Commitments and Contingencies | Note 9 – Commitments and Contingencies Evonik The Company entered into an agreement with SurModics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“SurModics”) in October 2010 for the exclusive worldwide licensing of certain technology, patent rights and know-how rights related to the production of EG-1962, (the “Evonik Agreement”). This agreement was later transferred to Evonik Industries AG (“Evonik”) when it purchased substantially all the assets of SurModics. Pursuant to the Evonik Agreement, in exchange for the license, the Company agreed to make milestone payments totaling up to $14.75 million upon the achievement of certain development, regulatory and sales milestones detailed in the Evonik Agreement. The Company paid $0.25 million upon execution of the Evonik Agreement. In August 2016, the Company paid a milestone of $1.0 million after the first patient in the Phase 3 clinical trial of EG-1962 was dosed. In addition, the Evonik Agreement calls for the Company to pay royalties on sales of certain products based on a mid-single digit percentage of net sales. The Evonik Agreement provides for the reduction of royalties in certain limited circumstances. The term of the Evonik Agreement will continue until the expiration of the Company’s obligation to pay royalties to Evonik. Either party may terminate the Evonik Agreement due to material breach by the other party. Evonik may terminate the Evonik Agreement or convert it to a non-exclusive license, in either case upon giving the Company written notice, if the Company fails to use commercially reasonable efforts to hit certain specified development, regulatory and commercial milestones. Following the discontinuation of the NEWTON 2 trial for EG-1962, the Company has ceased all research and development efforts related to EG-1962 and suspended efforts on its other product candidates. As such, unless the Company resumes such development activities, it is unlikely that the Company will have any additional milestone or royalty obligations to Evonik in the future. Oakwood Amended and Restated Master Formulation Development Agreement In June 2017, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Master Formulation Development Agreement (the “Restated Development Agreement”) with Oakwood Laboratories, L.L.C. (“Oakwood”), pursuant to which Oakwood agreed to continue to provide the Company with certain drug formulation development and non-commercial manufacturing services for EG-1962, in accordance with project plans that may be entered into from time to time. Under the Restated Development Agreement, the Company agreed to pay Oakwood to perform services under agreed upon project plans and to pay Oakwood up to an aggregate of $4.5 million. In July 2017 and April 2018, the Company paid $1.5 million and $0.5 million, respectively, of such aggregate amount in connection with entering into the Restated Development Agreement. The remaining $2.5 million was payable no later than April 1, 2019. The remaining payment was discounted to $2.375 million and paid pursuant to an accelerated payment agreement entered into in August 2018. As of December 31, 2018, there are no remaining payments under the Restated Development Agreement. As additional consideration for performance under the Restated Development Agreement and the Supply Agreement (as defined below), the Company agreed to pay Oakwood a royalty, during the Royalty Term, in an amount equal to a low single digit percentage of net sales of EG-1962, regardless of the manufacturer or supplier thereof. The “Royalty Term” is the period commencing upon the commercial launch of EG-1962 by the Company and continuing until twelve (12) years following such launch. The term of the Restated Development Agreement continues until the expiration or termination of the Supply Agreement, unless earlier terminated (the “Term”). The Company has the right to terminate project plans upon the occurrence of various circumstances described in the Restated Development Agreement. In the event that the Company terminates the most recent project plan prior to completion (which would include the Company’s decision to discontinue the development or commercialization of EG-1962), the Company must pay to Oakwood a termination fee for work completed. There are no payments due as of December 31, 2018. Oakwood Manufacturing and Supply Agreement Concurrent with its entry into the Restated Development Agreement, on June 30, 2017, the Company entered into a Manufacturing and Supply Agreement with Oakwood (the “Supply Agreement”), pursuant to which Oakwood agreed to manufacture and supply, and the Company agreed to purchase from Oakwood, EG-1962 in commercial quantities following the commercial launch of the product. Pursuant to the Supply Agreement, the Company agreed to pay Oakwood milestone payments that could total up to an aggregate of $2.25 million upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones. The term of the Supply Agreement will terminate automatically upon the termination of the Restated Development Agreement for any reason. Additionally, either party may terminate the Supply Agreement upon a material breach by the other party that fails to be cured in the applicable cure period. Following the discontinuation of the NEWTON 2 trial for EG-1962, the Company has ceased all research and development efforts related to EG-1962 and suspended efforts on its other product candidates. As such, the Company may terminate the Supply Agreement immediately upon notice to Oakwood (which will also result in the automatic termination of the Restated Development Agreement); provided, that if it chooses to do so prior to completion of the most recent project plan attached to the Restated Development Agreement, the Company must pay to Oakwood a termination fee. While certain of the Company’s milestone payments to Oakwood will remain outstanding (including the termination fee in the event the Restated Development Agreement is terminated), unless the Company resumes such development activities, it is unlikely that the Company will be required to pay additional milestone or royalty payments to Oakwood in the future pursuant to the Restated Development Agreement or the Supply Agreement. Class Action Civil Litigation On April 23, 2018, a purported securities class action complaint was filed against Edge, Brian Leuthner (Edge’s President and Chief Executive Officer) and Andrew Saik (Edge’s Chief Financial Officer) in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, captioned Sanfilippo v. Edge Therapeutics, Inc., Case No. 2:18-cv-8236. The complaint alleged that Edge, Mr. Leuthner and Mr. Saik violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making false and misleading statements concerning Edge’s business, operations and prospects by failing to disclose that Edge’s developmental product EG-1962 allegedly would likely fail a futility analysis. The complaint also asserted a “control” person claim against Mr. Leuthner and Mr. Saik pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The complaint was brought on behalf of all purchasers of Edge’s common stock between December 27, 2017, and March 27, 2018, and sought unspecified damages. On December 7, 2018, the court appointed Sam Kirkpatrick and Amos Bakouple lead plaintiffs for the putative class and appointed the firm Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP lead counsel for the putative class. On February 14, 2019, lead plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the action, without prejudice, as to all defendants Edge and the Edge Board have been named as defendants in two individual lawsuits and two putative class action lawsuits regarding the merger, each of which alleges that the registration statement on Form S-4 (Registration No. 333-228937) filed by Edge on December 21, 2018 omitted material information with respect to the proposed transaction, which rendered the registration statement on Form S-4 false or misleading. The case captioned Michael Condon v. Edge Therapeutics et al., case no. 2:19-cv-00152, or the Condon Action, was filed on January 4, 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The case captioned Adam Franchi et al. v. Edge Therapeutics et al., case no. 1:19-cv-00058-UNA, or the Franchi Action, was filed on January 9, 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case captioned Jeffrey L. Prince v. Edge Therapeutics et al., case no. 1:19-cv-00280, or the Prince Action, was filed on January 10, 2019 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case captioned Brian Foldenauer et al. v. Edge Therapeutics et al., case no. 1:19-cv-00280, or the Foldenauer Action, was filed on January 22, 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The causes of action set forth in each of the Condon Action, the Franchi Action, the Prince Action and the Foldenauer Action are (i) a claim against Edge and the Board for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as (ii) a claim against the Board for violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. In the Franchi Action, PDS was also named as a defendant in respect of the claim regarding violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. In each case, the plaintiffs seek, among other things, injunctive relief, rescissory damages, and an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses. Edge has voluntarily accepted service of process in the Franchi Action and Prince Action, but has not yet been served with process in the Condon Action or the Foldenauer Action. On January 18, 2019, the plaintiffs in the Prince Action filed a motion for a preliminary injunction barring any stockholder vote on the proposed merger until revised disclosures are made to Edge’s stockholders, and withdrew the motion for a preliminary injunction on February 1, 2019. Edge believes the litigation is without merit and in any event has been rendered moot by the final S-4 and subsequent disclosures. This litigation remains in the initial pleadings phase. Employment Matters The Company has entered into employment agreements with each of its executive officers. The agreements generally provide for, among other things, salary, bonus and severance payments. The employment agreements generally provide for between 12 months and 18 months of severance benefits to be paid to an executive (as well as certain potential bonus, COBRA and equity award benefits), subject to the effectiveness of a general release of claims, if the executive terminates his or her employment for good reason or if the Company terminates the executive’s employment without cause. Such severance payments may be provided for as long as 24 months in connection with a termination following a change of control. The continued provision of severance benefits is conditioned on each executive’s compliance with the terms of the Company’s confidentiality and invention and assignment agreement as well as his or her release of claims. On April 30, 2018, the Company initiated a corporate realignment to focus its efforts and resources on its ongoing operations and future plans that include a reduction in its workforce. This realignment was initiated following the Company’s announcement that it was discontinuing the Phase 3 NEWTON 2 study, based on the recommendation of an independent Data Monitoring Committee (the “DMC”) that the Company stop its Phase 3 NEWTON 2 study. The DMC recommendation was based on its conclusion that the study had a low probability of meeting its primary endpoint. During 2018, the Company reduced its workforce from 37 employees to 10 employees. In addition, the Company anticipates completing the payment of certain employee severance and benefits and certain retention compensation, as approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, by the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019. Leases Effective December 13, 2013, the Company entered into a 63 month lease for approximately 8,000 square feet of office space in Berkeley Heights, New Jersey. On February 18, 2016, the Company entered into a new 63 month lease for approximately 20,410 square feet of office space within the same office complex in Berkeley Heights, New Jersey. The terms of the new lease were structured so that the termination date of the December 13, 2013 lease coincided with the commencement date of the new lease on August 13, 2016. As a result of the lease termination, the Company wrote off $67,118 of leasehold improvements. Rent expense is recognized on a straight line basis where there are escalating payments, and was approximately $598,037 and $602,925 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The following is a schedule by years of future minimum rental payments required under operating leases that have initial or remaining non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2018: Year Ended December 31, 2019 $ 604,541 2020 603,371 2021 530,385 2022 and after – Total minimum payments required $ 1,738,297 |