Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Demand Notice In February 2020, the Company received a letter from a supplier relating to a supply agreement entered into with the Company in 2015. The supplier alleged the Company did not meet certain annual minimums under the supply agreement, and has requested $3.0 million in penalties, plus payment of the cost for certain raw materials. Based upon current information, the Company believes it has several defenses to the supplier’s claims. No lawsuit has been filed. The Company intends to cooperate with the supplier in an effort to amicably resolve its claim. If a resolution cannot be concluded; however, the Company intends to vigorously defend itself from the supplier’s allegations. Litigation SEC Investigation As a follow up to certain prior inquiries, the Company received a subpoena from the SEC during the Company’s quarter ended September 30, 2019 requesting, among other things, certain information and documents relating to the status of the Company’s request to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (the "CMS") for separate reimbursement status for Triferic Dialysate, the Company’s reserving methodology for expiring Triferic inventory, and the basis for the Board’s termination of the former CEO and CFO. The Company is cooperating with the SEC and is responding to the SEC’s requests for documents and information. Shareholder Class Action Lawsuits On July 27, 2018, Plaintiff Ah Kit Too filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York against the Company and former officers, Robert Chioini and Thomas Klema (the "Too Complaint"). The Too Complaint is a federal securities class action purportedly brought on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities, other than Defendants, who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of the Company between March 16, 2018 and June 26, 2018. The Too Complaint alleges that the Company and Messrs. Chioini and Klema violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). Specifically, the Too Complaint alleges that defendants filed reports with the SEC that contained purported inaccurate and misleading statements regarding the potential for the Company’s drug, Triferic, to quality for separate reimbursement status by the CMS. On September 4, 2018, Plaintiff Robert Spock filed a similar putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York against the Company and Messrs. Chioini and Klema (the "Spock Complaint"). The Spock Complaint is a federal securities class action purportedly brought on behalf of a class consisting of persons who purchased the Company’s securities between November 8, 2017 and June 26, 2018. This complaint alleges that the Company and Messrs. Chioini and Klema violated the Exchange Act in that the Company was aware the CMS would not pursue the Company’s proposal for separate reimbursement for Triferic; misstated reserves in the Company’s quarterly report for the first quarter of 2018; had a material weakness its internal controls over financial reporting, which rendered those controls ineffective; Mr. Chioini withheld material information regarding Triferic from the Company’s auditor, corporate counsel, and independent directors of the Board; and, as a result of these alleged issues, statements about the Company’s business were materially false and misleading. On September 25, 2018, four Company stockholders filed motions to appoint lead plaintiffs, lead counsel, and to consolidate the Ah Kit Too v. Rockwell securities class action with the Spock v. Rockwell securities class action. On October 10, 2018, the court issued an order consolidating the two actions, appointing co-lead plaintiffs and co-lead counsel. On December 10, 2018, lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, which included the same allegations as the initial complaints and asserted claims on behalf of a putative class consisting of person who purchased the Company’s securities between November 8, 2017 and June 26, 2018. On February 18, 2019, the Company answered the consolidated amended complaint. On August 7, 2019, all parties to the class action entered into a settlement of the consolidated class action. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement, the Company will pay the Plaintiffs $3.7 million (the “Settlement Amount") in exchange for a full release of all liability as to all defendants. Of the Settlement Amount, the Company contributed approximately $0.1 million, which represented the remaining retention amount under the Company’s director and officer liability insurance policy as of March 31, 2020. The remainder of the settlement amount will be funded by the Company’s director and officer insurance policy. The settlement was approved by the court on February 26, 2020. Shareholder Derivative Actions Plaintiff Bill Le Clair filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint on April 23, 2019 in Case No. 1:19-cv-02373, and Plaintiff John Post filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint on May 10, 2019 in Case No. 1:19-cv-02774 (the “Derivative Complaints”) in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York, purportedly on behalf of the Company (as nominal defendant) and against certain of the Company’s current and former directors (the “Individual Defendants”). The Derivative Complaints assert causes of actions against the Individual Defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment. The Derivative Complaints allege the Individual Defendants breached duties by, among other things, permitting alleged misstatements to be made in public filings regarding the status of separate reimbursement for Triferic from CMS, the adequacy of the Company's reserves and internal controls. The Derivative Complaints demand a jury trial, seeking monetary damages, corporate governance and internal procedure reform, injunctive relief on the Individual Directors’ trading activities, restitution, and attorneys’ fees. The cases have been consolidated and the parties are in advanced settlement discussions. If a settlement is not reached, the Defendants anticipate filing motions to dismiss. The Company has tendered the above shareholder derivative actions to its director and officer insurance carrier(s) for defense and indemnity under its applicable insurance policies. The Company maintains a $1.0 million self-insured retention under the applicable insurance policies, which will be exhausted upon payment of the Company’s share of the Settlement Amount from the settlement of the class action described above.

Commitments and Contingencies

Demand Notice

In February 2020, the Company received a letter from a supplier relating to a supply agreement entered into with the Company in 2015. The supplier alleged the Company did not meet certain annual minimums under the supply agreement, and has requested $3.0 million in penalties, plus payment of the cost for certain raw materials. Based upon current information, the Company believes it has several defenses to the supplier’s claims. No lawsuit has been filed. The Company intends to cooperate with the supplier in an effort to amicably resolve its claim. If a resolution cannot be concluded; however, the Company intends to vigorously defend itself from the supplier’s allegations.

Litigation

SEC Investigation

As a follow up to certain prior inquiries, the Company received a subpoena from the SEC during the Company’s quarter ended September 30, 2019 requesting, among other things, certain information and documents relating to the status of the Company’s request to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (the "CMS") for separate reimbursement status for Triferic Dialysate, the Company’s reserving methodology for expiring Triferic inventory, and the basis for the Board’s termination of the former CEO and CFO. The Company is cooperating with the SEC and is responding to the SEC’s requests for documents and information.

Shareholder Class Action Lawsuits

On July 27, 2018, Plaintiff Ah Kit Too filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York against the Company and former officers, Robert Chioini and Thomas Klema (the "Too Complaint"). The Too Complaint is a federal securities class action purportedly brought on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities, other than Defendants, who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of the Company between March 16, 2018 and June 26, 2018. The Too Complaint alleges that the Company and Messrs. Chioini and Klema violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). Specifically, the Too Complaint alleges that defendants filed reports with the SEC that contained purported inaccurate and misleading statements regarding the potential for the Company’s drug, Triferic, to quality for separate reimbursement status by the CMS.

On September 4, 2018, Plaintiff Robert Spock filed a similar putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York against the Company and Messrs. Chioini and Klema (the "Spock Complaint"). The Spock Complaint is a federal securities class action purportedly brought on behalf of a class consisting of persons who purchased the Company’s securities between November 8, 2017 and June 26, 2018. This complaint alleges that the Company and Messrs. Chioini and Klema violated the Exchange Act in that the Company was aware the CMS would not pursue the Company’s proposal for separate reimbursement for Triferic; misstated reserves in the Company’s quarterly report for the first quarter of 2018; had a material weakness its internal controls over financial reporting, which rendered those controls ineffective; Mr. Chioini withheld material information regarding Triferic from the Company’s auditor, corporate counsel, and independent directors of the Board; and, as a result of these alleged issues, statements about the Company’s business were materially false and misleading.

On September 25, 2018, four Company stockholders filed motions to appoint lead plaintiffs, lead counsel, and to consolidate the Ah Kit Too v. Rockwell securities class action with the Spock v. Rockwell securities class action. On October 10, 2018, the court issued an order consolidating the two actions, appointing co-lead plaintiffs and co-lead counsel. On December 10, 2018, lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, which included the same allegations as the initial complaints and asserted claims on behalf of a putative class consisting of person who purchased the Company’s securities between November 8, 2017 and June 26, 2018. On February 18, 2019, the Company answered the consolidated amended complaint.

On August 7, 2019, all parties to the class action entered into a settlement of the consolidated class action. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement, the Company will pay the Plaintiffs $3.7 million (the “Settlement Amount") in exchange for a full release of all liability as to all defendants. Of the Settlement Amount, the Company contributed approximately $0.1 million, which represented the remaining retention amount under the Company’s director and officer liability insurance policy as of March 31, 2020. The remainder of the settlement amount will be funded by the Company’s director and officer insurance policy. The settlement was approved by the court on February 26, 2020.

Shareholder Derivative Actions

Plaintiff Bill Le Clair filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint on April 23, 2019 in Case No. 1:19-cv-02373, and Plaintiff John Post filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint on May 10, 2019 in Case No. 1:19-cv-02774 (the “Derivative Complaints”) in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York, purportedly on behalf of the Company (as nominal defendant) and against certain of the Company’s current and former directors (the “Individual Defendants”). The Derivative Complaints assert causes of actions against the Individual Defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment. The Derivative Complaints allege the Individual Defendants breached duties by, among other things, permitting alleged misstatements to be made in public filings regarding the status of separate reimbursement for Triferic from CMS, the adequacy of the Company's reserves and internal controls. The Derivative Complaints demand a jury trial, seeking monetary damages, corporate governance and internal procedure reform, injunctive relief on the Individual Directors’ trading activities, restitution, and attorneys’ fees. The cases have been consolidated and the parties are in advanced settlement discussions. If a settlement is not reached, the Defendants anticipate filing motions to dismiss.

The Company has tendered the above shareholder derivative actions to its director and officer insurance carrier(s) for defense and indemnity under its applicable insurance policies. The Company maintains a $1.0 million self-insured retention under the applicable insurance policies, which will be exhausted upon payment of the Company’s share of the Settlement Amount from the settlement of the class action described above.