5. Commitments and Contingencies On June 26, 2019, the Company entered into a RIPA with Oberland. Pursuant to the RIPA, Oberland paid the Company $125.0 million at closing, less certain issuance costs, and, subject to the terms and conditions of the RIPA, the Company is eligible for an additional $25.0 million upon certain regulatory approval of the Company's product candidates and $50.0 million at its option upon reaching certain sales thresholds. As consideration for the payments, Oberland has the right to receive certain revenue interests from the Company based on the net sales of certain products, once approved, which will be tiered payments initially ranging from 2.5% to 7.5% of our net sales in the covered territory (as detailed in the RIPA). The initial mid-single digit repayment rate on U.S. revenue steps down to less than one percent rate upon certain revenue achievements. Esperion reacquires 100% revenue rights upon repayment completion. The Company recorded the proceeds from the RIPA as a liability on the balance sheets and are accounting for the RIPA under the effective-interest method over the estimated life of the RIPA. Future payments under the RIPA may range from $0.1 million in the next year to a maximum total payment of $243.8 million beyond one year. Per the terms of the agreement, every $100 million of net sales generated, less than or equal to $250 million in an annual aggregate, would result in a repayment obligation of approximately $7.5 million at the stated repayment rate in the first year. In the future, as net sales thresholds set forth in the agreement are met and the repayment percentage rate changes, the amount of the obligation and timing of payment is likely to change. As products are not yet approved for sale, the exact timing or amounts of repayment is likely to change each reporting period. A significant increase or decrease in net sales will materially impact the revenue interest liability, interest expense and the time period for repayment. Refer to Note 10 Liability Related to the Revenue Interest Purchase Agreement for further information. In February 2014, the Company entered into an operating lease agreement for its principal executive offices located in Ann Arbor, Michigan commencing in April 2014, with a term of 63 months . The Companys lease provides for fixed monthly rent for the term of the lease, with monthly rent increasing every 12 months subsequent to the first three months of the lease, and also provides for certain rent adjustments to be paid as determined by the landlord. On July 6, 2018, the Company entered into the first amendment of the lease for the Company's principal executive office in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The amended lease is to increase the current 7,941 rentable square feet of office space by 11,471 rentable square feet, together with the right to use common areas and facilities in common with the landlord and other tenants. The term of the lease commences with respect to all of the space in the leased premises on the later to occur of (i) the date upon which landlord delivers the premises to the Company under the terms of the lease with the delivery conditions set forth in the lease satisfied and (ii) November 1, 2018 (the "Lease Commencement Date"). The term of the lease shall end 60 months after the Lease Commencement Date. Under the terms of the lease, following the first month (during which the base rent is $0 ) and the second month (during which the base rent is $15,990 ), the base rent, subject to certain adjustments, for the leased premises will start at approximately $19,412 per month, plus certain operating expenses and taxes, and shall increase on an annual basis and/or as otherwise provided in the lease agreement. In addition, the Company has also entered into various operating leases related to vehicle leases and other IT equipment. Refer to Note 13 "Leases" for further information.  5. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued) The following table summarizes the Companys estimated future minimum commitments as of December 31, 2019:                      Less than        More than  Total 1 Year 1 - 3 Years 3 - 5 Years 5 Years   (in thousands) Revenue interest liability  $ 292,500  $   $   $   $ 292,500 Operating leases   1,741   538   987   216    Total  $ 294,241  $ 538  $ 987  $ 216  $ 292,500  Legal Proceedings On January 12, 2016, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, against the Company and Tim Mayleben, captioned Kevin L. Dougherty v. Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., et al. (No. 16-cv-10089). The lawsuit alleges that the Company and Mr. Mayleben violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 by allegedly failing to disclose in an August 17, 2015, public statement that the FDA would require a cardiovascular outcomes trial before approving the Companys lead product candidate. The lawsuit seeks, among other things, compensatory damages in connection with an allegedly inflated stock price between August 18, 2015, and September 28, 2015, as well as attorneys fees and costs. On May 20, 2016, an amended complaint was filed in the lawsuit and on July 5, 2016, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On December 27, 2016, the court granted the Companys motion to dismiss with prejudice and entered judgment in the Companys favor. On January 24, 2017, the plaintiffs in this lawsuit filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment. In May 2017, the court denied the plaintiffs motion to alter or amend the judgment. On June 19, 2017, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and on September 14, 2017, they filed their opening brief in support of the appeal. The appeal was fully briefed on December 7, 2017, and it was argued before the Sixth Circuit on March 15, 2018. On September 27, 2018, the Sixth Circuit issued an opinion in which it reversed the district courts dismissal and remanded for further proceedings. On October 11, 2018, the Company filed a petition for rehearing en banc and, on October 23, 2018, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals directed plaintiffs to respond to that petition. On December 3, 2018, the Sixth Circuit denied the Companys petition for en banc rehearing, and on December 11, 2018, the case was returned to the federal district court by mandate from the Sixth Circuit. On December 26, 2018, the Company filed an answer to the amended complaint, and on March 28, 2019, the Company filed its amended answer to the amended complaint. The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this matter and is unable to make a meaningful estimate of the amount or range of loss, if any, that could result from an unfavorable outcome. On December 15, 2016, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a derivative lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against Tim Mayleben, Roger Newton, Mary McGowan, Nicole Vitullo, Dov Goldstein, Daniel Janney, Antonio Gotto Jr., Mark McGovern, Gilbert Omenn, Scott Braunstein, and Patrick Enright. The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company when they made or approved improper statements on August 17, 2015, regarding the Companys lead product candidates path to FDA approval, and failed to ensure that reliable systems of internal controls were in place at the Company. On February 8, 2019, the Company and defendants filed a motion to dismiss the derivative lawsuit. On April 23, 2019, the plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss the derivative lawsuit, and the Company filed a reply brief on May 15, 2019. On November 6, 2019, the court held a hearing on the motion to dismiss. On February 13, 2020, the court granted the motion to dismiss with prejudice and entered judgment in the Companys favor. On May 7, 2018, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, captioned Kevin Bailey v. Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., et al. (No. 18-cv-11438 ). An amended complaint was filed on October 22, 2018, against the Company and certain directors and officers. The amended complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 based on allegedly making false and misleading statements and omissions about the safety and tolerability of bempedoic acid, and specifically facts and circumstances surrounding the Phase 3 trial results for bempedoic acid that the Company announced on May 2, 2018. On November 13, 2018, the Company filed a motion to  5. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued) dismiss the amended complaint, and that motion was fully briefed on December 18, 2018. The lawsuit sought, among other things, compensatory damages in connection with an allegedly inflated stock price between February 22, 2017, and May 22, 2018, as well as attorneys fees and costs. On February 19, 2019, the court granted the Companys motion to dismiss with prejudice and entered judgment in the Companys favor.