Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2013

Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

10. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Center for Neurologic Study (“CNS”) – The Company holds the exclusive worldwide marketing rights to NUEDEXTA for certain indications pursuant to an exclusive license agreement with CNS.

The Company paid a $75,000 milestone upon FDA approval of NUEDEXTA for the treatment of PBA in the first quarter of fiscal 2011. In addition, the Company is obligated to pay CNS a royalty ranging from approximately 5% to 8% of net U.S. GAAP revenue generated by sales of NUEDEXTA. During the six months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, royalties of approximately $1.6 million and $727,000, respectively, are recorded to cost of product sales in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations. Under certain circumstances, the Company may have the obligation to pay CNS a portion of net revenues received if the Company sublicenses NUEDEXTA to a third party.

Under the agreement with CNS, the Company is required to make payments on achievements of up to a maximum of ten milestones, based upon five specific medical indications. Maximum payments for these milestone payments could total approximately $1.1 million if the Company pursued the development of NUEDEXTA for all five of the licensed indications. In general, individual milestones range from $75,000 to $125,000 for each accepted new drug application (“NDA”) and a similar amount for each approved NDA in addition to the royalty discussed above on net U.S. GAAP revenues. The Company does not have the obligation to develop additional indications under the CNS license agreement.

Concert Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Concert”) – The Company holds the exclusive worldwide marketing rights to develop and commercialize Concert’s d-DM compounds for the potential treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders, as well as certain rights to other deuterium-modified dextromethorphan compounds pursuant to a license agreement with Concert.

Under the agreement with Concert, the Company is obligated to make milestone and royalty payments to Concert based on successful advancement of d-DM products for one or more indications in the United States, Europe, and Japan. Individual milestone payments range from $2.0 – 6.0 million, $1.5 – 15.0 million, and $25.0 – 60.0 million for clinical, regulatory and commercial targets respectively, and in aggregate could total over $200 million. Royalty payments are tiered, beginning in the single-digits and increasing to the low double-digits for worldwide net sales of d-DM products exceeding $1 billion annually. As of March 31, 2013, the Company has accrued $2.0 million, for milestones that have been achieved pursuant this agreement, as research and development expense in the condensed consolidated statement of operations.

Legal Contingencies –

NUEDEXTA ABBREVIATED NEW DRUG APPLICATION (“ANDA”) Litigation

In fiscal 2011 and 2012, the Company received Paragraph IV certification notices from five separate companies contending that certain of its patents listed in the FDA’s publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluation” (“FDA Orange Book”) (U.S. Patents 7,659,282 (“’282 Patent”), 8,227,484 (“’484 Patent”) and RE 38,115 (“’115 Patent”), which expire in August 2026, July 2023 and January 2016, respectively) are invalid, unenforceable and/or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use, sale or offer for sale of a generic form of NUEDEXTA as described in those companies’ abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”). The FDA Orange Book provides potential competitors, including generic drug companies, with a list of issued patents covering approved drugs. In August 2011 and March 2012, the Company filed lawsuits in the U.S District Court for the District of Delaware against Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. and Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc. (collectively “Par”), Actavis South Atlantic LLC and Actavis, Inc. (collectively “Actavis”), Wockhardt USA, LLC and Wockhardt, Ltd. (collectively, “Wockhardt”), Impax Laboratories, Inc. (“Impax”) and Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Watson Laboratories, Inc. and Watson Pharma, Inc. (collectively “Watson”) (Par, Actavis, Wockhardt, Impax and Watson, collectively the “Defendants”). In March 2012, the Company also filed a protective suit in the U.S District Court for the District of New Jersey against Watson. The New Jersey suit was voluntarily dismissed by the Company in May 2012. In September and October 2012, the Company filed lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against the Defendants. All lawsuits (collectively, the “ANDA Actions”) were filed on the basis that the Defendants’ submissions of their respective ANDAs to obtain approval to manufacture, use, sell, or offer for sale generic versions of NUEDEXTA prior to the expiration of the ’282 Patent, the ’484 Patent and the ’115 Patent listed in the FDA Orange Book constitute infringement of one or more claims of those patents. In October 2012, Watson announced that it completed the acquisition of Actavis and the divestiture of its ANDA for a generic form of NUEDEXTA to Sandoz, Inc.

On December 3, 2012, the Company received a Memorandum Opinion and Order (the “Order”) issued by Judge Leonard P. Stark of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Court”) related to the Markman hearing held October 5, 2012 in the Company’s ongoing patent infringement case against the Defendants. The Order establishes the meaning of the seven patent claim terms in dispute between the parties. After comprehensive briefing and oral argument, Judge Stark’s Order adopted the Company’s proposed or stipulated patent term constructions.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act, FDA final approval of the ANDAs submitted by the Defendants can occur no earlier than October 29, 2013. Further, as a result of the 30-month stay associated with the filing of the ANDA Actions, the FDA cannot grant final approval to any ANDA before December 30, 2013, unless there is an earlier court decision holding that the Orange Book-listed ’282, ’484 and ’115 patents are not infringed and/or are invalid. The Company intends to vigorously enforce its intellectual property rights relating to NUEDEXTA, but the Company cannot predict the outcome of these matters.

Alamo and Azur Litigation

In October 2011, Neal R. Cutler, M.D., the founder of Alamo Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Alamo”), filed a lawsuit in California Superior Court against Azur Pharma International III Limited and Azur Pharma Limited (collectively, “Azur”) and Avanir (the “Cutler Action”). The Company purchased Alamo in 2006 to acquire rights to FazaClo, an approved anti-psychotic drug. In connection with this acquisition of Alamo, the Company agreed to provide the Alamo equity holders, including Dr. Cutler, with milestone payments tied to the aggregate net revenues of FazaClo. In 2007, the Company sold FazaClo and its related assets and operations to Azur. In connection with this sale, Azur agreed to assume the milestone payment obligations due to Dr. Cutler under the Alamo purchase agreement, although the Company could remain liable for these payments if Azur defaults on these obligations. In the Cutler Action, Dr. Cutler alleges a breach of contract and a breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Dr. Cutler alleges that Azur has failed to make certain information reasonably available to Dr. Cutler and has withheld payments to which Dr. Cutler is entitled. Dr. Cutler alleges that Avanir has acquiesced in this conduct, and Dr. Cutler seeks to hold both Azur and Avanir liable for these actions. Azur Ltd. and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. entered into a business combination creating Jazz Pharmaceuticals, plc (“Jazz”). As successor in interest to Azur Ltd., Jazz agreed to indemnify Avanir in full for the claims asserted in the Cutler Action.

General and Other

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may face various claims brought by third parties and it may, from time to time, make claims or take legal actions to assert the Company’s rights, including intellectual property rights as well as claims relating to employment and the safety or efficacy of its products. Any of these claims could subject the Company to costly litigation and, while the Company generally believes that it has adequate insurance to cover many different types of liabilities, the Company’s insurance carriers may deny coverage or the Company’s policy limits may be inadequate to fully satisfy any damage awards or settlements. If this were to happen, the payment of any such awards could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operations, cash flows and financial position. Additionally, any such claims, whether or not successful, could damage the Company’s reputation and business. Management believes the outcomes of currently pending claims and lawsuits are not likely to have a material effect on the Company’s operations or financial position.

In addition, it is possible that the Company could incur termination fees and penalties if it elected to terminate contracts with certain vendors.

Guarantees and Indemnities – The Company indemnifies its directors and officers to the maximum extent permitted under the laws of the State of Delaware, and various lessors in connection with facility leases for certain claims arising from such facilities or leases. Additionally, the Company periodically enters into contracts that contain indemnification obligations, including contracts for the purchase and sale of assets, wholesale distribution agreements, clinical trials, pre-clinical development work and securities offerings. These indemnification obligations provide the contracting parties with the contractual right to have the Company pay for the costs associated with the defense and settlement of certain claims, typically in circumstances where the Company has failed to meet its contractual performance obligations in some fashion.

The maximum amount of potential future payments under such indemnifications is not determinable. The Company has not incurred significant costs related to these guarantees and indemnifications, and no liability has been recorded in the condensed consolidated financial statements for guarantees and indemnifications as of March 31, 2013.