United Therapeutics–Liquidia $380.7 Million Settlement, Payment Schedule, Yutrepia Changes and What Patients Need to Know

United Therapeutics Corporation and Liquidia Corporation have signed a global settlement, dated October 13, 2026, resolving six legal disputes over patents, trade secrets, contract claims and antitrust allegations tied to inhaled treprostinil drugs. The disclosed payments total $380.7 million: a $175 million net payment to United Therapeutics within 30 business days, $145.4 million in two installments of $72.7 million (due by January 31 and April 30, 2027), and $60.3 million to parties with financial interests in the related antitrust litigation.

Liquidia also agreed to stop promoting its drug Yutrepia for pulmonary hypertension associated with interstitial lung disease (PH-ILD) and to seek FDA approval to remove that indication from the label. Liquidia says Yutrepia remains available to patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) without interruption.

This is a company-to-company settlement, not a consumer class action. There is no claim form, no patient payout and no public deadline. Official filings: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819576/000110465926115672/tm2627557d1_8k.htm

Independent publisher notice: AllAboutLawyer.com is an independent legal information website. We are not a law firm, we do not represent either company, and we do not give medical or investment advice. Patients should not change treatment based on this article. Talk to a prescribing clinician.

Quick Facts: United Therapeutics–Liquidia Settlement

Item	Details
Official filing	Liquidia Form 8-K with settlement agreement (SEC): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819576/000110465926115672/tm2627557d1_8k.htm
Claim form / public fund	None. Business-to-business settlement
Total disclosed payments	$380.7 million ($175.0M + $145.4M + $60.3M)
Agreement date	October 13, 2026
Net payment to United Therapeutics	$175 million within 30 business days of the effective date
Installments	$72.7 million on or before January 31, 2027 and $72.7 million on or before April 30, 2027
Antitrust-related payments	$60.3 million to parties with interests in the antitrust litigation
Disputes resolved	Six pending matters in Delaware, North Carolina and New Jersey courts
Lead patent case	United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-00975 (D. Del.)
Key ruling	September 30, 2026: claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,826,327 found valid and infringed
Appeal	Liquidia agreed not to appeal that ruling
Yutrepia changes	Stop promoting for PH-ILD; submit label change to remove PH-ILD; PAH use continues
Admission of liability	None. The agreement has mutual releases and is not an admission
Consumer payment deadline	None

Who Are the Parties and What Are the Drugs?

United Therapeutics makes treprostinil treatments including Tyvaso (inhaled) and Remodulin (infusion). Liquidia developed Yutrepia, a dry-powder inhaled treprostinil. Treprostinil treats PAH, a form of high blood pressure in the lung arteries, and, in inhaled forms, PH-ILD, pulmonary hypertension that occurs with interstitial lung disease. The two conditions are different, and a drug may be marketed only for its FDA-approved uses.

The Delaware Ruling That Preceded the Settlement

On September 30, 2026, after trial, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware ruled that claims 1 and 14 of United Therapeutics’ ‘327 patent (U.S. Patent No. 11,826,327) were valid and infringed by Liquidia. The claims generally cover treating PH-ILD with inhaled treprostinil, including dry-powder forms. The settlement followed within two weeks. A court ruling on a patent is separate from the settlement’s no-admission clause, so the settlement does not erase the ruling.

The Payments Explained

Component	Amount	Timing
Net payment to United Therapeutics	$175,000,000	Within 30 business days of the effective date
First installment	$72,700,000	On or before January 31, 2027
Second installment	$72,700,000	On or before April 30, 2027
Payments to antitrust-related parties	$60,300,000	Per agreement
Total disclosed	$380,700,000

• The $175 million is a net figure that accounts for money United Therapeutics pays to resolve the related antitrust case.
• The two $72.7 million installments relate to continued Yutrepia sales for PH-ILD after the agreement date.
• Liquidia has said its preliminary third-quarter 2026 Yutrepia net sales were $222.7 million and its cash was $396.1 million at September 30, 2026 (unaudited), which bears on its ability to pay, though the settlement also provides for a letter of credit to secure some obligations.
• Some individual amounts in the filed agreement are redacted.

The Six Disputes Covered

Proceeding	Court and number	Issue
United Therapeutics v. Liquidia Technologies	D. Del., No. 1:23-cv-00975	Infringement of the ‘327 patent
United Therapeutics v. Liquidia Technologies	M.D.N.C., No. 1:25-cv-00368	Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 11,357,782
Liquidia Technologies v. United Therapeutics	M.D.N.C., No. 1:25-cv-00299	Dispute over Liquidia’s U.S. Patent No. 10,898,494
United Therapeutics and Lung Biotechnology PBC v. Liquidia Technologies and Robert Roscigno	N.C. Superior Court, No. 21CVS004094-310	Alleged trade-secret misappropriation
United Therapeutics and Lung Biotechnology PBC v. Robert Roscigno and Liquidia Technologies	N.C. Superior Court, No. 24CVS3755	Alleged breach of contract
Sandoz Inc. and RareGen, LLC v. United Therapeutics and Smiths Medical ASD	D.N.J., No. 2:19-cv-10170, with related Third Circuit appeals	Antitrust allegations

Not everything is necessarily closed. The agreement requires joint dismissals with prejudice after the initial payment, but it carves out certain claims against Robert Roscigno as an individual, and some obligations depend on conditions, including the antitrust settlement and the FDA label change. Check the dockets for dismissal entries before treating all six as ended.

What Changes for Yutrepia, Patients and Doctors

• Liquidia must stop marketing, advertising, promoting and detailing Yutrepia for PH-ILD.
• Liquidia has submitted a label supplement to remove PH-ILD as an indicated use and any reference to it. FDA approval of that change had not been confirmed as of the October 13 announcement.
• PAH use is unaffected, and Liquidia says supply continues without interruption.
• Patients taking inhaled treprostinil for PH-ILD should ask their clinician about their options and the current prescribing information.

Related article: Six Flags Goliath Death, Nine Ride Closures, X2 Brain Injury Lawsuits, $4.9B Debt and Stock Drop, What the Records Show

Laws Behind the Dispute

Patent infringement: 35 U.S.C. § 271. Direct infringement (§ 271(a)) and induced infringement (§ 271(b)) apply when a company’s product or promotion leads others to practice a patented method, which matters for a method-of-treatment patent like the ‘327 patent. For drugs approved through the FDA’s 505(b)(2) pathway, the act of filing the application can itself be an infringing act under § 271(e)(2).

Presumption of validity: 35 U.S.C. § 282. A challenger must prove invalidity by clear and convincing evidence. Validity defenses arise under §§ 101, 102, 103 and 112.

Remedies: 35 U.S.C. §§ 283, 284 and 285. Courts may grant injunctions under the eBay v. MercExchange (2006) four-factor test, award damages not less than a reasonable royalty, increase damages up to three times for willful infringement, and award attorney fees in exceptional cases. The post-agreement installments are tied to continued sales, a common way to resolve damages for ongoing use.

Appeals: 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1). Patent appeals go to the Federal Circuit. Liquidia agreed not to appeal.

Trade secrets: Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1836, and the North Carolina Trade Secrets Protection Act, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 66-152 et seq. These allow injunctions and damages for misappropriation.

Antitrust: Sherman Act §§ 1 and 2 (15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2) and Clayton Act § 4 (15 U.S.C. § 15). Private plaintiffs can seek treble damages for proven antitrust violations. The Sandoz and RareGen case alleged anticompetitive conduct involving treprostinil injection. Allegations are not findings.

FDA labeling: Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and 21 C.F.R. § 314.70. Changes to a drug’s approved labeling, including removing an indication, are made through supplements to the application. Promoting a drug for an unapproved use can create misbranding exposure under the FDCA, which is one reason the label change and marketing stop go together.

Settlements of drug patent disputes: FTC v. Actavis (2013). Large payments in drug patent settlements can draw antitrust scrutiny when a company pays a rival to delay competition. Nothing in the sources reviewed indicates a regulator has challenged this agreement.

Public-company disclosure: Exchange Act Form 8-K, Item 1.01. Both companies disclosed the agreement in SEC filings as a material definitive agreement.

Dismissals: Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). Parties can jointly dismiss federal cases, and “with prejudice” means the claims cannot be refiled.

Is the Settlement an Admission of Wrongdoing?

No. The agreement provides mutual releases and states it is not an admission of liability or wrongdoing. The September 30 patent ruling is a separate court decision.

Does Anyone Else Get Paid?

Patients, doctors and other buyers of either company’s products get no money from this settlement. The $60.3 million goes to parties with financial interests in the antitrust litigation, and the rest goes between the two companies.

Tax and Accounting Notes

Tax and accounting treatment of the payments for the companies depends on how the settlement is characterized (for example, damages for infringement versus other consideration) and is addressed in their financial statements. Patients have no tax consequence from this settlement.

What Happens Next

1. Liquidia makes the $175 million net payment within 30 business days of the effective date.
2. The parties file joint dismissals with prejudice of the covered matters after the initial payment, subject to the agreement’s conditions and exceptions.
3. Liquidia pursues FDA approval of the PH-ILD label removal and keeps PH-ILD promotion stopped.
4. Liquidia makes the $72.7 million installments by January 31 and April 30, 2027.

Check later SEC filings and the court dockets to confirm each step.

Key Dates

Date	Event
September 30, 2026	Delaware court rules claims 1 and 14 of the ‘327 patent valid and infringed
October 13, 2026	Settlement agreement signed and announced
October 14, 2026	Both companies file Form 8-K disclosures
About late November 2026	$175 million net payment due (30 business days from the effective date; confirm exact date)
January 31, 2027	First $72.7 million installment due
April 30, 2027	Second $72.7 million installment due

Frequently Asked Questions

How much is the settlement?

 $380.7 million in disclosed payments, often rounded to $381 million.

Who pays whom?

 Liquidia pays a net $175 million and $145.4 million to United Therapeutics, and $60.3 million to antitrust-related parties.

Can patients claim money?

 No. There is no claim form, fund or deadline.

Will Yutrepia stay available for PAH?

 Liquidia says yes, without interruption.

What happens to Yutrepia for PH-ILD?

 Liquidia will stop promoting it for PH-ILD and has asked the FDA to remove that indication. Approval was not confirmed as of October 13.

Which patent did United Therapeutics win on?

 Claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,826,327, ruled valid and infringed on September 30, 2026.

Did Liquidia admit infringement? 

The settlement is not an admission, but the court had already ruled on the patent claims and Liquidia agreed not to appeal.

Is every case now over?

 Not yet verified. Dismissals follow payment, and certain claims against Robert Roscigno individually are excluded.

Related Coverage on AllAboutLawyer.com

• Trulife Distribution Lawsuit: What You Need to Know About the Family Business Dispute (2026 Update)

Sources

1. Liquidia Corporation, Form 8-K (October 14, 2026), with the settlement agreement: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819576/000110465926115672/tm2627557d1_8k.htm
2. Liquidia Corporation, press release, “Liquidia Announces Global Settlement Resolving All Pending Litigation with United Therapeutics, Ensuring Continued Commercialization of YUTREPIA in PAH” (October 13, 2026): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819576/000110465926115672/tm2627557d1_ex99-1.htm
3. United Therapeutics Corporation, Form 8-K (October 14, 2026): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1082554/000110465926115723/tm2627546d1_8k.htm
4. U.S. District Court, District of Delaware, United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-00975, trial opinion (September 30, 2026): https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/delaware/dedce/1%3A2023cv00975/83482/475/
5. FDA, Yutrepia (treprostinil) inhalation powder prescribing information: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2025/213005s000lbl.pdf
6. 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 282, 283, 284, 285; 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1); 18 U.S.C. § 1836; 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2, 15; N.C. Gen. Stat. § 66-152 et seq.; 21 C.F.R. § 314.70; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)
7. eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (2006); FTC v. Actavis, Inc., 570 U.S. 136 (2013)

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information, not legal, medical or investment advice. Patients should consult a qualified clinician about treatment, and investors should review official company disclosures.