Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 9: Commitments and Contingencies The Company may become involved in or subject to, routine litigation, claims, disputes, proceedings and investigations in the ordinary course of business, which in management’s opinion will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, cash flows or results of operations. Any such litigation could divert management time and attention from Adamis, could involve significant amounts of legal fees and other fees and expenses. On September 26, 2018, the Company brought action against Belcher Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Belcher”) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida for a declaratory judgment (“Complaint”) of non-infringement of certain patents in which Belcher claims rights, relating to certain methods of preparing epinephrine solutions and treating allergic reactions using a method of preparing certain epinephrine solutions (collectively the “Patents-in-Suit”). The Complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that the company’s Symjepi™ (epinephrine) Injection product (“Symjepi”) does not infringe the Patents-in-Suit. On November 7, 2018, Belcher filed its Answer and Counterclaim to the Complaint and alleged that the company infringes the Patents-in-Suit as a result of the Symjepi product. Belcher’s Counterclaim seeks damages and injunctive relief in conjunction with the infringement claims. The company responded to the Counterclaim by generally denying any wrongdoing and asserting the affirmative defense that the Patents-in-Suit are invalid. The parties exchanged initial disclosures and initiated discovery in January 2019. On December 28, 2018, Belcher filed a reissue application for one of the Patents-in-Suit seeking to amend the asserted claims and correct an improper benefit claim. On March 29, 2019, the parties agreed to stay the litigation at the District Court pending the outcome of the reissue application and the Company’s petition for inter partes review, filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in April 2019, to challenge the validity of the remaining Patent-in-Suit. The Company believes that its Symjepi product does not infringe any valid and enforceable patent held by Belcher, and that Belcher’s Counterclaim is without merit. The Company intends to defend against Belcher’s claims and pursue all available legal remedies available to the company against Belcher. The Company has a production threshold commitment to a manufacturer of our Symjepi Products where the Company would be required to pay for maintenance fees if it does not meet certain periodic purchase order minimums. Any such maintenance fees would be prorated as a percentage of the required minimum production threshold. The Company believes that the production thresholds will be met in the succeeding periods, or if not that the fees will not be material, as they are prorated based on actual production.

Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2019

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Note 9: Commitments and Contingencies

The Company may become involved in or subject to, routine litigation, claims, disputes, proceedings and investigations in the ordinary course of business, which in management’s opinion will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, cash flows or results of operations. Any such litigation could divert management time and attention from Adamis, could involve significant amounts of legal fees and other fees and expenses.

On September 26, 2018, the Company brought action against Belcher Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Belcher”) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida for a declaratory judgment (“Complaint”) of non-infringement of certain patents in which Belcher claims rights, relating to certain methods of preparing epinephrine solutions and treating allergic reactions using a method of preparing certain epinephrine solutions (collectively the “Patents-in-Suit”). The Complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that the company’s Symjepi™ (epinephrine) Injection product (“Symjepi”) does not infringe the Patents-in-Suit. On November 7, 2018, Belcher filed its Answer and Counterclaim to the Complaint and alleged that the company infringes the Patents-in-Suit as a result of the Symjepi product. Belcher’s Counterclaim seeks damages and injunctive relief in conjunction with the infringement claims. The company responded to the Counterclaim by generally denying any wrongdoing and asserting the affirmative defense that the Patents-in-Suit are invalid. The parties exchanged initial disclosures and initiated discovery in January 2019. On December 28, 2018, Belcher filed a reissue application for one of the Patents-in-Suit seeking to amend the asserted claims and correct an improper benefit claim. On March 29, 2019, the parties agreed to stay the litigation at the District Court pending the outcome of the reissue application and the Company’s petition for inter partes review, filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in April 2019, to challenge the validity of the remaining Patent-in-Suit. The Company believes that its Symjepi product does not infringe any valid and enforceable patent held by Belcher, and that Belcher’s Counterclaim is without merit. The Company intends to defend against Belcher’s claims and pursue all available legal remedies available to the company against Belcher.

The Company has a production threshold commitment to a manufacturer of our Symjepi Products where the Company would be required to pay for maintenance fees if it does not meet certain periodic purchase order minimums. Any such maintenance fees would be prorated as a percentage of the required minimum production threshold. The Company believes that the production thresholds will be met in the succeeding periods, or if not that the fees will not be material, as they are prorated based on actual production.