Tempest Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

Our activities to evaluate and pursue potential strategic alternatives may not result in any transaction or enhance stockholder value.

Current wording

Our activities to evaluate and pursue potential strategic alternatives may not result in any transaction or enhance stockholder value. If we do not successfully consummate a strategic alternative, our board of directors may decide to pursue a dissolution and liquidation of our company.

Previous wording

Our existing cash and cash equivalents of $14.3 million as of June 30, 2025 is expected to fund our operations through less than 12 months from the date our consolidated financial statements are available to be issued. While we have begun to implement cost reductions in 2025, we have finite cash resources available to fund our operations. As part of cost reductions, we reduced our workforce by 21 of 26 full-time employees in April 2025. We also announced plans to explore a full range of strategic alternatives to advance our promising clinical stage programs and maximize stockholder value. Strategic alternatives under consideration may include, but are not limited to, mergers, acquisitions, partnerships, joint ventures, licensing arrangements or other strategic transactions. We have retained MTS Health Partners, L.P., an internationally recognized financial advisor with substantial experience in the biotechnology industry, to support us with the strategic evaluation process. If a strategic alternative is not available, we will be required to take additional actions, including a potential wind down of our operations.

Current wording

While we have implemented cost reductions in 2025, we have finite cash resources available to fund our operations. We announced plans to explore a full range of strategic alternatives to advance our promising clinical stage programs and maximize stockholder value. Strategic alternatives under consideration may include, but are not limited to, mergers, acquisitions, partnerships, joint ventures, licensing arrangements or other strategic transactions. We have retained MTS Health Partners, L.P., an internationally recognized financial advisor with substantial experience in the biotechnology industry, to support us with the strategic evaluation process. If a strategic alternative is not available, we will be required to take additional actions, including a potential wind down of our operations.

Previous wording

Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Our ability to raise additional capital has been adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions, inflation expectations, and the recent disruptions to and volatility in the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide resulting from geopolitical tensions.

Current wording

We will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Our ability to raise additional capital has been adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions, inflation expectations, and the recent disruptions to and volatility in the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide resulting from geopolitical tensions.

Previous wording

Our activities to evaluate and pursue potential strategic alternatives may not result in any transaction or enhance stockholder value.

Current wording

Our activities to evaluate and pursue potential strategic alternatives may not result in any transaction or enhance stockholder value. If we do not successfully consummate a strategic alternative, our board of directors may decide to pursue a dissolution and liquidation of our company.

Previous wording

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Biotechnology product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. Our operations to date have been limited primarily to organizing and staffing, business planning, raising capital, acquiring and developing product and technology rights, manufacturing, and conducting research and development activities for our product candidates. We have never generated any revenue from product sales, and we have not obtained regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates. We incurred net losses of $18.7 million and $17.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of June 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $225.8 million. Substantially all of our operating losses have resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years and for the foreseeable future as we continue to conduct research and development, clinical testing, regulatory compliance activities, manufacturing activities, and, if any of our product candidates is approved, sales and marketing activities. Our prior losses, combined with our expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

Current wording

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Biotechnology product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. Our operations to date have been limited primarily to organizing and staffing, business planning, raising capital, acquiring and developing product and technology rights, manufacturing, and conducting research and development activities for our product candidates. We have never generated any revenue from product sales, and we have not obtained regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates. We incurred net losses of $22.2 million and $28.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of September 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $229.3 million. Substantially all of our operating losses have resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years and for the foreseeable future as we continue to conduct research and development, clinical testing, regulatory compliance activities, manufacturing activities, and, if any of our product candidates is approved, sales and marketing activities. Our prior losses, combined with our expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

Previous wording

To succeed, we must recruit, retain, manage and motivate qualified clinical, scientific, technical and management personnel, and we face significant competition for experienced personnel. If we do not succeed in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, particularly at the management level, it could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan, harm our results of operations and increase our capabilities to successfully commercialize our product candidates. In particular, we believe that our future success is highly dependent upon the contributions of our senior management, particularly our Chief Executive Officer and President, Stephen Brady and our Chief Medical Officer, Sam Whiting. The loss of services of Messrs. Brady or Whiting, or any of our other senior management, could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology field is intense and as a result, we may be unable to continue to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel.

Current wording

To succeed, we must recruit, retain, manage and motivate qualified clinical, scientific, technical and management personnel, and we face significant competition for experienced personnel. In April 2025, we announced a reduction of our workforce to explore a full range of strategic alternatives to advance its promising clinical-stage programs and maximize stockholder value. This restructuring may make attracting and retention of our current and future personnel more challenging. If we do not succeed in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, particularly at the management level, it could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan, harm our results of operations and increase our capabilities to successfully commercialize our product candidates. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology field is intense and as a result, we may be unable to continue to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel.

Previous wording

business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the war in Israel, natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires, and public health crises.

Current wording

business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war, natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires, and public health crises.

Previous wording

Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment or retention may result in increased costs, program delays or both, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop our product candidates or could render further development impossible. For example, the impact of public health crises or geopolitical tensions, such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the war in Israel, may delay or prevent patients from enrolling or from receiving treatment in accordance with the protocol and the required timelines, which could delay our clinical trials, or prevent us from completing our clinical trials at all.

Current wording

Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment or retention may result in increased costs, program delays or both, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop our product candidates or could render further development impossible. For example, the impact of public health crises or geopolitical tensions, such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war, may delay or prevent patients from enrolling or from receiving treatment in accordance with the protocol and the required timelines, which could delay our clinical trials, or prevent us from completing our clinical trials at all.

Previous wording

potential unforeseen business disruptions or market fluctuations that delay our product development or clinical trials and increase our costs or expenses, such as business or operational disruptions, delays, or system failures due to malware, unauthorized access, terrorism, war, natural disasters, strikes, geopolitical conflicts (such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the war in Israel), restrictions on trade, import or export restrictions, or public health crises.

Current wording

potential unforeseen business disruptions or market fluctuations that delay our product development or clinical trials and increase our costs or expenses, such as business or operational disruptions, delays, or system failures due to malware, unauthorized access, terrorism, war, natural disasters, strikes, geopolitical conflicts (such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war), restrictions on trade, import or export restrictions, or public health crises.

Previous wording

For example, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA through plan year 2025. The IRA also reduces the "donut hole" under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and through a newly established manufacturer discount program. In the future, there may be other efforts to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the annual reconciliation bill, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (“OBBBA”), was signed into law which is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. OBBBA also narrows access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declines to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits, set to expire in 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. We are continuing to monitor any further changes to the ACA that, in turn, may potentially impact our business in the future.

Current wording

For example, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA through plan year 2025. The IRA also reduces the "donut hole" under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and through a newly established manufacturer discount program. In the future, there may be other efforts to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the annual reconciliation bill, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (“OBBBA”), was signed into law which is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. OBBBA also narrows access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declines to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits, set to expire at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. We are continuing to monitor any further changes to the ACA that, in turn, may potentially impact our business in the future.

Previous wording

The current Trump administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, the National Institutes of Health, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. These actions and proposals include, for example, (1) reducing agency workforce; (2) directing program cuts; (3) rescinding a Biden administration executive order tasking the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (“CMMI”) to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending and eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establishing an AI task force and developing a strategic plan; (4) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs for Medicare through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (5) imposing tariffs of imported pharmaceutical products; and (6) directing certain federal agencies to enforce existing law regarding hospital and price plan price transparency and by standardizing prices across hospitals and health plans. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (“Loper Bright”), the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to current regulations and guidance issued by federal agencies applicable to our operations, including those issued by the FDA. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA.

Current wording

The current Trump administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, the National Institutes of Health, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, on September 30, 2025, the current administration announced the first agreement with a major pharmaceutical company that requires the drug manufacturer to offer, through a direct to consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions and proposals include, for example, (1) reducing agency workforce; (2) directing program cuts; (3) rescinding a Biden administration executive order tasking the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (“CMMI”) to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending and eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establishing an AI task force and developing a strategic plan; (4) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs for Medicare through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (5) imposing tariffs of imported pharmaceutical products; (6) directing certain federal agencies to enforce existing law regarding hospital and price plan price transparency and by standardizing prices across hospitals and health plans, and (7) as part of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission’s recent Strategy Report, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (“Loper Bright”), the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to current regulations and guidance issued by federal agencies applicable to our operations, including those issued by the FDA. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA.

Previous wording

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities.

Current wording

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including in October 2025, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. If the current government shutdown continues or a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Previous wording

In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are contractually subject to industry standards adopted by industry groups and, we 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. We publish privacy policies,

Current wording

In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are contractually subject to industry standards adopted by industry groups and, we 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. We publish privacy policies, marketing materials and other statements concerning data privacy and security. Regulators in the United States are increasingly scrutinizing these statements, and if these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, misleading, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators or other adverse consequences.

Previous wording

The patenting process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. Additionally, recent reforms and changes at government agencies of the United States and those of non-U.S. jurisdictions could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications, and the maintenance, enforcement, or defense of our issued patents. For example, the ability of the USPTO and other applicable patent authorities to properly administer their functions is highly dependent on the levels of funding available to the agency and their ability to retain key personnel and fill key leadership appointments, among various factors. Termination of employees or delays in replacing or hiring for key positions could significantly impact the ability of the USPTO and other applicable patent authorities to fulfill their functions and could greatly impact our ability to timely and adequately prosecute or maintain our patent applications, and our ability to timely and adequately maintain, enforce, or defend our issued patents. In addition, we may not pursue or obtain patent protection in all relevant markets. 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. Moreover, in some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from or license to third parties and may be reliant on our licensors or licensees to do so. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in issued patents. Even if patent applications we license or own currently or in the future issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents that we hold or in-licenses may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether any of our platform advances and product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. In addition, our existing patents and any future patents we obtain may not be sufficiently broad to prevent others from using our technology or from developing competing products and technologies.

Current wording

The patenting process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. Additionally, recent reforms and changes at government agencies of the United States and those of non-U.S. jurisdictions could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications, and the maintenance, enforcement, or defense of our issued patents. For example, the ability of the USPTO and other applicable patent authorities to properly administer their functions is highly dependent on the levels of funding available to the agency and their ability to retain key personnel and fill key leadership appointments, among various factors. Termination of employees or delays in replacing or hiring for key positions could significantly impact the ability of the USPTO and other applicable patent authorities to fulfill their functions and could greatly impact our ability to timely and adequately prosecute or maintain our patent applications, and our ability to timely and adequately maintain, enforce, or defend our issued patents. In addition, we may not pursue or obtain patent protection in all relevant markets. 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. Moreover, in some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from or license to third parties and may be reliant on our licensors or licensees to do so. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in issued patents. Even if patent applications we own currently or in the future or may license in the future issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents that we hold or in-license may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether any of our platform advances and product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. In addition, our existing patents and any future patents we obtain may not be sufficiently broad to prevent others from using our technology or from developing competing products and technologies.

Previous wording

We currently and may in the future depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties, and our current or future licensors may not always act in our best interest. If we fail to comply with our obligations under our intellectual property licenses, if the licenses are terminated, or if disputes regarding these licenses arise, we could lose significant rights that may be important to our business.

Current wording

We may in the future depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties, and our future licensors may not always act in our best interest. If we fail to comply with our obligations under our intellectual property licenses, if the licenses are terminated, or if disputes regarding these licenses arise, we could lose significant rights that may be important to our business.

Previous wording

We currently license intellectual property from the Regents of the University of California and may in the future depend on patents, know-how and proprietary technology licensed from third parties. Our licenses to such patents, know-how and proprietary technology may not provide exclusive rights in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our products in the future. The agreements under which we license patents, know-how and proprietary technology from others may be complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations.

Current wording

We may in the future depend on patents, know-how and proprietary technology licensed from third parties. Our licenses to such patents, know-how and proprietary technology may not provide exclusive rights in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our products in the future. The agreements under which we license patents, know-how and proprietary technology from others may be complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations.

Previous wording

If our current or future licensors fail to adequately protect our licensed intellectual property, our ability to commercialize product candidates could suffer. We may not have complete control over the maintenance, prosecution and litigation of our current or future in-licensed patents and patent applications. For example, we cannot be certain that activities such as the maintenance and prosecution by our current or future licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. It is possible that our current or future licensors’ infringement proceedings or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves or may not be conducted in accordance with our best interests.

Current wording

If our future licensors fail to adequately protect our licensed intellectual property, our ability to commercialize product candidates could suffer. We may not have complete control over the maintenance, prosecution and litigation of our future in-licensed patents and patent applications. For example, we cannot be certain that activities such as the maintenance and prosecution by our future licensors will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. It is possible that our future licensors’ infringement proceedings or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves or may not be conducted in accordance with our best interests.

Previous wording

In addition, the resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we might believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant patents, know-how and proprietary technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement. Disputes that may arise between us and our current or future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement could include disputes regarding:

Current wording

In addition, the resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we might believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant patents, know-how and proprietary technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement. Disputes that may arise between us and our future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement could include disputes regarding:

Previous wording

If disputes over intellectual property that we currently license or may license in the future prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected technology or product candidates.

Current wording

If disputes over intellectual property that we may license in the future prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected technology or product candidates.

Previous wording

The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications and those of our licensors may not result in patents being issued which protect our product candidates or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates.

Current wording

The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications and those of our future licensors may not result in patents being issued which protect our product candidates or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates.

Previous wording

The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates or uses thereof in the United States or in other foreign countries. For example, while our patent applications are pending, we may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”), or become involved in interference or derivation proceedings, or equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. Even if patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge their inventorship, validity, enforceability or scope, including through opposition, revocation, reexamination, post-grant andinter partes review proceedings. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, patent term adjustment being jeopardized, patent term being reduced, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, 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 product candidates. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property or prevent others from designing around our claims. Moreover, some of our owned and in-licensed patents and patent applications may be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patent applications we hold with respect to our product candidates is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop, and threaten our ability to commercialize, our product candidates. Further, if we encounter delays in development, testing, and regulatory review of new product candidates, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced or eliminated.

Current wording

The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or may in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates or uses thereof in the United States or in other foreign countries. For example, while our patent applications are pending, we may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”), or become involved in interference or derivation proceedings, or equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. Even if patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge their inventorship, validity, enforceability or scope, including through opposition, revocation, reexamination, post-grant andinter partes review proceedings. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, patent term adjustment being jeopardized, patent term being reduced, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, 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 product candidates. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property or prevent others from designing around our claims. Moreover, some of our owned and in-licensed patents and patent applications may be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patent applications we hold with respect to our product candidates is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop, and threaten our ability to commercialize, our product candidates. Further, if we encounter delays in development, testing, and regulatory review of new product candidates, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced or eliminated.

Previous wording

Since patent applications in the United States and other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, at any moment in time, we cannot be certain that it was in the past or will be in the future the first to file any patent application related to our product candidates. In addition, some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued. As a result, there may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim, and we may be subject to priority disputes. We may be required to disclaim part or all of the term of certain patents or all of the term of certain patent applications. There also may be prior art of which we are aware, but which we do not believe affects the validity or enforceability of a claim, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to affect the validity or enforceability of a claim. No assurance can be given that, if challenged, our patents would be declared by a court, patent office or other governmental authority to be valid or enforceable or that even if found valid and enforceable, a competitor’s technology or product would be found by a court to infringe our patents. We may analyze patents or patent applications of our competitors that we believe are relevant to our activities, and consider that we are free to operate in relation to our product candidates, but our competitors may achieve issued claims, including in patents we consider to be unrelated, that block our efforts or potentially result in our product candidates or our activities infringing such claims. It is possible that our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering our products or technology similar to our products and technology. Those patent applications may have priority over our owned and in-licensed patent applications or patents, which could require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. The possibility also exists that others will develop products that have the same effect as our product candidates on an independent basis that do not infringe our patents or other intellectual property rights, or will design around the claims of patents that we have had issued that cover our product candidates or their use. Likewise, our currently owned patents and patent applications, if issued as patents, directed to our proprietary technologies and our product candidates are expected to expire from 2033 through 2046, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustments or extensions. Our earliest patents may expire before, or soon after, our first product achieves marketing approval in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Additionally, we cannot be assured that the USPTO or relevant foreign patent offices will grant any of the pending patent applications we own or in-license currently or in the future. Upon the expiration of our current patents, we …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Since patent applications in the United States and other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, at any moment in time, we cannot be certain that it was in the past or will be in the future the first to file any patent application related to our product candidates. In addition, some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued. As a result, there may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim, and we may be subject to priority disputes. We may be required to disclaim part or all of the term of certain patents or all of the term of certain patent applications. There also may be prior art of which we are aware, but which we do not believe affects the validity or enforceability of a claim, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to affect the validity or enforceability of a claim. No assurance can be given that, if challenged, our patents would be declared by a court, patent office or other governmental authority to be valid or enforceable or that even if found valid and enforceable, a competitor’s technology or product would be found by a court to infringe our patents. We may analyze patents or patent applications of our competitors that we believe are relevant to our activities, and consider that we are free to operate in relation to our product candidates, but our competitors may achieve issued claims, including in patents we consider to be unrelated, that block our efforts or potentially result in our product candidates or our activities infringing such claims. It is possible that our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering our products or technology similar to our products and technology. Those patent applications may have priority over our owned and in-licensed patent applications or patents, which could require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. The possibility also exists that others will develop products that have the same effect as our product candidates on an independent basis that do not infringe our patents or other intellectual property rights, or will design around the claims of patents that we have had issued that cover our product candidates or their use. Likewise, our currently owned patents and patent applications, if issued as patents, directed to our proprietary technologies and our product candidates are expected to expire from 2033 through 2046, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustments or extensions. Our earliest patents may expire before, or soon after, our first product achieves marketing approval in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Additionally, we cannot be assured that the USPTO or relevant foreign patent offices will grant any of the pending patent applications we own currently or in the future or may in-license in the future. Upon the expiration of our cu…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

we, or our current or future licensors, as the case may be, may fail to meet our or our obligations to the U.S. government regarding any patents and patent applications funded by U.S. government grants, leading to the loss or unenforceability of patent rights;

Current wording

we, or our future licensors, as the case may be, may fail to meet our or our obligations to the U.S. government regarding any patents and patent applications funded by U.S. government grants, leading to the loss or unenforceability of patent rights;

Previous wording

we, or our current or future licensors, as the case may be, might not have been the first to file patent applications for certain inventions;

Current wording

we, or our future licensors, as the case may be, might not have been the first to file patent applications for certain inventions;

Previous wording

the laws of foreign countries may not protect our, or our current or future licensors’, as the case may be, proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States;

Current wording

the laws of foreign countries may not protect our, or our future licensors’, as the case may be, proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States;

Previous wording

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our current or future licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents 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.

Current wording

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our future licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents 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.

Previous wording

Geo-political actions in the United States and in foreign countries (such as, the Russia and Ukraine conflict; retaliatory measures by foreign countries in response to actions by the United States, in particular, tariffs) could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications or those of any current or future licensors and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of any current or future licensors. For example, the United States and foreign government actions related to the Russia-Ukraine war may limit or prevent filing, prosecution and maintenance of patent applications in Russia. Government actions may also prevent maintenance of issued patents in Russia. These actions could result in abandonment or lapse of our patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in Russia. If such an event were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, a decree was adopted by the Russian government in March 2022, allowing Russian companies and individuals to exploit inventions owned by patentees that have citizenship or nationality in, are registered in, or have a predominately primary place of business or profit-making activities in the United States and other countries that Russia has deemed unfriendly without consent or compensation. Consequently, we would not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in Russia or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into Russia. Also, many foreign countries could threaten to impose retaliatory measures that may adversely impact our intellectual property rights in those countries. For example, on March 14, 2025, Brazil enacted Law No. 15.122/2025 (known as the “Economic Reciprocity Law”), which provides a framework that allows for the suspension of obligations related to foreign entity’s intellectual property rights. Accordingly, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

Current wording

Geo-political actions in the United States and in foreign countries (such as, the Russia and Ukraine conflict; retaliatory measures by foreign countries in response to actions by the United States, in particular; and tariffs) could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications or those of any future licensors and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of any future licensors. For example, the United States and foreign government actions related to the Russia-Ukraine war may limit or prevent filing, prosecution and maintenance of patent applications in Russia. Government actions may also prevent maintenance of issued patents in Russia. These actions could result in abandonment or lapse of our patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in Russia. If such an event were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, a decree was adopted by the Russian government in March 2022, allowing Russian companies and individuals to exploit inventions owned by patentees that have citizenship or nationality in, are registered in, or have a predominately primary place of business or profit-making activities in the United States and other countries that Russia has deemed unfriendly without consent or compensation. Consequently, we would not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in Russia or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into Russia. Also, many foreign countries could threaten to impose retaliatory measures that may adversely impact our intellectual property rights in those countries. For example, on March 14, 2025, Brazil enacted Law No. 15.122/2025 (known as the “Economic Reciprocity Law”), which provides a framework that allows for the suspension of obligations related to foreign entity’s intellectual property rights. Accordingly, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

Previous wording

Our patent application in-licensed from the Regents of the University of California has been supported through the use of U.S. government funding awarded by the National Institutes of Health. Although we do not currently own issued patents or pending patent applications that have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding, we may acquire in the future intellectual property rights that have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding or grants. Pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, the U.S. government has certain rights in inventions developed with government funding. These U.S. government rights include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right, under certain limited circumstances, to require us to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that: (1) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention; (2) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs; or (3) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations (also referred to as march-in rights). Recently, the government released a draft framework that may be used by an agency when deciding to exercise its march-in rights for public comments, and as such, the framework for deciding when march-in rights are exercised may change. If the U.S. government exercised its march-in rights in our current or future intellectual property rights that are generated through the use of U.S. government funding or grants, we could be forced to license or sublicense intellectual property developed by us or that we license on terms unfavorable to us, and there can be no assurance that we would receive compensation from the U.S. government for the exercise of such rights. The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if the grant recipient fails to disclose the invention to the government or fails to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us to expend substantial resources. In addition, the U.S. government requires that any products embodying any of these inventions or produced through the use of any of these inventions be manufactured substantially in the United States. This preference for U.S. industry may be waived by the federal agency that provided the funding if the owner or assignee of the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible. …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Although we do not currently license or own issued patents or pending patent applications that have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding, we may in-license or acquire in the future intellectual property rights that have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding or grants. Pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, the U.S. government has certain rights in inventions developed with government funding. These U.S. government rights include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right, under certain limited circumstances, to require us to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that: (1) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention; (2) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs; or (3) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations (also referred to as march-in rights). Recently, the government released a draft framework that may be used by an agency when deciding to exercise its march-in rights for public comments, and as such, the framework for deciding when march-in rights are exercised may change. If the U.S. government exercised its march-in rights in our current or future intellectual property rights that are generated through the use of U.S. government funding or grants, we could be forced to license or sublicense intellectual property developed by us or that we license on terms unfavorable to us, and there can be no assurance that we would receive compensation from the U.S. government for the exercise of such rights. The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if the grant recipient fails to disclose the invention to the government or fails to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us to expend substantial resources. In addition, the U.S. government requires that any products embodying any of these inventions or produced through the use of any of these inventions be manufactured substantially in the United States. This preference for U.S. industry may be waived by the federal agency that provided the funding if the owner or assignee of the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible. This preference for U.S. industry may limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. product manufacturers for products covered by such intellectual property.

Previous wording

general economic, political, and market conditions and overall fluctuations in the financial markets in the United States and abroad, including as a result of bank failures, public health crises or geopolitical tensions, such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the armed conflict in Israel and the Gaza Strip; and

Current wording

general economic, political, and market conditions and overall fluctuations in the financial markets in the United States and abroad, including as a result of bank failures, public health crises or geopolitical tensions, such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war; and