Insiders ranked by realized 90-day signed return on their open-market trades at Biovie Inc.. Minimum 3 scored trades. Returns are signed - a sale followed by a rally counts against the insider.
Year-over-year tone shift - average net-tone change across Risk Factors and MD&A vs the prior 10-K. This filing is -0.25pp more bearish than last year's.
Why YoY instead of absolute: the LM lexicon has ~6.6× more negative words than positive (legal/risk-disclosure language is heavy on hedging), so every 10-K reads bearish on raw tone. Year-over-year change strips that bias and surfaces the actual shift in management's framing.
Tone shift by section
The two components the gauge averages: how Risk Factors and MD&A each shifted in net tone versus last year's 10-K. The headline above is their average, so a green needle over a soft section just means the other section carried it.
Real-time Form 4 intelligence. Smarter insider tracking.
Flat
Net-tone change vs last year's 10-K.
MD&A
-0.41pp
Lean -
Net-tone change vs last year's 10-K.
Per-snippet highlights
Sentence-level sentiment highlighting with category and subcategory filters is coming once the snippet-scoring pipeline lands. For now, dig into the actual section text on the Sections tab.
Language change vs prior 10-K
Risk Factors (Item 1A) - words with the biggest YoY frequency increase
Negative rising
decline+3
claims+1
adversely+1
alleging+1
violations+1
Positive rising
benefit+1
Risk Factors (Item 1A)
22,011 words
ITEM 1A.
RISK FACTORS
Our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects are subject to the following risks. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently foreseeable to us may also impair our business operations. If any of the following risks or the risks described elsewhere in this report actually occurs, our business, financial condition or operating results could be materially adversely affected. In such case, the trading price of our Company’s Class A Common Stock, par value $0.0001 (“Common Stock”) could decline, and our stockholders may lose all or part of their investment.
This Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “believes,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “predict” or “anticipation” or the negative thereof or other variations thereon or comparable terminology. Actual results could differ materially from those discussed in the forward- looking statements as a result of certain factors, including those set forth below and elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
Risk Factor Summary
Our business operations are subject to numerous risks, factors and uncertainties, including those outside of our control, which could cause our actual results to be , including risks regarding the following:
Language change vs prior 10-K
MD&A (Item 7) - words with the biggest YoY frequency increase
Negative rising
complications+3
decline+2
closing+2
threatening+2
suffering+1
Positive rising
enhancement+1
progressed+1
good+1
advantage+1
MD&A (Item 7)
2,936 words
ITEM 7.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion of the Company’s financial condition and the results of operations should be read in conjunction with the Financial Statements and Notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this report.
Overview
BioVie Inc. (the “Company” or “we” or “our”) is a clinical-stage company developing innovative drug therapies for the treatment of neurological and neurodegenerative disorders and advanced liver disease.
Neurodegenerative Disease Program
The Company acquired the biopharmaceutical assets of NeurMedix, Inc. (“NeurMedix”) a privately held clinical-stage pharmaceutical company and a related party in June 2021. The acquired assets included NE3107 (or “bezisterim”). Bezisterim, the approved generic name for NE3107 is an investigational, novel, orally administered small molecule that is thought to inhibit inflammation-driven insulin resistance and major pathological inflammatory cascades with a novel mechanism of action. There is emerging scientific consensus that both inflammation and insulin resistance may play fundamental roles in the development of Alzheimer’s disease (“AD”) and Parkinson’s disease (“PD”), and bezisterim could, if approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), represent an entirely new medical approach to treating these devastating conditions affecting an estimated 6 million Americans suffering from AD, 1 million Americans from PD and Long COVID affects approximately 20 million adults in the US, and millions more worldwide.
If our third party contractors do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines or do not successfully perform and comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of or commercialize our product candidates.
Successful development of biopharmaceuticals is highly uncertain and is dependent on numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control.
The concentration of our assets within certain financial institutions could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are currently subject to securities class action litigation and may be subject to similar or other litigation in the future, which may have a material adverse effect on our business.
We have no products approved for commercial sale, have never generated any revenues, and may never achieve revenues or profitability, which could cause us to cease operations.
We are a development stage company with a limited operating history, making it difficult for you to evaluate our business and your investment.
If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve generic versions of any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval, or such authorities do not grant our products sufficient, or any, periods of exclusivity before approving generic versions of our products, the sales of our products could be adversely affected.
If we fail to obtain or maintain Orphan Drug exclusivity for BIV201, we will have to rely on other potential marketing exclusivity and on our intellectual property rights.
We will need to raise substantial additional capital in the future to fund our operations, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
We have limited experience in drug development and may not be able to successfully develop any drugs, which would cause us to cease operations.
Development of pharmaceutical products is a time-consuming process, subject to a number of risks, many of which are outside of our control.
We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular drug candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on drug candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.
We have no manufacturing experience, and the failure to comply with all applicable manufacturing regulations and requirements could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
We do not currently have the sales and marketing personnel necessary to sell products, and the failure to hire and retain such staff could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Even if we were to successfully develop approvable drugs, we will not be able to sell these drugs if we or our third-party manufacturers fail to comply with manufacturing regulations.
We must comply with significant and complex government regulations, compliance with which may delay or prevent the commercialization of our product candidates.
We may face business disruption and related risks if there is another pandemic.
The loss or unavailability of our management could put us at a competitive disadvantage.
We may not be able to attract and retain highly skilled personnel.
We may be unable to compete with enterprises in the highly competitive biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries and those equipped with more substantial resources than us.
There may be conflicts of interest among our officers, directors and stockholders.
We indemnify our officers and directors against liability to us and our security holders, and such indemnification could increase our operating costs.
Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property
We may be unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates.
If we fail to comply with our obligations in the licensing and collaboration agreements, our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be harmed.
Compliance with federal regulations such as “march-in” rights may limit our exclusive rights and our ability to contract with non-U.S. manufacturers.
Patent terms may be inadequate to establish our competitive position on our drug candidates for an adequate amount of time.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Changes in patent law could diminish the value of our patents and impair our ability to protect our drug candidate.
We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful, and our patents could be found invalid or unenforceable.
Our failure to identify relevant third-party patents or correctly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of patents, we may be subject to infringementclaims or may not be able to develop our drug candidates.
Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights.
We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that we or our employees have infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.
We may be subject to claimschallenging the inventorship of our patents and other intellectual property.
Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.
Intellectual property litigation may lead to unfavorable publicity that harms our reputation and causes the market price of shares of our Common Stock to decline.
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock
Our stock price is and may continue to be volatile and you may not be able to resell our Common Stock at or above the price you paid.
You may experience future dilution as a result of future equity offerings or if we issue shares subject to options, warrants, stock awards or other arrangements.
The reverse stock split effected on July 7, 2025 has caused and could further cause our stock price to decline relative to its value before the reverse stock split and decrease the liquidity of shares of our common stock.
The market price and trading volume of our Common Stock may be volatile.
Any failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could harm us.
Limited trading market for our Common Stock could make it difficult to liquidate an investment.
The lack of public company experience of our management team could negatively affect our business.
Investors may be less attracted to our Common Stock because we are as a smaller reporting company.
Additional audit and legal costs associated with periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act will negatively affect our ability to earn a profit.
Because we do not intend to pay any cash dividends on our Common Stock, our stockholders will not be able to receive a return on their shares unless they sell them.
We are authorized to issue “blank check” preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could adversely impact the rights of holders of our securities.
Provisions in our Articles of Incorporation, our Bylaws, and Nevada law might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or changes in our management and, therefore, depress the trading price of our Common Stock.
Risks Relating to Our Business and Industry
We rely and will continue to rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines or do not successfully perform and comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of or commercialize our product candidates.
We depend, and will continue to depend, on third parties, including, but not limited to, contract research organizations (“CROs”), clinical trial sites and clinical trial principal investigators, contract laboratories, IRBs, manufacturers, suppliers, and other third parties to conduct our clinical trials, including those for our drug candidates bezisterim (NE3107) and BIV201. We rely heavily on these third parties over the course of our clinical trials, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we retain ultimate responsibility for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the protocol and applicable legal, regulatory, and scientific standards and regulations, and our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and these third parties are required to comply with cGCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for the conduct of clinical trials on product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce cGCPs through periodic inspections and for-cause inspections of clinical trial principal investigators and trial sites. If, due to the failure of either the Company or a third party, a clinical trial fails to comply with applicable cGCPs, FDA’s IND requirements, other applicable regulatory requirements, or requirements set forth in the applicable IRB-approved protocol, the Company may be required to conduct additional clinical trials to support our marketing applications, which would delay the regulatory approval process. For example, our drug product candidate bezisterim (NE3107) was cleared by FDA for use in a Phase 3, randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, multicenter study in subjects who have mild to moderate AD. Enrollment in that trial began in August 2021, with a planned primary completion in late 2022/early 2023. On November 29, 2023, the Company announced topline efficacy data from its Phase 3 clinical trial (NCT04669028) of bezisterim (NE3107) in the treatment of mild to moderate AD. Upon trial completion, as the Company began the process of analyzing the trial data, the Company found significant deviations from the protocol and cGCP violations at 15 study sites (virtually all of which were from one geographic area). This highly unusual level of suspectedimproprieties led the Company to exclude all patients from these sites. We subsequently notified FDA’s OSI of such significant deviations from study protocol, the suspectedimproprieties, and the study sites involved. The identification of significant deviations from study protocol and numerous GCP violations at multiple study sites raised questions regarding the validity and robustness of data from these study sites. The unplanned exclusion of so many patients left the trial underpowered for its primary endpoints. However, based on the remaining dataset from those other sites determined to be in compliance with the protocol and GCP’s, a preliminary signal of efficacy was detected. The Company is considering: (1) employing the adaptive trial feature of the protocol to continue enrolling patients to achieve statistical significance; and/or (2) designing a new Phase 3 study of bezisterim (NE3107) that leverages the most recent scientific literature relating to AD along with the company's understanding regarding the effects of bezisterim (NE3107) in persons with mild-moderate AD.
Although we design the clinical trials for our product candidates, our CROs are tasked with facilitating and monitoring these trials. As a result, many aspects of our clinical development programs, including site and investigator selection, and the conduct, timing, and monitoring of the study, is outside our direct control, either partially or in whole. Our reliance on third parties to conduct clinical trials also results in less direct control over the collection, management, and quality of data developed through clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own employees. Communicating with third parties can also be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. Our business may be impacted if any of these third parties violates applicable federal, state, or foreign laws and/or regulations, including but not limited to FDA’s IND regulations, cGCPs, fraud and abuse or falseclaims laws, healthcare privacy and data security laws, or provide us or government agencies with inaccurate, misleading, or incomplete data.
Successful development of biopharmaceuticals is highly uncertain and is dependent on numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control.
Product candidates that appear promising in the early phases of development may fail to reach the market for several reasons. Pre-clinical study results may show the product candidate to be less effective than desired (e.g., the study failed to meet its primary endpoints) or to have harmful or problematic side effects. Product candidates may fail to receive the necessary regulatory approvals or may be delayed in receiving such approvals. Among other things, such delays may be caused by slow enrollment in clinical studies; length of time to achieve study endpoints; additional time requirements for data analysis; IND and later new drug application preparation; discussions with the FDA; an FDA request for additional pre-clinical or clinical data; unexpected safety or manufacturing issues; manufacturing costs; pricing or reimbursement issues; clinical sites deviating from the trial protocol, committing scientific misconduct, or other violations of regulatory requirements - which can render data from those sites unusable in support of regulatory approval; or other factors that make the product not economical. Proprietary rights of others and their competing products and technologies may also prevent the product from being commercialized.
Success in pre-clinical and early clinical studies does not ensure that large-scale clinical studies will be successful. Clinical results are frequently susceptible to varying interpretations that may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approvals. The length of time necessary to complete clinical studies and to submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one product to the next, and may be difficult to predict. There can be no assurance that any of our products will develop successfully, and the failure to develop our products will have a materially adverse effect on our business and will cause you to lose all of your investment.
The concentration of our assets within a certain financial institution could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
As of July 31, 2025, the Company had cash deposited in a certain financial institution in excess of federally insured levels. The Company regularly monitors the financial stability of these financial institutions and believes that it is not exposed to any significant credit risk in cash and cash equivalents. Bank failures, events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance, or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, or concerns or rumors about such events, may lead to liquidity constraints. In 2023, certain U.S. government banking regulators took steps to intervene in the operations of certain financial institutions due to liquidity concerns, which caused general heightened uncertainties in financial markets. While previous bank failures have not had a material direct impact on the Company’s operations, if further liquidity and financial stabilityconcerns arise with respect to banks and financial institutions, either nationally or in specific regions, the Company’s ability to access cash or enter into new financing arrangements may be threatened, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are currently subject to securities class action litigation and may be subject to similar or other litigation in the future, all of which will require significant management time and attention, result in significant legal expenses and may result in unfavorable outcomes, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition, and negatively affect the price of our Common Stock.
We are, and may in the future become, subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in or outside the ordinary course of business. For example, On January 19, 2024, a purported shareholder class action complaint, captioned Eric Olmstead v. BioVie Inc. et al. , No. 3:24-cv-00035, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, naming the Company and certain of its officers as defendants. On February 22, 2024, a second, related putative securities class action was filed in the same court asserting similar claimsagainst the same defendants, captioned Way v. BioVie Inc. et al. , No. 2:24-cv-00361. On April 15, 2024, the court consolidated these two actions under the caption In re BioVie Inc. Securities Litigation , No. 3:24-cv-00035, appointed the lead plaintiff, and approved selection of the lead counsel. On June 21, 2024, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint, alleging that the defendants made material misrepresentations and/or omissions of material fact relating to the Company’s business, operations, compliance, and prospects, including information related to the NM101 Phase 3 study and trial of bezisterim (NE3107) in mild to moderate probable Alzheimer’s Disease, in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The class action is on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s securities during the period from December 7, 2022 through November 28, 2023 and seeks unspecified monetary damages on behalf of the putative class and an award of costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees. In August 2024, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and that motion was fully briefed in December 2024. On March 27, 2025, the court denied the motion to dismiss, and the parties are now engaged in the early stages of the discovery process. In addition, on December 30, 2024 and April 28, 2025, respectively, two shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada by putative stockholders, allegedly on behalf of the Company, that piggy-back on the securities class action, alleging, among other things, that the defendantsbreached their fiduciary duties by causing or failing to prevent the securities violationsalleged in the securities class action. The Company believes that all of these claims are without merit and intends to defend vigorously against them, but there can be no assurances as to the outcome.
It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed, or allegations received from stockholders, with respect to these same or other matters and also naming us and/or our officers and directors as defendants. Such lawsuits and any other related lawsuits are subject to inherent uncertainties, and the actual defense and disposition costs will depend upon many unknown factors. The outcome of such lawsuits is necessarily uncertain. We could be forced to expend significant resources in the defense of the pending lawsuits and any additional lawsuits, and we may not prevail. In addition, we may incur substantial legal fees and costs in connection with such lawsuits. We currently are not able to estimate the possible cost to us from these matters, as the pending lawsuits are currently at an early stage, and we cannot be certain how long it may take to resolve the pending lawsuits or the possible amount of any damages that we may be required to pay. Monitoring, initiating and defendingagainst legal actions is time-consuming for our management, is likely to be expensive and may detract from our ability to fully focus our internal resources on our business activities. We could be forced to expend significant resources in the settlement or defense of the pending lawsuit and any potential future lawsuits, and we may not prevail in such lawsuits.
Although we have insurance coverage that we believe applies to these actions, the coverage is subject to a $2 million deductible. That means that we are responsible for the first $2 million of loss arising from these actions, which includes both defense costs and damages, before any insurance coverage will apply. Furthermore, our insurance coverage may be insufficient, and our assets may be insufficient to cover any amounts that exceed our insurance coverage, and we may have to pay damage awards or otherwise may enter into a settlement arrangement in connection with such claims. A decision adverse to our interests in the pending lawsuits, or in similar or related litigation, could result in the payment of substantial damages, or possibly fines, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, our stock price, cash flow, results of operations and financial condition. We have not established any reserve for any potential liability relating to the pending lawsuits or any potential future lawsuits. Any such payments or settlement arrangements in current or future litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition. In addition, such lawsuits may make it more difficult to finance our operations and affect our ability to make payments for damages.
We have no products approved for commercial sale, have never generated any revenues and may never achieve revenues or profitability, which could cause us to cease operations.
We have no products approved for commercial sale and, to date, we have not generated any revenue. Our ability to generate revenue depends heavily on (a) successful completion of one or more development programs demonstrating in human clinical trials that BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107), our product candidates, are safe and effective; (b) our ability to seek and obtain regulatory approvals, including, without limitation, with respect to the indications we are seeking; (c) successful commercialization of our product candidates; and (d) market acceptance of our products. There are no assurances that we will achieve any of the forgoing objectives. Furthermore, our product candidates are in the development stage, and have not been fully evaluated in human clinical trials. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates we will not achieve revenues or profitability in the foreseeable future, if at all. If we are unable to generate revenues or achieveprofitability, we may be unable to continue our operations.
We are a development stage company with a limited operating history, making it difficult for you to evaluate our business and your investment.
Although our Company was incorporated on April 10, 2013, we are a development stage biopharmaceutical company with potential therapies that have not been fully evaluated in clinical trials, and our operations are subject to all of the risks inherent in the establishment of a new business enterprise, including but not limited to the absence of an operating history, the lack of commercialized products, insufficient capital, expected substantial and continual losses for the foreseeable future, limited experience in dealing with regulatory issues, the lack of manufacturing experience and limited marketing experience, possible reliance on third parties for the development and commercialization of our proposed products, a competitive environment characterized by numerous, well-established and well capitalized competitors and reliance on key personnel.
Since inception, we have not established any revenues or operations that would provide financial stability in the long term, and there can be no assurance that we will realize our plans on our projected timetable in order to reach sustainable or profitable operations.
Investors are subject to all the risks incident to the creation and development of a new business and each investor should be prepared to withstand a complete loss of his, her or its investment. Furthermore, the accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that we will continue as a going concern. We have not emerged from the development stage, and may be unable to raise further equity. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
Because we are subject to these risks, you may have a difficult time evaluating our business and your investment in our Company. Our ability to become profitable depends primarily on our ability to develop drugs, to obtain approval for such drugs, and if approved, to successfully commercialize our drugs, our research and development (“R&D”) efforts, including the timing and cost of clinical trials; and our ability to enter into favorablealliances with third-parties who can provide substantial capabilities in clinical development, regulatory affairs, sales, marketing and distribution.
Even if we successfully develop and market BIV201 and/or bezisterim (NE3107), we may not generate sufficient or sustainable revenue to achieve or sustain profitability, which could cause us to cease operations and cause you to lose all of your investment.
If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve generic versions of any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval, or such authorities do not grant our products sufficient, or any, periods of exclusivity before approving generic versions of our products, the sales of our products could be adversely affected.
Once an NDA is approved, the product covered thereby becomes a “reference listed drug” (“RLD”), in the FDA’s publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” commonly known as the Orange Book. Other manufacturers may seek approval of generic versions of reference listed drugs through submission of abbreviated new drug applications (“ANDAs”) in the United States. In support of an ANDA, a generic manufacturer need not conduct clinical trials. Rather, the applicant generally must show that its product has the same active ingredient(s), dosage form, strength, route of administration and conditions of use or labeling as the reference listed drug and that the generic version is bioequivalent to the reference listed drug, meaning it is absorbed in the body at the same rate and to the same extent as the RLD. Generic products may be significantly less costly to bring to market than the reference listed drug and companies that produce generic products are generally able to offer them at lower prices. Moreover, generic versions of RLDs are often automatically substituted for the RLD by pharmacies when dispensing a prescription written for the RLD. Thus, following the introduction of a generic drug, a significant percentage of the sales of any branded product or reference listed drug is typically lost to the generic product.
The FDA may not approve an ANDA for a generic product until any applicable period of non-patent exclusivity for the reference listed drug has expired. The FDCA provides a period of five years of non-patent exclusivity for a new drug containing a new chemical entity (“NCE”). An NCE is an active ingredient that has not previously been approved by FDA in any other NDA. Specifically, in cases where such exclusivity has been granted, an ANDA may not be submitted to the FDA until the expiration of five years unless the submission is accompanied by a Paragraph IV certification that a patent covering the reference listed drug is either invalid or will not be infringed by the generic product, in which case the applicant may submit its application four years following approval of the reference listed drug. If an ANDA is submitted to FDA with a Paragraph IV Certification, the generic applicant must also provide a “Paragraph IV Notification” to the holder of the NDA for the RLD and to the owner of the listed patent(s) being challenged by the ANDA applicant, providing a detailed written statement of the basis for the ANDA applicant’s position that the relevant patent(s) is invalid or would not be infringed. If the patent owner brings a patent infringement lawsuit against the ANDA applicant within 45 days of the Paragraph IV Notification, FDA approval of the ANDA will be automatically stayed for 30 months, or until 7-1/2 years after the NDA approval if the generic application was filed between 4 years and 5 years after the NDA approval. Any such stay will be terminated earlier if the court rules that the patent is invalid or would not be infringed.
Competition that our products may face from generic versions of our products could materially and adversely impact our future revenue, profitability and cash flows and substantially limit our ability to obtain a return on the investments we have made in those product candidates.
If we fail to obtain or maintain Orphan Drug exclusivity for BIV201, we will have to rely on other potential marketing exclusivity, and on our intellectual property rights, which may reduce the length of time that we can prevent competitors from selling generic versions of BIV201.
We have obtained Orphan Drug Designation for BIV201 (terlipressin) in the U.S. for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome on November 21, 2018 and treatment of ascites due to all etiologies except cancer on September 8, 2016. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an Orphan Drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined, in part, as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the U.S. In the European Union (“EU”), Orphan Drug designation may be granted to drugs intended to treat, diagnose or prevent a life-threatening or chronically debilitating disease having a prevalence of no more than five in 10,000 people in the EU, and which meet other specified criteria. The company that first obtains FDA approval for a designated Orphan Drug for the associated rare disease may receive a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity during which time FDA may not approve another application for the same drug for the same orphan disease or condition. Orphan Drug Exclusivity does not prevent FDA approval of another application for the same drug for a different disease or condition, or of an application for a different drug for the same rare disease or condition. Orphan Drug exclusive marketing rights may be lost under several circumstances, including a later determination by the FDA that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug. Similar regulations are available in the EU with a ten-year period of market exclusivity.
Even though BioVie has obtained two Orphan Drug Designations for its lead product candidate, terlipressin, for treatment of ascites and for treatment of hepatorenal syndrome, and may seek other Orphan Drug Designations for BIV201, and Orphan Drug Designation for other product candidates, there is no assurance that BioVie will be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular rare indication. Further, even though BioVie has obtained Orphan Drug Designations for its lead product candidate, or even if BioVie obtains Orphan Drug Designation for other potential product candidates, such designation may not effectively protect BioVie from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition and the same drug can be approved for different conditions and potentially used off-label in the Orphan indication. Even after an Orphan Drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve another competing drug with the same active ingredient for the same condition for several reasons, including, if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior due to being safer or more effective or because it makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan Drug Designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug, nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.
In addition, other companies have received Orphan Drug designations for terlipressin. Mallinckrodt Hospital Products IP Limited received Orphan Drug designation in 2004 for terlipressin for the treatment of Hepatorenal Syndrome. Mallinckrodt has already gained FDA approval for its product, lyophilized terlipressin acetate for bolus intravenous administration for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome Type 1 in September 2022. PharmaIN Corporation received Orphan Drug Designation in 2012 for PGC-C12E-terlipressin for treatment of ascites due to all etiologies except cancer. In addition, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. received Orphan Drug designation in 1986 for terlipressin for the treatment of bleeding esophageal varices. If one of those or any other company with Orphan Drug Designation for the same drug as ours for the same proposed disease or condition receives FDA approval and Orphan Drug Exclusivity before our product is approved, approval of our drug(s) for the orphan indication may be blocked for seven years by the other company’s Orphan Exclusivity and they may obtain a competitive advantage even after the exclusivity period expires associated with being the first to market.
We will need to raise substantial additional capital in the future to fund our operations and we may be unable to raise such funds when needed and on acceptable terms, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Developing biopharmaceutical products, including conducting pre-clinical studies and clinical trials and establishing manufacturing capabilities, requires substantial funding. Additional financing will be required to fund the research and development of our product candidates. We have not generated any product revenues, and do not expect to generate any revenues until, and only if, we develop, and receive approval to sell our product candidates from the FDA and other regulatory authorities for our product candidates.
We may not have the resources to complete the development and commercialization of any of our proposed product candidates. We will require additional financing to further the clinical development of our product candidates. In the event that we cannot obtain the required financing, we will be unable to complete the development necessary to file an NDA with the FDA for BIV201 or bezisterim (NE3107). This will delay or require termination of research and development programs, preclinical studies and clinical trials, material characterization studies, regulatory processes, the establishment of our own laboratory or a search for third party marketing partners to market our products for us, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
The amount of capital we may need will depend on many factors, including the progress, timing and scope of our research and development programs, the progress, timing and scope of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, the time and cost necessary to obtain regulatory approvals, the time and cost necessary to establish our own marketing capabilities or to seek marketing partners, the time and cost necessary to respond to technological and market developments, changes made or new developments in our existing collaborative, licensing and other commercial relationships, and new collaborative, licensing and other commercial relationships that we may establish.
Until we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue, if ever, we expect to finance future cash needs through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, or corporate collaboration and licensing arrangements. Additional funds may not be available when we need them on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If adequate funds are not available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more of our research or development programs or our commercialization efforts. In addition, we could be forced to discontinue product development and reduce or foregoattractive business opportunities. To the extent that we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience additional significant dilution, and debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. To the extent that we raise additional funds through collaboration and licensing arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish some rights to our technologies or our product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. We may seek to access the public or private capital markets whenever conditions are favorable, even if we do not have an immediate need for additional capital at that time.
Our fixed expenses, such as rent and other contractual commitments, will likely increase in the future, as we may enter into leases for new facilities and capital equipment and/or enter into additional licenses and collaborative agreements. Therefore, if we fail to raise substantial additional capital to fund these expenses, we could be forced to cease operations, which could cause you to lose all of your investment.
We have limited experience in drug development and may not be able to successfully develop any drugs, which would cause us to cease operations.
We have never successfully developed a new drug and brought it to market. Our management and clinical teams have experience in drug development but they may not be able to successfully develop any drugs. Our ability to achieve revenues and profitability in our business will depend on, among other things, our ability to develop products internally or to obtain rights to them from others on favorable terms; complete laboratory testing and human studies; obtain and maintain necessary intellectual property rights to our products; successfully complete regulatory review to obtain requisite governmental agency approvals; enter into arrangements with third parties to manufacture our products on our behalf; and enter into arrangements with third parties to provide sales and marketing functions. If we are unable to achieve these objectives we will be forced to cease operations and you will lose all of your investment.
Development of pharmaceutical products is a time-consuming process, subject to a number of risks, many of which are outside of our control. Consequently, we can provide no assurance that our product candidates will obtain regulatory approval, and if we are unsuccessful or fail to timely develop new drugs, we could be forced to discontinue our operations.
Development and extensive testing will be required to determine the technical feasibility and commercial viability of BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107). Our success will depend on our ability to achieve scientific and technological advances and to translate such advances into reliable, commercially competitive drugs on a timely basis. Drugs that we may develop are not likely to be commercially available, at a minimum, for several years, if ever. Our drug product candidate, BIV201 (continuous infusion terlipressin), was cleared by the FDA to undergo testing in a mid-stage (Phase 2b) clinical trial for the treatment of refractory ascites due to cirrhosis. On June 24, 2021, we announced that the first patient has been enrolled in this study. In March 2023, the open-label trial was stopped after 15 of the planned 30 patients were enrolled, and an evaluation of those completed patients assessed. Encouraging data from these patients appeared to show that treatment with BIV201 plus SOC resulted in a reduction in ascites fluid accumulation during treatment versus pre-treatment. In June 2023 and December 2025, the Company requested and subsequently received guidance from the FDA regarding the design and endpoints for definitive clinical testing of BIV201 for the treatment of chronic liver cirrhosis. The Company is currently finalizing the protocol design for the Phase 3 study of BIV201 with a focus on demonstrating clinical benefit through a composite primary endpoint of complications and disease progression in patients with cirrhosis and ascites who have recently recovered from AKI.
The proposed development schedules for our product candidates may be affected by a variety of factors, including technological difficulties, proprietary technology of others, and changes in government regulation, many of which will not be within our control. In June 2021, FDA approved the drug aducanumab for treatment of Alzheimer’s despite a strong recommendation against approval from an FDA advisory committee. That FDA approval has generated significant medical and political controversy, including a Congressional investigation, announced on June 25, 2021, into the basis for FDA’s approval decision. That investigation, other potential investigations, and negative publicity of FDA’s approval decision could adversely impact the agency’s oversight of our clinical development program, how the agency may view and act upon any NDA we may file for bezisterim (NE3107), and the commercial viability of bezisterim (NE3107) if it were to be approved and marketed.
Any delay or further delay in the development, introduction or marketing of our product candidates could result either in such drugs being marketed at a time when their cost and performance characteristics would not be competitive in the marketplace or in the shortening of their commercial lives. In light of the long-term nature of our projects and other risk factors described elsewhere in this document, we may not be able to successfully complete the development or marketing of any drugs, which could cause us to cease operations.
From time to time, the FDA may have feedback on our clinical trial designs, including for example certain of our endpoints and outcome measures. As a result, we may consider revisions to our protocols which may delayprogress in implementing our trials. We may fail to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidate(s) if it is found to be unsafe or ineffective in clinical trials; does not receive necessary approval from the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies; fails to conform to a changing standard of care for the disease it seeks to treat; or is less effective or more expensive than current or alternative treatment methods.
Drug development failure can occur at any stage of clinical trials and as a result of many factors, there can be no assurance that we or our collaborators will reach our anticipated clinical targets. Even if the trials are successfully completed, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and we cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. We cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will view our product candidates as having efficacy even if positive results are observed in clinical trials. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the clinical trial protocols, and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. If the results of our ongoing or future clinical trials are inconclusive with respect to the efficacy of our product candidates, if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical and clinically meaningful significance, or if there are safety concerns associated with our product candidates, we may be delayed in obtaining marketing approval, if at all. Additionally, any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications. We also do not know what the long-term effects of exposure to our product candidates will be. Furthermore, our product candidates may be used in combination with other treatments and there can be no assurance that such use will not lead to unique or unexpected safety issues.
Failure to complete clinical trials or to prove that our product candidates are safe and effective would have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue and could require us to reduce the scope of or discontinue our operations, which could cause you to lose all of your investment.
We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular drug candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on drug candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.
Because we have limited human capital and financial resources, we focus on research programs and drug candidates that we identify for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other drug candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial drugs or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and drug candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable drugs. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular drug candidate, we may relinquishvaluable rights to that drug candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such drug candidate.
At any time and for any reason, we may determine that one or more of our discovery programs or preclinical or clinical drug candidates or programs does not have sufficient potential to warrant the allocation of resources toward such program or drug candidate. Accordingly, we may choose not to develop a potential drug candidate or elect to suspend, deprioritize or terminate one or more of our discovery programs or preclinical or clinical drug candidates or programs. For example, BIV201 has received Orphan Drug designation for HRS. On June 23, 2021, we announced that FDA has provided guidance on our planned Phase 3 clinical trial of BIV201 in (HRS-AKI) and have since reached agreement on the key elements of the trial design. Thereafter, we deprioritized HRS-AKI program to focus on bezisterim (NE3107). When we suspend, deprioritize or terminate a program or drug candidate in which we have invested significant resources, we will have expended resources on a program that will not provide a full return on our investment and may have missed the opportunity to have allocated those resources to potentially more productive uses, including existing or future programs or drug candidates.
We have no manufacturing experience, and the failure to comply with all applicable manufacturing regulations and requirements could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
We have never manufactured products in the highly regulated environment of pharmaceutical manufacturing, and our team has limited experience in the manufacture of drug therapies. There are numerous regulations and requirements that must be maintained to obtain licensure and permitting required prior to the commencement of manufacturing, as well as additional requirements to continue manufacturing pharmaceutical products. We currently do not own or lease facilities that could be used to manufacture any products that might be developed by us, and have contracted with an experienced Contract Manufacturing Organization (“CMO”) to perform the manufacturing of our new product candidates BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107). In addition, we do not have the resources at this time to acquire or lease suitable facilities. If we or our CMO fail to comply with regulations, to obtain the necessary licenses and knowhow or to obtain the requisite financing in order to comply with all applicable regulations and to own or lease the required facilities in order to manufacture our products, we could be forced to cease operations, which would cause you to lose all of your investment.
In addition, the FDA and other regulatory authorities require that product candidates and drug products be manufactured according to cGMP. Any failure by our third-party manufacturers to comply with cGMP could lead to a shortage of BIV201 and NE3107. In addition, such failure could be the basis for action by the FDA to withdraw approval, if granted to us, and for other regulatory enforcement action, including Warning Letters, product seizure, injunction or other civil or criminalpenalties.
BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107) and any other product candidates that we develop may have to compete with other products and product candidates for access to manufacturing facilities. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that are both capable of manufacturing for us and willing to do so. If we need to find another source of drug substance or drug product manufacturing for BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107), we may not be able to identify, or reach agreement with, commercial-scale manufacturers on commercially reasonably terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we will need to develop our own commercial-scale manufacturing capabilities, which would: impact commercialization of BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107) in the U.S. and other countries where it may be approved; require a capital investment by us that could be quite costly; and increase our operating expenses.
If our existing third-party manufacturers, or the third parties that we engage in the future to manufacture a product for commercial sale or for our clinical trials, should cease to continue to do so for any reason, we likely would experience significant delays in obtaining sufficient quantities of product for us to meet commercial demand or to advance our clinical trials while we identify and qualify replacement suppliers. If for any reason we are unable to obtain adequate supplies of BIV201 or any other product candidate that we develop, or the drug substances used to manufacture it, it will be more difficult for us to compete effectively, generate revenue, and further develop our products. In addition, if we are unable to assure a sufficient quantity of the drug for patients with rare diseases or conditions, we may lose any Orphan Drug exclusivity to which the product otherwise would be entitled.
We do not currently have the sales and marketing personnel necessary to sell products, and the failure to hire and retain such staff could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
We are an early stage development company with limited resources. Even if we had products available for sale, which we currently do not, we have not secured sales and marketing staff at this early stage of operations to sell products. We cannot generate sales without sales or marketing staff and must rely on others to provide any sales or marketing services until such personnel are secured, if ever. If we fail to hire and retain the requisite expertise in order to market and sell our products or fail to raise sufficient capital in order to afford to pay such sales or marketing staff, then we could be forced to cease operations and you could lose all of your investment.
Even if we were to successfully develop approvable drugs, we will not be able to sell these drugs if we or our third-party manufacturers fail to comply with manufacturing regulations, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
If we were to successfully develop approvable drugs, before we can begin selling these drugs, we must obtain regulatory approval of our manufacturing facility and process or the manufacturing facility and process of the third party or parties with whom we may outsource our manufacturing activities. In addition, the manufacture of our products must comply with the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practices regulations, commonly known as GMP regulations. The GMP regulations govern quality control and documentation policies and procedures. Our manufacturing facilities, if any in the future, and the manufacturing facilities of our third-party manufacturers will be continually subject to inspection by the FDA and other state, local and foreign regulatory authorities, before and after product approval. We cannot guarantee that we, or any potential third-party manufacturer of our products, will be able to comply with the GMP regulations or other applicable manufacturing regulations. The failure to comply with all necessary regulations would have a materially adverse effect on our business and could force us to cease operations and you could lose all of your investment.
We must comply with significant and complex government regulations, compliance with which may delay or prevent the commercialization of our product candidates, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
The R&D, manufacture and marketing of drug product candidates are subject to regulation, primarily by the FDA in the United States and by comparable authorities in other countries. These national agencies and other federal, state, local and foreign entities regulate, among other things, R&D activities (including testing in animals and in humans) and the testing, manufacturing, handling, labeling, storage, record keeping, approval, advertising and promotion of the product that we are developing. Noncompliance with applicable requirements can result in various adverse consequences, including approval delays or refusals to approve drug licenses or other applications, suspension or termination of clinical investigations, revocation of approvals previously granted, warning letters, fines, criminalprosecution, recalls or seizures of products, injunctionsagainst shipping drugs and total or partial suspension of production and/or refusal to allow a company to enter into governmental supply contracts.
The process of obtaining FDA approval is costly and time consuming. Current FDA requirements for a new human drug or biological product to be marketed in the United States include, among other things: (a) the successful conclusion of pre-clinical laboratory and animal tests, if appropriate, to gain preliminary information on the product’s safety; (b) filing with the FDA of an IND application to conduct human clinical trials for drugs or biologics; (c) the successful completion of adequate and well-controlled human clinical investigations to establish the safety and efficacy of the product for its recommended use; and (d) filing by a company and acceptance and approval by the FDA of a NDA for a drug product or a BLA for a biological product to allow commercial distribution of the drug or biologic. A delay in one or more of the procedural steps outlined above could be harmful to us in terms of getting our product candidates through clinical testing and to market, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
The FDA, clinical investigators, Data Safety Monitoring Boards, and IRBs review the ongoing conduct of, and emerging safety information from, clinical trials and may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of clinical trials at any time if it believes the product candidate exposes clinical subjects to an unacceptable health risk. Investigational drugs used in clinical studies must be produced in compliance with cGMP rules pursuant to FDA regulations.
Development, approval, and sales outside the United States of products that we develop will also be subject to regulatory requirements governing human clinical trials and marketing for drugs and biological products and devices. The requirements vary widely from country to country, but typically the registration and approval process takes several years and requires significant resources.
If we experience delays or discontinuations of our clinical trials by the FDA or comparable authorities in other countries, or if we fail to obtain registration or other approvals of our products or devices then we could be forced to cease our operations and you will lose all of your investment.
Even if we are successful in developing BIV201 and bezisterim (NE3107), our product candidates, we have limited experience in conducting or supervising clinical trials that must be performed to obtain data to submit in concert with applications for approval by the FDA. The regulatory process to obtain approval for drugs for commercial sale involves numerous steps. Drugs are subjected to clinical trials that allow development of case studies to examine safety, efficacy, and other issues to ensure that sale of drugs meets the requirements set forth by various governmental agencies, including the FDA. In the event that our protocols do not meet standards set forth by the FDA, or that our data is not sufficient to allow such trials to validate our drugs in the face of such examination, we might not be able to meet the requirements that allow our drugs to be approved for sale which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
We depend upon our management and their loss or unavailability could put us at a competitive disadvantage which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We currently depend upon the efforts and abilities of our executive management team of Cuong Do, our Chief Executive Officer–President; Wendy Kim, our Chief Financial Officer; Dr Joseph Palumbo, our Executive Vice President–Chief Medical Officer; Penelope Markham, our Senior Vice Ascites Programs & Strategic Initiatives–; Chris Reading, our Senior Vice President–Alzheimer’s Disease Program; Clarence Ahlem, our Senior Vice President – Operations President–Operations, Discovery and Parkinson’s Disease Program; ; and David Morse, our Senior Vice President–Chief Regulatory Officer; who all serve the Company full-time. The loss or unavailability of the services of any of these individuals for any significant period of time could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations which may cause you to lose all of your investment. We have not obtained, do not own, nor are we the beneficiary of key-person life insurance.
We may not be able to attract and retain highly skilled personnel, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Our ability to attract and retain highly skilled personnel is critical to our operations and expansion. We face competition for these types of personnel from other pharmaceutical companies and more established organizations, many of which have significantly larger operations and greater financial, technical, human and other resources than us. We may not be successful in attracting and retaining qualified personnel on a timely basis, on competitive terms, or at all. If we are not successful in attracting and retaining these personnel, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations will be materially and adversely affected.
The biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid technological developments and a high degree of competition. We may be unable to compete with enterprises equipped with more substantial resources than us, which could cause us to curtail or cease operations.
The biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid technological developments and a high degree of competition based primarily on scientific and technological factors. These factors include the availability of patent and other protection for technology and products, the ability to commercialize technological developments and the ability to obtain government approval for testing, manufacturing and marketing.
We compete with biopharmaceutical firms in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, as well as a growing number of large pharmaceutical companies that are applying biotechnology to their operations. Many biopharmaceutical companies have focused their development efforts in the human therapeutics area. Many major pharmaceutical companies have developed or acquired internal biotechnology capabilities or made commercial arrangements with other biopharmaceutical companies. These companies, as well as academic institutions, government agencies and private research organizations, also compete with us in recruiting and retaining highly qualified scientific personnel and consultants. Our ability to compete successfully with other companies in the pharmaceutical field will also depend to a considerable degree on the continuing availability of capital to us.
Although there are not currently any therapies approved by the FDA specifically for the treatment of ascites due to liver cirrhosis, we still face significant competitive and market risk. Other companies, such as Ocelot Bio, are developing therapies for severecomplications of advanced liver cirrhosis, which may in the future be developed for the treatment of ascites, and these therapies could compete indirectly or directly with our product candidate. Similarly, other companies, such as Biogen and Eli Lilly, are developing treatments for AD and PD, which could compete indirectly or directly with our product candidate. There may be other competitive development programs of which we are unaware. Even if our product candidates are ultimately approved by the FDA, there is no guarantee that once it is on the market doctors will adopt them in favor of current ascites treatment procedures such as diuretics and paracentesis with respect to BIV201 and AD and PD with respect to bezisterim (NE3107). These competitive and market risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations which may cause you to lose all of your investment.
Our competition will be determined in part by the potential indications for which drugs are developed and ultimately approved by regulatory authorities. Additionally, the timing of the market introduction of some of our potential product candidate or of competitors’ products may be an important competitive factor. Accordingly, the relative speed with which we can develop drugs, complete pre-clinical testing, clinical trials, approval processes and supply commercial quantities to market are important competitive factors. We expect that competition among drugs approved for sale will be based on various factors, including product efficacy, safety, reliability, availability, price and patent protection.
The successful development of biopharmaceuticals is highly uncertain. A variety of factors including, pre-clinical study results or regulatory approvals, could cause us to abandon the development of our product candidates.
There may be conflicts of interest among our officers, directors and stockholders.
Certain of our executive officers and directors and their affiliates are engaged in other activities and have interests in other entities on their own behalf or on behalf of other persons. Neither we nor any of our shareholders will have any rights in these ventures or their income or profits. In particular, our executive officers or directors or their affiliates may have an economic interest in or other business relationship with partner companies that invest in us or are engaged in competing drug development. Our executive officers or directors may have conflicting fiduciary duties to us and third parties. The terms of transactions with third parties may not be subject to arm’s length negotiations and therefore may be on terms less favorable to us than those that could be procured through arm’s length negotiations. Although we have established an audit committee comprised solely of independent directors to oversee transactions between us and our insiders, we do not have any formal policies in place to deal with such conflicting fiduciary duties should such a conflict arise.
We indemnify our officers and directors against liability to us and our security holders, and such indemnification could increase our operating costs.
Our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws require us to indemnify our officers and directors againstclaims associated with carrying out the duties of their offices. We are also required to advance the costs of certain legal defenses upon the indemnitee undertaking to repay such expenses to the extent it is determined that such person was not entitled to indemnification of such expenses. Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act may be permitted to our officers, directors, or control persons, the Commission has advised that such indemnification is against public policy and is therefore unenforceable.
Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property
We may be unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Our ability to compete effectively will depend on our ability to maintain the proprietary nature of our technologies. We cannot assure investors that we will continue to innovate and file new patent applications, or that if filed any future patent applications will result in granted patents with respect to the technology owned by us or licensed to us. Further, we cannot predict how long it will take for such patents to issue, if at all. The patent position of pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies, including ours, is generally uncertain and involves complex legal and factual considerations and, therefore, validity and enforceability cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents may be challenged, deemed unenforceable, invalidated or circumvented.
We have five (5) granted and seven (7) pending patent applications for our liquid formulations of terlipressen that claim priority to PCT/US2020/034269 filed on May 22, 2020 and published as WO2020/237170. We also have thirteen (13) issued U.S. patents, five (5) pending U.S. applications, three(3) pending Patent Cooperation Treaty applications four (4) issued foreign patents and eight (8) pending foreign patent applications directed to protecting bezisterim (NE3107) and related compounds and methods of making and using thereof. However, there can be no assurance that our pending patent applications will result in issued patents, or that any issued patent claims from pending or future patent applications will be sufficiently broad to protect BIV201, bezisterim (NE3107), or any other product candidates or to provide us with competitive advantages.
We can provide no assurance that any issued patents will provide us with any competitive advantage. We cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we and the patent examiner are unaware or that our interpretation of the relevance of prior art is correct. If a third-party patent or patent application is determined to have an earlier priority date, it may prevent our patent applications from issuing at all or issuing in a form that provides any competitive advantage for our drug candidates. Failure to obtain additional issued patents could have a material adverse effect on our ability to develop and commercialize our drug candidates. Even if our patent applications do issue as patents, third parties may be able to challenge the validity and enforceability of our patents on a variety of grounds, including that such third party’s patents and patent applications have an earlier priority date, and if such challenges are successful, we may be required to obtain one or more licenses from such third parties, if available on commercially reasonable terms, or be prohibited from commercializing our drug candidates.
We seek to protect our proprietary positions by, among other things, filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our current drug candidates and other drug candidates that we may identify. Obtaining, maintaining, defending and enforcing pharmaceutical patents is costly, time-consuming and complex, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications, or maintain, enforce and license any patents that may issue from such patent applications, at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Moreover, under certain of our license or collaboration agreements, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution and maintenance of patent applications, or to maintain the rights to patents licensed to or from third parties.
We currently are the assignee of a number of U.S. provisional patent applications. U.S. provisional patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of filing one or more of our related provisional patent applications. With regard to such U.S. provisional patent applications, if we do not timely file any non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority dates with respect to our provisional patent applications and any patent protection on the inventionsdisclosed in our provisional patent applications. Further, in the event that we do timely file non-provisional patent applications relating to our provisional patent applications, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents or if such issued patents will provide us with any competitive advantage.
As to our material inventions, trade secrets, and intellectual property, our employees, consultants, and advisors execute confidentiality agreements and agree to disclose and assign to us all inventions conceived during the workday, using our property, or which relate to our business. However, any of these parties may breach these agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. Further, we may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our drug candidates. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.
The patent position of pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal, technological and factual questions and has, in recent years, been the subject of much debate and litigation throughout the world. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, or vice versa. The standards that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) (and foreign countries) use to grant patents are not always applied predictably or uniformly and can change. There is also no uniform, worldwide policy regarding the subject matter and scope of claims granted or allowable in pharmaceutical or biotechnology patents. Accordingly, we do not know the degree of future protection for our proprietary rights or the breadth of claims that will be allowed in any patents issued to us or to others. The issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. The subject matter claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced or eliminated before the patent issues, if at all, and its scope can be reinterpreted or narrowed after issuance. Therefore, our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued in relevant jurisdictions that protect our drug candidates, in whole or in part, or that effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive drug candidates, and even if our patent applications issue as patents in relevant jurisdictions, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection for our drug candidates or technology, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Additionally, our competitors may be able to circumvent our patents by challenging their validity or by developing similar or alternative drug candidates or technologies in a non-infringing manner.
The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others, or other proceedings in the USPTO or applicable foreign offices that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could result in loss of exclusivity or ability to sell our products free from infringing the patents of third parties, patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, and limitation of the scope or duration of the patents directed to our drug candidates, all of which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical drug candidates or technology to compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize drug candidates or approved products (if any) without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of the claims of our patents and patent applications is threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future drug candidates, or could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds necessary to continue our research programs or clinical trials. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.
In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new drug candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products or technology similar or identical to ours for a meaningful amount of time, or at all. Moreover, some of our licensed patents and owned or licensed patent applications may in the future be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain exclusive licenses to any such co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Any of the foregoing could harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Further, we rely on a combination of trade secrets, know-how, technology and nondisclosure, and other contractual agreements and technical measures to protect our rights in the technology. If any trade secret, know-how or other technology not protected by a patent were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our business and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the U.S., and we may encounter significant problems in protecting our proprietary rights in these countries.
Our success depends in significant part on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce and defend patents and other intellectual property rights with respect to our drug candidates and technology and to operate our business without infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of others. If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient intellectual property protection for our drug candidates or other drug candidates that we may identify, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors and other third parties could develop and commercialize drug candidates similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our drug candidates and other drug candidates that we may pursue may be impaired.
Confidentiality agreements with employees and others may not adequately prevent disclosure of trade secrets and other proprietary information and disclosure of our trade secrets or proprietary information could compromise any competitive advantage that we have, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Our success depends, in part, on our ability to protect our proprietary rights to the technologies used in our product candidates. We depend heavily upon confidentiality agreements with our officers, employees, consultants and subcontractors to maintain the proprietary nature of our technology. These measures may not afford us complete or even sufficient protection, and may not afford an adequate remedy in the event of an unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. If we fail to protect and/or maintain our intellectual property, third parties may be able to compete more effectively against us, we may lose our technological or competitive advantage, and/or we may incur substantial litigation costs in our attempts to recover or restrict use of our intellectual property. In addition, others may independently develop technology similar to ours, otherwise avoiding the confidentiality agreements, or produce patents that would materially and adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations, in which event you could lose all of your investment.
We may enter into licensing and collaboration agreements with third parties. If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights to or from third parties, or these agreements are terminated, or we otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors or licensees, our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be harmed.
It may be necessary for us to use the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our products (if approved), in which case we would be required to obtain a license from these third parties. The licensing of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to license such technology, or if we are forced to license such technology on unfavorable terms, our business could be materially harmed.
We may fail to obtain any of these licenses or intellectual property rights on commercially reasonable terms. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. Licenses may not provide us with exclusive rights to use the applicable intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our drug candidates, products (if approved) and technology in the future. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected products, which could materially harm our business and the third parties owning such intellectual property rights could seek either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation. Conversely, we may not always be able to successfully pursue our claimsagainst others that infringe upon our technology. Thus, the proprietary nature of our technology or technology licensed by us may not provide adequate protection against competitors, and we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive products or technologies.
In addition, in some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications or to maintain, defend and enforce the patents that we license to or from third parties, and we may have to rely on our partners to fulfill these responsibilities. If our current or future licensors, licensees or collaboratorsfail to prepare, file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend licensed patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize any of our drug candidates or technology that are the subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected. In addition, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us and, as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing or otherwise violating the licensor’s rights.
If we fail to comply with our obligations, including the obligation to make various milestone payments and royalty payments, under any of the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license. If any of our license agreements is terminated, the underlying licensed patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity or we otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose intellectual property rights that are important to our business or be prevented from developing and commercializing our drug candidates, and competitors could have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. Termination of these agreements or reduction or elimination of our rights under these agreements may also result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated agreements with less favorable terms, cause us to lose our rights under these agreements, including our rights to important intellectual property or technology, or impede, delay or prohibit the further development or commercialization of one or more drug candidates that rely on such agreements. It is possible that we may be unable to obtain any additional licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our drug candidates or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis
Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues and certain provisions in intellectual property license agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. Disputes may arise between us and our licensing partners regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:
the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
whether and the extent to which technology and processes of one party infringe intellectual property of the other party that are not subject to the licensing agreement;
rights to sublicense patent and other rights to third parties;
any diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to development and commercialization of our drug candidates, and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations;
the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property;
rights to transfer or assign the license; and
the effects of termination.
The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected drug candidates. Moreover, any dispute or disagreement with our licensing partners may result in the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our drug candidates or any future drug candidates, and may result in costlylitigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources away from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Furthermore, current and future collaborators or strategic partners may develop, either alone or with others, products in related fields that are competitive with the products or potential products that are the subject of these collaborations. Competing products, either developed by our collaborators or strategic partners or to which the collaborators or strategic partners have rights, may result in the withdrawal of partner support for our drug candidates. Any of these developments could harm our product development efforts.
In addition, if our licensors fail to abide by the terms of the license, if the licensors fail to prevent infringement by third parties or if the licensed patents or other rights are found to be invalid or unenforceable, our business, competitive position, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.
Some of our intellectual property may be subject to federal regulations such as “march-in” rights, certain reporting requirements and a preference for U.S.-based companies if it is determined that our intellectual property has been discovered through government-funded programs. Compliance with such regulations may limit our exclusive rights, and limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. manufacturers.
Some of the intellectual property rights we have acquired or licensed or may acquire or license in the future may have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding and may therefore be subject to certain federal regulations. These U.S. government rights include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right, under certain limited circumstances, to require us to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that: (i) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention; (ii) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs; or (iii) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations (also referred to as “march-in rights”). The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if the grant recipient fails to disclose the invention to the government or fails to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us to expend substantial resources. In addition, the U.S. government requires that any products embodying any of these inventions or produced through the use of any of these inventions be manufactured substantially in the United States. This preference for U.S. industry may be waived by the federal agency that provided the funding if the owner or assignee of the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible. This preference for U.S. industry may limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. product manufacturers for products relating to such intellectual property. To the extent any of our future intellectual property is also generated through the use of U.S. government funding, the provisions of the Bayh-Dole Act may similarly apply.
Patent terms may be inadequate to establish our competitive position on our drug candidates for an adequate amount of time.
Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents directed to our drug candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a drug candidate, we may be open to competition from competitive medications, including generic versions. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new drug candidates, patents directed towards such drug candidates might expire before or shortly after such drug candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing drug candidates similar or identical to ours for a meaningful amount of time, or at all.
Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of any FDA marketing approval of our drug candidates, one or more of our owned or licensed U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Act, and similar legislation in the EU and certain other countries. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. Only one patent per approved product can be extended, the extension cannot extend the total patent term beyond 14 years from approval and only those claims for the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for the applicable drug candidate will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and trials by referencing our clinical and nonclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case, and our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patents on our drug candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and consequently our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States may be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patents to develop their own products and may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patents, but enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the United States. These products may compete with our drug candidates and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries do not favor the enforcement or protection of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claimsagainst us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful.
Many foreign countries, including some EU countries, India, Japan and China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled under specified circumstances to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In those countries, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of the applicable patents and limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
In 2012, the European Patent Package, or EU Patent Package, regulations were passed with the goal of providing a single pan-European Unitary Patent and a new European Unified Patent Court (“UPC”), for litigation involving European patents. Implementation of the EU Patent Package occurred in 2023. Under the UPC, all European patents, including those issued prior to ratification of the European Patent Package, will by default automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. The UPC will provide our competitors with a new forum to centrally revoke our European patents, and allow for the possibility of a competitor to obtain pan-European injunctions. It will be several years before we will understand the scope of patent rights that will be recognized and the strength of patent remedies that will be provided by the UPC. Under the EU Patent Package as currently proposed, we will have the right to opt our patents out of the UPC over the first seven years of the court’s existence, but doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the new unified court.
Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our drug candidates.
Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry is inherently uncertain, due in part to ongoing changes in the patent laws. For example, in the United States, depending on decisions by Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents, and interpretation thereof, could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our and our collaborators’ or licensors’ ability to obtain new patents or to enforce existing or future patents. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Therefore, there is increased uncertainty with regard to our and our collaborators’ or licensors’ ability to obtain patents in the future, as well as uncertainty with respect to the value of patents once obtained.
Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our and our collaborators’ or licensors’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or our collaborators’ or licensors’ issued patents. For example, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), enacted in September 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. The Leahy-Smith Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to challenge the validity of a patent by USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. The USPTO has developed regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, particularly the first inventor-to-file provisions. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our or our licensors’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or our licensors’ issued patents. Similarly, statutory or judicial changes to the patent laws of other countries may increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Any of the foregoing could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful, and issued patents directed towards our technology and drug candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged.
We are not aware that our patents directed to either BIV201 or bezisterim (NE3107), the product candidates we are currently developing, are infringed by third parties. However, there can be no assurance that our patents will not be found in the future to be infringed by others. Any patents we do obtain may be challenged by reexamination or otherwise invalidated or eventually found unenforceable. Both the patent application process and the process of managing patent disputes can be time-consuming and expensive.
Significantly, our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Our ability to enforce patent rights also depends on our ability to identify infringement. It may be difficult to identify infringers who do not advertise the components or methods that are used in connection with their products and services. Moreover, it may be difficult or impossible to obtain evidence of infringement in a competitor’s or potential competitor’s product or service. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaimsagainst us alleging that we infringe their patents or that our patents are invalid or unenforceable. In a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our owned or licensed patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly. We may find it impractical or undesirable to enforce our intellectual property against some third parties.
If we were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent directed to our drug candidates, or one of our future drug candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendantcounterclaimsalleginginvalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an allegedfailure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or insufficient written description. Grounds for a presentability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld material information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar claims before the USPTO or an equivalent foreign body, even outside the context of litigation. Potential proceedings include reexamination, post-grant review, inter partes review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of, or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our technology or any drug candidates that we may develop. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. These assertions may also be based on information known to us or the USPTO. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent rights directed towards the applicable drug candidates or technology related to the patent rendered invalid or unenforceable. Such a loss of patent rights would materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be materially harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.
The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Moreover, the cost to us of any litigation or other proceeding relating to our patents and other intellectual property rights, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial, and the litigation would divert our management’s efforts. We may not have sufficient resources to bring any such action to a successful conclusion. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could limit our ability to continue our operations and you could lose all of your investment.
Some of our competitors are larger than we are and have substantially greater resources. They are, therefore, likely to be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating our intellectual property. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources, which could harm our business. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could compromise our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our internal research programs, or in-license needed technology or other drug candidates. There could also be public announcements of the results of the hearing, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive those results to be negative, it could cause the price of shares of our Common Stock to decline. Any of the foregoing events could harm our business, financial condition, results of operation and prospects.
We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent, which might subject us to infringementclaims or adversely affect our ability to develop and market our drug candidates.
We cannot guarantee that any of our or our licensors’ patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending patent application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our drug candidates in any jurisdiction. For example, U.S. patent applications filed before November 29, 2000 and certain U.S. patent applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the United States remain confidential until patents issue. As mentioned above, patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering our drug candidates could have been filed by third parties without our knowledge. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our drug candidates or the use of our drug candidates. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our drug candidates. We may incorrectly determine that our drug candidates are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our drug candidates. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our drug candidates.
In addition, if we fail to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents, we may be subject to infringementclaims. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such infringementclaims. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, which may be significant, we may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing any of our drug candidates that are held to be infringing. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign drug candidates so that they no longer infringe the third-party intellectual property rights. Any of these events, even if we were ultimately to prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could negatively impact the success of our business.
Our commercial success depends upon our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our drug candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the pharmaceutical industry. We may become party to, or be threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our drug candidates and their manufacture and our other technology, including reexamination, interference, post-grant review, inter partes review or derivation proceedings before the USPTO or an equivalent foreign body. Numerous U.S.- and foreign-issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing our drug candidates. Third parties may assert infringementclaimsagainst us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit.
We do not believe that either BIV201 or bezisterim (NE3107), the product candidates we are currently developing, infringe the patents of any third parties. However, there can be no assurance that our technology will not be found in the future to infringe the patents of others. Moreover, patent applications are in some cases maintained in secrecy until patents are issued. The publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature frequently occurs substantially later than the date on which the underlying discoveries were made and patent applications were filed. Because patents can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications of which we are unaware that may later result in issued patents that our products or product candidates infringe. For example, pending applications may exist that provide support or can be amended to provide support for a claim that results in an issued patent that our product infringes.
Even if we believe third-party intellectual property claims are without merit, there is no assurance that a court would find in our favor on questions of claim scope, infringement, validity, enforceability or priority. A court of competent jurisdiction could hold that third-party patents asserted against us are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could materially and adversely affect our ability to commercialize any drug candidates we may develop and any other drug candidates or technologies covered by the asserted third-party patents. In order to successfullychallenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent.
If we are found to infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate a third party’s intellectual property rights, and we are unsuccessful in demonstrating that such rights are invalid or unenforceable, we could be required to obtain a license from such a third party in order to continue developing and marketing our products and technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be or may become non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing technology or product. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our drug candidates or force us to cease some of our business operations. In the event of a successful claim of infringementagainst us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties and other fees, redesign our infringing drug candidate or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that we or our employees have infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.
Many of our employees were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s former employer. We may also be subject to claims that patents and applications we have filed to protect inventions made on our behalf by our employees, consultants and advisors, even those related to one or more of our drug candidates, are rightfully owned by their former or concurrent employer. Litigation may be necessary to defendagainst these claims
If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may losevaluable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in prosecuting or defendingagainst such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs, delay development of our drug candidates and be a distraction to management. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We may be subject to claimschallenging the inventorship of our patents and other intellectual property.
We or our licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest (including co-ownership or ownership) in our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we or our licensors or collaborators may have inventorship disputes arising from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our drug candidates. While it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. Our and their assignment agreements may not be self-executing or may be breached, and litigation may be necessary to defendagainst these and other claimschallenging inventorship or our or our licensors’ or collaborators’ ownership of our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we or our licensors or collaboratorsfail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may losevaluable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our drug candidates. Even if we are successful in defendingagainst such claims, these claims may create considerable distraction to management and other employees of the company. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.
The degree of future protection, if any, afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:
others may be able to make products that are similar to any drug candidates we may develop or utilize similar technology but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we license or may own in the future;
we, or our current or future licensors or collaborators, might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patent or pending patent application that we license or may own in the future;
we, or our current or future licensors or collaborators might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our or their inventions;
others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our owned or licensed intellectual property rights;
it is possible that our pending owned or licensed patent applications or those that we may own or license in the future will not lead to issued patents;
issued patents that we hold rights to may be held invalid or unenforceable, including as a result of legal challenges by our competitors;
our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets;
we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable;
the intellectual property rights of others may harm our business; and
we may choose not to file a patent in order to maintain certain trade secrets or know-how, and a third party may subsequently file a patent directed to such intellectual property.
Should any of these events occur, they could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Intellectual property litigation may lead to unfavorable publicity that harms our reputation and causes the market price of shares of our Common Stock to decline.
During the course of any intellectual property litigation, there could be public announcements of the initiation of the litigation as well as results of hearings, rulings on motions, and other interim proceedings in the litigation. If securities analysts or investors regard these announcements as negative, the perceived value of our existing products, programs or intellectual property could be diminished. Accordingly, the market price of shares of our Common Stock may decline. Such announcements could also harm our reputation or the market for our future products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock
Our stock price is and may continue to be volatile and you may not be able to resell our Common Stock at or above the price you paid.
The market price for our Common Stock is volatile and may fluctuate significantly in response to a number of factors, many of which we cannot control, such as quarterly fluctuations in financial results, the timing and our ability to advance the development of our product candidates or changes in securities analysts’ recommendations could cause the price of our stock to fluctuate substantially. In addition, stock markets generally have recently experienced volatility. Our stock price is likely to experience significant volatility in the future. The price of our Common Stock may decline and the value of any investment in our Common Stock may be reduced regardless of our performance. Further, the daily trading volume of our Common Stock has historically been relatively low. As a result of the historically low volume, our shareholders may be unable to sell significant quantities of Common Stock in the public trading markets without a significant reduction in the price of our shares of Common Stock. Each of these factors, among others, could harm your investment in our Common Stock and could result in your being unable to resell the shares of our Common Stock that you purchase at a price equal to or above the price you paid.
In the past, when the market price of a stock has been volatile, holders of that stock have sometimes instituted securities class action litigationagainst the issuer. If any of our stockholders were to bring such a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit and the attention of our management would be diverted from the operation of our business.
You may experience future dilution as a result of future equity offerings or if we issue shares subject to options, warrants, stock awards or other arrangements.
In order to raise additional capital, we may in the future offer additional shares of our Common Stock or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for our Common Stock in any other offering at a price per share that is less than the current market price of our securities, and investors purchasing shares or other securities in the future could have rights superior to existing stockholders. The sale of additional shares of our Common Stock or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for our Common Stock would dilute all of our stockholders, and if such sales of convertible securities into or exchangeable into our Common Stock occur at a deemed issuance price that is lower than the current exercise price of our outstanding warrants sold to Acuitas Group Holdings, LLC (“Acuitas”) in August 2022 (the “Acuitas Warrants”), the exercise price for those warrants would adjust downward to the deemed issuance price pursuant to price adjustment protection contained within those warrants.
As of June 30, 2025, there were warrants outstanding to purchase an aggregate of 960,098 shares of our Common Stock at exercise prices ranging from $13.70 to $1,250.00 per share, 84,872 shares issuable upon exercise of outstanding options at exercise prices ranging from $19.00 to $4,209.00 per share and restricted stock units totaling 7,212. We may also grant additional options, warrants or equity awards. To the extent such shares are issued, the interest of holders of our Common Stock will be diluted.
Moreover, we are obligated to issue shares of our Common Stock upon achievement of certain clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones with respect to certain of our drug candidates (i.e., bezisterim (NE3107), NE3291, NE3413, and NE3789) pursuant to the asset purchase agreement, dated April 27, 2021, by and among the Company, NeurMedix and Acuitas, as amended on May 9, 2021. The achievement of these milestones could result in the issuance of up to 180,000 shares of our Common Stock, further diluting the interest of holders of our Common Stock.
We may, in the future, issue additional shares of Common Stock, which would reduce investors’ percent of ownership and may dilute our share value.
As of June 30, 2025, our Articles of Incorporation, as amended, authorize the issuance of 800,000,000 shares of Common Stock, and we had 1,917,061 shares of our Common Stock issued and 1,914,224 shares of our Common Stock issued and outstanding. Accordingly, we may issue up to an additional 798,082,939 shares of Common Stock. The future issuance of Common Stock may result in substantial dilution in the percentage of our Common Stock held by our then existing stockholders. We may value any Common Stock in the future on an arbitrary basis. The issuance of Common Stock for future services or acquisitions or other corporate actions may have the effect of diluting the value of the shares held by our investors, might have an adverse effect on any trading market for our Common Stock and could impair our ability to raise capital in the future through the sale of equity securities.
We effected a reverse stock split on July 7, 2025, and such reverse stock split has caused and could further cause our stock price to decline relative to its value before the reverse stock split and decrease the liquidity of shares of our common stock.
At a special meeting of the Company’s stockholders held on June 23, 2025, the Company’s stockholders approved a proposal to grant the Board authority, in its sole discretion, prior to the one-year anniversary of such special meeting, to effect a reverse stock split of the outstanding shares of Common Stock, at a ratio between 1-for-5 and 1-for-10. On June 26, 2025, pursuant to the authority granted by the Company’s stockholders, the Board approved a reverse stock split of our Common Stock at a ratio of 1-for-10 (the “Reverse Stock Split”). The Reverse Stock Split became effective at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time on July 7, 2025. The Reverse Stock split has caused a decline in the value of our outstanding Common Stock and there is no assurance that the Reverse Stock Split will not cause further decline in the value of our outstanding Common Stock. The liquidity of the shares of our Common Stock may be affected adversely by the Reverse Stock Split given the reduced number of shares that are outstanding following the Reverse Stock Split, especially if the market price of our Common Stock does not increase as a result of the Reverse Stock Split. In addition, the Reverse Stock Split has increased the number of stockholders who own odd lots (less than 100 shares) of our Common Stock, creating the potential for such stockholders to experience an increase in the cost of selling their shares and greaterdifficulty effecting such sales
The market price and trading volume of our Common Stock may be volatile.
The market price and trading volume of our Common Stock has been volatile. We expect that the market price of our Common Stock will continue to fluctuate significantly for many reasons, including in response to the risk factors described in this prospectus or for reasons unrelated to our specific performance. In recent years, the stock market has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. This volatility has affected the market prices of securities issued by many companies for reasons unrelated to their operating performance and may adversely affect the market price and trading volume of our Common Stock. Prices for our Common Stock may also be influenced by the depth and liquidity of the market for our Common Stock, investor perceptions about us and our business, our future financial results, the absence of cash dividends on our Common Stock and general economic and market conditions. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in their stock price. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and could divert our management and other resources.
Any failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could harm us.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). Under standards established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”), a deficiency in internal control over financial reporting exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or personnel, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. The PCAOB defines a material weakness as a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis.
If we are unable to assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or when required in the future, if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an unqualified opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our Common Stock could be adversely affected and we could become subject to litigation or investigations by the stock exchange on which our securities are listed, the Commission or other regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources.
There is a limited trading market for our Common Stock, which could make it difficult to liquidate an investment in our Common Stock, in a timely manner.
Our Common Stock is currently traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market. Because there is a limited public market for our Common Stock, investors may not be able to liquidate their investment whenever desired. We cannot assure that there will be an active trading market for our Common Stock and the lack of an active public trading market could mean that investors may be exposed to increased risk. In addition, if we failed to meet the criteria set forth in the regulations of the Commission, various requirements would be imposed by law on broker dealers who sell our securities to persons other than established customers and accredited investors. Consequently, such regulations may deter broker-dealers from recommending or selling our Common Stock, which may further affect its liquidity.
The lack of public company experience of our management team could adversely impact our ability to comply with the reporting requirements of U.S. securities laws, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Our officers have limited public company experience, which could impair our ability to comply with legal and regulatory requirements such as those imposed by Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Such responsibilities include complying with federal securities laws and making required disclosures on a timely basis. Any such deficiencies, weaknesses or lack of compliance could have a materially adverse effect on our ability to comply with the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, which is necessary to maintain our public company status. If we were to fail to fulfill those obligations, our ability to continue as a U.S. public company would be in jeopardy in which event you could lose your entire investment in our Company.
We are considered a smaller reporting company that is exempt from certain disclosure requirements, which could make our stock less attractive to potential investors.
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act defines a “smaller reporting company” as an issuer that is not an investment company, an asset-backed issuer, or a majority-owned subsidiary of a parent that is not a smaller reporting company and that:
Had a public float of less than $250 million as of the last business day of its most recently completed fiscal quarter, computed by multiplying the aggregate number of worldwide number of shares of its voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates by the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average of the bid and asked prices of common equity, in the principle market for the common equity; or
In the case of an initial registration statement under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act for shares of its common equity, had a public float of less than $250 million as of a date within 30 days of the date of the filing of the registration statement, computed by multiplying the aggregate worldwide number of such shares held by non-affiliates before the registration plus, in the case of a Securities Act registration statement, the number of such shares included in the registration statement by the estimated public offering price of the shares; or
In the case of an issuer who had annual revenue of less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year for which audit financial statements are available, had a public float as calculated under paragraph (1) or (2) of this definition that was either zero or less than $700 million.
As a “smaller reporting company” we are not required and may not include a Compensation Discussion and Analysis section in our proxy statements; we provide only 3 years of business development information; and have other “scaled” disclosure requirements that are less comprehensive than issuers that are not “smaller reporting companies” which could make our stock less attractive to potential investors, which could make it more difficult for you to sell your shares.
We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, which require us to incur audit fees and legal fees in connection with the preparation of such reports. These additional costs will negatively affect our ability to earn a profit.
We are required to file periodic reports with the Commission pursuant to the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. In order to comply with such requirements, our independent registered auditors have to review our financial statements on a quarterly basis and audit our financial statements on an annual basis. Moreover, our legal counsel has to review and assist in the preparation of such reports. Factors such as the number and type of transactions that we engage in and the complexity of our reports cannot accurately be determined at this time and may have a major negative effect on the cost and amount of time to be spent by our auditors and attorneys. However, the incurrence of such costs is an expense to our operations and thus has a negative effect on our ability to meet our overhead requirements and earn a profit.
Because we do not intend to pay any cash dividends on our Common Stock, our stockholders will not be able to receive a return on their shares unless they sell them.
We intend to retain any future earnings to finance the development and expansion of our business. We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our Common Stock in the foreseeable future. Unless we pay dividends, our stockholders will not be able to receive a return on their shares unless they sell them. There is no assurance that stockholders will be able to sell shares when desired.
We are authorized to issue “blank check” preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could adversely impact the rights of holders of our securities.
Our Articles of Incorporation authorize us to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of blank check preferred stock. Any preferred stock that we issue in the future may rank ahead of our Common Stock in terms of dividend priority or liquidation premiums and may have greater voting rights than our Common Stock. Any preferred stock issued may contain provisions allowing those shares to be converted into shares of Common Stock, which could dilute the value of our Common Stock to current stockholders and could adversely affect the market price, if any, of our Common Stock. The preferred stock could be utilized, under certain circumstances, as a method of discouraging, delaying, or preventing a change in control of our company. Although we have no present intention to issue any shares of our authorized preferred stock, there can be no assurance that we will not do so in the future.
Provisions in our Articles of Incorporation, our Bylaws, and Nevada law might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or changes in our management and, therefore, depress the trading price of our Common Stock.
Provisions of our Articles of Incorporation, our Bylaws, and Nevada law may have the effect of deterring unsolicited takeovers or delaying or preventing a change in control of our company or changes in our management, including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then current market prices. In addition, these provisions may limit the ability of stockholders to approve transactions that they may deem to be in their best interests. These provisions include:
the inability of stockholders to call special meetings;
the “business combinations” and “control share acquisitions” provisions of Nevada law, to the extent applicable, could discourage attempts to acquire our stockholders stock even on terms above the prevailing market price; and
the ability of our board of directors to designate the terms of and issue new series of preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could include the right to approve an acquisition or other change in our control or could be used to institute a rights plan, also known as a poison pill, that would dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, likely preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by our board of directors.
The existence of the forgoing provisions and anti-takeover measures could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Common Stock. They could also deter potential acquirers of our company, thereby reducing the likelihood that you could receive a premium for your Common Stock in an acquisition.
suffering
In neurodegenerative disease, bezisterim (NE3107) inhibits activation of inflammatory ERK and nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells (“NFκB”) (including interactions with TNF signaling and other relevant inflammatory pathways) that lead to neuroinflammation and insulin resistance. Bezisterim (NE3107) does not interfere with their homeostatic functions (e.g., insulin signaling and neuron growth and survival). Both inflammation and insulin resistance are drivers of AD and PD.
Chronic neuroinflammation, insulin resistance, and oxidative stress are common features in the major neurodegenerative diseases, including AD, PD, frontotemporal lobar dementia, and Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Bezisterim (NE3107) is an investigational oral small molecule, blood-brain permeable, compound with potential anti-inflammatory, insulin sensitizing, and ERK-binding properties that may allow it to selectively inhibit ERK-, NFκB- and TNF-stimulated inflammation. Bezisterim’s (NE3107) potential to inhibit neuroinflammation and insulin resistance forms the basis for the Company’s work testing the molecule in AD, PD, and long COVID patients. Bezisterim (NE3107) is patented in the United States, Australia, Canada, Europe and South Korea.
Parkinson’s Disease
PD is driven in large part by neuroinflammation and activation of brain microglia, leading to increased proinflammatory cytokines (particularly TNF). Multiple daily administrations of levodopa (converted to dopamine in the brain) is the current standard of care treatment for this movement disorder. However, levodopa effectiveness diminishes over time necessitating increased dosage and prolonged daily administration leads to side effects of uncontrolled movements called levodopa-induced dyskinesia, commonly referred to as LID, which is exacerbated by high dose levodopa. Although levodopa provides symptomatic benefit, it does not slow PD progression.
The Phase 2 study of bezisterim (NE3107) for the treatment of PD (NCT05083260), completed in December 2022, was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics study in PD participants treated with carbidopa/levodopa and bezisterim (NE3107). Forty-five patients with a defined L-dopa “off state” were randomized 1:1 to placebo: bezisterim (NE3107) 20 mg twice daily for 28 days. This trial was launched with two design objectives: 1) the primary objective was safety and a drug-drug interaction study as requested by the FDA to measure the potential for adverse interactions of bezisterim (NE3107) with carbidopa/ levodopa; and 2) the secondary objective was to determine if preclinical indications of promotoric activity and apparent enhancement of levodopa activity could be seen in humans. Both objectives were met.
To extend this Phase 2 data in progressed patients, the Company has designed a new Phase 2 study of bezisterim (NE3107) as a potential first line therapy to treat patients with new onset PD. In July 2024, the Company submitted the new protocol and received a response from the FDA which permitted the Company to proceed with the study. The trial commenced in April 2025.
Long COVID Program
In April 2024, the Company was awarded a clinical trial grant of $13.1 million from the U.S. Department of Defense (“DOD”), awarded through the Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs. In August 2024, the FD&A and the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command, Office of Human Research Oversight (“OHRO”) approved the Company’s plan, including the FDA approving the associated Investigation New Drug Application (“IND”), to evaluate bezisterim for the treatment of neurological symptoms that are associated with long COVID. The trial commenced in May 2025.
Liver Disease Program
In liver disease, our investigational drug candidate BIV201 (continuous infusion terlipressin), which has been granted both FDA Fast Track designation status and FDA Orphan Drug status, is being evaluated as a treatment option for patients suffering from ascites and other life-threateningcomplications of advanced liver cirrhosis caused by non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), hepatitis, and alcoholism. The initial target for BIV201 therapy was refractory ascites. These patients suffer from frequent life-threateningcomplications, generate more than $5 billion in annual treatment costs, and have an estimated 50% mortality rate within 6 to 12 months.
After receiving guidance from the FDA regarding the design of Phase 3 clinical testing of BIV201 for the treatment of patients with cirrhosis and ascites, the Company is now targeting a broader ascites patient population. The Company is currently finalizing the protocol design for the Phase 3 study of BIV201 with a focus on demonstrating clinical benefit through a composite primary endpoint of complications and disease progression in patients with cirrhosis and ascites who have recently recovered from acute kidney injury (“AKI”). This patient population is not limited to those having refractory ascites. BIV201 is administered as a patent-pending liquid formulation with patents issued in US, China, Japan, Chile and India to date.
C. Alzheimer’s Disease (NCT05083260)
On November 29, 2023, the Company announced the analysis of its unblinded, topline efficacy data from its Phase 3 clinical trial (NCT04669028) of bezisterim in the treatment of mild to moderate AD. The study had co-primary endpoints looking at cognition using the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Scale (ADAS-Cog 12) and function using the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB). Patients were randomly assigned, 1:1 versus placebo, to receive sequentially 5 mg of bezisterim orally twice a day for 14 days, then 10 mg orally twice a day for 14 days, followed by 26 weeks of 20 mg orally twice daily.
Upon trial completion, as the Company began the process of unblinding the trial data, the Company found significant deviation from protocol and current good clinical practices (“cGCPs”) violations at 15 study sites (virtually all of which were from one geographic area). This highly unusual level of suspectedimproprieties led the Company to exclude all patients from these sites and to refer the sites to the FDA Office of Scientific Investigations (“OSI”) for potential further action. After the patient exclusions, 81 patients remained in the Modified Intent to Treat population, 57 of whom were in the Per-Protocol population which included those who completed the trial and were verified to take study drug from pharmacokinetic data.
The trial was originally designed to be 80% powered with 125 patients in each of the treatment and placebo arms. The unplanned exclusion of so many patients left the trial underpowered for the primary endpoints. In the Per-Protocol population, which included those patients who completed the trial and who were further verified to have taken the study drug (based on pharmacokinetic data), an observed descriptive change from baseline appeared to suggest a slowing of cognitive loss; these same patients experienced an advantage in age deceleration vs. placebo as measured by DNA epigenetic change. Age deceleration is used by longevity researchers to measure the difference between the patient’s biological age, in this case as measured by the Horvath DNA methylation Skin Blood Clock, relative to the patient’s actual chronological age. This test was a non-primary/secondary endpoint, other-outcome measure, done via blood test collected at week 30 (end of study). Additional DNA methylation data continues to be collected and analyzed.
Results of Operations
Comparison of the Year Ended June 30, 2025 to the Year Ended June 30, 2024
Net loss
The net loss for the year ended June 30, 2025, was approximately $17.5 million as compared to the net loss of $32.1 million for the year ended June 30, 2024. The net decrease of $14.6 million was primarily attributed to decline in research and development expenses of $13.8 million, and a net increase in other income, net of approximately $465,000.
Total operating expenses for the years ended June 30, 2025 and 2024 were approximately $18.1 million and $32.2, respectively. The net decrease of approximately $14.1 million was primarily due to the decrease in research and development expenses as a result of the completion of clinical trials in the prior fiscal year.
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses were approximately $9.3 million and $23.1 million for the years ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. The $13.8 million reduction was primarily attributed to the completion of the clinical studies in the prior fiscal year and comprised of a declines in direct study costs of approximately $7.4 million, and the related expenses such as the clinical team payroll of approximately $1.4 million, and consultants expenses of approximately $3.0 million, reflecting a declining use of consultants and a reduction in the use of regulatory and other consultants totaling approximately $496,000. Other decreases included a decrease in Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (“CMC”) and new drug discovery totaling approximately $1.2 million, and a decrease in travel & conferences of approximately $123,000, as well as publications of approximately $166,000.
The decrease in clinical studies of approximately $7.4 million represented the net decrease in clinical trial studies expense of approximately $10.8 million due to the completion of the clinical trials in the prior fiscal year offset primarily by the planning, development and launch of the two new clinical studies, Sunrise PD Phase 2 and Long Covid Program, totaling approximately $3.3 million. The table below summarizes the approximate expense amounts for the years ended June 30, 2025 and 2024 by study:
For the Year Ended
For the Year Ended
Increase
June 30, 2025
June 30, 2024
(Decrease)
Current Studies
Sunrise PD Phase 2
Liver Program Phase 3
Long COVID Program, net of $5.3 million reimbursement
Investigator-Initiated studies
Completed Studies
Ascites BIV201 Phase 2b
AD mild to moderate pivotal Phase 3
PD NM201 Phase 2
Investigator-Initiated studies
Other studies in development/canceled
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended June 30, 2025, was approximately $8.6 million and was comparable to approximately $8.8 million for the year ended June 30, 2024. The net fluctuations in expenses were primarily comprised of decreases in stock-based compensation for the executive team and directors of approximately $436,000 and $595,000, respectively, and investor and public relation fees of $210,000, offset by increases in directors’ cash compensation of approximately $101,000, other professional and consultancy fees of approximately $582,000, legal fees of approximately $468,000, and audit and accounting fees of approximately $82,000.
Other Income and Expense
Other income, net was approximately $524,000 for the year ended June 30, 2025, compared to approximately $59,000 for the year ended June 30, 2024. The net increase in other income of approximately $465,000 was comprised of a decrease in the change in fair value of the related derivative liabilities of approximately $1.8 million, offset by the decline in interest expense, net $2.6 million due to the payoff of the notes payable on December 1, 2024 and decline in interest income of approximately $284,000.
Capital Resources and Liquidity
As of June 30, 2025, the Company had working capital of approximately $18.4 million, cash and cash equivalents of approximately $17.5 million, stockholders’ equity of approximately $19.0 million, and an accumulated deficit of approximately $352.1 million. Additionally, the Company had a net loss of approximately $17.5 million and net cash used in operating activities of approximately $19.0 million during the year ended June 30, 2025. The Company has not generated any revenues to date and no revenues are expected in the foreseeable future. The Company’s future operations are dependent on the success of the Company’s ongoing development and commercialization efforts, as well as its ability to secure additional financing as needed.
The future viability of the Company is largely dependent upon its ability to raise additional capital to finance its operations. Management expects that future sources of funding may include sales of equity, obtaining loans, or other strategic transactions.
Although management continues to pursue the Company’s strategic plans, there is no assurance that the Company will be successful in obtaining sufficient financing on terms acceptable to the Company, if at all, to fund continuing operations. These circumstances raise substantial doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
Registered Direct Offerings
On September 25, 2024, the Company closed a best efforts public offering (the “September 2024 Offering”) of 136,080 shares of its common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, pre-funded warrants (the “September Pre-funded Warrants”) to purchase 60,000 shares of Common Stock, and warrants to purchase up to 196,080 shares of Common Stock (the “September Common Warrants”) at a combined public offering price of $15.30 per share, or September Pre-funded Warrant, and the associated September Common Warrant. 26,500 September Pre-funded Warrants were exercised shortly thereafter and reflected on the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity as a component of proceeds from issuance of common stock. The September Common Warrants have an exercise price of $15.30 per share and were immediately exercisable upon issuance and will expire on the fifth anniversary date of the original issuance date. The gross proceeds to the Company from the September 2024 Offering was approximately $3.0 million, before deducting placement agent fees and offering expenses of approximately $747,000. Additionally, upon closing, the Company issued the placement agent warrants (“September Placement Agent’s Warrants”) to purchase 9,809 shares of Common Stock exercisable at a per share price of $19.10, which was equal to 125% of the public offering price per share. The September Placement Agent’s Warrants are exercisable during a five-year period commencing 180 days from September 25, 2024. Subsequently, 189,630 of common warrants from the September 2024 Offering were exercised at $15.30 per share for proceeds totaling approximately $2.9 million, and 33,500 September Pre-funded Warrants were also exercised. In addition, 667 September Placement Agent’s Warrants were exercised on a cashless exercise basis and 422 common shares were issued.
In October 2024, the Company closed three registered direct offerings totaling 825,600 shares of its common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, and two concurrent private placements of warrants to purchase up to 711,000 shares of Common Stock (the “October Common Warrants”) priced at-the-market under Nasdaq rules at prices ranging from $15.00 to $28.30 per share (the “October Offerings”) . The October Common Warrants have exercise prices ranging from $13.70 to $21.20 per share and are exercisable beginning six months following issuance and will expire on the fifth anniversary date of the original issuance dates. The gross proceeds to the Company from the October Offerings totaled approximately $15.9 million, before deducting placement agent fees and offering expenses of approximately $2.5 million. Additionally, upon closing of the October Offerings, the Company issued placement agent warrants (the “October Placement Agent’s Warrants”) to purchase 41,321 shares of Common Stock in the aggregate exercisable at a per share price ranging from $18.80 to $35.40, which was equal to 125% of the offering price per share in the applicable October Offering. The October Placement Agent’s Warrants are exercisable during a five-year period commencing 180 days from each of the respective closing dates of the October Offerings.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
The term “off-balance sheet arrangement” generally means any transaction, agreement or other contractual arrangement to which an entity unconsolidated with the Company is a party, under which the Company has (i) any obligation arising under a guarantee contract, derivative instrument or variable interest; or (ii) a retained or contingent interest in assets transferred to such entity or similar arrangement that serves as credit, liquidity or market risk support for such assets. The Company has no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect or change on the Company’s financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that are material to investors.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Research and Development
Research and development expenses and corresponding accrued expenses, consist primarily of costs associated with the preclinical and/or clinical trials of drug candidates, compensation and other expenses for research and development, personnel, supplies and development materials, costs for consultants and related contract research costs.
Stock-based Compensation
The Company follows the provision of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 718 - Stock Compensation (“ASC 718”), which requires the measurement of compensation expense for all share-based payment awards made to employees and non-employee director, including employee stock options. Share-based compensation expense is based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of ASC 718 and is generally recognized as an expense over the requisite service period, net of forfeitures which are recorded as they occur.
