- RZLT Dashboard
- Financials
- Filings
-
Holdings
-
Transcripts
- ETFs
- Insider
- Institutional
- Shorts
-
DEF 14A Filing
Rezolute (RZLT) DEF 14ADefinitive proxy
Filed: 28 Apr 21, 4:05pm
| By order of the Board of Directors | | | ||
| /s/ Nevan Charles Elam Nevan Charles Elam | | | ||
| Chief Executive Officer, Director Redwood City, California | | | | |
| | | | | 6 | | | |
| | | | | 15 | | | |
| | | | | 17 | | | |
| | | | | 23 | | | |
| | | | | 40 | | | |
| | | | | 42 | | | |
| | | | | 48 | | | |
| Appendices | | | | | | | |
| | | | | A-1 | | | |
| | | | | B-1 | | | |
| | | | | C-1 | | | |
| | | | | D-1 | | | |
| | | | | E-1 | | |
Name | | | Age | | | Position | | | Date Appointed | |
Young-Jin Kim | | | 63 | | | Chairman of the Board of Directors | | | February 10, 2019 | |
Nevan Charles Elam | | | 53 | | | Chief Executive Officer, Director and Principal Financial Officer | | | January 31, 2013 | |
Philippe Fauchet | | | 63 | | | Director | | | September 10, 2020 | |
Gil Labrucherie | | | 49 | | | Director | | | November 20, 2019 | |
Wladimir Hogenhuis | | | 56 | | | Director | | | March 2, 2021 | |
Nerissa Kreher | | | 48 | | | Director | | | March 2, 2021 | |
Director Name | | | April 15, 2021 | | | June 30, 2020 | | ||||||||||||
| Audit | | | Compensation | | | Nominating and Governance | | | Audit | | | Compensation | | | Nominating and Governance | | ||
Gil Labrucherie(1) | | | X | | | X | | | X | | | X | | | X | | | X | |
Jung-Hee Lim(2) | | | | | | | | | | | | X | | | X | | | X | |
Philippe Fauchet(3) | | | X | | | X | | | X | | | | | | | | | | |
Young-Jin Kim(4) | | | | | | | | | X | | | | | | X | | | X | |
Wladimir Hogenhuis(5) | | | X | | | X | | | X | | | | | | | | | | |
Nerissa Kreher(6) | | | | | | X | | | X | | | | | | | | | | |
Young Chul Sung, Ph.D.(7) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | X | | | X | |
Name of Beneficial Owner | | | Position with Company | | | Beneficial Ownership | | | Percent of Class | | ||||||
Stockholders in excess of 5% | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Handok, Inc. | | | Stockholder | | | | | 2,015,491(1) | | | | | | 24.1% | | |
Genexine, Inc. | | | Stockholder | | | | | 1,826,019(2) | | | | | | 21.9% | | |
Entities associated with Federated Hermes, Inc. | | | Stockholder | | | | | 1,612,122(3) | | | | | | 18.4% | | |
Entities associated with CDK Associates, LLC | | | Stockholder | | | | | 530,388(4) | | | | | | 6.3% | | |
Entities associated with Third Street Holdings, LLC | | | Stockholder | | | | | 33,855(4) | | | | | | 0.4% | | |
Armistice Capital Master Fund Ltd. | | | Stockholder | | | | | 483,637(5) | | | | | | 5.7% | | |
Directors and Executive Officers: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Young-Jin Kim | | | Chairman of the Board of Directors | | | | | 2,015,491(6) | | | | | | 24.1% | | |
Nevan Charles Elam | | | Chief Executive Officer and Director | | | | | 289,205(7) | | | | | | 3.3% | | |
Gil Labrucherie | | | Director | | | | | 5,994(8) | | | | | | * | | |
Philippe Fauchet | | | Director | | | | | 1,889(9) | | | | | | * | | |
Sankaram Mantripragada, Ph.D. | | | Scientist Emeritus | | | | | 117,682(10) | | | | | | 1.4% | | |
Brian Roberts | | | Senior Vice President of Clinical Development | | | | | 41,244(11) | | | | | | * | | |
Directors and executive officers as a group (6 people) | | | | | | | | 2,471,505(12) | | | | | | 28.1% | | |
| | | 2020 | | | 2019 | | ||||||||||||||||||
| | | Amount | | | Percent | | | Amount | | | Percent | | ||||||||||||
Audit fees | | | | $ | 142,000 | | | | | | 92% | | | | | $ | 142,035 | | | | | | 100% | | |
Audit-related fees | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | |
Tax fees | | | | | 12,000 | | | | | | 8% | | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | |
All other fees | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | |
Total | | | | $ | 154,000 | | | | | | 100% | | | | | $ | 142,035 | | | | | | 100% | | |
| | | | | | As of April 15, 2021 | | | As of June 30, 2020 | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | Plan Termination Date | | | Shares to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options: | | | Securities Available For Future Issuance | | | Shares to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options: | | | Securities Available For Future Issuance | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | Number of Shares | | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | | Number of Shares | | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
2014 Stock and Incentive Plan | | | March 21, 2019 | | | | | 3,099 | | | | | $ | 120.43 | | | | | | — | | | | | | 43,708 | | | | | $ | 153.47 | | | | | | — | | |
2015 Non-Qualified Stock Option Plan | | | February 23, 2020 | | | | | 87,700 | | | | | | 59.85 | | | | | | — | | | | | | 95,100 | | | | | | 55.19 | | | | | | — | | |
2016 Non-Qualified Stock Option Plan | | | October 31, 2021 | | | | | 483,550 | | | | | | 30.74 | | | | | | 76,450 | | | | | | 524,300 | | | | | | 29.63 | | | | | | 35,700 | | |
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
2019 Non Qualified Stock Option Plan | | | July 31, 2029 | | | | | 300,000 | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | — | | | | | | 300,000 | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | — | | |
Total | | | | | | | | 874,349 | | | | | | 28.41 | | | | | | 76,450 | | | | | | 963,108 | | | | | | 33.06 | | | | | | 35,700 | | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| Amendment of Charter Documents | | | Delaware law requires a vote of a corporation’s board of directors followed by the affirmative vote of the majority of shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote to approve any amendment to the | | | Nevada law requires a vote of the corporation’s board of directors followed by the affirmative vote of the majority of shares present or in person and entitled to vote to approve any amendment to the articles of incorporation. If any | | | | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | certificate of incorporation, unless a greater percentage vote is required by the certificate of incorporation. Where a separate vote by class or series is required, the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of such class or series is required unless the certificate of incorporation requires a greater percentage vote. Further, Delaware law states that if an amendment would increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of a class, increase or decrease the par value of shares of a class or alter or change the powers, preferences or special rights of a particular class or series of stock so as to affect them adversely, the class or series so affected shall be given the power to vote as a class notwithstanding the absence of any specifically enumerated power in the certificate of incorporation. Delaware law also states that the power to adopt, amend or repeal the bylaws of a corporation shall be vested in the stockholders entitled to vote, provided that the corporation in its certificate of incorporation may confer such power on the board of directors in addition to the stockholders. | | | proposed amendment would adversely alter or change any preference or any relative or other right given to any class or series of outstanding shares, then the amendment must be approved by the vote, in addition to the affirmative vote otherwise required, of the holders of shares representing a majority of the voting power of each class or series adversely affected by the amendment. Nevada law provides that, unless otherwise prohibited by any bylaw adopted by the stockholders, the directors may adopt, amend or repeal any bylaw, including any bylaw adopted by the stockholders. The articles of incorporation may grant the authority to adopt, amend or repeal bylaws exclusively to the directors. | | | | |
| Number of Directors | | | Delaware law provides that a corporation must have at least one or more directors to be fixed as provided in the bylaws of the corporation, unless the certificate of incorporation fixes the number of directors, in which case a change in the number of directors shall be made only | | | Nevada law provides that a corporation must have at least one director, and may provide in its articles of incorporation or in its bylaws for a fixed number of directors or a variable number of directors, and for the manner in which the number of directors may be increased or decreased. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to setting the number of directors of the Company. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | by amendment of the certificate of incorporation. | | | | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that subject to the rights of the holders of any series of preferred stock of the Company then outstanding to elect additional directors under specified circumstances, the number of directors shall be fixed from time to time exclusively by the Board of Directors pursuant to a resolution adopted by a majority of the board. | | | The Nevada Bylaws provide that subject to the rights of the holders of any series of preferred stock of the Company then outstanding to elect additional directors under specified circumstances, the number of directors shall be fixed from time to time exclusively by the Board of Directors pursuant to a resolution adopted by a majority of the board. | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws and the Delaware Bylaws are the same in this regard. | |
| Classified Board of Directors | | | Under Delaware law, the certificate of incorporation or the bylaws may provide for the classification of directors into as many as three classes with staggered terms of office. The certificate of incorporation may provide the holders of any class or series of stock the right to elect 1 or more directors. In addition, the certificate of incorporation may confer upon 1 or more directors voting powers greater than or less than those of other directors. | | | Under Nevada law, the articles of incorporation or the bylaws may provide for the classification of directors as to the duration of their respective terms of office or as to their election by one or more authorized classes or series of shares. At least one-fourth of the total number of the directors must be elected annually. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to classification of the Board. | |
| Term of Board of Directors | | | The default rule in Delaware is that each director shall hold office until the next annual meeting of stockholders (and until such director’s successor is elected and qualified) or until such director’s earlier resignation or removal. | | | Nevada law provides that, unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, each director holds office after the expiration of his or her term until a successor is elected and qualified at an annual meeting of stockholders, or until the director resigns or is removed. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to the term of directors. | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that each director shall hold office until such director’s successor is elected and qualified. | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide that each director shall hold office until the next annual shareholder meeting or until his or her successor is elected and qualified. | | | The Rezolute-Nevada Bylaws and the Company’s existing Bylaws are identical in this regard. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| Removal of Directors | | | Delaware law provides that a director may be removed with or without cause by the holders of a majority in voting power of the issued and outstanding stock entitled to vote, except that (1) members of a classified board of directors may be removed only for cause, unless the certificate of incorporation provides otherwise, and (2) in the case of a corporation having cumulative voting, directors may not be removed in certain situations without satisfying certain stockholder approval requirements. | | | Nevada law provides that the any director may be removed, with or without cause, from office by the vote of stockholders representing not less than two-thirds of the voting power of the issued and outstanding stock entitled to vote. With respect to corporations that elect directors with cumulative voting, any director or directors who constitute fewer than all of the directors may not be removed except upon vote of the stockholders owning sufficient shares to prevent each director’s election at the time of removal. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to the removal of directors. | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide any director, or the entire Board of Directors, may be removed from office at any time only for cause and only by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 50.1% of the voting power of all of the then outstanding shares of the Corporation then entitled to vote at an election of directors, voting together as a single class. | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide any director, or the entire Board of Directors, may be removed from office at any time only for cause and only by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 50.1% of the voting power of all of the then outstanding shares of the Corporation then entitled to vote at an election of directors, voting together as a single class. | | | The Rezolute-Nevada Bylaws and the Company’s existing Bylaws are identical in this regard. | |
| Filling Vacancies on the Board of Directors | | | Delaware law provides that, unless otherwise provided in the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of a corporation, vacancies may be filled by a majority of the directors then in office, although less than a quorum, or by a sole remaining director. Further, if, at the time of filling any vacancy, the directors then in office shall constitute less than a majority of the whole board, the Delaware Court of Chancery may, upon application of any stockholder or stockholders | | | Nevada law provides that all vacancies, including those caused by an increase in the number of directors, may be filled by a majority of the remaining directors, though less than a quorum, unless it is otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation, pursuant to a resignation by a director, the board may fill the vacancy or vacancies with each director so appointed to hold office during the remainder of the term of | | | Delaware law provides greater protection to the Company’s stockholders by permitting stockholders representing at least 10% of the issued and outstanding shares to apply to the Delaware Court of Chancery to have an election of directors in the situation where the directors in office constitute less than a majority of the whole Board. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | holding at least 10% of the total number of the shares at the time outstanding having the right to vote for such directors, summarily order an election to be held to fill any such vacancies or newly created directorships, or to replace the directors chosen by the directors then in office. | | | office of the resigning director or directors. | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that any vacancy on the board of directors may be filled be filled only by a resolution of a majority of the directors then in office even though less than a quorum, or by a sole remaining director and not by the stockholders, | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide that vacancies on the Board may be filled only by a resolution of a majority of the directors then in office even though less than a quorum, or by a sole remaining director and not by the stockholders, | | | The Rezolute-Nevada Bylaws provide the same appointment rights as the Company’s existing Bylaws. | |
| Cumulative Voting | | | Delaware law permits corporations to provide for cumulative voting in the corporation’s certificate of incorporation. | | | Nevada law permits cumulative voting only if the articles of incorporation provide for cumulative voting and certain procedures regarding notice are followed. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to cumulative voting for directors. | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation does not provide for cumulative voting. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation do not provide for cumulative voting. | | | The Rezolute-Delaware Certificate of Incorporation and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation are identical in respect to not allowing cumulative voting. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| Board Action by Written Consent | | | Under Delaware law, unless otherwise stated in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, any action required or permitted to be taken at any meeting of the board of directors or committee of the board of directors may be taken without a meeting if all members of the board consent thereto in writing, or by electronic transmission and the writing or writings or electronic transmission or transmissions are filed with the minutes of proceedings of the board, or committee. | | | Under Nevada law, unless otherwise stated in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, any action required or permitted to be taken at a meeting of the board of directors or committee of the board of directors may be taken without a meeting if, before or after the action, a written consent thereto is signed by all the members of the board except any interested directors. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to the action by written consent. | |
| The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation and the Delaware Bylaws do not change this statutory provision. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws do not change this statutory provision. | | | | | |||
| Interested Party Transactions | | | Delaware law provides that no contract or transaction between a corporation and one or more of its directors or officers, or between a corporation and any other entity of which one or more of its directors or officers are directors or officers, or in which one or more of its directors or officers have a financial interest, is void or voidable if (a) the material facts as to the director’s or officer’s relationship or interest and as to the contract or transaction are disclosed or known to the board of directors or a committee thereof, which authorizes the contract or transaction in good faith by the affirmative vote of a majority of the disinterested directors, even though the disinterested directors are less than a quorum, (b) the material facts as to the director’s or officer’s relationship or interest and | | | Nevada law provides that no contract or transaction between a corporation and one or more of its directors or officers, or between a corporation and any other entity of which one or more of its directors or officers are directors or officers, or in which one or more of its directors or officers have a financial interest, is void or voidable if (a) the director’s or officer’s interest in the contract or transaction is known to the board, committee or stockholders and the transaction is approved or ratified by the board, committee or stockholders in good faith by a vote sufficient for the purpose (without counting the vote of the interested director or officer), (b) the fact of the common interest is not known to the director or officer at the time the transaction is brought before the board, or (c) the | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar, with Delaware law providing additional provisions for the approval of related party transactions by stockholders. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | as to the contract or transaction are disclosed or known to the stockholders entitled to vote thereon and the contract or transaction is specifically approved in good faith by the stockholders or (c) the contract or transaction is fair to the corporation as of the time it is authorized, approved or ratified by the board of directors, a committee thereof, or the stockholders. | | | contract or transaction is fair to the corporation at the time it is authorized or approved. | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation and Delaware Bylaws will not change this statutory rule. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws do not change this statutory rule. | | | | |
| Stockholder Voting- Quorum | | | Delaware law provides that a majority of shares entitled to vote, present in person or by proxy, constitutes a quorum at a stockholder meeting. | | | Nevada law provides that a majority of the voting power, present in person or by proxy at a meeting of stockholders (regardless of whether the proxy has authority to vote on all matters), constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to quorum requirements. | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that a majority of the voting power, present in person or by proxy at a meeting of stockholders constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business. | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide that a majority of the voting power, present in person or by proxy at a meeting of stockholders constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business. | | | The Rezolute-Nevada Bylaws and the Company’s existing Bylaws are identical in respect to quorum requirements. | |
| Stockholder Voting-Action | | | In all matters other than the election of directors, the affirmative vote of the majority shares present in person or by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote on the subject matter constitutes the act of the stockholders. Where are separate vote by a class or series or classes or series is required, a majority of the outstanding shares of such class or series, present in person or by proxy, generally constitutes a quorum and the affirmative vote of the majority of shares of such class or series present in person | | | Action by the stockholders on a matter other than the election of directors is approved if the number of votes cast in favor of the action exceeds the number of votes cast in opposition to the action. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to stockholder voting. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | or by proxy constitutes the act of such class or series. | | | | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that action by the stockholders on a matter is approved by a majority of the stock present or represented and voting on the matter, except when a different vote is required by law, the articles of incorporation or the bylaws (such as the election of directors which is determined by a plurality of the votes cast). | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide that action by the stockholders on a matter is approved by a majority of the stock present or represented and voting on the matter, except when a different vote is required by law, the articles of incorporation or the bylaws (such as the election of directors which is determined by a plurality of the votes cast). | | | The Rezolute-Nevada and the Company’s existing Bylaws are substantially similar. | |
| Director Elections | | | Delaware law provides that, unless otherwise stated in the certificate or bylaws, the election of directors shall be by a plurality of the vote. | | | Nevada law provides that, unless otherwise stated in the articles or bylaws, the election of directors shall be by a plurality of the vote. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in respect to the election of directors. | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that the election of directors shall be by a plurality of the vote. | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide that the election of directors shall be by a plurality of the vote | | | The Rezolute-Nevada and the Company’s existing Bylaws are substantially similar. | |
| Stockholder Action by Written Consent | | | Delaware law provides that, unless the certificate of incorporation provides otherwise, any action required to be taken at any annual or special meeting of stockholders may be taken without a meeting, without prior notice and without a vote, if the holders of outstanding stock having not less than the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize or take such action at a meeting at which all shares entitled to vote thereon were present and voted consent to the action in writing. In addition, the corporation is required to give prompt notice of the taking of the corporate action without a meeting by less than unanimous written consent to those stockholders who did not consent in writing. | | | Nevada law provides that, unless the articles of incorporation or the bylaws provide otherwise, any action required or permitted to be taken at a meeting of the stockholders may be taken without a meeting if the holders of the outstanding stock having at least the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize or take such action at a meeting consent to the action in writing. | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in relation to action by written consent of the stockholders. | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that any action required to be taken at any annual or special | | | The Company’s Nevada Bylaws provide that any action required to be taken at any | | | The Rezolute-Nevada and the Company’s existing Bylaws are substantially similar. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | meeting of stockholders may be effected only at a duly called annual or special meeting of the stockholders of the Corporation and may not be effected by written consent. | | | annual or special meeting of stockholders may be effected only at a duly called annual or special meeting of the stockholders of the Corporation and may not be effected by written consent. | | | | |
| Stockholder Vote for Mergers and Other Corporate Reorganizations | | | Under Delaware law, a majority of outstanding shares entitled to vote, as well as approval by the board of directors is required for a merger or a sale of substantially all of the assets of the corporation. Generally, Delaware law does not require a stockholder vote of the surviving corporation in a merger (unless the corporation provides otherwise in its certificate of incorporation) if: (a) the plan of merger does not amend the existing certificate of incorporation; (b) each share of stock of the surviving corporation outstanding immediately before the effective date of the merger is an identical outstanding share after the merger; and (c) either no shares of common stock of the surviving corporation and no shares, securities or obligations convertible into such stock are to be issued or delivered under the plan of merger, or the authorized unissued shares or shares of common stock of the surviving corporation to be issued or delivered under the plan of merger plus those initially issuable upon conversion of any other shares, securities or obligations to be issued or delivered under such plan do not exceed 20% of the shares of common stock of such constituent corporation outstanding immediately prior to the effective date of the merger. | | | Under Nevada law, a majority of outstanding shares entitled to vote, as well as approval by the board of directors is required for a merger or a sale of substantially all of the assets of the corporation. Generally, Nevada law does not require a stockholder vote of the surviving corporation in a merger if: (a) the plan of merger does not amend the existing articles of incorporation; (b) each share of stock of the surviving corporation outstanding immediately before the effective date of the merger is an identical outstanding share after the merger; (c) the number of voting shares outstanding immediately after the merger, plus the number of voting shares issued as a result of the merger, either by the conversion of securities issued pursuant to the merger or the exercise of rights and warrants issued pursuant to the merger, will not exceed by more than 20% the total number of voting shares of the surviving domestic corporation outstanding immediately before the merger; and (d) the number of participating shares outstanding immediately after the merger, plus the number of participating shares issuable as a result of the merger, either by the conversion of securities issued pursuant to the merger or the exercise of rights and warrants issued pursuant to the merger, will not exceed by more than 20% the total number of participating shares | | | Nevada and Delaware law are substantially similar in relation to stockholder approval of mergers and other corporate reorganizations. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | | | | outstanding immediately before the merger. | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation and Delaware Bylaws do not change this statutory rule. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws do not change this statutory rule. | | | | |
| Special Meetings of Stockholders | | | Under Delaware law, a special meeting of stockholders may be called by the board of directors or by such persons as may be authorized by the certificate of incorporation or by the bylaws. | | | Under Nevada law, unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, the entire board of directors, any two directors or the president may call annual and special meetings of the stockholders and directors. | | | Nevada law provides for explicit authority to call special meetings to any two directors and the president, whereas Delaware law leaves discretion to the certificate of incorporation or the bylaws. | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide that a special meeting may be called at any time by the chairperson of the Board, the CEO, or by a majority of the Board. | | | The Company’s existing Bylaws provide that special meetings of stockholders may be called by the chairman of the Board, the CEO, or the majority of the board. | | | The Rezolute-Nevada Bylaws and the Company’s existing Bylaws are substantially the same. | |
| Failure to Hold an Annual Meeting of Stockholders | | | Delaware law provides that if an annual meeting for election of directors is not held on the date designated or an action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting has not been taken within 30 days after the date designated for the annual meeting, or if no date has been designated, for a period of 13 months after the latest to occur of the organization of the corporation, its last annual meeting or the last action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting, the Court of Chancery may summarily order a meeting to be held upon the application of any stockholder or director. | | | Nevada law provides that if a corporation fails to elect directors within 18 months after the last election of directors, a Nevada district court will have jurisdiction in equity and may order an election upon petition of one or more stockholders holding at least 15% of the voting power. | | | Delaware law provides for a shorter interval than Nevada law (13 months vs. 18 months) before a shareholder can apply to a court to order meeting for the election of directors. Nevada law requires that application to be made by a stockholder holding at least 15% of the voting power, whereas Delaware law permits any stockholder or director to make the application. | |
| The Certificate of Incorporation and Delaware Bylaws do not change this statutory rule. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws do not change this statutory rule. | | | | | |||
| Limitation on Director Liability | | | Under Delaware law, if a corporation’s certificate of incorporation so provides, the personal liability of a director for breach of fiduciary duty as a director may be eliminated or | | | Under Nevada law, unless the articles of incorporation or an amendment thereto (filed on or after October 1, 2003) provides for greater individual liability, a director or officer is | | | Delaware law is more extensive in the enumeration of actions under which the Company may not eliminate a director’s personal liability. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | limited. A corporation’s certificate of incorporation, however, may not limit or eliminate a director’s personal liability (a) for any breach of the director’s duty of loyalty to the corporation or its stockholders, (b) for acts or omissions not in good faith or involving intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law, (c) for the payment of unlawful dividends, stock repurchases or redemptions, or (d) for any transaction in which the director received an improper personal benefit. | | | not individually liable to the corporation or its stockholders or creditors for any damages as a result of any act or failure to act in his or her capacity as a director or officer unless it is proven that: (a) the director’s or officer’s act or failure to act constituted a breach of his or her fiduciary duties as a director or officer; and (b) the breach of those duties involved intentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law. | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation do not change this statutory provision. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation do not change this statutory provision. | | | | |
| Indemnification | | | Under Delaware law, a corporation may indemnify any person who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party to any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative (other than an action by or in the right of the corporation) by reason of the fact that the person is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, against expenses (including attorneys’ fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by the person in connection with such action, suit or proceeding if: the person acted in good faith and in a manner the person reasonably believed to be in or | | | Under Nevada law, a corporation may indemnify any person who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party to any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative, except an action by or in the right of the corporation, by reason of the fact that the person is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, against expenses, including attorneys’ fees, judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by the person in connection with the action, suit or proceeding if the person: (a) is not liable pursuant to NRS 78.138; or (b) acted in good faith and in a | | | | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | not opposed to the best interests of the corporation, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe the person’s conduct was unlawful. With respect to actions by or in the right of the corporation, no indemnification shall be made with respect to any claim, issue or matter as to which such person shall have been adjudged to be liable to the corporation unless and only to the extent that the Court of Chancery or the court in which such action or suit is brought shall determine upon application that, despite the adjudication of liability but in view of all the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses which such court shall deem proper. A director or officer who is successful, on the merits or otherwise, in defense of any proceeding subject to the Delaware corporate statutes’ indemnification provisions shall be indemnified against expenses (including attorneys’ fees) actually and reasonably incurred by such person in connection therewith. | | | manner which he or she reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the corporation, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe the conduct was unlawful. However, indemnification may not be made for any claim, issue or matter as to which such a person has been adjudged to be liable to the corporation or for amounts paid in settlement to the corporation, unless and only to the extent that the court in which the action or suit was brought determines upon application that in view of all the circumstances of the case, the person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses as the court deems proper. To the extent that such person has been successful on the merits or otherwise in defense of any proceeding subject to the Nevada indemnification laws, the corporation shall indemnify him or her against expenses, including attorneys’ fees, actually and reasonably incurred by him or her in connection with the defense. | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation and the Delaware Bylaws do not change this statutory provision. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws do not change this statutory provision. | | | | |
| Advancement of Expenses | | | Delaware law provides that expenses incurred by an officer or director of the corporation in defending any civil, criminal, administrative or investigative action, suit or proceeding may be paid by the corporation in advance of the final disposition of such action, suit or proceeding upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf | | | Nevada law provides that the articles of incorporation, the bylaws or an agreement made by the corporation may provide that the expenses of officers and directors incurred in defending a civil or criminal action, suit or proceeding must be paid by the corporation as they are incurred and in advance of the final | | | | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | of such director or officer to repay such amount if it is ultimately determined that such person is not entitled to be indemnified by the corporation as authorized under the indemnification laws of Delaware. Such expenses may be so paid upon such terms and conditions as the corporation deems appropriate. Under Delaware law, unless otherwise provided in its certificate of incorporation or bylaws, a corporation has the discretion whether or not to advance expenses. | | | disposition of the action, suit or proceeding, upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of the director or officer to repay the amount if it is ultimately determined by a court of competent jurisdiction that the director or officer is not entitled to be indemnified by the corporation. | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Bylaws provide for advanced payment of expenses in accordance with the statutory provision. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws do not alter this statutory provision. | | | | |
| Declaration and Payment of Dividends | | | Under Delaware law, subject to any restriction contained in a corporation’s certificate of incorporation, the board of directors may declare, and the corporation may pay, dividends or other distributions upon the shares of its capital stock either (a) out of “surplus” or (b) in the event that there is no surplus, out of the net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year, unless net assets (total assets in excess of total liabilities) are less than the capital of all outstanding preferred stock. “Surplus” is defined as the excess of the net assets of the corporation over the amount determined to be the capital of the corporation by the board of directors (which amount cannot be less than the aggregate par value of all issued shares of capital stock). | | | Under Nevada law, except as otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation, a board of directors may authorize and the corporation may make distributions to its stockholders, including distributions on shares that are partially paid. However, no distribution may be made if, after giving effect to such distribution: (a) the corporation would not be able to pay its debts as they become due in the usual course of business; or (b) except as otherwise specifically allowed by the articles of incorporation, the corporation’s total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus the amount that would be needed, if the corporation were to be dissolved at the time of distribution, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of stockholders whose preferential rights are superior to those receiving the distribution. | | | Delaware law is more restrictive than Nevada law with respect to when dividends may be declared and paid. | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation does not change this statutory provision. | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation do not change this statutory provision. | | | | |
| Business Combinations | | | Delaware law prohibits, in certain circumstances, a “business combination” between the corporation and an “interested stockholder” within three years of the stockholder becoming an “interested stockholder.” Generally, an “interested stockholder” is a holder who, directly or indirectly, controls 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock or is an affiliate of the corporation and was the owner of 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock at any time within the three-year period prior to the date upon which the status of an “interested stockholder” is being determined. A “business combination” includes a merger or consolidation, a sale or other disposition of assets having an aggregate market value equal to 10% or more of the consolidated assets of the corporation or the aggregate market value of the outstanding stock of the corporation and certain transactions that would increase the interested stockholder’s proportionate share ownership in the corporation. This provision does not apply where, among other things, (i) the transaction which resulted in the individual becoming an interested stockholder is approved by the corporation’s board of directors prior to the date the interested stockholder acquired such 15% interest, (ii) upon consummation of | | | Nevada law prohibits certain business combinations between a Nevada corporation and an interested stockholder for three years after such person becomes an interested stockholder. Generally, an interested stockholder is a holder who is the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of a corporation’s outstanding stock and at any time within three years immediately before the date in question was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the then outstanding stock of the corporation. After the three year period, business combinations remain prohibited unless they are (a) approved by the board of directors prior to the date that the person first became an interested stockholder or a majority of the outstanding voting power not beneficially owned by the interested party, or (b) the interested stockholder satisfies certain fair-value requirements. An interested stockholder is (i) a person that beneficially owns, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting power of the outstanding voting shares of a corporation, or (ii) an affiliate or associate of the corporation who, at any time within the past three years, was an interested stockholder of the corporation. | | | | |
| Provision | | | Delaware Law and Rezolute-Delaware’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Nevada Law and Rezolute-Nevada’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws | | | Notes | |
| | | | the transaction which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested stockholder owned at least 85% of the outstanding voting stock of the corporation at the time the transaction commenced, or (iii) at or after the date the person becomes an interested stockholder, the business combination is approved by a majority of the board of directors of the corporation and an affirmative vote of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding voting stock at an annual or special meeting and not by written consent, excluding stock not owned by the interested stockholder. This provision also does not apply if a stockholder acquires a 15% interest inadvertently and divests itself of such ownership and would not have been a 15% stockholder in the preceding three years but for the inadvertent acquisition of ownership. | | | | | | | |
| | | | The Delaware Certificate of Incorporation has not opted out of this statutory provision | | | The Company’s existing Articles of Incorporation has not opted out of this statutory provision. | | | | |
Name | | | Age | | | Position | | | Date Appointed | |
Young-Jin Kim | | | 64 | | | Chairman of the Board of Directors | | | February 10, 2019 | |
Nevan Charles Elam | | | 53 | | | Chief Executive Officer and Director | | | January 31, 2013 | |
Philippe Fauchet | | | 63 | | | Director | | | November 20, 2019 | |
Gil Labrucherie | | | 49 | | | Director | | | November 20, 2019 | |
Wladimir Hogenhuis | | | 56 | | | Director | | | March 2, 2021 | |
Nerissa Kreher | | | 48 | | | Director | | | March 2, 2021 | |
Brian Roberts | | | 46 | | | Senior Vice President of Clinical Development | | | October 23, 2020 | |
Keith Vendola | | | 49 | | | Former Chief Strategy Officer | | | May 16, 2018 | |
Sankaram Mantripragada, Ph.D. | | | 62 | | | Scientist Emeritus | | | January 31, 2013 | |
Name and Position | | | Fiscal Year | | | Salary | | | Bonus | | | Stock Option Awards | | | All Other Compensation | | | Total | | ||||||||||||||||||
Nevan Charles Elam, | | | | | 2020 | | | | | $ | 490,000(1) | | | | | $ | 97,020(4) | | | | | $ | 2,688,000(6) | | | | | $ | 23,683(7) | | | | | $ | 3,298,703 | | |
Chief Executive Officer | | | | | 2019 | | | | | | 453,333(1) | | | | | | 258,750(5) | | | | | | — | | | | | | 20,163(7) | | | | | | 732,246 | | |
Sankaram Mantripragada, | | | | | 2020 | | | | | $ | 350,000(2) | | | | | $ | 57,750(4) | | | | | $ | 627,000(6) | | | | | $ | 31,883(8) | | | | | $ | 1,066,633 | | |
Scientist Emeritus | | | | | 2019 | | | | | | 350,000(2) | | | | | | 181,125(5) | | | | | | — | | | | | | 31,269(8) | | | | | | 562,394 | | |
Keith Vendola, | | | | | 2020 | | | | | $ | 365,000(3) | | | | | $ | 36,135(4) | | | | | $ | 538,000(6) | | | | | $ | 13,581(9) | | | | | $ | 952,716 | | |
Former Chief Financial Officer | | | | | 2019 | | | | | | 330,000(3) | | | | | | 8,044(5) | | | | | | 395,723(6) | | | | | | 1,605 | | | | | | 735,372 | | |
Name | | | Grant Date | | | Vesting Type | | | Number of Securities Underlying | | | Option Exercise Price | | | Option Expiration Date | | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Unexercised Options | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Exercisable | | | Unexercisable | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nevan Charles Elam(1): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | 3/26/14 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 27,000 | | | | | | — | | | | | $ | 156.00 | | | | | | 3/26/21 | | |
| | | | | 2/23/15 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 34,800 | | | | | | — | | | | | | 103.00 | | | | | | 2/23/25 | | |
| | | | | 12/28/16 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 61,250 | | | | | | 8,750 | | | | | | 60.00 | | | | | | 12/28/16 | | |
| | | | | 7/31/19 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 95,833 | | | | | | 104,167 | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | 7/31/29 | | |
| | | | | 7/31/19 | | | | | | Hybrid | | | | | | — | | | | | | 100,000(2) | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | 7/31/29 | | |
Total for Mr. Elam | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 218,883 | | | | | | 212,917 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Sankaram Mantripragada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | 3/26/14 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 10,000 | | | | | | — | | | | | $ | 156.00 | | | | | | 3/26/21 | | |
| | | 2/23/15 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 13,900 | | | | | | — | | | | | | 103.00 | | | | | | 2/23/25 | | | ||
| | | 5/12/17 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 15,417 | | | | | | 4,583 | | | | | | 60.00 | | | | | | 5/12/27 | | | ||
| | | 6/30/17 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 15,000 | | | | | | 5,000 | | | | | | 60.00 | | | | | | 6/30/27 | | | ||
| | | 7/31/19 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 22,521 | | | | | | 24,479 | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | 7/31/29 | | | ||
| | | | | 7/31/19 | | | | | | Hybrid | | | | | | — | | | | | | 23,000(2) | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | 7/31/29 | | |
Total for Dr. Mantripragada | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 76,838 | | | | | | 57,062 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Keith Vendola: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | 7/2/18 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 9,583 | | | | | | 10,417 | | | | | $ | 26.00 | | | | | | 7/2/28 | | |
| | | 7/31/19 | | | | | | Time | | | | | | 19,167 | | | | | | 20,833 | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | 7/31/29 | | | ||
| | | | | 7/31/19 | | | | | | Hybrid | | | | | | — | | | | | | 20,000(2) | | | | | | 14.50 | | | | | | 7/31/29 | | |
Total for Mr. Vendola | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 28,750 | | | | | | 51,250 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Appendix A — Form of Proxy Card | | | | |
| Appendix B — 2021 Equity Plan | | | | |
| Appendix C — Agreement and Plan of Merger | | | | |
| Appendix D — Articles of Incorporation for Nevada Reincorporation | | | | |
| Appendix E — Bylaws for Nevada Reincorporation | | | | |
| | | | REZOLUTE, INC | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | By: | |
| | | | Its: | |