Ocular Therapeutix faces EyePoint defamation suit; injunction ruling still pending

Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. (Nasdaq: OCUL) is defending a lawsuit by EyePoint, Inc. that accuses it of making false and defamatory statements about EyePoint and its DURAVYU product candidate, according to its 10-Q filed Aug 3, 2026. A Massachusetts judge has denied a temporary restraining order, but has not yet ruled on EyePoint's request for a preliminary injunction.

EyePoint filed the suit on March 20, 2026 in Middlesex County Superior Court of Massachusetts. The only defendant the 10-Q names is Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. The filing gives no case number and does not say that any Ocular officer or director is a defendant.

The case

EyePoint alleges that Ocular made certain false and defamatory statements about EyePoint and DURAVYU. The 10-Q does not say what the statements were or where they were made. The complaint asserts four counts: defamation; commercial disparagement; unfair or deceptive practices in violation of Massachusetts General Laws c. 93A, sections 2 and 11; and tortious interference with advantageous business relations. EyePoint seeks, among other things, injunctive relief, damages and attorneys' fees.

Ocular's 10-K for 2025, filed Feb. 5, 2026, before the suit, listed Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals among the companies pursuing later-stage wet AMD programs that would compete with AXPAXLI, Ocular's lead product candidate. The 10-Q does not describe the relationship between the two companies beyond the litigation. Ocular's forward-looking statements also list its plans to submit a new drug application for AXPAXLI in wet AMD based on SOL-1 trial Week 52 data, and they list the outcome of the EyePoint litigation among the subjects of those statements.

Defendants

Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. is the sole defendant named in the filing. The plaintiff is EyePoint, Inc.

Where it stands

On March 23, 2026, EyePoint moved for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction, seeking among other things to stop Ocular from disseminating allegedly false and misleading statements. The court denied the restraining order on April 13, 2026. It held hearings on the preliminary injunction motion on May 5, 2026 and July 7, 2026 and, as of the 10-Q, had not ruled. The 10-Q gives no date for a decision and does not say when a trial might take place.

Ocular says it intends to vigorously defend the case. It adds that it cannot provide any assurance about the outcome and cannot predict with any degree of certainty the extent of any potential liability.

Why it matters to shareholders

Ocular assessed the matter under ASC 450, the accounting standard for contingencies, and determined that no accrual had been incurred as of June 30, 2026. It says it does not currently believe the matter will have a material adverse effect on its financial position or liquidity. It also warns that the outcome is inherently unpredictable and that there is no assurance the scope of the matter will not increase.

The 10-Q lists defending against legal proceedings, including the EyePoint litigation, among the activities that determine its future capital requirements. As of June 30, 2026, Ocular reported cash and cash equivalents of $598.6 million and outstanding notes payable with a principal amount of $82.5 million under its Barings Credit Facility. The filing does not state defense costs for the case and does not mention insurance.

The 10-Q says litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties and that an adverse result in these or other matters may harm Ocular's business. Its indemnification note says the maximum potential amount of future payments under indemnification provisions in its agreements is not determinable.

Report an error

Companies in this story

OCULOcular Therapeutix, Inc.NASDAQ · United StatesOpen the starter desk