2721

Patents issued to our partners may offer protection for sales of the relevant products by our partners against competition from biosimilars or otherwise, but we will only be entitled to royalties and other payments on those sales to the extent provided by the terms of the relevant agreements with our partners.

We currently rely on proprietary technology licensed from third parties and may rely on other third-party licensors in the future. If we lose our existing licenses or are unable to acquire or license additional proprietary rights from these licensors or other third parties, we may not be able to continue developing and commercializing our products.

We currently in-license certain technology and intellectual property from third parties to be able to use such technology and intellectual property in our products and product candidates and to aid in our research activities. In the future we may in-license technology and intellectual property from additional licensors.

We rely on certain of these licensors to file and prosecute patent applications and maintain patents and otherwise protect the technology and intellectual property we license from them. We have limited control over these activities or any other technology and intellectual property that may be related to our in-licensed intellectual property. For example, we cannot be certain that such activities by these licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. We have limited control over the manner in which our licensors initiate an infringement proceeding against a third-party infringer of the intellectual property rights or defend certain of the technology and intellectual property that is licensed to us.

The growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire or in-license additional proprietary rights. For example, our programs may involve additional product candidates that may require the use of additional proprietary rights held by third parties. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any relevant third-party intellectual property rights that we identify as necessary or important to our business operations. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all, which would harm our business. We may need to proceed without making use of the technologies, compositions or methods covered by such third-party intellectual property rights and may need to attempt to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if we were able to develop such alternatives, which may not be feasible at a reasonable cost or at all. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive practice, and companies that may be more established, or have greater resources or greater clinical or commercialization capabilities than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our product candidates, products and related proprietary technologies. Furthermore, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or

infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. There is also a risk that, even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court will construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from continuing its activities on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover these activities. An adverse outcome in a litigation or proceeding involving one or more of our patents could limit our ability to assert those patents against those parties or other competitors and may curtail or preclude our ability to exclude third parties from making and selling similar or competitive products, which could materially harm our business and negatively affect sales of our products. Similarly, if we assert trademark or trade name infringement claims, a court may determine that the trademarks or trade names we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks or trade names, which we may need in order to build name recognition with potential collaboration partners or customers in our markets of interest, thus this could materially harm our business and negatively affect our position in the marketplace.

In addition, the standards that courts use to interpret patents are not always applied predictably or uniformly and can change, particularly as new technologies develop. As a result, we cannot predict with certainty how much protection, if any, will be given to our patents if we attempt to enforce them and they are challenged in court. Further, even if we prevail against an infringer in a U.S. district court or foreign trial-level court, there is always the risk that the infringer will file an appeal and the initial court judgment will be overturned at the appeals court and/or that an adverse decision will be issued by the appeals court relating to the validity or enforceability of our patents. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted in a manner insufficient to achieve our business objectives.

Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation in certain territories, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which securities analysts or investors could perceive to be negative. Moreover, there can be no assurance that we will have sufficient financial or other resources to file and pursue such infringement claims, which typically last for years before they are concluded. Even if we ultimately prevail in such claims, the monetary cost of such litigation and the diversion of the attention of our management and scientific personnel could outweigh any benefit we receive as a result of the proceedings.

Claims that our or our collaboration partners’ technologies, products, product candidates, compositions or their uses infringe or interfere with the patent rights of third parties, or that we, our employees, our consultants or our collaboration partners have misappropriated third-party trade secrets, could result in costly litigation and could require substantial time and money to resolve, even if litigation were avoided. The basis of such litigation could be existing patents or patents that are granted in the future. If we, our employees, our consultants or our collaboration partners were to face infringement claims or challenges by third parties, an adverse outcome could subject us or our collaboration partners to significant liabilities to such third parties. Litigation or threatened litigation could result in significant demands on the time and attention of our management team. A negative outcome could expose us or our collaboration partners to payment of costs, damages and other financial remedies, including in some jurisdictions, increased damages, such as treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we were found to have willfully infringed a patent.patent, and equitable remedies such as restraining orders or injunctions. Litigation with third parties concerning alleged infringement of their intellectual property rights could require us and our collaboration partners to bear substantial costs and impose burdens on our and their management and personnel, even if we or our collaboration partners were to ultimately succeed in such proceedings. Costs of patent litigation and awards of damages in patent infringement cases can be significant, and equitable remedies such as temporary restraining orders and injunctions can negatively impact or prevent product development and commercialization. A negative outcome could also lead us or our collaboration partners to delay, curtail or cease the development and commercialization of some or all of our products and product candidates, or could cause us or our collaboration partners to seek legal or administrative actions against third parties. We or our collaboration partners may need to obtain licenses from third parties and such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain licenses from a third party to resolve a dispute, such settlement arrangements could involve substantial costs including one-time and/or ongoing royalty payments.

If we areWe may be unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets and know-how, our business and competitive position would be harmed.know-how.

In addition to seeking patent protection for our products and product candidates, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect these trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, collaboration partners, consultants, advisors, vendors, university and/or institutional researchers and other third parties. We also have entered or seek to enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees, advisors and consultants. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and once disclosed we may lose trade secret protection. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures of our intellectual property is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property will be effective. In addition, we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Our trade secrets may also be obtained by third parties

We will not seek to protect our intellectual property rights or technologies in all jurisdictions throughout the world, and we may not be able to adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the jurisdictions where we seek protection.

Obtaining and maintaining a patent portfolio entails significant expense and resources. Part of the expense includes periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents or applications due in several stages over the lifetime of patents or applications, as well as the cost associated with complying with numerous procedural provisions during the patent application process. Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our technologies, products and product candidates in all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive and, therefore, we typically elect to seek less extensive protections in certain jurisdictions only. We may choose not to pursue or maintain protection for particular inventions, products or product candidates. In addition, there are situations in which failure to make certain payments or noncompliance with certain requirements in the patent process can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. If we choose to forego patent protection or allow a patent application or patent to lapse purposefully or inadvertently, our competitive position could suffer. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we do not pursue and obtain patent protection to develop their own products in a manner that exploits our technologies and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States or in Europe, and thus such protection may not be sufficient to prevent or stop infringing activities.

The requirements for patentability may differ from country to country, particularly in developing countries, and the breadth of patent claims allowed can be inconsistent. In addition, the legal systems of some countries, particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, especially those relating to biopharmaceuticals or biotechnologies. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. Also, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties if the patents are not being exploited within a certain time period. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no benefit. Patent protection must ultimately be sought on a country-by-country or region-by-region basis, which is an expensive and time consuming process with uncertain outcomes. If we fail to timely file a patent application in a specific country or major market, we may be precluded from doing so at a later date. Accordingly, we may choose not to seek patent protection in certain countries, and we will not have the benefit of patent protection in such countries. Proceedings and legal actions to enforce our patent rights in the United States or in Europe and in foreign jurisdictions can be expensive, could result in substantial costs, and could divert management time and our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business. In addition, such proceedings or legal actions could put our patents at risk of being invalidated, found unenforceable or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not being issued and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. We may or may not choose to pursue litigation or other actions against those that have infringed our patents, or used them without authorization, due to the associated expense and time commitment of monitoring these activities. If we fail to protect or to enforce our intellectual property rights successfully, our competitive position could suffer, which could harm our results of operations.

In addition, changes in the law and legal decisions by courts in the United States, Europe and foreign countries may affect our ability to obtain or maintain adequate protection for our technologies, products, product candidates or compositions or uses thereof and the enforcement of intellectual property.

Accordingly, our effortsproperty, and may apply retroactively to enforce our intellectual property rights aroundaffect the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop term and/or license.

Third parties may challenge the inventorshipscope of our patent filings and other intellectual property or may assert ownership or commercial rights to inventions we develop.patents.

Third parties may in the future make claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our intellectual property. We have written agreements with our collaboration partners that provide for the ownership of intellectual property arising from our

collaborations. In some instances, there may not be adequate written provisions to address clearly the resolution of intellectual property rights that may arise from collaboration. Disputes may arise with respect to ownership of the intellectual property developed pursuant to such collaborations. In addition, we may face claims by third parties that our agreements with employees, contractors or consultants obligating them to assign intellectual property to us are ineffective, or in conflict with prior or competing contractual obligations of assignment, which could result in ownership disputes regarding intellectual property we have developed or will develop and interfere with our ability to capture the commercial value of such inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve an ownership dispute, and if we are not successful, we may be precluded from using certain intellectual property, or may lose our exclusive rights in that intellectual property. Either outcome could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects.

Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our existing and future products and processes.

Recent patent reform legislation in the United States 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, 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 U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art, may affect patent litigation, and switched the United States patent system from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-to-file” system. Under a “first-to-file” system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether another inventor had conceived or reduced to practice the invention earlier. The USPTO 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, in particular, the first-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. 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.

In addition, patent reform legislation may pass in the future that could lead to additional uncertainties and increased costs surrounding the prosecution, enforcement and defense of our patents and pending patent applications. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws of the United States are interpreted. Similarly, foreign courts have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws in their respective jurisdictions are interpreted. We cannot predict future changes in the interpretation of patent laws or changes to patent laws that might be enacted into law by United States and foreign legislative bodies. Those changes may materially affect our patents or patent applications and our ability to obtain additional patent protection in the future.

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In addition, periodic maintenance fees on issued patents often must be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies over the lifetime of the patent. While an unintentional lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction.

Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we or our partners fail to maintain the patents and patent applications

If we do not own or control trademarks associated with our products, product candidates or technologies, we may not be in control of defending against any claims brought against those trademarks. At times, competitors may adopt trademarks and trade names similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks, then we may not be able to compete effectively, and our business may be adversely affected.

In addition, any proprietary name we propose to use with any of our product candidatecandidates in the United States or other jurisdictions must be approved by the FDA, the EMA or other governmental authorities, regardless of whether we have registered, or applied to register, the proposed proprietary name as a trademark. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable proprietary product name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Government restrictions on pricing and reimbursement, as well as other healthcare payorpayer cost-containment initiatives, may negatively impact our ability to generate revenue.

Sales of certain of our products and our product candidates, if and when approved for marketing, have and will depend, in part, on the extent to which our products will be covered by third-party payors,payers, such as U.S. government health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. These third party payorsthird-party payers play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs, biologics and medical devices will be covered. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payorspayers and other governmental payorspayers develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs, biologics and medical devices. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payorspayers will decide with respect to coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates. Further, the adoption and implementation of any future governmental cost containment or other health reform initiative may result in additional downward pressure on the price that we may receive for any approved product. The primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere has been cost containment, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products and/or biosimilars. Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States,Therefore, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits. Adoption of price controls, cost containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could limit our net revenue and results.

Further, from time to time, typically on an annual basis, payment rates are updated and revised by third-party payors.payers. Such updates could impact the demand for our products, to the extent that patients who are prescribed our products, if approved, are not separately reimbursed for the cost of the product. For example, Medicare reimbursement under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule is updated on an annual basis. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 instituted a 0.5% payment update for July 2015 through the end of 2019, and a 0% payment update for 2020 through 2025, along with a merit-based incentive payment system beginning January 1, 2019, that will replace current incentive programs. For 2026 and subsequent years, the payment update will be either 0.75% or 0.25% depending on which Alternate Payment Model the physician participates.

In addition, in certain jurisdictions, marketing approval for a product, or the ability to launch an approved product, is subject to determination of pricing and reimbursement levels. In such jurisdictions, even if we or our collaboration partners are able to obtain marketing approval for our products, commercialization of our products may be significantly delayed or prevented altogether if we are unable to secure reimbursement for our products, at competitive levels or at all.

products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, medical devices and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the successful commercialization of new products.

In addition, any products we or our collaboration partners are able to commercialize may be subject to competition from lower-priced imports of those same products, leading to reduced revenues and lower sales margins, as well as lower-priced imports of competing products from countries with government price controls or other market dynamics that, in each case, reduce prices of products.

Even if approved, our products will be subject to extensive post-approval regulation, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.

Once a product is approved, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. For U.S. approvals, the holder of an approved BLA is subject to periodic and other FDA monitoring and reporting obligations, including obligations to monitor and report adverse events and instances of the failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. In addition, the FDA strictly regulates the promotional claims that may be made about pharmaceutical products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. Application holders must also submit advertising and other promotional material to the FDA and report on ongoing clinical trials.

Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws. In addition, we or our collaboration partners may be subject to significant liability if physicians prescribe any of our products to patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label and if we are found to have promoted off-label uses of such products. For example, the U.S. federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. Manufacturing facilities remain subject to FDA inspection and must continue to adhere to the FDA’s cGMP requirements. Application holders must obtain FDA approval for product and manufacturing changes, depending on the nature of the change. In addition, any regulatory approvals that we or our collaboration partners receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase IV clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate.

Sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs in the United States must comply with the U.S. Medicare-Medicaid Anti-Fraud and Abuse Act, as amended, the False Claims Act, also as amended, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and similar state laws. Pricing and rebate programs must comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended, and the Veteran’s Health Care Act, as amended. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. All of these activities are also potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

Within the European Union, once a Marketing Authorizationmarketing authorization is obtained, numerous post-approval requirements also apply. The requirements are regulatedpromulgated by both EU regulations (such as reporting of adverse events, etc.) as well as national applicable regulations (related to, for example, prices and promotional material). In addition, as part of its marketing authorization process, the EMA may grant marketing authorizations on the basis of less complete data than is normally required, when, for certain categories of medicinal products, doing so may meet unmet medical needs of patients and serve the interest of public health. In such cases, it is possible for the Committee for Medicinal Products for

duly justified and only in the case of a product intended to be used in emergency situations in response to public-health threats. Conditional marketing authorizations are valid for one year, on a renewable basis. The holder will be required to complete ongoing studiestrials or to conduct new studiestrials with a view to confirming that the benefit-risk balance is positive. In addition, specific obligations may be imposed in relation to the collection of pharmacovigilance data. Although we may seek a conditional marketing authorization for one or more of our product candidates by the EMA, the EMA or CHMP may ultimately not agree that the requirements for such conditional marketing authorization have been satisfied. Certain approvals of DARZALEX and Arzerra in the European Union were initially granted on the basis of conditional marketing authorizations. Each of these conditions have been met.

Other jurisdictions also impose certain post-approval requirements or may grant conditional marketing approvals. Depending on the circumstances, failure to meet these post-approval requirements can result in criminal prosecution, fines or other penalties, injunctions, notices or warning letters, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production or changes to manufacturing processes, denial or withdrawal of pre-marketing product approvals, import controls, or refusal to allow us to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts, each of which could have a significant impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, future growth prospects and reputation. In addition, even if we and our collaboration partners comply with FDA, EMA and other applicable requirements, new information regarding the safety or effectiveness of a product could lead the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authorities to modify or withdraw a product approval. Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could also require us or our collaboration partners to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our and our collaboration partners’ ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results could be adversely affected.

We may face difficulties from changes to current regulations and future legislation.

Existing regulatory policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our products and product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States, the European Union or in other countries. We expect more rigorous coverage criteria in the future in the U.S. healthcare market and an additional downward pressure on the prices thatIf we or our partners receive for approved products, which may trigger a similar reduction in payments from private payors. If we or ourcollaboration partners are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we and our collaboration partners are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we or they may lose any marketing approval that we or they may have obtained, which could adversely impact our business and financial results.

In particular, since its enactment, there have been judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act or(“ACA”) in the ACA,United States, as well as efforts by the current administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. There is currently uncertainty with respect to the impact any such repeal may have, and any resulting changes may take time to unfold, which could have an impact on coverage and reimbursement for healthcare items and services covered by plans that were authorized by the ACA. However, we cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or effect of any such legislation or executive action or the impact of potential legislation or executive action on us. Most recently,For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, was enacted, which, among other things, removesremoved the penalties for not complying with the ACA’s individual mandate to carry health insurance. There may be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA in the future.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions toof Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, effective April 1, 2013, which, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will stay in effect through 2027fiscal year 2031, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 30, 2022 and a 1% reduction from April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022, unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law theThe American Taxpayer Relief Act, of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the U.S. government to recover overpayments to

Furthermore, the Trump Administration has taken several executive actions, includingInflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law on August 16, 2022. The IRA, among other things, (i) allows the issuanceU.S. Department of Health and Human Services to negotiate prices for certain single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B and Part D, and subjects drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a number of executive orders,potential excise tax for failing to comply with the legislation by offering a price that could impose significant burdens on,is not equal to or otherwise materially delay,less than the FDA’s abilitynegotiated “maximum fair price” under the law; and (ii) establishes rebates under Medicare to engage in routine oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuing guidance, and reviewing and approving marketing applications. It is difficult to predict how these orderspenalize drug price increases that outpace inflation. Negotiations will be implementedbegin with ten high-cost drugs paid for by Medicare Part D, and the extent to which theynegotiated prices will impacttake effect in 2026. The effect of the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If these executive actions impose restrictionsIRA on the FDA’s ability to engage in oversightbiopharmaceutical industry is uncertain, and implementation activities in the normal course, we and our partners could be limited and/or delayed in obtaining new regulatory approvals or maintaining existing approvals, either of whichIRA could have a material adverse effect on our business financial condition,and results of operations and future growth prospects.in the future.

We are subject to various laws protecting the confidentiality of certain data and personal information, including patient health information, and our actual or perceived failure to comply could result in penalties and reputational damage.

In the course of our operations, we collect, use, store, disclose, transfer and otherwise process an increasing volume of personal information, including from our employees and third parties with whom we conduct business. Numerous countries in which we, our collaboration partners and our third-party contractors, including CROs and CMOs, operate, manufacture and sell our products have, or are developing, laws protecting personal data and the individual’s right to privacy as well as the confidentiality of certain personal data and patient health information. information (i.e., laws and regulations that address data privacy and security).

EU member states and other jurisdictions have adopted data protection laws and regulations, which impose significant compliance obligations. For example, the EU General Data Protection Regulation or the (“GDPR which became applicable on May 25, 2018, introduced new data protection”) imposes a range of requirements in the European Economic Area (the 28 member states of the European Union plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), or the EEA, and substantial fines for infringements of the data protection rules. For several EEA jurisdictions, the GDPR expanded significantly the jurisdictional reach of EEA data protection law by extending the law’s applicationrelating to the processingcollection, use handling and protection of personal data in connection with the offering of goods or services to data subjects located in the EEA and processing personal data in connection with monitoring the behavior of data subjects located in the EEA. The GDPR imposes several increased obligations and specific restrictions on controllers and processors processing personal data including, for example, additional requirements in relation to the information obligation, where applicable, higher standards for organizations to demonstrate compliance, such as obtainment of valid consent or assessment of another legal basis to justify the data processing activities, increased requirements pertaining to health data (including, in certain situations, where such data is key-coded), mandatory data breach notification requirements, appointment of a data protection officer where the core activities of the controller or the processor consist of processing of sensitive personal data (i.e., health data) on a large scale, additional mandatory requirements for the content of data processing agreements with service providers processing personal data, implementation of appropriate technical and organizational measures and expanded rights for individuals over their personal data. This could affect our and our partners or third-party contractors’ ability to collect, analyze and transfer personal data, including health data from clinical trials and adverse event reporting, or could cause our costs to increase, potentially leading to harm to our business and financial condition. If the measures implemented by us or our collaboration partners or service providers in order to comply with the GDPR requirements are not considered sufficient to ensure the necessary compliance level, we may be subject to litigation, regulatory investigations, enforcement notices requiring us to change the way we use personal data and/or fines of up to €20€20 million or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, as well as compensation claims by affected individuals, negative publicity and a potential loss of business. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

WhileRelatedly, following the United Kingdom’s (“U.K.”) withdrawal from the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and the European Union, and the expiry of the transition period, companies have to comply with both the GDPR and the GDPR as a directly effective regulation, was designedincorporated into U.K. national law, the latter regime having the ability to harmonizeseparately fine up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. The relationship between the U.K. and the European Union in relation to certain aspects of data protection law acrossremains unclear, for example around how data can lawfully be transferred between each jurisdiction, which may expose us to further compliance risk. If we do not comply with our obligations under the EEA, it does permit member states to legislate in many areas (particularly with regardGDPR, we could be exposed to the processingfines discussed above. In addition, we may be the subject of genetic, biometric litigation and/or adverse publicity, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Further, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in July 2020 that the Privacy Shield, used by thousands of companies to transfer data between the European Union and United States, was invalid and could no longer be used. In September 2020, Switzerland concluded that the Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework does not provide an adequate level of protection for data transfers from Switzerland to the United States. Alternative transfer mechanisms may be used while the authorities interpret the decisions and scope of the invalidated Privacy Shield, including the standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”); however, the SCCs have also been called into question in the same ruling that invalidated the Privacy Shield. At present, there are few if any viable alternatives to the SCCs, so future developments may necessitate further expenditures on local infrastructure, changes to internal business processes, or may otherwise affect or restrict sales and operations.

operations.
​

Our operations involve hazardous materials and we and third parties with whom we contract must comply with environmental laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we do business.regulations.

As a biotechnology company, weWe are subject to environmental and safety laws and regulations, including those governing the use of hazardous materials. Thematerials, and the cost of compliance with health and safety regulations is substantial. Our business activities involve the controlled use of hazardous materials. Our research and development activities involve the controlled storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials, including the components of our product candidates and other hazardous compounds. We, our partners and manufacturers and suppliers with whom we may contract are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are

•actual or anticipated fluctuations in our financial condition and operating results;

•the release of new data from the clinical trials of our products and product candidates;

•actual or anticipated changes in our growth rate relative to our competitors;

•competition from existing products or new products that may emerge;

•announcements by us or our competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, collaborations or capital commitments;

•failure to meet or exceed financial estimates and projections of the investment community or that we provide to the public;

•issuance of new or updated research or reports by securities analysts;

•fluctuations in the valuation of companies perceived by investors to be comparable to us;

•currency fluctuations;

•price and volume fluctuations attributable to inconsistent trading volume levels of our ADSs;

•additions or departures of key management or scientific personnel;

•disputes or other developments related to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies, products and product candidates;

•changes to coverage policies or reimbursement levels by commercial third party payors and government payors and any announcements relating to coverage policies or reimbursement levels;

•announcement or expectation of additional debt or equity financing efforts;

•issuances or sales of our shares or ADSs by us, our insiders or our other shareholders or ADS holders; and

•general economic and market conditions.

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for the ADSs to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their shares or ADSs at a favorable price or at all, and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of the trading market for our ADSs. In addition, in the past, when the market price of a stock has been volatile, holders of that stock have sometimes instituted securities class action litigation against the issuer. If any of the holders of shares or ADSs were to bring such a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit, the attention of our senior management would be diverted from the operation of our business, and we could incur significant liabilities, any one of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of the ADSs and their trading volume could decline.

The trading market for the ADSs and shares will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We are currently followed by analysts, but there can be no assurance that these analysts will continue to follow us or that additional securities or industry analysts will commence coverage of us. If no or only limited securities or industry analysts cover our company, the trading price for the ADSs would be negatively impacted. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our equity securities, publishes inaccurate

or unfavorable research about our business or expresses a negative opinion regarding the performance of our securities, or if our clinical trial results or operating performance fail to meet analyst expectations, the price of the ADSs would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, or

In addition, the deposit agreement provides that, subject to the depositary’s right to require a claim to be submitted to arbitration, the federal or state courts in the City of New York have non‑exclusivenon-exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine claims arising under the deposit agreement and in that regard, to the fullest extent permitted by law, ADS holders waive the right to a jury trial of any claim they may have against us or the depositary arising out of or relating to our shares, the ADSs or the deposit agreement, including any claim under the U.S. federal securities laws.

If we or the depositary opposed a jury trial demand based on the waiver, the court would determine whether the waiver was enforceable based on the facts and circumstances of that case in accordance with the applicable U.S. state and federal law. To our knowledge, the enforceability of a contractual pre‑disputepre-dispute jury trial waiver in connection with claims arising under the U.S. federal securities laws has not been finally adjudicated by the United States Supreme Court. However, we believe that a contractual pre‑disputepre-dispute jury trial waiver provision is generally enforceable, including under the laws of the State of New York, which govern the deposit agreement. In determining whether to enforce a contractual pre‑disputepre-dispute jury trial waiver provision, courts will generally consider whether a party knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to a jury trial. We believe that this is the case with respect to the deposit agreement and the ADSs. It is advisable that youpotential holders consult legal counsel regarding the jury waiver provision before investing in the ADSs.

If any holders or beneficial owners of ADSs bring a claim against us or the depositary in connection with matters arising under the deposit agreement or the ADSs, including claims under U.S. federal securities laws, a holder or beneficial owner may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to such claims, which may have the effect of limiting and discouraging lawsuits against us and/or the depositary. If a lawsuit is brought against us and/or the depositary under the deposit agreement, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may result in different outcomes than a trial by jury would have had, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiff(s) in any such action.

Nevertheless, if this jury trial waiver provision is not enforced, to the extent a court action proceeds, it would proceed under the terms of the deposit agreement with a jury trial. No condition, stipulation or provision of the deposit agreement or ADSs serves as a waiver by any holder or beneficial owner of ADSs or by us or the depositary of compliance with any substantive provision of, or a disclaimer of liability under, the U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

Claims of U.S. civil liabilities may not be enforceable against us.

We are incorporated under the laws of Denmark. Although our wholly owned subsidiary, Genmab US, Inc., has an office and laboratory space in the United States, substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. The majority of our directors and senior management reside outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce judgments against them or us in U.S. courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. securities laws.

The United States and Denmark currently do not have a treaty providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a U.S. court, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not be enforceable in Denmark.

In order to obtain a judgment that is enforceable in Denmark, the party in whose favor a final and conclusive judgment of the U.S. court has been rendered will be required to file its claim again with a court of competent jurisdiction in Denmark. The Danish court will not be bound by the judgment by the U.S. court, but the

countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.laws, against us or members of our Board of Directors or our senior management, or certain experts named herein who are residents of Denmark or countries other than the United States.

We are a “foreign private issuer,” as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations, and, consequently, we are not subject to all of the disclosure and corporate governance requirements applicable to public companies organized within the United States.

We are a “foreign private issuer,” as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations, and, consequently, we are not subject to all of the disclosure requirements applicable to public companies organized within the United States. For example, we are exempt from certain rules under the Exchange Act that regulate disclosure obligations and procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations applicable to a security registered under the Exchange Act, including the U.S. proxy rules under Section 14 of the Exchange Act. In addition, our directors and senior management are exempt from the reporting and “short‑swing”“short-swing” profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act and related rules with respect to their purchases and sales of our securities. Moreover, while we currently publish annual and quarterly reports on our website pursuant to the rules of Nasdaq Copenhagen and expect to file such financial reports on an annual and quarterly basis with the SEC, we will not be required to file such reports with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. public companies and will not be required to file quarterly reports on Form 10‑Q10-Q or current reports on Form 8‑K8-K that a U.S. domestic company would be required to file under the Exchange Act. Accordingly, there may be less publicly available information concerning our company than there would be if we were not a foreign private issuer. In addition, as a foreign private issuer and as permitted by the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC or the Nasdaq Stock Market,(“NASDAQ”), we will comply with certain home country corporate governance practices rather than the corporate governance requirements of the Nasdaq Stock Market.

If we lose our foreign private issuer status in the future, we would incur significant additional costs and expenses.

As a foreign private issuer, we are not required to comply with all the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and related rules and regulations. While we currently qualify as a foreign private issuer, the determination of foreign private issuer status is made annually on the last business day of an issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter and, accordingly, we could lose our foreign private issuer status in the future. We will next make a determination with respect to ourOur foreign private issuer status onwill next be determined as of June 30, 2020.2023.

The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws if we lose our foreign private issuer status would be significantly more than the costs we expect to incur as a foreign private issuer. If we lose our foreign private issuer status, we would be required to report as a U.S. domestic issuer and be subject to other U.S. securities laws applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly greater than the costs we incur as a foreign private issuer. For example, as a U.S. domestic issuer, we would be required to file periodic reports and registration statements with the SEC on U.S. domestic issuer forms, which are more detailed and extensive in certain respects than the forms available to us as a foreign private issuer. We would also be required to prepare our financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP and modify certain of our policies to comply with corporate governance practices applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. Such conversion and modifications would involve additional costs. In addition, we may lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements on U.S. stock exchanges that are available to foreign private issuers, which could also increase our costs.

If we are a passive foreign investment company for U.S. federal income tax purposes for any taxable year, U.S. holders of our ADSs could be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

A non-U.S. corporation will be a passive foreign investment company or (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes for any taxable year if either (i) at least 75% of its gross income for such taxable year is “passive income” (as defined in the relevant provisions of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended or the Code)(“Code”) or (ii) at least 50%

However, the determination of whether or not we are a PFIC or not according to the PFIC rules is made on an annual basis and will depend on the nature and composition of our income and assets and the value of our assets from time to time. Therefore, changes in the nature and composition of our income or assets or the value of our assets may cause us to become a PFIC. The determination of the value of our assets (including goodwill not reflected on our balance sheet) may be based, in part, on the total market value of our shares and ADSs, which is subject to change and may be volatile.

If we are a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. person holds ADSs, certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences could apply to such U.S. person. See “Item 7.E—“Item 10.E—Taxation—Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.”

Changes in Danish, U.S. or other foreign tax laws or compliance requirements, or the practical interpretation and administration thereof, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are affected by various Danish, U.S. and foreign taxes, including direct and indirect taxes imposed on our global activities, such as corporate income, withholding, customs, excise/energy, value added, sales, environmental and other taxes. Significant judgment is required in determining our provisions for taxes and there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain.

Changes in Danish or foreign direct or indirect tax laws or compliance requirements, including the practical interpretation and administration thereof, including in respect to market practices, or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects.

Tax authorities may disagree with our positions and conclusions regarding certain tax positions, resulting in unanticipated costs, taxes or non-realization of expected benefits.

A tax authority may disagree with tax positions that we have taken, which could result in increased tax liabilities. Danish, U.S., or another tax authority could challenge our allocation of income by tax jurisdiction and the amounts paid between our subsidiaries pursuant to our intercompany arrangements and transfer pricing policies, including amounts paid with respect to our intellectual property development. Similarly, a tax authority could assert that we are subject to tax in a jurisdiction where we believe we have not established a taxable connection, often referred to as a “permanent establishment” under international tax treaties, and such an assertion, if successful, could increase our expected tax liability in one or more jurisdictions. A tax authority may take the position that material income tax liabilities, interest and penalties are payable by us, in which case, we expect that we might contest such assessment. Contesting such an assessment may be lengthy and costly, and if we were unsuccessful in disputing the assessment, the implications could increase our anticipated effective tax rate.

ITEM 4INFORMATION4INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

A.   History and Development of the Company

We were incorporated on June 11, 1998 as a private limited liability company (Anpartsselskab,(“Anpartsselskab”, or ApS)“ApS”) under Danish law as a shelf company and are registered with the Danish Business Authority (Erhvervsstyrelsen) in Copenhagen, Denmark under registration number (CVR) no. 21023884. Our name was changed to Genmab ApS on November 17, 1998 and we commenced operations in February 1999. On May 31, 1999, we were converted into a public limited liability company (Aktieselskab,(“Aktieselskab”, or “A/S)S”) and changed our name to Genmab A/S.

Emerging Growth Company

As a company with less than $1.07 billion in revenue during our last fiscal year, we qualify as an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act. An emerging growth company may take advantage of specified reduced reporting and other burdens that are otherwise applicable generally to public companies. These provisions include an exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

We may choose to take advantage of some but not all of these reduced burdens, and therefore the information that we provide holders of shares and ADSs may be different than the information you might receive from other public companies in which you hold equity.

We may take advantage of these provisions for up to five years following the date of our initial public offering in the United States or such earlier time that we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will cease to be an emerging growth company upon the earliest of the following:

B.    BUSINESS OVERVIEW

We are an international biotechnology company specializing in antibody therapeutics for the treatment of cancer and other diseases. Ourwith a core purpose is tothat our team will improve the lives of patients by creatingthrough innovative and developing innovativedifferentiated antibody products.therapeutics. Our vision is to transform cancer treatment by launchinghas driven our own proprietarypassionate, innovative and collaborative teams to invent four next-generation antibody technology platforms that play a key role in building our product by 2025 and advancing our pipeline, offueling multiple differentiated and well‑tolerated antibodies. We are building and expanding our late‑stage development and commercial capabilities to allow us to bring our proprietary products to market in the future. We are continuing to build a well‑diversified portfolio of products, product candidates and technologies.

In addition to a broad pipeline of differentiated product candidates, our portfolio includes three approved partnered products; daratumumab, marketed by Janssen Biotech, Inc. as DARZALEX for the treatment of certain indications of multiple myeloma, or MM, ofatumumab, marketed as Arzerra by Novartis AG for the treatment of certain indications of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, or CLL, and teprotumumab, approved as TEPEZZA for the treatment of thyroid eye disease.  We also have a strongcancer treatments that make an impact on people’s lives. Our pipeline of novel antibody‑basedantibody-based product candidates for the treatment of solid tumors and hematological cancers which areis designed to address unmet medical needs and improve treatment outcomes for cancer patients. Our goal in building our pipeline is to retain at least 50% of product rights in selected programs and in geographic areas where we believe we will be able to maximize their value; we consider such products to be “our own” proprietary products. Our pipeline includes bispecific T-cell engagers, next-generation immune checkpoint modulators, effector function enhanced antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates. We currently have sevennine proprietary product candidates, where we are responsible for at least 50% of development, in clinical development:development. Our most advanced products are tisotumab vedotin enapotamaband epcoritamab. Tisotumab vedotin, HexaBody-DR5/DR5, epcoritamab (DuoBody-CD3xCD20), DuoBody-PD-L1x4‑1BB, DuoBody-CD40x4-1BB and DuoHexaBody-CD37. In addition,marketed as Tivdak, is being developed in collaboration with Seagen. Tivdak was granted accelerated approval by the FDA for the treatment of adult patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer with disease progression on or after chemotherapy. Tivdak is the first Clinical Trial Applications (CTAs)and only FDA approved ADC in this indication. Epcoritamab is being developed in collaboration with AbbVie. In September 2022, we submitted a BLA for DuoBody-CD3x5T4 were submitted to authorities in Denmark and Spain in January 2020, followed by the Investigational New Drug (IND) application, which was submittedSC epcoritamab to the FDA, which was subsequently accepted with Priority Review in February 2020. We also have approximately 20 proprietary and partnered pre‑clinical programs, including two proprietary product candidates for whichNovember 2022 with a target action date of May 21, 2023. In December 2022 we intend to submit INDssubmitted a JNDA to the FDA and/or CTAsMHLW. AbbVie submitted an MAA to the EMA in 2020.October 2022, which was validated that same month. In addition to our marketed products and clinical product candidates, we have multiple in-house and partnered pre-clinical programs.

​

In addition to Genmab’s own pipeline of product candidates, our innovation and proprietary technology platforms are applied in the pipelines of global pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. These companies are running clinical development programs with antibodies created by Genmab or created using Genmab’s proprietary DuoBody bispecific antibody technology platform. The programs run from Phase 1 development to approved medicines. The five approved medicines created by Genmab or that incorporate Genmab’s innovation are daratumumab, marketed by Janssen as DARZALEX (intravenous (“IV”) formulation) and DARZALEX FASPRO or DARZALEX SC (SC formulation), approved in the U.S., Europe, Japan and certain other territories for the treatment of certain indications of MM and AL amyloidosis; amivantamab, marketed in the U.S., Europe and certain other territories as RYBREVANT for the treatment of certain adult patients with locally-advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”) with epidermal growth factor receptor (“EGFR”) exon 20 insertion mutations; teclistamab, marketed in the U.S. and Europe as TECVAYLI for certain indications of MM; SC ofatumumab, marketed in the U.S., Europe, Japan and certain other territories as Kesimpta by Novartis for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (“RMS”); teprotumumab, marketed in the U.S. as TEPEZZA by Horizon for the treatment of thyroid eye disease (“TED”). In addition, in December 2022