MoonLake Immunotherapeutics

From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us due to defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, negative publicity, reputational harm and other factors, and there can be no assurances that favorable outcomes will be obtained.

On October 17, 2025, a putative class action captioned Peters v. MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-8612 (the “Peters Action”) was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”), naming the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, and its Chief Financial Officer as defendants. The Peters Action is purportedly brought on behalf of a class of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s Class A Ordinary Shares from March 10, 2024 through September 29, 2025 (the “Class Period”). The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), based on allegedly false or misleading statements related to the clinical benefits and prospects of Sonelokimab. A substantially identical action captioned Bridgewood v. MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, et al., Case No. 1:25‑cv‑08500 (the “Bridgewood Action” and, together with the Peters Action, the “Class Actions”), was filed in the same court on October 15, 2025 and voluntarily dismissed without prejudice by the plaintiff on October 22, 2025.

On January 6, 2026, the Court appointed lead plaintiff and lead counsel. On April 16, 2026, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint naming the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, its Chief Financial Officer, and its Chief Scientific Officer as defendants. The amended complaint covers the same Class Period and asserts substantially similar claims under the Exchange Act as the earlier complaints in the Class Actions. On June 16, 2026, defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. On August 14, 2026, plaintiffs filed an opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss. On September 15, 2026, defendants filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss. The motion remains pending.

The defendants deny the allegations of wrongdoing in the Class Actions and intend to vigorously defend against the claims. The Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the Peters Action and therefore cannot estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, if any, that may result from the lawsuit.