Commitments and Contingencies
|3 Months Ended|
Mar. 31, 2021
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES||COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
In connection with our acquisitions of CURNA, OPKO Diagnostics and OPKO Renal, we agreed to pay future consideration to the sellers upon the achievement of certain events. As a result, as of March 31, 2021, we recorded $3.6 million as contingent consideration, with $0.0 million recorded within Accrued expenses and $3.6 million recorded within Other long-term liabilities in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Refer to Note 5.
On April 5, 2019, former shareholders of Claros Diagnostics, Inc. filed a complaint in the Chancery Court of Delaware against the Company, alleging among other things, that the Company breached the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated October 13, 2011 by and among the Company, Claros Merger Subsidiary, LLC and Claros Diagnostics, Inc. (the “Merger Agreement”): (i) by failing to make a milestone payment of $2.375 million (payable in OPKO Common Stock) upon obtaining FDA approval of the Claros PSA test; and (ii) by repudiating its obligations to make additional future milestone payments as required under the Merger Agreement. In January 2021, the Company and the shareholder representative entered into a settlement agreement providing, among other things, that the Company pay the shareholders $1.2 million, which the Company has paid.
As previously disclosed, on September 7, 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York (the “SEC Complaint”) against a number of individuals and entities (the “Defendants”), including the Company and its CEO and Chairman, Dr. Phillip Frost. The SEC alleged, among other things, that the Company (i) aided and abetted an illegal “pump and dump” scheme perpetrated by a number of the Defendants, and (ii) failed to file required Schedules 13D or 13G with the SEC. The Company and Dr. Frost entered into settlement agreements with the SEC that resolved the SEC Complaint against each of them, which were approved by the court in January 2019. Pursuant to the settlement, and without admitting or denying any of the allegations of the SEC Complaint, the Company is enjoined from violating Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act and paid a $100,000 penalty. Liability under Section 13(d) can be established without any showing of wrongful intent or negligence.
Following the SEC’s announcement of the SEC Complaint, we were named in several class action lawsuits, more than a dozen derivative suits which have now been settled, and other litigation relating to the allegations in the SEC Complaint among other matters. On June 26, 2020, The Amitim Funds, the lead plaintiff in the class action lawsuits, filed a Stipulation of Settlement in the Southern District of Florida of behalf of itself and the remainder of the class, which provides for the
settlement of and release of the class action claims against the Company and Dr. Frost for $16.5 million. Our insurance carriers have agreed to provide coverage for a significant portion of the settlement amount in connection with the class action lawsuits. On April 28, 2021, an Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice was entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, approving the settlement.
In April 2017, the Civil Division of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (the “SDNY”) informed BioReference that it believed that, from 2008 to 2012, BioReference had, in violation of the False Claims Act, improperly billed Medicare and TRICARE (both are federal government healthcare programs) for clinical laboratory services provided to hospital inpatient beneficiaries at certain hospitals. In April 2019, the SDNY also informed BioReference that it believed that BioReference provided physicians subsidies for electronic health record systems prior to 2012 that violated regulations adopted by HHS in 2006 which allowed laboratories to provide these donations under certain conditions. BioReference and the SDNY reached a settlement with respect to these matters and a final settlement and release, including BioReference’s payment of an approximately $11.5 million settlement amount, was approved on September 22, 2020. The amount of related attorneys’ fees is currently being negotiated.
On June 3, 2019, BioReference reported that Retrieval-Masters Creditors Bureau, Inc. d/b/a American Medical Collection Agency (“AMCA”), had notified BioReference about a data security incident involving AMCA (the “AMCA Incident”). AMCA informed BioReference that an unauthorized user had access to AMCA’s system between August 1, 2018 and March 30, 2019. AMCA advised that AMCA’s affected system may have included patient name, date of birth, address, phone, date of service, provider, and balance information, as well as credit card information, bank account information (but no passwords or security questions) and email addresses that were provided by the consumer to AMCA. AMCA advised BioReference that no Social Security Numbers were compromised, and BioReference provided no laboratory results or diagnostic information to AMCA. BioReference notified patients and provided notice to the Office of Civil Rights of the AMCA Incident. BioReference had been named in at least two class action lawsuits against AMCA and other defendants in connection with the AMCA Incident. In April 2020, the class action lawsuits against BioReference were dismissed without prejudice. The Office of Inspector General and Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) of the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as the attorney generals’ offices from certain states have contacted BioReference to request additional information relating to the AMCA Incident. On June 22, 2020 the OCR advised us it was closing its file regarding the AHCA matter and no further action is required of BioReference with respect to this matter. The resolution with the OCR does not, however, foreclose continued inquiries from attorney generals’ offices from other states. Accordingly, it is not possible at this time to estimate the amount of loss or range of loss, if any, that might result from adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, or other resolution of these investigations based on the stage of these investigations, and the absence of specific allegations.
From time to time, we may receive inquiries, document requests, Civil Investigative Demands (“CIDs”) or subpoenas from the Department of Justice, OCR, CMS, various payors and fiscal intermediaries, and other state and federal regulators regarding investigations, audits and reviews. In addition to the matters discussed in this note, we are currently responding to CIDs, subpoenas, payor audits, and document requests for various matters relating to our laboratory operations. Some pending or threatened proceedings against us may involve potentially substantial amounts as well as the possibility of civil, criminal, or administrative fines, penalties, or other sanctions, which could be material. Settlements of suits involving the types of issues that we routinely confront may require monetary payments as well as corporate integrity agreements. Additionally, qui tam or “whistleblower” actions initiated under the civil False Claims Act may be pending but placed under seal by the court to comply with the False Claims Act’s requirements for filing such suits. Also, from time to time, we may detect issues of non-compliance with federal healthcare laws pertaining to claims submission and reimbursement practices and/or financial relationships with physicians, among other things. We may avail ourselves of various mechanisms to address these issues, including participation in voluntary disclosure protocols. Participating in voluntary disclosure protocols can have the potential for significant settlement obligations or even enforcement action. The Company generally has cooperated, and intends to continue to cooperate, with appropriate regulatory authorities as and when investigations, audits and inquiries arise.
We are a party to other litigation in the ordinary course of business. While we cannot predict the ultimate outcome of legal matters, we accrue a liability for legal contingencies when we believe that it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and that we can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss. It’s reasonably possible the ultimate liability could exceed amounts currently estimated and we review established accruals and adjust them to reflect ongoing negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other relevant information. To the extent new information is obtained and our views on the probable outcomes of claims, suits, assessments, investigations or legal proceedings change, changes in our accrued liabilities would be recorded in the period in which such determination is made. Because of the high degree of judgment involved in establishing loss estimates, the ultimate outcome of such matters will differ from our estimates and such differences may be material to our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.At March 31, 2021, we were committed to make future purchases for inventory and other items in 2021 that occur in the ordinary course of business under various purchase arrangements with fixed purchase provisions aggregating approximately $301.5 million.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef