may be repaid and re-borrowed at any time prior to February 13, 2015, and any outstanding principal drawn during the term of the loan facility is due and payable on February 13, 2015. In conjunction with the execution of the February 2012 amendment to the loan agreement, the Company paid a one-time commitment fee of $175,000. The commitment fee has been capitalized as a debt discount and is being amortized to interest expense over the remaining term of the loan agreement. The amended loan agreement will remain in full force and effect for so long as any obligations remain outstanding or Comerica has any obligation to make credit extensions under the amended loan agreement.
	Amounts borrowed under the amended loan agreement are secured by substantially all of the Company’s personal property, excluding intellectual property. Under the amended loan agreement, the Company is subject to certain affirmative and negative covenants, including limitations on the Company’s ability to: undergo certain change of control events; convey, sell, lease, license, transfer or otherwise dispose of assets; create, incur, assume, guarantee or be liable with respect to certain indebtedness; grant liens; pay dividends and make certain other restricted payments; and make investments. In addition, under the amended loan agreement, the Company is required to maintain its cash balances with either Comerica or another financial institution covered by a control agreement for the benefit of Comerica. The Company is also subject to specified financial covenants with respect to a minimum liquidity ratio and, in specified limited circumstances, minimum EBITDA requirements as defined in the amended loan agreement. The Company believes it has currently met all of its obligations under the amended loan agreement.

Strategic_Collaboration_with_C

Strategic Collaboration with Cosmo	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Strategic Collaboration with Cosmo	'
	13. Strategic Collaboration with Cosmo
	In December 2008, the Company entered into a strategic collaboration with Cosmo Technologies Limited (“Cosmo”), an affiliate of Cosmo Pharmaceuticals S.p.A., including a license agreement, stock issuance agreement and registration rights agreement, under which the Company was granted exclusive rights to develop and commercialize Uceris and rifamycin SV MMX® in the U.S. Following the first commercial sale of Uceris which occurred in February 2013, Cosmo elected, in April 2013, to receive payment of a $7.0 million commercial milestone in cash. The Company accrued the $7.0 million commercial milestone in February 2013 and made the cash payment to Cosmo in April 2013. The commercial milestone has been capitalized in intangible assets and is being amortized to license fees and royalties over the estimated useful life of the asset on a straight-line basis through mid-2020.

License_Agreement_and_Supply_A

License Agreement and Supply Agreement with Pharming	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
License Agreement and Supply Agreement with Pharming	'
	14. License Agreement and Supply Agreement with Pharming
	In September 2010, the Company entered into a license agreement and a supply agreement with Pharming Group NV (“Pharming”) under which the Company was granted certain non-exclusive rights to develop and manufacture, and certain exclusive rights to commercialize Ruconest® (recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor) in the U.S., Canada and Mexico for the treatment of hereditary angioedema (“HAE”) and other future indications. Under the terms of the license agreement, as a result of the FDA acceptance for review of the biologics license application (“BLA”) for Ruconest in June 2013, the Company paid Pharming a $5.0 million milestone in July 2013. The $5.0 million milestone is included in license fees and royalties in the nine months ended September 30, 2013.

Recent_Accounting_Pronouncemen

Recent Accounting Pronouncements	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Recent Accounting Pronouncements	'
	15. Recent Accounting Pronouncements
	In June and December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued authoritative guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income. Under this newly issued authoritative guidance, an entity has the option to present comprehensive income and net income either in a single continuous statement or in two separate but consecutive statements. This guidance, therefore, eliminated the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The Company adopted the requirements of this guidance effective for its fiscal year beginning January 1, 2012. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In February 2013, the FASB amended its guidance on reporting reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income. For significant items reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income to net income in their entirety in the same reporting period, this amendment requires reporting about the effect of the reclassifications on the respective line items in the statement where net income is presented. For items that are not reclassified to net income in their entirety in the same reporting period, a cross reference to other disclosures currently required under GAAP is required in the notes to the financial statements. This amendment is effective for interim periods beginning after December 15, 2012. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Contingencies

Contingencies	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Contingencies	'
	16. Contingencies
	Zegerid Rx Litigation
	In April 2010, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware ruled that five patents covering Zegerid capsules and Zegerid powder for oral suspension (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,489,346; 6,645,988; 6,699,885; 6,780,882; and 7,399,772) were invalid due to obviousness. These patents were the subject of lawsuits the Company filed in 2007 against Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. (“Par”) in response to abbreviated new drug applications (“ANDAs”) filed by Par with the FDA. The University of Missouri, licensor of the patents, is joined in the litigation as a co-plaintiff. In May 2010, the Company filed an appeal of the District Court’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Following the District Court’s decision, Par launched its generic version of Zegerid capsules in late June 2010.
	In September 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed in part the April 2010 decision of the District Court. The Federal Circuit found that certain claims of asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 6,780,882 and 7,399,772, which Par had been found to infringe, were not invalid due to obviousness. These patents represent two of the five patents that were found to be invalid by the District Court, and the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s finding of invalidity for the asserted claims from the remaining three patents. The Federal Circuit also upheld the District Court’s finding that there was no inequitable conduct. Following the Federal Circuit’s decision, Par announced that it had ceased distribution of its generic Zegerid capsules product in September 2012. In December 2012, the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a combined petition for panel and en banc rehearing filed by Par and issued its mandate, remanding the case to the District Court for further proceedings pertaining to damages. In February 2013, the Company filed an amended complaint with the District Court for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,780,882 and 7,399,772 and requested a jury trial with respect to the issue of damages in connection with Par’s launch of its generic version of Zegerid capsules in June 2010. The trial has been scheduled in November 2014. In March 2013, Par filed its amended answer, which alleges, among other things, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and non-infringement based on purported invalidity of the two asserted patents. In addition, Par filed a motion for a judgment on the pleadings, alleging, among other things, that the two asserted patents are invalid because the Federal Circuit purportedly did not expressly address certain prior art references considered by the District Court, and the Company is waiting for a ruling from the District Court on Par’s motion. Although the Company does not believe that Par has a meritorious basis upon which to further challenge validity of the asserted patents in this proceeding, the Company cannot be certain of the timing or outcome of this or any other proceedings. If the District Court rules in favor of Par on its pending motion or otherwise, the Company cannot be certain of the impact to the Company, including if or when Par might re-launch its generic product. In addition, in April 2013, Par received approval from the FDA of its generic version of Zegerid powder for oral suspension.
	In December 2011, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Zydus Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Zydus”) for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Zegerid capsules. The University of Missouri, licensor of the patents, is joined in the litigation as a co-plaintiff. Zydus had filed an ANDA with the FDA regarding its intent to market a generic version of Zegerid capsules prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In September 2012, the Company amended its complaint to be limited to U.S. Patent No. 7,399,772, which patent was found not to be invalid in the September 2012 Federal Circuit decision. In October 2012, Zydus filed its answer, which alleges, among other things, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The lawsuit was commenced within the requisite 45-day time period, resulting in an FDA stay on the approval of Zydus’ proposed product for 30 months or until a decision is rendered by the District Court, which is adverse to the asserted patent. The trial for this matter has been scheduled in January 2014. Absent a court decision, the 30-month stay is expected to expire in May 2014. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.
	In August 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd. and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. (collectively “Dr. Reddy’s”) for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Zegerid capsules. The Company and the University of Missouri, licensor of the patents, were joined in the litigation as co-plaintiffs. Dr. Reddy’s had filed an ANDA with the FDA regarding its intent to market a generic version of Zegerid capsules prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In June 2013, this case was settled allowing Dr. Reddy’s to begin selling a generic version of prescription Zegerid capsules upon expiration of the applicable patent (or earlier under certain circumstances), and the District Court entered an order dismissing the case with prejudice.
	Zegerid OTC Litigation
	In September 2010, MSD Consumer Products, Inc. (“Merck”), a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Par for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Zegerid OTC®. The Company and the University of Missouri, licensors of the listed patents, are joined in the lawsuit as co-plaintiffs. Par had filed an ANDA with the FDA regarding its intent to market a generic version of Zegerid OTC prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In October 2012, Merck amended its complaint to be limited to U.S. Patent No. 7,399,772, which patent was found not to be invalid in the September 2012 Federal Circuit decision. Also in October 2012, Par filed its answer, which alleges, among other things, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, non-infringement and invalidity. Par has received tentative approval of its proposed generic Zegerid OTC product. The lawsuit was commenced within the requisite 45-day time period, resulting in an FDA stay on the approval of Par’s proposed product for 30 months or until a decision is rendered by the District Court, which is adverse to the asserted patent. Although the 30-month stay expired in February 2013, the parties have agreed that Par will not launch its generic Zegerid OTC product unless there is a District Court judgment favorable to Par or in certain other specified circumstances. The District Court issued a Markman order in October 2013 in which the District Court adopted Merck’s proposed construction of several claim terms that were consistent with those adopted by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. A trial has been scheduled in January 2015. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.
	In September 2010, Merck filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Perrigo Research and Development Company (“Perrigo”) for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Zegerid OTC. The Company and the University of Missouri, licensors of the listed patents, were joined in the lawsuits as co-plaintiffs. Perrigo had filed an ANDA with the FDA regarding its intent to market a generic version of Zegerid OTC prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In January 2013, this case was settled allowing Perrigo to market a generic version of Zegerid OTC upon expiration of the applicable patents (or earlier under certain circumstances), and the District Court entered an order dismissing the case with prejudice.
	In December 2011, Merck filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Zydus for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Zegerid OTC. The Company and the University of Missouri, licensors of the listed patents, are joined in the litigation as co-plaintiffs. Zydus had filed an ANDA with the FDA regarding its intent to market a generic version of Zegerid OTC prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In September 2012, Merck amended its complaint to be limited to U.S. Patent No. 7,399,772, which patent was found not to be invalid in the September 2012 Federal Circuit decision. In October 2012, Zydus filed its answer, which alleges, among other things, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The lawsuit was commenced within the requisite 45-day time period, resulting in an FDA stay on the approval of Zydus’ proposed product for 30 months or until a decision is rendered by the District Court, which is adverse to the asserted patent. Absent a court decision, the 30-month stay is expected to expire in May 2014. The trial for this matter has been scheduled in January 2014. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.
	Any adverse outcome in the Zegerid Rx and Zegerid OTC litigation described above would adversely impact the Company, including the amount of revenues the Company receives from sales of Zegerid brand and authorized generic prescription products and the Company’s ability to receive, milestone payments and royalties under its agreement with Merck. For example, the royalties payable to the Company under its license agreement with Merck are subject to reduction in the event it is ultimately determined by the courts (with the decision being unappealable or unappealed within the time allowed for appeal) that there is no valid claim of the licensed patents covering the manufacture, use or sale of the Zegerid OTC product and third parties have received marketing approval for, and are conducting bona fide ongoing commercial sales of, generic versions of the licensed products. Any negative outcome may also negatively impact the patent protection for the products being commercialized pursuant to the Company’s ex-US license with Glaxo Group Limited (“GSK”), an affiliate of GlaxoSmithKline, plc. Although a U.S. ruling is not binding in countries outside the U.S., similar challenges to those raised in the U.S. litigation may be raised in territories outside the U.S. At this time the Company is unable to estimate possible losses or ranges of losses for ongoing actions.
	Regardless of how these litigation matters are ultimately resolved, the litigation has been and will continue to be costly, time-consuming and distracting to management, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
	Glumetza Patent Litigation
	In November 2009, Depomed filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Lupin Limited and its wholly owned subsidiary, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively “Lupin”) for infringement of certain patents listed in the Orange Book for Glumetza. The lawsuit was filed in response to an ANDA filed with the FDA by Lupin regarding Lupin’s intent to market generic versions of Glumetza 500 mg and 1000 mg tablets prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In February 2012, the case was settled allowing Lupin to begin selling a generic version of Glumetza in February 2016, or earlier under certain circumstances, and the District Court entered an order dismissing the case without prejudice.
	In June 2011, Depomed filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Sun Pharma Global FZE, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Inc. (collectively “Sun”) for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Glumetza. Valeant International Bermuda (“Valeant”) was joined in the lawsuit as a co-plaintiff. The lawsuit was filed in response to an ANDA filed with the FDA by Sun regarding Sun’s intent to market generic versions of Glumetza 500 mg and 1000 mg tablets prior to the expiration of the listed patents. In January 2013, the case was settled allowing Sun to begin selling a generic version of Glumetza in August 2016, or earlier under certain circumstances, and the District Court dismissed the case without prejudice.
	In April 2012, Depomed filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against Watson Laboratories, Inc. — Florida, Actavis, Inc. and Watson Pharma, Inc., collectively referred to herein as Watson, for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Glumetza 1000 mg at the time the lawsuit was filed (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,488,962 and 7,780,987). Valeant is joined in the lawsuit as a co-plaintiff. The lawsuit was filed in response to an ANDA filed with the FDA by Watson regarding Watson’s intent to market a generic version of Glumetza 1000 mg tablets prior to the expiration of the listed patents. Depomed and Valeant commenced the lawsuit within the requisite 45-day time period, resulting in an FDA stay on the approval of Watson’s proposed product for 30 months or until a decision is rendered by the District Court, which is adverse to the asserted patents. Absent a court decision, the 30-month stay is expected to expire in September 2014. In June 2012, Watson filed its answer, which alleges, among other things, non-infringement and invalidity of the asserted patents, failure to state a claim, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and has also filed counterclaims. In February 2013, Depomed amended its complaint to add infringement of a newly listed Orange Book patent (U.S. Patent No. 8,323,692), as well as two non-Orange Book listed patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,736,667 and 8,329,215). The Markman hearing for this matter has been scheduled in April 2014, and the trial has been scheduled in May 2014. In August 2013, the District Court ordered that the case be stayed. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.
	In February 2013, Depomed filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against Watson for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Glumetza 500 mg (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,340,475; 6,488,962; 6,635,280 and 6,723,340). The lawsuit was filed in response to an ANDA filed with the FDA by Watson regarding Watson’s intent to market a generic version of Glumetza 500 mg tablets prior to the expiration of the listed patents. Depomed commenced the lawsuit within the requisite 45-day time period, resulting in an FDA stay on the approval of Watson’s proposed product for 30 months or until a decision is rendered by the District Court, which is adverse to the asserted patents. Absent a court decision, the 30-month stay is expected to expire in July 2015. In March 2013, Watson filed its answer, which alleges, among other things, non-infringement and invalidity of the asserted patents, failure to state a claim, and lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and has also filed counterclaims. The Markman hearing for this matter has been scheduled in December 2014, and a trial has been scheduled in January 2015. In August 2013, the District Court ordered that the case be stayed. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.
	Under the terms of the Company’s commercialization agreement with Depomed, Depomed will manage any ongoing patent infringement litigation relating to Glumetza, subject to certain consent rights in favor of the Company, including with regard to any proposed settlements. The Company is responsible for 70% of the future out-of-pocket costs, and Depomed is responsible for 30% of the future out-of-pocket costs, related to patent infringement cases. Although Depomed has indicated that it intends to vigorously defend and enforce its patent rights, the Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of ongoing or future actions. At this time the Company is unable to estimate possible losses or ranges of losses for ongoing actions.
	Any adverse outcome in the litigation described above would adversely impact the Company and its revenues. Regardless of how these litigation matters are ultimately resolved, the litigation will continue to be costly, time-consuming and distracting to management, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
	In addition, certain of the patents that provide coverage for Glumetza are utilized in other products developed by Depomed or Depomed licensees and are subject to ongoing patent infringement litigation and may be subject to patent infringement litigation in the future. Any adverse outcome in such patent infringement litigation could negatively impact the value of the patent coverage for Glumetza.
	Fenoglide Patent Litigation
	Prior to the execution of the license agreement, Shore Therapeutics, Inc. (“Shore”) entered into a settlement arrangement with Impax Laboratories, Inc. (“Impax”) in connection with patent infringement litigation associated with Impax’s ANDA for a generic version of Fenoglide and a related paragraph IV challenge. The settlement terms grant Impax a sublicense to begin selling a generic version of Fenoglide on October 1, 2015, or earlier under certain circumstances. In February 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware entered an order dismissing the litigation, and the Company assumed Shore’s obligations associated with the sublicense to Impax.
	In January 2013, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against Mylan Inc. and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (collectively “Mylan”) for infringement of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Fenoglide 120 mg and 40 mg at the time the lawsuit was filed (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,658,944, and 8,124,125). Veloxis Pharmaceuticals A/S (“Veloxis”) is joined in the lawsuit as a co-plaintiff. The lawsuit was filed in response to an ANDA filed with the FDA by Mylan regarding Mylan’s intent to market a generic version of Fenoglide 120 mg and 40 mg tablets prior to the expiration of the listed patents. The Company commenced the lawsuit within the requisite 45-day time period, resulting in an FDA stay on the approval of Mylan’s proposed product for 30 months or until a decision is rendered by the District Court, which is adverse to the asserted patents, whichever may occur earlier. Absent a court decision, the 30-month stay is expected to expire in June 2015. In February 2013, Mylan filed its answer, which alleges, among other things, non-infringement, invalidity, and failure to state a claim, and has also filed counterclaims. In August 2013, the Company filed an amended complaint to add infringement of a newly listed Orange Book patent (U.S. Patent No. 8,481,078). In September 2013, Mylan filed its answer to the amended complaint, which alleges, among other things, non-infringement, invalidity, and failure to state a claim, and has also filed counterclaims. The Markman hearing for this matter has been scheduled in June 2014, and a trial has been scheduled in March 2015. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.
	Trademark Litigation
	In October 2013, Endochoice, Inc. (“Endochoice”) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Company for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition under the Trademark Act, unfair trade practices under the New York Unfair Trade Practices Act, and trademark infringement and unfair competition under the common law of the State of New York, all in connection with the Company’s use of a graphical logo in connection with some materials related to Uceris. Endochoice’s requested relief includes a permanent injunction preventing the Company from continued use of the graphical logo, that the Company surrender for destruction all products, web pages, labels, advertisements, promotional and other materials that use the graphical logo, an award of damages, and payment of Endochoice’s costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees. The Company is not able to predict the timing or outcome of this lawsuit.

Subsequent_Event

Subsequent Event	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Subsequent Event	'
	17. Subsequent Event
	On November 7, 2013, the Company entered into an agreement and plan of merger (“Merger Agreement”) with Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (“Parent”), Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent, and Willow Acquisition Sub Corporation, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Parent (“Merger Sub”), pursuant to which, and on the terms and subject to the conditions thereof, among other things, Merger Sub will commence a tender offer (“Offer”), no later than December 3, 2013, to acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock of the Company at a purchase price of $32.00 per share in cash, without interest (the “Offer Price”). Following the completion of the Offer and subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will merge with and into the Company, with the Company surviving as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent, pursuant to the procedure provided for under Section 251(h) of the Delaware General Corporation Law without any additional stockholder approvals (the “Merger”).
	At the effective time of the Merger (the “Effective Time”), by virtue of the Merger and without any action on the part of the holders of any shares of common stock of the Company, each outstanding share of common stock of the Company, other than any shares owned by the Company, Parent, Merger Sub or any wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company or of Parent, or any stockholders who are entitled to and who properly exercise appraisal rights under Delaware law, will be canceled and converted into the right to receive an amount in cash equal to the Offer Price. In addition, upon the closing of the Offer each outstanding Company stock option will fully vest and, at the Effective Time, the holder thereof will be entitled to receive an amount in cash, without interest and less the amount of any tax withholding, equal to the product of the excess, if any, of the Offer Price over the exercise price of such option and the number of shares of Company common stock underlying such option.
	The obligation of Merger Sub to purchase the shares of common stock of the Company tendered in the Offer is subject to the satisfaction or waiver of a number of conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, including (i) that there shall have been validly tendered and not validly withdrawn a number of shares of common stock of the Company that represent one more than 50% of the total number of shares of common stock of the Company outstanding at the time of the expiration of the Offer (calculated on a fully-diluted basis), and (ii) the expiration or termination of applicable waiting periods under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended. The consummation of the Offer is not subject to any financing condition.
	The Merger Agreement contains customary representations, warranties and covenants, including covenants obligating the Company to continue to conduct its business in the ordinary course and to cooperate in seeking regulatory approvals. The Company has also agreed (1) to cease all existing, and agreed not to solicit or initiate any additional, discussions with third parties regarding other proposals to acquire the Company and (2) to certain restrictions on its ability to respond to such proposals, subject to fulfillment of certain fiduciary requirements of the board of directors of the Company.
	The Merger Agreement includes a remedy of specific performance for the Company, Parent and Merger Sub. The Merger Agreement also contains certain termination rights in favor of each the Company and Parent, including under certain circumstances, the requirement for the Company to pay to Parent a termination fee of $80 million. The board of directors of the Company has unanimously (i) determined that the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby are fair to, advisable and in the best interests of the Company’s stockholders, (ii) approved and declared advisable the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby and (iii) resolved to recommend acceptance of the Offer by the Company’s stockholders. The board of directors of Parent also has unanimously approved the transaction. The Company expects to complete the Merger in the first quarter of 2014, subject to the satisfaction of the closing conditions.
	Concurrently with the execution and delivery of the Merger Agreement, on November 7, 2013, the Company and Parent entered into an agreement (the “License Amendment”) with Cosmo, which License Amendment modifies certain terms of the License Agreement by and between the Company and Cosmo dated December 10, 2008 (the “Original License Agreement”). Under the terms of the License Amendment, among other things, effective and conditioned upon the consummation of the Merger, (1) the Company agreed to return to Cosmo all rights to rifamycin SV MMX acquired by the Company under the Original License Agreement, (2) Cosmo consented to the development, promotion and marketing in the United States by the Company, Parent and any of their subsidiaries of budesonide products; provided, that the Company, Parent and their subsidiaries are prohibited from developing, promoting or marketing an oral formulation budesonide product other than the product licensed by the Company under the Original License Agreement, and (3) milestone obligations payable to Cosmo are only payable in cash, and the Stock Issuance Agreement between the Company and Cosmo, effective as of December 10, 2008, and the Registration Rights Agreement between the Company and Cosmo, dated as of December 10, 2008 and amended on April 23, 2009, were terminated. The License Amendment shall automatically terminate upon any termination of the Merger Agreement or if the Merger is not consummated by June 30, 2014.

Basis_of_Presentation_Policies

Basis of Presentation (Policies)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Basis of Presentation	'
	The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) related to the preparation of interim financial statements and the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission related to a quarterly report on Form 10-Q. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2012 has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements at that date but does not include all information and disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The interim consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments which, in the opinion of management, are necessary for a fair presentation of the financial condition and results of operations for the periods presented. Except as otherwise disclosed, all such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature.
	Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any future periods. For further information, please see the consolidated financial statements and related disclosures included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
	The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as well as disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. Estimates also affect the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Principles of Consolidation	'
	The unaudited interim consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of Santarus, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Covella Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Covella”). The Company does not have any interest in variable interest entities. All material intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Revenue Recognition	'
	The Company recognizes revenue when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, title has passed, the price is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured.
	Product Sales, Net. The Company sells its commercial products primarily to pharmaceutical wholesale distributors. The Company is obligated to accept from customers products that are returned within six months of their expiration date or up to 12 months beyond their expiration date. The shelf life of the Company’s products from the date of manufacture is as follows: Uceris® (budesonide) extended release tablets (36 months); Zegerid® (omeprazole/sodium bicarbonate) capsules and powder for oral suspension (36 months); Glumetza® (metformin hydrochloride extended release tablets) (36 to 48 months); Cycloset® (bromocriptine mesylate) tablets (18 months); and Fenoglide® (fenofibrate) tablets (36 months). The Company authorizes returns for expired or damaged products in accordance with its return goods policy and procedures. The Company issues credit to the customer for expired or damaged returned product. The Company rarely exchanges product from inventory for returned product. At the time of sale, the Company records its estimates for product returns as a reduction to revenue at full sales value with a corresponding increase in the allowance for product returns liability. Actual returns are recorded as a reduction to the allowance for product returns liability at sales value with a corresponding decrease in accounts receivable for credit issued to the customer.
	The Company recognizes product sales net of estimated allowances for product returns, estimated rebates in connection with contracts relating to managed care, Medicare, patient coupons and voucher programs, and estimated chargebacks from distributors, wholesaler fees and prompt payment and other discounts. The Company establishes allowances for estimated product returns, rebates and chargebacks based primarily on the following qualitative and quantitative factors:
		•	the number of and specific contractual terms of agreements with customers;
		•	estimated levels of inventory in the distribution channel;
		•	estimated remaining shelf life of products;
		•	analysis of prescription data gathered by a third-party prescription data provider;
		•	direct communication with customers;
		•	historical product returns, rebates and chargebacks;
		•	anticipated introduction of competitive products or generics;
		•	anticipated pricing strategy changes by the Company and/or its competitors; and
		•	the impact of state and federal regulations.
	In its analyses, the Company utilizes prescription data purchased from a third-party data provider to develop estimates of historical inventory channel pull-through. The Company utilizes a separate analysis which compares historical product shipments less returns to estimated historical prescriptions written. Based on that analysis, the Company develops an estimate of the quantity of product in the distribution channel which may be subject to various product return, rebate and chargeback exposures.
	The Company’s estimates of product returns, rebates and chargebacks require its most subjective and complex judgment due to the need to make estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. If actual future payments for returns, rebates, chargebacks and other discounts vary from the estimates the Company made at the time of sale, its financial position, results of operations and cash flows would be impacted.
	The Company’s allowance for product returns was $24.2 million as of September 30, 2013 and $20.6 million as of December 31, 2012. The Company recognizes product sales at the time title passes to its customers, and the Company provides for an estimate of future product returns at that time based upon historical product returns trends, analysis of product expiration dating and estimated inventory levels in the distribution channel, review of returns trends for similar products, if available, and the other factors discussed above. Due to the lengthy shelf life of the Company’s products and the terms of the Company’s returns policy, there may be a significant time lag between the date the Company determines the estimated allowance and when the Company receives the product return and issues credit to a customer. Therefore, the amount of returns processed against the allowance in a particular year generally has no direct correlation to the product sales in the same year, and the Company may record adjustments to its estimated allowance over several periods, which can result in a net increase or a net decrease in its operating results in those periods.
	The Company has been tracking its Zegerid product returns history by individual production batches from the time of its first commercial product launch of Zegerid powder for oral suspension 20 mg in late 2004. The Company launched Cycloset in November 2010 and began distributing Fenoglide in December 2011. Under a commercialization agreement with Depomed, Inc. (“Depomed”), the Company began distributing and recording product sales for Glumetza in September 2011. The Company has provided for an estimate of product returns based upon a review of the Company’s product returns history and returns trends for similar products, taking into consideration the effect of a product’s shelf life on its returns history. The Company launched Uceris in February 2013 and recognizes product sales when title has passed to customers. Based on the Company’s historical experience with its Zegerid and Glumetza products, the Company has the ability to develop a reasonable estimate of Uceris product returns, taking into consideration the similar shelf lives and distribution channels of these products.
	The Company’s allowance for rebates, chargebacks and other discounts was $23.0 million as of September 30, 2013 and $17.2 million as of December 31, 2012. These allowances reflect an estimate of the Company’s liability for rebates due to managed care organizations under specific contracts, rebates due to various organizations in connection with Medicare contracts, patient coupons and voucher programs, chargebacks due to various organizations purchasing the Company’s products through federal contracts and/or group purchasing agreements, and other rebates and customer discounts due in connection with wholesaler fees and prompt payment and other discounts. The Company estimates its liability for rebates and chargebacks at each reporting period based on a combination of the qualitative and quantitative assumptions listed above. In each reporting period, the Company evaluates its outstanding contracts and applies the contractual discounts to the invoiced price of wholesaler shipments recognized. Although the total invoiced price of shipments to wholesalers for the reporting period and the contractual terms are known during the reporting period, the Company projects the ultimate disposition of the sale (e.g. future utilization rates of cash payors, managed care, Medicare or other contracted organizations). This estimate is based on historical trends adjusted for anticipated changes based on specific contractual terms of new agreements with customers, anticipated pricing strategy changes by the Company and/or its competitors and the other qualitative and quantitative factors described above. There may be a significant time lag between the date the Company determines the estimated allowance and when the Company makes the contractual payment or issues credit to a customer. Due to this time lag, the Company records adjustments to its estimated allowance over several periods, which can result in a net increase or a net decrease in its operating results in those periods.
	In late June 2010, the Company began selling an authorized generic version of its prescription Zegerid capsules under a distribution and supply agreement with Prasco, LLC (“Prasco”). Prasco has agreed to purchase all of its authorized generic product requirements from the Company and pays a specified invoice supply price for such products. The Company recognizes revenue from shipments to Prasco at the invoice supply price and the related cost of product sales when title transfers, which is generally at the time of shipment. The Company is also entitled to receive a significant percentage of the gross margin on sales of the authorized generic products by Prasco, which the Company recognizes as an addition to product sales, net when Prasco reports to the Company the gross margin from the ultimate sale of the products. Any adjustments to the gross margin related to Prasco’s estimated sales discounts and other deductions are recognized in the period Prasco reports the amounts to the Company.
	Promotion, Royalty and Other License Revenue. The Company analyzes each element of its promotion and licensing agreements to determine the appropriate revenue recognition. Prior to January 1, 2011, the Company recognized revenue on upfront payments over the period of significant involvement under the related agreements unless the fee was in exchange for products delivered or services rendered that represent the culmination of a separate earnings process and no further performance obligation existed under the contract. The Company follows the authoritative guidance for revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables materially modified or entered into after December 31, 2010. Under this guidance, the Company identifies the deliverables included within the agreement and evaluates which deliverables represent separate units of accounting. Upfront license fees are generally recognized upon delivery of the license if the facts and circumstances dictate that the license has standalone value from any undelivered items, the relative selling price allocation of the license is equal to or exceeds the upfront license fees, persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the Company’s price to the partner is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Upfront license fees are deferred if facts and circumstances dictate that the license does not have standalone value. The determination of the length of the period over which to defer revenue is subject to judgment and estimation and can have an impact on the amount of revenue recognized in a given period.
	Effective January 1, 2011, the Company adopted prospectively, the authoritative guidance that offers an alternative method of revenue recognition for milestone payments. Under the milestone method guidance, the Company recognizes payment that is contingent upon the achievement of a substantive milestone, as defined in the guidance, in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. Other milestones that do not fall under the definition of a milestone under the milestone method are recognized under the authoritative guidance concerning revenue recognition. Sales milestones, royalties and promotion fees are based on sales and/or gross margin information, which may include estimates of sales discounts and other deductions, received from the relevant alliance agreement partner. Sales milestones, royalties and promotion fees are recognized as revenue when earned under the agreements, and any adjustments related to estimated sales discounts and other deductions are recognized in the period the alliance agreement partner reports the amounts to the Company.
Income Tax	'
	The Company provides for income taxes under the liability method. This approach requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of differences between the tax basis of assets or liabilities and their carrying amounts in the financial statements. The Company provides a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that these items will expire before the Company is able to realize their benefit. The Company calculates the valuation allowance in accordance with the authoritative guidance relating to income taxes, which requires an assessment of both positive and negative evidence regarding the realizability of these deferred tax assets, when measuring the need for a valuation allowance. Significant judgment is required in determining any valuation allowance against deferred tax assets. As of December 31, 2012, due to a history of operating losses and other key operating factors, including uncertainty regarding the pending U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approval to market and commercialize Uceris, the Company concluded that a full valuation allowance was necessary to offset all of its deferred tax assets. As of June 30, 2013, the Company concluded that it was more likely than not that its deferred tax assets would be realized through future taxable income. This conclusion was based on the Company’s sustained profitability for 2011, 2012 and the six months ended June 30, 2013, assessment of sales trends for each of the Company’s products including Uceris, which the Company commercially launched in February 2013, and projections of positive future earnings. The release of the valuation allowance resulted in an income tax benefit of $54.9 million, which was recorded as a discrete item in the three months ended June 30, 2013. The release of the valuation allowance will not affect the amount of cash paid for income taxes. The Company reassesses its ability to realize the deferred tax benefits on a quarterly basis. If it is more likely than not that the Company will not realize the deferred tax benefits, then all or a portion of the valuation allowance may need to be re-established, which would result in a charge to tax expense.
	The Company follows the authoritative guidance relating to accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. This guidance clarifies the recognition threshold and measurement attributes for financial statement disclosure of tax positions taken or expected to be taken on a tax return. The impact of an uncertain income tax position on the income tax return must be recognized at the largest amount that is more likely than not to be sustained upon audit by the relevant taxing authority. An uncertain tax position will not be recognized if it has less than a 50% likelihood of being sustained.
Net Income Per Share	'
	Basic income per share is calculated by dividing the net income by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period, without consideration for common stock equivalents. Diluted income per share is computed by dividing the net income by the weighted average number of common share equivalents outstanding for the period determined using the treasury-stock method. For purposes of this calculation, common stock subject to repurchase by the Company, contingently issuable shares, options and warrants are considered to be common stock equivalents and are only included in the calculation of diluted income per share when their effect is dilutive.
Available-for-Sale Securities	'
	The Company has classified its debt securities as available-for-sale and, accordingly, carries these investments at fair value, and unrealized holding gains or losses on these securities are carried as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. The cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums or accretion of discounts to maturity, and such amortization or accretion is included in interest income. Realized gains and losses and declines in value judged to be other-than-temporary on available-for-sale securities are included in interest income. The cost of securities sold is based on the specific identification method.
Fair Value Measurements	'
	The carrying values of the Company’s financial instruments, including cash, cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities and the Company’s revolving credit facility approximate fair value due to the relative short-term nature of these instruments.
	The authoritative guidance for fair value measurements establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value. These tiers include: Level 1, defined as observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets; Level 2, defined as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either directly or indirectly observable; and Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop its own assumptions.
	The Company obtains the fair value of its Level 2 financial instruments from its investment managers, who obtain these fair values from professional pricing sources. The professional pricing sources determine fair value using pricing models whereby all significant observable inputs, including maturity dates, issue dates, settlement dates, reported trades, broker-dealer quotes, issue spreads, benchmark securities or other market related data, are observable or can be derived from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the financial instrument. The Company validates the fair values of its Level 2 financial instruments provided by its investment managers by comparing these fair values to a third-party data source.
Inventories and Related Reserves	'
	Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market (net realizable value). Cost is determined by the first-in, first-out method. Inventories consist of finished goods and raw materials used in the manufacture of the Company’s commercial products. The Company provides reserves for potentially excess, dated or obsolete inventories based on an analysis of inventory on hand and on firm purchase commitments, compared to forecasts of future sales.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements	'
	In June and December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued authoritative guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income. Under this newly issued authoritative guidance, an entity has the option to present comprehensive income and net income either in a single continuous statement or in two separate but consecutive statements. This guidance, therefore, eliminated the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The Company adopted the requirements of this guidance effective for its fiscal year beginning January 1, 2012. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In February 2013, the FASB amended its guidance on reporting reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income. For significant items reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income to net income in their entirety in the same reporting period, this amendment requires reporting about the effect of the reclassifications on the respective line items in the statement where net income is presented. For items that are not reclassified to net income in their entirety in the same reporting period, a cross reference to other disclosures currently required under GAAP is required in the notes to the financial statements. This amendment is effective for interim periods beginning after December 15, 2012. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Net_Income_Per_Share_Tables

Net Income Per Share (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Summary of Net Income Per Share	'
		Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
		September 30,				September 30,
		2013		2012		2013		2012
	Numerator:
	Net income (in thousands)	$	30,319	$	8,984	$	122,568	$	13,059
	Denominator:
	Weighted average common shares outstanding for basic net income per share		66,567,180		62,992,473		65,321,156		62,496,446
	Net effect of dilutive common stock equivalents		12,821,182		6,730,621		12,633,080		5,410,174
	Denominator for diluted net income per share		79,388,362		69,723,094		77,954,236		67,906,620
	Net income per share
	Basic	$	0.46	$	0.14	$	1.88	$	0.21
	Diluted	$	0.38	$	0.13	$	1.57	$	0.19

AvailableforSale_Securities_Ta

Available-for-Sale Securities (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Summary of Available-for-Sale Investment Securities	'
	The following is a summary of the Company’s available-for-sale investment securities as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 (in thousands):
		Amortized		Market		Unrealized
		Cost		Value		Gain
	September 30, 2013:
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	$	47,577	$	47,581	$	4
	December 31, 2012:
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	$	44,961	$	44,964	$	3

Fair_Value_Measurements_Tables

Fair Value Measurements (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis	'
	The Company’s assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):
		Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
		Quoted		Significant			Significant		Total
		Prices in		Other			Unobservable
		Active		Observable			Inputs
		Markets		Inputs			(Level 3)
		for		(Level 2)
		Identical
		Assets
		(Level 1)
	September 30, 2013:
	Assets
	Money market funds	$	121,063	$	—		$	—	$	121,063
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities		—		48,406			—		48,406
	Deferred compensation plan assets		947		—			—		947
		$	122,010	$	48,406		$	—	$	170,416
	Liabilities
	Contingent consideration	$	—	$	—		$	2,761	$	2,761
	Deferred compensation plan liabilities		947		—			—		947
		$	947	$	—		$	2,761	$	3,708
	December 31, 2012:
	Assets
	Money market funds	$	48,522	$	—		$	—	$	48,522
	U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities		—		47,164			—		47,164
	Deferred compensation plan assets		169		—			—		169
		$	48,691	$	47,164		$	—	$	95,855
	Liabilities
	Contingent consideration	$	—	$	—		$	2,200	$	2,200
	Deferred compensation plan liabilities		169		—			—		169
		$	169	$	—		$	2,200	$	2,369
Summary of Changes in Fair Value	'
	The following table provides a summary of changes in fair value of the Company’s Level 3 liabilities for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 (in thousands):
		Three Months  Ended					Nine Months Ended
		September 30,					September 30,
		2013		2012			2013		2012
	Contingent Consideration:
	Beginning balance	$	2,642	$	2,342		$	2,200	$	2,054
	Change in fair value recorded in operating expenses		119		(313	)		561		(25	)
	Ending balance	$	2,761	$	2,029		$	2,761	$	2,029

Balance_Sheet_Details_Tables

Balance Sheet Details (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Inventories Net	'
	Inventories, net consist of the following (in thousands):
		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
	Raw materials	$	2,239		$	1,533
	Finished goods		10,748			9,968
			12,987			11,501
	Allowance for excess and obsolete inventory		(1,105	)		(1,604	)
		$	11,882		$	9,897
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities	'
	Accounts payable and accrued liabilities consist of the following (in thousands):
		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
	Accounts payable	$	7,019		$	6,873
	Accrued compensation and benefits		8,580			9,183
	Accrued rebates		15,083			11,693
	Accrued license fees and royalties		11,949			7,181
	Accrued research and development expenses		3,875			3,441
	Accrued legal fees		1,625			1,953
	Income taxes payable		—			950
	Other accrued liabilities		4,531			4,550
		$	52,662		$	45,824

Revenue_Recognition_Additional

Revenue Recognition - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Period company is obligated to accept returned customer products before expiration date	'6 months	'
Period company is obligated to accept returned customer products after expiration date	'12 months	'
Allowance for product returns	$24,165,000	$20,574,000
Company's allowance for rebates chargebacks and other discounts	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Allowance for rebate, chargebacks and other discounts	$23,000,000	$17,200,000
Zegerid	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Shelf life of products from date of manufacture	'36 months	'
Cycloset	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Shelf life of products from date of manufacture	'18 months	'
Fenoglide	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Shelf life of products from date of manufacture	'36 months	'
Glumetza | Minimum	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Shelf life of products from date of manufacture	'36 months	'
Glumetza | Maximum	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Shelf life of products from date of manufacture	'48 months	'
Uceris	'	'
Revenue Recognition [Line Items]	'	'
Shelf life of products from date of manufacture	'36 months	'

StockBased_Compensation_Additi

Stock-Based Compensation - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $)	3 Months Ended			9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013	Mar. 31, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Total stock based compensation	$4,200,000	'	$1,800,000	$10,099,000	$4,897,000
Number of shares subject to annual options granted	'	2,591,870	'	'	'
Stock options vesting period	'	'	'	'4 years	'
Unrecognized compensation cost related to stock options and employee stock purchase plan rights	$35,000,000	'	'	$35,000,000	'
Weighted average period of recognized compensation	'	'	'	'2 years 10 months 24 days	'

Income_Taxes_Additional_Inform

Income Taxes - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $)	3 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Jun. 30, 2013
Income Taxes [Line Items]	'
Income tax benefit discrete item	$54.90

Net_Income_Per_Share_Additiona

Net Income Per Share - Additional Information (Detail)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Computation Of Earnings Per Share Line Items	'	'	'	'
Potential dilutive securities	3	3.1	2.2	6.8

Net_Income_Per_Share_Detail

Net Income Per Share (Detail) (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Numerator:	'	'	'	'
Net income (in thousands)	$30,319	$8,984	$122,568	$13,059
Denominator:	'	'	'	'
Weighted average common shares outstanding for basic net income per share	66,567,180	62,992,473	65,321,156	62,496,446
Net effect of dilutive common stock equivalents	12,821,182	6,730,621	12,633,080	5,410,174
Denominator for diluted net income per share	79,388,362	69,723,094	77,954,236	67,906,620
Net income per share	'	'	'	'
Basic	$0.46	$0.14	$1.88	$0.21
Diluted	$0.38	$0.13	$1.57	$0.19

Segment_Reporting_Additional_I

Segment Reporting - Additional Information (Detail)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
	Segment
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]	'
Number of segments	1

AvailableforSale_Securities_Ad

Available-for-Sale Securities - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Dec. 31, 2012
Schedule of Available-for-sale Securities [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Realized gains or losses on sales	$0	$0	$0	$0	'
Period within which available-for-sale securities contractually mature	'1 year	'	'1 year	'	'1 year

Summary_of_AvailableforSale_In

Summary of Available-for-Sale Investment Securities (Detail) (U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities, USD $)	9 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	'	'
Schedule of Available-for-sale Securities [Line Items]	'	'
Amortized Cost	$47,577	$44,961
Market Value	47,581	44,964
Unrealized Gain	$4	$3

Assets_and_Liabilities_Measure

Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on Recurring Basis (Detail) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	$170,416	$95,855
Liabilities	3,708	2,369
Money market funds	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	121,063	48,522
U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	48,406	47,164
Deferred compensation plan assets	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	947	169
Contingent consideration	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Liabilities	2,761	2,200
Deferred compensation plan liabilities	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Liabilities	947	169
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1)	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	122,010	48,691
Liabilities	947	169
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | Money market funds	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	121,063	48,522
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | Deferred compensation plan assets	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	947	169
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | Deferred compensation plan liabilities	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Liabilities	947	169
Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	48,406	47,164
Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2) | U.S. government sponsored enterprise securities	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Assets	48,406	47,164
Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Liabilities	2,761	2,200
Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) | Contingent consideration	'	'
Organization And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]	'	'
Liabilities	$2,761	$2,200

Fair_Value_Measurements_Detail

Fair Value Measurements (Detail) (Contingent consideration, USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Contingent consideration	'	'	'	'
Fair Value, Assets and Liabilities Measured on Recurring and Nonrecurring Basis [Line Items]	'	'	'	'
Beginning balance	$2,642	$2,342	$2,200	$2,054
Change in fair value recorded in operating expenses	119	-313	561	-25
Ending balance	$2,761	$2,029	$2,761	$2,029

Inventories_Net_Detail

Inventories Net (Detail) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified
Inventory [Line Items]	'	'
Raw materials	$2,239	$1,533
Finished goods	10,748	9,968
Gross inventory	12,987	11,501
Allowance for excess and obsolete inventory	-1,105	-1,604
Inventories, net	$11,882	$9,897

Accounts_Payable_and_Accrued_L

Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities (Detail) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Thousands, unless otherwise specified
Accrued Liabilities [Line Items]	'	'
Accounts payable	$7,019	$6,873
Accrued compensation and benefits	8,580	9,183
Accrued rebates	15,083	11,693
Accrued license fees and royalties	11,949	7,181
Accrued research and development expenses	3,875	3,441
Accrued legal fees	1,625	1,953
Income taxes payable	'	950
Other accrued liabilities	4,531	4,550
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$52,662	$45,824

LongTerm_Debt_Additional_Infor

Long-Term Debt - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $)	9 Months Ended	1 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013	Aug. 31, 2013	Feb. 28, 2012	Dec. 31, 2008	Feb. 28, 2012
		Amended Loan Agreement	Amended Loan Agreement	Amended Loan Agreement	Amended Loan Agreement
					Libor Rate Plus
Line of Credit Facility [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Advance limit, amended loan agreement	'	'	$35,000,000	'	'
Amount drawn	'	'	'	10,000,000	'
Debt instrument basis spread on LIBOR rate	'	'	'	'	2.25%
Maturity date of the revolving line of credit	'	'	13-Feb-15	'	'
Line of credit facility, one-time commitment fee amount	'	'	175,000	'	'
Payment on credit facility	$10,000,000	$10,000,000	'	'	'

Strategic_Collaboration_with_C1

Strategic Collaboration with Cosmo - Additional Information (Detail) (Cosmo Technologies Limited, Commercial Milestones, USD $)	1 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Apr. 30, 2013	Feb. 28, 2013
Cosmo Technologies Limited | Commercial Milestones	'	'
Collaborative Arrangements and Non-collaborative Arrangement Transactions [Line Items]	'	'
Accrued commercial milestone payments	'	$7
Commercial milestone paid	$7	'

License_Agreement_and_Supply_A1

License Agreement and Supply Agreement with Pharming - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended		1 Months Ended	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Jul. 31, 2013	Sep. 30, 2013
					Pharming Group NV	Pharming Group NV
Licenses Agreements [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'	'
Milestone recorded in license fees and royalties	$20,918,000	$14,849,000	$63,701,000	$43,544,000	'	$5,000,000
Milestone paid	'	'	'	'	$5,000,000	'

Contingencies_Additional_Infor

Contingencies - Additional Information (Detail)	Apr. 30, 2010	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2011	Sep. 30, 2010	Jan. 31, 2013	Feb. 28, 2013	Apr. 30, 2012
	Patent	Patent Infringement Lawsuits	Patent Infringement Lawsuits	Patent Infringement Lawsuits	Patent Infringement Lawsuits	Patent Infringement Lawsuits	Patent Infringement Lawsuits
			Zydus Pharmaceuticals USA Inc	Par Pharmaceutical Incorporated	Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc	Watson	Watson
Commitments and Contingencies [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'	'	'
Number of patents ruled invalid by Court	5	'	'	'	'	'	'
Requisite time period to commence lawsuit	'	'	'45 days	'45 days	'45 days	'45 days	'45 days
Period of stay on product	'	'	'30 months	'30 months	'30 months	'30 months	'30 months
Stay expected to expire	'	'	'May 2014	'February 2013	'June 2015	'July 2015	'September 2014
Santarus responsibility for future out-of-pocket costs related to patent infringement cases	'	70.00%	'	'	'	'	'
Depomed responsibility for future out-of-pocket costs related to patent infringement cases	'	30.00%	'	'	'	'	'

Subsequent_Event_Additional_In

Subsequent Event - Additional Information (Detail) (Subsequent Event, USD $)	Nov. 07, 2013
In Millions, except Per Share data, unless otherwise specified
Subsequent Event	'
Subsequent Event [Line Items]	'
Purchase price per share in cash	$32
Percentage of outstanding common stock that shares tendered must exceed	50.00%
Termination fee	$80