Commitments and Contingencies | 10 Legal Proceedings On September 21, 2020, a putative stockholder class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York styled Ye Zhou v. NextCure, Inc., et. al., Case 1:20-cv-0772 (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Ye Zhou Action”). On February 26, 2021, the Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint that asserts claims against us, certain of our officers and members of our board of directors, and the underwriters in our May 2019 initial public offering and November 2019 underwritten secondary public offering. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), with respect to statements made regarding the Company’s NC318 product candidate and the FIND-IO platform. The complaint seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of our securities between May 8, 2019 and July 14, 2020. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint on April 27, 2021, and on July 12, 2023 the court issued a memorandum opinion and order granting defendants’ motion to dismiss against all counts of the consolidated amended complaint. On July 13, 2023, judgement on behalf of Company and the other named defendants was entered, and the case for the Ye Zhou Action was closed by the court. Plaintiffs in the Ye Zhou Action have until August 11, 2023 to file a Notice of Appeal with the court should they desire to appeal the order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss. On March 24, 2021, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Southern Division, styled Zach Liu v. Richman et. al., Case:21-cv-00754 (the “Liu Action”), alleging breaches of fiduciary duty by officers and/or directors, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, and violations of the Exchange Act and the Securities Act. The complaint seeks unspecified damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, declaratory relief, corporate governance changes, and restitution. On May 17, 2021, the Court granted the parties’ joint motion to stay the Liu Action pending resolution of the defendants’ motion to dismiss filed in respect of the Ye Zhou Action. On August 1, 2023, Company filed a notice with the court in the Liu Action advising of the result of the motion to dismiss an entry of judgement in the Ye Zhou Action. The parties will be meeting and conferring to establish jointly a litigation schedule for the Liu Action, and it is unknown at this time when substantive litigation activity will recommence in the Liu Action. The Company intends to vigorously defend the Liu Action and any appeal of the Ye Zhou Action (if filed). Based on the Company’s assessment of the facts underlying these claims, the uncertainty of litigation, and the preliminary stage of these cases, the Company cannot estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss that may result from these actions. On December 14, 2021, a purported misappropriation of certain trade secrets lawsuit was filed in Federal District Court for the District of Delaware, styled Immunaccel, LLC v. NextCure, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-01755-UNA (the “Immunaccel Action”). The lawsuit’s original complaint alleged that the Company misappropriated certain trade secrets belonging to Immunaccel, LLC (“Immunaccel”) related to a drug discovery and screening platform named IMMUNE 3D. The complaint alleged two causes of action, one under the Delaware Uniform Trade Secrets Act and another under the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the original complaint on April 22, 2022. In response to the Company’s motion to dismiss, Immunaccel filed an amended complaint on June 21, 2022 (“Amended Complaint”). The Amended Complaint added as parties to the Immunaccel Action Screen Therapeutics LLC (“Screen”), an affiliate entity of Immunaccel, and the Company’s CEO, Michael Richman, in his capacity as an individual. The Amended Complaint alleged that Mr. Richman breached certain contractual and fiduciary duties owed to Screen due to Mr. Richman’s prior relationship as an investor in, and purported advisor to, Screen. The Amended Complaint alleged four causes of action for breach of contract against Mr. Richman and three related causes of action against Mr. Richman for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and fraudulent misrepresentation. In addition to two trade secrets causes of action similar to those previously alleged in the original complaint against the Company, the Amended Complaint also alleged that the Company tortiously interfered with the contracts between Mr. Richman and Screen and that the Company aided and abetted the alleged breach of fiduciary duty by Mr. Richman. The Company and Mr. Richman each separately filed separate motions to dismiss the Amended Complaint on August 5, 2022, jointly seeking to dismiss all claims asserted against them by the plaintiffs. The Immunaccel Action was dismissed with prejudice by the court on June 21, 2023 following the Company, Mr. Richman, Screen, and Immunaccel settling all claims, including any unpleaded claims and counterclaims, relating to the Immunaccel Action. The settlement and any agreements entered into in connection therewith are not material to the Company. |