Item 3. Legal Proceedings
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Between July 19 and August 3, 2018, following negative publicity about NUPLAZID, three purported stockholders of ours filed putative securities class action complaints (captioned Staublein v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 18-cv-01647, Stone v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 18-cv-01672, and Barglow v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 18-cv-01812) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against us and certain of our current and former executive officers. Thereafter, several putative lead plaintiffs filed motions to consolidate the cases and to appoint a lead plaintiff. On January 3, 2019, the Court consolidated the cases under the caption In re Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 18-cv-01647, and took the lead plaintiff motions under submission. On February 26, 2019, the Court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel. Lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on April 15, 2019. The consolidated complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements regarding our business, operations, and prospects by failing to disclose that adverse events and safety concerns regarding NUPLAZID threatened initial and continuing FDA approval, and by failing to disclose that we engaged in business practices likely to attract regulatory scrutiny. The consolidated complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint on June 7, 2019. On June 1, 2020, the Court granted the motion in part and gave lead plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. On July 16, 2020, lead plaintiff filed the amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on August 28, 2020. Lead plaintiff opposed the motion on September 15, 2020. Defendants’ reply in support of the motion to dismiss was filed on November 11, 2020. On March 29, 2021, the Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss with leave to amend. On April 16, 2021, lead plaintiff filed a third amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the third amended complaint on May 31, 2021. The lead plaintiff opposed the motion on July 12, 2021 and Defendants filed their reply in support of their motion on August 11, 2021. On January 3, 2022, the Court issued an order and judgment dismissing lead plaintiff’s third amended complaint without leave to amend and closing the case. The deadline to appeal the order and judgment expired on February 2, 2022.
On February 7, 2020, a purported stockholder of ours filed a derivative complaint (captioned Barney v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0238) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against our directors and certain of our current and former executive officers. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment arising from allegations similar to those in the federal securities class action described above. On September 9, 2020, the Court substituted plaintiffs and re-captioned the case Shumacher v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0238. On June 23, 2020, a second derivative complaint (captioned Lazarus v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-0843) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. On September 9, 2020, the Court transferred the Lazarus case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and re-captioned the case Lazarus v. Davis et al., Case No. 20-cv-1774. On January 15, 2021, the Court consolidated the cases under the name In re ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Case No. 20-cv-0238, appointed lead counsel for the plaintiffs, and designated the complaint in the Shumacher case as the operative complaint. The consolidated case is stayed until the defendants in the federal securities class action answer, or the federal securities class action is dismissed with prejudice and all appeals are exhausted, or any party to the stipulation to stay gives 15 days’ written notice that it no longer consents to the voluntary stay. As discussed above, the federal securities class action was dismissed with prejudice on January 3, 2022, and the deadline to appeal that dismissal expired on February 2, 2022
On July 24, 2020, we filed complaints against (i) Aurobindo Pharma Limited and its affiliate Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. and (ii) Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and its affiliate Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and on July 30, 2020, we filed complaints against (i) Hetero Labs Limited and its affiliates Hetero Labs Limited Unit-V and Hetero USA Inc., (ii) MSN Laboratories Private Ltd. and its affiliate MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and (iii) Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. and its affiliate Cadila Healthcare Limited. These complaints, which were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, allege infringement of certain of our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. The cases have been assigned to the Honorable Richard G. Andrews. On September 1, 2020, Aurobindo filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On September 22, 2020, we filed our answer to Aurobindo’s counterclaims. On August 31, 2020, Teva filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On September 21, 2020, we filed our answer to Teva’s counterclaims. On October 5, 2020, Hetero filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On October 26,
56
2020, we filed our answer to Hetero’s counterclaims. On September 30, 2020, MSN filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On November 5, 2020, we filed our first amended complaint against MSN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of certain of our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On November 19, 2020, MSN filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On December 10, 2020, we filed our answer to MSN’s counterclaims. On November 2, 2020, Zydus filed its answer and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On November 23, 2020, we filed our answer to Zydus’s counterclaims. On December 8, 2020, the parties’ joint proposed scheduling order was entered by Judge Andrews. On April 7, 2021, we filed our first amended complaints against Hetero and Teva and our second amended complaint against MSN, to include an additional Orange Book-listed patent covering NUPLAZID. On April 8, 2021, we filed our first amended complaint against Zydus and on April 9, 2021, we filed our first amended complaint against Aurobindo. On April 20, 2021, MSN filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to our second amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity regarding certain of the our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. On April 21, 2021, Teva filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to our first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On April 22, 2021, Zydus filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to our first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity .
On April 22, 2021, Aurobindo filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to our first amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. On May 11, 2021, we filed our answer to MSN’s counterclaims. On May 12, we filed our answer to Teva’s counterclaims. On May 13, we filed our answer to Zydus’s counterclaims and our answer to Aurobindo’s counterclaims. A joint trial in the matters is scheduled for May 15, 2023. We entered into an agreement effective April 22, 2021 with Hetero settling all claims and counterclaims in the litigation. The agreement allows Hetero to launch its generic pimavanserin product on July 27, 2038, subject to certain triggers for earlier launch. The Hetero case was dismissed by joint agreement on May 3, 2021.
On August 27, 2021, we filed our second amended complaint against Zydus to include an additional Orange Book-listed patent covering NUPLAZID. On September 10, 2021, Zydus filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims to our second amended complaint, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity. Also on September 10, 2021, the parties filed their Joint Claim Construction Chart. On October 1, 2021, we filed our answer to Zydus’s counterclaims. On November 30, 2021, we filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss two of our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID against Teva, which was ordered by the Court on December 1, 2021. On January 28, 2022, the parties filed their Joint Claim Construction Brief and Appendix. On January 31, 2022, a joint motion for claim construction was ordered by the Court, setting a claim construction hearing on February 23, 2022. A ruling is expected in the near future.
On April 19, 2021, a purported stockholder of ours filed a putative securities class action complaint (captioned Marechal v. Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 21-cv-0762) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against us and certain of our current executive officers. The complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements regarding our business, operations, and prospects by failing to disclose that the materials submitted in support of our sNDA seeking approval of pimavanserin for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with dementia-related psychosis contained statistical and design deficiencies and that the FDA was unlikely to approve the sNDA in its current form. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. On June 21, 2021, five motions for lead plaintiff and lead counsel were filed. Thereafter, four of the five movants either withdrew their motions or filed statements of non-opposition. On September 29, 2021, the Court issued an order designating lead plaintiff and lead counsel. On December 10, 2021, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on February 15, 2022.
We currently believe that none of the foregoing claims or actions pending against us as of December 31, 2021 is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial position, or results of operations. Given the unpredictability inherent in litigation, however, we cannot predict the outcome of these matters. We are unable to estimate possible losses or ranges of losses that may result from these matters, and therefore we have not accrued any amounts in connection with these matters other than attorneys’ fees incurred to date .
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures .
This item is not applicable.
57
PART II
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.