ANEB Anebulo Pharmaceuticals Inc

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information in this Quarterly Report, before deciding whether to purchase, hold or sell shares of our common stock. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this Quarterly Report and those we may make from time to time. When evaluating our business, you should consider all of the factors described as well as the other information in our Annual Report and in this Quarterly Report, including our financial statements and the related notes, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation” and Item 1A, “Risk Factors.” We have marked with an asterisk (*) those risk factors that did not appear as risk factors in, or contain changes to the similarly titled risk factors included in, Item 1A of our Annual Report. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects would likely be materially and adversely affected. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock would likely decline and you may lose all or part of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations.

Risks Related to our Business, Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We have not generated any revenue since our inception and expect to incur future losses and may never become profitable.*

We have not generated any revenue. As of March 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $54.7 million, which includes a fair value adjustment for Milestone Warrants of approximately $26.6 million. The likelihood of our future success must be considered in light of the expenses, difficulties, complications and delays often encountered in connection with the clinical trials that will be conducted and on the development of new solutions to common addictions. These potential challenges include unanticipated clinical trial delays, poor data, changes in the regulatory and competitive landscape and additional costs and expenses that may exceed current budget estimates. In order to complete certain clinical trials and otherwise operate pursuant to our current business strategy, we anticipate that we will incur increased operating expenses. In addition, we expect to incur significant losses and experience negative cash flow in the future as we fund the operating losses and capital expenditures. We recognize that if we are unable to generate sufficient revenues or source funding, we will not be able to continue operations as currently contemplated, complete planned clinical trials and/or achieve profitability. Our failure to achieve or maintain profitability will also negatively impact the value of our shares. If we are unsuccessful in addressing these risks, then we may need to curtail our business activities.

The future success of our business cannot be determined at this time, and we do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales in the near term. In addition, we have no experience in obtaining regulatory approval for and commercializing drug products on our own and face a number of challenges with respect to development and commercialization efforts, including, among other challenges:

If we are unable to meet any one or more of these challenges successfully, our ability to effectively obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our products could be limited, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We currently rely on a license from a third party, and in the future may rely on additional licenses from other third parties, in relation to our development of ANEB-001, and if we fail to comply with our obligations under our current or future intellectual property license agreements or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our current or any future licensors, we could lose intellectual property rights that are important to our business.

We are, and expect to continue to be, reliant upon third-party licensors for certain patent and other intellectual property rights that are important or necessary to the development of our product candidates, including ANEB-001. On May 26, 2020, we entered into an exclusive license agreement (the “License Agreement”) with Vernalis, pursuant to which Vernalis granted to us an exclusive license to develop and commercialize our ANEB-001 product candidate. Under the License Agreement, we have the sole discretion to carry out the development and commercialization of ANEB-001, including obtaining regulatory approvals. We retain the sole right over certain patent rights (including patent applications) and know-how controlled by us that are necessary or reasonably useful to developing and commercializing the licensed product during the term of the License Agreement. The License Agreement imposes, and we expect that any future license agreement will impose, specified diligence, milestone payment, royalty, commercialization, development and other obligations on us and require us to meet development timelines, or to exercise diligent or commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products, in order to maintain the license.

Furthermore, our licensors have, or may have in the future, the right to terminate a license if we materially breach the agreement and fail to cure such breach within a specified period or in the event we undergo certain bankruptcy events. In spite of our best efforts, our current or any future licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements. If our license agreements are terminated, we may lose our rights to develop and commercialize product candidates and technology, lose patent protection, experience significant delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates and technology, and incur liability for damages. If these in-licenses are terminated, or if the underlying intellectual property fails to provide the intended exclusivity, our competitors or other third parties could have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products and technologies identical or competitive to ours and we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates and technology. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties, including our competitors, to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses and to compete with any product candidates we may develop and our technology. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our License Agreement with Vernalis continues for an indefinite term and terminates, among other ways, under the following circumstances: (i) on its terms when royalties and other sums cease to be payable thereunder; (ii) by us at any time by providing 60 days’ prior notice; or (iii) upon an event of default, such as a material breach or insolvency of the other party. Upon termination, all rights and licenses granted by Vernalis will revert immediately to Vernalis; all outstanding sums as of the termination date will be immediately due and payable to Vernalis; and we will return or destroy, at Vernalis’s request, any regulatory or other materials provided by Vernalis pursuant to the License Agreement.

Disputes may also arise between us and Vernalis or future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:

If we do not prevail in such disputes, we may lose any or all of our rights under such license agreements, experience significant delays in the development and commercialization of our products and technologies, or incur liability for damages, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensor(s) and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensor(s), including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties, including our competitors, to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses and to compete with our products.

In addition, the agreements under which we currently and in the future license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize any affected products or services, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Absent the license agreements, we may infringe patents subject to those agreements, and if the license agreements are terminated, we may be subject to litigation by the licensor. Litigation could result in substantial costs to us and distract our management. If we do not prevail, we may be required to pay damages, including treble damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses and royalties or be enjoined from selling ANEB-001, which could adversely affect our ability to offer products or services, our ability to continue operations and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We currently have no product revenue and will need to raise additional capital in the future, which may be unavailable to us or may cause dilution or place significant restrictions on our ability to operate.*

We may be unable to generate sufficient revenue or cash flow to fund our operations. We expect that our cash at March 31, 2023, will enable us to fund our current and planned operating expenses and capital expenditures into the second quarter of calendar year 2024. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect, and we may exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development of our programs, we are unable to estimate the amounts of increased capital outlays and operating expenses associated with completing the research and development of our product candidate. Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue from sales of any of our current or future product candidates, we will need to seek additional equity or debt financing or potential collaboration, license or development agreements to provide the capital required to maintain or expand our operations, continue the development of our product candidate, build our sales and marketing capabilities, promote brand identity, develop or acquire complementary technologies, products or businesses, or provide for our working capital requirements and other operating and general corporate purposes.

We currently do not have any arrangements or credit facilities as a source of funds, and we make no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient additional capital in the future if needed on acceptable terms, or at all. If such financing is not available on satisfactory terms, or is not available at all, we may be required to delay, scale back or eliminate the development of our current or future product candidates and other business. This may materially adversely affect our operations and financial condition as well as our ability to achieve business objectives and maintain competitiveness.

If we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities and/or equity-linked securities, the percentage ownership of our existing stockholders may be reduced, and accordingly these stockholders may experience substantial dilution. We may also issue equity securities and/or equity-linked securities that provide for rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of our common stock. Given our need for cash and that equity and equity-linked issuances are very common types of fundraising for companies like us, the risk of dilution is particularly significant for our stockholders.

Debt financing, if obtained, may involve agreements that include liens on our assets and covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions such as incurring additional debt. Debt financing could also be required to be repaid regardless of our operating results.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements, we may be required to relinquish some rights to our current or future products or revenue streams or to grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Any additional capital raising efforts may divert the attention of our management from day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

We have limited operating history as a publicly-traded company, and our inexperience could materially and adversely affect us and our stockholders.

We became a public company in May 2021 and, therefore, we have limited operating history as a publicly traded company. Our board of directors and management team have overall responsibility for our management. As a publicly-traded company, we are required to develop and implement substantial control systems, policies and procedures in order to satisfy our periodic SEC reporting and Nasdaq obligations. We cannot assure you that management’s past experience will be sufficient to successfully develop and implement these systems, policies and procedures and to operate our company. Failure to do so could jeopardize our status as a public company, and the loss of such status may materially and adversely affect us and our stockholders.

Our current and future operations substantially depend on our Founder and Chief Executive Officer and our ability to hire other key personnel, the loss of any of whom could disrupt our business operations.

Our business depends and will continue to depend in substantial part on the continued service of Joseph F. Lawler, M.D., Ph.D., our founder and a director, and Simon Allen, our Chief Executive Officer and a director. The loss of the services of Dr. Lawler or Mr. Allen would significantly impede implementation and execution of our business strategy and may result in the failure to reach our goals. Further, the loss of either Dr. Lawler or Mr. Allen would be negatively perceived in the capital markets. We do not have “key-man” life insurance for our benefit on the lives of either Dr. Lawler or Mr. Allen.

Our future viability and ability to achieve sales and profits will also depend on our ability to attract, train, retain and motivate highly qualified personnel in the diverse areas required for continuing operations. There is a risk that we will be unable to attract, train, retain or motivate qualified personnel, both near term or in the future, and the failure to do so may severely damage our prospects.

Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry could adversely affect our current and projected business operations and our financial condition and results of operations.*

Adverse developments that affect financial institutions, such as events involving liquidity that are rumored or actual, have in the past and may in the future lead to bank failures and market-wide liquidity problems. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as receiver. Similarly, on March 12, 2023, Signature Bank and Silvergate Capital Corp. were each swept into receivership. In addition, on May 1, 2023, the FDIC seized First Republic Bank and sold its assets to JPMorgan Chase & Co. While the U.S. Department of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board have implemented a program to provide up to $25 billion of loans to financial institutions secured by certain of such government securities held by financial institutions to mitigate the risk of potential losses on the sale of such instruments, widespread demands for customer withdrawals or other liquidity needs of financial institutions for immediate liquidity may exceed the capacity of such program, there is no guarantee that such programs will be sufficient. Additionally, it is uncertain whether the U.S. Department of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board will provide access to uninsured funds in the future in the event of the closure of other banks or financial institutions, or that they would do so in a timely fashion.

While we have not experienced any adverse impact to our liquidity or to our current and projected business operations, financial condition or results of operations as a result of the matters relating to SVB, Signature Bank, Silvergate Capital Corp and First Republic Bank, uncertainty remains over liquidity concerns in the broader financial services industry, and our business, our business partners or industry as a whole may be adversely impacted in ways that we cannot predict at this time.

Although we assess our banking relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to cash in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect the financial institutions with which we have banking relationships. These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry. These factors could also include factors involving financial markets or the financial services industry generally. The results of events or concerns that involve one or more of these factors could include a variety of material and adverse impacts on our current and projected business operations and our financial condition and results of operations. These could include, but may not be limited to, delayed access to deposits or other financial assets or the uninsured loss of deposits or other financial assets; or termination of cash management arrangements and/or delays in accessing or actual loss of funds subject to cash management arrangements.

In addition, widespread investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, financial obligations or fulfill our other obligations, result in breaches of our financial and/or contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws. Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity and our current and/or projected business operations and financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for important aspects of ANEB-001, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products that are similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our current or future product candidates may be adversely affected.

Our commercial success will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to ANEB-001, our product candidate. On October 12, 2021, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued to us U.S. Patent No. 11,141,404, titled “Formulations and Methods for Treating Acute Cannabinoid Overdose.” The issued patent describes the use of our investigational drug ANEB-001 to treat ACI, and is expected to provide patent protection through at least 2040. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing additional patent applications in the United States and abroad related to aspects of our product candidate that are important to our business and maintaining and protecting our existing patent filings. Given that the development of our product candidates is at an early stage, our intellectual property portfolio with respect to certain aspects of our product candidates is also at an early stage. For example, we have filed or intend to file additional patent applications related to aspects of ANEB-001, our product candidate; however, there can be no assurance that any such patent applications will issue as granted patents around the world. The requirements for patentability differ in certain countries, and certain countries have heightened requirements for patentability. Further, in some cases, we have only filed provisional patent applications on certain aspects of our technology and product candidate, and provisional patent applications are not eligible to become an issued patent until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of the filing date of the applicable provisional patent application. Any failure to file a non-provisional patent application within this timeline could cause us to lose the ability to obtain patent protection for the inventions disclosed in the associated provisional patent applications.

Further, any changes we make to our product candidates to cause them to have what we view as more advantageous properties may not be covered by our existing patent applications, and we may be required to file new applications and/or seek other forms of protection for any such altered product candidates. There can be no assurance that we would be able to secure patent protection that would adequately cover any such altered product candidates. There can also be no assurance that any such patent applications will be issued as granted patents, and even if they do issue, such patent claims may be insufficient to prevent third parties, such as our competitors, from utilizing our technology. Any failure to obtain or maintain patent protection related to aspects of our product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Even if we obtain additional issued or granted patents with respect to our product candidates, we cannot be certain that such patents or any of our existing patents will not later be found to be invalid and/or unenforceable.

The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we may enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, distribution partners, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection.

The patent position of pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our current and future patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued, and even if issued, the patents may not meaningfully protect our current or future product candidates, effectively prevent competitors and third parties from commercializing competitive products or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative products in a non-infringing manner.

Moreover, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Patent applications we own currently or that in the future issue as patents may not be issued in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents to which we have rights may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented, or invalidated by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether our product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity, or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) or post-issuance worldwide become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant and inter partes review, or interference proceedings or other similar proceedings challenging our patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding, or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate or render unenforceable, such patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our product candidates or other technologies and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, our patents may be subject to post-grant challenge proceedings in the United States, such as post-grant or inter partes review at the USPTO or oppositions proceedings in a foreign patent office, that challenge our priority of invention or other features of patentability with respect to our patents and patent applications. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our product candidates and other technologies. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

If we are unsuccessful in any such proceeding or other priority or inventorship dispute, we may be required to obtain licenses from third parties, including parties involved in any such post-grant or opposition proceedings or other priority or inventorship disputes. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or may be non-exclusive. If we are unable to obtain and maintain such licenses, we may need to cease the development, manufacture, and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates we may develop. Termination of these licenses or reduction or elimination of our rights under these licenses may result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated agreements with less favorable terms, or cause us to lose our rights under these licenses, including our rights to important intellectual property or technology. The loss of exclusivity or the narrowing of our owned and licensed patent claims could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products.

In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing, and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Some of our patents and patent applications may in the future be co-owned with third parties. In addition, future collaborators or licensors may co-own their patents and patent applications with other third parties with whom we do not have a direct relationship. Our rights to certain of these patents and patent applications may be dependent, in part, on inter-institutional or other operating agreements between the joint owners of such patents and patent applications, who are not parties to our license agreements. If our future collaborators or licensors do not have exclusive control of the grant of licenses under any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications or we are otherwise unable to secure such exclusive rights, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology to the extent such products and technology are not also covered by our intellectual property. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us.

We cannot be certain that our current and future patent rights will be effective in protecting ANEB-001 and related technologies. Failure to protect such assets may have a material adverse effect on our business, operations, financial condition and prospects.

If we do not obtain patent term extension and data and marketing exclusivity for any product candidates we may develop, our business may be materially harmed.

Depending upon the timing, duration, and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of ANEB-001 and related technologies we may develop, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (the “Hatch-Waxman Act”). The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Similar extensions as compensation for patent term lost during regulatory review processes are also available in certain foreign countries and territories, such as in Europe under a Supplementary Patent Certificate. However, we may not be granted an extension in the United States and/or foreign countries and territories because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents, or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is shorter than what we request, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects could be materially harmed.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world, which could negatively impact our business.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patent rights on important aspects of ANEB-001 in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Further, licensing partners may not prosecute patents in certain jurisdictions in which we may obtain commercial rights, thereby precluding the possibility of later obtaining patent protection in these countries. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may develop their own products and may also export infringing products to territories where we may have patent protection, but enforcement may not be as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with ANEB-001, and our patent or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patent rights or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in our expected significant markets, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our current or future product candidates. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our current or future product candidates in all of our expected significant foreign markets.

Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we or any of our future collaborators or licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be adversely affected. Changes in patent law in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States or foreign patent offices could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. On or after March 16, 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the America Invents Act) enacted on September 16, 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third-party that files a patent application in the USPTO on or after March 16, 2013, but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third-party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to ANEB-001 or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our patents or patent applications.

The America Invents Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and also may affect patent litigation. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third-party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third-party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third-party as a defendant in a district court action. Therefore, the America Invents 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, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Changes in European patent practice could also increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. No earlier than June 1, 2023, European applications will soon have the option, upon grant of a patent, of becoming a Unitary Patent which will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Unitary Patent Court, or UPC. This will be a significant change in European patent practice. As the UPC is a new court system, there is no precedent for the court, increasing the uncertainty of any patent litigation or revocation proceeding in Europe.

In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of biopharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. 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. This combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the validity and enforceability of patents, once obtained. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could have a material adverse effect on our existing patent portfolio and our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property in the future.

The expiration or loss of patent protection may adversely affect our future revenues and operating earnings.

Patent protection is important in the development and eventual commercialization of our product candidate. Patents covering our product candidate normally provide market exclusivity, which is important in order for our product candidate to become profitable. We obtained one patent in October 2021, which is expected to provide patent protection through 2040. Even if we are successful in obtaining further patents, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a utility patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Without patent protection, we may be open to competition from generic versions of such compositions, methods and devices. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar to ours.

Risks Related to Product Development, Regulatory Approval, Manufacturing and Commercialization

Delays in the completion of, or the termination of, a clinical trial for ANEB-001, our lead drug candidate, could adversely affect our business.

Clinical trials are very expensive, time-consuming, unpredictable and difficult to design and implement. The results of clinical trials may be unfavorable, they may continue for several years, and they may take significantly longer to complete and involve significantly more costs than expected. Delays in the commencement or completion of clinical testing could significantly affect product development costs and plans with respect to our drug candidate. The commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed and experience difficulties for a number of reasons, including delays and difficulties caused by circumstances over which we may have no control. For instance, approvals of the scope, design or trial site may not be obtained from the FDA and other required bodies in a timely manner or at all, agreements with acceptable terms may not be reached in a timely manner or at all with CROs to conduct the trials, a sufficient number of subjects may not be recruited and enrolled in the trials, and third-party manufacturers of the materials for use in the trials may encounter delays and problems in the manufacturing process, including failure to produce materials in sufficient quantities or of an acceptable quality to complete the trials. Clinical trial delays could shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

We are relying on clinical trials performed by our licensor Vernalis, a third party, for a different indication, and the FDA or a foreign equivalent regulator may disagree with our ability to reference clinical data from third-party trials.*

As part of the preclinical characterization of ANEB-001, Vernalis demonstrated that oral administration of ANEB-001 reduced hypolocomotion in mice after 30 minutes, effectively reversing the actions of THC. In 2006 and 2007, two Phase 1 studies for the treatment of obesity were conducted by Vernalis for ANEB-001. The Vernalis clinical trials were not conducted or overseen by us. Nonetheless, we are relying on these studies performed by a third party for a different indication. The FDA or a foreign equivalent regulator may disagree with our ability to reference the clinical data generated by the third-party trials. Should this occur, we are likely to experience delays in our ability to receive regulatory approval and commercialize our product candidate.

If we are not able to obtain any required regulatory approvals for ANEB-001, we will not be able to commercialize our lead drug candidate and our ability to generate revenue will be limited.

Our drug candidate is a treatment in development for ACI. We must successfully complete clinical trials for our drug candidate before we can apply for marketing approval. Even if we complete our clinical trials, it does not assure marketing approval. Our clinical trials may be unsuccessful, which would materially harm our business. Even if our initial clinical trials are successful, we are required to conduct additional clinical trials to establish our drug candidate’s safety and efficacy, before an NDA, or its foreign equivalents can be filed with the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for marketing approval of our drug candidate.

Success in early phases of preclinical and clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. A failure of one or more of our clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. We may experience unforeseen events during, or as a result of, the clinical trial process that could delay or prevent our ability to receive regulatory approval or commercialize our drug candidate. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, approval, sale, marketing, advertising and promotion, pricing, export, import and distribution of drug products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries, which regulations differ from country to country. We are not permitted to market our drug in the United States until we receive approval of an NDA from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from such countries. In the United States, the FDA generally requires the completion of clinical trials of each drug to establish its safety and efficacy and extensive pharmaceutical development to ensure its quality before an NDA is approved. Regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions impose similar requirements. Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage result in the submission of an NDA to the FDA and even fewer are eventually approved for commercialization. If our development efforts for our drug candidate, including regulatory approval, are not successful for its planned indications, or if adequate demand for our drug candidate is not generated, our business will be materially adversely affected.

Our success depends on the receipt of regulatory approval and the issuance of such regulatory approvals is uncertain and subject to a number of risks, including the following:

Failure to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidate for the foregoing, or any other reasons, will prevent us from commercializing our drug candidate, and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired. We cannot guarantee that regulators will agree with our assessment of the results of our ongoing and future clinical trials or that such trials will be successful. The FDA and other regulators have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data is insufficient for approval and require additional clinical trials, or preclinical or other studies. In addition, varying interpretations of the data obtained from preclinical and clinical testing could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval of our drug candidate.

We have not submitted an NDA or received regulatory approval to market our drug candidate in any jurisdiction. We have no experience in filing the applications necessary to gain regulatory approvals and expect to rely on consultants and third party CROs, with expertise in this area to assist us in this process. Securing regulatory approvals to market a product requires the submission of preclinical, clinical, and/or pharmacokinetic data, information about product manufacturing processes and inspection of facilities and supporting information to the appropriate regulatory authorities for each therapeutic indication to establish a drug candidate’s safety and efficacy for each indication. Our drug candidate may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that may preclude us from obtaining regulatory approval or prevent or limit commercial use with respect to one or all intended indications.

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals is expensive, often takes many years, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon, among other things, the type, complexity and novelty of the drug candidate involved, the jurisdiction in which regulatory approval is sought and the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. Changes in regulatory approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for a submitted product application may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application.

Even if we receive regulatory approval for ANEB-001, our lead drug candidate, we may not be able to successfully commercialize the product and the revenue that we generate from its sales, if any, may be limited.

If approved for marketing, the commercial success of ANEB-001 will depend upon the product’s acceptance by the medical community, including physicians, patients and healthcare payors. The degree of market

acceptance for our drug candidate will depend on a number of factors, including:

If our drug candidate is approved, but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, healthcare payors and patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue and we may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability. Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of our drug candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful.

In addition, even if we obtain regulatory approvals, the timing or scope of any approvals may prohibit or reduce our ability to commercialize our drug candidate successfully. For example, if the approval process takes too long, we may miss market opportunities and give other companies the ability to develop competing products or establish market dominance. Any regulatory approval we ultimately obtain may be limited or subject to restrictions or post-approval commitments that render our drug candidate not commercially viable. For example, regulatory authorities may approve our drug candidate for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our drug candidate, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve our drug candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that indication. Further, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may place conditions on approvals or require risk management plans or a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”) to assure the safe use of the drug. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the NDA must submit a proposed REMS; the FDA will not approve the NDA without an approved REMS, if required. A REMS could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA may also require a REMS for an approved product when new safety information emerges. Any of these limitations on approval or marketing could restrict the commercial promotion, distribution, prescription or dispensing of our drug candidate. Moreover, product approvals may be withdrawn for non-compliance with regulatory standards or if problems occur following the initial marketing of the product. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial success of our drug candidate.

Interim, topline and preliminary data from our preclinical studies or clinical trials may change as more data become available, and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary, interim or topline data from our preclinical studies or clinical trials, which may be subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the interim, topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim, topline and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between preliminary, interim or topline data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the approvability or commercialization of the particular drug candidate and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine to be material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular drug candidate or our business. If the interim, topline, or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for and commercialize our drug candidates, our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition may be harmed.

Even if we obtain marketing approval for ANEB-001, we will be subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, ANEB-001 could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and withdrawal from the market and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with ANEB-001.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for ANEB-001 for an indication, the FDA or foreign equivalent may still impose significant restrictions on their indicated uses or marketing or the conditions of approval, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly and time-consuming post-approval studies and post-market surveillance to monitor safety and efficacy. Our drug candidate will also be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements governing the manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, advertising, promotion, recordkeeping and reporting of adverse events and other post-market information. These requirements include registration with the FDA, as well as continued compliance with current GCP regulations, for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with CGMP requirements relating to quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents.

The FDA has the authority to require a REMS as part of an NDA or after approval, which may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of an approved drug, such as limiting prescribing to certain physicians or medical centers that have undergone specialized training, limiting treatment to patients who meet certain safe-use criteria or requiring patient testing, monitoring and/or enrollment in a registry.

With respect to sales and marketing activities by us or any future partner, advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules in addition to other applicable federal, state and local laws in the United States and similar legal requirements in other countries. Application holders must obtain FDA approval for product and manufacturing changes, depending on the nature of the change.

If we or a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with our product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or we or our manufacturers fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, we may be subject to the following administrative or judicial sanctions:

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our drug candidate and generate revenue. Adverse regulatory action, whether pre- or post-approval, can also potentially lead to product liability claims and increase our product liability exposure.

Any products we develop may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party coverage and reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, thereby harming our business.

In the United States, commercial sales of any products subject to regulatory approval could be conditioned on whether third-party payors (such as government authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations) are able to provide coverage and reimbursement in connection with the products.

Coverage and reimbursement of costs are areas of significant uncertainty for any products subject to regulatory approval. The process for determining coverage versus reimbursement may vary widely among third-party payors. Third-party payors may also impose additional requirements on and restrictions to coverage and reimbursement, which could influence the purchase of certain healthcare services and products.

Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific drugs on an approved list, or formulary, which could omit some FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Third-party payors may also place drugs at certain formulary levels that result in a lower reimbursement and higher cost-sharing obligation for patients. A third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product may not necessarily imply approval of an adequate reimbursement rate. In addition, the unavailability of third-party reimbursement may affect our ability to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. Coverage by one third-party payor may not necessarily indicate or imply coverage or reimbursement by other third-party payors. Also, the level or scope of coverage and reimbursement may vary significantly among third-party payors. Further, commercial third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. In addition to scrutinizing the safety and efficacy of medical products and services, third-party payors have increasingly begun to examine and challenge the price, cost-effectiveness and necessity of certain products and services. Thus, to obtain and maintain coverage and reimbursement for any products approved for sale, the conducting of expensive pharmacoeconomic studies may be required to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of such products. There is a chance that third-party payors may not consider our product medically necessary or cost-effective. If third-party payors make such a determination, they may not cover the product after approval as a benefit under their plans. If third-party payors do cover the product, the returns from sales of our product may not sufficiently yield a profit. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage, and adequate reimbursement for new therapeutics we develop and for which we obtain regulatory approval could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our financial condition.

Furthermore, federal and state governmental authorities have increasingly shown an interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit government-paid healthcare costs. Such cost containment programs include restrictions on coverage and reimbursement, price controls and requirements to substitute branded prescription drugs with generic products. The adoption and expansion of such restrictive policies and controls could impose limitations or exclusions from coverage for our product.

In the United States, we expect third-party payors and government authorities to increase emphasis on managed care and cost containment measures, which will impact the pricing and coverage for pharmaceutical products. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if we achieve favorable coverage and reimbursement status for an approved product, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates could still be implemented in the future.

Current legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to commercialize ANEB-001 and affect the prices we may obtain and our current and future relationships with healthcare professionals, clinical investigators, consultants, patient organizations, customers, CROs and third-party payors.

Healthcare providers and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which the Company obtains marketing approval. The Company’s current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, including HCPs, clinical investigators, CROs, third-party payors and customers may expose it to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which the Company markets, sells and distributes its products for which it obtains marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:

Efforts to ensure that the Company’s current and future business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve on-going substantial costs. If the Company’s operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to it, it may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and the curtailment or restructuring of the Company’s operations. Defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if the Company is successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against it, its business may be impaired.

ANEB-001, our lead drug candidate, may face competition sooner than expected.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for important aspects of ANEB-001 and technologies and to prevent third parties from infringing upon our proprietary rights. We must also operate without infringing upon patents and proprietary rights of others, including by obtaining appropriate licenses to patents or other proprietary rights held by third parties, if necessary. However, the applications we have filed or may file in the future may never yield patents that protect our inventions and intellectual property assets. Failure to obtain patents that sufficiently cover our formulations and technologies would limit our protection against compounding pharmacies, outsourcing facilities, generic drug manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies and other parties who may seek to copy our products, produce products substantially similar to ours or use technologies substantially similar to those we own.

Any termination or suspension of, or delays in the commencement or completion of, any necessary studies of ANEB-001, our lead drug candidate, for any indications could result in increased costs to us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.

The commencement and completion of clinical studies can be delayed for a number of reasons, including delays related to:

Product development costs for our drug candidate will increase if we have delays in testing or approval or if we need to perform more or larger clinical studies than planned. Additionally, changes in regulatory requirements and policies may occur and we may need to amend study protocols to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our study protocols to the FDA, comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and IRBs for reexamination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of that study. If we experience delays in completion of, or if we, the FDA or other regulatory authorities, the IRB, or other reviewing entities, or any of our clinical study sites suspend or terminate any of our clinical studies of our drug candidate, its commercial prospects may be materially harmed and our ability to generate product revenues will be delayed. Any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, termination or suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical studies may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our drug candidate. In addition, if one or more clinical studies are delayed, our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our drug candidate could be significantly reduced.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.

Clinical testing of our drug candidate is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. We cannot assure you that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will view the results as we do or that any future trials of our drug candidate will achieve positive results. Drugs in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical testing and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Any future clinical trial results for our drug candidate may not be successful.

In addition, a number of factors could contribute to a lack of favorable safety and efficacy results for our drug candidate. For example, such trials could result in increased variability due to varying site characteristics, such as local standards of care and differences in evaluation period, and due to varying patient characteristics including demographic factors and health status.

We may be exposed to product liability risks, and clinical and preclinical liability risks, which could place a substantial financial burden upon us should we be sued.

Our business exposes us to potential product liability and other liability risks that are inherent in the testing, manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceutical formulations and products. We cannot be sure that claims will not be asserted against us. We cannot give assurances that we will be able to continue to obtain or maintain adequate product liability insurance on acceptable terms, if at all, or that such insurance will provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. A successful liability claim or series of claims brought against us, and any claims or losses in excess of any product liability insurance coverage that we may obtain, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

ANEB-001, our lead product candidate, may have undesirable side effects which may delay or prevent marketing approval, or, if approval is received, require it to be taken off the market, require it to include safety warnings or otherwise limit sales of the product.

Unforeseen side effects from ANEB-001 could arise either during clinical development or, if approved, after the product has been marketed. This could cause regulatory approvals for, or market acceptance of, the product to be harder and more costly to obtain.

To date, no serious adverse events have been attributed to ANEB-001. However, development of ANEB-001 for weight loss was discontinued by Vernalis after a different CB1 antagonist showed significant side effects after prolonged administration (months or more). While we current expect ANEB-001 to be limited to a single dose to treat ACI, there may be unforeseen side effects from ANEB-001 for the treatment of ACI or other indications we may explore. The results of our current or future clinical trials may show that our product candidate causes undesirable or unacceptable side effects, which could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials, and result in delay of, or failure to obtain, marketing approval from the FDA and other regulatory authorities, or result in marketing approval from the FDA and other regulatory authorities with restrictive label warnings. If our product candidate receives marketing approval and we or others later identify undesirable or unacceptable side effects caused by the use of our product:

Any of these events could prevent us or our potential future collaborators from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the product or could substantially increase commercialization costs and expenses, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenues from the sale of our product.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization and we have no direct experience marketing pharmaceutical products. If we are unable to establish our own marketing and sales capabilities, or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products after approval, we may not be able to generate product revenues.

We do not have a sales organization for the marketing, sales and distribution of any pharmaceutical products. In order to commercialize ANEB-001, we must develop these capabilities on our own or make arrangements with third parties for the marketing, sales and distribution of our products, if approved. The establishment and development of a direct sales force will be expensive and time-consuming and could delay our product launch, and we cannot be certain that we would be able to successfully develop this capability. As a result, we may seek one or more partners to handle some or all of the sales, marketing and distribution of our products once approved. There also may be certain markets within the United States and elsewhere for our product candidates that receive approval for which we may seek a co-promotion arrangement. However, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with third parties to sell any of our products that may be approved on favorable terms, or at all. In the event, we are unable to develop our own marketing and sales force or collaborate with a third-party marketing and sales organization, we will not be able to commercialize our current or future product candidates following approval, which will negatively impact our ability to generate product revenues. Furthermore, whether we commercialize our product candidates following approval on our own or rely on a third party, our ability to generate revenue would be dependent on the effectiveness of the sales force. In addition, to the extent we rely on third parties to commercialize any product candidate that may be approved in the future, we would likely receive less revenues than if we commercialized such product candidates ourselves.

New drugs, which may be developed by others, could impair our ability to maintain and grow our business and remain competitive.

The pharmaceutical industry is subject to rapid and substantial technological change. Developments by others may render our technologies and product candidates non-competitive or obsolete. For example, Aelis Farma, which is developing a medication based on a pregnanolone derivative to treat cannabis use disorders, and Opiant Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which is developing a drinabant injection to treat acute cannabis overdose, could obtain regulatory approval before we are able to obtain regulatory approval for ANEB-001, which could materially harm our business prospects. We also may be unable to keep pace with technological developments and other market factors. Technological competition from medical device, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, universities, governmental entities and others diversifying into the field is intense and is expected to increase. Many of these entities have significantly greater research and development capabilities and budgets than we do, as well as substantially more marketing, manufacturing, financial and managerial resources. These entities represent significant competition for us.

Risks Related to our Reliance on Third Parties

We depend on third parties in connection with our preclinical testing and clinical trials, which may result in costs and delays that prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval or successfully commercializing ANEB-001 or future product candidates.

We engage third parties to perform various aspects of our preclinical testing and clinical trials. We have entered into agreements with third parties, including Traxeus, Aptuit (Verona) SRL, Sterling Pharma Solutions, and Centre for Human Drug Research, which provide certain pharmaceutical research and development services to us. We depend on these third parties to perform these activities on a timely basis in accordance with the protocol, good laboratory practices, good clinical practices and other regulatory requirements. Our reliance on these third parties for preclinical and clinical development activities reduces our control over these activities. Accordingly, if these parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, our preclinical testing and clinical trials may be extended, delayed, terminated or our data may be rejected by the FDA. If there are delays in testing or obtaining regulatory approvals as a result of a third party’s failure to perform, our drug discovery and development costs will likely increase, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our current or future product candidates.

Third parties’ abilities to adequately and timely manufacture and supply our current or future product candidates is dependent on the operation of their facilities which may be impacted by, among other things:

If the efficient manufacture and supply of our current or future product candidates is interrupted, we may experience delayed shipments or supply constraints, which may materially impact our ongoing and future preclinical testing and clinical trials.

Any contract manufacturer must undergo a potentially lengthy FDA approval process, as well as other regulatory approval processes, and are subject to continued review by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. If we or our third-party service providers cease or interrupt production or if our third-party service providers fail to supply materials, products or services to us, we may experience delayed shipments, and supply constraints for our current or future product candidates.

We will be completely dependent on third parties to manufacture ANEB-001, and our commercialization of ANEB-001 could be halted, delayed or made less profitable if those third parties fail to obtain manufacturing approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of ANEB-001 or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.

We do not currently have, nor do we plan to acquire, the capability or infrastructure to manufacture the API in ANEB-001 for use in our clinical trials or for commercial product, if any. In addition, we do not have the capability to encapsulate our drug candidate as a finished drug product for commercial distribution. As a result, we will be obligated to rely on contract manufacturers, if and when our drug candidate is approved for commercialization. We have not entered into an agreement with any contract manufacturers for commercial supply and may not be able to engage a contract manufacturer for commercial supply of our drug candidate on favorable terms to us, or at all.

The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our drug candidate must be approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit an NDA to the FDA or their equivalents to other relevant regulatory authorities. We will not control the manufacturing process of, and will be completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with CGMP regulations for the manufacture of both active drug substances and finished drug products. These CGMP regulations cover all aspects of the manufacturing, testing, quality control and record keeping relating to our drug candidates. If our contract manufacturers do not successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our drug candidate or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our drug candidate, if approved.

Our contract manufacturers will be subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and corresponding state and foreign agencies for compliance with CGMP regulations and similar regulatory requirements. We will not have control over our contract manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards. Failure by any of our contract manufacturers to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, failure to grant approval to market our drug candidate, delays, suspensions or withdrawals of approvals, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect our business. In addition, we will not have control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. Failure by our contract manufacturers to comply with or maintain any of these standards could adversely affect our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market any of our drug candidate.

If, for any reason, these third parties are unable or unwilling to perform, we may not be able to terminate our agreements with them, and we may not be able to locate alternative manufacturers or formulators or enter into favorable agreements with them and we cannot be certain that any such third parties will have the manufacturing capacity to meet future requirements. If these manufacturers or any alternate manufacturer of finished drug product experiences any significant difficulties in its respective manufacturing processes for our API or finished products or should cease doing business with us, we could experience significant interruptions in the supply of our drug candidate or may not be able to create a supply of our drug candidate at all. Were we to encounter manufacturing issues, our ability to produce a sufficient supply of our drug candidate might be negatively affected. Our inability to coordinate the efforts of our third-party manufacturing partners, or the lack of capacity available at our third-party manufacturing partners, could impair our ability to supply our drug candidate at required levels. Because of the significant regulatory requirements that we would need to satisfy in order to qualify a new bulk or finished product manufacturer, if we face these or other difficulties with our current manufacturing partners, we could experience significant interruptions in the supply of our drug candidate if we decided to transfer the manufacturing of our drug candidate to one or more alternative manufacturers in an effort to deal with the difficulties.

Any manufacturing problem or the loss of a contract manufacturer could be disruptive to our operations and result in lost sales. Additionally, we rely on third parties to supply the raw materials needed to manufacture our potential product. Any reliance on suppliers may involve several risks, including a potential inability to obtain critical materials and reduced control over production costs, delivery schedules, reliability and quality. Any unanticipated disruption to a future contract manufacturer caused by problems at suppliers could delay shipment of our drug candidate, increase our cost of goods sold and result in lost sales.

We cannot guarantee that our future manufacturing and supply partners will be able to reduce the costs of commercial scale manufacturing of our drug candidate over time. If the commercial-scale manufacturing costs of our drug candidate are higher than expected, these costs may significantly impact our operating results. In order to reduce costs, we may need to develop and implement process improvements. However, in order to do so, we will need, from time to time, to notify or make submissions with regulatory authorities, and the improvements may be subject to approval by such regulatory authorities.

We cannot be sure that we will receive these necessary approvals or that these approvals will be granted in a timely fashion. We also cannot guarantee that we will be able to enhance and optimize output in our commercial manufacturing process. If we cannot enhance and optimize output, we may not be able to reduce our costs over time.

Our reliance on collaborations with third parties to develop and commercialize ANEB-001 is subject to inherent risks and may result in delays in product development and lost or reduced revenues, restricting our ability to commercialize ANEB-001 and adversely affecting our profitability.

Our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval of, manufacture and commercialize ANEB-001 depends upon our ability to maintain existing, and enter into and maintain new, contractual and collaborative arrangements with others. We also engage, and intend in the future to continue to engage, contract manufacturers and clinical trial investigators.

In addition, although not a primary component of our current strategy, the identification of new compounds or product candidates for development may require us to enter into license or other collaborative agreements with others, including other pharmaceutical companies and research institutions. Such collaborative agreements for the acquisition of new compounds or product candidates would typically require us to pay license fees, make milestone payments and/or pay royalties. Furthermore, these agreements may result in our revenues being lower than if we developed such product candidates and in our loss of control over the development of such product candidates.

Contractors or collaborators may have the right to terminate their agreements with us or reduce their payments to us under those agreements on limited or no notice and for no reason or reasons outside of our control. For example, we may be unable to maintain our relationship with Vernalis on a commercially reasonable basis, if at all. If we are unable to retain Vernalis as a licensor on commercially acceptable terms, we may not be able to commercialize ANEB-001 and we may experience delays in or suspension of the marketing of ANEB-001. The same could apply to other product candidates we may develop or acquire in the future. Our dependence upon third parties to assist with the development and commercialization of our product candidates may adversely affect our ability to generate profits or acceptable profit margins and our ability to develop and deliver such product candidates on a timely and competitive basis.

If our current or future licensees exercise termination rights they may have, or if these license agreements terminate because of delays in obtaining regulatory approvals, or for other reasons, and we are not able to establish replacement or additional research and development collaborations or licensing arrangements, we may not be able to develop and/or commercialize our product candidates. Moreover, any future collaborations or license arrangements we may enter into may not be on terms favorable to us.

A further risk we face with the collaborations is that business combinations and changes in the collaborator or their business strategy may adversely affect their willingness or ability to complete their obligations to us. Our current or any future collaborations or license arrangements ultimately may not be successful. Our agreements with collaborators typically allow them discretion in electing whether to pursue various development, regulatory, commercialization and other activities. If any collaborator were to breach its agreement with us or otherwise fail to conduct collaborative activities in a timely or successful manner, the preclinical or clinical development or commercialization of the affected product candidate or research program would be delayed or terminated.

Other risks associated with our collaborative and contractual arrangements with others include the following:

These factors could lead to delays in the development and/or commercialization of our current or future product candidates, or could result in us not being able to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. Further, disagreements with our contractors or collaborators could require or result in litigation or arbitration, which would be time-consuming and expensive. Our ultimate success may depend upon the success and performance on the part of these third parties. If we fail to maintain these relationships or establish new relationships as required, development and/or commercialization of our product candidates will be delayed or may never be realized.

We currently outsource, and from time to time in the future may outsource, a portion of our internal business functions to third-party providers. Outsourcing these functions has significant risks, and our failure to manage these risks successfully could materially adversely affect our business.*

We currently, and from time to time in the future, may outsource portions of our internal business functions to third-party providers. For example, on March 2, 2023, we entered into a master services agreement with Potrero Hill Advisors, LLC (“Potrero”), pursuant to which, among other things, Potrero will serve as an independent consultant for purposes of providing us with certain strategic and financial advice and support services, including the services of Sandra A. Gardiner as our Acting Chief Financial Officer. If these third-party providers do not perform as expected or if they choose to discontinue providing services to us, we may experience significant disruptions in our operations, including our ability to timely comply with our reporting obligations.

Risks Related to Government Regulation of our Industry

Legislative or regulatory reform of the healthcare system may affect our ability to sell our products profitably.*

In both the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell future products and profitability. Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We do not know whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our drug candidate, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements.

On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the ACA, which includes a number of healthcare reform provisions and requires most U.S. citizens to have health insurance. The ACA was intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. The law, among other things, imposes a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products, addresses a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, increases the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, and establishes a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D. Substantial new provisions affecting compliance also have been added, which may require modification of business practices with healthcare practitioners. The ACA also revised the definition of “average manufacturer price” for reporting purposes, which could increase the amount of Medicaid drug rebates to states. Further, the law imposed a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products.

There have been judicial, congressional, and executive branch efforts to repeal, modify or delay the implementation of the law. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. In addition, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and created a new manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA. We are continuing to monitor any changes to the ACA that, in turn, may potentially impact our business in the future.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. For example, the IRA, among other things, (1) directs the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare and (2) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be implemented but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. Further, in response to the Biden administration’s October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the CMS Innovation Center which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future. We expect that additional federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, and in turn could significantly reduce the projected value of certain development projects and reduce or eliminate our profitability. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for the Company’s product candidates, if approved, and accordingly, the financial operations.

Clinical trials for ANEB-001 have and may in the future be conducted outside the United States and not under an IND, and where this is the case, the FDA may not accept data from such trials.

Our ongoing clinical trial for ANEB-001 is being conducted in the Netherlands and we may conduct future clinical trials outside of the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States and not under an IND in support of research or marketing applications for our product candidates, this is subject to certain conditions set out in 21 C.F.R. § 312.120. For example, such foreign clinical trials should be conducted in accordance with GCP, including review and approval by an independent ethics committee and obtaining the informed consent from subjects of the clinical trials. The FDA must also be able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if the agency deems it necessary. The foreign clinical data should also be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice. Other factors that may affect the acceptance of foreign clinical data include differences in clinical conditions, study populations or regulatory requirements between the U.S. and the foreign country. If the FDA does not accept such foreign clinical data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our drug candidate not receiving marketing approval.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock

The trading price and volume of our common stock in the public markets has experienced, and may in the future experience, volatility due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control.*

The trading price and volume of our common stock on The Nasdaq Capital Market has experienced, and may in the future experience, volatility. The market price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially as a result of many factors, some of which are beyond our control. These fluctuations could cause you to lose all or part of the value of your investment in our common stock. Factors that could cause fluctuations in the market price of our common stock include the following:

In addition, the stock market in general has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to operating performance of individual companies. These broad market factors may seriously harm the market price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted. A class action suit against us could result in significant liabilities and, regardless of the outcome, could result in substantial costs and the diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

Future sales, or the perception of future sales, of a substantial number of our shares of common stock could depress the trading price of our common stock.

If we or our stockholders, particularly our officers, directors and large stockholders, sell a significant percentage of our outstanding common stock in the public market or if the market perceives that these sales could occur, the market price of shares of our common stock could decline. These sales may make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-linked securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate, or to use equity as consideration for future acquisitions.

Our principal stockholders and management own a substantial majority of our stock and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.*

Certain of our executive officers, directors and large stockholders own a substantial majority of our outstanding capital stock. As a result of their share ownership, these stockholders have the ability to influence us through their ownership positions. These stockholders may be able to determine all matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, these stockholders, acting together, can control elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents, or approval of any merger, sale of assets, or other major corporate transaction. This may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you may believe are in your best interest as one of our stockholders.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents could discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company and may affect the trading price of our common stock.*

Our corporate documents and Delaware corporate law contain provisions that may enable our board of directors to resist a change in control of our company even if a change in control were to be considered favorable by you and other stockholders. These provisions:

In addition, Delaware corporate law prohibits large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or consolidating with us except under certain circumstances. These provisions and other provisions under Delaware corporate law could discourage, delay or prevent a transaction involving a change in control of our company. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for our stockholders to elect directors of their choosing and cause us to take other corporate actions our stockholders desire.

Our certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, and federal district courts will be the sole and exclusive forum for Securities Act claims, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees.

Our certificate of incorporation provides that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by our directors, officers or other employees to us or to our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim against us or any director, officer or other employee arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our certificate of incorporation or bylaws or (iv) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in all cases to the fullest extent permitted by law and subject to the court having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants; provided that these provisions of our certificate of incorporation will not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act, or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

Our certificate of incorporation further provides that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum. We note that investors cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. The choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our current or former directors, officers, or other employees or stockholders, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our current or former directors, officers, and other employees or stockholders. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We do not expect to pay any dividends on our common stock.

We currently expect to retain all future earnings, if any, for future operation, expansion and debt repayment and have no current plans to pay any cash dividends to holders of our common stock. Any decision to declare and pay dividends in the future will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on, among other things, our operating results, financial condition, cash requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, we must comply with the covenants in our credit agreements to be able to pay cash dividends, and our ability to pay dividends generally may be further limited by covenants of any existing and future outstanding indebtedness we or our subsidiaries incur. As a result, you may not receive any return on an investment in our common stock unless you sell our common stock for a price greater than that which you paid for it.

General Risk Factors

If we fail to establish and maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting, our operating results and our ability to operate our business could be harmed.

Ensuring that we have adequate internal control over financial reporting in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. In connection with our IPO, we began the process of documenting, reviewing, and improving our internal controls and procedures for compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), which will require annual management assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our common stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

Implementing any appropriate changes to our internal controls may distract our officers and employees, entail substantial costs to modify our existing processes, and take significant time to complete. These changes may not, however, be effective in maintaining the adequacy of our internal controls, and any failure to maintain that adequacy, or consequent inability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis, could increase our operating costs and harm our business. In addition, investors’ perceptions that our internal controls are inadequate or that we are unable to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis may harm our stock price and could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are incurring significantly increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management is required to devote substantial time to compliance efforts.

As a public company, we are incurring significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. For example, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the accounting and internal controls provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, and will be required to comply with the applicable requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), as well as rules and regulations subsequently implemented by the SEC and Nasdaq, including the establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and changes in corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time and resources to complying with these requirements. Moreover, these rules and regulations are increasing our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. In particular, we expect to incur significant expenses and devote substantial management effort toward ensuring compliance with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which will increase when we are no longer an “emerging growth company,” as defined by the JOBS Act. These new obligations will require substantial attention from our management team and could divert their attention away from the day-to-day management of our business. We will need to hire additional accounting and financial staff with appropriate public company experience and technical accounting knowledge and maintain an internal audit function. We cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur as a result of being a public company or the timing of such costs. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors and board committees or as executive officers, and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance.

Changes in accounting principles or guidance, or in their interpretations, could result in unfavorable accounting charges or effects, including changes to our previously filed financial statements, which could cause our stock price to decline.

We prepare our financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. These principles are subject to interpretation by the SEC and various bodies formed to interpret and create appropriate accounting principles and guidance. A change in these principles or guidance, or in their interpretations, may have a significant negative effect on our reported results and retroactively affect previously reported results, which, in turn, could cause our stock price to decline.

We are an “emerging growth company” and our election to delay adoption of new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies may result in our financial statements not being comparable to those of some other public companies. As a result of this and other reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our securities may be less attractive to investors.*

As a company with less than $1.235 billion in annual revenue, we qualify as an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act. An emerging growth company may take advantage of specified reduced reporting requirements that are otherwise generally applicable to public companies. In particular, as an emerging growth company we:

We have and intend to continue to take advantage of all of these reduced reporting requirements and exemptions, including the longer phase-in periods for the adoption of new or revised financial accounting standards under Section 107 of the JOBS Act. Our election to use the phase-in periods may make it difficult to compare our financial statements to those of non-emerging growth companies and other emerging growth companies that have opted out of the phase-in periods under Section 107 of the JOBS Act.

Certain of these reduced reporting requirements and exemptions were already available to us due to the fact that we also qualify as a “smaller reporting company” under SEC rules. For instance, smaller reporting companies are not required to obtain an auditor attestation and report regarding management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting, are not required to provide a compensation discussion and analysis, are not required to provide a pay-for-performance graph or CEO pay ratio disclosure, and may present only two years of audited financial statements and related MD&A disclosure.

Under the JOBS Act, we may take advantage of the above-described reduced reporting requirements and exemptions for up to five years after our initial sale of common equity pursuant to a registration statement declared effective under the Securities Act, or such earlier time that we no longer meet the definition of an emerging growth company. In this regard, the JOBS Act provides that we would cease to be an “emerging growth company” if we have more than $1.235 billion in annual revenue, have more than $700 million in market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates, or issue more than $1 billion in principal amount of non-convertible debt over a three-year period. Under current SEC rules, however, we will continue to qualify as a “smaller reporting company” for so long as we have a public float (i.e., the market value of common equity held by non-affiliates) of less than $250 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter, or have annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and have a public float of less than $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter.

We cannot predict if investors will find our securities less attractive due to our reliance on these exemptions. If investors were to find our securities less attractive as a result of our election, we may have difficulty raising all of the proceeds we seek in this offering.

Changes in tax laws or regulations that are applied adversely to us or our customers may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations.*  

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could affect our business operations and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, legislation enacted in 2017 informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act and the Inflation Reduction Act enacted many significant changes to the U.S. tax laws. As a further example, effective January 1, 2022, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenses for tax purposes in the year incurred and requires taxpayers to capitalize and subsequently amortize such expenses over five years for research activities conducted in the United States and over 15 years for research activities conducted outside the United States. Although there have been legislative proposals to repeal or defer the capitalization requirement to later years, there can be no assurance that the provision will be repealed or otherwise modified. Future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to such legislation may affect us, and certain aspects of such legislation could be repealed or modified in future legislation. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax laws. Future tax reform legislation could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense.

Our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes to offset future taxable income or taxes may be limited.*

Under current law, federal net operating losses incurred in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal net operating losses is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax laws. In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change in its equity ownership value over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. We may have experienced an ownership change in the past and we may also experience additional ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. If an ownership change occurs and our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards is materially limited, it would harm our future operating results by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating loss carryforwards is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us and adversely affect our future cash flows.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about us, our business or our market, or if they change their recommendations regarding our stock adversely, or if our actual results differ significantly from our guidance, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock is influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about us, our business, our market or our competitors. If any of the analysts who may cover us change their recommendation regarding our stock adversely, or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors, our stock price would likely decline. If any analyst who may cover us were to cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

In addition, from time to time, we may release earnings guidance or other forward-looking statements in our earnings releases, earnings conference calls or otherwise regarding our future performance that represent our management’s estimates as of the date of release. Some or all of the assumptions of any future guidance that we furnish may not materialize or may vary significantly from actual future results. Any failure to meet guidance or analysts’ expectations could have a material adverse effect on the trading price or volume of our stock.

Health epidemics or pandemics may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.*

Health epidemics or pandemics may negatively impact worldwide economic and commercial activity and financial markets. For example, Covid-19 has previously resulted in significant business and operational disruptions, including business closures, supply chain disruptions, travel restrictions, stay-at-home orders and limitations on the availability of workforces. Our Netherlands Trial was previously delayed due to Covid-19 and it is possible we may encounter similar delays or other disruptions associated with Covid-19 or other health epidemics or pandemics. If we or any of our business partners, clinical trial sites, suppliers and other third parties with whom we conduct business, were to experience shutdowns or other business disruptions as a result of Covid-19 (including new variants) or other health epidemic or pandemic, our ability to conduct our business in the manner and on the timelines presently planned could be materially and negatively impacted. For example, if our development of ANEB-001 were to be delayed, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, an epidemic’s or pandemic’s impact on the medical community and the global economy could have an adverse impact on future sales upon which we expect to derive royalties and milestones, which could lead to a decrease in our revenues, net income and assets. If the adverse effects of a health epidemic or pandemic continue for a prolonged period or result in sustained economic stress, higher inflation levels or recession, many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section could be exacerbated, such as those relating to our reliance on a limited number of suppliers and our need to raise additional capital to fund our existing operations.

Unstable market and economic conditions may have serious adverse consequences on our business, financial condition and stock price.*

The global credit and financial markets have recently experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, bank failures, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. There can be no assurance that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur. Our general business strategy may be adversely affected by any such economic downturn, volatile business environment or continued unpredictable and unstable market conditions. If the current equity and credit markets deteriorate, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly and more dilutive. Failure to secure any necessary financing in a timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy, financial performance and stock price and could require us to delay or abandon clinical development plans. In addition, there is a risk that one or more of our current service providers, manufacturers and other partners may not survive an economic downturn, which could directly affect our ability to attain our operating goals on schedule and on budget.

Inflation may adversely affect us by increasing our costs.

Recently, inflation has increased throughout the U.S. economy. Inflation can adversely affect us by increasing the costs of clinical trials and research, the development of our product candidates, administration and other costs of doing business. We may experience increases in the prices of labor and other costs of doing business. In an inflationary environment, cost increases may outpace our expectations, causing us to use our cash and other liquid assets faster than forecasted. If this happens, we may need to raise additional capital to fund our operations, which may not be available in sufficient amounts or on reasonable terms, if at all, sooner than expected.

If our internal information technology systems or sensitive information, or those of our third-party CROs or other contractors or consultants, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences from such compromise, including but not limited to, a material disruption of the development of our product candidates, regulatory investigations or actions, litigation, fines and penalties, reputational harm, loss of revenue or profits, and other adverse consequences.*

We are increasingly dependent upon information technology systems, infrastructure and data to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we may process confidential, and sensitive information, including personal data (such as health-related data), intellectual property, and trade secrets (collectively, “sensitive information”). It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of such confidential information. We also have outsourced elements of our operations to third parties in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, third-party providers of cloud-based infrastructure, encryption and authentication technology, employee email, and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. We may share or receive sensitive information with or from third parties.

Cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, and online and offline fraud are prevalent and continue to increase. These threats come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including, without limitation, nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties upon which we rely may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including cyber-attacks that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to produce, sell and distribute our goods and services.

We and the third parties upon which we rely may be subject to a variety of evolving threats, including, but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks (such as credential stuffing), personnel misconduct or error, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. Ransomware attacks, including by organized criminal threat actors, nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors, are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. Similarly, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties and infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised or that they do not contain exploitable defects or bugs that could result in a breach of or disruption to our information technology systems or the third-party information technology systems that support us and our services. Additionally, our workforce works remotely at least part of the time which poses increased risks to our information technology systems and data as a result of utilizing network connections outside our premises. Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could also expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies.

Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption. A security incident or other interruption could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive information. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to conduct our business operations. For example, a security incident could result in a material disruption and delay of the development of our product candidates. In addition, the loss of pre-clinical study data or future clinical trial data for our product candidates could result in delays in our marketing approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data.

We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities to try to protect against security incidents. Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures, industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and sensitive information.

While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We may be unable in the future to detect vulnerabilities in our information technology systems because such threats and techniques change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. Despite our efforts to identify and remediate vulnerabilities, if any, in our information technology systems, our efforts may not be successful. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities.

Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosures or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third-party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences. These consequences may include: government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may cause interruptions in our operations and could result in a material disruption of our programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data for our product candidates could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data.

Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations. We cannot be sure that our insurance coverage will be adequate or sufficient to protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices, that such coverage will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or that such coverage will pay future claims.