UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2019

or

For the Transition Period from _____ to _____.

Commission File No. 001-35366

FORTRESS BIOTECH, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (781) 652-4500

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes  ¨ No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes  ¨ No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes  x No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes  x No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.     ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes  ¨ No  x

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $71,367,503 based upon the closing sale price of our common stock of $1.50 on that date. Common stock held by each officer and director and by each person known to own in excess of 5% of outstanding shares of our common stock has been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. The determination of affiliate status in not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for its 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III hereof.

FORTRESS BIOTECH, INC.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K that are not descriptions of historical facts are forward-looking statements that are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could negatively affect our business, operating results, financial condition and stock price. We have attempted to identify forward-looking statements by terminology including “anticipates,” “believes,” “can,” “continue,” “could,” “estimates,” “expects,” “intends,” “may,” “might,” “plans,” “potential,” “predicts,” “should,” or “will” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those currently anticipated include those set forth under “Item 1A. Risk Factors” including, in particular, risks relating to:

We expressly disclaim any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect any change in our expectations or any changes in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based, except as required by law. The information contained herein is intended to be reviewed in its totality, and any stipulations, conditions or provisos that apply to a given piece of information in one part of this presentation should be read as applying mutatis mutandis to every other instance of such information appearing herein.

PART I

Item 1. Business.

Overview

Fortress Biotech, Inc. (“Fortress” or the “Company”) is a biopharmaceutical company dedicated to acquiring, developing and commercializing pharmaceutical and biotechnology products and product candidates, which we do at the Fortress level, at our majority-owned and majority-controlled subsidiaries and joint ventures, and at entities we founded and in which we maintain significant minority ownership positions. Fortress has a talented and experienced business development team, comprising scientists, doctors and finance professionals, who identify and evaluate promising products and product candidates for potential acquisition by new or existing partner companies. Through our partner companies, we have executed such arrangements in partnership with some of the world’s foremost universities, research institutes and pharmaceutical companies, including City of Hope National Medical Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania, and AstraZeneca plc.

Following the exclusive license or other acquisition of the intellectual property underpinning a product or product candidate, Fortress leverages its business, scientific, regulatory, legal and finance expertise to help the partners achieve their goals. Partner companies then assess a broad range of strategic arrangements to accelerate and provide additional funding to support research and development, including joint ventures, partnerships, out-licensings, and public and private financings; to date, three partner companies are publicly-traded, and two have consummated strategic partnerships with industry leaders Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and InvaGen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (a subsidiary of Cipla Limited).

Several of our partner companies possess licenses to product candidate intellectual property, including Aevitas Therapeutics, Inc. (“Aevitas”), Avenue Therapeutics, Inc. (“Avenue”), Baergic Bio, Inc. (“Baergic”), Caelum Biosciences, Inc. (“Caelum”), Cellvation, Inc. (“Cellvation”), Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. (“Checkpoint”), Cyprium Therapeutics, Inc. (“Cyprium”), Helocyte, Inc. (“Helocyte”), Hepla Sciences, Inc. (“Hepla”), Journey Medical Corporation (“Journey” or “JMC”), Mustang Bio, Inc. (“Mustang”) and Oncogenuity, Inc. (“Oncogenuity”).

The Company is a Delaware corporation incorporated in 2006. As used throughout this filing, the words “we”, “us” and “our” may refer to Fortress individually or together with our affiliates and partners, as dictated by context.

Product Candidates and Other Intellectual Property

Commercialized Products

Through our partner company Journey we market five dermatology products:

Ximino®: Ximino (minocycline hydrochloride) extended release capsule is a tetracycline-class drug indicated to treat only inflammatory lesions of non-nodular moderate to severe acne vulgaris. Journey launched Ximino in August 2019.

Targadox®: Targadox (doxycycline hyclate USP) 50mg tablets is a tetracycline-class drug indicated as adjunctive therapy for severe acne.

Exelderm®: Exelderm (sulconazole nitrate, USP) Cream and Solution are antifungal agents indicated for the treatment of tinea infection, such as ringworm and jock itch.

Ceracade®: Ceracade Skin Emulsion is a steroid-free, ceramide-dominant formulation used to treat dry skin conditions and to manage and relieve the burning and itching associated with various types of dermatitis and radiation dermatitis.

Luxamend®: Luxamend Wound Cream is a water-based emulsion formulated for the dressing and management of superficial wounds, minor abrasions, dermal ulcers, donor sites, first- and second-degree burns, including sunburns, and radiation dermatitis.

Late Stage Product Candidates

Intravenous (IV) Tramadol

Our partner company Avenue, in collaboration with InvaGen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is developing intravenous (“IV”) Tramadol, for the treatment of moderate to moderately severe post-operative pain. IV Tramadol may fill a gap in the acute pain market between IV acetaminophen/NSAIDs and IV conventional narcotics. Avenue announced in May 2018 that its first pivotal Phase 3 study met its primary endpoint and all key secondary endpoints.  In June 2019, Avenue announced its second pivotal Phase 3 study met its primary endpoint and all key secondary endpoints.  In December 2019, Avenue submitted a new drug application (“NDA”), for IV Tramadol to treat moderate to moderately severe postoperative pain pursuant to Section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”).  In February 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) accepted the NDA submission for review and set a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”) goal date of October 10, 2020.

CUTX-101

Our partner company Cyprium is currently developing CUTX-101, a copper histidinate injection for the treatment of Menkes disease. Menkes disease is a rare X-linked pediatric disease caused by gene mutations of copper transporter ATP7A, which affects approximately one in 100,000 newborns per year. Biochemically, Menkes patients may have low levels of copper in their blood and brains, as well as abnormal levels of catecholamine, but definitive diagnosis is typically made by sequencing of the ATP7A gene. There is no current FDA-approved treatment for Menkes disease and its variants. CUTX-101, along with an AAV-ATP7A gene therapy that is also being developed by Cyprium, was granted orphan drug designation by the FDA. CUTX-101 was also granted Fast Track Designation by the FDA for classic Menkes disease in patients who have not demonstrated significant clinical progression. In January 2019, Cyprium received notification from the FDA that the sponsorship of the Investigational New Drug (“IND”) Application for CUTX-101 was successfully transferred to Cyprium. Additional information on the Expanded Access study can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT04074512.

In January 2020, the FDA granted Rare Pediatric Disease Designation to CUTX-101 for the treatment of Menkes disease.

MB-107 (Ex vivo Lentiviral Therapy for X-linked Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (XSCID))

Our partner company Mustang collaborates with St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital (“St. Jude”) in the development of a first-in-class ex vivo lentiviral gene therapy for the treatment of X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (“XSCID”). On August 2, 2018, Mustang entered into an exclusive worldwide license agreement with St. Jude for the development of this therapy. XSCID is the most common form of severe combined immune deficiency. The acquisition of this license expands our pipeline into gene therapy, allowing us to leverage existing synergies for Mustang’s Worcester, Massachusetts, cell-processing facility. This gene therapy is currently in two Phase 1/2 clinical trials: a multicenter trial in newly diagnosed infants sponsored by St. Jude and a single-center trial in previously transplanted patients sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”). Results in these two trials have been promising, and Mustang plans to file separate IND Applications in 2020 in order to conduct a pivotal non-randomized phase 2 registration trial in each of the two patient populations.

Cosibelimab (formerly CK-301)

Our partner company Checkpoint is currently evaluating its lead antibody product candidate, cosibelimab (formerly CK-301), an anti-PD-L1 antibody licensed from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, in a Phase 1 clinical trial in Checkpoint therapy-naïve patients with selected recurrent or metastatic cancers, including ongoing cohorts intended to support one or more Biologics License Application (“BLA”) submissions. Additional information on the Phase 1 trial can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT03212404.

CK-101 (EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC)

Checkpoint is also currently evaluating a lead small-molecule, targeted anti-cancer agent, CK-101, in a Phase 1 clinical trial for the treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”). In September 2018, Checkpoint announced preliminary interim safety and efficacy data from the ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial. The data were presented in an oral presentation at the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (“IASLC”) 19th World Conference on Lung Cancer in Toronto. The clinical trial is ongoing to identify the optimal dose with a new softgel capsule formulation to maximize therapeutic effect, following which a Phase 3 trial is planned in treatment-naïve EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients. Additional information on the Phase 1 trial can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT NCT02926768.

CAEL-101 (AL Amyloidosis)

Our partner company Caelum, in collaboration with Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is working to develop a novel, first-in-class monoclonal antibody called CAEL-101 for the treatment of amyloid light chain (“AL”) amyloidosis. CAEL-101 is designed to improve organ function by reducing or eliminating amyloid deposits in the tissues and organs of patients with AL amyloidosis. The antibody is designed to bind to insoluble light chain amyloid protein, including both kappa and lambda subtypes. In a Phase 1a/1b study, CAEL-101 demonstrated improved organ function, including cardiac and renal function, in 27 patients with relapsed and refractory AL amyloidosis who had previously not had an organ response to standard of care therapy. These data support CAEL-101’s potential to be a well-tolerated therapy that promotes amyloid resolution. CAEL-101 has received Orphan Drug Designation from the FDA as a therapy for patients with AL amyloidosis, and as a radio-imaging agent in AL amyloidosis.

Triplex

Through our partner company Helocyte we are developing Triplex, a first-in-class and potentially best-in-class universal recombinant Modified Vaccinia Ankara viral vector vaccine engineered to induce a robust and durable virus-specific T cell response to three immuno-dominant proteins [UL83 (pp65), UL123 (IE1), UL122 (IE2)] linked to cytomegalovirus (‘CMV’) complications in the transplant setting. In a Phase 1 study, Triplex was found to be safe, well-tolerated and highly immunogenic when administered to healthy volunteers at multiple dose levels (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01941056). In a recently completed Phase 2 trial, Triplex was observed to be safe, well-tolerated, highly immunogenic and efficacious in reducing CMV events in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02506933). Triplex is currently the subject of multiple other ongoing and planned studies, one involving vaccination of the stem cell transplant donor (followed by vaccination of the recipient) in higher risk patients - potentially introducing CMV immunity sooner and positioning Triplex ahead of prophylactic antivirals in the standard of care. Helocyte secured an exclusive, worldwide license to Triplex from City of Hope National Medical Center (“COH”) in April of 2015.

CEVA-101

Through our partner company Cellvation, we are working to develop CEVA-101, a cellular product comprised of autologous Bone Marrow-derived Mononuclear Cells (“BMMNCs”) currently being developed for the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (“TBI”) in adults and children.

Early Stage Product Candidates

MB-102 (CD123 CAR T for AML)

Our partner company Mustang collaborates with COH and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (“Fred Hutch”) in the development of proprietary, autologous, chimeric antigen receptor (“CAR”) engineered T-cell (“CAR T”) therapies. CAR T therapies use the patient’s own T-cells to engage and destroy specific tumors. The process involves selecting specific T-cell subtypes, genetically engineering them to express chimeric antigen receptors and placing them back in the patient where they recognize and destroy cancer cells. We believe that harnessing the body’s own immune system to treat cancer is the next generation of cancer care that may prove curative across tumor types that have proved resistant to standard pharmacological and biological treatments.

One such CAR T is CD123 or MB-102, a subunit of the heterodimeric interleukin-3-receptor (“IL-3R”), which is widely expressed on human hematologic malignancies, including acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”). In addition, CD123 can be found on the surface of B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, hairy cell leukemia, blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (“BPDCN”), myelodysplastic syndrome, chronic myeloid leukemia and Hodgkin lymphoma.

Mustang is currently investigating MB-102 as a target for adoptive cellular immunotherapy in AML, BPDCN and high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (“MDS”), since high CD123 expression is associated with enhanced AML blast proliferation, increased resistance of blasts to apoptosis, and poor clinical prognosis. CD123 is overexpressed in the vast majority of cases of AML and high-risk MDS and in essentially all cases of BPDCN. In the third quarter of 2019 the FDA approved Mustang’s IND application to initiate a multi-center Phase 1/2 clinical trial of MB-102 for AML, high risk MDS, and BPDCN, and Mustang expects to enroll the first patient in this trial in the first half of 2020.

MB-101 (IL13Rα2 CAR T for Glioblastoma)

Mustang is also currently developing MB-101, an optimized CAR T product incorporating enhancements in CAR T design and T cell engineering to improve antitumor potency and T cell persistence. Having optimized dose, schedule, route of administration and T cell selection, a phase 1 trial is currently underway at COH combining MB-101 with immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat patients with recurrent or refractory glioblastoma multiforme (“GBM”). Additional information on the trial can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT04003649. In the second half of 2020, COH expects to initiate a phase 1 trial of MB-101 to treat patients with recurrent or refractory GBM with a substantial component of leptomeningeal disease. Finally, also in the second half of 2020, Mustang expects to initiate a multicenter phase 1 trial combining MB-101 with MB-108, a phase 1 oncolytic virus in-licensed by Mustang from Nationwide Children’s Hospital, to treat patients with recurrent or refractory GBM.

GBM is the most common brain and central nervous system (“CNS”) cancer, accounting for 45.2% of malignant primary brain and CNS tumors, 54% of all gliomas, and 16% of all primary brain and CNS tumors. There were an estimated 12,390 new glioblastoma cases predicted in 2017 in the US. Malignant brain tumors are the most common cause of cancer-related deaths in adolescents and young adults aged 15-39 and the most common cancer occurring among 15-19 year-olds in the US. While GBM is a rare disease (2-3 cases per 100,000 persons per year in the US and EU), it is quite lethal, with five-year survival rates historically under 10%. Standard of care therapy consists of maximal surgical resection, radiation and chemotherapy with temozolomide, which, while rarely curative, is shown to extend median overall survival from 4.5 to 15 months. GBM remains difficult to treat due to the inherent resistance of the tumor to conventional therapies.

Immunotherapy approaches targeting brain tumors offer promise over conventional treatments. IL13Rα2 is an attractive target for CAR T therapy, as it has limited expression in normal tissue but is over-expressed on the surface of greater than 50% of GBMs. CAR T cells are designed to express membrane-tethered IL-13 receptor ligand mutated at a single site (glutamic acid at position 13 to a tyrosine; E13Y) with high affinity for IL13Rα2 and reduced binding to IL13Rα1 in order to reduce healthy tissue targeting (Kahlon KS et al. Cancer Research. 2004;64:9160-9166).

MB-104 (CS1 CAR T for Multiple Myeloma and Light Chain Amyloidosis)

Another Mustang program is a CAR T directed against CS1 (also known as CD319, CRACC and SLAMF7), which was identified as an NK cell receptor regulating immune functions. It is also expressed on B cells, T cells, dendritic cells, NK-T cells, and monocytes. CS1 is overexpressed in multiple myeloma (“MM”) and light chain amyloidosis (“AL”), which makes it a good target for immunotherapy. A humanized anti-CS1 antibody, elotuzumab (Empliciti®), is approved in combination with other medications for the treatment of adult patients with MM who have received prior therapies. Despite great advances in treatment, MM remains an incurable malignancy of plasma cells. AL is a protein deposition disorder that is a result of a plasma cell dysplasia, similar to MM. Immunotherapy is an attractive approach for AL because of the low burden of disease. Our academic partners at COH have developed a novel second generation CS1-specific CAR T cell therapy. In preclinical studies, they have demonstrated efficacy of these CAR T cells, both in vitro and in vivo, within the context of clinically relevant models of MM and AL. COH is evaluating the safety of this CS1-specific CAR T cell therapy in a Phase 1 trial. Mustang expects to file an IND for MB-104 in 2020 and to initiate its own Phase 1 clinical trial shortly thereafter for the treatment of patients with MM.

MB-106 (CD20 CAR T for B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma)

CD20 is a B-cell lineage-specific phosphoprotein that is expressed in high, homogeneous density on the surface of more than 95% of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (“NHL”). CD20 is stable on the cell surface with minimal shedding or internalization upon binding antibody and is present at only nanomolar levels as soluble antigen. It is well established as an effective immunotherapy target, with extensive studies demonstrating improved tumor responses and survival of B-NHL patients treated with rituximab and other anti-CD20 antibodies. CD20 is being developed by our partner company Mustang.

More than 70,000 new cases of NHL are diagnosed each year in the United States, and more than 19,000 patients die of this group of diseases annually. Most forms of NHL including follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, and small lymphocytic lymphoma, which account collectively for ~45% of all cases of NHL are incurable with available therapies, except for allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (“allo-SCT”). However, many NHL patients are not suitable candidates for allo-SCT, and this treatment is also limited by significant rates of morbidity and mortality due to graft- versus-host disease. Innovative new treatments are therefore urgently needed.

Fred Hutch has an open IND for a Phase 1 clinical study to assess the anti-tumor activity and safety of administering CD20-directed CAR T cells. This IND was submitted on February 24, 2017, with Fred Hutch as the sponsor. The trial will also assess CAR T cell persistence and determine the potential immunogenicity of the cells, and Mustang together with Fred Hutch will determine a recommended Phase 2 dose.

MB-103 (HER2 CAR T for GBM & Metastatic Breast Cancer to Brain)

HER2/neu (often shortened to “HER2”) is a growth-promoting protein on the outside of all breast cells. Breast cancer cells with higher than normal levels of HER2 are called HER2-positive (“HER2+”). These cancers tend to grow and spread faster than other breast cancers. Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women, with over 42,000 women in the United States expected to die from advanced metastatic disease in 2020. Approximately 20% to 25% of breast cancers overexpress HER2, which is an established therapeutic target of both monoclonal antibodies (“mAbs”) and receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors. With the advent of effective mAbs directed against HER2, the median overall survival of patients with metastatic HER2+ breast cancer has improved. However, management of metastatic disease in the CNS - observed in up to 50% of HER2+ breast cancer patients - continues to be a clinical challenge in large part due to the inability of mAbs to sufficiently cross the blood-brain barrier. Although small-molecule inhibitors of HER2 exist and have been clinically approved, their single-agent efficacy in the context of metastatic disease to the brain has been limited. While HER2-targeted therapy in combination with conventional agents has shown some promise for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer, control of brain metastases remains a significant unmet clinical need, as most patients survive less than two years following CNS involvement.

CAR-based T-cell immunotherapy is being actively investigated for the treatment of solid tumors, including HER2+ cancers. Mustang’s academic partners at COH have developed a second-generation HER2-specific CAR T-cell for the treatment of refractory/relapsed HER2+ GBM, as well as for the treatment of brain and/or leptomeningeal metastases from HER2 positive cancers. COH’s preclinical data demonstrate effective targeting of breast cancer brain metastases with intraventricular delivery of HER2-directed CAR T cells. COH is evaluating the safety of this HER2-specific CAR T cell therapy in two phase 1 trials that commenced in the fourth quarter of 2018. Additional information on the Phase 1 trials can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifiers NCT03389230 and NCT03696030.

MB-108 (C134 Oncolytic Virus for GBM)

MB-108 is an attenuated herpes simplex virus type 1 that is currently in development at our partner company Mustang. It was in-licensed from Nationwide Children’s Hospital, and the University of Alabama at Birmingham is evaluating the safety of this oncolytic virus in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. In the second half of 2020, Mustang intends to combine MB-108 with MB-101 to potentially enhance efficacy in treating GBM. Additional information on the ongoing Phase 1 trial of MB-108 alone can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT03657576.

MB-105 (PSCA CAR T for Prostate & Pancreatic Cancers)

PSCA is a glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored cell membrane glycoprotein. In addition to being highly expressed in the prostate it is also expressed in the bladder, placenta, colon, kidney, and stomach. Prostate cancer may be amenable to T cell-based immunotherapy since several tumor antigens, including prostate stem-cell antigen (“PSCA”), are widely over-expressed in metastatic disease. Mustang’s academic partners at COH have developed a second-generation PSCA-specific CAR T cell therapy that has demonstrated robust in vitro and in vivo anti-tumor activity in patient-derived, clinically relevant, bone-metastatic prostate cancer xenograft models. COH is evaluating the safety of this PSCA-specific CAR T cell therapy in a Phase 1 trial treating patients with PSCA+ metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Additional information on this trial can be found on www.ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT03873805.

BAER-101 (novel α2/3–subtype-selective GABA A positive allosteric modulator (“PAM”))

Through our majority-owned partner Baergic, we are developing BAER-101, a high affinity, selective modulator of the gamma-aminobutyric acid (“GABA”) A, which is a receptor system with differential binding and modulatory properties dependent on the particular GABA A subtype. Baergic will explore BAER-101 in a number of Central Nervous System (“CNS”) disorders where patients are not adequately treated.

CD38

CD38 is a novel fully human monoclonal antibody designed to recognize CD38 expressing tumor cells (including but not limited to multiple myeloma (“MM”)) and kill them through multiple mechanisms, including antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (“ADCC”), complement-dependent cytotoxicity (“CDC”), antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis (“ADCP”) and programmed cell death (“PCD”). We have an exclusive option to license a preclinical program.

Preclinical Product Candidates

AAV-ATP7A Gene Therapy

Through our majority-owned partner Cyprium, we are developing adeno-associated virus (“AAV”) gene therapy (“AAV-ATP7A”). In March 2017, Cyprium entered into a license agreement with Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (“NICHD”) to acquire the global rights to develop and commercialize AAV-ATP7A gene therapy. AAV-ATP7A gene therapy has demonstrated the ability to rescue neurological phenotypes and improve survival when coadministered with copper histidinate injections in a mouse model of Menkes disease and has been granted orphan drug designation by the FDA.

AVTS-001 Gene Therapy

Through our majority-owned partner Aevitas, we are developing AVTS-001, an AAV gene therapy that may restore lasting production of regulatory proteins, potentially providing a curative treatment for diseases with high unmet need.

CK-103 (BET Inhibitor)

Our partner company Checkpoint is currently developing CK-103, a novel, selective and potent small molecule inhibitor of Bromodomain and Extra-Terminal motif (BET) proteins. Checkpoint plans to develop CK-103 for the treatment of various advanced and metastatic solid tumor cancers, including, but not limited to, those associated with elevated c-Myc expression. Checkpoint entered into a collaboration with TG Therapeutics, Inc. (“TGTX”) to develop CK-103 in the field of hematological malignancies. Checkpoint retains the right to develop and commercialize CK-103 in solid tumors.

CEVA-D and CEVA-102

In partnership with Cellvation, we are developing CEVA-D, a novel bioreactor device that enhances the anti-inflammatory potency of bone marrow-derived cells without genetic manipulation, using wall shear stress (“WSS”) to suppress tumor necrosis factor-a (“TNF-a”) production by activated immune cells. CEVA-102 is the first cell product produced by CEVA-D, which we plan to develop for the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (“TBI”) in adults and children.

CK-302 (Anti-GITR)

CK-302 is a fully human agonistic monoclonal antibody in development at Checkpoint that is designed to bind and trigger signaling in GITR expressing cells. GITR is a co-stimulatory molecule of the TNF receptor family and is expressed on activated T cells, B cells, natural killer (“NK”) and regulatory T cells (“Treg”). Checkpoint is developing CK-302 for oncology indications where scientific literature supports the potential for an anti-GITR to be effective.

CK-303 (Anti-CAIX)

Also in development at Checkpoint is CK-303, a fully human anti-carbonic anhydrase IX (“CAIX”) antibody designed to recognize CAIX expressing cells and kill them via antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (“ADCC”) and complement-dependent cytotoxicity (“CDC”). Scientific literature indicates that CAIX is a well characterized tumor associated antigen with expression almost exclusively limited to the cells of renal cell carcinoma (“RCC”). Checkpoint is developing CK-303 for the treatment of patients with RCC in combination with an anti-PD-L1 and/or anti-GITR antibody as well as potentially other anti-tumor immune response potentiating compounds and/or targeted therapies.

ConVax (formerly Pentamer)

We and our partner Helocyte are also developing ConVax, a universal recombinant Modified Vaccinia Ankara viral vector vaccine designed to induce robust and durable humoral and cellular immune responses to cytomegalovirus (“CMV”).

Intellectual Property Generally

Our goal is to obtain, maintain and enforce patent protection for our product candidates, formulations, processes, methods and any other proprietary technologies, preserve our trade secrets, and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of other parties, both in the United States and in other countries. Our policy is to actively seek to obtain, where appropriate, the broadest intellectual property protection possible for our product candidates, proprietary information and proprietary technology through a combination of contractual arrangements and patents, both in the United States and abroad. However, patent protection may not afford us with complete protection against competitors who seek to circumvent our patents.

We also depend upon the skills, knowledge, experience and know-how of our and our partners’ management and research and development personnel, as well as that of our advisers, consultants and other contractors. To help protect our proprietary know-how, which is not patentable, and for inventions for which patents may be difficult to enforce, we and our partners currently rely and will in the future rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect our interests. To this end, we and our partners require all of our employees, consultants, advisers and other contractors to enter into confidentiality agreements that prohibit the disclosure of confidential information and, where applicable, require disclosure and assignment to us of the ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions important to our business.

Competition

We and our partners operate in highly competitive segments of the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical markets. We face competition from many different sources, including commercial pharmaceutical and biotechnology enterprises, academic institutions, government agencies, and private and public research institutions. Many of our and our partners’ competitors have significantly greater financial, product development, manufacturing and marketing resources than us. Large pharmaceutical companies have extensive experience in clinical testing and obtaining regulatory approval for drugs. In addition, many universities and private and public research institutes are active in diseases of the skin research, some in direct competition with us and our partners. We and our partners also may compete with these organizations to recruit scientists and clinical development personnel. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

Our competitors are pursuing the development and/or acquisition of pharmaceuticals, medical devices and OTC products that target the same diseases and conditions that we are targeting in biotechnology, biopharmaceutical, dermatological and other therapeutic areas. If competitors introduce new products, delivery systems or processes with therapeutic or cost advantages, our products can be subject to progressive price reductions or decreased volume of sales, or both. Most new products that we introduce must compete with other products already on the market or products that are later developed by competitors. The principal methods of competition for our products include quality, efficacy, market acceptance, price, and marketing and promotional efforts, patient access programs and product insurance coverage reimbursement.

The only pharmaceutical area in which we sell marketed products is dermatology, and the dermatological product competitive landscape is highly fragmented, with a large number of mid-size and smaller companies competing in both the prescription, OTC and cosmeceutical sectors. The market for our dermatological products is very competitive, both across product categories and geographies. In addition to larger diversified pharmaceutical and medical device companies, we face competition from mid-size and smaller, regional and entrepreneurial companies with fewer products in niche areas or regions. The oral acne antibiotic market, in which Targadox and Ximino compete, is divided into two categories: minocycline and doxycycline. Targadox competes in the doxycycline category, primarily against Mayne Pharma’s Doryx® brand. Ximino competes primarily against Ortho Dermatologics Solodyn® brand. Also, in 2019 Almirall introduced SEYSARA™, a tetracycline-class drug indicated for the treatment of inflammatory lesions of non-nodular moderate to severe acne vulgaris in patients 9 years of age and older which competes against both Targadox and Ximino. Exelderm®, a broad spectrum anti-fungal with two formulations, competes against Sebela Pharma’s Naftin® and Ortho Dermatologics Luzu®.

Government Regulation and Product Approval

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of products such as those we and our partners are developing.

United States Pharmaceutical Product Development Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates pharmaceutical (drug and biologic) products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and implementing regulations. Pharmaceutical products are also subject to other federal, state and local statutes and regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product-development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us. The process required by the FDA before a pharmaceutical product may be marketed in the United States generally includes the following:

The lengthy process of seeking required approvals and the continuing need for compliance with applicable statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial resources and approvals are inherently uncertain.

Before testing any compounds with potential therapeutic value in humans, the pharmaceutical product candidate enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the pharmaceutical product candidate. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs. The sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA places the IND on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a pharmaceutical product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. Accordingly, we cannot be certain that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that suspend or terminate such clinical trial.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the pharmaceutical product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by the sponsor. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA if conducted under a U.S. IND. Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP requirements. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB or ethics committee if conducted outside of the United States, at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB or ethics committee is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of trial participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB or ethics committee also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. We intend to use third-party clinical research organizations (“CROs”) to administer and conduct our planned clinical trials and will rely upon such CROs, as well as medical institutions, clinical investigators and consultants, to conduct our trials in accordance with our clinical protocols and to play a significant role in the subsequent collection and analysis of data from these trials. The failure by any of such third parties to meet expected timelines, adhere to our protocols or meet regulatory standards could adversely impact the subject product development program. Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

Post-approval studies, or Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These studies are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication and may be requested by the FDA as a condition of approval.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events or any finding from tests in laboratory animals that suggests a significant risk for human subjects. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA or the sponsor or, if used, its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB or ethics committee can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s or ethics committee’s requirements or if the pharmaceutical product has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the pharmaceutical product as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the pharmaceutical product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final pharmaceutical product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected, tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the pharmaceutical product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

United States Review and Approval Processes

The results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the pharmaceutical product, proposed labeling and other relevant information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA/BLA requesting approval to market the product.

The NDA/BLA review and approval process is lengthy and difficult and the FDA may refuse to approve an NDA/BLA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical data or other data and information. Even if such data and information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA/BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA for compliance with cGMPs, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. We cannot be certain that we, our partners or our or their suppliers will be able to comply with the cGMP and other FDA regulatory requirements.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any pharmaceutical products for which we or our partners receive FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements, which include, among others, standards for direct-to-consumer advertising, promoting pharmaceutical products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the pharmaceutical product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Failure to comply with FDA requirements can have negative consequences, including adverse publicity, enforcement letters from the FDA, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, and civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA also may require Phase 4 testing, risk minimization action plans and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product.

Orphan Drugs

Under the Orphan Drug Act, special incentives exist for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases or conditions, which are defined to include those diseases or conditions that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the United States. Requests for orphan drug designation must be submitted before the submission of an NDA or BLA.

If a product that has an orphan drug designation is the first such product to receive FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity for that use. This means that, subsequent to approval, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same disease, except in limited circumstances, for seven years. The FDA may approve a subsequent application from another person if the FDA determines that the application is for a different drug or different use, or if the FDA determines that the subsequent product is clinically superior, or that the holder of the initial orphan drug approval cannot assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the drug to meet the public’s need. If the FDA approves someone else’s application for the same drug that has orphan exclusivity, but for a different use, the competing drug could be prescribed by physicians outside its FDA approval for the orphan use, notwithstanding the existence of orphan exclusivity. A grant of an orphan designation is not a guarantee that a product will be approved. If a sponsor receives orphan drug exclusivity upon approval, there can be no assurance that the exclusivity will prevent another person from receiving approval for the same or a similar drug for the same or other uses.

Pediatric Information

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, NDAs and BLAs or supplements to NDAs and BLAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the treatment for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the treatment is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any product for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.

The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, or BPCA, provides BLA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity-patent or non-patent-for a product if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within a specific time frame.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

In the United States, our activities are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (formerly the Health Care Financing Administration), other divisions of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the United States Department of Justice and individual United States Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments.

Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

In the United States and markets in other countries, sales of any products for which we and our partners receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in part on the availability of reimbursement from third-party payors, including government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Third-party payors are increasingly examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy, and, accordingly, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved therapeutics. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available for our products to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in research and product development. We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state healthcare legislation and regulations, including the Affordable Care Act.

International Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, there are a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of any product candidates. The approval process varies from country to country, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval.

Employees

As of December 31, 2019, we had 93 full-time employees at Fortress and our partner companies.

Executive Officers of Fortress

The following table sets forth certain information about our executive officers as of December 31, 2019.

Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D. has served as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors since October 2009 and as Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since December 2013. From November 2014 to August 2015, he served as interim President and Chief Executive Officer of Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: CKPT). Dr. Rosenwald currently serves as a member of the board of directors of Fortress partner companies Avenue Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: ATXI), Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: CKPT), and Mustang Bio, Inc. (Nasdaq: MBIO). From 1991 to 2008, Dr. Rosenwald served as the Chairman of Paramount BioCapital, Inc. He received his B.S. in finance from Pennsylvania State University and his M.D. from Temple University School of Medicine.

Robyn M. Hunter was appointed as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer on June 26, 2017. Ms. Hunter has more than 30 years of financial and operational experience in an array of industries. Prior to serving as the Company’s CFO, Ms. Hunter served as the Company’s Vice President and Corporate Controller from June 2011 until June 2017, where she implemented financial and operational processes, procedures and policies to facilitate the Company’s execution of its growth strategy. From January 2006 to May 2011, Ms. Hunter served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Schochet Associates. From August 2004 to January 2006, Ms. Hunter served as the Corporate Controller for Indevus Pharmaceuticals. From 1990 to 2004, Ms. Hunter held several positions from Accounting Manager to Vice President and Treasurer of The Stackpole Corporation. Ms. Hunter holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Union College in Schenectady New York.

George Avgerinos, Ph.D. has served as our Senior Vice President, Biologics Operations since June 2013. Dr. Avgerinos joined us from AbbVie, Inc., where he was Vice President, HUMIRA® Manufacturing Sciences and External Partnerships. In his 22-year career at AbbVie, Inc., formerly Abbott Laboratories, formerly BASF Bioresearch Corporation (BASF), Dr. Avgerinos was responsible for many aspects of biologics development and operations. These included the HUMIRA® operations franchise, global biologics process and manufacturing sciences, biologics CMC, manufacturing operations, and third-party manufacturing. During his tenure, Dr. Avgerinos led and participated in the development of numerous clinical candidates which included the launch of HUMIRA®. He supported expansion of the supply chain to over $9.0 billion in annual global sales. Dr. Avgerinos’ efforts on HUMIRA® have been recognized with numerous awards, including the prestigious Abbott’s Chairman’s award in 2011. Dr. Avgerinos received a B.A. in Biophysics from the University of Connecticut and a Ph.D. in Biochemical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Avgerinos also provides services for TG Therapeutics, Inc., a related party, pursuant to a shared services agreement.

Michael S. Weiss has served as our Executive Vice Chairman, Strategic Development since February 2014. He currently serves as a member of the board of directors of several of our partner companies, including Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: CKPT) and Mustang Bio, Inc. (Nasdaq: MBIO). Mr. Weiss is currently the Executive Chairman of Mustang Bio, Inc. (where he served as interim CEO from March 2015 to April 2017) and the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. (where he served as interim CEO from August 2015 to October 2015). From March 2015 until February 2019, Mr. Weiss served on the board of Avenue Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: ATXI). Since December 2011, Mr. Weiss has served in multiple capacities at TG Therapeutics, Inc., a related party, and is currently its Executive Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President. In 1999, Mr. Weiss founded Access Oncology, which was later acquired by Keryx Biopharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: KERX) in 2004. Following the merger, Mr. Weiss remained as CEO of Keryx. He began his professional career as a lawyer with Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP. Mr. Weiss earned his B.S. in Finance from The University of Albany and his J.D. from Columbia Law School.

Available Information

We and certain of our affiliates file annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy and information statements and amendments to reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a), 14 and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. The public may obtain these filings at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 or by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains a website at http://www.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding our Company and other companies that file materials with the SEC electronically. Copies of our and certain of our affiliates’ reports on Form 10-K, Forms 10-Q and Forms 8-K may be obtained, free of charge, electronically through our website at www.fortressbiotech.com.

Item 1A. Risk factors

Investing in our Common Stock, Series A Preferred Stock or any other type of equity or debt securities (together our “Securities”) involves a high degree of risk. You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described below, together with all of the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K including the consolidated financial statements and the related notes, as well as the risks, uncertainties and other information set forth in the reports and other materials filed or furnished by our partners and affiliates Checkpoint, Mustang, and Avenue with the SEC, before deciding to invest in our Securities. If any of the following risks or the risks included in the public filings of Checkpoint, Mustang or Avenue were to materialize, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In that event, the market price of our Securities could decline, and you could lose part of or all of your investment in our Securities. In addition, you should be aware that the below stated risks should be read as being applicable to our partners and affiliates such that, if any of the negative outcomes associated with any such risk is experienced by one of our partners or affiliates, the value of Fortress’ holdings in such partner or affiliate (if any) may decline.

Risks Related to our Growth Strategy

If we acquire, enter into joint ventures with or obtain a controlling interest in companies in the future, it could adversely affect our operating results and the value of our Securities, thereby diluting stockholder value, disrupting our business and/or diminishing the value of our holdings in our partner companies.

As part of our growth strategy, we might acquire, enter into joint ventures with, or obtain significant ownership stakes in other companies. Acquisitions of, joint ventures with and investments in other companies involve numerous risks, including, but not necessarily limited to:

If we fail to properly evaluate potential acquisitions, joint ventures or other transaction opportunities, we might not achieve the anticipated benefits of any such transaction, we might incur higher costs than anticipated, and management resources and attention might be diverted from other necessary or valuable activities.

If we cannot innovate and develop products and services and/or commercialize biopharmaceutical products or grow our and their respective businesses, we may not be able to generate revenue.

Our growth strategy also depends on our ability to generate revenue. If we cannot innovate and develop products and services, or commercialize future biopharmaceutical products or grow their respective businesses, we may not be able to generate revenue growth as anticipated.

Our future growth depends in part on our ability to identify and acquire or in-license products and product candidates, and if we are unable to do so, or to integrate acquired products into our operations, we may have limited growth opportunities.

An important part of our business strategy is to continue to develop a pipeline of product candidates by acquiring or in-licensing products, businesses or technologies. Future in-licenses or acquisitions, however, may entail numerous operational and financial risks, including, but not necessarily limited to:

We have limited resources to identify and execute the acquisition or in-licensing of third-party products, businesses and technologies and integrate them into our current infrastructure. In particular, we may compete with larger pharmaceutical companies and other competitors in our efforts to establish new collaborations and in-licensing opportunities. These competitors likely will have access to greater financial resources than us and may have greater expertise in identifying and evaluating new opportunities. Moreover, we may devote resources to potential acquisitions or in-licensing opportunities that are never completed, or we may fail to realize the anticipated benefits of such efforts.

We may not be able to generate returns for our investors if our partners, several of which have limited or no operating history, no commercialized revenue generating products, and are not yet profitable, cannot obtain additional third-party financing.

As part of our growth strategy, we have made and will likely continue to make substantial financial and operational commitments in our partners, which often have limited or no operating history, no commercialized revenue generating products, and require additional third-party financing to fund product and services development or acquisitions. Our business depends in large part on the ability of one or more of our partner companies to innovate, in-license, develop or acquire successful biopharmaceutical products and/or acquire companies in increasingly competitive and highly regulated markets. If certain of our partner companies do not successfully obtain additional third-party financing to commercialize products or successfully acquire companies, as applicable, the value of our businesses and our ownership stakes in our partner companies may be materially adversely affected.

If we cannot continue to fund our research and development programs, we may be required to reduce product development, which will adversely impact our growth strategy.

Our research and development (“R&D”) programs will require substantial additional capital to conduct research, preclinical testing and clinical trials, establish pilot scale and commercial scale manufacturing processes and facilities, and establish and develop quality control, regulatory, marketing, sales, and administrative capabilities to support these programs. We expect to fund our R&D activities from a combination of cash generated from royalties and milestones from our partners in various past, ongoing, and future collaborations, and through additional equity or debt financings from third parties. These financings could depress the stock prices of our securities. If additional funds are required to support our operations and such funds cannot be obtained on favorable terms, we may not be able to develop products, which will adversely impact our growth strategy.

Collaborative relationships with third parties could cause us to expend significant resources and incur substantial business risk with no assurance of financial return.

We anticipate substantial reliance upon strategic collaborations for marketing and commercializing our existing product candidates and we may rely even more on strategic collaborations for R&D of other product candidates. We may sell product offerings through strategic partnerships with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. If we are unable to establish or manage such strategic collaborations on terms favorable to us in the future, our revenue and drug development may be limited.

If we enter into R&D collaborations during the early phases of drug development, success will, in part, depend on the performance of research collaborators. We may not directly control the amount or timing of resources devoted by research collaborators to activities related to product candidates. Research collaborators may not commit sufficient resources to our R&D programs. If any research collaborator fails to commit sufficient resources, the preclinical or clinical development programs related to the collaboration could be delayed or terminated. Also, collaborators may pursue existing or other development-stage products or alternative technologies in preference to those being developed in collaboration with us. Finally, if we fail to make required milestone or royalty payments to collaborators or to observe other obligations in agreements with them, the collaborators may have the right to terminate or stop performance of those agreements.

Establishing strategic collaborations is difficult and time-consuming. Our discussions with potential collaborators may not lead to the establishment of collaborations on favorable terms, if at all. Potential collaborators may reject collaborations based upon their assessment of our financial, regulatory or intellectual property positions. Even if we successfully establish new collaborations, these relationships may never result in the successful development or commercialization of product candidates or the generation of sales revenue. To the extent that we enter into collaborative arrangements, the related product revenues that might follow are likely to be lower than if we directly marketed and sold products. Such collaborators may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on, and such collaborations could be more attractive than the one with us for any future product candidate.

Management of our relationships with collaborators will require:

As we continue to execute our growth strategy, we may be subject to further government regulation which could adversely affect our financial results.

If we engage in business combinations and other transactions that result in holding minority or non-control investment interests in a number of entities, we may become subject to regulation under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”). If we do become subject to the Investment Company Act, we would be required to register as an investment company and could be expected to incur significant registration and compliance costs in the future.

We may not be able to manage our anticipated growth, which may in turn adversely impact our business.

We will need to continue to expend capital on improving our infrastructure to address our anticipated growth. Acquisitions of companies or products could place a strain on our management, and administrative, operational and financial systems. In addition, we may need to hire, train, and manage more employees, focusing on their integration with us and corporate culture. Integration and management issues associated with increased acquisitions may require a disproportionate amount of our management’s time and attention and distract our management from other activities related to running our business.

We may not be able to hire or retain key officers or employees needed to implement our business strategy and develop products and businesses.

Our success depends on the continued contributions of our executive officers, financial, scientific, and technical personnel and consultants, and on our ability to attract additional personnel as we continue to implement growth strategies and acquire and invest in companies with varied businesses. During our operating history, many essential responsibilities have been assigned to a relatively small number of individuals. However, as we continue to implement our growth strategy, the demands on our key employees will expand, and we will need to recruit additional qualified employees. The competition for such qualified personnel is intense, and the loss of services of certain key personnel, or our inability to attract additional personnel to fill critical positions, could adversely affect our business.

We currently depend heavily upon the efforts and abilities of our management team and the management teams of our partners. The loss or unavailability of the services of any of these individuals could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results. In addition, we have not obtained, do not own, and are not the beneficiary of key-person life insurance for any of our key personnel. We only maintain a limited amount of directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage. There can be no assurance that this coverage will be sufficient to cover the costs of the events that may occur, in which case, there could be a substantial impact on our ability to continue operations.

Our employees, consultants, or third-party partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including but not necessarily limited to noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements or internal procedures, policies or agreements to which such employees, consultants and partners are subject, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct. Misconduct by employees, consultants, or third-party partners could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations, provide accurate information to the FDA, comply with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMPs”), comply with federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately, comply with internal procedures, policies or agreements to which such employees, consultants or partners are subject, or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee, consultant, or third-party misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation, as well as civil and criminal liability. The precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and results of operations, including the imposition of significant fines or other civil and/or criminal sanctions.

We receive a large amount of proprietary information from potential or existing licensors of intellectual property and potential acquisition target companies, all pursuant to confidentiality agreements. The confidentiality and proprietary invention assignment agreements that we have in place with each of our employees and consultants prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of such information, but such employees or consultants may nonetheless disclose such information through negligence or willful misconduct. Any such unauthorized disclosures could subject us to monetary damages and/or injunctive or equitable relief. The notes, analyses and memoranda that we have generated based on such information are also valuable to our businesses, and the unauthorized disclosure or misappropriation of such materials by our employees and consultants could significantly harm our strategic initiatives – especially if such disclosures are made to our competitor companies.

Certain of our officers and directors serve in similar roles at our partners, affiliates, related parties and/or other entities with which we transact business or in which we hold significant minority ownership positions; ongoing and future relationships and transactions between these parties could result in conflicts of interest.

We share directors and/or officers with certain of our partners, and other entities with which we transact business or in which we hold significant minority ownership positions, and such arrangements could create conflicts of interest in the future, including with respect to the allocation of corporate opportunities. While we believe that we have put in place policies and procedures to identify and mitigate such conflicts, and that any existing agreements that may give rise to such conflicts and any such policies or procedures were negotiated at arm’s length in conformity with fiduciary duties, such conflicts of interest may nonetheless arise. The existence and consequences of such potential conflicts could expose us to lost profits, claims by our investors and creditors, and harm to our results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Biopharmaceutical Business and Industry

We are an early-stage company with limited operating history on which stockholders can base an investment decision, and we rely heavily on third parties for the development and manufacturing of products and product candidates.

We are primarily an early-stage biopharmaceutical company and certain of our partners, on whose successes we largely rely, are also early-stage biopharmaceutical companies with limited operating histories. To date, we have engaged primarily in acquisition, evaluative and R&D activities and have not generated any revenues from product sales (except through Journey). We have incurred significant net losses since our inception. As of December 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $436.2 million. We may need to rely on third parties for activities critical to the product candidate development process, including but not necessarily limited to:

We have also not demonstrated the ability to perform the functions necessary for the successful commercialization of any of our pre-market product candidates, should any of them be approved for marketing. If we were to have any such product candidates approved, the successful commercialization of such products would require us to perform or contract with third parties for performance of a variety of critical functions, including, but not necessarily limited to:

Our operations have been limited to acquiring, developing and securing the proprietary rights for, and undertaking pre-clinical development and clinical trials of, product candidates, both at the Fortress level and via our partner companies. These operations provide a limited basis for our stockholders and prospective investors to assess our ability to develop and commercialize potential product candidates, as well as for you to assess the advisability of investing in our securities.

If we are unable to establish or maintain sales and marketing capabilities or fail to enter into agreements with third parties to market, distribute and sell products that may be successfully developed, we may not be able to effectively market and sell products and generate product revenue.

We do not currently have the infrastructure for the sales, marketing and distribution of any of our product candidates (except for that which exists through Journey), and we must build and maintain such infrastructures or make arrangements with third parties to perform these functions in order to commercialize any products that we may successfully develop. The establishment and development of a sales force, either by us or certain of our partners, or the establishment of a contract sales force, to market any products for which we may receive marketing approval is expensive and time-consuming and could delay any such product launch or compromise the successful commercialization of such products. If we are unable to establish and maintain sales and marketing capabilities or any other non-technical capabilities necessary to commercialize any products that may be successfully developed, we will need to contract with third parties to market and sell such products. We may not be able to establish arrangements with third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Journey’s sales force has been and is expected to continue to be an important contributor to its commercial success; any disruptions to Journey’s relationship with such sales force could materially adversely affect Journey’s product sales.

If any of our product candidates that may be successfully developed do not achieve broad market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors and the medical community, the revenues that any such product candidates generate from sales will be limited.

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors and the medical community. Coverage and reimbursement of our product candidates by third-party payors, including government payors, generally would also be necessary for commercial success. The degree of market acceptance of any approved products would depend on a number of factors, including, but not necessarily limited to:

If any product candidate is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, hospitals, healthcare payors and patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from these products and in turn we may not become or remain profitable.

Reimbursement may be limited or unavailable in certain market segments for our product candidates, which could make it difficult for us to sell our products profitably.

We intend to seek approval to market our future products in both the United States and in countries and territories outside the United States. If we obtain approval in one or more foreign countries, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those countries relating to such products. In some foreign countries, particularly in the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals and biologics is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product candidate. In addition, market acceptance and sales of our product candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors for any of our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures.

Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which pharmaceuticals they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time consuming and costly process that could require that we provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement. If reimbursement of our future products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability. Additionally, while we may seek approval of our products in combination with each other, there can be no guarantee that we will obtain coverage and reimbursement for any of our products together, or that such reimbursement will incentivize the use of our products in combination with each other as opposed to in combination with other agents which may be priced more favorably to the medical community.

In both the United States and certain foreign countries, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably. In particular, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 revised the payment methodology for many products reimbursed by Medicare, resulting in lower rates of reimbursement for many types of drugs, and added a prescription drug benefit to the Medicare program that involves commercial plans negotiating drug prices for their members. Since 2003, there have been a number of other legislative and regulatory changes to the coverage and reimbursement landscape for pharmaceuticals.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively, the “Affordable Care Act” or “ACA,” was enacted in 2010 and made significant changes to the United States’ healthcare system. The ACA and any revisions or replacements of that Act, any substitute legislation, and other changes in the law or regulatory framework could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to our potential product candidates are:

The Supreme Court upheld the ACA in the main challenge to the constitutionality of the law in 2012. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that the individual mandate and corresponding penalty was constitutional because it would be considered a tax by the federal government. The Supreme Court also upheld federal subsidies for purchasers of insurance through federally facilitated exchanges in a decision released in June 2015.

President Trump ran for office on a platform that supported the repeal of the ACA, and one of his first actions after his inauguration was to sign an Executive Order instructing federal agencies to waive or delay requirements of the ACA that impose economic or regulatory burdens on states, families, the health-care industry and others.

In January 2017, Congress voted to adopt a budget resolution for fiscal year 2017, or the Budget Resolution, that authorizes the implementation of legislation that would repeal portions of the ACA. The Budget Resolution is not a law. However, it is widely viewed as the first step toward the passage of legislation that would repeal certain aspects of the ACA. In March 2017, following the passage of the budget resolution for fiscal year 2017, the United States House of Representatives passed legislation known as the American Health Care Act of 2017, which, if enacted, would amend or repeal significant portions of the ACA. Attempts in the Senate in 2017 to pass ACA repeal legislation, including the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017, were unsuccessful.

At the end of 2017, Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which repealed the penalty for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential health coverage as required by the ACA. Following this legislation, Texas and 19 other states filed a lawsuit alleging that the ACA is unconstitutional as the individual mandate was repealed, undermining the legal basis for the Supreme Court’s prior decision. On December 14, 2018, a Texas federal district court judge issued a ruling declaring that the ACA in its entirety is unconstitutional. Upon appeal, the Fifth Circuit upheld the district court’s ruling that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. However, the Fifth Circuit remanded the case back to the district court to conduct a more thorough assessment of the constitutionality of the entire ACA despite the individual mandate being unconstitutional. While this decision has no immediate legal effect on the ACA and its provisions, this lawsuit is ongoing and the outcome may have a significant impact on our business.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, the “BBA,” which set government spending levels for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019, revised certain provisions of the ACA. Specifically, beginning in 2019, the BBA increased manufacturer point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs in the Medicare Part D coverage gap from 50% to 70%, ultimately increasing the liability for brand drug manufacturers. Further, this mandatory manufacturer discount applies to biosimilars beginning in 2019.

The 116th Congress has explored legislation intended to address the cost of prescription drugs. Notably, the major committees of jurisdiction in the Senate (Finance Committee, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and Judiciary Committee), have marked up legislation intended to address various elements of the prescription drug supply chain. Proposals include a significant overhaul of the Medicare Part D benefit design, addressing patent “loopholes”, and efforts to cap the increase in drug prices. The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved drug-related legislation intended to increase transparency of drug prices and also curb anti-competitive behavior in the pharmaceutical supply chain. In addition, the House Ways & Means Committee approved legislation intended to improve drug price transparency, including for drug manufacturers to justify certain price increases. While we cannot predict what proposals may ultimately become law, the elements under consideration could significantly change the landscape in which the pharmaceutical market operates.

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) advanced the Lower Health Care Costs Act of 2019. Among other things, the bill is intended to reduce costs in the United States health sector. The bill revises certain requirements to expedite the approval of generics and biosimilars. It also limits prices that pharmacy benefit managers may charge health insurers or enrollees for prescription drugs. Although this bill still needs to pass the full Senate and House of Representatives, it is worth noting the wide-ranging effects it could have on the health care sector.

The 116th Congress has explored legislation intended to address the cost of prescription drugs. Notably, the major committees of jurisdiction in the Senate (Finance Committee, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and Judiciary Committee), have marked up legislation intended to address various elements of the prescription drug supply chain. Proposals include a significant overhaul of the Medicare Part D benefit design, addressing patent loopholes, and efforts to cap increases in drug prices. On December 12, 2019, the House of Representatives passed broad legislation (H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act) that would, among other provisions, require HHS to negotiate drug prices and impose price caps and restructure the Medicare Part D benefit, imposing more financial responsibility on certain drug manufacturers. Failure by a manufacturer to reach an agreement with HHS on the negotiated price could result in significant penalties for prescription drug manufacturers. In addition, S. 2543, the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act would also, among other provisions, restructure the Medicare Part D benefit, but it would not authorize direct negotiation by the federal government. While we cannot predict what proposals may ultimately become law, the elements under consideration could significantly change the landscape in which the pharmaceutical market operates.

The Trump Administration has also taken several regulatory steps to redirect ACA implementation. The Department of Health and Human Services, the HHS, finalized a Medicare hospital payment reduction for Part B drugs acquired through the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The courts have since overturned this payment reduction, but the lawsuit is ongoing on appeal and HHS continues to implement the payment cuts. HHS also has signaled its intent to continue to pursue reimbursement policy changes for all Medicare Part B drugs that likely would reduce hospital and physician reimbursement for these drugs.

HHS has made numerous other proposals aimed at lowering drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries and increasing price transparency. While many of the proposals have been withdrawn or struck down by the courts, it appears the Trump Administration will continue to explore its authority to make regulatory changes to the pharmaceutical industry. For example, the Trump Administration released an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking related to an international price index model. It is unclear what eventually will be proposed, but the President has alluded to the concept of most favored nation pricing with regard to U.S. drug purchasing. In addition, HHS, in conjunction with the FDA, released two pharmaceutical importation models in December 2019: (1) a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to permit importation of pharmaceuticals from Canada, and (2) draft FDA guidance permitting manufacturers to import their own pharmaceuticals that were originally intended for marketing in other countries.

HHS also has taken steps to increase the availability of cheaper health insurance options, typically with fewer benefits and less generous coverage. The Administration has also signaled its intention to address drug prices and to increase competition, including by increasing the availability of biosimilars and generic drugs. As these are regulatory actions, a new administration could undo or modify these efforts.

There likely will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals at the federal and state levels directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare products and services. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect:

In addition, governments may impose price controls, which may adversely affect our future profitability. In January 2020, President Trump signed into law the U.S.-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) trade deal into law. As enacted, there are no commitments with respect to biologic product intellectual property rights or data protection, which may create an unfavorable environment across these three countries.

Our current and future relationships with customers and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere may be subject, directly or indirectly, to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, transparency, health information privacy and security and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors in the US and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the federal False Claims Act, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we sell, market and distribute any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. In addition, we may be subject to transparency laws and patient privacy regulation by the federal and state governments and by governments in foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not necessarily limited to:

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our businesses. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business, including our collaborators, is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, it may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from participation in government healthcare programs, which could also materially affect our businesses.

Failure to be included in formularies developed by managed care organizations and coverage by other organizations may negatively impact the utilization of our products, which could harm our market shares and could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Managed care organizations and other third-party payors try to negotiate the pricing of medical services and products to control their costs. Managed care organizations and pharmacy benefit managers typically develop formularies to reduce their cost for medications. Formularies can be based on the prices and therapeutic benefits of the available products. Due to their lower costs, generic products are often favored. The breadth of the products covered by formularies varies considerably from one managed care organization to another, and many formularies include alternative and competitive products for treatment of particular medical conditions. Failure to be included in such formularies or to achieve favorable formulary status may negatively impact the utilization and market share of our products. If our products are not included within an adequate number of formularies or adequate reimbursement levels are not provided, or if those policies increasingly favor generic products, this could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Most of our product candidates are at early stages of development and may not be successfully developed or commercialized.

Most of our existing product candidates remain in the early stages of development and will require substantial further capital expenditures, development, testing and regulatory clearances/approvals prior to commercialization. The development and regulatory approval processes take several years, and it is not likely that our product candidates, even if successfully developed and approved by the FDA and/or foreign equivalent regulatory bodies, would be commercially available for several years. Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage successfully obtain regulatory approval and are commercialized. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the requisite financing to fund development programs, we cannot assure you that any of our product candidates will be successfully developed or commercialized, which could result in the failure of our business and a loss of your investment in our Company.

Because we in-license the intellectual property needed to develop and commercialize products and product candidates from third parties, any dispute with the licensors or the non-performance of such license agreements may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidates.

The patents, patent applications and other intellectual property rights underpinning all of our existing product candidates were in-licensed from third parties. Under the terms of such license agreements, the licensors generally have the right to terminate such agreements in the event of a material breach. The licenses require us to make annual, milestone or other payments prior to commercialization of any product and our ability to make these payments depends on the ability to generate cash in the future. These license agreements also generally require the use of diligent and reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize product candidates.

If there is any conflict, dispute, disagreement or issue of non-performance between us or one of our partners, on the one hand, and the respective licensing partner, on the other hand, regarding the rights or obligations under the license agreements, including any conflict, dispute or disagreement arising from a failure to satisfy payment obligations under such agreements, the ability to develop and commercialize the affected product candidate may be adversely affected.

The types of disputes that may arise between us and the third parties from whom we license intellectual property include, but are not necessarily limited to:

In addition, the agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations or may conflict in such a way that puts us in breach of one or more agreements, which would make us susceptible to lengthy and expensive disputes with one or more of such third-party licensing partners. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreements, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

Product candidates that we advance into clinical trials may not receive regulatory approval.

Pharmaceutical development has inherent risks. We will be required to demonstrate through well-controlled clinical trials that product candidates are effective with a favorable benefit-risk profile for use in their target indications before seeking regulatory approvals for their commercial sale. Success in early clinical trials does not mean that later clinical trials will be successful, as product candidates in later-stage clinical trials may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety or efficacy despite having progressed through initial clinical testing. Also, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials that are not currently anticipated. Companies frequently suffer significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after earlier clinical trials have shown promising results. As a result, product candidates that we advance into clinical trials may not receive regulatory approval.

In addition, even if our product candidates were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any such product candidates or any future product candidate for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our products, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. The regulatory authority may also require the label to contain warnings, contraindications, or precautions that limit the commercialization of the product. In addition, the Drug Enforcement Agency (or foreign equivalent) may classify one or more of our product candidates in scheduling under the Controlled Substances Act (or its foreign equivalent) that could impede such product’s commercial viability. Any of these scenarios could compromise the commercial prospects for one or more of our current or future product candidates.

Regulatory approval for any approved product is limited by the FDA to those specific indications and conditions for which clinical safety and efficacy have been demonstrated.

Any regulatory approval is limited to those specific diseases and indications for which a product is deemed to be safe and effective by the FDA. In addition to the FDA approval required for new formulations, any new indication for an approved product also requires FDA approval. If we are not able to obtain FDA approval for any desired future indications for our products, our ability to effectively market and sell our products may be reduced and our business may be adversely affected.

While physicians may choose to prescribe drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those tested in clinical studies and approved by the regulatory authorities, our ability to promote the products is limited to those indications that are specifically approved by the FDA. These “off-label” uses are common across medical specialties and may constitute an appropriate treatment for some patients in varied circumstances. Regulatory authorities in the US generally do not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. Regulatory authorities do, however, restrict communications by pharmaceutical companies on the subject of off-label use. If our promotional activities fail to comply with these regulations or guidelines, we may be subject to warnings from, or enforcement action by, these authorities. In addition, our failure to follow FDA rules and guidelines relating to promotion and advertising may cause the FDA to suspend or withdraw an approved product from the market, require a recall or institute fines, or could result in disgorgement of money, operating restrictions, corrective advertising, injunctions or criminal prosecution, any of which could harm our business.

Any product candidates we advance into clinical development are subject to extensive regulation, which can be costly and time consuming, cause unanticipated delays or prevent the receipt of the required approvals to commercialize product candidates.

The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing and distribution of any product candidate, including our product candidates, is subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States and by comparable health authorities in foreign markets. In the United States, we are not permitted to market a product candidate until such product candidate’s Biologics License Application (“BLA”) or New Drug Application (“NDA”) is approved by the FDA. The process of obtaining approval is expensive, often takes many years, and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the products involved. In addition to significant clinical testing requirements, our ability to obtain marketing approval for product candidates depends on obtaining the final results of required non-clinical testing, including characterization of the manufactured components of our product candidates and validation of our manufacturing processes. The FDA may determine that our product manufacturing processes, testing procedures or facilities are inadequate to justify approval. Approval policies or regulations may change, and the FDA has substantial discretion in the pharmaceutical approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Despite the time and expense invested in the clinical development of product candidates, regulatory approval is never guaranteed.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies can delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons, including, but not limited to:

With respect to foreign markets, approval procedures vary among countries and, in addition to the aforementioned risks, can involve additional product testing, administrative review periods and agreements with pricing authorities. In addition, recent events raising questions about the safety of certain marketed pharmaceuticals may result in increased cautiousness by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities in reviewing new pharmaceuticals based on safety, efficacy or other regulatory considerations and may result in significant delays in obtaining regulatory approvals. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approvals would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates.

Any product candidate we advance into clinical trials may cause unacceptable adverse events or have other properties that may delay or prevent their regulatory approval or commercialization or limit their commercial potential.

Unacceptable adverse events caused by any of our product candidates that we advance into clinical trials could cause regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or stop clinical trials and could result in the denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities for any or all targeted indications and markets. This, in turn, could prevent us from commercializing the affected product candidate and generating revenues from its sale.

We have not completed testing for any of our product candidates for the indications for which we intend to seek product approval in humans, and we currently do not know the extent of the adverse events, if any, that will be observed in patients who receive any of our product candidates. If any of our product candidates causes unacceptable adverse events in clinical trials, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval or commercialize such products, or, if such product candidates are approved for marketing, future adverse events could cause us to withdraw such products from the market.

Delays in the commencement or resumption of our clinical trials could result in increased costs and delay our ability to pursue regulatory approval.

The commencement or resumption of clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including, but not necessarily limited to, delays in:

Any delays in the commencement of our clinical trials will delay our ability to pursue regulatory approval for product candidates. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate.

Suspensions or delays in the completion of clinical testing could result in increased costs and delay or prevent our ability to complete development of that product or generate product revenues.

Once a clinical trial has begun, patient recruitment and enrollment may be slower than we anticipate. Clinical trials may also be delayed as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results or difficulties in obtaining sufficient quantities of product manufactured in accordance with regulatory requirements and on a timely basis. Further, a clinical trial may be modified, suspended or terminated by us, an IRB, an ethics committee or a data safety monitoring committee overseeing the clinical trial, any clinical trial site with respect to that site, or the FDA or other regulatory authorities, due to a number of factors, including, but not necessarily limited to:

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance also may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit clinical trial protocols to IRBs for re-examination, which may in turn impact the costs and timing of, and the likelihood of successfully completing, a clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or if we must suspend or terminate, any clinical trial of any product candidate, our ability to obtain regulatory approval for that product candidate will be delayed, and the commercial prospects, if any, for the product candidate may suffer as a result. In addition, many of these factors may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate.

Even if approved, any product candidates that we may develop and market may be later withdrawn from the market or subject to promotional limitations.

We may not be able to obtain the labeling claims or scheduling classifications necessary or desirable for the promotion of our marketed products (or our product candidates if approved). We may also be required to undertake post-marketing clinical trials. If the results of such post-marketing studies are not satisfactory or if adverse events or other safety issues arise after approval, the FDA or a comparable regulatory authority in another jurisdiction may withdraw marketing authorization or may condition continued marketing on commitments from us that may be expensive and/or time consuming to complete. In addition, if we or others identify adverse side effects after any of our products are on the market, or if manufacturing problems occur, regulatory approval may be withdrawn and reformulation of our products, additional clinical trials, changes in labeling of our products and additional marketing applications may be required. Any reformulation or labeling changes may limit the marketability of such products if approved.

We currently rely predominantly on third parties to manufacture our preclinical and clinical pharmaceutical supplies and expect to continue to rely heavily on them and other contractors to produce commercial supplies of our products, and our dependence on third-party suppliers could adversely impact our businesses. We also rely solely on third parties to manufacture Journey’s commercialized products, which dependence may also adversely impact our businesses.

We depend heavily on third party manufacturers for product supply. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to applicable specifications and with FDA regulatory requirements, we will not be able to secure and/or maintain FDA approval for those products. Our third-party suppliers will be required to maintain compliance with cGMPs and will be subject to inspections by the FDA and comparable agencies and authorities in other jurisdictions to confirm such compliance. In the event that the FDA or such other authorities determine that our third-party suppliers have not complied with cGMPs or comparable regulations, the relevant clinical trials could be terminated or subjected to a clinical hold until such time as we are able to obtain appropriate replacement material and/or applicable compliance, and commercial product could be unfit for sale, or if distributed, could be recalled from the market. Any delay, interruption or other issues that arise in the manufacture, testing, packaging, labeling, storage, or distribution of our products as a result of a failure of the facilities or operations of our third-party suppliers to comply with regulatory requirements or pass any regulatory agency inspection could significantly impair our ability to develop and commercialize our products and product candidates. In addition, several of our currently commercialized products, sold through our partner company Journey, are produced by a single manufacturer, and, although we closely monitor inventory prophylactically, disruptions to such supply arrangements could adversely affect our ability to meet product demand and therefore diminish revenues.

We also rely on third-party manufacturers to purchase from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to produce product candidates for anticipated clinical trials. There are a small number of suppliers for certain capital equipment and raw materials that are used to manufacture those products. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these raw materials by our third-party manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of these raw materials. Any significant delay in the supply of raw material components related to an ongoing clinical trial could considerably delay completion of our clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval.

We do not expect to have the resources or capacity to commercially manufacture our product candidates internally, if approved, and would likely continue to be heavily dependent upon third-party manufacturers. Our dependence on third parties to manufacture and supply clinical trial materials, as well as our planned dependence on third party manufacturers for any products that may be approved, may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize products in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all.

We rely on third parties to conduct clinical trials. If these third parties do not meet agreed-upon deadlines or otherwise conduct the trials as required, our clinical development programs could be delayed or unsuccessful, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates when expected or at all.

We rely on third-party contract research organizations and site management organizations to conduct most of our preclinical studies and all of our clinical trials for our product candidates. We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as contract research organizations, site management organizations, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct some of our preclinical studies and all of our clinical trials. These CROs, investigators, and other third parties will and do play a significant role in the conduct of our trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data from the clinical trials.

There is no guarantee that any CROs, investigators and other third parties upon which we rely for administration and conduct of our clinical trials will devote adequate time and resources to such trials or perform as contractually required. If any of these third parties fails to meet expected deadlines, or fails to adhere to our clinical protocols or otherwise perform in a substandard manner, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated. If any of the clinical trial sites terminates for any reason, we may lose follow-up information on patients enrolled in our ongoing clinical trials unless the care of those patients is transferred to another qualified clinical trial site. In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisers or consultants to us from time to time and receive cash or equity compensation in connection with such services. If these relationships and any related compensation result in perceived or actual conflicts of interest, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site, or the FDA’s willingness to accept such data, may be jeopardized.

Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials are conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial and for ensuring that our preclinical studies are conducted in accordance with good laboratory practice (“GLP”) as appropriate. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practices (“GCPs”) for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. Regulatory authorities enforce these requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our clinical research organizations fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials complies with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

If any of our relationships with these third-party contract research organizations or site management organizations terminates, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative contract research organizations or site management organizations or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional contract research organizations or site management organizations involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new contract research organization or site management organization commences work. As a result, delays could occur, which could compromise our ability to meet our desired development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our contract research organizations or site management organizations, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future.

We rely on clinical and pre-clinical data and results obtained by third parties that could ultimately prove to be inaccurate or unreliable.

As part of the strategy we implement to mitigate development risk, we seek to develop product candidates with well-studied mechanisms of action, and we intend to utilize biomarkers to assess potential clinical efficacy early in the development process. This strategy necessarily relies upon clinical and pre-clinical data and other results produced or obtained by third parties, which may ultimately prove to be inaccurate or unreliable. If the third-party data and results we rely upon prove to be inaccurate, unreliable or not applicable to our product candidates, we could make inaccurate assumptions and conclusions about our product candidates, and our research and development efforts could be compromised or called into question during the review of any marketing applications that we submit.

If our competitors develop treatments for any of the target indications for which our product candidates are being developed and those competitor products are approved more quickly, marketed more successfully or demonstrated to be more effective, the commercial opportunity with respect to that product candidate will be reduced or eliminated.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are subject to rapid and intense technological change. We face, and will continue to face, competition in the development and marketing of our product candidates from academic institutions, government agencies, research institutions and biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. There can be no assurance that developments by others will not render one or more of our product candidates obsolete or noncompetitive. Furthermore, new developments, including the development of other drug technologies and methods of preventing the incidence of disease, occur in the pharmaceutical industry at a rapid pace. These developments may render one or more of our product candidates obsolete or noncompetitive.

Competitors may seek to develop alternative formulations that do not directly infringe on our in-licensed patent rights. The commercial opportunity for one or more of our product candidates could be significantly harmed if competitors are able to develop alternative formulations outside the scope of our in-licensed patents. Compared to us, many of our potential competitors have substantially greater:

As a result of these factors, our competitors may obtain regulatory approval of their products more rapidly than we are able to or may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit our ability to develop or commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Our competitors may also develop drugs that are more effective, safe, useful and less costly than ours and may be more successful than us in manufacturing and marketing their products. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. We will also face competition from these third parties in establishing clinical trial sites, in patient registration for clinical trials, and in identifying and in-licensing new product candidates.

We face potential product liability exposure, and if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability for one or more of our product candidates or a future product candidate we may license or acquire and may have to limit their commercialization.

The use of one or more of our product candidates and any future product candidate we may license or acquire in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval expose us to the risk of product liability claims. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during clinical testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability or a breach of warranties. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, health care providers or others using, administering or selling our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against these claims, we will incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

We will obtain limited product liability insurance coverage for any and all of our upcoming clinical trials. However, our insurance coverage may not reimburse us or may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. When needed we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for one or more of our product candidates in development, but we may be unable to obtain commercially reasonable product liability insurance for any products approved for marketing. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to fall and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and adversely affect our business.

Additionally, we have entered into various agreements under which we indemnify third parties for certain claims relating to product candidates. These indemnification obligations may require us to pay significant sums of money for claims that are covered by these indemnifications.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could harm our business.

We, and/or third parties on our behalf, may use hazardous materials, including chemicals and biological agents and compounds that could be dangerous to human health and safety or the environment. Our operations may also produce hazardous waste products. Federal, state and local laws and regulations govern the use, generation, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and wastes. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our product development efforts. In addition, we cannot entirely eliminate the risk of accidental injury or contamination from these materials or wastes. We do not carry specific biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage, and our property and casualty and general liability insurance policies specifically exclude coverage for damages and fines arising from biological or hazardous waste exposure or contamination. Accordingly, in the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for damages or penalized with fines in an amount exceeding our respective resources, and clinical trials or regulatory approvals could be suspended.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover costs and expenses incurred due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted in connection with the storage or disposal of biological or hazardous materials.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our technology and products, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize technology and products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our technology and products may be impaired.

Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to obtain patent protection for product candidates and their formulations and uses. The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or our partners will be successful in obtaining patents or what the scope of an issued patent may ultimately be. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

In addition, patents that may be issued or in-licensed may be challenged, invalidated, modified, revoked, circumvented, found to be unenforceable, or otherwise may not provide any competitive advantage. Moreover, we may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the US Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial, and it is possible that our efforts to establish priority of invention would be unsuccessful, resulting in a material adverse effect on our US patent positions. An adverse determination in any such submission, patent office trial, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, render unenforceable, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technologies or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates. Third parties are often responsible for maintaining patent protection for our product candidates, at our and their expense. If that party fails to appropriately prosecute and maintain patent protection for a product candidate, our abilities to develop and commercialize products may be adversely affected, and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products. Such a failure to properly protect intellectual property rights relating to any of our product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, U.S. patent laws may change, which could prevent or limit us from filing patent applications or patent claims to protect products and/or technologies or limit the exclusivity periods that are available to patent holders, as well as affect the validity, enforceability, or scope of issued patents.

We and our licensors also rely on trade secrets and proprietary know-how to protect product candidates. Although we have taken steps to protect our and their trade secrets and unpatented know-how, including entering into confidentiality and non-use agreements with third parties, and proprietary information and invention assignment agreements with employees, consultants and advisers, third parties may still come upon this same or similar information independently. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may also breach the agreements and may unintentionally or willfully disclose our or our licensors’ proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to identify such breaches or obtain adequate remedies. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. Moreover, if any of our or our licensors’ trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we and our licensors would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our or our licensors’ trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive positions would be harmed.

The patent prosecution 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. It is also possible that we will fail to identify any patentable aspects of our research and development output and methodology, and, even if we do, an opportunity to obtain patent protection may have passed. Given the uncertain and time-consuming process of filing patent applications and prosecuting them, it is possible that our product(s) or process(es) originally covered by the scope of the patent application may have changed or been modified, leaving our product(s) or process(es) without patent protection. If our licensors or we fail to obtain or maintain patent protection or trade secret protection for one or more product candidates or any future product candidate we may license or acquire, third parties may be able to leverage our proprietary information and products without risk of infringement, which could impair our ability to compete in the market and adversely affect our ability to generate revenues and achieve profitability. Moreover, should we enter into other collaborations we may be required to consult with or cede control to collaborators regarding the prosecution, maintenance and enforcement of licensed patents. Therefore, these patents and applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, no consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in pharmaceutical or biotechnology patents has emerged to date in the US. The patent situation outside the US is even more uncertain. The laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the US, and we may fail to seek or obtain patent protection in all major markets. For example, European patent law restricts the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than US law does. We might also become involved in derivation proceedings in an event that a third party misappropriates one or more of our inventions and files their own patent application directed to such one or more inventions. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial and it is possible that our efforts to establish priority of invention (or that a third party derived an invention from us) would be unsuccessful, resulting in a material adverse effect on our US patent position. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or products, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the US and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. For example, the federal courts of the US have taken an increasingly dim view of the patent eligibility of certain subject matter, such as naturally occurring nucleic acid sequences, amino acid sequences and certain methods of utilizing same, which include their detection in a biological sample and diagnostic conclusions arising from their detection. Such subject matter, which had long been a staple of the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industry to protect their discoveries, is now considered, with few exceptions, ineligible in the first instance for protection under the patent laws of the US. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed and remain enforceable in our patents or in those licensed from a third party.

Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These include changes to transition from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first inventor-to-file” system and to the way issued patents are challenged. The formation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board now provides a less burdensome, quicker and less expensive process for challenging issued patents. The PTO recently developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first inventor-to-file provisions, only became effective on March 16, 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our owned or licensed patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.

We also may rely on the regulatory period of market exclusivity for any of our biologic product candidates that are successfully developed and approved for commercialization. Although this period in the United States is generally 12 years from the date of marketing approval (depending on the nature of the specific product), there is a risk that the U.S. Congress could amend laws to significantly shorten this exclusivity period. Once any regulatory period of exclusivity expires, depending on the status of our patent coverage and the nature of the product, we may not be able to prevent others from marketing products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with our products, which would materially adversely affect our business.

If we or our licensors are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, it will be costly and time consuming, and an unfavorable outcome in that litigation would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our success also depends on our ability, and the abilities of any of our respective current or future collaborators, to develop, manufacture, market and sell product candidates without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing products, some of which may be directed at claims that overlap with the subject matter of our or our licensors’ intellectual property. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications, unknown to us, which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates or proprietary technologies may infringe. Similarly, there may be issued patents relevant to our product candidates of which we or our licensors are not aware. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the US and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after a first filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we or such licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in patents or pending patent applications that we own or licensed, or that we and our licensors were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. In the event that a third party has also filed a US patent application relating to our product candidates or a similar invention, depending upon the priority dates claimed by the competing parties, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the PTO to determine priority of invention in the US. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial, and it is possible that our efforts to establish priority of invention would be unsuccessful, resulting in a material adverse effect on our U.S. patent position. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our or any of our licensors’ patent rights are highly uncertain.

There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries generally. If a third party claims that we or any of our licensors, suppliers or collaborators infringe the third party’s intellectual property rights, we may have to, among other things:

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of licensors, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our or our licensors’ patents. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any claims we assert against accused infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging invalidity of our or our licensors’ patents or that we infringe their patents; or provoke those parties to petition the PTO to institute inter partes review against the asserted patents, which may lead to a finding that all or some of the claims of the patent are invalid. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or our licensor’s is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our or our licensors’ patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, found to be unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly and could likewise put pending patent applications at risk of not issuing. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

We may be subject to claims that our employees and/or consultants have wrongfully used or disclosed to us alleged trade secrets of their former employers or other clients.

As is common in the biopharmaceutical industry, we rely on employees and consultants to assist in the development of product candidates, many of whom were previously employed at, or may have previously been or are currently providing consulting services to, other biopharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. We may become subject to claims related to whether these individuals have inadvertently or otherwise used, disclosed or misappropriated trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers or their former or current clients. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and/or the employees or consultants that are implicated.

Any product for which we obtain marketing approval could be subject to restrictions or withdrawal from the market and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with products, when and if any of them are approved.

Any product for which we obtain marketing approval, along with the manufacturing processes and facilities, post-approval clinical data, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for such product, will be subject to continual requirements of, and review by, the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration requirements, cGMP requirements relating to quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping, and requirements regarding company presentations and interactions with healthcare professionals. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or subject to conditions of approval, or contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product. We also may be subject to state laws and registration requirements covering the distribution of drug products. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in actions such as:

If we or our suppliers, third-party contractors, clinical investigators or collaborators are slow to adapt, or are unable to adapt, to changes in existing regulatory requirements or adoption of new regulatory requirements or policies, we or our collaborators may be subject to the actions listed above, including losing marketing approval for products when and if any of them are approved, resulting in decreased revenue from milestones, product sales or royalties.

We rely on information technology, and any internet or internal computer system failures, inadequacies, interruptions or compromises of our systems or the security of confidential information could damage our reputation and harm our business.

Although a significant portion of our business is conducted using traditional methods of contact and communications such as face-to-face meetings, our business is increasingly dependent on critical, complex and interdependent information technology systems, including internet-based systems, to support business processes as well as internal and external communications. We could experience system failures and degradations in the future. We cannot assure you that we will be able to prevent an extended and/or material system failure if any of the following or similar events occurs:

If any of the foregoing events were to occur, our business operations could be disrupted in ways that would require the incurrence of substantial expenditures to remedy. Any system failure, accident or security breach that causes interruptions in our operations could result in a material disruption of our drug development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed clinical trials for one or more of our product conducts could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data and applications, or inappropriate/unauthorized disclosure of confidential or proprietary information (including trade secrets), we could incur liability and our business and financial condition could be harmed.

The occurrence of a catastrophic disaster could damage our facilities beyond insurance limits or we could lose key data which could cause us to curtail or cease operations.

We are vulnerable to damage and/or loss of vital data from natural disasters, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, power loss, fire, health epidemics and pandemics, floods and similar events, as well as from accidental loss or destruction. If any disaster were to occur, our ability to operate our businesses could be seriously impaired. We have property, liability and business interruption insurance that may not be adequate to cover losses resulting from disasters or other similar significant business interruptions, and we do not plan to purchase additional insurance to cover such losses due to the cost of obtaining such coverage. Any significant losses that are not recoverable under our insurance policies could seriously impair our business, financial condition and prospects. Any of the aforementioned circumstances, including without limitation the emerging COVID-19 virus, may also impede our employees’ and consultants’ abilities to provide services in-person and/or in a timely manner; hinder our ability to raise funds to finance our operations on favorable terms or at all; and trigger effectiveness of “force majeure” clauses under agreements with respect to which we receive goods and services, or under which we are obligated to achieve developmental milestones on certain timeframes. Disputes with third parties over the applicability of such “force majeure” clauses, or the enforceability of developmental milestones and related extension mechanisms in light of such business interruptions, may arise and may become expensive and time-consuming.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of how government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action taken by the U.S. presidential administration may impact our business and industry. In particular, the U.S. President has taken several executive actions, specifically through rulemaking and guidance, that could impact the pharmaceutical business and industry. A few of the major administrative actions include:

It is also possible that the Trump Administration will include drug pricing proposals in annual rulemaking throughout the year. As noted above, it is impossible to predict whether these policies will be included in future rulemaking; however, it is possible and worth noting.

Changes in funding for the FDA and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner, which could negatively impact our business or the business of our partners.

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, ability to hire and retain key personnel, ability to accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. 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 or the business of our partners. For example, over the last several years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough nonessential FDA employees and stop routine activities. If 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. If the timing of FDA’s review and approval of new products is delayed, the timing of our or our partners’ development process may be delayed, which could result in delayed milestone revenues and materially harm our operations or business.

We will need to obtain FDA approval of any proposed product brand names, and any failure or delay associated with such approval may adversely impact our business.

A pharmaceutical product cannot be marketed in the US or other countries until it has completed a rigorous and extensive regulatory review processes, including approval of a brand name. Any brand names we intend to use for our product candidates will require approval from the FDA regardless of whether we have secured a formal trademark registration from the PTO. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product brand names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. The FDA may also object to a product brand name if it believes the name inappropriately implies medical claims. If the FDA objects to any of our proposed product brand names, we may be required to adopt an alternative brand name for our product candidates. If we adopt an alternative brand name, we would lose the benefit of our existing trademark applications for such product candidate and may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable product brand name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA. We may be unable to build a successful brand identity for a new trademark in a timely manner or at all, which would limit our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of the therapies that underpin many of our product candidates may damage public perception of our product candidates or adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates.

Public perception may be influenced by claims that one or more of the therapies underpinning our product candidates, including without limitation gene therapy, is unsafe, and such therapy may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. In particular, the success of our gene therapy platforms will depend upon physicians specializing in the treatment of those diseases that our product candidates target prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are already familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would have a negative effect on our business or financial condition and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. Adverse events in our clinical trials, even if not ultimately attributable to our product candidates, and the resulting publicity, could lead to increased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our potential product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that do obtain approval and/or a decrease in demand for any such product candidates. Concern about environmental spread of our products, whether real or anticipated, may also hinder the commercialization of our products.

Risks Relating to our Finances, Capital Requirements and Other Financial Matters

We are an early-stage company with a history of operating losses that is expected to continue, and we are unable to predict the extent of future losses, whether we will generate significant or any revenues or whether we will achieve or sustain profitability.

We are an early-stage company and our prospects must be considered in light of the uncertainties, risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in their early stages of operations. We continue to generate operating losses in all periods including losses from continuing operations of approximately $101.7 million and $130.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. At December 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $436.2 million. We expect to make substantial expenditures and incur increasing operating costs and interest expense in the future, and our accumulated deficit will increase significantly as we expand development and clinical trial activities for our product candidates and finance investments in certain of our existing and new partners and affiliates in accordance with our growth strategy. Our losses have had, and are expected to continue to have, an adverse impact on our working capital, total assets and stockholders’ equity.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products, we are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if:

Our ability to become profitable depends upon our ability to generate revenue. To date, we have not generated any revenue from our development stage products, and we do not know when, or if, we will generate any revenue. Our ability to generate revenue depends on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, our ability to:

Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would depress the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product offerings or even continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

We have also historically financed a significant portion of our growth and operations in part through the assumption of debt; should an event of default occur under any applicable loan documents, our business would be materially adversely affected.

At December 31, 2019, the total amount of debt outstanding, net of the debt discount was $84.7 million. If we default on our obligations, the holders of our debt may declare the outstanding amounts immediately payable together with accrued interest, and/or take possession of pledged collateral, if any. If an event of default occurs, we may not be able to cure it within any applicable cure period, if at all. If the maturity of our indebtedness is accelerated, we may not have sufficient funds available for repayment or we may not have the ability to borrow or obtain sufficient funds to replace the accelerated indebtedness on terms acceptable to us, or at all. In addition, current or future debt obligations may limit our ability to finance future operations or satisfy capital needs or to engage in, expand or pursue our business activities. Such restrictive covenants may also prevent us from engaging in activities that could be beneficial to our business and our stockholders unless we repay the outstanding debt, which may not be desirable or possible.

To service our debt securities, which may be deemed to include our Series A Preferred Stock, we will be required to generate a significant amount of cash. Our ability to generate cash depends on a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control, and any failure to meet our debt obligations would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common stock and/or preferred stock to decline.

Prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, may affect our ability to make payments on our debt. If we do not generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy our debt obligations, we may have to undertake alternative financing plans, such as refinancing or restructuring our debt, selling assets, reducing or delaying capital investments or seeking to raise additional capital. Alternatively, as we have done in the past, we may also elect to refinance certain of our debt, for example, to extend maturities. Our ability to restructure or refinance our debt will depend on the capital markets and our financial condition at such time. If we are unable to access the capital markets, whether because of the condition of those capital markets or our own financial condition or reputation within such capital markets, we may be unable to refinance our debt. In addition, any refinancing of our debt could be at higher interest rates and may require us to comply with more onerous covenants, which could further restrict our business operations. Our inability to generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy our debt obligations or to refinance our obligations on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common stock and/or debt securities to decline.

Repayment of our indebtedness is dependent in part on the generation of cash flow by Journey and its ability to make such cash available to us, by dividend, debt repayment or otherwise. Journey may not be able to, or may not be permitted to, make distributions to enable us to make payments in respect of our indebtedness. Each of our subsidiaries, including Journey, is a distinct legal entity and, under certain circumstances, legal and contractual restrictions may limit our ability to obtain cash from our subsidiaries.

Our ability to continue to reduce our indebtedness will depend upon factors including our future operating performance, our ability to access the capital markets to refinance existing debt and prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. We can provide no assurance of the amount by which we will reduce our debt, if at all. In addition, servicing our debt will result in a reduction in the amount of our cash flow available for other purposes, including operating costs and capital expenditures that could improve our competitive position and results of operations.

We have in the past acted, do currently act, and are likely to continue in the future to act as guarantor and/or indemnitor of the obligations, actions or inactions of certain of our subsidiaries and affiliated companies; depending on the terms of such arrangements, we may be contractually obligated to pay substantial amounts to third parties based on the actions or inactions of our subsidiaries and/or affiliates.

We have in the past acted, do currently act, and are likely to continue in the future to act as guarantor of the debt obligations of several of our subsidiaries and/or affiliates, including Aevitas, Baergic, Cellvation and Cyprium. Depending on the terms of such guaranty arrangements, we may be contractually obligated to pay substantial amounts to third party lenders based on the actions or inactions of such subsidiaries and/or affiliates, which would result in a reduction of the amount of our cash available for other purposes and may have a material adverse effect on the price of our Securities.

We also have in the past acted, do currently act, and are likely to continue in the future to act as indemnitor of potential losses that may be experienced by one or more of our affiliated companies and/or their partners or investors. In particular, under that certain Indemnification Agreement, dated as of November 12, 2018 (the “Indemnification Agreement”), we indemnify InvaGen Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“InvaGen”) and its affiliates for any losses they may sustain in connection with inaccuracies that may appear in the representations and warranties that our partner company Avenue made to InvaGen in that certain Stock Purchase and Merger Agreement, dated as of November 12, 2018 (the “Avenue SPMA”). The maximum amount of indemnification we may have to provide under the Indemnification Agreement is $35.0 million, and such obligation terminates upon the consummation of the Merger Transaction (as defined in the Avenue SPMA). In the event of payment by us of any such indemnification amount, we would be able to recoup such amounts (other than our pro rata share of the indemnification as a shareholder in Avenue) from the Merger Transaction proceeds, but if the Merger Transaction never occurs, we would have no means of recouping such previously-paid indemnification amounts. If we become obligated to pay all or a portion of such indemnification amounts (regardless of whether or not we are partially reimbursed out of the proceeds of the Merger Transaction), our business and the market value of our common stock and/or debt securities may be materially adversely impacted.

We have in the past and are likely in the future to undergo collaborations and/or divestitures with respect to certain of our assets and subsidiaries, some of which may be material and/or transformative, which could adversely affect our business, prospects and opportunities for growth.

We have in the past completed a number of partnerships and/or contingent sales of our assets and subsidiaries, including an equity investment and contingent sale between Avenue and InvaGen and an equity investment and contingent option transaction between Caelum and Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Each of these transactions has been time-consuming and has diverted management’s attention. As a result of these contingent sales (and other similar transactions we may in the future complete), we may experience a reduction in the size or scope of our business, our market share in particular markets, our opportunities with respect to certain markets, products or therapeutic categories or our ability to compete in certain markets and therapeutic categories. For example, in connection with execution of the Avenue SPMA, we signed a Restrictive Covenant Agreement, which prohibits us from, directly or indirectly, engaging in the business of hospital administered pain management anywhere in the world other than Canada, Central America or South America for a period of five years after the earlier of the termination of the Avenue SPMA or consummation of the Merger Transaction (as defined in the SPMA).

In addition, in connection with any such transaction that involves a (contingent or non-contingent) sale of one of our assets or subsidiaries, we may surrender our ability to realize long-term value from such asset or subsidiary, in the form of foregone royalties, milestone payments, sublicensing revenue or otherwise, in exchange for upfront and/or other payments. In the event, for instance, that a product candidate underpinning any such asset or subsidiary is granted FDA approval for commercialization following the execution of documentation governing the sale by us of such asset or subsidiary, the transferee of such asset or subsidiary may realize tremendous value from commercializing such product, which we would have realized for ourselves had we not executed such sale transaction and been able to achieve applicable approvals independently.

Should we seek to enter into collaborations or divestitures with respect to other assets or subsidiaries, we may be unable to consummate such arrangements on satisfactory or commercially reasonable terms within our anticipated timelines. In addition, our ability to identify, enter into and/or consummate collaborations and/or divestitures may be limited by competition we face from other companies in pursuing similar transactions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. Any collaboration or divestiture we pursue, whether we are able to complete it or not, may be complex, time consuming and expensive, may divert the management’s attention, have a negative impact on our customer relationships, cause us to incur costs associated with maintaining the business of the targeted collaboration or divestiture during the transaction process and also to incur costs of closing and disposing the affected business or transferring the operations of the business to other facilities. In addition, if such transactions are not completed for any reason, the market price of our common stock may reflect a market assumption that such transactions will occur, and a failure to complete such transactions could result in a negative perception by the market of us generally and a decline in the market price of our common stock. For example, consummation of the Avenue-InvaGen merger contemplated by the Avenue SPMA is conditioned on, inter alia: (i) final FDA approval of IV tramadol (Avenue’s lead product candidate); (ii) labeling for IV tramadol containing an indication as moderate to moderately severe (post-operative) pain, not restricted to any specific type of surgery; (iii) classification of IV tramadol by the DEA as a Schedule IV drug; and (iv) there being no Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy from the FDA applicable to IV tramadol. If one or more of these conditions is not satisfied, InvaGen will not be obligated to consummate the Avenue-InvaGen merger, which could materially adversely affect our business.

As a result of these factors, any collaboration or divestiture (whether or not completed) could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common stock and/or preferred stock to decline.

We may need substantial additional funding and may be unable to raise capital when needed, which may force us to delay, curtail or eliminate one or more of our R&D programs, commercialization efforts or planned acquisitions and potentially change our growth strategy.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 we incurred R&D expenses of approximately $75.2 million and $83.3 million, respectively. We expect to continue to spend significant amounts on our growth strategy. We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents will enable us to continue to fund operations in the normal course of business for at least the next 12 months. Until such time, if ever, as we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue and achieve profitability, we expect to seek to finance potential cash needs. Our ability to obtain additional funding when needed, changes to our operating plans, our existing and anticipated working capital needs, the acceleration or modification of our planned R&D activities, expenditures, acquisitions and growth strategy, increased expenses or other events may affect our need for additional capital in the future and require us to seek additional funding sooner or on different terms than anticipated. In addition, if we are unable to raise additional capital when needed, we might have to delay, curtail or eliminate one or more of our R&D programs and commercialization efforts and potentially change our growth strategy.

Raising additional funds by issuing securities or through licensing or lending arrangements may cause dilution to our existing stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish proprietary rights.

To the extent that we raise additional capital by issuing common stock (or preferred stock that is convertible into common stock), the share ownership of existing stockholders will be diluted. Any future debt financings may involve covenants that restrict our operations, including limitations on our ability to incur liens or additional debt, pay dividends, redeem our stock, make certain financial commitments and engage in certain merger, consolidation or asset sale transactions, among other restrictions. In addition, if we raise additional funds through licensing or sublicensing arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish potentially valuable rights to our product candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Future revenue based on sales of our dermatology products, especially Ximino, Targadox and Exelderm, may be lower than expected or lower than in previous periods.

The vast majority of our operating income for the foreseeable future is expected to come from the sale of dermatology products through our partner company Journey Medical Corporation. Any setback that may occur with respect to such products, in particular Ximino, Targadox and Exelderm, could significantly impair our operating results and/or reduce our revenue and the market prices of our Securities. Setbacks for such products could include, but are not necessarily limited to, problems with shipping, distribution, demand, manufacturing, product safety, marketing, government regulation or reimbursement, licenses and approvals, intellectual property rights, competition with existing or new products, physician or patient acceptance of the products, as well as higher than expected total rebates, returns or recalls. These products also are or may become subject to third party generic competition.

We will continue to incur significant increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives. Also, if we fail to maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting in the future, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired, which could harm our operating results, investors’ views of us and, as a result, the value of our Securities.

As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”), as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC, and the rules of the Nasdaq Stock Exchange. These rules impose various requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and appropriate corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel have devoted and will continue to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, these rules and regulations make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

SOX requires, among other things, that we maintain effective internal controls for financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. As a result, we are required to periodically perform an evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of those controls, as required by Section 404 of SOX. Additionally, our independent auditors are required to perform a similar evaluation and report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. These efforts to comply with Section 404 and related regulations have required, and continue to require, the commitment of significant financial and managerial resources. While we anticipate maintaining the integrity of our internal controls over financial reporting and all other aspects of Section 404, we cannot be certain that a material weakness will not be identified when we test the effectiveness of our control systems in the future. If a material weakness is identified, we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources, costly litigation or a loss of public confidence in our internal controls, which could have an adverse effect on the market price of our stock.

Our ability to use our pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes to offset post-change taxable income or taxes may be subject to limitation.

We may, from time to time, carry net operating loss carryforwards (“NOLs”) as deferred tax assets on our balance sheet.  Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50-percentage- point cumulative change (by value) in the equity ownership of certain stockholders over a rolling three-year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change taxable income or taxes may be limited. We may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of shifts in our stock ownership, some of which changes are outside our control. As a result, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes to offset post-change taxable income or taxes may be subject to limitation.

Risks Associated with our Capital Stock

Some of our executives, directors and principal stockholders can control our direction and policies, and their interests may be adverse to the interests of our other stockholders.

At December 31, 2019, Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D. our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, beneficially owned 11.6% of our issued and outstanding capital stock. At December 31, 2019, Michael S. Weiss, our Executive Vice Chairman, Strategic Development, beneficially owned 12.7% of our issued and outstanding capital stock. By virtue of their holdings and membership on our Board of Directors, Dr. Rosenwald and Mr. Weiss may individually influence our management and our affairs and may make it difficult for us to consummate corporate transactions such as mergers, consolidations or the sale of all or substantially all of our assets that may be favorable from our standpoint or that of our other stockholders.

The market price of our securities may be volatile and may fluctuate in a way that is disproportionate to our operating performance.

The stock prices of our securities may experience substantial volatility as a result of a number of factors, including, but not necessarily limited to:

Many of these factors are beyond our control. The stock markets in general, and the market for pharmaceutical and biotechnological companies in particular, have historically experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. These fluctuations often have been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. These broad market and industry factors could reduce the market prices of our securities, regardless of our actual operating performance.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our Common Stock, or the perception that such sales may occur, may adversely impact the price of our Common Stock.

Almost all of the 78.7 million outstanding shares of our Common Stock, inclusive of outstanding equity awards, as of December 31, 2019 are available for sale in the public market, either pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), or an effective registration statement. In addition, pursuant to our current shelf registration statement on Form S-3, from time to time we may issue and sell shares of our Common Stock or Preferred Stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $38.3 million as of December 31, 2019. Any sale of a substantial number of shares of our Common Stock or our Preferred Stock could cause a drop in the trading price of our Common Stock or Preferred Stock on the Nasdaq Stock Market.

We have never paid and currently do not intend to pay cash dividends in the near future, except for the dividend we pay on our Preferred A shares. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, will be the sole source of gain for our Common Stockholders.

We have never paid cash dividends on our Common Stock, or made stock dividends, except for the dividend we pay on shares of our Series A Preferred Stock, and we currently intend to retain future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our businesses, and retain our stock positions. In addition, the terms of existing and future debt agreements may preclude us from paying cash or stock dividends. Equally, each of our partners is governed by its own board of directors with individual governance and decision-making regimes and mandates to oversee such entities in accordance with their respective fiduciary duties. As a result, we alone cannot determine the acts that could maximize value to you of such partners in which we maintain ownership positions, such as declaring cash or stock dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our Common Stock will be the sole source of gain for our Common Stockholders for the foreseeable future.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws and Delaware law might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our Company or changes in our management and, therefore, depress the trading price of our Common Stock or other Securities.

Provisions of our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws and Delaware law may have the effect of deterring unsolicited takeovers and/or delaying or preventing a change in control of our Company or changes in our management, including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then-current market prices. In addition, these provisions may limit the ability of stockholders to approve transactions that they may deem to be in their best interests. These provisions include:

In addition, the Delaware General Corporation Law prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder, generally a person which together with its affiliates owns, or within the last three years has owned, 15% of our voting stock, for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person became an interested stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a prescribed manner.

The existence of the foregoing provisions and anti-takeover measures could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Common Stock. They could also deter potential acquirers of our Company, thereby reducing the likelihood that you would receive a premium for your ownership of our Securities through an acquisition.

None.

On October 3, 2014, we entered into a 15-year lease for office space at 2 Gansevoort Street, New York, NY 10014, at an average annual rent of $2.7 million. We took possession of this space, which serves as our principal executive offices, in December 2015, and took occupancy in April 2016. Total rent expense, over the full term of the lease for this space will approximate $40.7 million. In conjunction with the lease, we entered into Desk Space Agreements with two related parties: OPPM and TGTX, to occupy 10% and 45%, respectively, of the office space that requires them to pay their share of the average annual rent of $0.3 million and $1.1 million, respectively. The total net rent expense to us will approximate $16.0 million over the lease term. These initial rent allocations will be adjusted periodically for each party based upon actual percentage of the office space occupied. Additionally, we have reserved the right to execute desk space agreements with other third parties and those arrangements will also affect the cost of the lease actually borne by us.

In October 2015, we entered into a 5-year lease for approximately 6,100 square feet of office space in Waltham, MA at an average annual rent of approximately $0.2 million. We took occupancy of this space in January 2016.

Journey

In June 2017, Journey extended its lease for 2,295 square feet of office space in Scottsdale, AZ by one year, at an average annual rent of approximately $55,000. Journey originally took occupancy of this space in November 2014. In August 2018, Journey amended their lease and entered into a new two-year extension for 3,681 square feet of office space in the same location in Scottsdale, AZ at an annual rate of approximately $94,000. The term of this amended lease commenced on December 1, 2018 and will expire on November 30, 2020.

Mustang

On October 27, 2017, Mustang entered into a lease agreement with WCS - 377 Plantation Street, Inc., a Massachusetts nonprofit corporation. Pursuant to the terms of the lease agreement, we agreed to lease 27,043 square feet from the landlord, located at 377 Plantation Street in Worcester, MA (the “Facility”), through November 2026, subject to additional extensions at the Company’s option. Base rent, net of abatements of $0.6 million over the lease term, totals approximately $3.6 million, on a triple-net basis.

The terms of the lease also require that we post an initial security deposit of $0.8 million, in the form of $0.5 million letter of credit and $0.3 million in cash, which increased to $1.3 million ($1.0 million letter of credit, $0.3 million in cash) on November 1, 2019. After the fifth lease year, the letter of credit obligation is subject to reduction.

The Facility began operations for the production of personalized CAR T and gene therapies in 2018.

To our knowledge, no legal proceedings are pending against us, other than routine actions and administrative proceedings, and other actions not deemed material are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

Not applicable.

PART II

Market Information for Common Stock

We became a public company on November 17, 2011. Our Common Stock is listed for trading on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “FBIO.”

Holders of Record

As of March 12, 2020, there were approximately 552 holders of record of our Common Stock. The actual number of stockholders is greater than this number of record holders and includes stockholders who are beneficial owners, but whose shares are held in street name by brokers and other nominees. This number of holders of record also does not include stockholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

Dividends

We have never paid cash dividends on our Common Stock and currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business.

Equity Compensation Plans

The information required by Item 5 of Form 10-K regarding equity compensation plans is incorporated herein by reference to “Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.”

Not applicable.

Statements in the following discussion and throughout this report that are not historical in nature are “forward-looking statements.” You can identify forward-looking statements by the use of words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “intend,” “believe,” and similar expressions. Although we believe the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, such statements are inherently subject to risk and we can give no assurances that our expectations will prove to be correct. Actual results could differ from those described in this report because of numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, without limitation, those described under Item 1A “Risk Factors.” We undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this report or to reflect actual outcomes. Please see “Forward-Looking Statements” at the beginning of this Form 10-K.

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and the related notes thereto and other financial information appearing elsewhere in this Form 10-K. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements in the discussion of our financial condition and results of operations to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this report or to reflect actual outcomes

We are a biopharmaceutical company dedicated to acquiring, developing and commercializing pharmaceutical and biotechnology products and product candidates, which we do at the Fortress level, at our majority-owned and majority-controlled subsidiaries and joint ventures, and at entities we founded and in which we maintain significant minority ownership positions. Fortress has a talented and experienced business development team, comprising scientists, doctors and finance professionals, who identify and evaluate promising products and product candidates for potential acquisition by new or existing partner companies. Through our partner companies, we have executed such arrangements in partnership with some of the world’s foremost universities, research institutes and pharmaceutical companies, including City of Hope National Medical Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania, and AstraZeneca plc.

Following the exclusive license or other acquisition of the intellectual property underpinning a product or product candidate, we leverage our business, scientific, regulatory, legal and finance expertise to help our partners achieve their goals. Our partner companies then assess a broad range of strategic arrangements to accelerate and provide additional funding to support research and development, including joint ventures, partnerships, out-licensings, and public and private financings; to date, three partner companies are publicly-traded, and two have consummated strategic partnerships with industry leaders Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and InvaGen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (a subsidiary of Cipla Limited).

Recent Events

Marketed Dermatology Products

Late Stage Product Candidates

Intravenous (IV) Tramadol

CUTX-101

CAEL-101 (AL Amyloidosis)

MB-107 ( Ex vivo Lentiviral Therapy for X-linked Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (XSCID))

Cosibelimab (formerly CK-301)

Early Stage Product Candidates

MB-101 (IL13Rα2 CAR T for Glioblastoma)

MB-108 (C134 Oncolytic Virus for GBM)

MB-104 (CS1 CAR T for Multiple Myeloma and Light Chain Amyloidosis)

MB-103 (HER2 CAR T for GBM & Metastatic Breast Cancer to Brain)

MB-105 (PSCA CAR T for Prostate & Pancreatic Cancers)

MB-106 (CD20-targeted CAR T cell therapy)

BAER-101 (novel α2/3–subtype-selective GABA A positive allosteric modulator (“PAM”))

General Corporate

Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates

See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Results of Operations

General

For the year ended December 31, 2019 we generated $36.6 million of net revenue; $34.9 million of revenue relates primarily to the sale of Journey branded and generic products and $1.7 million of revenue is in connection with Checkpoint’s collaborative agreements with TGTX, a related party. At December 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of $436.2 million primarily as a result of research and development expenses, purchases of in-process research and development and general and administrative expenses. While we may in the future generate revenue from a variety of sources, including license fees, milestone payments, research and development payments in connection with strategic partnerships and/or product sales, our current non-marketed product candidates are at various stages of development and may never be successfully developed or commercialized. Accordingly, we expect to continue to incur substantial losses from operations for the foreseeable future and there can be no assurance that we will ever generate significant revenues.

We had $10.5 million of costs of goods sold in connection with the sale of JMC branded and generic products for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development costs primarily consist of personnel related expenses, including salaries, benefits, travel, and other related expenses, stock-based compensation, payments made to third parties for licenses and milestones, costs related to in-licensed products and technology, payments made to third party contract research organizations for preclinical and clinical studies, investigative sites for clinical trials, consultants, the cost of acquiring and manufacturing clinical trial materials, costs associated with regulatory filings and patents, laboratory costs and other supplies.

Also included in research and development is the total purchase price for licenses acquired during the period.

For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, research and development expenses were approximately $75.2 million and $83.3 million, respectively. Additionally, during the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, we expensed approximately $6.1 million and $4.1 million, respectively, in costs related to the acquisition of licenses.

The table below provides a summary of research and development costs associated with the development of our licenses by entity, for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Note 1: Includes the following partner companies: Aevitas, Baergic, Caelum (2018 only), Cellvation, Cyprium, Helocyte and Tamid Bio, Inc. (a Fortress partner company that has since discontinued operations) (“Tamid”).

Noncash, stock-based compensation expense included in research and development for the year ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, was $2.8 million and $5.3 million, respectively.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist principally of personnel related costs, professional fees for legal, consulting, audit and tax services, rent and other general operating expenses not otherwise included in research and development expenses. For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, general and administrative expenses were $55.6 million and $53.4 million, respectively. Stock based compensation expense included in general and administrative expenses in 2019 and 2018 was $10.4 million and $9.7 million, respectively.

The table below provides a summary by entity of general and administrative expenses for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively:

Note 1: Includes cost of outsourced sales force.

Note 2: Includes the following partner companies: Aevitas, Baergic, Caelum (2018 only), Cellvation, Cyprium, Escala, Helocyte and Tamid.

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2019 and 2018

For the year ended December 31, 2019, $1.7 million of revenue was in connection with Checkpoint’s collaborative agreements with TGTX, and $34.9 million of revenue related primarily to the sale of Journey branded and generic products. The net increase in revenue of $9.7 million or 36% is due to the expansion of Journey’s marketed products, as well as overall sales growth, which resulted in a product revenue increase of $11.5 million offset by a decrease in revenue from a related party of $1.8 million.

Cost of goods sold increased by $4.4 million or 72% due to the growth in Journey’s product sales.

Research and development expenses decreased $8.1 million, or 10%, from the year ended December 31, 2018 to the year ended December 31, 2019. The following table shows research and development spending for Fortress and each partner company:

Note 1: Includes the following partner company: Aevitas, Baergic, Caelum (2018 only), Cellvation, Cyprium, Escala, Helocyte, and Tamid.

The increase in stock-based compensation for Checkpoint is attributable to new grants made in 2019 and to the decrease in value attributed to marking to market grants held by non-employees in 2018, while the decrease in Mustang’s stock-based compensation is due to the decrease in value attributed to marking to market grants held by non-employees in 2018. With the adoption of ASU 2018-07 on January 1, 2019, non-employee compensation costs are recognized over the requisite service period based on a measurement of fair value for stock awards made at the time the award is granted.

The decrease in Fortress research and development spending is due to the lower research and development headcount subsequent to the transfer of Fortress research and development employees to TGTX, a related party, in the quarter ended September 30, 2018. Checkpoint’s decrease in research and development spending is attributable to the decreased manufacturing costs for cosibelimab, offset slightly by increased clinical trial expense for its product candidates. Mustang’s increase in research and development spending is attributable to lab supplies for the cell processing facility, as well as increased headcount and sponsored research for several programs, including XSCID. The decrease in “Other” is attributable to costs incurred by Caelum for the start-up of product development activities, and Helocyte for the start-up of sponsored research activities not replicated in 2019.

General and administrative expenses increased $2.2 million, or 4%, from the year ended December 31, 2018 to the year ended December 31, 2019. The following table shows general and administrative spending for Fortress and by each partner company:

Note 1: Includes cost of outsourced sales force.

Note 2: Includes the following partner companies: Aevitas, Baergic, Caelum (2018 only), Cellvation, Cyprium, Escala, Helocyte and Tamid.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, the increase in general and administrative expenses of $2.2 million or 4% is primarily attributable to an increase in JMC’s sales and marketing costs due to increased headcount and costs related to the launch of Ximino, Mustang’s increased headcount and increased legal fees associated with debt and equity capital raises, offset by a decrease in Fortress headcount-related costs due to lower headcount for Fortress, a decrease in accounting fees for Fortress due to the sale of National, and lower legal, marketing and investor relations costs at Avenue due to the lead-up to the InvaGen transaction, as well as the decrease in Other due to the deconsolidation of Caelum.

Total other income (expense) increased $20.0 million, or 185%, from expense of $10.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 to income of $9.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, primarily due to the $18.5 million gain on the deconsolidation of Caelum and an increase of $1.5 million in interest income due to higher cash balances in 2019.

Non-controlling interests increased $3.9 million, or 7%, from the year ended December 31, 2018 to the year ended December 31, 2019. This increase reflects the partner companies’ share of net loss.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Components of cash flows from publicly-traded partner companies are comprised of:

Note 1: Includes Fortress and non-public subsidiaries.

Operating Activities

Net cash used in operating activities decreased $3.9 million from the year ended December 31, 2018 to the year ended December 31, 2019. The decrease is due to the decrease of $29.1 million in net loss from continuing operations, primarily offset by the gain from the deconsolidation of Caelum of $18.5 million, the change in operating assets and liabilities of $10.6 million, a decrease in stock-based compensation expense of $1.8 million, and a decrease in the fair value of investments of $1.4 million partially offset by the increase in depreciation and amortization expense of $3.5 million.

Investing Activities

Net cash provided by investing activities increased $1.3 million from the year ended December 31, 2018 to the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase is primarily due to a decrease in the purchase of short-term investments of $47.6 million, a decrease in the purchase of property and equipment of $4.7 million, and an increase in net cash provided by discontinued activities of $3.3 million. These activities are offset by the decrease in the redemption of certificates of deposit of $48.4 million, an increase in the purchasing of research and development licenses of $3.6 million, $1.2 million decrease in cash due to deconsolidation of Caelum, as well as an increase of $1.2 million in funds used to purchase intangible assets.

Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $146.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $50.6 million of net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2018, an increase of $96.1 million. The increase is primarily due to $56.8 million increase in proceeds from partner company’s under written capital raises and $22.0 million in partner company’s at-the-market offering, $13.6 million increase in proceeds from partner company’s Horizon Notes, as well as $13.2 million increase in proceeds from the Company’s at-the-market offering, and an increase of $5.3 million in net proceeds from the issuance of Series A preferred stock, and a $4.4 million decrease in debt repayment of partner Company’s convertible notes. This is offset slightly by the $20.0 million decrease in proceeds from the Company’s 2018 Venture Notes.

We fund our operations through cash on hand, the sale of debt and third-party financings. At December 31, 2019, we had cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash of $153.4 million of which $51.1 million relates to Fortress, $26.1 million relates to Checkpoint, $62.4 million relates to Mustang, $8.7 million relates to Avenue, and $5.1 million relates to the remaining partner companies. Restricted cash of $16.6 million is comprised of: $14.9 million collateralizing the IDB Note, $0.6 million of which is securing a letter of credit used as a security deposit for the New York, NY lease that became effective on October 3, 2014, $1.0 million secures the Worcester, Massachusetts lease signed by Mustang that became effective on October 27, 2017, and $0.1 million securing the Waltham, Massachusetts lease signed by Fortress that became effective in October 2015.

Pursuant to the terms of an Amended and Restated At Market Issuance Sales Agreement with MLV & Co. LLC, and FBR Capital Markets & Co. (“ATM”), for the year ended December 31, 2019, Fortress issued approximately 8.0 million shares of common stock at an average price of $1.88 per share for gross proceeds of $15.1 million.

On June 28, 2019, Fortress entered into an At Market Issuance Sales Agreement (“2019 Common ATM”), with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., H.C. Wainwright & Co. Inc., Jones Trading Institutional Services LLC and B. Riley, as selling agents, governing potential sales of the Company’s common stock. For the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company issued approximately 3.8 million shares of common stock for gross proceeds of $5.6 million at an average selling price of $1.49. Under the 2019 Common ATM, the Company pays the agents a commission rate of up to 3.0% of the gross proceeds from the sale of any shares of common stock, and in connection with these sales, with respect to the year ended December 31, 2019, Fortress paid aggregate fees of approximately $0.2 million.

Under an At Market Sales Agreement (the “2018 Preferred ATM”), with B. Riley, National Securities Corporation, LifeSci Capital LLC, Maxim Group LLC and Noble Capital Markets, Inc. as selling agents, governing the issuance of the Company’s 9.375% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Perpetual Preferred Stock (“Perpetual Preferred Stock”), for the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company issued 39,292 shares of Perpetual Preferred Stock for gross proceeds $0.8 million at an average selling price of $20.67.

In November 2019, Fortress announced the pricing of an underwritten public offering of 262,500 shares of its 9.375% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Perpetual Preferred Stock, (plus a 45-day option to purchase up to an additional 39,375 shares, which was exercised in November 2019) at a price of $20.00 per share for gross proceeds of approximately $6.0 million, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses.

On February 22, 2020 Fortress announced the pricing of an underwritten public offering of 625,000 shares of its Perpetual Preferred Stock, (plus a 45-day option to purchase up to an additional 93,750 shares, which was exercised in February 2020) at a price of $20.00 per share for gross proceeds of approximately $14.4 million, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses.

From January 1, 2020 through March 12, 2020 the Company issued approximately 2.3 million shares of common stock for gross proceeds of $6.1 million at an average selling price of $2.5922 under the 2019 ATM.

Checkpoint had entered into an At-the-Market Issuance Sales Agreement (the "Checkpoint ATM") with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc. and H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC, relating to the sale of shares of common stock. In 2019, Checkpoint sold a total of 2,273,189 shares of common stock under the Checkpoint ATM for aggregate total gross proceeds of approximately $8.0 million at an average selling price of $3.52 per share.

In November 2019, Checkpoint completed an underwritten public offering, whereby it sold 15,400,000 shares of its common stock at a price of $1.27 per share for gross proceeds of approximately $19.6 million. Total net proceeds from the offering were approximately $17.6 million, net of underwriting discounts and offering expenses of approximately $2.0 million.

In March 2018, Checkpoint completed an underwritten public offering, whereby it sold 5,290,000 shares of its common stock at a price of $4.35 per share for gross proceeds of approximately $23.0 million. Total net proceeds from the offering were approximately $20.8 million, net of underwriting discounts and offering expenses of approximately $2.2 million.

Mustang had entered into an At-the-Market Issuance Sales Agreement (the "Mustang ATM") with B. Riley FBR, Inc., Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., National Securities Corporation, and Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. (each an "Agent" and collectively, the "Agents"), relating to the sale of shares of common stock, for the year ended December 31, 2019, Mustang issued approximately 3.5 million shares of common stock at an average price of $6.42 per share for gross proceeds of $22.5 million.

In April 2019, Mustang announced the pricing of an underwritten public offering, whereby it sold 6,875,000 shares of its common stock, (plus a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 1,031,250 shares of common stock, which was exercised in May 2019) at a price of $4.00 per share for gross proceeds of approximately $31.6 million, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. The shares were sold under the 2018 Mustang S-3. Mustang paid aggregate fees of approximately $2.1 million and received approximately $29.5 million of net proceeds.

From January 1, 2020 through March 12, 2020 Mustang issued approximately 1.2 million shares of common stock for gross proceeds of $5.0 million at an average selling price of $4.00 under the Mustang ATM.

In 2019, Fortress also raised $0.1 million from the issuance of our common shares in connection with our ESPP, compared to $0.2 million raised from the issuance of our common shares in connection with our ESPP in 2018 .

We will require additional financing to fully develop and prepare regulatory filings and obtain regulatory approvals for our existing and new product candidates, fund operating losses, and, if deemed appropriate, establish or secure through third parties manufacturing for our potential products, and sales and marketing capabilities. We have funded our operations to date primarily through the sale of equity and debt securities. We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents is sufficient to fund operations for at least the next twelve months. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategies. We may seek funds through equity or debt financings, joint venture or similar development collaborations, the sale of partner companies (such as the stock purchase of Caelum by Alexion that would result from option exercise or the contingent merger of Avenue with InvaGen), royalty financings, or through other sources of financing.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We do not have any financings or other relationships with unconsolidated entities or other persons.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 2 of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of recent accounting standards and pronouncements.

Not applicable.

The information required by this Item is set forth in the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto beginning at page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

None.

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Controls and Procedures

Disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) are designed only to provide reasonable assurance that they will meet their objectives. Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness, as of December 31, 2019, of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e). Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in our Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting refers to the process designed by, or under the supervision of, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, and effected by our Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and includes those policies and procedures that:

Internal control over financial reporting has inherent limitations. Internal control over financial reporting is a process that involves human diligence and compliance and is subject to lapses in judgment and breakdowns resulting from human failures. Internal control over financial reporting also can be circumvented by collusion or improper management override. Because of such limitations, there is a risk that material misstatements may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by internal control over financial reporting. However, these inherent limitations are known features of the financial reporting process. Therefore, it is possible to design into the process safeguards to reduce, though not eliminate, this risk.

Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019. In making the assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013).

Based on the results of this assessment, management (including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer) has concluded that, as of December 31, 2019, our internal control over financial reporting was effective.

Attestation Report of Registered Public Accounting Firm

The effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019 has been audited by our independent registered accounting firm, BDO USA, LLP, as stated in their attestation report, which is included on page F-3 herein.

Changes in Internal Controls over Financial Reporting.

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during our most recent fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

None.

PART III

The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference from our Proxy Statement for our 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference from our Proxy Statement for our 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference from our Proxy Statement for our 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference from our Proxy Statement for our 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference from our Proxy Statement for our 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

PART IV

(a) Financial Statements.

The following financial statements are filed as part of this report:

(b) Exhibits.