aibioARS Pharmaceuticals details Aptar trade secret suit and its own antitrust claim over neffy parts
Tickers SPRY
AptarGroup and Aptar France sued ARS Pharmaceuticals and ARS Pharmaceuticals Operations in March 2025. The company's separate antitrust suit against AptarGroup was moved to New York in July 2026.
Key facts
- Company
- ARS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: SPRY)
- News type
- Legal
- Primary source
- ARS Pharmaceuticals 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2026 (SEC EDGAR)
ARS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: SPRY) described a trade secret and contract suit brought by Aptar in its 10-Q filed August 13, 2026. AptarGroup, Inc. and Aptar France SAS sued ARS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and ARS Pharmaceuticals Operations, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on March 25, 2025. Those two ARS entities are the defendants. The 10-Q gives no case number.
The company has its own suit against AptarGroup, an antitrust claim filed in California in September 2025 and now moved to New York. ARS says it intends to defend itself vigorously in the matter.
The case
Aptar alleges that ARS violated the Defend Trade Secrets Act (18 USC § 1836), misappropriated trade secrets under New York state law, and committed various breaches of contract. The 10-Q does not describe the contracts or the trade secrets, and it states no amount of damages sought.
The 10-K says the unit dose sprayer device used in neffy, the company's epinephrine nasal spray, is produced by Aptar Pharma and by Silgan Dispensing Systems, and that both have sufficient capacity to satisfy its long-term requirements. It adds that the patent for the Aptar unit dose nasal spray device expired in early 2020.
Defendants
In Aptar's suit the defendants are ARS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and ARS Pharmaceuticals Operations, Inc. The 10-Q names no individual defendants. The plaintiffs are AptarGroup, Inc. and Aptar France SAS. In the antitrust suit the roles reverse: ARS is the plaintiff and AptarGroup is the defendant.
Where it stands
ARS was served and moved to dismiss on June 12, 2025. Aptar opposed on July 28, 2025, and ARS replied on August 27, 2025. On March 30, 2026, the court granted the motion in part and denied it in part. It dismissed the claim for trade secret misappropriation under New York law and let the other claims go forward.
Aptar asked for leave on April 29, 2026 to replead the dismissed claim, and ARS opposed. The court granted leave on June 17, 2026, and ARS answered the amended complaint on July 6, 2026.
In the antitrust suit, filed September 29, 2025 in the Southern District of California, ARS alleges that AptarGroup violated federal antitrust law in connection with its sale of certain constituent parts of neffy. Aptar moved on December 16, 2025 to dismiss or transfer. ARS opposed on January 27, 2026 and Aptar replied on February 27, 2026. On July 17, 2026 the court declined to address the dismissal arguments and transferred the case to the Southern District of New York. Aptar moved to dismiss again on August 7, 2026, and ARS says it intends to oppose.
Related matters
The same note describes patent suits ARS filed against Lupin, Inc., Lupin Ltd. and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in the District of New Jersey in August 2025 and February 2026, and against Cipla Ltd. and Cipla USA, Inc. in April 2026. Each followed a Paragraph IV notice about a generic neffy. It also reports a fax-advertising class action filed July 10, 2026 and a securities class action filed August 5, 2026.
Why it matters to shareholders
The 10-Q says the company cannot predict the outcome of its suits and that an unfavorable result could have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition. It also says the possible loss or range of loss cannot be reasonably estimated, so ARS recorded no liability as of June 30, 2026. The filing does not say whether insurance covers the Aptar case.