CRYO CELL INTERNATIONAL INC

On January 6, 2023, a complaint styled Lindsey Lehr v. Cryo-Cell International, Inc., Case No. 50-2023-CA-000091, was filed in the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County, Florida, naming the Company as defendant and asserting claims on behalf of a putative class of individuals who entered agreements with the Company for umbilical cord blood storage services since May 2018. The complaint alleged that the Company’s advertising does not accurately represent the value and efficacy of its services and asserted claims (and sought unspecified damages) under Florida law. On March 14, 2023, the Company removed the case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:23-cv-80405-AMC), and on March 21, 2023, moved to compel arbitration and stay the case. On October 10, 2023, the Court granted the Company’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed the case. On October 27, 2023, the plaintiff filed a demand for arbitration and statement of claims with the American Arbitration Association, and on January 18, 2024, the plaintiff filed an amended statement of claims dropping her class action allegations against the Company. On March 19, 2024, the Company filed an answering statement and counterclaim in response to the plaintiff’s claims. A final hearing on the plaintiff’s remaining individual claims and on the Company’s counterclaim is scheduled for September 2025. The Company believes the plaintiff’s claims are unlikely to prevail and is contesting the action vigorously. The Company believes that the resolution of this matter should not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, consolidated financial position or results of operations. It is possible, however, that there could be an unfavorable outcome or resolution of the claims asserted, which could negatively and materially impact the Company’s business, consolidated financial position and results of operations. Litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance that the Company will prevail. The Company does not include an estimate of legal fees and other related defense costs in its estimate of loss contingencies.

On October 4, 2024, the Company filed a demand for arbitration (the “Arbitration Demand”) against Duke University with the American Arbitration Association alleging that Duke fraudulently induced the Company to enter its Patent and Technology License Agreement with Duke and that Duke breached the agreement on various occasions. The Arbitration Demand includes five counts against Duke, as follows: Count I – Breach of the Duke License Agreement; Count II – Breach of the Implied Contractual Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; Count III – Fraudulent Inducement to Enter the Duke License Agreement; Count IV – Violation of North Carolina’s Unfair Trade Practices Act; and Count V – Unjust Enrichment. In connection therewith, the Company has requested an award in the Company’s favor and against Duke for damages in an amount to be proved at a final hearing, interest, attorneys’ fees, and arbitration fees and costs, along with all other relief to which the Company is entitled at law or in equity. On November 18, 2024, Duke responded to the Arbitration Demand and asserted counterclaims against the Company which Duke amended on March 24, 2025, for breach of the License Agreement and indemnity, seeking unspecified damages and related relief. On December 12, 2024, the Company filed an answering statement in response to Duke’s counterclaims. The Company believes Duke’s counterclaims are without merit and intends to contest them vigorously. The Company believes that the resolution of the Duke counterclaims should not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, consolidated financial position or results of operations. It is possible, however, that there could be an unfavorable outcome or resolution of the claims asserted (inclusive of the claims the Company asserts against Duke and the counterclaims Duke asserts against the Company), which could negatively and materially impact the Company’s business, consolidated financial position and results of operations. Litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance that the Company will prevail. As discussed further in Note 12, the Company has received from Duke a notice of termination of the License Agreement as of May 17, 2025. It is unlikely that the Company will be able to commercialize the rights licensed under the Duke License Agreement, treat patients using the rights and technologies licensed from Duke, spinoff Cell Corp. or otherwise obtain the benefits of the Duke License Agreement. Nor can there be any assurances that the Company will open the Cryo-Cell Institute for Cellular Therapies. The Company does not include an estimate of legal fees and other related defense costs in its estimate of loss contingencies. See “Note 12” and "Risk Factors" for additional information regarding Duke.

In addition to the above, from time to time, the Company is subject to proceedings, lawsuits, contract disputes and other claims in the normal course of its business.