Commitments and Contingencies | 8. Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings From time to time, the Company is subject to various legal proceedings or claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company accrues a liability when the Company's management believes that it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated, and as of June 30, 2022, the Company has not recorded any such liabilities. The following is a brief description of the more significant legal proceedings. Securities Class Actions On June 25, 2021 , plaintiffs Fan Wang and Hang Gao filed a putative securities class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against the Company and the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer Dr. Leen Kawas, captioned Wang v. Athira Pharma, Inc., et al. , No. 2:21-cv-00861. Plaintiffs Wang and Gao assert claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and SEC Rule 10b-5, alleging that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements and omitted material adverse facts regarding the Company’s business. Specifically, the Wang plaintiffs allege that the Company failed to disclose to investors that certain research conducted by Dr. Kawas was allegedly tainted by scientific misconduct during her doctoral work at WSU, including the manipulation of data, and that as a result, the defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading. The Wang plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, and reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees. That same day, on June 25, 2021 , plaintiff Harshdeep Jawandha filed a putative securities class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against the Company, Dr. Kawas, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, certain members of the Company’s board of directors at the time of the Company’s IPO, as well as the IPO underwriters, captioned Jawandha v. Athira Pharma, Inc., et al. , No. 2:21-cv-00862. The Jawandha complaint asserts violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"), alleging that that the Company’s IPO registration statement was materially false and misleading because it omitted to state that certain of Dr. Kawas’s published doctoral research papers at WSU contained allegedly improperly altered images, that the research was allegedly foundational to the Company’s efforts to develop treatments for Alzheimer’s disease, and that the defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading. The plaintiff seeks unspecified compensatory damages, and reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees. Also on June 25, 2021 , plaintiffs Timothy Slyne and Tai Slyne filed a putative securities class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against the Company, Dr. Kawas, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, and the same members of the Company’s board of directors and underwriters as in the Jawandha complaint, captioned Slyne v. Athira Pharma, Inc. et al. , No. 2:21-cv-00864. The Slyne complaint asserts violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act, alleging that purported issues with Dr. Kawas’s doctoral research at WSU should have been disclosed in the Company’s IPO registration statement. The Slyne plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory damages, reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, and injunctive and other equitable relief. On August 9, 2021, the court issued an order consolidating the three cases. On October 5, 2021, the district court issued an order appointing lead plaintiffs and approved their selection of lead and liaison counsel. On January 7, 2022, lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, which asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5 and Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act. The consolidated amended complaint is brought against the Company, Dr. Kawas, the Company’s chief financial officer, certain members of the Company's board of directors at the time of the Company's IPO and secondary public offering (SPO), and the IPO and SPO underwriters. As with the previous complaints, it is based on allegations that the IPO and SPO registration statements and/or other public statements were materially false and misleading because they omitted to state that certain of Dr. Kawas’s published doctoral research papers at WSU contained allegedly improperly altered images. Lead plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory damages, as well as equitable and injunctive relief on behalf of themselves and the purported class. On March 8, 2022, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss lead plaintiffs’ consolidated amended complaint for failure to state a claim under the federal securities laws. On July 29, 2022, the court issued an order granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss. The order dismissed the Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) claims arising under the Exchange Act, dismissed the Section 11 claim arising under the Securities Act as to all defendants other than the Company and Dr. Kawas, dismissed the Section 12(a)(2) claim arising under the Securities Act as to the lead plaintiffs, and dismissed the Section 15 claim arising under the Securities Act against all defendants other than Dr. Kawas. Lead plaintiffs have until August 19, 2022 to file a second consolidated amended complaint. If lead plaintiffs do not file a second consolidated amended complaint, the parties are required to file a joint status report by September 15, 2022. Shareholder Derivative Actions On April 14, 2022, a shareholder derivative action was filed by plaintiff Stephen Bushansky in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against certain current and former members of the Company’s board of directors, titled Bushansky v. Kawas et al. , No. 2:22-cv-497. Plaintiff purports to bring the action derivatively on behalf of the Company, which is a nominal defendant to the action. The derivative complaint alleges that the Company’s board of directors breached its fiduciary duties by failing to prevent alleged misstatements in the Company’s public filings, failing to discover altered images in certain research papers, and failing to take appropriate action. The derivative complaint asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act as well as claims for breach of fiduciary duty, contribution and indemnification, aiding and abetting, and waste of corporate assets. The derivative complaint seeks unspecified damages, disgorgement of profits, benefits, and other compensation received by the individual defendants, restitution, declaratory relief, and an award of costs and expenses to the derivative plaintiff, including attorneys’ fees. On May 6, 2022, a second shareholder derivative action was filed by plaintiff Thomas Houlihan in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company, titled Houlihan v. Kawas et al ., No. 2:22-cv-620. Plaintiff purports to bring the action derivatively on behalf of the Company, which is a nominal defendant to the action. The derivative complaint alleges that certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties by failing to prevent alleged misstatements in the Company’s public filings and failing to take appropriate action regarding altered images in certain research papers. The derivative complaint asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act as well as claims for breach of fiduciary duties, contribution, and indemnification. The derivative complaint seeks unspecified damages, unspecified corporate governance reforms, restitution, and an award of costs and expenses to the derivative plaintiff, including attorneys’ fees. On May 26, 2022, the court issued an order consolidating the cases and staying them until further order of the court. The Company cannot predict the outcome of these suits, and failure by the Company to obtain a favorable resolution of these suits could have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition. The Company’s chances of success on the merits are still uncertain and any possible loss or range of loss cannot be reasonably estimated and as such the Company has not recorded a liability as of June 30, 2022. Operating Leases The Company has operating leases for laboratory and office facilities in Bothell, Washington that expire in August 2027 . The initial terms of the leases range from 6.3 to 7 years and the Company has options to extend the leases for an additional five years that it is not reasonably certain to exercise . As of June 30, 2022, the Company was not party to any finance leases. The following table reconciles the Company’s undiscounted operating lease cash flows to its operating lease liability (in thousands): June 30, Remaining 2022 $ 228 2023 466 2024 480 2025 494 Thereafter 856 Total undiscounted lease payments 2,524 Present value adjustment for minimum lease ( 463 ) Net lease liability $ 2,061 The weighted average remaining lease term and the weighted average discount rate used to determine the operating lease liability were as follows: June 30, Weighted average remaining lease term (years) 5.2 Weighted average discount rate 8.1 % Operating lease expense and variable lease expense consisted of the following (in thousands): Three Months Ended June 30, Six Months Ended June 30, 2022 2021 2022 2021 Operating lease expense $ 88 $ 85 $ 177 $ 146 Variable lease expense 41 20 85 40 |