Litigation	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2012
Loss Contingency [Abstract]
Litigation	Litigation From time to time in the ordinary course of business, we become involved in various lawsuits, claims and proceedings relating to the conduct of our business, including those pertaining to product liability, patent infringement and employment claims. Product Liability Litigation As of March 31, 2012, we and Lilly were involved in approximately 95 separate product liability cases involving approximately 526 plaintiffs in various courts in the United States. Approximately 70 plaintiffs who previously filed cases have subsequently dismissed their cases or claims without prejudice. Certain of these cases have been brought by individuals who allege they have used BYETTA. They generally seek compensatory and punitive damages for alleged injuries, consisting primarily of pancreatitis and, in some cases, alleged wrongful death. Most of the cases are pending in California state court, where the Judicial Council has granted our petition for a “coordinated proceeding” for all California state court cases alleging harm allegedly as a result of BYETTA use. We also have received notice from plaintiff's counsel of additional claims by individuals who have not filed suit. While we cannot reasonably predict the outcome of any lawsuit, claim or proceeding, we and Lilly intend to vigorously defend these matters. However, if we are unsuccessful in our defense, these matters could result in a material adverse impact to our financial position and results of operations. Stockholder Litigation On April 4, 2012, a derivative and putative class action titled Duane Howell v. Paulo F. Costa et al. (Case No. 37-2012-00095130) was filed by a putative stockholder in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty against our current directors arising out of, among other things, alleged responses by the directors to an alleged offer to acquire the Company. The complaint seeks, among other things, a declaration of breach of the directors' fiduciary duties, the establishment of a committee of independent directors or third party to evaluate strategic alternatives and potential offers for the Company, a prohibition of the directors from entering into certain contractual commitments that allegedly could harm the Company or its stockholders and an invalidation of the Company's shareholder rights plan. On May 1, 2012, the parties agreed to a temporary stay in the action, subject to Court approval. Icahn Litigation On April 12, 2012, an action titled Icahn Partners LP v. Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Case No. 7418) was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint asserts claims arising out of the Company's response to the plaintiff's demand to inspect certain books and records of the Company purportedly pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. The complaint seeks an order from the court compelling the Company to provide certain books and records to the plaintiff for purposes of inspection and copying.

Litigation

From time to time in the ordinary course of business, we become involved in various lawsuits, claims and proceedings relating to the conduct of our business, including those pertaining to product liability, patent infringement and employment claims.

Product Liability Litigation

As of March 31, 2012, we and Lilly were involved in approximately 95 separate product liability cases involving approximately 526 plaintiffs in various courts in the United States. Approximately 70 plaintiffs who previously filed cases have subsequently dismissed their cases or claims without prejudice. Certain of these cases have been brought by individuals who allege they have used BYETTA. They generally seek compensatory and punitive damages for alleged injuries, consisting primarily of pancreatitis and, in some cases, alleged wrongful death. Most of the cases are pending in California state court, where the Judicial Council has granted our petition for a “coordinated proceeding” for all California state court cases alleging harm allegedly as a result of BYETTA use. We also have received notice from plaintiff's counsel of additional claims by individuals who have not filed suit. While we cannot reasonably predict the outcome of any lawsuit, claim or proceeding, we and Lilly intend to vigorously defend these matters. However, if we are unsuccessful in our defense, these matters could result in a material adverse impact to our financial position and results of operations.

Stockholder Litigation

On April 4, 2012, a derivative and putative class action titled Duane Howell v. Paulo F. Costa et al. (Case No. 37-2012-00095130) was filed by a putative stockholder in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty against our current directors arising out of, among other things, alleged responses by the directors to an alleged offer to acquire the Company. The complaint seeks, among other things, a declaration of breach of the directors' fiduciary duties, the establishment of a committee of independent directors or third party to evaluate strategic alternatives and potential offers for the Company, a prohibition of the directors from entering into certain contractual commitments that allegedly could harm the Company or its stockholders and an invalidation of the Company's shareholder rights plan. On May 1, 2012, the parties agreed to a temporary stay in the action, subject to Court approval.

Icahn Litigation

On April 12, 2012, an action titled Icahn Partners LP v. Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Case No. 7418) was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint asserts claims arising out of the Company's response to the plaintiff's demand to inspect certain books and records of the Company purportedly pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. The complaint seeks an order from the court compelling the Company to provide certain books and records to the plaintiff for purposes of inspection and copying.