Item 1a. Risk Factors
Investing in our ordinary shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, in addition to the other information set forth in this annual report, including the consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this annual report, before purchasing our ordinary shares. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations could be negatively impacted. In that case, the trading price of our ordinary shares would likely decline and you might lose all or part of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations.
Summary of Selected Risk Factors
Our business is subject to a number of risks, including risks that may prevent us from achieving our business objectives or may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and prospects. These risks are discussed more fully below and include, but are not limited to, risks related to, the following:
We may not be able to continue as a going concern and holders of our ordinary shares could suffer a total loss of their investment.
Pursuant to the restructuring process as contemplated by the Support Agreement, if completed, holders of our ordinary shares will have their equity cancelled and will be given certain contingent value rights, or CVRs, which may have no value.
Pursuit of a strategic transaction has consumed a substantial portion of the time and attention of our management and we expect that our restructuring process will continue to consume the attention of our management, which may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations, and we may face increased levels of employee attrition. In addition, the third-party costs associated with a potential strategic transaction have been and will continue to be significant.
While we complete our restructuring process, we will be subject to the risks and uncertainties associated with voluntary restructuring proceedings in Israel.
We have not generated significant revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.
We are heavily dependent on the success of Omisirge, including obtaining regulatory approvals in geographies outside of the United States, and if Omisirge is not successfully commercialized, our business will be adversely affected.
We have limited experience producing Omisirge at commercial levels and we have limited experience operating a cGMP compliant manufacturing facility.
We currently have a limited marketing and sales organization. If we are unable to establish adequate sales and marketing capabilities to support the commercial launch of Omisirge or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell Omisirge, we may be unable to generate sufficient product revenue.
Sales of Omisirge will be limited unless it achieves broad market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers, hospital pharmacists and others in the medical community.
It may be difficult for us to profitably sell Omisirge if coverage and reimbursement for Omisirge is limited by government authorities and/or third-party payer policies.
We are subject to the risk of various legal and regulatory proceedings, including litigation in the ordinary course of business. Our business further entails a significant risk of product liability and our ability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.
Omisirge and the administration process may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could limit the commercial profile of an approved label or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, and result in costly and damaging product liability claims against us.
Omisirge will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.
We may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designations that we have obtained, including market exclusivity, which may cause our revenue, if any, to be reduced.
Our business operations and current and future relationships with healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payers, patient organizations and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.
We face competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.
Even though Omisirge is approved by the FDA for marketing in the United States, we may never obtain approval of Omisirge outside of the United States, which would limit our market opportunities and adversely affect our business.
The misuse or off-label use of our products may harm our reputation in the marketplace, result in injuries that lead to product liability suits or result in costly investigations, fines or sanctions by regulatory bodies if we are deemed to have engaged in the promotion of these uses, any of which could be costly to our business.
Failure or perceived failure to comply with existing or future laws, regulations, contracts, self-regulatory schemes standards and other obligations related to data privacy and security (including security incidents) could harm our business. Compliance or the actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could increase the costs of our products/services, limit their use or adoption, and otherwise negatively affect our operating results and business.
We rely on a limited number of suppliers to provide the raw materials other than cord blood (serum and growth factor) needed to produce our product. We have a relationship with a single supplier, Miltenyi Biotec GmbH, for certain equipment (columns and beads) necessary to manufacture our product.
Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets and other intellectual property, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets and other intellectual property will be misappropriated or disclosed.
We face a variety of challenges and uncertainties associated with our dependence on the availability of CBUs at cord blood banks for the manufacture of Omisirge.
If we are unable to obtain, maintain or protect intellectual property rights related to Omisirge, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.
The market price of our ordinary shares may fluctuate significantly, which could result in substantial losses by our investors.
The exchange of some or all of the 2021 Notes or 2022 Note into our ordinary shares could result in significant dilution to existing shareholders, adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares and impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities.
Significant parts of our operations are located in Israel and, therefore, our results may be adversely affected by political, economic and military conditions in Israel.
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Restructuring Process
We may not be able to continue as a going concern and holders of our ordinary shares could suffer a total loss of their investment.
Our cash balance as of December 31, 2023 was $46.6 million. Our preliminary estimated unrestricted cash balance as of March 15, 2024 was $28.5 million, reflecting a monthly burn rate of $7.2 million, which we expect to continue. These conditions raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern beyond the second quarter of 2024. We have incurred net losses each year since our inception in 1998, including net losses of $63.0 million and $79.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $479.8 million.
Although we have implemented significant cost reductions and other cash-focused measures to manage liquidity, including implementing a workforce reduction of 25% of our workforce as announced on March 27, 2024, without restructuring our substantial debt, we will not have the necessary cash resources for our operations and to pay our outstanding obligations under the 2022 Notes (as defined below) and the 2021 Notes (as defined below) as they become due. As of March 15, 2024, we owed approximately $5.0 million under our senior secured exchangeable notes issued on December 12, 2022, or the 2022 Notes, and we owed approximately $75.0 million under our senior unsecured exchangeable notes issued on February 16, 2021, or the 2021 Notes, and we have ongoing payment obligations under each of these notes. With the goal of maximizing value for our stakeholders, on March 26, 2024, we entered into the Support Agreement with Highbridge, pursuant to which we and Highbridge have agreed to restructure all of our outstanding equity and debt in a voluntary restructuring proceeding that is governed by Israeli law, referred to as our restructuring process. If we are unable to complete our restructuring process as contemplated by the Support Agreement, we will likely enter involuntary insolvency proceedings in Israel and wind down our operations. There will be significant costs associated with such proceedings and wind down, such as separation of employees and termination of contracts, and we could owe certain taxes on any such transaction. If we enter involuntary insolvency proceedings, we expect that there will be no distribution (cash or otherwise) to shareholders after payment of the foregoing expenses and our shareholders will suffer a total loss of their investment.
Pursuant to the restructuring process as contemplated by the Support Agreement, if completed, holders of our ordinary shares will have their equity cancelled and will be given certain contingent value rights, which may have no value.
If our restructuring process is completed as contemplated by the Support Agreement, Gamida Cell Ltd. will be a newly reorganized private operating company that is owned entirely by Highbridge and our business will continue as a going concern with Highbridge being the only impaired creditor. No cash or other consideration will be available for distribution to our shareholders after discharge of our debts and liabilities and payment of expenses associated with this process. However, pursuant to the Support Agreement, each holder of ordinary shares of the Company as of the completion of the restructuring process will be entitled to receive certain CVRs pursuant to a contingent value rights agreement, or the CVR Agreement, to be executed in connection with the restructuring process upon cancellation of such holder’s ordinary shares and subject to the completion of the restructuring process.
When issued, the CVRs will require cash payments to CVR holders of: (i) $10 million in the aggregate, if, within three years following the effective date of the restructuring, aggregate U.S. revenues from sales of Omisirge exceed $100 million in any four consecutive fiscal quarters; and (ii) $15 million in the aggregate, if, within three years following the effective date of the restructuring, aggregate U.S. revenues from sales of Omisirge in any four consecutive fiscal quarter exceed $150 million; and (iii) $2.5 million in the aggregate upon the first regulatory approval of any product associated with the Company’s NK cell platform within four years following the effective date of the restructuring. The CVRs will not be transferable, will not have any voting or dividend rights, and interest will not accrue on any amounts potentially payable on the CVRs. Accordingly, the right of any shareholder of record as of the completion of our restructuring process to receive any future payment on or derive any value from the CVRs will be contingent solely upon the achievement of the foregoing events within the time periods specified. For the year ended December 31, 2023, we had $1.8 million of net revenues from sales of Omisirge, which were solely in the United States. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that Omisirge will be successfully commercialized or that the newly reorganized company will be able to achieve the revenues required or regulatory milestone for any payment under the CVRs. If these events are not achieved for any reason within the time periods specified, no payments will be made under the CVRs, and the CVRs will be expire without value. Furthermore, the CVRs will be unsecured obligations and all payments under the CVRs, all other obligations under the CVR Agreement and the CVRs and any rights or claims relating thereto will be subordinated in right of payment to the prior payment in full of all current or future senior obligations or the reorganized company. Finally, the Israeli and U.S. federal income tax treatment of the CVRs is unclear. There is no legal authority directly addressing the Israeli or U.S. federal income tax treatment of the receipt of, and payments on, the CVRs, and there can be no assurance that Israel Tax Authority or the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, would not assert, or that a court would not sustain, a position that could result in adverse Israeli or U.S. federal income tax consequences to holders of the CVRs.
Pursuit of a strategic transaction has consumed a substantial portion of the time and attention of our management and we expect that our restructuring process will continue to consume the attention of our management, which may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations, and we may face increased levels of employee attrition. In addition, the third-party costs associated with our restructuring process have been and will continue to be significant.
While we complete our restructuring process, our management has and will continue to be required to spend a significant amount of time and effort focusing on the potential transaction. This diversion of attention may materially adversely affect the conduct of our business, and, as a result, our financial condition and results of operations. During our strategic review process and our restructuring process, our employees have faced considerable distraction and uncertainty and we expect to experience increased levels of employee attrition. A loss of key personnel or material erosion of employee morale could have a materially adverse effect on our ability to maintain our operations as a going concern, thereby adversely affecting our business and results of operations. The failure to retain members of our management team and other key personnel could impair our ability to execute our restructuring process, thereby having a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and increasing the likelihood that we will have to enter involuntary insolvency proceedings.
Furthermore, we have and expect to continue to incur significant third-party costs associated with negotiating and completing our restructuring process. We can give no assurance as to the level of such costs, given that there can be no guarantee that we will complete our restructuring process as currently contemplated, including with respect to the duration of the restructuring process.
While we complete our restructuring process, we will be subject to the risks and uncertainties associated with voluntary restructuring proceedings in Israel.
On March 27, 2024, we voluntarily initiated restructuring proceedings pursuant to Israeli law and subject to the jurisdiction of Israeli courts. Our ability to continue operating as a going concern will be subject to the risks and uncertainties associated with restructuring proceedings, including, among others: our ability to execute, confirm and consummate our restructuring process; the high costs of restructuring proceedings and related fees; our ability to obtain sufficient financing to allow us to emerge from insolvency and execute our business plan post-emergence, including the fact that Highbridge is not required to provide any financing to the Company during the restructuring process or until its completion (if completed), and our ability to comply with terms and conditions of that financing; our ability to continue our operations in the ordinary course; our ability to maintain our relationships with our transplant centers and other third parties; our ability to obtain, maintain or renew contracts that are critical to our operations on reasonably acceptable terms and conditions; our ability to attract, motivate and retain key employees; heightened risks of shareholder and other litigation; and the actions and decisions of our stakeholders and other third parties who have interests in our restructuring proceedings that may be inconsistent with our operational and strategic plans. Any delays in our restructuring proceedings would increase the risks of our being unable to restructure our business and emerge from restructuring proceedings and may increase our costs associated with the restructuring process, result in the termination of our Support Agreement, and/or result in prolonged operational disruption or a complete wind down of our business. Also, we will need the prior approval of the Highbridge for material transactions that are not included in a budget that has been approved by Highbridge, or which would result in a material variance from such approved budget. Because of the risks and uncertainties associated with any restructuring proceedings, we cannot accurately predict or quantify the ultimate impact of events that could occur during any such proceedings. There can be no guarantees that we will emerge from restructuring proceedings and our restructuring process as a going concern. Further, we do not anticipate that holders of our ordinary shares will receive any recovery (cash or otherwise) from our restructuring proceedings or restructuring process at the completion of the process.
Our workforce reduction may not result in anticipated savings and could disrupt our business more than we expect.
On March 27, 2024, we announced that our board of directors had authorized the termination of approximately 25% of our employees. We expect to complete the workforce reduction during the second quarter of 2024. We may not realize, in full or in part, the anticipated benefits and savings from this plan due to unforeseen difficulties, delays or unexpected costs. If we are unable to realize the expected cost savings from the workforce reduction, our operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected. We expect that our workforce reduction and our restructuring process will be disruptive to our operations and could yield unanticipated consequences, such as attrition beyond planned staff reductions, increased difficulties in our day-to-day operations and reduced employee morale. If employees who were not affected by the workforce reduction seek alternative employment, this could result in our seeking contractor support at unplanned additional expense.
Completion of our restructuring process will constitute an event of default under the Indenture governing the 2021 Notes and the Loan and Security Agreement governing the 2022 Notes.
Both the Indenture governing the 2021 Notes and Loan and Security Agreement governing the 2022 Notes provide that a number of events will constitute an event of default, including our initiation of voluntary restructuring proceedings in the District Court of Beersheba, Israel on March 27, 2024. However, Highbridge has agreed not to pursue any remedies available to it under either the Indenture or the Loan and Security Agreement so long as the Support Agreement is in effect. In an event of default arising from insolvency, all obligations under the Indenture and the Loan and Security Agreement become immediately due and payable without action by the lenders. If any other event of default occurs and is continuing, the trustee or the holders of at least 25% in aggregate principal amount of the then outstanding 2021 Notes, in the case of the Indenture, or the administrative agent, at the direction of certain of the lenders, in the case of the Loan and Security Agreement, may, without notice or demand, deliver a notice of an event of default and by notice to us declare all obligations under the 2021 Notes and the 2022 Notes immediately due and payable. Such acceleration of our debt under the Indenture or the Loan and Security Agreement would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and we would be forced into involuntary insolvency proceedings and wind down of our operations.
These risks have been and are likely to continue to be exacerbated by our ongoing restructuring proceedings and the corresponding event of default on our 2021 Notes and 2022 Notes, as further discussed herein. To the extent we are required or choose to seek third-party financing in the future, including in connection with any exit financing contemplated by the Support Agreement, there can be no assurance that we would be able to obtain any such required financing on a timely basis or at all, particularly in light of our ongoing restructuring proceedings and the corresponding event of default on our 2021 Notes and 2022 Notes. Additionally, any future financing arrangements could include terms that are not commercially beneficial to us, which could further restrict our operations and exacerbate any impact on our results of operations and liquidity that may result from any of the factors described herein or other factors.
We have not generated significant revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.
We have not generated significant revenue from product sales and our ability to generate future revenue from the commercialization of Omisirge is uncertain. We have had to invest certain costs to build out a sales and distribution team to support the launch of Omisirge. Furthermore, generating revenue from product sales will depend heavily on our ability to:
commercialize Omisirge with collaborators;
obtain regulatory approvals and marketing authorizations for Omisirge in jurisdictions outside of the United States;
expose, educate and train physicians and other medical professionals to use Omisirge;
maintain regulatory approval for a sustainable and scalable in-house and/or third-party manufacturing process for Omisirge that meets all applicable regulatory standards;
establish and maintain supply and, if applicable, manufacturing relationships with third parties that can provide adequate, in both amount and quality, products to support the market demand for Omisirge;
ensure procedures utilizing Omisirge are approved for coverage and adequate reimbursement from governmental agencies, private insurance plans, managed care organizations, and other third-party payers in jurisdictions where they have been approved for marketing;
address any competing technological and market developments that impact Omisirge or its prospective usage by medical professionals;
negotiate favorable terms in any collaboration, licensing or other arrangements into which we may enter and perform our obligations under such collaborations;
maintain, protect and expand our portfolio of intellectual property rights, including patents, patent applications, trade secrets and knowhow; and
avoid and defend against third-party interference, infringement or other intellectual property related claims; attract, hire and retain qualified personnel.
Though we have obtained regulatory approval to market Omisirge in the United States, our revenue will be dependent in part upon the size of the markets in additional territories, if any, in which we gain regulatory approval for Omisirge, the accepted price for Omisirge, our ability to obtain reimbursement for Omisirge at any price, whether we own the commercial rights for that territory in which Omisirge has been approved and the expenses associated with manufacturing and marketing Omisirge for such markets. Therefore, we may not generate significant revenue from the sale of Omisirge. Further, if we are not able to generate significant revenue from the sale of Omisirge, we may be forced to curtail or cease our operations. Due to the numerous risks and uncertainties involved in product development and commercialization, it is difficult to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, or if, we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability.
Risks Related to Commercialization of Omisirge
We are heavily dependent on the success of Omisirge, including obtaining regulatory approvals in geographies outside of the United States, and if Omisirge is not successfully commercialized, our business will be adversely affected.
To date, we have deployed all our efforts and financial resources to: (i) research and develop our NAM cell expansion platform, our product, Omisirge, and our NK cell portfolio, including conducting preclinical and clinical studies and providing general and administrative support for these operations; (ii) develop and secure our intellectual property portfolio for our product candidates; (iii) establish our manufacturing facility at Kiryat Gat to produce Omisirge for our clinical trials and commercial use, and (iv) establish a commercial organization to support the launch of Omisirge.
Omisirge may not attain market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payers or the medical community. We believe that the degree of market acceptance and our ability to generate revenues from Omisirge will depend on a number of factors, including:
our success in educating medical professionals and patients about the benefits, administration and use of Omisirge;
timing of market introduction of medicines that may compete with Omisirge;
our ability to successfully demonstrate the safety and efficacy of Omisirge;
continued projected growth of the markets in which Omisirge competes;
the effectiveness of our marketing, sales and distribution strategy, and operations, as well as that of any current and future licensees;
the extent to which physicians perform HSCT;
prevalence and severity of any side effects;
if and when we are able to obtain regulatory approvals for additional indications for Omisirge;
availability of, and ability to maintain, coverage and adequate reimbursement and pricing from government and other third-party payers for procedures utilizing Omisirge;
potential or perceived advantages or disadvantages of Omisirge over alternative treatments, including cost of treatment and relative convenience and ease of administration;
strength of sales, marketing and distribution support;
the price of Omisirge, both in absolute terms and relative to alternative treatments;
impact of past and limitation of future medicine price increases;
our ability to maintain a commercially viable manufacturing process that is compliant with cGMP and produces Omisirge at Kiryat Gat or through third party manufacturers;
our ability to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights with respect to Omisirge;
the performance of third-party distribution partners, over which we have limited control; and
medicine labeling or medicine insert requirements of the FDA or other regulatory authorities.
Many of these commercial risks are beyond our control. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able to commercialize Omisirge for its target indication. If we fail to achieve these objectives or overcome the challenges presented above, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize Omisirge. Accordingly, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue through the sale of Omisirge to enable us to continue our business.
We have limited experience producing Omisirge at commercial levels and we have limited experience operating a cGMP manufacturing facility.
We do not have an extensive number of employees with the experience or ability to manufacture Omisirge at commercial levels. Although the FDA has determined that our manufacturing facility at Kiryat Gat is cGMP compliant, the FDA and equivalent foreign regulatory authority may still in the future find violations of cGMP at our facility. We may encounter technical or scientific issues related to manufacturing or development that we may be unable to resolve in a timely manner or with available funds. We also may encounter problems hiring and retaining the experienced specialist scientific, quality control and manufacturing personnel needed to operate our manufacturing process, which could result in delays in our production or difficulties in maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Any problems in our manufacturing process or facilities could make us a less attractive collaborator for potential partners, including larger pharmaceutical companies, which could limit our access to additional attractive development programs. Problems in our manufacturing process or facilities also could restrict our ability to meet market demand for Omisirge.
We currently have a limited marketing and sales organization. If we are unable to establish adequate sales and marketing capabilities to support the commercial launch of Omisirge or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell Omisirge, we may be unable to generate any product revenue.
Although we have a chief executive officer with commercial experience, and we have hired other commercial leaders to lead our efforts to commercialize Omisirge, we currently have a limited sales and marketing organization, and we have limited experience selling and marketing Omisirge. To successfully commercialize Omisirge, we will need to develop these capabilities, either on our own or with others. We may establish a larger sales and marketing organization independently or by utilizing experienced third parties with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize Omisirge in major markets, all of which will be expensive, difficult and time consuming. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact our ability to commercialize Omisirge.
Further, our initial estimate of the size of the required sales force may be materially more or less than the size of the sales force actually required to effectively commercialize Omisirge. As such, we may be required to hire sales representatives and third-party partners to adequately support the commercialization of Omisirge, or we may incur excess costs if we hire more sales representatives than necessary. With respect to certain geographical markets, we may enter into collaborations with other entities to utilize their local marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into such agreements on favorable terms, if at all. We also may enter into collaborations with large pharmaceutical companies to commercialize Omisirge. If our future collaborators do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize Omisirge, if any, and we are unable to develop the necessary marketing capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain our business. We may compete with companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.
Our efforts to educate the medical community, including physicians, hospital pharmacists and stem cell transplant specialists, and third-party payers on the benefits of Omisirge may require significant resources and may never be successful. If Omisirge fails to achieve market acceptance among physicians, patients or third-party payers, we will not be able to generate significant revenue from Omisirge, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Sales of Omisirge will be limited unless it achieves broad market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers, hospital pharmacists and others in the medical community.
The commercial success of Omisirge will depend upon the acceptance of Omisirge by the medical community, including physicians, patients, healthcare payers and hospital personnel, including transplant teams and pharmacists. The degree of market acceptance will depend on a number of factors, including:
the demonstration of clinical safety and efficacy of Omisirge in clinical trials;
the efficacy, potential and perceived advantages of Omisirge over alternative treatments;
the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects;
product labeling or product insert requirements of the FDA or other equivalent foreign regulatory authorities, including any limitations or the black box warning contained in Omisirge’s approved labeling;
distribution and use restrictions imposed by the FDA or other equivalent foreign regulatory authorities agreed to by us as part of a mandatory or voluntary risk management plan;
our ability to obtain third-party payer coverage and adequate reimbursement for Omisirge;
the willingness of patients to pay for drugs out of pocket in the absence of third-party coverage;
the demonstration of the effectiveness of Omisirge in reducing the cost of alternative treatments;
the strength of marketing and distribution support;
the timing of market introduction of competitive products;
the availability of products and their ability to meet market demand; and
publicity concerning Omisirge or competing products and treatments.
There are a number of alternatives to Omisirge, including stem cell transplantation using cells from matched related donors, matched unrelated donors, mismatched unrelated donors, haploidentical donors or unmodified umbilical cord blood. If Omisirge does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payers and hospital personnel, including transplant teams and pharmacists, we may not generate sufficient revenue from Omisirge, and we may not become or remain profitable. In addition, our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payers on the benefits of Omisirge may require significant resources and may never be successful.
It may be difficult for us to profitably sell Omisirge if coverage and reimbursement for Omisirge is limited by government authorities and/or third-party payer policies.
Uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of Omisirge. In the United States and markets in other countries, sales of Omisirge will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payers provide coverage, and establish adequate reimbursement levels, for Omisirge. In the United States, third-party payers include federal and state healthcare programs, private managed care providers, health insurers and other organizations.
The process for determining whether a third-party payer will provide coverage for Omisirge may be separate from the process for establishing the reimbursement rate that such a payer will pay for Omisirge. Third-party payers may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication.
Third-party payers are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products, therapies and services, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy.
We may need to conduct expensive pharmaco-economic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of Omisirge. Omisirge may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. A payer’s decision to provide coverage for Omisirge does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, the determination of one payer to provide coverage for Omisirge does not assure that other payers will also provide such coverage for Omisirge. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.
Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. In the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. The EU provides options for EU Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Other EU Member States allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. In addition, some EU Member States provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status.
Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may required to complete additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies (so called health technology assessments). This Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”) of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States.
Recently, many countries in the EU have increased the amount of discounts required on pharmaceuticals and these efforts could continue as countries attempt to manage healthcare expenditures, especially in light of the severe fiscal and debt crises experienced by many countries in the EU. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription products, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. Political, economic, and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States, and parallel trade (arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States), can further reduce prices.
The marketability of Omisirge may suffer if the government and third-party payers fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, emphasis on managed care in the United States has increased and we expect will continue to increase the pressure on healthcare pricing. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for Omisirge, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.
In addition to any healthcare reform measures that may affect reimbursement, market acceptance and sales of Omisirge will depend on, in part, the extent to which the procedures utilizing Omisirge, performed by health care providers, will be covered by third-party payers, such as government health care programs, commercial insurance and managed care organizations. In the event health care providers and patients accept Omisirge as medically useful, cost effective and safe, there is uncertainty on how exactly Omisirge will be reimbursed. Third-party payers determine the extent to which new products will be covered as a benefit under their plans and the level of reimbursement for any covered product or procedure that may utilize a covered product. Coverage will be dependent on FDA-approval and other factors; reimbursement may vary across payers which is a risk for our product candidates. Establishment of reimbursement guidelines for products is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payers will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for Omisirge.
A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere has been cost containment, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of less expensive products. Third-party payers decide which products and procedures they will pay for and establish reimbursement and co-payment levels. Government and other third-party payers are increasingly challenging the prices charged for health care products and procedures, examining the cost effectiveness of procedures, and the products used in such procedures, in addition to their safety and efficacy, and payers limit coverage and reimbursement to the appropriate patient per a products label. We cannot be sure that coverage will be available for Omisirge, or, if coverage is available, the level of direct or indirect reimbursement.
We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of Omisirge due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and other treatments, has become increasingly intense. As a result, high barriers exist to the successful commercialization of new products. Further, the adoption and implementation of any future governmental cost containment or other health reform initiative may result in additional downward pressure on the price that we may receive for Omisirge.
Reimbursement by a third-party payer may depend upon a number of factors including the third-party payer’s determination that use of Omisirge is:
a covered benefit or part of a covered benefit under its health plan;
safe, effective and medically necessary;
appropriate for the specific patient;
cost-effective; and
neither experimental nor investigational.
There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement are typically made by The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as CMS decides whether and to what extent products, and the procedures that utilize such products, will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payers may follow CMS, but have their own methods and approval processes for determining reimbursement for new products and the procedures that utilize such products.
No uniform policy requirement for coverage and reimbursement exists among third-party payers in the United States. Similarly, health care providers enter into participation agreements with third-party payers wherein reimbursement rates are negotiated. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payer to payer and health care provider to health care provider. As a result, we cannot be sure that coverage or adequate reimbursement will be available for Omisirge or procedures utilizing Omisirge. Also, we cannot be sure that reimbursement amounts will not reduce the demand for, or the price of, Omisirge. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to commercialize Omisirge or achieve profitably.
Omisirge was granted specific ICD-10-PCS codes which map to DRG-014. In addition, CMS did indicate that Omisirge would be reimbursed as a stem cell source for an allogeneic stem cell transplant, and, therefore would be considered an allogeneic stem cell transplant acquisition cost under 42 CFR 412.113(e)(2)(vii), and Medicare’s share will be paid under reasonable cost as a donor source under the Section 108 legislation. As a result, we have withdrawn our NTAP application since the Omisirge reimbursement will be covered under Section 108. There is a risk that CMS may modify their coverage and/or reimbursement approach in the future for new therapies, including for Omisirge.
We are subject to the risk of various legal and regulatory proceedings, including litigation in the ordinary course of business. Our business further entails a significant risk of product liability and our ability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.
In the ordinary course of business, we may become subject to various legal and regulatory proceedings, which may include but are not limited to those involving antitrust, tax, environmental, intellectual property, data privacy and other matters, including general commercial litigation. Any claims raised in legal and regulatory proceedings, whether with or without merit, could be time-consuming and expensive to defend and could divert management’s attention and resources. Additionally, the outcome of legal and regulatory proceedings may differ from our expectations because the outcomes of these proceedings are often difficult to predict reliably. Various factors and developments can lead to changes in our estimates of liabilities and related insurance receivables, where applicable, or may require us to make additional estimates, including new or modified estimates that may be appropriate due to a judicial ruling or judgment, a settlement, regulatory developments or changes in applicable law. A future adverse ruling, settlement or unfavorable development could result in charges that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in any particular period. In accordance with customary practice, we maintain insurance against some, but not all, of these potential claims. In the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance at commercially acceptable premium levels.
Furthermore, our business exposes us to significant product liability risks inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of therapeutic treatments. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our development programs. If we succeed in marketing products, such claims could result in an FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our products, our manufacturing processes and facilities or our marketing programs and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used or suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our products, injury to our reputation, costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management’s time and our resources, substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients and a decline in our share price. We do not currently have product liability insurance and do not anticipate obtaining product liability insurance until such time as we have received FDA or other comparable authority approval for a product and there is a product that is being provided to patients outside of clinical trials. Any insurance we have or may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Omisirge and the administration process may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could limit the commercial profile of an approved label or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, and result in costly and damaging product liability claims against us.
Undesirable side effects, including toxicity caused by Omisirge, could cause the FDA to withdraw approval of Omisirge for any or all targeted indications.
Drug-related, drug-product related, formulation-related and administration-related side effects result in potential product liability claims, which could exceed our insurance coverage.
Patients who require HSCT are often already in severe and advanced stages of disease and have both known and unknown significant pre-existing and potentially life-threatening health risks. Omisirge may be associated with infusion reactions, graft versus host disease, engraftment syndrome, and graft failure, Infusion reactions occurred following Omisirge infusion, including hypertension, mucosal inflammation, dysphagia, dyspnea, vomiting and gastrointestinal toxicity were reported in 47% (55/117) patients transplanted with Omisirge. Grade 3-4 infusion reactions were reported in 15% (18/117) of patients transplanted with Omisirge. Primary graft failure, defined as failure to achieve an absolute neutrophil count greater than 500 per microliter blood by Day 42 after transplantation, occurred in 3% (4/117) of patients in Omisirge clinical trials. Acute and chronic GvHD, including life-threatening and fatal cases, occurred in patients transplanted with Omisirge. Grade II-IV acute GvHD was reported in 58% (68/117) of patients transplanted with Omisirge. Grade III- IV acute GvHD was reported in 17% (20/117) of patients transplanted with Omisirge. Chronic GvHD occurred in 35% (41/117) of patients transplanted with Omisirge. Two patients treated with Omisirge developed post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) in the second-year post-transplant. In our first Phase ½ clinical trial of GDA-201, adverse events included one patient who died of E. coli sepsis. Such events could subject us to costly litigation, require us to pay substantial amounts of money to injured patients, delay, negatively impact or end our opportunity to receive or maintain regulatory approval to market our products, or require us to suspend or abandon our commercialization efforts.
Even in a circumstance in which we do not believe that an adverse event is related to our products, the investigation into the circumstance may be time-consuming or inconclusive. For instance, allogeneic bone marrow transplant, the area in which Omisirge is being used, is associated with serious complications, including death. In addition, there are expected toxicities for patients who receive an allogeneic bone marrow transplant, such as infertility. Thus, while not directly associated with Omisirge, there are attendant risks with the space in which our product candidates operate, and any related investigations may interrupt our development and commercialization efforts, delay our regulatory approval process, or impact and limit the type of regulatory approvals our product candidates receive or maintain. As a result of these factors, a product liability claim, even if successfully defended, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Additionally, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by Omisirge, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including, but not limited to:
Regulatory authorities may suspend, vary or withdraw approvals of Omisirge;
regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label in addition to Omisirge’s “black box” warning, such as a contraindication;
additional restrictions may be imposed on the marketing of Omisirge or the manufacturing processes for Omisirge or any component thereof;
we may be required to create a REMS, or comparable foreign strategies, which could include a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients, a communication plan for healthcare providers and/or other elements to assure safe use;
we may be required to recall Omisirge, change the way Omisirge is administered or conduct additional clinical trials;
we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients;
Omisirge may become less competitive; and
our reputation may suffer.
Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of Omisirge, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Risks Related to Government Regulation
Omisirge will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.
Omisirge will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies, and submission of safety, efficacy, and other post- market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and European Union and requirements of comparable regulatory authorities.
Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive requirements from the FDA, EU, national competent authorities of the EU Member States and additional regulatory authorities, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections, including periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, competent authorities of EU Member States or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to monitor assess and ensure compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any approved marketing application. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including shutdown of the third-party vendor or invalidation of drug product lots or processes, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product and significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money, and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production, and quality control.
We will have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our product. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs and biologics are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. As such, we may not promote our products “off-label” for indications or uses for which we do not have approval. The holder of an approved application must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. We could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical studies to verify the safety and efficacy of our products in general or in specific patient subsets. An unsuccessful post- marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.
If a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, such regulatory authority may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory authority or enforcement authority may, among other things:
issue warning letters;
impose civil or criminal penalties;
Suspend, vary or withdraw regulatory approval;
suspend any of our clinical studies;
refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications submitted by us;
impose restrictions on our operations, including closing our contract manufacturers’ facilities; or
seize or detain products, or require a product recall.
Failure to comply with EU and EU Member State laws that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing authorization of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the marketing authorization, or with other applicable regulatory requirements may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant marketing authorization, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the marketing authorization, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.
Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected.
Moreover, the policies of the FDA and of other equivalent foreign regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates.
We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.
We may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designations that we have obtained, including market exclusivity, which may cause our revenue, if any, to be reduced.
We obtained orphan drug designation for Omisirge from the FDA and the European Commission for the treatment of hematologic malignancies, and we may pursue orphan drug designation for certain of our future product candidates. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug or biologic product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the European Union, the European Commission, following the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, or COMP, opinion, grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition either (i) affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union or (ii) without the benefits derived from orphan sales of the drug in the European Union would be insufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biological product. In addition,there must be no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or, if such a method exists, the medicine must be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.
In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages, and application fee waivers. In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity the orphan patient population. In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and, potentially, ten years of market exclusivity following the granting of marketing authorization. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. However, this period may be reduced to six years if, if at the end of the fifth year, the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold.
Even though we obtained orphan drug designation for Omisirge from the FDA for the treatment of hematologic malignancies and from the European Commission for allogeneic ex-vivo-expanded umbilical cord blood-derived haematopoietic CD34+ progenitor cells and allogeneic non-expanded umbilical cord blood-derived haematopoietic mature myeloid and lymphoid cells (also known as NiCord), orphan drug exclusivity may not effectively protect Omisirge from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or European Commission can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA or European Commission concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug or biologic nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.
Enacted and future healthcare legislation may affect the prices we may set for Omisirge.
In the United States, the European Union and other jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the PPACA, was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private payers. Among the provisions of the PPACA, those of greatest importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries include the following: imposed new fees on entities that manufacture or import certain branded prescription drugs; expanded pharmaceutical manufacturer obligations to provide discounts and rebates to certain government programs; implemented a licensure framework for follow-on biologic products; expanded health care fraud and abuse laws; revised the methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers to the state and federal government under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for certain drugs and biologics, including products that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; imposed an additional rebate similar to an inflation penalty on new formulations of drugs; extended the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to utilization of prescriptions of individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; expanded the 340B program which caps the price at which manufacturers can sell covered outpatient pharmaceuticals to specified hospitals, clinics and community health centers; and provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research.
There have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the PPACA. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or Tax Act, included a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the PPACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate”. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the PPACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Further, there have been a number of health reform measures by the Biden administration that have impacted the PPACA. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in PPACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and by creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the PPACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the PPACA and our business.
In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the PPACA was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, led to aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect until 2032, unless additional action is taken by Congress. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws or any other similar laws introduced in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other health care funding, which could negatively affect our customers and accordingly, our financial operations.
Moreover, payment methodologies are subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. For example, CMS has developed value-based payment models for a variety of care settings, including the inpatient prospective payment system used for reimbursing inpatient hospital services. In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several U.S. Presidential executive orders, Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under government payer programs, and review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs. For example, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs the Secretary of HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D, and subjects drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law, and (ii) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. These provisions take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. In addition, in response to the Biden administration’s October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future. Further, on December 7, 2023, the Biden administration announced an initiative to control the price of prescription drugs through the use of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act. On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published for comment a Draft Interagency Guidance Framework for Considering the Exercise of March-In Rights which for the first time includes the price of a product as one factor an agency can use when deciding to exercise march-in rights. While march-in rights have not previously been exercised, it is uncertain if that will continue under the new framework.
We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for Omisirge or additional pricing pressures.
Individual states in the United States have also increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. For example, on January 5, 2024, the FDA approved Florida’s Section 804 Importation Program (SIP) proposal to import certain drugs from Canada for specific state healthcare programs. It is unclear how this program will be implemented, including which drugs will be chosen, and whether it will be subject to legal challenges in the United States or Canada. Other states have also submitted SIP proposals that are pending review by the FDA. Any such approved importation plans, when implemented, may result in lower drug prices for products covered by those programs. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third- party payers or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing.
In the European Union, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the European Union or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than European Union, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most European Union member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Any increase in European Union and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post- approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In markets outside of the United States and European Union, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.
We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action in the United States, the European Union or any other jurisdiction. If we or any third parties we may engage are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or such third parties are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidates may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.
Our business operations and current and future relationships with healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payers, patient organizations and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.
Our business operations and current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payers, patient organizations and customers, may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse, privacy and security and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute our product candidates, if approved. Such laws include:
the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or certain rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of, any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under any U.S. federal healthcare program, such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
the U.S. federal civil and criminal false claims, including the civil False Claims Act, which prohibit, among other things, including through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and civil monetary penalties laws which prohibit individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the U.S. federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the U.S. federal government. Pharmaceutical manufacturers can cause false claims to be presented to the U.S. federal government by engaging in impermissible marketing practices, such as the off-label promotion of a product for an indication for which it has not received FDA approval. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act;
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the healthcare fraud statute implemented under HIPAA or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, which also imposes certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy and security of individually identifiable health information of covered entities subject to the rule, such as health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and certain healthcare providers, as well as their business associates, independent contractors of a covered entity that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information on their behalf and their subcontractors that use, disclose, access, or otherwise process individually identifiable health information;
the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA, which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices;
the U.S. Public Health Service Act, which prohibits, among other things, the introduction into interstate commerce of a biological product unless a biologics license is in effect for that product;
the U.S. Physician Payments Sunshine Act and its implementing regulations, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the government information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;
analogous U.S. state laws and regulations, including: state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to our business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payer, including private insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws and regulations that require drug manufacturers to file reports relating to pricing and marketing information, which requires tracking gifts and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities; state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, which prohibits, among other things, U.S. companies and their employees and agents from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to non-U.S. government officials, employees of public international organizations and non-U.S. government owned or affiliated entities, candidates for non-U.S. political office, and non-U.S. political parties or officials thereof; and
similar healthcare laws and regulations in the European Union and other jurisdictions, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers.
Outside the United States, interactions between pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals are also governed by strict laws, such as national anti-bribery laws of European countries, national sunshine rules, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.
Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment, which could affect our ability to operate our business. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired.
Legislative or regulatory healthcare reforms in the United States and abroad may make it more difficult and costly for us to produce, market and distribute our products after clearance or approval is obtained.
From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the manufacture and marketing of regulated products or the reimbursement thereof. In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require changes to manufacturing methods; recall, replacement, or discontinuance of Omisirge; and additional recordkeeping.
We face competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.
The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. We face competition from major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established and early-stage biotechnology companies, and universities and other research institutions. Many of our competitors have greater financial and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and more experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Large pharmaceutical companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing pharmaceutical products. These companies also have significantly greater research, sales and marketing capabilities and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions.
Established pharmaceutical companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel therapeutics or to in-license novel therapeutics that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. As a result of all of these factors, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection or FDA approval or discovering, developing and commercializing treatments in the rare disease indications that we are targeting before we do. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies.
Doctors may recommend that patients undergo stem cell transplantation using cells from matched related donors, matched or mismatched unrelated donors, haploidentical donors or unmodified umbilical cord blood instead of using Omisirge or may choose other therapy options instead of our other NAM-derived product candidates. In addition, there are several clinical-stage development programs that seek to improve umbilical cord blood transplantation through the use of ex vivo expansion technologies to increase the quantity of hematopoietic stem cells for use in HSCT or the use of ex vivo differentiation technologies to increase the quantity of hematopoietic progenitor cells for use in HSCT. We are aware of several other companies with product candidates in various stages of development for allogeneic HSCT grafts, including but not limited to ExCellThera and Garuda Therapeutics. In addition, many universities and private and public research institutes may develop technologies of interest to us but license them to our competitors. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, technologies and drug products that are more effective or less costly than Omisirge or any other product candidates that we are currently developing or that we may develop, which could render our products obsolete and noncompetitive.
We believe that our ability to successfully compete will depend on, among other things:
our ability to protect, develop and maintain intellectual property rights related to our product;
our ability to maintain a good relationship with regulatory authorities;
our ability to commercialize and market any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval;
market perception and acceptance of stem cell therapeutics;
acceptance of our product by physicians and institutions that perform HSCT procedures;
the price of our product;
coverage and adequate levels of reimbursement under private and governmental health insurance plans, including Medicare; and
our ability to manufacture and sell commercial quantities of Omisirge to the market.
If our competitors market products that are more effective, safer or less expensive than Omisirge, we may not achieve commercial success. Any inability to successfully compete effectively will adversely impact our business and financial prospects.
Even though Omisirge is approved by the FDA for marketing in the United States, we may never obtain approval of Omisirge outside of the United States, which would limit our market opportunities and adversely affect our business.
Approval of a product candidate in the United States by the FDA does not ensure approval of such product candidate by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by non-U.S. regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or by the FDA. Sales of Omisirge or our other product candidates outside of the United States will be subject to the regulatory requirements of other jurisdictions governing clinical trials and marketing approval. Even if the FDA grants marketing approval for a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities in other countries also must approve the manufacturing and marketing of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and more onerous than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. In many countries outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our product candidates, if approved, is also subject to approval.
Even if a product candidate is approved in another country, the applicable regulatory authority may limit the indications for which the product may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the product labeling or require expensive and time-consuming additional clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval. Regulatory authorities in countries outside of the United States and the European Union also have requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those countries. Obtaining non-U.S. regulatory approvals and compliance with non-U.S. regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product candidates in certain countries.
Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Also, regulatory approval for a product candidate may be withdrawn. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of Omisirge or our other product candidates will be harmed and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects will be adversely affected.
The misuse or off-label use of our products may harm our reputation in the marketplace, result in injuries that lead to product liability suits or result in costly investigations, fines or sanctions by regulatory bodies if we are deemed to have engaged in the promotion of these uses, any of which could be costly to our business.
In the United States, we obtained marketing approval for Omisirge for use in adult and pediatric patients 12 years and older with hematologic malignancies who are planned for umbilical cord blood transplantation following myeloablative conditioning to reduce the time to neutrophil recovery and the incidence of infection. We will train our Omisirge marketing and sales personnel to not promote Omisirge for any other uses outside of any FDA-cleared indications for use, known as “off-label use.”
We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using Omisirge off-label, when in the physician’s independent professional medical judgment, he or she deems it appropriate. As a result, there may be increased risk of injury to patients if physicians attempt to use Omisirge for these uses for which they are not approved. Furthermore, the use Omisirge for indications other than those approved by the FDA or any non-U.S. regulatory body may not effectively treat such conditions, which could harm our reputation in the marketplace among physicians and patients.
If the FDA, the national competent authorities of the EU Member States any other regulatory body in a jurisdiction in which we operate determines that our promotional materials or training constitute promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance or imposition of an untitled letter, which is used for violators that do not necessitate a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state or non-U.S. enforcement authorities might take action under other regulatory authority, such as false claims laws, if they consider our business activities to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including, but not limited to, criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment of our operations.
We are subject to stringent and evolving United States and foreign laws, regulations and rules, contractual obligations, industry standards, policies and other obligations related to data privacy and security. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation (including class claims) and mass arbitration demands; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse business consequences .
In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive data, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and sensitive third-party data (collectively, sensitive information). Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security.
In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). For example, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable protected health information. In the past few years, numerous U.S. states—including California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah—have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”), (collectively, “CCPA”) applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for fines of up to $7,500 per intentional violation and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Although the CCPA exempts some data processed in the context of clinical trials, the CCPA increases compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we maintain about California residents. similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. While these states, like the CCPA, also exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these developments further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us, the third parties upon whom we rely, and our customers.
Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards govern data privacy and security. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (“EU GDPR”), the United Kingdom’s GDPR (“UK GDPR”), Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais, or “LGPD”) (Law No. 13,709/2018), Israel’s Protection of Privacy Law, Singapore’s Personal Data Protection Act impose strict requirements for processing personal data.
‘For example, under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions; fines of up to 20 million Euros under the EU GDPR, 17.5 million pounds sterling under the UK GDPR or, in each case, 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater; or private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. In the ordinary course of business, we may transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and the United Kingdom (“UK”) have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA’ standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-US Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers out of Europe for allegedly violating the ’ GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are contractually subject to industry standards adopted by industry groups and, we are, or may become subject to such obligations in the future. We are also bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. For example, certain privacy laws, such as the GDPR, require our customers to impose specific contractual restrictions on their service providers.
We publish privacy policies, marketing materials and other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials, or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators or other adverse consequences. Obligations related to data privacy and security (and consumers’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty.
Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources, which may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf.
We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our data privacy and security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties on whom we rely on may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. If we or the third parties on which we rely fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with applicable data privacy and security obligations, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to: government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; orders to destroy or not use personal data; and imprisonment of company officials. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data nda the number of violations. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations.
Risks Related to our Reliance on Third Parties
We rely on a limited number of suppliers to provide the raw materials other than cord blood (serum and growth factor) needed to produce our product candidates. We have a relationship with a single supplier, Miltenyi Biotec GmbH, for certain equipment (columns and beads) necessary to manufacture our product candidates.
We do not have any control over the availability of these raw materials or pieces of equipment. If we or our providers are unable to purchase these raw materials or equipment on acceptable terms, at sufficient quality levels, or in adequate quantities, if at all, the development and commercialization of our product candidates or any future product candidates, could be delayed or there could be a shortage in supply, which could impair our ability to meet our development objectives for our product candidates or generate revenue from the sale of any approved products.
Even following our establishment of our own planned cGMP-compliant manufacturing capabilities, we intend to continue to rely on third-party suppliers for these raw materials and pieces of equipment, which will expose us to risks including:
failure of any supplier to become or maintain its status as a cGMP-compliant manufacturer of raw materials, which status is a prerequisite to our attainment of a BLA for Omisirge and our other product candidate;
termination or nonrenewal of supply or service agreements with third parties in a manner or at a time that is costly or damaging to us; and
disruptions to the operations of our third-party suppliers and service providers caused by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy of the supplier or service provider.
Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets and other intellectual property, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets and other intellectual property will be misappropriated or disclosed.
Because we rely on third parties to provide us with the materials that we use to develop and manufacture Omisirge, we may, at times, share trade secrets and other intellectual property with such third parties. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements, or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets and intellectual property. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.
Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors or other third parties may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of these agreements, independent development or publication of information including our trade secrets by third parties. A competitor’s or other third party’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We face a variety of challenges and uncertainties associated with our dependence on the availability of human umbilical cord blood units, or CBUs, at cord blood banks for the manufacture of Omisirge.
CBUs are one of the raw materials for the manufacture of Omisirge. The CBUs currently used in the manufacture of Omisirge are procured directly by the clinical cell processing facilities from cord blood banks, which hold more than 800,000 CBUs that have been donated, processed and cryopreserved. However, the availability of CBUs for the manufacture of Omisirge depends on a number of regulatory, political, economic and technical factors outside of our control, including:
government policies relating to the regulation of CBUs for clinical use;
the availability of government funding for cord blood banks;
pregnancy and birth rates, and the willingness of mothers to consent to the donation of CBUs and the terms of such consent;
individual cord blood bank policies and practices relating to CBU acquisition and banking;
the pricing of CBUs;
the methods used in searching for and matching CBUs to patients, which involve emerging technology related to current and future CBU parameters that guide the selection of an appropriate CBU for transplantation; and
methods for the procurement and shipment of CBUs and their handling and storage at clinical sites, any or all of which may have been complicated by public health policies aimed at slowing the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Additionally, we do not have control over the types of CBUs used in the manufacture of Omisirge. We rely heavily on these clinical cell processing facilities to procure CBUs from cord blood banks that are compliant with government regulations and within the current standard of care. In addition, we may identify specific characteristics of CBUs, such as their volume and red blood cell content, that may limit their ability to be used to manufacture Omisirge even though these CBUs may otherwise be suitable for use in allogeneic transplant. As a result, the requirement for CBUs to meet our specifications may limit the potential inventory of CBUs eligible for use in the manufacture of Omisirge. There is a large variability in the tests, methods and equipment utilized by cord blood banks in testing CBUs before storage. This could result in CBUs that are found to be unsuitable for production after their arrival at the manufacturing site. In the United States, cord blood banks are required to file a BLA and meet certain continued regulatory requirements in order to bank and provide CBUs for transplantation. Despite these requirements, most of the cord blood banks in the United States are not licensed. While the FDA currently allows CBUs from unlicensed cord blood banks to be used for transplantation and we have used CBUs from such facilities in the manufacture of Omisirge for our clinical trials, the FDA may later prohibit the use of such CBUs for transplantation. Additionally, although CBUs from non-U.S. cord blood banks, which are generally unlicensed, are currently available in the United States for use in transplantation and we have used CBUs from non-U.S. cord blood banks in our clinical trials, we will not be able to use cord blood from non-U.S. cord blood banks for the manufacturing of Omisirge. Any inability to procure adequate supplies of CBUs will adversely impact our ability to develop and commercialize Omisirge.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
If we are unable to obtain, maintain or protect intellectual property rights related to Omisirge, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.
We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies and product candidates. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and in other countries with respect to our proprietary technology and product candidates.
We have sought to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and in other countries, with respect to our novel technologies and product candidates, which are important to our business. Patent prosecution is expensive and time consuming. We may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection.
Further, the patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions for which legal principles remain unsettled. This renders the patent prosecution process particularly expensive and time-consuming. There is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patent applications has been found and that there are no material defects in the form, preparation, or prosecution of our patent applications, which can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue, and even if such patents cover our product, because the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, our patents or pending patent applications may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad, which may result in such patents being narrowed, found unenforceable or invalidated. For example, we may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, or become involved in post-grant review procedures, oppositions, derivations, reexaminations, inter parts review, or IPR, or interference proceedings, in the United States or elsewhere, challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patent applications and any future patents may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product, or prevent others from designing around our claims. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.
If we cannot obtain and maintain effective patent rights for our product, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business and results of operations would be harmed.
In addition to the protection afforded by any patents that have been or may be granted, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, and for processes for which patents are difficult to enforce. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data, trade secrets and intellectual property by maintaining the physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. Notwithstanding these measures, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets and intellectual property may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. Although we expect all our employees and consultants and other third parties who may be involved in the development of intellectual property for us to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary knowhow, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that we have entered into such agreements with all applicable third parties or that all such agreements have been duly executed. Even if we have entered into such agreements, we cannot assure you that our counterparties will comply with the terms of such agreements or that the assignment of intellectual property rights under such agreements is self-executing. We may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights. Even if we are successful in prosecuting or defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our senior management and scientific personnel.
We also cannot assure you that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets and intellectual property could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets and intellectual property are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. Any of the foregoing could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Patent reform legislation and rule changes could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of any issued patents.
Our ability to obtain patents is highly uncertain because, to date, some legal principles remain unsettled, there has not been a consistent policy regarding the breadth or interpretation of claims allowed in patents in the United States and the specific content of patents and patent applications that are necessary to support and interpret patent claims is highly uncertain due to the complex nature of the relevant legal, scientific, and factual issues. Changes in either patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.
For example, on September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The USPTO has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the Leahy-Smith Act and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions only became effective in March 2013. Prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent was entitled to the patent. As of March 2013, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first to file a patent application is generally entitled to the patent. 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 be certain that 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 Leahy-Smith Act has also introduced procedures making it easier for third parties to challenge issued patents, as well as to intervene in the prosecution of patent applications. Finally, the Leahy-Smith Act contains new statutory provisions that require the USPTO to issue new regulations for their implementation, and it may take the courts years to interpret the provisions of the new statute.
However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. Further, 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. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have owned or licensed or that we might obtain in the future. Any inability to obtain, enforce, and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition.
Similarly, changes in patent laws and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions or changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we own or that we may obtain in the future. Further, the laws of some countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. For example, if the issuance to us, in a given country, of a patent covering an invention is not followed by the issuance, in other countries, of patents covering the same invention, or if any judicial interpretation of the validity, enforceability, or scope of the claims, or the written description or enablement, in a patent issued in one country is not similar to the interpretation given to the corresponding patent issued in another country, our ability to protect our intellectual property in those countries may be limited. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may materially diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection. Any of the foregoing could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.
Our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. If other entities use trademarks similar to ours in different jurisdictions, or have senior rights to ours, it could interfere with our use of our current trademarks throughout the world.
Intellectual property rights of third parties could adversely affect our ability to continue to commercialize our product. Such litigation or licenses could be costly or not available on commercially reasonable terms.
It is inherently difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate without infringing on or otherwise violating third-party rights. Our competitive position may suffer if patents issued to third parties or other third-party intellectual property rights cover our product or elements thereof, or our manufacturing or uses relevant to our development plans. In such cases, we may not be in a position to continue to commercialize our product unless we successfully pursue litigation to nullify or invalidate the third-party intellectual property right concerned, or enter into a license agreement with the intellectual property right holder, if available on commercially reasonable terms.
There may also be pending patent applications that if they result in issued patents, could be alleged to be infringed by our product. If such an infringement claim should be brought and be successful, we may be required to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed, we may be forced to cease the commercialization of our product, or we may need to seek a license from any patent holders. No assurances can be given that a license will be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we were able to obtain such a license, it could be granted on non-exclusive terms, thereby providing our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us.
It is also possible that we have failed to identify relevant third-party patents or applications. For example, U.S. applications filed before November 29, 2000, and certain U.S. applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the U.S. remain confidential until patents issue. Patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing to which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering our product or platform technology could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Additionally, pending patent applications which have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our platform technologies or our product . Third-party intellectual property right holders may also actively bring infringement claims against us. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully defend, settle or otherwise resolve such infringement claims. If we are unable to successfully settle future claims on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to engage in or continue costly, unpredictable and time-consuming litigation. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, we may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing our product that are held to be infringing. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign our product so that we no longer infringe the third-party intellectual property rights, which may not be commercially feasible. 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 otherwise significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts.
Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringing or otherwise violating the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There have been many lawsuits and other proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions, post grant review, IPR, and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO and corresponding non-U.S. patent offices. Numerous U.S. and non-U.S. issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we developed our product. As the pharmaceutical industry expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties or other intellectual property claims.
Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture, or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our product may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of our product, any materials formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to continue to commercialize such product unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be invalid or unenforceable.
Similarly, if any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture, or methods of use, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to continue to commercialize our product unless we obtain a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further commercialize our product. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.
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. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares. Any of the foregoing could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
’ We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.
Competitors may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate our intellectual property or that of our licensors that we may acquire in the future. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. If we initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering our product, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are common, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review, inter parties review, or IPR, and equivalent proceedings in non-U.S. jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product. 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, our patent counsel, and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could have a material adverse impact on our business.
Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our 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 harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.
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. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares. Any of the foregoing could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.
We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and independent contractors 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 our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any of our employees’ former employers or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship of our intellectual property.
We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in or right to compensation with respect to our current patent and patent applications, future patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who were involved in developing our product. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or claiming the right to compensation. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. To the extent that our employees have not effectively waived the right to compensation with respect to inventions that they helped create, they may be able to assert claims for compensation with respect to our future revenue. As a result, we may receive less revenue from future products if such claims are successful, which in turn could impact our future profitability, business, results of operations and prospects.
We may become subject to claims for remuneration or royalties for assigned service invention rights by our employees, which could result in litigation and adversely affect our business.
A significant portion of our intellectual property has been developed by our employees in the course of their employment for us. Under the Israeli Patent Law, 5727-1967, or the Patent Law, inventions conceived by an employee in the course and as a result of or arising from his or her employment with a company are regarded as “service inventions,” which belong to the employer, absent a specific agreement between the employee and employer giving the employee service invention rights. The Patent Law also provides that if there is no such agreement between an employer and an employee, the Israeli Compensation and Royalties Committee, or the Committee, a body constituted under the Patent Law, shall determine whether the employee is entitled to remuneration for his inventions. Case law clarifies that the right to receive consideration for “service inventions” can be waived by the employee and that in certain circumstances, such waiver does not necessarily have to be explicit. The Committee will examine, on a case-by-case basis, the general contractual framework between the parties, using interpretation rules of the general Israeli contract laws. Further, the Committee has not yet determined one specific formula for calculating this remuneration (but rather uses the criteria specified in the Patent Law). Although we generally enter into assignment-of-invention agreements with our employees pursuant to which such individuals assign to us all rights to any inventions created in the scope of their employment or engagement with us, we may face claims demanding remuneration in consideration for assigned inventions. As a consequence of such claims, we could be required to pay additional remuneration or royalties to our current and/or former employees, or be forced to litigate such claims, which could negatively affect our business.
Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.
Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our patents and/or applications and any patent rights we may own or license in the future. We rely on our outside counsel or third-party service providers to pay these fees due to the USPTO and non-U.S. patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance could harm our business.
We may enjoy only limited geographical protection with respect to certain patents and we may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Filing and prosecuting patent applications and defending patents covering our product in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our product, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
In addition, we may decide to abandon national and regional patent applications before grant. The examination of each national or regional patent application is an independent proceeding. As a result, patent applications in the same family may issue as patents in some jurisdictions, such as in the United States, but may issue as patents with claims of different scope or may even be refused in other jurisdictions. It is also quite common that depending on the country, the scope of patent protection may vary for the same product candidate or technology. The laws of some jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws or rules and regulations in the United States, and many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in such jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in other jurisdictions, whether or not successful, 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 as patents, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against 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.
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. Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in our expected significant markets, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our product. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product in all our expected significant non-U.S. markets. If we encounter difficulties in protecting, or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting, the intellectual property rights important for our business in such jurisdictions, the value of these rights may be diminished and we may face additional competition from others in those jurisdictions.
Some countries also have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In those countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patents. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired.
Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product 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 covering our product are obtained, once the patent life has expired for our product, we may be open to competition from competitive medications, including biosimilar and generic medications. Our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing product candidates similar or identical to Omisirge.
Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of any FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and similar legislation in the European Union. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit 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 covering 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 product 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 preclinical 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.
Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.
The degree of future protection 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. The following examples are illustrative:
others may be able to make products that are similar to our product but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own;
we might not have been the first to invent the inventions covered by our patents or the first to file patent applications covering our inventions;
others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights;
it is possible that our pending patent applications will not lead to issued patents;
issued patents that we own may be held invalid or unenforceable as a result of legal challenges by our competitors;
issued patents that we own may not provide coverage for all aspects of our product in all countries;
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; and
the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business.
Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Risks Related to Our Business Operations
We rely on a single facility to manufacture Omisirge that is located in Kiryat Gat, Israel, proximate to the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Hamas in and around the Gaza Strip. Damage to this site, or hesitancy on the part of our customers to place orders with us, as a result of such hostilities or otherwise could have a material adverse effect on our ability to manufacture Omisirge and generate revenue.
We are solely dependent on our facility in Kiryat Gat, Israel for the manufacture of the commercial supply of Omisirge. This facility has been cGMP certified by the FDA and completed physical inspection by the Israeli Ministry of Health. Ongoing hostilities between Israel and Hamas in and around the Gaza Strip could severely disrupt our manufacturing operations at our Kiryat Gat facility, as could other hostilities that could occur whether or not related to the current violence, as well as severe natural disasters or other damage to this site. If any event were to occur that prevents us from using all or a significant portion of this facility or otherwise disrupts our operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue manufacturing Omisirge for a substantial period of time in sufficient quantities or at all. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans that we have in place currently are limited and are unlikely to prove adequate to guarantee a continuation of supply of Omisirge in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. Even if the physical plant of our Kiryat Gat facility is not damaged in the ongoing hostilities, if certain or all of our on-site employees are called for military service, we may be unable to produce Omisirge at our Kiryat Gat facility at anticipated levels or at all. Furthermore, our customers may be hesitant to place orders with us as a result of these hostilities. The ongoing hostilities could also disrupt our supply chain. We rely on our ability to import starting materials into Israel (including CBUs) to manufacture Omisirge and our ability to export Omisirge manufactured for a given patient. If the conflict between Israel and Hamas affects the flow of air travel into and out of Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv, it could have a material adverse impact on our ability to manufacture and deliver Omisirge and generate revenue. Failure to produce our sole commercial product for an extended period of time could lead to a material decline in our revenue and our ability to function as an ongoing commercial enterprise.
Our commercial insurance does not cover losses that may occur as a result of events associated with war and terrorism, including any prospective damage to our facility at Kiryat Gat resulting therefrom. Although the Israeli government currently covers the reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war, we cannot assure you that such government coverage will be maintained or that it will sufficiently cover any such potential damages. Any losses or damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Completion of our restructuring process depends in part on our ability to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.
We are highly dependent on our employees, consultants and advisors. The loss of their services without a proper replacement may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives, including completion of our restructuring process. Our employees, consultants and advisors may leave our employment at any time. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms or at all, given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical companies for individuals with similar skill sets and the increased uncertainty caused by our restructuring process. The inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel, or the loss of the services of any members of our senior management team without proper replacement, may impede our ability to complete our restructuring process.
Business disruptions could seriously harm our future revenue and financial condition and increase costs and expenses.
Our operations and those of our third-party suppliers and collaborators could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes or other extreme weather conditions, public health crises, labor disputes, war or other business interruptions. Although we have limited business interruption insurance policies in place, any interruption could come with high costs for us, as salaries and loan payments would usually continue. Moreover, any interruption could seriously harm one or more of our research, development or manufacturing programs, the commercialization of any approved product or our clinical trial operations.
The recent attack by Hamas and other terrorist organizations from the Gaza Strip on Israel and Israel’s declaration of war against them, and the war in Ukraine, causes and may continue to cause geopolitical and macroeconomic uncertainty, and an escalation of the conflict could disrupt our supply chain. Furthermore, both the war in Ukraine and the war between Hamas and Israel have resulted in significant disruptions to global financial markets, which may adversely affect our ability to raise capital or complete our strategic restructuring process. The resulting high inflation rates may materially affect our business and corresponding financial position and cash flows. Inflationary factors, such as increases in interest rates and overhead costs may adversely affect our operating results. Rising interest rates also present a recent challenge impacting the U.S. economy and could make it more difficult for us to obtain traditional financing on acceptable terms, if at all, in the future. Furthermore, such economic conditions have produced downward pressure on share prices.
If our information technology systems or those third parties upon which we rely or our data, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences resulting from such compromise, including but not limited to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse consequences.
In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive data, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and sensitive third-party data (collectively, sensitive information). Cyber-attacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud, and other similar activities threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our sensitive information and information technology systems, and those of the third parties upon which we rely. Such threats are prevalent and continue to rise, are increasingly difficult to detect, and come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we, the third parties upon which we rely, and our customers may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to produce, sell and distribute our goods and services.
We and the third parties upon which we rely are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing attacks, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, attacks enhanced or facilitated by AI, and other similar threats.
In particular, severe ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, ability to provide our products or services, loss of sensitive information and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. Remote work has become more common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees utilize network connections, computers and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit and in public locations.
Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate companies into our information technology environment and security program.
We rely on third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to process sensitive information in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, hosting companies, contract research organizations, and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. If our third-party service providers experience a security incident or other interruption, we could experience adverse consequences.
While we may be entitled to damages if our third-party service providers fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award. In addition, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties’ infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised.
While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption that could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive information or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties upon whom we rely. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to provide our products. We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities (including our clinical trial activities) to try to protect against security incidents.
Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures or industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and sensitive information. Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders, including affected individuals, customers, regulators, and investors, of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences, such as government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; diversion of management attention; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may prevent or cause customers to stop using our products, deter new customers from using our products, and negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.
Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations. We cannot be sure that our insurance coverage will be adequate or sufficient to protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices, that such coverage will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or that such coverage will pay future claims. In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position.
We may be subject to extensive environmental, health and safety, and other laws and regulations in multiple jurisdictions.
Our business involves the controlled use, directly or indirectly through our service providers, of hazardous materials, various biological compounds and chemicals; therefore, we, our agents and our service providers may be subject to various environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing air emissions, water and wastewater discharges, noise emissions, the use, management and disposal of hazardous, radioactive and biological materials and wastes and the cleanup of contaminated sites. The risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be eliminated. If an accident, spill or release of any regulated chemicals or substances occurs, we could be held liable for resulting damages, including for investigation, remediation and monitoring of the contamination, including natural resource damages, the costs of which could be substantial. We are also subject to numerous environmental, health and workplace safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures, exposure to blood-borne pathogens and the handling of biohazardous materials and chemicals. Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover the costs and expenses that may be incurred because of injuries to our employees resulting from the use of these materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. Additional or more stringent federal, state, local or non-U.S. laws and regulations affecting our operations may be adopted in the future. We may incur substantial capital costs and operating expenses and may be required to obtain consents to comply with any of these or certain other laws or regulations and the terms and conditions of any permits or licenses required pursuant to such laws and regulations. For instance, we have undergone inspections and obtained approvals from various governmental agencies. We hold a general business license from the City of Jerusalem that is valid until December 31, 2027.
We also hold a toxic substances permit from the Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection (the Hazardous Material Division) and a Certificate of GMP Compliance of a Manufacturer from the Israeli Ministry of Health - Pharmaceutical Administration. Failure to renew any of the foregoing licenses and permits may harm our on-going and future operations. In addition, fines and penalties may be imposed for noncompliance with environmental, health and safety and other laws and regulations or for the failure to have, or comply with the terms and conditions of our business license, or required environmental or other permits or consents.
Our employees and independent contractors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.
We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees and independent contractors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with FDA and other equivalent foreign regulations, provide accurate information to the FDA or equivalent foreign regulatory authorities, comply with manufacturing standards we may establish, comply with federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee and independent contractor misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, including individually identifiable information, creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of product candidates. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.
Under current Israeli law, we may not be able to enforce employees’ covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of our former employees.
We generally enter into non-competition agreements with our key employees, in most cases within the framework of their employment agreements.
These agreements prohibit our key employees, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors for a limited period. Under applicable Israeli law, we may be unable to enforce these agreements or any part thereof. If we cannot enforce our noncompetition agreements with our employees, then we may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former employees, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and ability to capitalize on our proprietary information.
Risks Related to Ownership of our Ordinary Shares
The market price of our ordinary shares may fluctuate significantly, which could result in substantial losses by our investors.
The stock market in general, and the market for pharmaceutical companies in particular, has experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, you may not be able to sell your ordinary shares at or above the price you paid for them. The following factors, in addition to other risk factors described in this section, may have a significant impact on the market price of our ordinary shares:
investor reaction to the news of our restructuring process;
success of the commercial launch of Omisirge;
announcements of therapeutic innovations or new products by us or our competitors;
adverse actions taken by regulatory authorities with respect to our manufacturing supply chain or sales and marketing activities;
changes or developments in laws or regulations, and payer reimbursement requirements applicable to any candidate product in any of our platforms;
any adverse changes to our relationship with manufacturers or suppliers, especially manufacturers of candidate products;
any intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other actions in which we may become involved;
announcements concerning our competitors or the pharmaceutical industry in general;
achievement of expected product sales and profitability or our failure to meet expectations;
our commencement of, or involvement in, litigation;
any changes in our board of directors or management;
any escalation or expansion of the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Hamas in and around the Gaza Strip or in the Middle East more generally; and
the other factors described in this “Risk Factors” section.
If our quarterly operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the price of our ordinary shares could decline substantially. Furthermore, any quarterly fluctuations in our operating results may, in turn, cause the price of our shares to fluctuate substantially. We believe that quarterly comparisons of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication of our future performance.
Further, the stock market in general, the Nasdaq Global Market and the market for biotechnology companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of companies like ours, including due to coordinate buying and selling activities and market manipulation. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our ordinary shares regardless of our actual operating performance. In addition, a systemic decline in the financial markets, recent and potential future disruptions in access to bank deposits or lending commitments due to bank failures and related factors beyond our control may cause our share price to decline rapidly and unexpectedly. Price volatility of our ordinary shares might be worse if the trading volume of our ordinary shares is low. In the past, following periods of market volatility, shareholders have often instituted securities class action litigation. If we were involved in securities litigation, it could have a substantial cost and divert resources and attention of management from our business, even if we are successful.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our ordinary shares in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our ordinary shares and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that sales may have on the prevailing market price of our ordinary shares. In addition, we have registered all ordinary shares that we may issue under our equity compensation plans, and, as such, these shares can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance.
Moreover, the liquidity of our ordinary shares may be limited, not only in terms of the number of ordinary shares that can be bought and sold at a given price, but by potential delays in the timing of executing transactions in our ordinary shares and a reduction in security analyst and media’s coverage of our company, if any. These factors may result in lower prices for our ordinary shares than might otherwise be obtained and could also result in a larger spread between the bid and ask prices for our ordinary shares. In addition, without a large float, our ordinary shares will be less liquid than the stock of companies with broader public ownership and, as a result, the trading prices of our ordinary shares may be more volatile. In the absence of an active public trading market, an investor may be unable to liquidate its investment in our ordinary shares. Trading of a relatively small volume of our ordinary shares may have a greater impact on the trading price of our ordinary shares than would be the case if our public float were larger. We cannot predict the prices at which our ordinary shares will trade in the future.
If we are or become classified as a “passive foreign investment company,” our U.S. shareholders may suffer adverse tax consequences as a result.
Generally, for any taxable year, if at least 75% of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the value of our assets (generally determined based on a weighted quarterly average) is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income, including cash, we would be characterized as a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. For purposes of these tests, passive income generally includes dividends, interest, gains from commodities and securities transactions, certain gains from the disposition of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. If we are characterized as a PFIC, our U.S. shareholders may suffer adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of our ordinary shares treated as ordinary income, rather than capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on our ordinary shares by individuals who are U.S. holders, having interest charges apply to distributions by us and gains from the sales of our ordinary shares, and additional tax reporting requirements.
Our status as a PFIC generally will depend on the nature and composition of our income and the nature, composition and value of our assets (which generally will be determined based on the fair market value of each asset, with the value of goodwill and going concern value determined in large part by reference to the market value of our ordinary shares from time to time, which may be volatile). If our market capitalization declines while we hold a substantial amount of cash for any taxable year, we may be a PFIC for such taxable year. The manner and timeframe in which we spend the cash we raise in any offering, the transactions we enter into, and how our corporate structure may change in the future will affect the nature and composition of our income and assets. Our PFIC status may depend, in part, on the treatment of payments we receive from other sources (including government grants), which is uncertain, and the magnitude of such payments compared to passive income from investments. The Company has not yet determined its PFIC status for 2023. Because the determination of whether we are a PFIC for any taxable year is a factual determination made annually after the end of each taxable year by applying principles and methodologies that in some circumstances are unclear and subject to varying interpretation, there can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC in any taxable year. Accordingly, our U.S. counsel expresses no opinion with respect to our PFIC status for any taxable year ended.
The tax consequences that would apply if we are classified as a PFIC would also be different from those described above if a U.S. shareholder were able to make a valid “qualified electing fund,” or QEF, election.
If a “United States person” is treated as owning at least 10% of our shares, such holder may be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.
If a “United States person” is treated as owning (directly, indirectly or constructively through the application of attribution rules) at least 10% of the value or voting power of our shares, such person may be treated as a “United States shareholder” with respect to each “controlled foreign corporation” in our group (if any). Because our group includes one or more U.S. subsidiaries, certain of our current or future non-U.S. subsidiaries could be treated as controlled foreign corporations (regardless of whether we are or are not treated as a controlled foreign corporation). A United States shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation may be required to annually report and include in its U.S. taxable income its pro rata share of the controlled foreign corporation’s “Subpart F income,” “global intangible low-taxed income” and investments in U.S. property, whether or not such controlled foreign corporation makes any distributions. An individual that is a United States shareholder with respect to a controlled foreign corporation generally would not be allowed certain tax deductions or foreign tax credits that would be allowed to a United States shareholder that is a U.S. corporation. A failure to comply with these reporting obligations may subject a Untied States shareholder to significant monetary penalties and may prevent the statute of limitations with respect to the United States shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax return for the year for which reporting was due from starting. We cannot provide any assurances that we will assist investors in determining whether we (or any of our current or future non-U.S. subsidiaries) are treated as a controlled foreign corporation or whether such investor is treated as a United States shareholder with respect to any of such controlled foreign corporations or furnish to any United States shareholders information that may be necessary to comply with the aforementioned reporting and tax paying obligations. United States investors should consult their own advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to their investment in our shares.
The intended tax effects of our corporate structure and intercompany arrangements depend on the application of the tax laws of various jurisdictions and on how we operate our business.
During the ordinary course of business, there are many transactions and calculations for which the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. For example, our effective tax rates could be adversely affected by changes in foreign currency exchange rates or by changes in the relevant tax, accounting and other laws, regulations, principles and interpretations. As we intend to operate in numerous countries and taxing jurisdictions, the application of tax laws can be subject to diverging and sometimes conflicting interpretations by tax authorities of these jurisdictions. It is not uncommon for taxing authorities in different countries to have conflicting views, for instance, with respect to, among other things, the manner in which the arm’s length standard is applied for transfer pricing purposes, or with respect to the valuation of intellectual property.
If tax authorities in any of the countries in which we operate were to successfully challenge our transfer prices as not reflecting arms’ length transactions, they could require us to adjust our transfer prices and thereby reallocate our income to reflect these revised transfer prices, which could result in a higher tax liability to us. In addition, if the country from which the income is reallocated does not agree with the reallocation, both countries could tax the same income, potentially resulting in double taxation. If tax authorities were to allocate income to a higher tax jurisdiction, subject our income to double taxation or assess interest and penalties, it would increase our consolidated tax liability, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Similarly, a tax authority could assert that we are subject to tax in a jurisdiction where we believe we have not established a taxable connection, often referred to as a “permanent establishment” under international tax treaties, and such an assertion, if successful could increase our expected tax liability in one or more jurisdictions.
Future changes to tax laws could materially adversely affect our company and reduce net return to our shareholders.
Tax laws are dynamic and subject to change as new laws are passed and interpretations of the law are issued or applied. Such changes may include (but are not limited to) the taxation of operating income, investment income, dividends received, or (in the specific context of withholding tax) dividends paid. For instance, the recently enacted Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 imposes, among other rules, a 15% minimum tax on the book income of certain large corporations and a 1% excise tax on certain corporate stock repurchases. We are unable to predict what tax reform may be proposed or enacted in the future or what effect such changes would have on our business, but such changes, to the extent they are brought into tax legislation, regulations, policies, or practices, could affect our financial position and overall or effective tax rates in the future in countries where we have operations, reduce post-tax returns to our shareholder, and increase the complexity, burden, and cost of tax compliance.
For U.S. tax purposes, our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.
Under the Tax Act, as modified by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, U.S. federal net operating losses, or NOLs, generated in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such NOLs may be limited. In addition, under Section 382 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its stock ownership over a three-year period) is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change U.S. federal NOLs to offset future taxable income. If we have undergone an ownership change in the past, or if future changes in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control, results in an ownership change, our ability to utilize our U.S. federal NOLs may be limited by Section 382 of the Code. As a result, even if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our NOLs to offset such income may be limited, which could increase our tax liability and decrease our cash flow. It is uncertain if and to what extent states will conform to U.S. federal income tax law with respect to the treatment of NOLs.
The tax benefits that are available to us require us to continue to meet various conditions and may be terminated or reduced in the future, which could increase our costs and taxes.
Some of our operations in Israel may entitle us to certain tax benefits under the Law for the Encouragement of Capital Investments, 5719-1959, or the Investment Law, once we begin to produce revenue. If we do not meet the requirements for maintaining these benefits, they may be reduced or cancelled and the relevant operations would be subject to Israeli corporate tax at the standard rate, which is set at 23% in 2023 and thereafter. In addition to being subject to the standard corporate tax rate, we could be required to refund any tax benefits that we will receive, plus interest and penalties thereon. Even if we continue to meet the relevant requirements, the tax benefits that our current “Preferred Enterprise” is entitled to may not be continued in the future at their current levels or at all. If these tax benefits were reduced or eliminated, the amount of taxes that we will pay would likely increase, as all our operations would consequently be subject to corporate tax at the standard rate, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Additionally, if we increase our activities outside of Israel, for example, by way of acquisitions, our increased activities may not be eligible for inclusion in Israeli tax benefits programs.
We have never paid cash dividends on our share capital, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our ordinary shares. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our ordinary shares will be investors’ sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. In addition, Israeli law limits our ability to declare and pay dividends, and may subject our dividends to Israeli withholding taxes.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about us, our business or our market, or if they adversely change their recommendations or publish negative reports regarding our business or our ordinary shares, our share price and trading volume could be negatively impacted.
The trading market for our ordinary shares is influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us, our business, our market or our competitors. We do not have any control over these analysts, and we cannot provide any assurance that analysts will continue to cover us or provide favorable coverage. If any of the analysts who cover us adversely change their recommendation regarding our shares, or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors, our share price would likely decline. If any analyst who covers us were to cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.
Risks Related to Israeli Law and Our Operations in Israel
Conditions in Israel, including the most recent attack by Hamas and other terrorist organizations form the Gaza Strip and elsewhere in the region, and Israel’s war against them, may adversely affect our operations and limit our ability to market our products, which would lead to a decrease in revenues. Significant parts of our operations are located in Israel and, therefore, our results may be adversely affected by political, economic and military conditions in Israel.
Because a material part of our operations are conducted in Israel and certain members of our management as well as many of our employees and consultants, including employees of our service providers, are located in Israel, our business and operations are directly affected by economic, political, geopolitical and military conditions in Israel. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, a number of armed conflicts have occurred between Israel and its neighboring countries and terrorist organizations active in the region. These conflicts have involved missile strikes, hostile infiltrations and terrorism against civilian targets in various parts of Israel, which have negatively affected business conditions in Israel.
In October 2023, Hamas terrorists infiltrated Israel’s southern border from the Gaza Strip and conducted a series of attacks on civilian and military targets. Hamas also launched extensive rocket attacks on Israeli population and industrial centers located along Israel’s border with the Gaza Strip and in other areas within the State of Israel. These attacks resulted in extensive deaths, injuries and kidnapping of civilians and soldiers. Following the attack, Israel’s security cabinet declared war against Hamas and a military campaign against these terrorist organizations commenced in parallel to their continued rocket and terror attacks. In addition, since the commencement of these events, there have been continued hostilities along Israel’s northern border with Lebanon (with the Hezbollah terror organization) and southern border (with the Houthi movement in Yemen, as described below). It is possible that hostilities with Hezbollah in Lebanon will escalate, and that other terrorist organizations, including Palestinian military organizations in the West Bank as well as other hostile countries, such as Iran, will join the hostilities. Such clashes may escalate in the future into a greater regional conflict.
The intensity and duration of Israel’s current war against Hamas is difficult to predict, as are such war’s economic implications on the Company’s business and operations and on Israel’s economy in general. These events may be intertwined with wider macroeconomic indications of a deterioration of Israel’s economic standing that may involve a downgrade in Israel’s credit rating by rating agencies (such as the recent downgrade by Moody’s of its credit rating of Israel from A1 to A2, as well as the downgrade of its outlook rating from “stable” to “negative”), which may have a material adverse effect on the Company and its ability to effectively conduct its operations.
In connection with the Israeli security cabinet’s declaration of war against Hamas and possible hostilities with other organizations, several hundred thousand Israeli military reservists were drafted to perform immediate military service. Although many of such military reservists have since been released, they may be called up for additional reserve duty, depending on developments in the war in Gaza and along Israel’s other borders. Certain of our employees and consultants in Israel, in addition to employees of our service providers located in Israel, have been called, and additional employees may be called, for service in the current or future wars or other armed conflicts with Hamas as well as the other pending or future armed conflicts in which Israel is or may become engaged, and such persons may be absent for an extended period of time. As a result, our operations may be disrupted by such absences, which disruption may materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. Additionally, the absence of employees of our Israeli suppliers and contract manufacturers, due to their military service in the current or future wars or other armed conflicts may disrupt their operations, which in turn may prevent or delay shipments of our products, harm our operations and product development and cause any future sales to decrease.
The hostilities with Hamas, Hezbollah and other organizations and countries have included and may include terror, missile and drone attacks. In the event that our facilities are damaged as a result of hostile actions, or hostilities otherwise disrupt our ongoing operations, our ability to deliver or provide products and services in a timely manner to meet our contractual obligations towards customers and vendors could be materially and adversely affected. Our commercial insurance does not cover losses that may occur as a result of events associated with war and terrorism. Although the Israeli government currently covers the reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war, we cannot assure you that such government coverage will be maintained or that it will sufficiently cover our potential damages. Any losses or damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on our business.
In addition, some countries around the world restrict doing business with Israel and Israeli companies, and additional countries may impose restrictions on doing business with Israel and Israeli companies if hostilities in Israel or political instability in the region continue or increase. These restrictions may limit materially our ability to obtain raw materials from these countries or sell our products and provide our services to companies and customers in these countries. In addition, there have been increased efforts by countries, activists and organizations to cause companies and consumers to boycott Israeli goods and services. In addition, in January 2024, the International Court of Justice, or ICJ, issued an interim ruling in a case filed by South Africa against Israel in December 2023, making allegations of genocide amid and in connection with the war in Gaza, and ordered Israel, among other things, to take measures to prevent genocidal acts, prevent and punish incitement to genocide, and take steps to provide basic services and humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza. There are concerns that companies and businesses will terminate, and may have already terminated, certain commercial relationships with Israeli companies following the ICJ decision. The foregoing efforts by countries, activists and organizations, particularly if they become more widespread, as well as the ICJ rulings and future rulings and orders of other tribunals against Israel (if handed), may materially and adversely impact our ability to and provide sell our products and services outside of Israel.
Furthermore, following Hamas’ attack on Israel and Israel’s security cabinet declaration of war against Hamas, the Houthi movement, which controls parts of Yemen, launched a number of attacks on marine vessels traversing the Red Sea, which marine vessels were thought to either be in route towards Israel or to be partly owned by Israeli businessmen. The Red Sea is a vital maritime route for international trade traveling to or from Israel. As a result of such disruptions, we may experience in the future delays in supplier deliveries (including electronic components and other products upon which we rely) extended lead times, and increased cost of freight, increased insurance costs, purchased materials and manufacturing labor costs. The risk of ongoing supply disruptions may further result in delayed deliveries of our products and may also have adverse impact on economic conditions in Israel.
Finally, political conditions within Israel may affect our operations. Israel has held five general elections between 2019 and 2022, and prior to October 2023, the Israeli government pursued extensive changes to Israel’s judicial system, which sparked extensive political debate and unrest. In response to such initiative, many individuals, organizations and institutions, both within and outside of Israel, voiced concerns that the proposed changes may negatively impact the business environment in Israel including due to reluctance of foreign investors to invest or transact business in Israel, as well as to increased currency fluctuations, downgrades in credit rating, increased interest rates, increased volatility in security markets and other changes in macroeconomic conditions. To date, these initiatives have been substantially put on hold. If such changes to Israel’s judicial system are again pursued by the government and approved by the parliament, this may have an adverse effect on our business, our results of operations and our ability to raise additional funds, if deemed necessary by our management and board of directors.
Because we incur a portion of our expenses in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, our financial condition and results of operations may be harmed by currency fluctuations and inflation.
While our reporting and functional currency is the U.S. dollar, we pay a meaningful portion of our expenses in NIS, Euros and other currencies. The salaries of our Israeli employees, many of our general and administrative expenses (including rent for our real property facility in Israel), and the fees that we pay to certain of our partners, are denominated in NIS. Certain of our suppliers are located in Europe and are paid in Euros. As a result, we are exposed to the currency fluctuation risks relating to the denomination of our future expenses in U.S. dollars. More specifically, if the U.S. dollar becomes devalued against the NIS or the Euro, our NIS- or Euro- denominated expenses will be greater than anticipated when reported in U.S. dollars. Inflation in Israel compounds the adverse impact of such devaluation by further increasing the amount of our Israeli expenses. Israeli inflation may also (in the future) outweigh the positive effect of any appreciation of the U.S. dollar relative to the NIS, if, and to the extent that, it outpaces such appreciation or precedes such appreciation. The Israeli rate of inflation did not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition during 2022 or 2023. Given our general lack of currency hedging arrangements to protect us from fluctuations in the exchange rates of the NIS or the Euro and other non-U.S. currencies in relation to the U.S. dollar (and/or from inflation of such non-U.S. currencies), we may be exposed to material adverse effects from such movements. We cannot predict any future trends in the rate of inflation in Israel or in Europe or the rate of devaluation (if any) of the U.S. dollar against the NIS or the Euro.
Provisions of Israeli law and our amended and restated articles of association may delay, prevent or make undesirable an acquisition of all or a significant portion of our shares or assets.
Certain provisions of Israeli law and our amended and restated articles of association could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and may make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire us or for our shareholders to elect different individuals to our board of directors, even if doing so would be beneficial to our shareholders, and may limit the price that investors may be willing to pay in the future for our ordinary shares. For example, our amended and restated articles of association provide that our directors are elected on a staggered basis, such that a potential acquirer cannot readily replace our entire board of directors at a single annual general meeting of the shareholders. In addition, Israeli corporate law regulates mergers and requires that a tender offer be affected when more than a specified percentage of shares in a company are purchased.
Our amended and restated articles of association also include, among others things, the following restrictions which may delay, prevent or make undesirable an acquisition of all or a significant portion of our shares or assets:
An amendment to our amended and restated articles of association generally require a vote of the holders of a majority of our outstanding ordinary shares entitled to vote present and voting on the matter at a general meeting of shareholders (referred to as simple majority), and the amendment of a number of provisions, such as the provision dividing our directors into three classes, requires a vote of the holders of at least 60% of our voting power. The affirmative vote of a majority of the directors in addition to the approval of our shareholders, is also required in order to amend our amended and restated articles of association.
A director may not be removed except by a vote of the holders of at least 60% of our voting power, unless otherwise the director is prohibited from serving as a director under applicable law or upon a determination by the board that their physical or mental state prevents them from serving; and director vacancies may be filled by our board of directors.
Subject to certain exceptions, we are restricted from engaging in certain business combination transactions, with any shareholder who holds 20% or more of our voting power. The transactions subject to such restrictions include mergers, consolidations and dispositions of our assets with a market value of 10% or more of our assets or outstanding shares. Subject to certain exceptions, such restrictions will apply for a period of three years following each time a shareholder became the holder of 20% or more of our voting power.
Subject to certain exceptions, there is a restriction on certain transactions which may have a significant effect on the Company’s structure, assets or business, including significant mergers and acquisitions, a disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company, a voluntary dissolution and material changes to the principal business of the Company.
Further, Israeli tax considerations may make potential transactions undesirable to us or to some of our shareholders whose country of residence does not have a tax treaty with Israel granting tax relief to such shareholders from Israeli tax. With respect to certain mergers, Israeli tax law may impose certain restrictions on future transactions, including with respect to dispositions of shares received as consideration, for a period of two years from the date of the merger.
Furthermore, under the Encouragement of Research, Development and Technological Innovation in the Industry Law 5744-1984 (formerly known as the Law for the Encouragement of Research and Development in Industry 5744-1984), and the regulations and guidelines promulgated thereunder, or the Innovation Law, to which we are subject due to our receipt of grants from the Israel Innovation Authority, or IIA (formerly known as the Office of the Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Economy and Industry, or the OCS), a recipient of IIA grants such as us must report to IIA regarding any change of control of our company or regarding any change in the holding of the means of control of our company which results in any non- Israeli citizen or resident becoming an “interested party”, as defined in the Innovation Law, in our company, and in the latter event, the non-Israeli citizen or resident will be required to execute an undertaking in favor of IIA, in a form prescribed by IIA, acknowledging the restrictions imposed by such law and agreeing to abide by its terms.
Investors may have difficulties enforcing a U.S. judgment, including judgments based upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws against us or asserting U.S. securities laws claims in Israel.
Service of process upon us and enforcement of judgments obtained in the United States against us may be difficult to obtain within the United States. We have been informed by our legal counsel in Israel that it may be difficult to assert claims under U.S. securities laws in original actions instituted in Israel or obtain a judgment based on the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal securities laws. Israeli courts may refuse to hear a claim based on a violation of U.S. securities laws against us because Israel may not be the most appropriate forum to bring such a claim. In addition, even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in Israel addressing the matters described above. Israeli courts might not enforce judgments rendered outside Israel, which may make it difficult to collect on judgments rendered against us.
Moreover, among other reasons, including but not limited to, fraud or absence of due process, or the existence of a judgment which is at variance with another judgment that was given in the same matter if a suit in the same matter between the same parties was pending before a court or tribunal in Israel, an Israeli court will not enforce a non-Israeli judgment if it was given in a state whose laws do not provide for the enforcement of judgments of Israeli courts (subject to exceptional cases) or if its enforcement is likely to prejudice the sovereignty or security of the State of Israel.
Your liabilities and responsibilities as a shareholder will be governed by Israeli law, which differs in some material respects from the U.S. law that governs the liabilities and responsibilities of shareholders of U.S. corporations.
We are incorporated under Israeli law. The rights and responsibilities of holders of our ordinary shares are governed by our amended and restated articles of association and the Israeli Companies Law 5759-1999, or the Companies Law. These rights and responsibilities differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders in typical U.S. corporations. In particular, pursuant to the Companies Law each shareholder of an Israeli company has to act in good faith in exercising his or her rights and fulfilling his or her obligations toward the company and other shareholders and to refrain from abusing his or her power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at the general meeting of shareholders and class meetings, on amendments to a company’s articles of association, increases in a company’s authorized share capital, mergers, and transactions requiring shareholders’ approval under the Companies Law. In addition, a controlling shareholder of an Israeli company or a shareholder who knows that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a shareholder vote or who has the power to appoint or prevent the appointment of a director or officer in the company, or has other powers toward the company, has a duty of fairness toward the company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness.
Because Israeli corporate law has undergone extensive revision in recent years, there is little case law available to assist in understanding the implications of these provisions that govern shareholder behavior.
Our amended and restated articles of association provide that unless we consent to an alternate forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the exclusive forum of resolution of any claims arising under the Securities Act which may impose additional litigation costs on our shareholders.
Our amended and restated articles of association provide that the federal district courts of the United States shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause or causes of action arising under the Securities Act, including all causes of action asserted against any defendant to such complaint. Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both U.S. state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees and may increase the costs associated with such lawsuits, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find these provisions of our amended and restated articles of association inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in our share capital shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to the choice of forum provisions of our amended and restated articles of association described above. This provision would not apply to shall not apply to causes of action arising under the Exchange Act.
Our amended and restated articles of association provide that unless the Company consents otherwise, the competent courts of Tel Aviv, Israel shall be the sole and exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between the Company and its shareholders under the Companies Law and the Israeli Securities Law, which could limit its shareholders ability to brings claims and proceedings against, as well as obtain favorable judicial forum for disputes with the Company, its directors, officers and other employees.
The competent courts of Tel Aviv, Israel shall be the exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of the Company, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of the Company to the Company or the Company’s shareholders, or (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Companies Law or the Israeli Securities Law. This exclusive forum provisions is intended to apply to claims arising under Israeli Law and would not apply to claims brought pursuant to the Securities Act or the Exchange Act or any other claim for which federal courts would have exclusive jurisdiction. Such exclusive forum provision in our amended and restated articles of association will not relieve the Company of its duties to comply with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, and shareholders of the Company will not be deemed to have waived the Company’s compliance with these laws, rules and regulations. This exclusive forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum of its choosing for disputes with the Company or its directors or other employees which may discourage lawsuits against the Company, its directors, officers and employees.
