(9) Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

On August 30, 2017, Amarin Pharma, Inc. and Amarin Pharmaceuticals Ireland Limited, each wholly-owned subsidiaries of Amarin Corporation plc, filed a lawsuit with the United States International Trade Commission, or the ITC, captioned In the Matter of Certain Synthetically Produced, Predominantly EPA Omega-3 Products in Ethyl Ester or Re-esterified Triglyceride Form, USITC Docket 337-3247, against manufacturers, importers, and distributors of products containing synthetically produced omega-3 products in ethyl ester or re-esterified triglyceride form that contain more EPA than DHA or any other single component for use in or as dietary supplements. The lawsuit sought an investigation by the ITC under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. §1337), which makes unlawful unfair methods of competition and unfair acts involving the importation and sale of articles in the United States that injure or threaten injury to a domestic industry. On October 27, 2017, the ITC determined to not institute our requested investigation. On December 1, 2017, the Company appealed the ITC’s non-institution decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Case Nos. 18-1247, 18-114). That appeal is ongoing. The Company intends to pursue this matter vigorously.

In September and October 2016, the Company received paragraph IV certification notices from four companies contending to varying degrees that certain of its patents are invalid, unenforceable and/or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use, sale or offer for sale of a generic form of Vascepa as described in those companies’ abbreviated new drug applications, or ANDAs. The Company filed patent infringement lawsuits against three of these four ANDA applicants. In October 2016, Amarin filed a lawsuit against Roxane Laboratories, Inc. and related parties (collectively, “Roxane”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The case against Roxane is captioned Amarin Pharma, Inc. et al. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc. et al., Civ. A. No. 2:16-cv-02525 (D. Nev.). According to a stipulation filed with the Nevada court, in December 2016, Roxane transferred its ANDA to West-Ward Pharmaceuticals International Limited, which then designated West-Ward Pharmaceuticals Corp. (or together with West-Ward Pharmaceuticals International Limited, West-Ward) as its agent for FDA communications. In view of the ANDA transfer, in February 2017, West-Ward replaced Roxane and related parties as Defendants in the above-referenced case. The case against West-Ward is now captioned Amarin Pharma, Inc. et al. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals Corp. et al., Civ. A. No. 2:16-cv-02525 (D. Nev.). In November 2016, Amarin filed a lawsuit against Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd. (collectively, “DRL”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The case against DRL is captioned Amarin Pharma, Inc. et al. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. et al., Civ. A. No. 2:16-cv-02562 (D. Nev.). In November 2016, Amarin filed a lawsuit against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited (collectively, “Teva”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The case against Teva is captioned Amarin Pharma, Inc. et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., Civ. A. No. 2:16-cv-02658. In all three lawsuits, Amarin is seeking, among other remedies, an order enjoining each defendant from marketing generic versions of Vascepa before the last to expire of the asserted patents in 2030. The three lawsuits have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings. As a result of the statutory stay associated with the filing of these lawsuits under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the FDA cannot grant final approval to West-Ward, DRL, or Teva’s respective ANDA before January 2020, unless there is an earlier court decision holding that the subject patents are not infringed and/or are invalid.

The fourth ANDA applicant referenced above is Apotex Inc. (“Apotex”), which sent Amarin a paragraph IV certification notice in September 2016. The notice reflected that Apotex made a paragraph IV notice as to some, but not all, of the patents listed in the Orange Book for Vascepa. Because Apotex did not make a paragraph IV certification as to all listed patents, Apotex cannot market a generic version of Vascepa before the last to expire of the patents for which Apotex did not make a paragraph IV certification, which is in 2030. At a later date, Apotex may elect to amend its ANDA in order to make a paragraph IV certification as to additional listed patents. If and when Apotex does make such an amendment, it would be required to send Amarin an additional paragraph IV certification notice, and Amarin would then have the ability to file a lawsuit against Apotex pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act.

The Company introduced to the market its 0.5-gram dose strength of Vascepa in October 2016. In August 2017, as anticipated, the Company received a paragraph IV certification notice from Teva contending that certain of its patents are invalid, unenforceable and/or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use, sale or offer for sale of a generic form of the 0.5-gram dose strength of Vascepa, as described in the Teva abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA. This Teva ANDA was filed as an amendment to the 1-gram Teva ANDA and is related to patents already at issue in the 1-gram Vascepa patent litigation. Accordingly, in October 2017, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Teva in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The case is captioned Amarin Pharma, Inc. et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., Civ. A. No. 2:17-cv-2641 (D. Nev.). In this lawsuit, the Company is seeking, among other remedies, an order enjoining Teva from marketing generic versions of the 0.5-gram dose strength of Vascepa before the last to expire of the asserted patents in 2030. This new lawsuit against Teva has been consolidated with the pending lawsuits against Teva, West-Ward, and DRL referenced above based on the 1-gram dose strength of Vascepa, and all four lawsuits will proceed on the same schedule.

On April 26, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the Company’s motion to dismiss the putative consolidated class action lawsuit captioned In re Amarin Corporation plc, Securities Litigation, No. 3:13-cv-06663 (D.N.J. Nov. 1, 2013). The class action was dismissed without prejudice with leave for plaintiffs to file an amended complaint. The lawsuit sought unspecified monetary damages and attorneys’ fees and costs alleging that the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors made misstatements and omissions regarding the FDA’s willingness to approve Vascepa’s ANCHOR indication and related contributing factors and the potential relevance of data from the ongoing REDUCE-IT trial to that potential approval. The April 2016 dismissal was the second motion to dismiss granted in favor of Amarin and related defendants in this litigation. The first motion to dismiss in this litigation was granted in June 2015 in response to the original complaint and related amendment. On May 26, 2016, plaintiffs appealed the most recent dismissal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. On May 23, 2017, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey that granted the Company’s motion to dismiss the putative consolidated class action lawsuit (Case No. 16-2640). Plaintiffs sought a rehearing and en banc review of such affirmation, each of which were denied. The appeal period for this matter has expired. The Company considers this matter closed.

The Company intends to vigorously enforce its intellectual property rights relating to Vascepa, but cannot predict the outcome of these lawsuits or any subsequently filed lawsuits.

In addition to the above, in the ordinary course of business, the Company is from time to time involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings, and threats of litigation relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements and other matters.

Leases

The Company leases office space under operating leases. Future minimum lease payments under these leases, net of sublease rental income, as of December 31, 2017 are as follows:

In thousands
Year Ending December 31,	Operating Leases
2018	$	642
2019		156
2020-2022		—
Total	$	798

On September 30, 2011, the Company entered into an agreement for 320 square feet of office space at 2 Pembroke House, Upper Pembroke Street 28-32 in Dublin, Ireland. The office space was subsequently reduced to 270 square feet, effective November 1, 2013. The agreement began November 1, 2011 and terminates on October 31, 2018 and can be extended automatically for successive one-year periods. Monthly rent is approximately €2,900 (approximately $3,500 at the time of filing). The agreement can be terminated by either party with three months prior written notice.

On July 1, 2011, the Company leased 9,747 square feet of office space in Bedminster, New Jersey. The lease, as amended, terminates on April 30, 2019, and may also be terminated with six months prior notice. On December 6, 2011 the Company leased an additional 2,142 square feet of space in the same location. On December 15, 2012 and May 8, 2013, the Company leased an additional 2,601 and 10,883 square feet of space, respectively, in the same location. In January 2014 and April 2014, the Company entered into separate transactions with the landlord of this property to vacate approximately 2,142 and 2,000 square feet of space in exchange for discounts on contractual future rent payments. In January 2015, the Company executed an agreement to sublease approximately 4,700 square feet of this property to a third party, effective April 1, 2015. This sublease agreement was terminated as of September 30, 2017. Additionally, in June 2015, the Company executed an agreement to sublease approximately 2,500 square feet of this property to a separate third party, effective June 16, 2015. On December 15, 2016, the Company leased an additional 732 square feet of space in the same location, effective January 1, 2017.

Total rent expense during the years ended 2017, 2016 and 2015 was approximately $0.6 million, $0.6 million, and $0.8 million, respectively.

Milestone and Supply Purchase Obligations

The Company entered into long-term supply agreements with multiple FDA-approved API suppliers and encapsulators. Certain supply agreements require annual minimum volume commitments by the Company and certain volume shortfalls may require payments for such shortfalls, as detailed below.

The Company entered into its initial Vascepa API supply agreement with Nisshin Pharma, Inc (“Nisshin”) in 2010. In 2011, the Company entered into agreements with two additional suppliers, Chemport, Inc (“Chemport”) and BASF (formerly Equateq Limited), for the supply of API. In 2012, the Company agreed to terms with a fourth API supplier, a consortium of companies led by Slanmhor Pharmaceutical, Inc. (“Slanmhor”). The API supply agreement with BASF terminated in February 2014. In July 2014, the Company terminated the supply agreement with Slanmhor and subsequently, in June 2015, entered into a new supply agreement with Finorga SAS (“Novasep”). These agreements included requirements for the suppliers to meet certain product specifications and qualify their materials and facilities with applicable regulatory authorities including the FDA. The Company has incurred certain costs associated with the qualification of product produced by these suppliers as described below.

Nisshin, Chemport and Novasep are currently the three manufacturers from which the Company purchases API. As of December 31, 2017, the Company has no royalty, milestone or minimum purchase commitments with Nisshin.

Chemport was approved by the FDA to manufacture API for commercial sale in April 2013 and the Company began purchasing commercial supply from Chemport in 2013. The agreement with Chemport contains a provision requiring the Company to pay Chemport in cash for any shortfall in the minimum purchase obligations. The Company began purchasing commercial supply from Novasep in 2015. API manufactured by Novasep was previously approved by the FDA in July 2014. The 2015 supply agreement with Novasep contains a provision requiring the Company to pay Novasep a cash remedy for any shortfall in the minimum purchase obligations.

Pursuant to the supply agreements, there is a total of $40.1 million that is potentially payable over the term of such agreements based on minimum purchase obligations. The Company continues to meet its contractual purchase obligations.

Under the 2004 share repurchase agreement with Laxdale Limited (“Laxdale”), upon receipt of marketing approval in Europe for the first indication for Vascepa (or first indication of any product containing Amarin Neuroscience Limited intellectual property acquired from Laxdale in 2004), the Company must make an aggregate stock or cash payment to the former shareholders of Laxdale (at the sole option of each of the sellers) of £7.5 million (approximately $10.1 million as of December 31, 2017). Also under the Laxdale agreement, upon receipt of a marketing approval in the United States or Europe for a further indication of Vascepa (or further indication of any other product using Amarin Neuroscience Limited intellectual property), the Company must make an aggregate stock or cash payment (at the sole option of each of the sellers) of £5 million (approximately $6.7 million as of December 31, 2017) for each of the two potential market approvals (i.e., £10 million maximum, or approximately $13.5 million as of December 31, 2017).

The Company has no provision for any of the obligations above since the amounts are either not probable or able to be estimated as of December 31, 2017.