We have focused our efforts on urologic and other oncological and infectious disease indications that are difficult to treat and with large unmet needs, and we believe our platform will be broadly applicable across multiple tumor types and infections. Based on the breadth and depth of our platforms, we believe our competitors will range from large pharmaceutical companies to emerging novel biotechnology companies.

We have developed, acquired, and in-licensed patents and patent applications across platforms as previously described for: (1) activated NK and T cells; (2) memory T cell activation; and (3) activated tumoricidal macrophages. With respect to activated NK and T cells, we have developed N-803, an N72D variant IL-15 complexed to a dimeric IL-15Ra/Fc fusion protein; with respect to memory T cell activation, we have developed adenoviral and yeast immunotherapies expressing tumor antigens such as CEA, MUC1, and Brachyury, and in-licensed saRNA technologies; and with respect to activated tumoricidal macrophages, we have in-licensed intellectual property licensed to aldoxorubicin, a tumor-targeted doxorubicin conjugate, from LadRx.

We own patents and patent applications related to the development and commercialization of N-803. As of December 31, 2022,2023, our owned patent portfolio directed to N-803, methods of use of N-803, and combinations with additional therapeutics consists of approximately 1927 issued U.S. patents and 814 pending U.S. patent applications, as well as approximately 7782 patents issued in jurisdictions outside of the U.S., including Europe, China, Japan, Canada, and Australia. Excluding any patent term adjustment and patent term extension, the issued U.S. patents directed to N-803, methods of use of N-803 and combinations with additional therapeutics are expected to expire from 2028 to 2039.2040. Excluding any applicable extensions, the issued foreign

For example, these patents and patent applications include claims directed to:

We co-own and exclusively in-license patents and patent applications from LadRx related to the development and commercialization of aldoxorubicin. As of December 31, 2022,2023, our licensed patent portfolio directed to aldoxorubicin and methods of use of aldoxorubicin consists of approximately 34 issued U.S. patents, as well as approximately 2223 patents issued in jurisdictions outside of the U.S., including Europe, Japan, Korea, and Australia. Excluding any patent term adjustment and patent term extension, the issued U.S. patents directed to aldoxorubicin are expected to expire from 20332030 to 2034. Excluding any applicable extensions, the issued foreign patents are expected to expire from 2033 to 2034. For example, these patents and this patent application include claims directed to:

We in-license patents and patent applications from AAHI related to the development and commercialization of adjuvant formulations and saRNA based vaccines. As of December 31, 2022,2023, our licensed patent portfolio directed to adjuvant formulations and saRNA vaccine platforms consists of approximately 45 issued U.S. patents and approximately 45 pending U.S. patent applications, as well as 1 issued patent in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. Excluding any patent term adjustment and patent term extension, the issued U.S. patents directed to adjuvant formulations and saRNA-based vaccines are expected to expire from 2027 to 2038. If any patents issue from our pending U.S. patent applications, excluding any patent term adjustment and patent term extension, such patents will be expected to expire from 20342033 to 2038. TheIn November 2023, the validity of one of our in-licensed issued European patents, (EPEP Patent No. 2068918) is being2068918, previously challenged in an opposition proceeding.proceeding was upheld upon appeal. This patent is directed to vaccine compositions comprising certain lipid adjuvants. We believe AAHI has meritorious defenses against the opposition.

We own patents and patent applications related to the development and commercialization of GMP-in-a-Box. As of December 31, 2022,2023, our patent portfolio directed to GMP-in-a-Box consists of approximately 78 issued U.S. patents and approximately 2 pending U.S. patent applications as well as approximately 6265 patents issued in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. Excluding any patent term adjustment and patent term extension, the issued U.S. patents directed to GMP-in-a-Box are expected to expire in 2030 and 2037. If patents issue from our pending patent applications, excluding any patent term adjustment and patent term extension, such patents will be expected to expire in 2035 and 2039. For example, these patents and patent applications include claims directed to methods, bioreactors, and apparatuses for monitoring and culturing cells.

The patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the scope of claims allowable in patents in the field of immunotherapy has emerged in the U.S. The patent situation outside of the U.S. is even more uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the U.S. and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions and enforce our intellectual property rights, and more generally could affect the value of our intellectual property. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions, and improvements. With respect to both licensed and owned intellectual property, we cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any current pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed in the future, nor can we be sure that any existing patents or any patents that may be granted in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our product candidates and the methods used to manufacture those product candidates. Moreover, even our issued patents do not guarantee us the right to practice our technology in relation to the commercialization of our product candidates. The area of patent and other intellectual property rights in biotechnology is an evolving one with many risks and uncertainties, and third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing our product candidates and practicing our technology. Our issued patents and those that may issue in the future may be challenged, invalidated, or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related products or limit the length of the term of patent protection that we may have for our product candidates. In addition, the rights granted under any issued patents may not provide us with protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar technology. Furthermore, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies. For these reasons, we may have competition for our product candidates. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product candidate, it is possible that, before any particular product candidate can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantage of the patent.

The following description of certain of our collaboration and license agreements is not a comprehensive listing of all such agreements to which we are a party, and the inclusion of a description of any collaboration or license agreement is not an indication that we consider such agreement(s) to be material to our business and operations as a whole, which is a dynamic and evolving analysis and may change over time.

In 2021, the CRADA was amended and the research plan was modified to include the preclinical and clinical development of ImmunityBio’s proprietary adenovirus platform expressing TAAs; proprietary yeast platform expressing TAAs; proprietary agent N-803 and derivatives, agent N-809 and derivatives, and/or TxM product candidates; proprietary recombinant NK cells and mAbs; proprietary RNA vaccines and adjuvants; and other proprietary agents owned or controlled by ImmunityBio for cancer immunotherapy. The term of the CRADA was extended through May 2026. Under this agreement, we agreed to pay NCI funding totaling $1.3 million per year, payable in semi-annual installments each year through 2025.

In September 2021, we amended and restated the AAHI RNA License Agreement, pursuant to which AAHI granted us an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license to AAHI’s rights to an RNA vaccine platform for the development and commercialization of certain therapeutic, diagnostic, or prophylactic products for the prevention, treatment or diagnosis of any indication, other than those subject to pre-existing third-party license grants, including, without limitation, SARS-CoV-2. Pursuant to the terms of the amended and restated AAHI RNA License Agreement, we made an additional one-time, non-creditable, non-refundable, upfront payment to AAHI of $1.5 million. We paid a license fee of $3.0 million in 2022 and $5.5 million in 2023. We are also required to pay a license maintenance feesfee to AAHI as follows: $3.0 million paid in 2022 andof $5.5 million annually from 20232024 through 2030. The company may terminate the restated agreement without cause by paying AAHI a $10.0 million one-time early termination fee. In addition, the milestone payments to AAHI based on the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones for the first licensed product were amended to a total of up to $4.0 million. We are required to pay royalties on annual net sales of licensed products on a country-by-country and product-by-product basis of a low- to mid-single digit percentage.

In connection with the license agreements, in May 2021 we also entered into a sponsored research agreement (SRA) with AAHI pursuant to which we will fund continued research of at least $2.0 million per year, payable in four equal quarterly installments each year until May 2024, or such year of earlier termination.

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state, and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring, and post-approval reporting of small molecule and biologics such as those we are developing. We, along with third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical, and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of our product candidates. 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.

When a clinical trial using genetically engineered cells is conducted at, or sponsored by, institutions receiving NIH funding for wild-type DNA research, prior to the submission of an IND to the FDA, a protocol and related documentation is submitted to and the study is registered with the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities (OBA)OBA pursuant to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules (NIH Guidelines).Guidelines. Compliance with the NIH Guidelines is mandatory for investigators at institutions receiving NIH funds for research involving wild-type DNA, and many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them. The NIH is responsible for convening the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (RAC),RAC, a federal advisory committee that discusses protocols that raise novel or particularly important scientific, safety, or ethical considerations at one of its quarterly public meetings. The OBA will notify the FDA of the RAC’s decision regarding the necessity for full public review of a protocol. RAC proceedings and reports are posted to the OBA web site and may be accessed by the public. If the FDA allows the IND to proceed, but the RAC decides that full public review of the protocol is warranted, the FDA will request at the completion of its IND review that sponsors delay initiation of the protocol until after completion of the RAC review process.

For purposes of BLA or NDA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap.overlap:

Phase 1,I, Phase 2II, and Phase 3III testing may not be completed successfully within a specified period, if at all, and there can be no assurance that the data collected will support FDA approval or licensure of the product. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents with use of biological products, the Public Health Service ActPHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews a BLA/NDA to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency accepts it for filing. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA or NDA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this event, the BLA/NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information. Once a BLA/NDA has been filed,submitted, the FDA’s goal is to review the application within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application relates to an unmet medical need in a serious or life-threatening indication, the FDA may review the application six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. The review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews a BLA/NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective, or safe, pure, and potent for the proposed indication(s) and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency or efficacy. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving a BLA/NDA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities comply with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. If applicable, FDA regulations also require tissue establishments to register and list their human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products with the FDA and to evaluate donors through screening and testing. Additionally, before approving a BLA/NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP.GCP guidelines. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

The testing and approval process require substantial time, effort, and financial resources, and each may take several years to complete. The FDA may not grant approval on a timely basis, or at all, and we may encounter difficulties or unanticipated costs in our efforts to secure necessary governmental approvals, which could delay or preclude us from marketing our product candidates. After the FDA evaluates a BLA/NDA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a complete response letter.CRL. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A complete response letterCRL indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete, and the application is not ready for approval. A complete response letterCRL may request additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a BLA/NDA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the BLA/NDA with a REMS plan to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or other restrictions to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more Phase 4IV post-market trials and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies. In addition, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development.

Under the accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a BLA/NDA on the basis of either a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Post-marketing studies or completion of ongoing studies after marketing approval are generally required to verify the product’s clinical benefit in relationship to the surrogate endpoint or ultimate outcome in relationship to the clinical benefit. In December 2022, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, including theThe Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (FDORA), was signed into law. FDORA made several changes to the FDA’s authorities and its regulatory framework, including, among other changes, reforms to the accelerated approval pathway, such as requiring the FDA to specify conditions for post-approval study requirements and setting forth procedures for the FDA to withdraw a product on an expedited basis for non-compliance with post-approval requirements.

In addition, the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA)PREA requires a sponsor to conduct pediatric clinical trials for certain drugs and biological products, for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration. Under PREA, original NDAs/BLAs and supplements must contain a pediatric assessment unless the sponsor has received a deferral or waiver. The required assessment must evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The sponsor or FDA may request a deferral of pediatric clinical trials for some or all of the pediatric subpopulations. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product candidate is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric clinical trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric clinical trials begin. The FDA must send a non-compliance letter to any sponsor that fails to submit the required assessment, keep a deferral current or fails to submit a request for approval of a pediatric formulation.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA or NDA, to market the same biologic or drug product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the BLA application user fee.

A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the U.S. may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

In the U.S., once a drug is approved, its manufacture is subject to comprehensive and continuing regulation by the FDA. FDA regulations require that drugs be manufactured in specific facilities per the BLA or NDA approval and in accordance with cGMP. Drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. These regulations also impose certain organizational, procedural, and documentation requirements with respect to manufacturing and quality assurance activities. BLA or NDA holders using contract manufacturers, laboratories or packagers are responsible for the selection and monitoring of qualified firms, and, in certain circumstances, qualified suppliers to these firms. These firms and, where applicable, their suppliers are subject to inspections by the FDA at any time, and the discovery of violative conditions, including failure to conform to cGMP, could result in enforcement actions that interrupt the operation of any such facilities or the ability to distribute drugs manufactured, processed, or tested by them.

The FDA may also require post-approval testing, sometimes referred to as Phase 4IV testing, risk minimization action plans, and post-marketing surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved drug or place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the drug. The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

Prescription drug advertising is subject to federal, state, and foreign regulations. In the U.S., the FDA regulates prescription drug promotion, including direct-to-consumer advertising. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use. Any distribution of prescription drugs and pharmaceutical samples must comply with the U.S. Prescription Drug Marketing Act (PDMA),PDMA, a part of the FDCA.FD&C Act. The Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA),DSCSA, enacted in 2013, aims to build an electronic system to identify and

There are three types of 510(k)s: traditional; special; and abbreviated. Special 510(k)s are for devices that are modified and the modification needs a new 510(k) but does not affect the intended use or alter the fundamental scientific technology of the device. Abbreviated 510(k)s are for devices that conform to a recognized standard. The special and abbreviated 510(k)s are intended to streamline review, and the FDA intends to process special 510(k)s within 30 days of receipt.

After a PMA application is submitted, the FDA has 45 days to determine whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review and thus whether the FDA will file the application for review. The FDA has 180 days to review a filed PMA application, although the review of an application generally occurs over a significantly longer period of time and can take up to several years. During this review period, the FDA may request additional information or clarification of the information already provided. Also, an advisory panel of experts from outside the FDA may be convened to review and evaluate the application and provide recommendations to the FDA as to the approvability of the device.

Although the FDA is not bound by the advisory panel decision, the panel’s recommendations are important to the FDA’s overall decision making process. In addition, the FDA may conduct a preapproval inspection of the manufacturing facility to ensure compliance with the Quality System Regulation (QSR).QSR. The agency also may inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with FDA’s regulations.

Upon completion of the PMA review, the FDA may: (i) approve the PMA application which authorizes commercial marketing with specific prescribing information for one or more indications, which can be more limited than those originally sought; (ii) issue an approvable letter which indicates the FDA’s belief that the PMA application is approvable and states what additional information the FDA requires or the post-approval commitments that must be agreed to prior to approval; (iii)issue a not approvable letter which outlines steps required for approval, but which are typically more onerous than those in an approvable letter, and may require additional clinical trials that are often expensive and time consuming and can delay approval for months or even years; or (iv) deny the application. If the FDA issues an approvable or not approvable letter, the applicant has 180 days to respond, after which the FDA’s review clock is reset.

Clinical trials are almost always required to support PMA and are sometimes required for 510(k) clearance. In the U.S., for significant risk devices, these trials require submission of an application for an Investigational Device Exemption (IDE)IDE to the FDA. The IDE application must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and laboratory testing results, showing it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. The IDE must be approved in advance by the FDA for a specific number of patients at specified trial sites. During the trial, the sponsor must comply with the FDA’s IDE requirements for investigator selection, trial monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping. The investigators must obtain patient informed consent, rigorously follow the investigational plan, and trial protocol, control the disposition of investigational devices and comply with all reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Clinical trials for significant risk devices may not begin until the

Sponsors of clinical trials of devices are required to register with clinical trials.gov, a public database of clinical trial information. Information related to the device, patient population, phase of investigation, study sites and investigators and other aspects of the clinical trial is made public as part of the registration.

Some changes to an approved PMA device, including changes in indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new PMA application or PMA supplement, as appropriate, before the change can be implemented. Supplements to a PMA application often require the submission of the same type of information required for an original PMA application, except that the supplement is generally limited to that information needed to support the proposed change from the device covered by the original PMA. The FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing PMA supplements as it does in reviewing original PMA applications.

Failure by us or by our suppliers to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA or state authorities, which may include any of the following sanctions:

Newly discovered or developed safety or effectiveness data may require changes to a product’s labeling, including the addition of new warnings and contraindications, and also may require the implementation of other risk management measures. Also, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory clearance or approval of our medical device product candidates under development. Medical device manufacturers are also subject to other federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to safe working conditions, laboratory and manufacturing practices.

We are subject to numerous foreign, federal, state, and local environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. In addition, our leasing and operation of real property may subject us to liability pursuant to certain U.S. environmental laws and regulations, under which current or previous owners or operators of real property and entities that disposed or arranged for the disposal of hazardous substances may be held strictly, jointly, and severally liable for the cost of investigating or remediating contamination caused by hazardous substance releases, even if they did not know of and were not responsible for the releases.

Our sales, promotion, medical education, clinical research, and other activities following product approval will be subject to regulation by numerous regulatory and law enforcement authorities in the U.S. in addition to the FDA, including potentially the Federal Trade Commission,FTC, the Department of Justice, the CMS, other divisions of HHS and state and local governments. Our promotional and scientific/educational programs must comply with the AKS, the FCA, physician payment transparency laws, privacy laws, security laws, and additional federal and state laws similar to the foregoing. If drugs are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. Drugs must meet applicable child-resistant packaging requirements under the U.S. Poison Prevention Packaging Act. Manufacturing, sales, promotion, and other activities are also potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws. Changes in regulations, statutes, or the interpretation of existing regulations could impact our business in the future by requiring, for example: (i) changes to our manufacturing arrangements; (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling; (iii) the recall or discontinuation of our products; or (iv) additional record-keeping requirements. If any such changes were to be imposed, they could adversely affect the operation of our business.

The AKS prohibits, among other things, the knowing and willing, direct or indirect offer, receipt, solicitation, or payment of remuneration in exchange for or to induce the referral of patients, including the purchase, order or lease of any good, facility, item or service that would be paid for in whole or part by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care programs. Remuneration has been broadly defined to include anything of value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced-price items and services. The AKS has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, formulary managers, and beneficiaries on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the AKS. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all its facts and circumstances. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the AKS has been violated. The government has enforced the AKS to reach large settlements with healthcare companies based on sham research or consulting and other financial arrangements with physicians. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA. Many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs, as well as private payors.

Federal false claims and false statement laws, including the FCA, imposes liability on persons or entities that, among other things, knowingly present or cause to be presented claims that are false or fraudulent or not provided as claimed for payment or approval by a federal health care program. The FCA has been used to prosecute persons or entities that “cause”cause the submission of claims for payment that are inaccurate or fraudulent, by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers, promoting a product off-label, submitting claims for services not provided as claimed, or submitting claims for services that were provided but not medically necessary. Actions under the FCA may be brought by the Attorney General, or as a

Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws. In addition, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Additionally, to the extent that our product candidates, once commercialized, are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

In addition, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments made to physicians and certain other healthcare providers and teaching hospitals. The ACA, among other things, under the federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act, imposed reporting requirements on certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, for payments or other transfers of value made by them to certain covered recipients, including physicians and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Effective January 1, 2022, these reporting obligations with respect to covered recipients have been extended to include payments and transfers of value made to non-physician providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Covered manufacturers are required to collect and report detailed payment data and submit legal attestation to the accuracy of such data to the government each year. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately, and completely reported in an annual submission. Additionally, entities that do not comply with mandatory reporting requirements may be subject to a corporate integrity agreement. Certain states also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs, impose restrictions on covered manufacturers’ marketing practices and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to physicians and other healthcare professionals.

We may also be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH)HITECH and their respective implementing regulations, impose specified requirements on certain health care providers, plans, and clearinghouses, or collectively, covered entities, and their “businessbusiness associates,” relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security standards directly applicable to “businessbusiness associates,” which includes independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain, or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, certain states have their own laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other and/or HIPAA in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, and diminished profits and future earnings, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. If any of the physicians or other providers, independent contractors, or entities with whom we do business are found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment, which could affect our ability to operate our business. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired.

The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost containment measures and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could further limit our revenues and results. We may need to conduct expensive clinical trials to demonstrate the comparative cost-effectiveness of our product candidates. The product candidates that we develop may not be considered cost-effective and thus may not be covered or sufficiently reimbursed. It is time consuming and expensive for us to seek coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors, as each payor will make its own determination as to whether to cover a product and at what level of reimbursement. Thus, one payor’s decision to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement for a product does not assure that another payor will provide coverage or that the reimbursement levels will be adequate. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Reimbursement may not be available or sufficient to allow us to sell our product candidates on a competitive and profitable basis.

Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, effective January 1, 2024, the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates that manufacturers pay to state Medicaid programs will bewas eliminated. Elimination of this cap may require pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than it receives on the sale of products, which could have a material impact on our business. Further, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at increasing competition for prescription drugs. In August 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which includes prescription drug provisions that have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry and Medicare beneficiaries, including allowing the federal government to negotiate a maximum fair price for certain high-priced single source Medicare drugs, imposing penalties and excise tax for manufacturers that fail to comply with the drug price negotiation requirements, requiring inflation rebates for all Medicare Part B and Part D drugs, with limited exceptions, if their drug prices increase faster than inflation, and redesigning Medicare Part D to reduce out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for beneficiaries, among other changes. Various industry stakeholders have initiated lawsuits against the U.S. government asserting that the price negotiation provisions of the IRA are unconstitutional. The impact of these judicial challenges, legislative, executive, and administrative actions and any future healthcare measures and agency rules implemented by the Biden administration on us and the pharmaceutical industry as a whole is unclear. The impact of these regulations and any future

Since the enactment of the ACA, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. In June 2021, the United States Supreme Court held that Texas and other challengers had no legal standing to challenge the ACA, dismissing the case without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Accordingly, the ACA remains in effect in its current form. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how additional challenges and healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA. Complying with any new legislation or changes in healthcare regulation could be time-intensive and expensive, resulting in material adverse effect on our business.

At the state level, individual states are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. For example, a number of states are considering or have recently enacted state drug price transparency and reporting laws that could substantially increase our compliance burdens and expose us to greater liability under such state laws once we begin commercialization after obtaining regulatory approval for any of our products. For example, the FDA recently authorized the state of Florida to import certain prescription drugs from Canada for a period of two years to help reduce drug costs, provided that Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration meets the requirements set forth by the FDA. Other states may follow Florida. These measures could reduce the demand for our products, if approved, or impose additional pricing pressures on how much we can charge for our products if approved.

We expect that the ACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product candidates. Furthermore, the current presidential administration and Congress may continue to attempt broad sweeping changes to the current health care laws. We face uncertainties that might result from modifications or repeal of any of the provisions of the ACA, including as a result of current and future executive orders and legislative actions. The impact of those changes on us and potential effect on the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries as a whole is currently unknown. However, any changes to the ACA are likely to have an impact on our results of operations and may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. We cannot predict what other healthcare programs and regulations will ultimately be implemented at the federal or state level or the effect any future legislation or regulation in the U.S. may have on our business.

We believe that fostering a workplace that celebrates differences and strengths creates an environment that supports the inclusion and value of diverse thoughts, backgrounds and perspectives. A well rounded culture allows for ongoing dialogue and discussions that challenge the status quo and create a learning environment that supports diversity, equity and inclusion. As part of our commitment, we continue to encourage a culture where employees can freely ask questions and raise concerns. Our annual performance review process helps support our commitment to develop and retain top talent by providing an opportunity to have open dialogue, establish goals, discuss milestones and continue to engage in opportunities to develop and cultivate the talent. Additionally, our management team makes themselves available to all employees including 1:1s, Department Meetings and Town Hall events.

ImmunityBio is incorporated in Delaware and its principal executive offices are located in San Diego, California.

If we are required by the FDA or any equivalent foreign regulatory authority to perform clinical trials or studies in addition to those we currently expect to conduct, or if there are any delays in completing the clinical trials of our product candidates, our expenses could increase substantially. Although weWe have submitted a BLA for our product candidate, Anktiva in combination with BCG for the treatment of patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with CIS with or without Ta or T1 disease, which was accepted bydisease. On May 9, 2023, the FDA for review, settingdelivered a target PDUFA action date ofCRL to us regarding the BLA filed in May 2022, indicating that the FDA had determined that it could not approve the original BLA submission in its initial form, and the FDA made recommendations to address the issues raised.

On October 23, 2023, we may not receive approval byannounced that we had completed the target PDUFA actionresubmission of the BLA addressing the issues in the CRL. On October 26, 2023, we announced that the FDA had accepted our BLA resubmission for review and considered it as a complete response to the CRL. The FDA has set a new user fee goal date (PDUFA date) of April 23, 2024. While we believe the BLA resubmission addresses the issues identified in the CRL, there is no guarantee that the FDA will ultimately agree that such issues have been successfully addressed and resolved. It is unclear when the FDA will approve our BLA, if at all, for commercialization and even if approved, the resulting revenue may not enable us to achieve profitability. Even if we obtain regulatory approval to market a product candidate, our future revenues will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates have received approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, reimbursement from third-party payors and adequate market share for our product candidates in those markets.

We expect our expenses and net losses to increase significantly as we prepare to potentially commercialize our product candidate, Anktiva in combination with BCG for the treatment of patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with CIS with or without Ta or T1 disease, if approved by the FDA, continue our development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our other product candidates, and begin to commercialize other approved products, if any, as well as hire additional personnel, protect our intellectual property and incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, depending on the timing of our clinical studies and trials, associated manufacturing needs, commercialization activities if our product candidates are approved and our expenditures on other research and development activities.

Since we will need to raise substantial additional funding to finance our operations, we may experience further ownership changes in the future, some of which may be outside of our control. Limits on our ability to use our pre-change NOLs or credits to offset U.S. federal taxable income could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us if we earn net taxable income in the future. In addition, under the legislation commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA),TCJA, as modified by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, (CARES Act), the amount of NOLs generated in taxable periods beginning after December 31, 2017, that we are permitted to deduct in any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2020 is limited to 80% of our taxable income in such year, where taxable income is determined without regard to the NOL deduction itself. The TCJA allows post-2017 unused NOLs to be carried forward indefinitely. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws.

In addition, unapproved therapies face the same risks described with respect to our product candidates currently in development and clinical trials, including the potential for serious adverse effects, delays in clinical trials and lack of FDA approval. If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve or revoke their approval of these other therapies, or if safety, efficacy, quality, manufacturing or supply issues arise with, the therapies we choose to evaluate in combination with any of our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or market such combination therapy.

In addition, we do not have data on possible harmful long-term effects of our product candidates and do not expect to have this data in the near future. As a result, our ability to generate clinical safety and effectiveness data sufficient to support submission of a marketing application or commercialization of our product candidates is uncertain and is subject to significant risk.

In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is typically selected from a more extensive amount of available information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. If the interim, top-line or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

Because our product candidates include, and we expect our future product candidates to include, candidates based on advanced therapy technologies, we expect that they will require extensive research and development and have substantial manufacturing costs. In addition, costs to treat patients and to treat potential side effects that may result from our product

Collaborations with other entities may be subject to additional delays because of the management of the trials, contract negotiations, the need to obtain agreement from multiple parties and the necessity of obtaining additional approvals for therapeutics used in the combination trials. These combination therapies will require additional testing and clinical trials will require additional FDA regulatory approval and will increase our future costs.

Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us, slow down our product development and approval process or impair our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. In addition, if we make manufacturing changes to our product candidates, we may be required to, or we may elect to, conduct additional trials to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. These changes may require FDA approval or notification and may not have their desired effect. The FDA may also not accept data from prior versions of the product to support an application, delaying our clinical trials or programs or necessitating additional clinical trials or preclinical studies. We may find that this change has unintended consequences that necessitates additional development and manufacturing work, additional clinical and preclinical studies, or that results in refusal to file or non-approval of a BLA and/or NDA.

Clinical trial delays could shorten any periods during which our product candidates have patent protection and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations. In addition, we have in the past experienced clinical holds imposed upon certain of our or investigator-initiatedinvestigator-led clinical trials for various reasons, and we may experience further clinical trial holds in the future. If we fail to commence or complete, or experience delays in, any of our planned clinical trials, our stock price and our ability to conduct our business as currently planned could be harmed.

We planIn connection with our financing in December 2023, we entered into the RIPA with Infinity and Oberland. Oberland has the right to collaborate with governmental, academicreceive quarterly Revenue Interest Payments from us based on, among other things, our worldwide net sales, excluding those in China, which will be tiered payments initially ranging from 3.00% to 7.00% (or after funding of the Second Payment, 4.50% to 10.00%), subject to increase or decrease, following the Test Date depending on whether our aggregate payments made to Oberland as of the Test Date have met or exceeded the Cumulative Purchaser Payments. In addition, if our aggregate payments made as of the Test Date to Oberland do not equal or exceed the amount of the Cumulative Purchaser Payments as of such date, then we are obligated to make a one-time payment True-Up Payment as described above. In addition to other considerations of the RIPA and corporate partners, including affiliates,the associated impact to improveour profitability and develop N-803, hAd5cash flow, if we were required to make a True-Up Payment, we may need to seek additional sources of capital, and other therapies for new indications for use in combination with other therapies and to improve and develop other product candidates, which may expose us to additional risks, or we may not realize the benefits of such collaborations.be able to achieve profitability or positive cash flow.

Because the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we may need to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites. In addition, in the past we have engaged, and we intend to continue to engage, in clinical trial efforts outside of the U.S., which gives rise to additional potential complexity and challenges, and further reliance upon third parties in foreign jurisdictions. Moreover, because our product candidates represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer and/or viral disease treatment, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy and approved immunotherapies that have established safety and efficacy profiles, rather than enroll patients in any future clinical trial.

Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment or retention may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates or could render further development impossible.

Our failure to comply or our third-party CMOs’ failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approvalreview process. We may not be able to demonstrate sufficient comparability between products manufactured in different runs at the same or at different facilities to allow for inclusion of the clinical results from patients treated with products from these different facilities,runs, in our product registrations. registrations or to assure a cGMP process to qualify our product candidates. On May 9, 2023, the FDA delivered a CRL to us regarding the BLA filed in May 2022, indicating that the FDA had determined that it could not approve the original BLA submission in its initial form, and the FDA made recommendations to address the issues raised. The deficiencies in the CRL related to the FDA’s pre-license inspection of the company’s third-party CMOs, among other items. Satisfactory resolution of the observations noted at the pre-license inspection would be required before the BLA could be approved.

We also are required to register certain clinical trials and post the results of certain completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so could result in enforcement actions and adverse publicity.

Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails exposure to risks to which we would not be subject if we manufactured the product candidate ourselves, including:

Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. If microbial, viral, environmental or other contaminants are discovered in our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities in which our product candidates are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination which could delay clinical trials and adversely harm our business. If we or our third-party CMOs are unable to reliably produce products to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, or in accordance with the strict regulatory requirements, we may not obtain or maintain the approvals we need to commercialize such products. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that either we or our third-party CMOs will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product, or to meet potential future demand. Deviations from manufacturing requirements may further require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third party to implement and may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical trial or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.

As product candidates progress through preclinical and clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield and manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and generate revenues.

To the extent we use third-party CMOs, we are ultimately responsible for the manufacture of our products, if approved, and product candidates. A failure to comply with these requirements may result in regulatory enforcement actions against our manufacturers or us, including fines and civil and criminal penalties, which could result in imprisonment, suspension or restrictions of production, injunctions, delay or denial of product approval or supplements to approved products, clinical holds or termination of clinical trials, warning or untitled letters, regulatory authority communications warning the public about safety issues with the biologic, refusal to permit the import or export of the products, product seizure, detention, or recall, operating restrictions, suits under the federal civil False Claims Act (FCA),FCA, corporate integrity agreements, consent decrees, or withdrawal of product approval.

Any of these challenges could delay completion of clinical trials, require bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidate, impair commercialization efforts, increase our cost of goods, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Further, in the future if we transition from our current third-party CMOs to our own manufacturing facilities, or to alternative third-party CMOs, for one or more of our product candidates, including our product candidate, Anktiva in combination with BCG for the treatment of patients with BCG‑unresponsive NMIBC with CIS with or without Ta or T1 disease, for which we submitted a BLA in May 2022, we may need to conduct additional preclinical, analytical or clinical trials and obtain FDA approval before such manufacturing changes are implemented. If we are unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of supplies before and after a manufacturing change, such manufacturing change can result in a delay or disruption in our clinical development plan or our ability to commercialize any approved product. Any production shortfall that impairs the supply of our product candidates could negatively impact our ability to complete clinical trials, obtain regulatory approval and commercialize our product candidates. If our product candidates receive approval, a product shortfall could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and adversely affect our ability to satisfy demand for our product candidates, which could materially and adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

In addition, our planned operations, including our development, testing and future manufacturing activities, are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These laws and regulations govern, among other things, the controlled use, handling, release and disposal of and the maintenance of a registry for, hazardous materials and biological materials, such as chemical solvents, human cells, carcinogenic compounds, mutagenic compounds and compounds that may have a toxic effect on reproduction, laboratory procedures and exposure to blood-borne pathogens. If we fail to comply with such laws and regulations, we could be subject to fines or other sanctions. Failure to successfully complete our build-outs and successfully operate our planned manufacturing facilities and satisfy manufacturing-related regulatory requirements could adversely affect the commercial viability of our product candidates and our business.

There is no assurance that the approaches offered by our product candidates will gain broad acceptance among doctors or patients or that governmental agencies or third-party medical insurers will be willing to provide reimbursement coverage for our proposed product candidates. Public perception may be influenced by claims, such as claims that our technologies are unsafe, unethical or immoral and, consequently, our approach may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. Negative public reaction to cell-based immunotherapy in general could result in greater government regulation and stricter labeling requirements of immunotherapy products, including our product candidates, and could cause a decrease in the demand for any products we may develop. Moreover, our success will depend upon physicians specializing in the treatment of those diseases that our product candidates target prescribing, and their patients being willing to receive treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments they are already familiar with and for which greater clinical data may be available. The market for any products that we successfully develop will also depend on the cost of the product. WeAside from our lead product candidate, where costs could materially change, we do not yet have sufficient information to reliably estimate what it will cost to commercially manufacture our current product candidates, and the actual cost to manufacture these products could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of these products. Our goal is to reduce the cost of manufacturing and providing our therapies. However, unless we can

Our inability to obtain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of products we may develop, alone or with corporate collaborators. Our insurance policies may also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to product liability claims for which we have no coverage. While we have obtained clinical trial insurance for our clinical trials, we may have to pay amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts. Even if our agreements with any future corporate collaborators entitle us to indemnification against losses, such indemnification may not be available or adequate should any claim arise.

We may not be able to implement our business plan if the acceptance of our product candidates is inhibited by price competition or the reluctance of physicians to switch from other methods of treatment to our product, or if physicians switch to other new therapies, drugs or biologic products or choose to reserve our product candidates for use in limited circumstances. We may be adversely impacted if any of these competitors gain market share as a result of new technologies, commercialization strategies or otherwise.

Our product candidates may qualify for the BPCIA’s 12-year period of exclusivity. There is a risk that any product candidates we may develop that are approved as a biological product under a BLA would not qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity or that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider any product candidates we may develop to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Additionally, this period of regulatory exclusivity does not block companies pursuing regulatory approval via their own traditional BLA, rather than via the abbreviated pathway. Even if we receive a period of BPCIA exclusivity for our first licensed product, if subsequent products do not include a modification to the structure of the product that impacts safety, purity, or potency, we may not receive additional periods of exclusivity for those products. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference product candidates in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. Medicare Part B encourages use of biosimilars by paying the provider the same percentage of the reference product average sale price as a mark-up, regardless of which product is reimbursed. It is also possible that payors will give reimbursement preference to biosimilars even over reference biologics absent a determination of interchangeability.

For our small molecular product candidates, if qualified, the regulatory exclusivity period is less than for our biologic product candidates. The Federal Food, Drug, and CosmeticFD&C Act (FDCA) provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the U.S. to the first applicant to gain approval of an NDA for a drug where the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an abbreviated NDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for a generic version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement. The FDCAFD&C Act also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, 505(b)(2) NDA or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, thatwhich were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example, new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. As such, we may face competition from generic versions of our small molecule product candidates, which will negatively impact our long-term business prospects and marketing opportunities.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, infrastructure and data, and those of our CROs, CMOs, clinical sites and other contractors and consultants, are vulnerablesubject to failurerisks relating to cyberattacks, security breaches, or damage from computerother incidents, including through viruses and other malware, employee error, unauthorized and authorized access, or other cybersecurity attacks, natural disasters, terrorism, war, fire, and telecommunication and electrical failures.failures, denial of service attacks, social engineering (including phishing attacks) and other means. As the cyberthreat landscape evolves, these cyberattacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity and are becoming increasingly difficult to detect. The techniques used by cybercriminals change frequently, may not be recognized until launched and can originate from a wide variety of sources, including outside groups such as external service providers, organized crime affiliates, terrorist organizations or hostile foreign governments or agencies. Cyberattacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, denial-of-service, social engineering and other means to affect service reliability and threaten data confidentiality, integrity and availability. While we and our shared services partner, NantWorks, LLC (NantWorks), have invested, and continue to invest, in the protection of our data, systems, and information technology infrastructure, there can be no assurance that our efforts, or the efforts of our partners, vendors, CROs, CMOs, clinical sites and other contractors and consultants, will be successful. Any failure or perceived failure in our systems, infrastructure or data, or to identify or prevent cyberattacks, security breaches or other incidents, including service interruptions or identify breaches in our or their systems, that could adversely affect our business and operations, and/or result in the loss, unavailability, misuse, unauthorized use or acquisition, or other unauthorized processing of critical or sensitive information, which couldand result in financial, legal, business or reputational harm to us.harm. In addition, our liability insurance may not be sufficient in type or amount to cover us against claims related to any such failures, security breaches, cyberattacks andor other related breaches.incidents.

If any such event were to occur, andit could also cause interruptions in our operations, it could result inincluding a disruption of our product development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing clinical trials for a product candidate could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data or may limit our ability to effectively execute a product recall, if required. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were toAny such event could result in a lossliability, delays in

Large-scale clinical trials require significant financial and management resources. We expect to be heavily reliant on third and related parties, including medical institutions, academic institutions, clinical investigators or CROs to conduct, supervise or monitor some or all aspects of our clinical trials, and in some cases, third-party CMOs to manufacture products, which may force us to encounter delays and challenges that are outside of our control. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable trial protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs, clinical trial sites, and other third parties does not relieve us of these responsibilities. Our CROs and other third parties must communicate and coordinate with one another in order for our trials to be successful. We have a limited history of conducting clinical trials and have nolimited experience as a company in filingsubmitting and supporting the applications necessary to gain marketing approvals. Our relative lack of experience conducting clinical trials may contribute to our planned clinical trials not beginning or completing on time, if at all. Securing marketing approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites by, applicable regulatory authorities.

We rely on third parties to manufacture, package, label and ship some of our product candidates for the clinical trials that we conduct. Any performance failure on the part of these third parties could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates or commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential product revenues.

Our CROs, clinical trial sites and other third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other therapeutic development activities that could harm our competitive position. In addition, these third parties are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with them, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing clinical and preclinical programs. If these third parties conducting our clinical trials (i) do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, (ii) do not meet expected deadlines, (iii) experience work stoppages, (iv) do not conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, (v) need to be replaced, (vi) experience financial hardships or (vii) terminate their agreements with us or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical trial protocols, GCP guidelines or other regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our trials may need to be repeated, extended, delayed or terminated, we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates or we or they may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions. Additionally, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials or enter into new arrangements with alternative CROs, clinical investigators or other third parties, which we may not be able to do on commercially reasonable terms, or at all and which may involve additional cost and time and require management time and focus. As a result, delays could occur, which could compromise our ability to meet our desired development timelines. Furthermore, if any of the third parties conducting our clinical trials experience any financial hardships due to difficulties relating to the operation of their business, it could damage our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, if an agreement with any of our collaborators terminates, our access to technology and intellectual property licensed to us by that collaborator may be restricted or terminate entirely, which may delay the continued development of our product candidates using the collaborator’s technology or intellectual property or require us to stop development of those product candidates completely. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed. To the extent we are unable to successfully identify and manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be materially and adversely affected.

We expect to retain third-party service providers to perform a variety of functions related to the sale of our current or future product candidates, key aspects of which will be out of our direct control. These service providers may provide key services related to sales, market access, distribution, customer service, accounts receivable management, state reporting, compliance support, and cash collection. If we retain a service provider, we wouldwill substantially rely on it as well as other third-party providers that perform services for us, including entrusting our inventories of products to their care and handling. If these third-party service providers fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, fail to meet expected deadlines or otherwise do not carry out their contractual duties to us, or encounter physical or natural damage at their facilities, our ability to deliver product to meet commercial demand would be significantly impaired and we may be subject to regulatory enforcement action.

Additionally, we may contract in the future with a third party to calculate and report pricing information mandated by various government programs. If a third party fails to timely report or adjust prices as required or errs in calculating government pricing information from transactional data in our financial records, it could impact our discount and rebate liability, and potentially subject us to regulatory sanctions or FCA lawsuits.

Our reliance on third and related parties can also present intellectual property-related risks. For example, collaborators may not properly obtain, maintain, enforce or defend intellectual property or proprietary rights relating to our product candidates or technology or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to expose us to potential litigation or other intellectual property-related proceedings, including proceedings challenging the scope, ownership, validity and enforceability of our intellectual property. Collaborators may also own or co-own intellectual property covering our product candidates or technology that results from our collaboration with them, and in such cases, we may not have the exclusive right to commercialize such intellectual property or such product candidates or technology. Collaborators may also gain access to our trade secrets or formulations and impact our ability to commercialize proprietary technology. We may also need the cooperation of our collaborators to enforce or defend any intellectual property we contribute to or that arises out of our collaborations, which may not be provided to us.

We also anticipate that part of our strategy for pursuing the wide range of indications potentially addressed by N-803 will involve further investigator-initiatedinvestigator-led clinical trials. While these trials generally provide us with valuable clinical data that can inform our future development strategy, we generally have less control over not only the conduct but also the design of these clinical trials. Third-party investigators may design clinical trials involving our product candidates with clinical endpoints that are more difficult to achieve or in other ways that increase the risk of negative clinical trial results compared to clinical trials we may design on our own. Negative results from investigator-initiatedinvestigator-led clinical trials, regardless of how the clinical trial was designed or conducted, could have a material adverse effect on our business and the perception of our product candidates.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services.