Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2020

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Proceedings

Between May 5, 2015 and June 16, 2015, three class action lawsuits were filed by shareholders in the U.S. District Court, for the District of Massachusetts, against the Company and certain then current and former executives of the Company. Two suits subsequently were voluntarily dismissed. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System v. Insulet, et al., 1:15-cv-12345, (“ATRS”) alleged that the Company (and certain then current and former executives) committed violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making allegedly false and misleading statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. On February 8, 2018, the parties executed a binding stipulation of settlement, under which all claims were released, and a payment was made into an escrow account for the plaintiffs and the class they purport to represent. On August 6, 2018, the Court issued an order approving the settlement, but took the plaintiffs’ motion for fees and expenses under advisement, which motion remains pending. The Company had previously accrued fees and expenses in connection with this matter for the amount of the final settlement liability that was not covered by insurance, the amount of which was not material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In addition, on April 26, 2017, a derivative action (Walker v. DeSisto, et al., 1:17-cv-10738) (“Walker”) was filed, and on October 13, 2017, a second derivative action (Carnazza v. DeSisto, et al., 1:17-cv-11977) (“Carnazza”) was filed, both on behalf of the Company, each by a shareholder in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts against the Company (as a nominal defendant) and certain individual then current and former officers and directors of the Company. The allegations in the actions are substantially similar to those alleged in the securities class action. The actions seek, among other things, damages, disgorgement of certain types of compensation or profits, and attorneys’ fees and costs. On July 11, 2018, the parties executed a binding stipulation of settlement, under which all claims were released, and a payment of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses will be paid to plaintiffs’ counsel, subject to the Court’s approval. On July 13, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, which is pending. The Company expects that such fees and expenses payable to plaintiff’s counsel will be covered by the Company’s insurance.

In June 2020, Roche Diabetes Care, Inc. (“Roche”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging that the Company’s manufacture and sale of its Omnipod Insulin Management System, Omnipod Starter Kit and Omnipod 10 Pod Pack in the United States infringed Roche’s now-expired U.S. Patent 7,931,613. Roche is seeking monetary damages and attorneys’ fees and costs. Since the patent expired in 2019, Roche is not seeking injunctive relief and the lawsuit will have no impact on ongoing sales of the Company’s products. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to Roche’s claims and intends to vigorously defend against them. At this time, based on available information regarding this litigation, the Company is unable to reasonably assess the ultimate outcome of this case or determine an estimate, or range of estimates, of potential losses. The court has not yet set a schedule for the case.

In July 2020, the Company filed a patent infringement claim against Roche Diabetes Care Limited (“Roche Ltd.”) in the United Kingdom alleging that Roche Ltd.’s manufacture and sale of the Accu-Chek® Solo insulin pump and its consumable components infringes European Patent No. 1 335 764 in the United Kingdom. The Company is seeking an injunction to last until expiry of the patent and monetary damages.

The Company is, from time to time, involved in the normal course of business in various legal proceedings, including intellectual property, contract, employment and product liability suits. Other than as described above, the Company does not expect the outcome of these proceedings, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on its results of operations.

Fees to Former European Distributor

Following the expiration of an agreement with a former European distributor on June 30, 2018, the Company was required to pay a quarterly per-unit fee for Omnipod sales to certain customers of the former European distributor for a one-year period through June 30, 2019. The Company recognized a liability and an associated intangible asset for this fee as qualifying sales occurred. The methodology applicable for determining the total fee under the distribution agreement is subject to an active arbitration proceeding in Switzerland. The final amount of the fee could vary significantly depending on the number of customers who count for purposes of calculating the fee under the terms of the agreement. The Company estimates that the final aggregate fee is in the range of $5 million to $55 million. As of both June 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, the Company had $2.7 million accrued related to this matter. The associated gross intangible asset was $7.8 million at both June 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019.