11. Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
11. Commitments and Contingencies	Note 11. Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings 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 Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (Orange Book) as covering Zohydro ER. Actavis and 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 non-infringement 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 non-infringement 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. The 30-month stay for Actavis expired on February 12, 2017 and on February 22, 2017, Judge Gregory M. Sleet of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware concluded that Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc.'s proposed generic versions of Zohydro ER infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 9,132,096 (which expires on September 12, 2034) and 6,902,742 (which expires on November 1, 2019). Further, Judge Sleet 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 these two patents. On March 22, 2017 Actavis filed an appeal, which was fully briefed as of September 13, 2017. Oral argument in the appeal has not yet been scheduled. On October 30, 2017, Recro brought suit against Actavis for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,713,611 (the '611 Patent), a continuation of the '096 Patent that issued on July 25, 2017 and was listed in the Orange Book as covering Zohydro ER. Pernix and Actavis entered into a settlement agreement on January 29, 2018. That settlement agreement resolved the pending disputes between Recro and Actavis. Pernix Ireland Pain, DAC and Pernix Therapeutics, LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case No. 16-138; Pernix Ireland Pain, DAC. 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 issued on February 23, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,326,982 (the '982 Patent), which issued on May 3, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,333,201 (the '201 Patent), which 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 (Defendants) 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, 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. Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss the Complaints under Rule 12(b)(6), 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. United States Patent Nos. 9,421,200 ("the '200 Patent") and 9,433,619 ("the '619 Patent") 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 and '619 Patents. Actavis and Alvogen filed their respective Answers on November 30, 2016, denying Pernix LLC's infringement allegations, and raising Counterclaims of non-infringement and invalidity as to each of the asserted Pernix LLC patents. Pernix LLC and Actavis entered into a settlement agreement on January 29, 2018. Under the terms of the agreement, Pernix LLC will grant Actavis a license to begin selling a generic version of Zohydro® ER on March 1, 2029, or earlier under certain circumstances. Other details of the settlement are confidential. The launch of Actavis's generic product is contingent upon Actavis receiving final approval from the FDA of its ANDA for a generic version of Zohydro® ER. Trial related to the suit against Alvogen is scheduled for June 11, 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, Odyssey Services (Odyssey), that was not initially named as a defendant in this litigation. On June 22, 2017, Pernix filed a third-party complaint against Odyssey, seeking indemnity and contribution for any amounts that Pernix may be liable to pay to the Plaintiff. Odyssey has since filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the third-party claims against it. That motion is currently pending before the Court. The Company therefore may not be able to secure indemnification from Odyssey for costs that it might incur relative to this matter, and insurance defense and indemnity do not appear available to the Company. The Company is in the process of attempting to quantify its potential liability; however, it disputes plaintiffs' claims and, based upon known facts, intends to vigorously defend itself in this litigation. Opioids Litigation Beginning in 2014 and continuing to the present, a number of pharmaceutical companies have been named in numerous lawsuits brought by certain state and local governments related to the marketing of opioid pain medications. The claims are generally based on alleged misrepresentations and/or omissions in connection with the sale and marketing of prescription opioid pain medications and/or an alleged failure to take adequate steps to prevent abuse and diversion. The suits generally seek penalties and/or injunctive and monetary relief. These cases are in early stages of litigation. In May 2018, the Company was notified that the State of Arkansas has named approximately 65 companies and individuals, including the Company, in an ongoing lawsuit relative to the marketing and sale of opioid pain medications. At this time, the Company is unaware of whether it will be named in any of the other opioid pain medication lawsuits brought by other state and local governments. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the claims in the Arkansas litigation but is unable to predict probable outcomes at this time. 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 March 31, 2018, remaining payment obligations of the Company owed under these settlement agreements are $500,000. 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 March 31, 2018. 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 March 31, 2018, the net present value of remaining payment obligations owed under this settlement agreement is $1.9 million and is recorded within other liabilities - current on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2018. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Arbitration Pursuant to Amendment No. 2, the Company agreed that if on or before September 30, 2019, the Company (x) redeems or repurchases its 4.25% Convertible Notes for greater than 31.00 cents for every one dollar of principal amount outstanding or (y) exchange 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, the Company 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 $2.0 million. GSK has agreed that for so long as the Company complies 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. As of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company has recorded $2.0 million as contingent consideration for the potential payment due by September 30, 2019 and is recorded in Arbitration Award on the Company's consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2017. Also, the Company recorded $10.5 million as Gain from legal settlement for the year ended December 31, 2017 pursuant to Amendment No. 2 in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

11. Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2018

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Note 11. Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Proceedings

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 Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (Orange Book) as covering Zohydro ER. Actavis and 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 non-infringement 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 non-infringement 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. The 30-month stay for Actavis expired on February 12, 2017 and on February 22, 2017, Judge Gregory M. Sleet of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware concluded that Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc.'s proposed generic versions of Zohydro ER infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 9,132,096 (which expires on September 12, 2034) and 6,902,742 (which expires on November 1, 2019). Further, Judge Sleet 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 these two patents. On March 22, 2017 Actavis filed an appeal, which was fully briefed as of September 13, 2017. Oral argument in the appeal has not yet been scheduled. On October 30, 2017, Recro brought suit against Actavis for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,713,611 (the '611 Patent), a continuation of the '096 Patent that issued on July 25, 2017 and was listed in the Orange Book as covering Zohydro ER. Pernix and Actavis entered into a settlement agreement on January 29, 2018. That settlement agreement resolved the pending disputes between Recro and Actavis.

Pernix Ireland Pain, DAC and Pernix Therapeutics, LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., District of Delaware Case No. 16-138; Pernix Ireland Pain, DAC. 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 issued on February 23, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,326,982 (the '982 Patent), which issued on May 3, 2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,333,201 (the '201 Patent), which 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 (Defendants) 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, 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. Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss the Complaints under Rule 12(b)(6), 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. United States Patent Nos. 9,421,200 ("the '200 Patent") and 9,433,619 ("the '619 Patent") 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 and '619 Patents. Actavis and Alvogen filed their respective Answers on November 30, 2016, denying Pernix LLC's infringement allegations, and raising Counterclaims of non-infringement and invalidity as to each of the asserted Pernix LLC patents. Pernix LLC and Actavis entered into a settlement agreement on January 29, 2018. Under the terms of the agreement, Pernix LLC will grant Actavis a license to begin selling a generic version of Zohydro® ER on March 1, 2029, or earlier under certain circumstances. Other details of the settlement are confidential. The launch of Actavis's generic product is contingent upon Actavis receiving final approval from the FDA of its ANDA for a generic version of Zohydro® ER. Trial related to the suit against Alvogen is scheduled for June 11, 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, Odyssey Services (Odyssey), that was not initially named as a defendant in this litigation. On June 22, 2017, Pernix filed a third-party complaint against Odyssey, seeking indemnity and contribution for any amounts that Pernix may be liable to pay to the Plaintiff. Odyssey has since filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the third-party claims against it. That motion is currently pending before the Court. The Company therefore may not be able to secure indemnification from Odyssey for costs that it might incur relative to this matter, and insurance defense and indemnity do not appear available to the Company. The Company is in the process of attempting to quantify its potential liability; however, it disputes plaintiffs' claims and, based upon known facts, intends to vigorously defend itself in this litigation.

Opioids Litigation

Beginning in 2014 and continuing to the present, a number of pharmaceutical companies have been named in numerous lawsuits brought by certain state and local governments related to the marketing of opioid pain medications. The claims are generally based on alleged misrepresentations and/or omissions in connection with the sale and marketing of prescription opioid pain medications and/or an alleged failure to take adequate steps to prevent abuse and diversion. The suits generally seek penalties and/or injunctive and monetary relief. These cases are in early stages of litigation. In May 2018, the Company was notified that the State of Arkansas has named approximately 65 companies and individuals, including the Company, in an ongoing lawsuit relative to the marketing and sale of opioid pain medications. At this time, the Company is unaware of whether it will be named in any of the other opioid pain medication lawsuits brought by other state and local governments. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the claims in the Arkansas litigation but is unable to predict probable outcomes at this time.

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 March 31, 2018, remaining payment obligations of the Company owed under these settlement agreements are $500,000. 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 March 31, 2018.

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 March 31, 2018, the net present value of remaining payment obligations owed under this settlement agreement is $1.9 million and is recorded within other liabilities - current on the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2018.

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Arbitration

Pursuant to Amendment No. 2, the Company agreed that if on or before September 30, 2019, the Company (x) redeems or repurchases its 4.25% Convertible Notes for greater than 31.00 cents for every one dollar of principal amount outstanding or (y) exchange 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, the Company 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 $2.0 million. GSK has agreed that for so long as the Company complies 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. As of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company has recorded $2.0 million as contingent consideration for the potential payment due by September 30, 2019 and is recorded in Arbitration Award on the Company's consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2017. Also, the Company recorded $10.5 million as Gain from legal settlement for the year ended December 31, 2017 pursuant to Amendment No. 2 in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.