Intellia Therapeutics Inc

Previous wording

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. In evaluating us and our business, careful consideration should be given to the following risk factors, in addition to the other information set forth in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, and in other documents that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). If any of the following risks and uncertainties actually occurs, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. The risks summarized and described below are not intended to be exhaustive and are not the only risks facing us. New risk factors can emerge from time to time, and we cannot predict the impact that any factor or combination of factors may have on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. In evaluating us and our business, careful consideration should be given to the following risk factors, in addition to the other information set forth in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, and in other documents that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). If any of the following risks and uncertainties actually occurs, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. The risks described below are not intended to be exhaustive and are not the only risks facing us. New risk factors can emerge from time to time, and we cannot predict the impact that any factor or combination of factors may have on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology has only recently been clinically validated for human therapeutic use. The approaches we are taking to discover and develop novel therapeutics using CRISPR/Cas9 systems are unproven and may never lead to marketable products. If we are unable to develop viable product candidates, achieve regulatory approval for any such product candidate or market and sell any product candidates, we may never achieve profitability.

Current wording

CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology has only recently been clinically validated for human therapeutic use.

Previous wording

CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology has limited clinical validation and has only recently been approved for human therapeutic use. The approaches we are taking to discover and develop novel therapeutics using CRISPR/Cas9 systems are unproven and may never lead to marketable products. If we are unable to develop viable product candidates, achieve regulatory approval for any such product candidate or market and sell any products, we may never achieve profitability.

Current wording

The approaches we are taking to discover and develop novel therapeutics using CRISPR/Cas9 systems are unproven and may never lead to marketable products.

Previous wording

Results, including data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, that we announce from time to time, such as the interim data from our ongoing Phase 1 study of NTLA-2001 or Phase 1/2 study of NTLA-2002, are not necessarily predictive of our other ongoing and future preclinical and clinical studies, and they do not guarantee or indicate the likelihood of approval of any potential product candidate by the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) or any other regulatory agency. If we cannot replicate the positive results from any of our preclinical or clinical studies, we may be unable to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize any potential product candidate.

Current wording

Results, including data from our preclinical and clinical studies, are not necessarily predictive of our other ongoing and future preclinical and clinical studies, and they do not guarantee or indicate the likelihood of approval of any potential product candidate by the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) or any other regulatory agency. If we cannot replicate the positive results from any of our preclinical or clinical activities and studies, we may be unable to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize any potential product candidate.

Previous wording

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of CRISPR/Cas9 use, genome editing or gene therapy generally may damage public perception of the safety of any product candidates that we develop and adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for such product candidates.

Current wording

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of CRISPR/Cas9 use, genome editing or gene therapy may damage public perception of the safety of our product candidates and adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for such product candidates.

Previous wording

We depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties and termination or modification of any of these licenses could result in the loss of significant rights, which would harm our business.

Current wording

We have licensed intellectual property from third parties for use in our programs, and termination or modification of any of these licenses could result in the loss of those intellectual property rights, which could harm our business.

Previous wording

In vivo genome editing products andex vivo engineered cell therapies based on CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology are novel and may be complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience manufacturing problems that result in delays in the development, approval or commercialization of our product candidates or otherwise harm our business.

Current wording

In vivo genome editing products andex vivo engineered cell therapies based on CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology are novel, complex and difficult to manufacture.

Previous wording

In vivo genome editing products andex vivo engineered cell therapies based on CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology are novel and may be complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience manufacturing problems or regulatory requirements that result in delays in the development, approval or commercialization of our product candidates or otherwise harm our business.

Current wording

We could experience manufacturing problems that result in delays in the development, approval or commercialization of our product candidates or otherwise harm our business.

Previous wording

Our technological advancements and any potential for revenue may be derived in part from our collaborations, including, for example, with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”), and if the collaboration or co-development agreements related to a material collaboration were to be terminated or materially altered in an adverse manner, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be harmed.

Current wording

Our technological advancements and any potential for revenue may be derived in part from our collaborations, including, for example, with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”), and if the collaboration or co-development agreements related to a material collaboration were to be terminated or materially altered in an adverse manner, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be harmed.

Previous wording

We are focused on developing curative medicines utilizing CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology, includingin vivo therapies andex vivo engineered cell therapies. Although there have been significant advances in recent years in the fields of gene therapy and genome editing, in vivo CRISPR-based genome editing technologies are relatively new and their therapeutic utility is largely unproven. Our approach to developing therapies centers on using CRISPR/Cas9 technology to alter, introduce or remove genetic informationin vivoto treat various disorders, or to engineer human cellsex vivo to create therapeutic cells that can be introduced into the human body to address the underlying disease.

Current wording

We are focused on developing novel therapeutics utilizing CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology, includingin vivo therapies andex vivo engineered cell therapies. Although there have been significant advances in recent years in the fields of gene therapy and genome editing, in vivo CRISPR-based genome editing technologies are relatively new and their therapeutic utility is largely unproven. Our approach to developing therapies centers on using CRISPR/Cas9 technology to alter, introduce or remove genetic informationin vivoto treat various disorders, or to engineer human cellsex vivo to create therapeutic cells that can be introduced into the human body to address the underlying disease.

Previous wording

Successful development of products by us will require solving a number of issues, including developing or obtaining technologies to safely deliver a therapeutic agent into target cells within the human body or engineer human cells while outside of the body such that the modified cells can have a therapeutic effect when delivered to the patient, optimizing the efficacy and specificity of such products, and ensuring and demonstrating the therapeutic selectivity, efficacy, potency, purity and safety of such products. There can be no assurance we will be successful in solving any or all of these issues. With regards to CRISPR/Cas9-based therapies specifically, we are in clinical-stage development for NTLA-2001, NTLA-2002 and NTLA-3001, and advancing towards clinical testing for our otherin vivo andex vivo product candidates. Although one CRISPR/Cas9-editedex vivo therapy has been recently approved in the United States (“U.S.”) and European Union (“EU”), no genome editingin vivo therapy has been approved in the U.S., EU countries or other key jurisdictions, and the potential to successfully obtain approval for any of our CRISPR/Cas9 product candidates remains unproven.

Current wording

Successful development of products by us will require solving a number of issues, including developing or obtaining technologies to safely deliver a therapeutic agent into target cells within the human body or engineer human cells while outside of the body such that the modified cells can have a therapeutic effect when delivered to the patient, optimizing the efficacy and specificity of such products, and demonstrating the therapeutic selectivity, efficacy, potency, purity and safety of such products. There can be no assurance we will be successful in solving any or all of these issues. With regards to CRISPR/Cas9-based therapies specifically, we are in clinical-stage development for nex-z and NTLA-2002 and advancing towards clinical testing for our otherin vivo andex vivo product candidates. Although one CRISPR/Cas9-editedex vivo therapy has been approved in the United States (“U.S.”) and European Union (“EU”), no genome editingin vivo therapy has been approved in the U.S., EU countries or other key jurisdictions, and the potential to successfully obtain approval for any of our CRISPR/Cas9 product candidates remains uncertain.

Previous wording

Public perception and related media coverage of potential therapy-related efficacy or safety issues, including adoption of new therapeutics or novel approaches to treatment, as well as ethical concerns related specifically to genome editing and CRISPR/Cas9, may adversely influence the willingness of subjects to participate in clinical trials, or if any therapeutic is approved, of physicians and patients to accept these novel and personalized treatments. Physicians, healthcare providers and third party payors often are slow to adopt new products, technologies and treatment practices, particularly those that may also require additional upfront costs and training. Physicians may not be willing to undergo training to adopt these novel and potentially personalized therapies, may decide the particular therapy is too complex or potentially risky to adopt without appropriate training, and may choose not to administer the therapy. Further, due to health conditions, genetic profile or other reasons, certain patients may not be candidates for the therapies. In addition, responses by federal and state agencies, congressional committees and foreign governments to negative public perception, ethical concerns or financial considerations may result in new legislation, regulations, or medical standards that could limit our ability to develop or commercialize any product candidates, obtain or maintain regulatory approval or otherwise achieve profitability. New government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, regulations, policies or guidance changed, or interpretations by agencies or courts changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be. Based on these and other factors, healthcare providers and payors may decide that the benefits of these new therapies do not or will not outweigh their costs.

Current wording

Public perception and related media coverage of potential therapy-related efficacy or safety issues, including adoption of new therapeutics or novel approaches to treatment, as well as ethical concerns related specifically to genome editing and CRISPR-based therapies, may adversely influence the willingness of subjects to participate in clinical trials, or if any therapeutic is approved, of physicians and patients to accept these novel and personalized treatments. Physicians, healthcare providers and third party payors often are slow to adopt new products, technologies and treatment practices, particularly those that may also require additional upfront costs and training. Physicians may not be willing to undergo training to adopt these novel therapies, may decide the particular therapy is too complex or potentially risky to adopt without appropriate training, and may choose not to administer the therapy. Further, due to health conditions, genetic profile or other reasons, certain patients may not be candidates for the therapies. In addition, responses by federal and state agencies, congressional committees and foreign governments to negative public perception, ethical concerns or financial considerations may result in new legislation, regulations, or medical standards that could limit our ability to develop or commercialize any product candidates, obtain or maintain regulatory approval or otherwise achieve profitability. New government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, regulations, policies or guidance changed, or interpretations by agencies or courts changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be. Based on these and other factors, healthcare providers and payors may decide that the benefits of these new therapies do not or will not outweigh their costs, which would affect our ability to market and sell our product candidates and achieve profitability.

Previous wording

Clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of any product candidates.*

Current wording

We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of any product candidates.

Previous wording

Successful completion of clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting a Biologics License Application (“BLA”) to the FDA, and similar applications to comparable foreign regulatory authorities, for each product candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any product candidates. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin or be completed on schedule, if at all. In addition, the regulatory requirements for later phase clinical trials, such as pivotal trials, are generally more stringent than earlier phase clinical trials, such as Phase 1 trials. We may not meet the requirements of regulatory authorities, such as the FDA, for initiating later phase clinical trials for our product candidates, which could delay the development of our product candidates, including the submission of a BLA or comparable marketing application.

Current wording

Successful completion of clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting a Biologics License Application (“BLA”) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), and similar applications to comparable foreign regulatory authorities, for each product candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any product candidates. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin or be completed on schedule, if at all. In addition, the regulatory requirements for later phase clinical trials, such as pivotal trials, are generally more stringent than earlier phase clinical trials, such as Phase 1 trials. We may not meet the requirements of regulatory authorities, such as the FDA, for initiating later phase clinical trials for our product candidates, which could delay the development of our product candidates, including the submission of a BLA or comparable marketing application.

Previous wording

our third party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their performance obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, or may deviate from the clinical trial protocol or drop out of the trial, which may require that we add new clinical trial sites or investigators;

Current wording

our third party contractors, clinical trial sites or investigators may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their performance obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, or may deviate from the clinical trial protocol or drop out of the trial, which may require that we add new clinical trial sites or investigators;

Previous wording

we may not ultimately obtain regulatory approval for a BLA, or corresponding applications outside the U.S., such as a marketing authorization application in the U.K. and other similar regulatory authorities, such as the EMA, which may have very limited or no experience with the clinical development of CRISPR/Cas9-based therapeutics, particularlyin vivo therapeutics.

Current wording

we may not ultimately obtain regulatory approval for a BLA, or corresponding applications outside the U.S., such as a marketing authorization application in the U.K. and other similar regulatory authorities, which may have very limited or no experience with the clinical development of CRISPR/Cas9-based therapeutics, particularlyin vivo therapeutics.

Previous wording

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, the relevant ethics committee or the FDA or other relevant regulatory authorities, or if the Data Monitoring Committee (“DMC”) for such trial recommends such suspension or termination. Such authorities may impose or recommend such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, manufacturing or quality control issues, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product or treatment, failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also lead to a delay in submitting a BLA or comparable marketing application or ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Further, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials.

Current wording

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, the relevant ethics committee or the FDA or other relevant regulatory authorities, or if the Data Monitoring Committee (“DMC”) for such trial recommends such suspension or termination. Such authorities may impose or recommend such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our study protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, manufacturing or quality control issues, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product or treatment, failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also lead to a delay in submitting a BLA or comparable marketing application or ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Further, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials.

Previous wording

regulatory guidance regarding the requirements governing gene and genome editing therapy products have changed and may continue to change in the future, including, e.g., the finalized guidance document titled “Human Gene Therapy Products Incorporating Human Genome Editing” that the FDA issued in January 2024;

Current wording

regulatory guidance for gene and genome editing therapy products has changed and may continue to change in the future, including, e.g., the finalized guidance document titled “Human Gene Therapy Products Incorporating Human

Previous wording

transient expression of the Cas9 protein or other genome editing components of our product candidates could lead to patients having an immunological reaction towards those cells, which could be severe or life-threatening;

Current wording

transient expression of the Cas9 protein or other genome editing components of our product candidates could lead to patients having an immunological reaction towards those modified cells, which could be severe or life-threatening;

Previous wording

To date, most human clinical trials utilizing eitherin vivo orex vivo CRISPR-based therapeutics, including our clinical trials for NTLA-2001 for transthyretin (“ATTR”) amyloidosis, NTLA-2002 for hereditary angioedema (“HAE”) and NTLA-3001 for alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (“AATD”)-associated lung disease, are still at a clinical stage, with only oneex vivo CRISPR-based therapeutic product approved in December 2023 in the U.S. and EU. We have ongoing clinical trials in various countries for NTLA-2001 and NTLA-2002 for patients with ATTR amyloidosis and HAE, respectively. There is no certainty that the FDA or other similar agencies will continue to apply to all our CRISPR/Cas9 product candidates the same regulatory pathway and requirements it is applying to otherin vivo therapies orex vivo engineered therapeutics.

Current wording

To date, most human clinical trials utilizing eitherin vivo orex vivo CRISPR-based therapeutics are still at a clinical stage, with only oneex vivo CRISPR-based therapeutic product approved in the U.S. and EU. We have ongoing clinical trials in various countries for nex-z for transthyretin (“ATTR”) amyloidosis and NTLA-2002 for hereditary angioedema (“HAE”). There is no certainty that the FDA or other similar agencies will continue to apply to all our CRISPR/Cas9 product candidates the same regulatory pathway and requirements it is applying to otherin vivo therapies orex vivo engineered therapeutics.

Previous wording

In addition, if any product candidates encounter safety or efficacy problems, development delays, regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business could be significantly harmed. For the reasons described above, among others, regulatory bodies, particularly the FDA, have requested, and may request in the future, additional preclinical studies for genome editing products, such as additional studies related to toxicology, biodistribution or reproductive health, and/or preclinical studies earlier in clinical development compared to other therapeutic modalities. Although the FDA cleared the INDs that we have submitted, it is possible that the FDA may impose requirements that result in a delay of any of our programs, including our submission of a BLA or comparable marketing application, or their regulatory approval. For example, following the March 2023 IND clearance for NTLA-2002, the FDA requested supplemental preclinical data related to the inclusion of female patients of child-bearing potential, which we have since provided to the FDA in advance of the planned Phase 3 study and have received written feedback from the FDA that the data provided support inclusion of female patients of child-bearing potential in the Phase 3 study. If we are unable to complete the required studies satisfactorily, the FDA or other regulatory bodies could require that we exclude certain patient populations from clinical studies, place our clinical studies on hold, or require us to cease further clinical studies or deny approval of such product candidates. Further, competitors that are developingin vivo orex vivo products with similar technology may experience problems with their product candidates or programs that could in turn cause us to identify problems with our product candidates and programs, or cause the FDA or other regulatory bodies to impose additional requirements, that could cause us to delay or pause development of our product candidates. Any of these occurrences may harm our ability to identify and develop product candidates, and may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects significantly.

Current wording

In addition, if any product candidates encounter safety or efficacy problems, development delays, regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business could be significantly harmed. For the reasons described above, among others, regulatory bodies, particularly the FDA, have requested, and may request in the future, additional preclinical studies for genome editing products, such as additional studies related to toxicology, biodistribution or reproductive health, and/or preclinical studies earlier in clinical development compared to other therapeutic modalities. Although the FDA cleared the INDs that we have submitted, it is possible that the FDA may impose requirements that result in a delay of any of our programs, including our submission of a BLA or comparable marketing application, or their regulatory approval. If we are unable to complete the required studies satisfactorily, the FDA or other regulatory bodies could require that we exclude certain patient populations from clinical studies, place our clinical studies on hold, or require us to cease further clinical studies or deny approval of such product candidates. Further, competitors that are developingin vivo orex vivo products with similar technology may experience problems with their product candidates or programs that could in turn cause us to identify problems with our product candidates and programs or cause the FDA or other regulatory bodies to impose additional requirements, that could cause us to delay or pause development of our product candidates. Any of these occurrences may harm our ability to identify and develop product candidates, and may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects significantly.

Previous wording

We may experience manufacturing delays or other issues that prevent us from executing the clinical trials for NTLA-2001, NTLA-2002, NTLA-3001 or our other product candidates on the timeline we expect. Moreover, we cannot guarantee that the FDA, MHRA, the New Zealand Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Authority, or other regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future or approve amendments to our INDs or equivalent regulatory filings, including for NTLA-2001, NTLA-2002, NTLA-3001 or our other product candidates on the timeline we expect.

Current wording

We may experience manufacturing delays or other issues that prevent us from executing the clinical trials for nex-z and NTLA-2002 or our other product candidates on the timeline we expect. Moreover, we cannot guarantee that the FDA, MHRA, the New Zealand Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Authority, or other regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future or that they will approve amendments to our INDs or equivalent regulatory filings, including for nex-z and NTLA-2002, or our other product candidates, on the timeline we expect.

Previous wording

From time to time, we may disclose interim data from our clinical trials, such as the interim results of our ongoing Phase 1 study of NTLA-2001 or Phase 1/2 study of NTLA-2002 or planned Phase 1/2 study of NTLA-3001. Interim data from clinical trials that have not been completed are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available or as patients from our clinical trials continue other treatments for their disease. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Consequently, interim data should be viewed with caution until we make the final data and analysis available.

Current wording

From time to time, we may disclose interim data from our clinical trials, such as the interim results of our ongoing Phase 1 study of nex-z or Phase 1/2 study of NTLA-2002. Interim data from clinical trials that have not been completed are subject to the risk that the later results may be materially different as patient enrollment continues. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Consequently, interim data should be viewed with caution until we make the final data and analysis available.

Previous wording

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of CRISPR/Cas9 use, genome editing or gene therapy generally may damage public perception of the safety of any product candidates that we develop and adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for such product candidates.

Current wording

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of CRISPR/Cas9 use, genome editing or gene therapy may damage public perception of the safety of our product candidates and adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for such product candidates.

Previous wording

Gene therapy in general, and genome editing in particular, remain novel technologies, with only a limited number of gene therapy products, and only oneex vivo genome editing product, approved to date in the U.S. and EU. Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy or genome editing, including the use of CRISPR/Cas9, is unsafe or unethical, or carries an undue risk of side effects, such as improper modification of a gene sequence in a patient’s chromosome that could lead to cancer, and gene therapy or genome editing may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. In particular, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of diseases targeted by our product candidates prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are more familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. In addition, responses by the U.S., state or foreign governments to negative public perception or ethical concerns may result in new legislation or regulations that could limit our ability to develop or commercialize any product candidates, obtain or maintain regulatory approval or otherwise achieve profitability. More restrictive statutory regimes, government regulations or negative public opinion could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and prospects, and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. For example, certain gene therapy trials led to several well-publicized adverse events, including cases of leukemia and death. Serious adverse events, such as these, in our clinical trials, or other clinical trials involving gene therapy or genome editing products or our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidate. In addition, the use of the technology by third parties in areas that are not being pursued by us, such as for targeting and editing of embryonic cells, could adversely impact public and governmental perceptions regarding the ethics and risks of the CRISPR/Cas9 technology and lead to social or legal changes that could limit our ability to apply the technology to develop human therapies addressing disease. For example, reports of the use of CRISPR/Cas9 in China and Russia to edit embryosin utero have generated, and may continue to generate, negative public perception about the use of the technology in humans. Negative public and governmental perception of the technology, or additional governmental regulation …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Gene therapy in general, and genome editing in particular, remain novel technologies, with only a limited number of gene therapy products, and only oneex vivo genome editing product, approved to date in the U.S. and EU. Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy or genome editing, including the use of CRISPR/Cas9, is unsafe or unethical, or carries an undue risk of side effects, such as improper modification of a gene sequence in a patient’s chromosome that could lead to disease such as cancer, and gene therapy or genome editing may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. In particular, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of diseases targeted by our product candidates prescribing our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are more familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. In addition, responses by the U.S., state or foreign governments to negative public perception or ethical concerns may result in new legislation or regulations that could limit our ability to develop or commercialize any product candidates, obtain or maintain regulatory approval or otherwise achieve profitability. More restrictive statutory regimes, government regulations or negative public opinion could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and prospects, and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. For example, certain gene therapy trials led to several well-publicized adverse events, including cases of leukemia and death. Serious adverse events, such as these, in our clinical trials, or other clinical trials involving gene therapy or genome editing products or our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidate. In addition, the use of genome editing technology by third parties in areas that are not being pursued by us, such as for targeting and editing of embryonic cells, could adversely impact public and governmental perceptions regarding the ethics and risks of CRISPR/Cas9 technology and lead to social or legal changes that could limit our ability to apply the technology to develop human therapies addressing disease. For example, reports of the use of CRISPR/Cas9 in China and Russia to edit embryosin utero have generated, and may continue to generate, negative public perception about the use of the technology in humans. Negative public and governmental perception of the technology, or additional governmental regulation of our techn…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Therapeutic applications of genome editing technologies, and CRISPR/Cas9 in particular, for bothin vivo products andex vivo products, are unproven and must undergo rigorous clinical trials and regulatory review before receiving marketing authorization. If the results of our clinical studies or those of any other third parties, including with respect to genome editing technology or engineered cell therapies, are inconclusive or fail to show efficacy or if such clinical trials give rise to safety concerns or adverse events, we may:

Current wording

Therapeutic applications of genome editing technologies, and CRISPR/Cas9 in particular, for bothin vivo products andex vivo products, are uncertain and must undergo rigorous clinical trials and regulatory review before receiving marketing authorization. If the results of our clinical studies or those of any other third parties, including with respect to genome editing technology or engineered cell therapies, are inconclusive or fail to show efficacy or if such clinical trials give rise to safety concerns or adverse events, we may:

Previous wording

We are at a clinical stage of development and our technology and approach has not yet led, and may never lead, to the approval or commercialization of any of our product candidates, including NTLA-2001 for ATTR amyloidosis, NTLA-2002 for HAE, or NTLA-3001 for AATD, or to our other product candidates being deemed appropriate for clinical development and ultimately approval by a regulatory agency. Even if we are successful in building our pipeline of product candidates, completing clinical development, establishing the necessary manufacturing processes and capabilities, obtaining regulatory approvals and commercializing product candidates will require substantial additional funding and are subject to the risks of failure inherent in therapeutic product development. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development involves significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate acceptable safety and efficacy profiles, gain regulatory approval, or become commercially viable.

Current wording

We are at a clinical stage of development and our technology and approach has not yet led, and may never lead, to the approval or commercialization of any of our product candidates, including nex-z for ATTR amyloidosis, NTLA-2002 for HAE, or to our other preclinical stage product candidates being deemed appropriate for clinical development and ultimately approval by a regulatory agency. Even if we are successful in building our pipeline of product candidates, completing clinical development, establishing the necessary manufacturing processes and capabilities, obtaining regulatory approvals and commercializing product candidates will require substantial additional funding and are subject to the risks of failure inherent in therapeutic product development. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development involves significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate acceptable safety and efficacy profiles, gain regulatory approval, or become commercially viable.

Previous wording

We cannot provide any assurance that we will be able to successfully advance any of our product candidates, including NTLA-2001, NTLA-2002, NTLA-3001 or product candidates developed through our collaborations, through the entire research and development process. Any of our other programs may show promise, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development or commercialization for many reasons. For more information regarding these risks, see the above risk factor section entitled “Risks Related to Preclinical and Clinical Development.”

Current wording

We cannot provide any assurance that we will be able to successfully advance any of our product candidates, including nex-z, NTLA-2002 or product candidates developed through our collaborations, through the entire research and development process. Any of our other programs may show promise yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development or commercialization for many reasons. For more information regarding these risks, see the above risk factor section entitled “Risks Related to Preclinical and Clinical Development.”

Previous wording

limitations or warnings contained in the labeling approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities;

Current wording

limitations or warnings contained in the labeling approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which may include warnings or other information about possible unintended DNA changes;

Previous wording

the amount of upfront costs or training required for healthcare providers to administer our product candidates;

Current wording

the amount of upfront costs or training required for healthcare providers to administer our product candidates, which may include availability of adequate facilities and equipment;

Previous wording

Third party claims of intellectual property infringement against us, our licensors or our collaborators may prevent or delay our product discovery and development efforts.

Current wording

Third party claims of intellectual property infringement against us, our licensors or our collaborators may prevent or delay our product discovery, research, development, and/or commercialization efforts.

Previous wording

Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates and in areas potentially related to components and methods we use or may use in our research and development efforts. As industry, government, academia and other biotechnology and pharmaceutical research expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. Our development candidates are complex and may include multiple components such as Cas9 protein or messenger ribonucleic acid encoding Cas9 protein, guide ribonucleic acids (“gRNAs”), targeting molecules, or formulation components such as lipids. We cannot guarantee that any of these components of our technology, processes, future product candidates or the use of such product candidates do not infringe third party patents. It is also possible that we have failed to identify relevant third party patents or applications. Because patent rights are granted jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction, our freedom to practice certain technologies, including our ability to research, develop and commercialize our product candidates, may differ by country.

Current wording

Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates and in areas potentially related to components and methods we use or may use in our research, development, and commercialization efforts. As our product candidates advance through development, as research in the fields in which we work expands, and as more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates, or the resulting products, may give rise to claims of infringement of patent rights owned or controlled by third parties. Our product candidates are complex and may include multiple components, such as Cas9 protein or messenger ribonucleic acid encoding Cas9 protein, guide ribonucleic acids (“gRNAs”), targeting molecules, virus or virus-like particles, or formulation components, such as lipids and lipid nanoparticles. We cannot guarantee that any of these components of our technology, processes, or future product candidates, or the commercialization or use of such product candidates, do not infringe third party patents. It is also possible that we have failed to identify relevant third party patents or applications. Because patent rights are granted jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction, our freedom to practice certain technologies, including our ability to research, develop and/or commercialize our product candidates, or the resulting products, may differ by country.

Previous wording

Third parties may assert that we infringe their patents or that we are otherwise employing their proprietary technology without authorization, and may sue us. There may be third party patents with claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods of use or treatment that cover product candidates we discover and develop. 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 candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies or the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates or products that we develop infringes these patents. If a court of competent jurisdiction were to hold that we infringed such patents, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize the applicable product candidate or products unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing, manufacturing or importing the infringing technology or product. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing one or more of our product candidates or products that we develop, force us to redesign our infringing products or force us to cease some or all of our business operations, any of which could materially harm our business and could prevent us from further developing and commercializing such products or future product candidates, thereby causing us significant harm. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third party patent on commercially reasonable terms, our ability to commercialize our product candidates or products that we develop may be impaired or delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. In addition, we may be obligated to defend and/or indemnify our existing or potential collaborators, clinical investigators, contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”), CROs, consultants or vendors if a third party asserts similar infringement claims against them based on use of our technologies or the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates or products that we develop, including product candidates or products developed with our collaborators. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business. Even if we are not found liable for infringing or misappropri…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Third parties may assert that we infringe their patents or that we are otherwise employing their proprietary technology without authorization and may sue us. There may be third party patents with claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods of use or treatment that cover product candidates we discover, research, develop, and/or commercialize. For example, on July 8, 2024, BlueAllele Corp. (“BlueAllele”) filed a complaint alleging infringement by Intellia of various patents in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, as more fully discussed in the Legal Proceedings section below. 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 candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies or the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates or products that we develop infringes these patents. If a court of competent jurisdiction were to hold that we infringed such patents, the holders of any such patents may be able to obtain a court order, or other form of relief, blocking our ability to commercialize, manufacture, import, and/or use the applicable product candidate, or resulting products, in the applicable jurisdiction(s) unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or obtaining such a license may result in significant costs or delays. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be limited in scope or geography or it could be non-exclusive, i.e., our competitors may be able to obtain a similar license on substantially the same or better terms. If we are unable to obtain a license on reasonable terms, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing, manufacturing, importing, and/or using the infringing technology or product, or to redesign our infringing products, which could result in significant costs or delays. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. Any of the foregoing assertions or results could materially harm our business, cause significant costs or delays to our plans, and/or prevent us from further developing and commercializing the affected product candidates or products, thereby causing us significant harm.

Previous wording

Third parties may seek to claim intellectual property rights that encompass or overlap with intellectual property that we own or license from them or others. Legal proceedings may be initiated to determine the scope and ownership of these rights, and could result in our loss of rights, including injunctions or other equitable relief that could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our product candidates or products that we develop, including product candidates or products developed with our collaborators. For example, through a license agreement between Caribou Biosciences, Inc. and us (the “Caribou License”), we sublicense the rights of the Regents of the University of California and the University of Vienna (collectively, “UC/Vienna”) to a worldwide patent portfolio that covers methods of use and compositions relating to engineered CRISPR/Cas9 systems for, among other things, cleaving or editing DNA and altering gene product expression in various organisms, including eukaryotic cells. We sublicense the UC/Vienna rights to this portfolio for human therapeutic, prophylactic and palliative uses, including companion diagnostics, except for anti-fungal and anti-microbial uses. This patent portfolio to-date includes, for example, multiple granted, allowed, and/or allowable patent applications in the U.S., as well as granted patents from the European Patent Office, the United Kingdom’s Intellectual Property Office, the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, Australia’s Intellectual Property agency and China’s Intellectual Property Office, among others. Because UC/Vienna co-own this portfolio with Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier (who has separately licensed her rights to other parties), we refer to this co-owned worldwide patent portfolio as the “UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family.”

Current wording

For example, through a license agreement between Caribou Biosciences, Inc. and us (the “Caribou License”), we sublicense the rights of the Regents of the University of California and the University of Vienna (collectively, “UC/Vienna”) to a worldwide patent portfolio that covers methods of use and compositions relating to engineered CRISPR/Cas9 systems for, among other things, cleaving or editing DNA and altering gene product expression in various organisms, including eukaryotic cells. We sublicense the UC/Vienna rights to this patent portfolio for human therapeutic, prophylactic and palliative uses, including companion diagnostics, except for anti-fungal and anti-microbial uses. Because UC/Vienna co-own this portfolio with Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier (who has separately licensed her rights to other parties), we refer to this co-owned worldwide patent portfolio as the “UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family.” In addition, we have granted further sublicenses to this portfolio to our collaborators in certain fields of use. The UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent portfolio to-date includes, for example, multiple granted, allowed, and/or allowable patent applications in the U.S., as well as granted patents from the European Patent Office, the United Kingdom’s Intellectual Property Office, the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, Australia’s Intellectual Property agency and China’s Intellectual Property Office, among others.

Previous wording

Third parties could assert that our licensors, such as UC/Vienna/Charpentier, do not have rights to the licensed technology (such as the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in the case of the Caribou License), including inventorship and ownership rights to currently issued or allowable patents, or that any rights owned by our licensors, such as UC/Vienna/Charpentier, are limited. If such third parties were found to have rights to the licensed technology (such as CRISPR/Cas9 technology), we could be required to obtain rights from such parties or cease our development and commercialization efforts. For example, under our Caribou License, we have rights to patent applications owned by UC/Vienna/Charpentier covering certain aspects of CRISPR/Cas9 systems to edit genes in eukaryotic cells, including human cells (collectively, the “UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family”). The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Rockefeller University (collectively, the “Broad Institute”) co-own patents and patent applications that also claim CRISPR/Cas9 systems to edit genes in eukaryotic cells (collectively, the “Broad Institute patent family”). Because the respective owners of various

Current wording

Third parties could assert, and have in the past asserted, that our licensors do not have rights to the licensed patents and/or patent applications (such as, in the case of the Caribou License, the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family), including inventorship and ownership rights to currently issued or allowable patents. In addition, third parties could assert, and have asserted, that our licensors, or any rights owned by our licensors, such as UC/Vienna/Charpentier, are limited. If such third parties were found to have rights to patents or patent applications covering our licensed technology (such as CRISPR/Cas9 technology), they could assert that we infringe such patents and, as discussed above, we may be required to obtain rights from such parties (e.g., by obtaining a license) or cease our development and commercialization efforts. Even if such third parties are not ultimately successful in their claims, such assertions could result in significant costs or delays to our programs.

Previous wording

UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent applications and the Broad Institute patent family both allege owning intellectual property claiming overlapping aspects of CRISPR/Cas9 systems and methods to edit genes in eukaryotic cells, including human cells, our ability to market and sell CRISPR/Cas9-based human therapeutics may be adversely impacted depending on the scope and actual ownership over the inventions claimed in the competing patent portfolios. On June 25, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) declared an interference between the UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family and the Broad Institute patent family to determine which research group first invented the use of the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in eukaryotic cells and, therefore, is entitled to the U.S. patents covering that invention. The interference involved 14 allowable patent applications from the UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family and 13 patents and one patent application from the Broad Institute patent family. On February 28, 2022, the PTAB issued a Decision of Priority and Judgment in the interference finding that the Broad Institute patent family has priority over the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family with respect to the subject matter of the interference. An appeal and cross-appeal from the interference are pending at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as Case Nos. 22-1594 and 22-1653, and the oral argument occurred on May 7, 2024.

Current wording

For example, various patent applications within the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family and the Broad Institute patent family have been involved in patent interferences and other patent challenges in the U.S. and other jurisdictions, in which the respective owners have alleged, and are alleging, that they invented and/or own intellectual property claiming overlapping aspects of CRISPR/Cas9 systems. Specifically, certain patent applications within the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family, licensed to us under the Caribou License, covering certain aspects of CRISPR/Cas9 systems to edit genes in eukaryotic cells, including human cells (collectively, the “UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family”) have been the subject of patent interferences involving patents and patent applications co-owned by the Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Rockefeller University (collectively, the “Broad Institute”) that also claim CRISPR/Cas9 systems to edit genes in eukaryotic cells (collectively, the “Broad Institute patent family”). For example, on June 25, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) declared an interference between the UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family and the Broad Institute patent family to determine which research group first invented the use of the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in eukaryotic cells and, therefore, is entitled to the U.S. patents covering that invention. The interference involved 14 allowable patent applications from the UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family and 13 patents and one patent application from the Broad Institute patent family. On February 28, 2022, the PTAB issued a Decision of Priority and Judgment in the interference finding that the Broad Institute patent family has priority over the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family with respect to the subject matter of the interference. An appeal and cross-appeal from the interference are pending at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as Case Nos. 22-1594 and 22-1653 (the “Interference Appeal”), and the oral argument occurred on May 7, 2024.

Previous wording

On December 14, 2020, the PTAB declared an additional interference between the same 14 allowable patent applications in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family, and one patent application owned by ToolGen, Inc. And, on June 21, 2021, the PTAB declared another interference between the same 14 allowable patent applications in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family and one patent application owned by Sigma-Aldrich Co. LLC (a subsidiary of Merck KGaA). Because the patent applications involved in these interferences also purport to cover the use of CRISPR/Cas9 for gene editing in eukaryotic cells, the PTAB seeks to determine between the various groups which one invented first and is entitled to the resulting U.S. patents. A decision on motions issued in the ToolGen interference on September 28, 2022, and the priority phase of that interference was suspended until a mandate concludes the Federal Circuit appeal and cross-appeal in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier interference with the Broad Institute. The Sigma-Aldrich interference is in its motions phase, and an order scheduling oral argument issued on October 24, 2022. If either the Broad Institute, ToolGen or Sigma-Aldrich were to succeed in any of their respective interferences, the prevailing party or parties could seek to assert its issued patents against us based on our CRISPR/Cas9-based activities, including commercialization. In addition, the prevailing party may assert similar infringement claims against our existing or potential collaborators, clinical investigators, CMOs, CROs, consultants or vendors, and we may be obligated to defend and/or indemnify those parties against such infringement claims.

Current wording

In addition, on December 14, 2020, the PTAB declared an interference between the same 14 allowable patent applications in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family, and one patent application owned by ToolGen, Inc. And, on June 21, 2021, the PTAB declared another interference between the same 14 allowable patent applications in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier eukaryotic patent family and one patent application owned by Sigma-Aldrich Co. LLC (a subsidiary of Merck KGaA). Because the patent applications involved in these interferences also purport to cover the use of CRISPR/Cas9 for gene editing in eukaryotic cells, the PTAB seeks to determine between the various groups which one invented first and is entitled to the resulting U.S. patents. A decision on motions issued in the ToolGen interference on September 28, 2022, and the priority phase of that interference was suspended until a mandate concludes the Interference Appeal. The Sigma-Aldrich interference is in its motions phase, and an order scheduling oral argument issued on October 24, 2022. In addition, other third parties, such as Vilnius University (whose patents we have sublicensed under our Caribou Agreement) and Harvard University, filed patent applications claiming CRISPR/Cas9-related inventions around or within a year after the first patent application filed in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family and allege (or may allege) that they invented one or more of the inventions claimed by UC/Vienna/Charpentier before UC/Vienna/Charpentier. If the USPTO deems the scope of any of such third party’s claims sufficiently overlap with the allowable claims from the applicable patent applications in the UC/Vienna/Charpentier patent family, the USPTO could declare other interference proceedings to determine the actual inventor of such claims.

Previous wording

Further, many third parties, including the third parties described above, have also filed patent applications and obtained patents covering aspects of the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in other key jurisdictions, including the EU members, the U.K., China and Japan. If these patents are deemed valid and cover our product candidates or related activities, we could be prevented from developing and commercializing all or some of our product candidates unless we license the relevant intellectual property or avoid it.

Current wording

Further, many third parties, including the third parties described above, have also filed patent applications and obtained patents covering aspects of the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in other key jurisdictions, including the EU members, the U.K., China and Japan. If these patents are deemed valid and cover our product candidates or related activities, we could be prevented from developing and/or commercializing all or some of our product candidates, or the resulting products, unless we license the relevant intellectual property or avoid it.

Previous wording

Defense of any potential infringement claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense, would be a substantial diversion of management and other employee resources from our business and may impact our reputation. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, or a third party that we are obliged to defend and indemnify, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. In that event, we could be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. Refer to “Item 1. Legal Proceedings” above for an example.

Current wording

Defense of any potential infringement claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense, would be a substantial diversion of management and other employee resources from our business and may impact our reputation. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, or a third party that we are obliged to defend and indemnify, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. In that event, we could be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. For example, the BlueAllele litigation described above has required us to divert resources to the defense of BlueAllele’s allegations.

Previous wording

We are dependent on patents, know-how and proprietary technology, both our own and licensed from others, including Caribou. Any termination of these licenses, loss by our licensors of the rights they receive from others, diminution of our rights or those of our licensors, or a finding that such intellectual property lacks legal effect, could result in the loss of significant rights and could harm our ability to commercialize any product candidates. For example, UC/Vienna could challenge Caribou’s rights under their agreement, including Caribou’s right to sublicense its rights to others, such as Intellia, and on what terms such a sublicense would be granted, each of which could adversely impact our rights under our agreement with Caribou. Similarly, Caribou or other licensors, or other third parties from which we derive rights, could challenge the scope of our licensed rights or fields under our license agreement, which could adversely impact our exclusive rights to use CRISPR/Cas9 technology in our human therapeutics field. For example, in connection with the arbitration regarding the scope of the Caribou License, we executed a leaseback agreement with Caribou granting it a sublicense to develop and commercialize CB-010, which is a chimeric antigen receptor T (“CAR-T”) cell therapy directed at CD19. The leaseback agreement could adversely affect our business or that of our collaborators developing similar human therapeutics.

Current wording

We are dependent on patents, know-how and proprietary technology, both our own and licensed from others, including Caribou. Any termination of these licenses, loss by our licensors of the rights they receive from others, diminution of our rights or those of our licensors, or a finding that such intellectual property lacks legal effect, could result in the loss of significant rights and could harm our ability to commercialize any product candidates.