10. Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
10. Commitments and Contingencies	Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Arbitration The Company was involved in an arbitration proceeding with GSK. GSK claimed that the Company owed GSK damages relating to an alleged breach by the Company of a covenant contained in the Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement (APSA), dated as of May 13, 2014 by and among GSK and the Company pertaining to a pre-existing customer agreement. The Company asserted counterclaims and defenses under the APSA and also asserted claims against GSK related to breaches of a supply agreement between the parties. The Company and GSK entered into an interim settlement agreement (the Interim Settlement Agreement) under which the Company agreed to make payments to GSK and escrow additional funds. Additionally, the parties agreed to submit the matter to binding arbitration. On January 31, 2017, the arbitration tribunal issued opinions in favor of GSK, awarding it damages and fees in the amount of approximately $35 million, plus interest (estimated to be approximately $2 to $5 million). The tribunal also denied the Company's claim that GSK breached its obligations under the supply agreement. The Company had already paid to GSK an aggregate of $16.5 million, including $6.2 million from the escrow account, which will offset the total award. After discussions with GSK, an agreement was reached on March 17, 2017, to amend the Interim Settlement Agreement with GSK whereby the Company agreed to establish a payment schedule for satisfaction of the current balance of the award. Pursuant to the amendment, the Company agreed that the outstanding balance as of the date of the amendment was approximately $21.5 million to GSK and the Company agreed to make quarterly installments in amounts totaling $1.0 million in 2017, $3.5 million in 2018 and approximately $17.0 million in 2019. The Company recorded the fair value of this settlement in the amount of approximately $18.5 million in its financial statements at December 31, 2016 and recorded $15.3 million as a reduction to net revenues, $1.0 million to selling, general and administrative expense and $2.2 million to interest expense in the year ended December 31, 2016. As of June 30, 2017, the net present value of remaining payment obligations owed under this settlement agreement was $19.0 million. The current portion is recorded in other liabilities - current and the non-current portion was recorded in arbitration award on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2017. As discussed earlier, on July 20, 2017, the Pernix Parties and GSK entered into Amendment No. 2 to the Interim Settlement Agreement between the Pernix Parties and GSK dated July 27, 2015. Amendment No. 2 permits payment by the Pernix Parties to GSK of a reduced amount in full satisfaction of the remaining approximately $21.2 million unpaid portion of the Award granted to GSK in the arbitration of certain matters previously disputed by the parties. Pursuant to Amendment No. 2, the Pernix Parties are obligated to make two fixed payments to GSK: (i) a payment of $3.45 million due on or before August 4, 207 and (ii) a payment of $3.2 million due on or before December 31, 2017. Also pursuant to Amendment No. 2, the Pernix Parties agreed that if on or before September 30, 2019, Pernix (x) redeems or repurchases 4.25% Convertible Notes for greater than 31.00 cents for every one dollar of principal amount outstanding or (y) exchanges such notes for new notes or similar instruments that have a face value providing such exchanging holders a recovery that is greater than 31.00 cents for every one dollar of 4.25% Convertible Notes exchanged by such holders, Pernix shall, no later than five business days thereafter, distribute to GSK additional cash or notes, as applicable, equal to such excess recovery, but in no event to exceed $2 million. GSK has agreed that for so long as the Pernix Parties comply with the payment terms set forth in the Amendment No. 2, enforcement of the Award will be stayed and GSK shall not seek to enforce or exercise any other remedies in respect of the Award, and that the outstanding balance of the Award shall be unconditionally and irrevocably forgiven upon satisfaction of such terms. A portion of the proceeds from the Transactions will be used to pay the amounts due to GSK under Amendment No. 2. Recro Gainesville LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case Nos. 14-1118, 15-413, and 15-1196; Recro Gainesville LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd., District of Delaware Case No. 14-1364 Recro is the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,228,398 (the '398 Patent) and 6,902,742 (the '742 Patent), both of which expire on November 1, 2019, and U.S. Patent No. 9,132,096 (the '096 Patent), which expires on September 12, 2034. All three patents (collectively, the Orange Book Patents) are listed in the United States Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Orange Book: Approved Drug Product with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (Orange Book) as covering Zohydro ER. Actavis plc (Actavis) and Alvogen Pine Brook, Inc. (Alvogen) each filed abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) with the FDA seeking approval of proposed generic versions of Zohydro ER in 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 mg dosage strengths. Those ANDAs and amendments thereto contained certifications asserting that the Orange Book Patents are invalid and not infringed. Pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act, Recro brought suit against Actavis on September 3, 2014 and May 21, 2015 for declaratory judgment of infringement of the '398 and '742 Patents, and on December 23, 2015 for declaratory judgment of infringement of the '096 Patent. In response, Actavis filed counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity of all three Orange Book Patents. Pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act, Recro brought suit against Alvogen on November 3, 2014 for declaratory judgment of infringement of the '398 and '742 Patents. In response, Alvogen filed counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity of those two patents. On September 13, 2016, Recro and Actavis jointly filed a stipulation of dismissal of all claims and counterclaims relating to the '398 Patent, and that stipulation was entered by the Court on September 14, 2016. On September 29, 2016, Recro and Alvogen jointly filed a stipulation of dismissal of all claims and counterclaims then-pending, and that stipulation was entered by the Court on September 30, 2016, ending the case between Recro and Alvogen. Recro and Actavis participated in a bench trial in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware regarding the '742 and '096 Patents, which was completed on October 7, 2016. During the trial, Actavis declined to pursue its invalidity counterclaims as to both the '742 and '096 Patents. The parties' post-trial submissions regarding the remaining issues of infringement were filed on November 7, 2016. On February 23, 2017, the Company received a favorable opinion for this litigation and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware concluded that Actavis' proposed generic version of Zohydro ER infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 9,132,096 and 6,902,742. The Judge has entered an order enjoining Actavis from engaging in the commercial manufacture, use, offer to sell, or sale in the United States, or importation into the United States of Actavis' ANDA product prior to expiration of the two patents. On March 17, 2017 Actavis filed a notice of appeal, which is currently pending. The Company remains confident in Recro's legal position with respect to this matter. Pernix Ireland Pain, Ltd. and Pernix Therapeutics, LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case No. 16-138; Pernix Ireland Pain, Ltd. and Pernix Therapeutics, LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations, Ltd., District of Delaware Case No. 16-139. Pernix Ireland Pain, Ltd. is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 9,265,760 (the '760 Patent), which was issued on February 23, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,326,982 (the '982 Patent), which was issued on May 3, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,333,201 (the '201 Patent), which was issued on May 10, 2016, and U.S. Patent No. 9,339,499 (the '499 Patent), which issued on May 17, 2016 (collectively, the Pernix Zohydro ER Patents). The Pernix Zohydro ER Patents are listed in the Orange Book as covering Zohydro ER. Pernix Therapeutics, LLC (Pernix LLC) is the exclusive licensee of the Pernix Zohydro ER Patents and is the sole distributor of Zohydro ER in the United States. As discussed above, Actavis and Alvogen (together, the Defendants) each filed ANDAs with the FDA seeking approval of proposed generic versions of Zohydro ER in 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 mg dosage strengths, and litigation regarding those ANDAs is ongoing in the District of Delaware in Recro Gainesville LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case Nos. 14-1118, 15-413, 15-1196; and Recro Gainesville LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd., District of Delaware Case No. 14-1364. Pernix LLC brought suit against Defendants in the District of Delaware on March 4, 2016, seeking declaratory judgment of infringement of the '760 Patent. The complaints relating to the `760 Patent were served on March 7, 2016. Pernix LLC filed and served first and second amended complaints on May 13, 2016 and May 31, 2016, against Alvogen and Actavis respectively, adding allegations of infringement with respect to the '982, '201, and '499 Patents. The Defendants filed motions to dismiss the complaints under Rule 12(b)(6,) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, asserting that the claims of the Pernix Zohydro ER Patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101. Briefing regarding the motion to dismiss was completed on July 11, 2016. Pernix Ireland also owns United States Patent Nos. 9,421,200 (the '200 Patent) and 9,433,619 (the '619 Patent) which were issued on August 23, 2016 and September 5, 2016, respectively. Pernix LLC filed and served second and third amended complaints, against Alvogen and Actavis respectively, on October 12, 2016, adding allegations of infringement with respect to the '200 Patent and '619 Patent. Actavis and Alvogen filed their respective answers on November 30, 2016, denying Pernix LLC's infringement allegations, and raising counterclaims of noninfringement and invalidity as to each of the asserted Pernix LLC patents. Pernix LLC filed its answers to Actavis and Alvogen's respective counterclaims on December 23, 2016. Trial in the case is scheduled for April 16, 2018. Medicine to Go Pharmacies, Inc. v. Macoven Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Pernix Therapeutics Holdings, Inc., District Court of New Jersey Case No. 3:16-cv-07717 On October 23, 2016, Medicine to Go Pharmacies, Inc. (the Macoven Plaintiff) filed an action against Macoven, Pernix and unidentified individuals seeking redress for the sending of unlawful advertisements to facsimile machines in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227. On December 2, 2016, the Company filed its answers in defense of the allegations. The fax campaign that is the subject of this litigation was administered by a third party that is not presently a defendant in this litigation. The Company may not be able to secure indemnification from this third party for costs that it might incur relative to this matter and insurance defense and indemnity does not appear available to the Company. While certain cases of this nature have historically resolved for non-material amounts, it is difficult for the Company to quantify its potential liability, if any, at this time. Based upon known facts, the Company intends to vigorously defend itself in this litigation. Other Commitments and Contingencies In July 2012 and January 2013, Somaxon settled two patent litigation claims with parties seeking to market generic equivalents of Silenor. As of June 30, 2017, remaining payment obligations of the Company owed under these settlement agreements are $750,000. The balance is payable in equal annual installments of $250,000 through 2019. The current portion is recorded in other liabilities - current and the non-current portion is recorded in other liabilities - long-term on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2017. During the first quarter of 2014, the Company settled all claims arising from certain actions by Cypress under the Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act prior to its acquisition by the Company. As part of the settlement, the Company agreed to pay $12.0 million, payable in annual amounts of $2.0 million until the settlement is paid in full. As of June 30, 2017, the net present value of remaining payment obligations owed under this settlement agreement is $3.7 million. The current portion is recorded in other liabilities - current and the non-current portion is recorded in other liabilities - long-term on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2017. In connection with the acquisition of Treximet, the Company is responsible for the payment of royalties to Pozen of 18% of Treximet net sales with quarterly minimum royalty amounts of $4.0 million for the calendar quarters commencing on January 1, 2015 and ending on March 31, 2018.

10. Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2017

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Proceedings

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Arbitration

The Company was involved in an arbitration proceeding with GSK. GSK claimed that the Company owed GSK damages relating to an alleged breach by the Company of a covenant contained in the Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement (APSA), dated as of May 13, 2014 by and among GSK and the Company pertaining to a pre-existing customer agreement. The Company asserted counterclaims and defenses under the APSA and also asserted claims against GSK related to breaches of a supply agreement between the parties. The Company and GSK entered into an interim settlement agreement (the Interim Settlement Agreement) under which the Company agreed to make payments to GSK and escrow additional funds. Additionally, the parties agreed to submit the matter to binding arbitration.

On January 31, 2017, the arbitration tribunal issued opinions in favor of GSK, awarding it damages and fees in the amount of approximately $35 million, plus interest (estimated to be approximately $2 to $5 million). The tribunal also denied the Company's claim that GSK breached its obligations under the supply agreement. The Company had already paid to GSK an aggregate of $16.5 million, including $6.2 million from the escrow account, which will offset the total award. After discussions with GSK, an agreement was reached on March 17, 2017, to amend the Interim Settlement Agreement with GSK whereby the Company agreed to establish a payment schedule for satisfaction of the current balance of the award. Pursuant to the amendment, the Company agreed that the outstanding balance as of the date of the amendment was approximately $21.5 million to GSK and the Company agreed to make quarterly installments in amounts totaling $1.0 million in 2017, $3.5 million in 2018 and approximately $17.0 million in 2019. The Company recorded the fair value of this settlement in the amount of approximately $18.5 million in its financial statements at December 31, 2016 and recorded $15.3 million as a reduction to net revenues, $1.0 million to selling, general and administrative expense and $2.2 million to interest expense in the year ended December 31, 2016. As of June 30, 2017, the net present value of remaining payment obligations owed under this settlement agreement was $19.0 million. The current portion is recorded in other liabilities - current and the non-current portion was recorded in arbitration award on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2017.

As discussed earlier, on July 20, 2017, the Pernix Parties and GSK entered into Amendment No. 2 to the Interim Settlement Agreement between the Pernix Parties and GSK dated July 27, 2015. Amendment No. 2 permits payment by the Pernix Parties to GSK of a reduced amount in full satisfaction of the remaining approximately $21.2 million unpaid portion of the Award granted to GSK in the arbitration of certain matters previously disputed by the parties. Pursuant to Amendment No. 2, the Pernix Parties are obligated to make two fixed payments to GSK: (i) a payment of $3.45 million due on or before August 4, 207 and (ii) a payment of $3.2 million due on or before December 31, 2017. Also pursuant to Amendment No. 2, the Pernix Parties agreed that if on or before September 30, 2019, Pernix (x) redeems or repurchases 4.25% Convertible Notes for greater than 31.00 cents for every one dollar of principal amount outstanding or (y) exchanges such notes for new notes or similar instruments that have a face value providing such exchanging holders a recovery that is greater than 31.00 cents for every one dollar of 4.25% Convertible Notes exchanged by such holders, Pernix shall, no later than five business days thereafter, distribute to GSK additional cash or notes, as applicable, equal to such excess recovery, but in no event to exceed $2 million. GSK has agreed that for so long as the Pernix Parties comply with the payment terms set forth in the Amendment No. 2, enforcement of the Award will be stayed and GSK shall not seek to enforce or exercise any other remedies in respect of the Award, and that the outstanding balance of the Award shall be unconditionally and irrevocably forgiven upon satisfaction of such terms. A portion of the proceeds from the Transactions will be used to pay the amounts due to GSK under Amendment No. 2.

Recro Gainesville LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case Nos. 14-1118, 15-413, and 15-1196; Recro Gainesville LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd., District of Delaware Case No. 14-1364

Recro is the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,228,398 (the '398 Patent) and 6,902,742 (the '742 Patent), both of which expire on November 1, 2019, and U.S. Patent No. 9,132,096 (the '096 Patent), which expires on September 12, 2034. All three patents (collectively, the Orange Book Patents) are listed in the United States Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Orange Book: Approved Drug Product with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (Orange Book) as covering Zohydro ER. Actavis plc (Actavis) and Alvogen Pine Brook, Inc. (Alvogen) each filed abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) with the FDA seeking approval of proposed generic versions of Zohydro ER in 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 mg dosage strengths. Those ANDAs and amendments thereto contained certifications asserting that the Orange Book Patents are invalid and not infringed. Pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act, Recro brought suit against Actavis on September 3, 2014 and May 21, 2015 for declaratory judgment of infringement of the '398 and '742 Patents, and on December 23, 2015 for declaratory judgment of infringement of the '096 Patent. In response, Actavis filed counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity of all three Orange Book Patents. Pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act, Recro brought suit against Alvogen on November 3, 2014 for declaratory judgment of infringement of the '398 and '742 Patents. In response, Alvogen filed counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity of those two patents. On September 13, 2016, Recro and Actavis jointly filed a stipulation of dismissal of all claims and counterclaims relating to the '398 Patent, and that stipulation was entered by the Court on September 14, 2016. On September 29, 2016, Recro and Alvogen jointly filed a stipulation of dismissal of all claims and counterclaims then-pending, and that stipulation was entered by the Court on September 30, 2016, ending the case between Recro and Alvogen. Recro and Actavis participated in a bench trial in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware regarding the '742 and '096 Patents, which was completed on October 7, 2016. During the trial, Actavis declined to pursue its invalidity counterclaims as to both the '742 and '096 Patents. The parties' post-trial submissions regarding the remaining issues of infringement were filed on November 7, 2016. On February 23, 2017, the Company received a favorable opinion for this litigation and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware concluded that Actavis' proposed generic version of Zohydro ER infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 9,132,096 and 6,902,742. The Judge has entered an order enjoining Actavis from engaging in the commercial manufacture, use, offer to sell, or sale in the United States, or importation into the United States of Actavis' ANDA product prior to expiration of the two patents. On March 17, 2017 Actavis filed a notice of appeal, which is currently pending. The Company remains confident in Recro's legal position with respect to this matter.

Pernix Ireland Pain, Ltd. and Pernix Therapeutics, LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case No. 16-138; Pernix Ireland Pain, Ltd. and Pernix Therapeutics, LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations, Ltd., District of Delaware Case No. 16-139.

Pernix Ireland Pain, Ltd. is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 9,265,760 (the '760 Patent), which was issued on February 23, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,326,982 (the '982 Patent), which was issued on May 3, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,333,201 (the '201 Patent), which was issued on May 10, 2016, and U.S. Patent No. 9,339,499 (the '499 Patent), which issued on May 17, 2016 (collectively, the Pernix Zohydro ER Patents). The Pernix Zohydro ER Patents are listed in the Orange Book as covering Zohydro ER. Pernix Therapeutics, LLC (Pernix LLC) is the exclusive licensee of the Pernix Zohydro ER Patents and is the sole distributor of Zohydro ER in the United States. As discussed above, Actavis and Alvogen (together, the Defendants) each filed ANDAs with the FDA seeking approval of proposed generic versions of Zohydro ER in 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 mg dosage strengths, and litigation regarding those ANDAs is ongoing in the District of Delaware in Recro Gainesville LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case Nos. 14-1118, 15-413, 15-1196; and Recro Gainesville LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd., District of Delaware Case No. 14-1364. Pernix LLC brought suit against Defendants in the District of Delaware on March 4, 2016, seeking declaratory judgment of infringement of the '760 Patent. The complaints relating to the `760 Patent were served on March 7, 2016. Pernix LLC filed and served first and second amended complaints on May 13, 2016 and May 31, 2016, against Alvogen and Actavis respectively, adding allegations of infringement with respect to the '982, '201, and '499 Patents. The Defendants filed motions to dismiss the complaints under Rule 12(b)(6,) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, asserting that the claims of the Pernix Zohydro ER Patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101. Briefing regarding the motion to dismiss was completed on July 11, 2016. Pernix Ireland also owns United States Patent Nos. 9,421,200 (the '200 Patent) and 9,433,619 (the '619 Patent) which were issued on August 23, 2016 and September 5, 2016, respectively. Pernix LLC filed and served second and third amended complaints, against Alvogen and Actavis respectively, on October 12, 2016, adding allegations of infringement with respect to the '200 Patent and '619 Patent. Actavis and Alvogen filed their respective answers on November 30, 2016, denying Pernix LLC's infringement allegations, and raising counterclaims of noninfringement and invalidity as to each of the asserted Pernix LLC patents. Pernix LLC filed its answers to Actavis and Alvogen's respective counterclaims on December 23, 2016. Trial in the case is scheduled for April 16, 2018.

Medicine to Go Pharmacies, Inc. v. Macoven Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Pernix Therapeutics Holdings, Inc., District Court of New Jersey Case No. 3:16-cv-07717

On October 23, 2016, Medicine to Go Pharmacies, Inc. (the Macoven Plaintiff) filed an action against Macoven, Pernix and unidentified individuals seeking redress for the sending of unlawful advertisements to facsimile machines in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227. On December 2, 2016, the Company filed its answers in defense of the allegations. The fax campaign that is the subject of this litigation was administered by a third party that is not presently a defendant in this litigation. The Company may not be able to secure indemnification from this third party for costs that it might incur relative to this matter and insurance defense and indemnity does not appear available to the Company. While certain cases of this nature have historically resolved for non-material amounts, it is difficult for the Company to quantify its potential liability, if any, at this time. Based upon known facts, the Company intends to vigorously defend itself in this litigation.

Other Commitments and Contingencies

In July 2012 and January 2013, Somaxon settled two patent litigation claims with parties seeking to market generic equivalents of Silenor. As of June 30, 2017, remaining payment obligations of the Company owed under these settlement agreements are $750,000. The balance is payable in equal annual installments of $250,000 through 2019. The current portion is recorded in other liabilities - current and the non-current portion is recorded in other liabilities - long-term on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2017.

During the first quarter of 2014, the Company settled all claims arising from certain actions by Cypress under the Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act prior to its acquisition by the Company. As part of the settlement, the Company agreed to pay $12.0 million, payable in annual amounts of $2.0 million until the settlement is paid in full. As of June 30, 2017, the net present value of remaining payment obligations owed under this settlement agreement is $3.7 million. The current portion is recorded in other liabilities - current and the non-current portion is recorded in other liabilities - long-term on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2017.

In connection with the acquisition of Treximet, the Company is responsible for the payment of royalties to Pozen of 18% of Treximet net sales with quarterly minimum royalty amounts of $4.0 million for the calendar quarters commencing on January 1, 2015 and ending on March 31, 2018.