Litigation	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2013
Litigation
Litigation	21. Litigation Department of Health and Human Services Subpoena In December 2013, we received a subpoena from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services reflecting a civil investigation by the United States Department of Justice, principally represented by the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland. The subpoena requests documents regarding Remodulin, Tyvaso and Adcirca, including our marketing practices relating to these products. We are cooperating with the investigation. We are not aware that a claim, litigation or assessment has been asserted in connection with the subpoena. However, we cannot predict what actions, if any, may be taken by the OIG, the Department of Justice, other governmental entities, or any third parties in connection with such investigation. Sandoz Inc. In February 2012, we received a Paragraph IV Certification Notice Letter (the Original Notice Letter) from Sandoz Inc. (Sandoz) advising that Sandoz had submitted an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) to the FDA requesting approval to market a generic version of the 10 mg/mL strength of Remodulin. In December 2012, we received notice (the Second Notice Letter) that Sandoz had amended its previously filed ANDA to request additional approval to market generic versions of the 1 mg/mL, 2.5 mg/mL, and 5 mg/mL strengths of Remodulin. In the Original Notice Letter and the Second Notice Letter, Sandoz stated that it intends to market a generic version of Remodulin before the expiration of the following patents we hold relating to Remodulin: U.S. Patent No. 5,153,222, which expires in October 2014; U.S. Patent No. 6,765,117, which expires in October 2017; and U.S. Patent No. 7,999,007, which expires in March 2029. Each of these patents is listed in the FDA's Orange Book. We responded to the Original Notice Letter by filing a lawsuit in March 2012 against Sandoz in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey alleging patent infringement (the First Lawsuit). We responded to the Second Notice Letter by filing an additional lawsuit in January 2013 for patent infringement in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (the Second Lawsuit). Sandoz has filed its answer to our complaint in the First Lawsuit, and has also filed counterclaims alleging that the patents at issue in the litigation are invalid or will not be infringed by the commercial manufacture, use or sale of the proposed product described in Sandoz's ANDA submission. Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the FDA is automatically precluded from approving Sandoz's ANDA with respect to each concentration of Remodulin for up to 30 months from receipt of the Notice Letter corresponding to such concentration or until the issuance of a district court decision that is adverse to us, whichever occurs first. We intend to vigorously enforce our intellectual property rights relating to Remodulin. Lexington Insurance Company During the third quarter of 2011, we reported a claim to our insurance provider regarding damage to certain Remodulin inventory that occurred as the result of a warehouse accident. The estimated net commercial value of the damaged inventory was approximately $65.0 million. Because we did not reach a satisfactory agreement on the amount to settle the claim, we filed a lawsuit against Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington) in April 2012 in the North Carolina Business Court, a specialized division of North Carolina's Superior Court, seeking to recover the full net commercial value of the damaged inventory. In September 2012, we entered into a final and binding settlement agreement and release with Lexington, under which Lexington agreed to pay us $31.0 million within thirty days. We received payment in early October 2012. The settlement agreement provided that the parties would release and forever discharge each other from any future claims, demands, or causes of action of any kind in connection with the matter. As all contingencies related to this matter were resolved, we recognized a corresponding gain during the third quarter ended September 30, 2012. The gain has been recognized under the caption "other, net" on our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.

21. Litigation

Department of Health and Human Services Subpoena

In December 2013, we received a subpoena from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services reflecting a civil investigation by the United States Department of Justice, principally represented by the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland. The subpoena requests documents regarding Remodulin, Tyvaso and Adcirca, including our marketing practices relating to these products. We are cooperating with the investigation. We are not aware that a claim, litigation or assessment has been asserted in connection with the subpoena. However, we cannot predict what actions, if any, may be taken by the OIG, the Department of Justice, other governmental entities, or any third parties in connection with such investigation.

Sandoz Inc.

In February 2012, we received a Paragraph IV Certification Notice Letter (the Original Notice Letter) from Sandoz Inc. (Sandoz) advising that Sandoz had submitted an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) to the FDA requesting approval to market a generic version of the 10 mg/mL strength of Remodulin. In December 2012, we received notice (the Second Notice Letter) that Sandoz had amended its previously filed ANDA to request additional approval to market generic versions of the 1 mg/mL, 2.5 mg/mL, and 5 mg/mL strengths of Remodulin. In the Original Notice Letter and the Second Notice Letter, Sandoz stated that it intends to market a generic version of Remodulin before the expiration of the following patents we hold relating to Remodulin: U.S. Patent No. 5,153,222, which expires in October 2014; U.S. Patent No. 6,765,117, which expires in October 2017; and U.S. Patent No. 7,999,007, which expires in March 2029. Each of these patents is listed in the FDA's Orange Book.

We responded to the Original Notice Letter by filing a lawsuit in March 2012 against Sandoz in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey alleging patent infringement (the First Lawsuit). We responded to the Second Notice Letter by filing an additional lawsuit in January 2013 for patent infringement in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (the Second Lawsuit). Sandoz has filed its answer to our complaint in the First Lawsuit, and has also filed counterclaims alleging that the patents at issue in the litigation are invalid or will not be infringed by the commercial manufacture, use or sale of the proposed product described in Sandoz's ANDA submission.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the FDA is automatically precluded from approving Sandoz's ANDA with respect to each concentration of Remodulin for up to 30 months from receipt of the Notice Letter corresponding to such concentration or until the issuance of a district court decision that is adverse to us, whichever occurs first. We intend to vigorously enforce our intellectual property rights relating to Remodulin.

Lexington Insurance Company

During the third quarter of 2011, we reported a claim to our insurance provider regarding damage to certain Remodulin inventory that occurred as the result of a warehouse accident. The estimated net commercial value of the damaged inventory was approximately $65.0 million. Because we did not reach a satisfactory agreement on the amount to settle the claim, we filed a lawsuit against Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington) in April 2012 in the North Carolina Business Court, a specialized division of North Carolina's Superior Court, seeking to recover the full net commercial value of the damaged inventory.

In September 2012, we entered into a final and binding settlement agreement and release with Lexington, under which Lexington agreed to pay us $31.0 million within thirty days. We received payment in early October 2012. The settlement agreement provided that the parties would release and forever discharge each other from any future claims, demands, or causes of action of any kind in connection with the matter. As all contingencies related to this matter were resolved, we recognized a corresponding gain during the third quarter ended September 30, 2012. The gain has been recognized under the caption "other, net" on our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.