Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Commitments and Contingencies

v3.22.2.2
Commitments and Contingencies
3 Months Ended
Aug. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies.  
Commitments and Contingencies

Note 9. Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments with Samsung BioLogics Co., Ltd. (“Samsung”)

In April 2019, the Company entered into an agreement with Samsung, pursuant to which Samsung will perform technology transfer, process validation, manufacturing, pre-approval inspection and supply services for the commercial supply of leronlimab bulk drug substance effective through calendar year 2027. In 2020, the Company entered into an additional agreement, pursuant to which Samsung will perform technology transfer, process validation, vial filling and storage services for clinical, pre-approval inspection, and commercial supply of leronlimab drug product. Samsung is obligated to procure necessary raw materials for the Company and manufacture a specified minimum number of batches, and the Company is required to provide a rolling three-year forecast of future estimated manufacturing requirements to Samsung that are binding.

On January 6, 2022, Samsung provided written notice to the Company alleging that the Company had materially breached the parties’ Master Services and Project Specific Agreements for failure to pay $13.5 million due on December 31, 2021. An additional $22.8 million became due under the agreements on January 31, 2022. Under the agreements, Samsung may be entitled to terminate its services if the parties cannot reach an agreement as to the past due balance. Management is in ongoing discussions with Samsung regarding potential approaches to resolve these issues, including proposals by both parties of a revised schedule of payments over an extended period of time, and proposals by the Company of satisfaction of a portion of the Company’s payment obligations in equity securities of the Company and postponing or cancelling the manufacturing of additional drug provided for in the agreements. As of August 31, 2022, the Company had past due balances of approximately $35.7 million due to Samsung which were included in accounts payable. As of August 31, 2022, the future commitments pursuant to these agreements were estimated as follows (in thousands):

Fiscal Year

    

Amount

2023 (9 months remaining)

$

34,638

2024

121,750

2025

76,400

2026 and thereafter

Total

$

232,788

Operating Lease Commitments

We lease our principal office location in Vancouver, Washington. The Vancouver lease expires on April 30, 2026. Consistent with the guidance in ASC 842, Leases, we have recorded this lease in our consolidated balance sheet as an operating lease. For the purpose of determining the right of use asset and associated lease liability, we determined that the renewal of the Vancouver lease was not reasonably probable. The lease does not include any restrictions or covenants requiring special treatment under ASC 842, Leases. During the three months ended August 31, 2022 and 2021, we recognized approximately $46.0 thousand and $48.9 thousand of operating lease costs. Operating lease right-of-use assets are included in other non-current assets and the current portion of operating lease liabilities are included in accrued liabilities and compensation on the consolidated balance sheets. The long-term operating lease liabilities are presented separately as operating lease on the consolidated balance sheets. The following table summarizes the operating lease balances.

(in thousands)

August 31, 2022

May 31, 2022

Assets

Right-of-use asset

$

502

$

536

Liabilities

Current operating lease liability

$

135

$

134

Non-current operating lease liability

 

387

 

422

Total operating lease liability

$

522

$

556

The minimum (base rental) lease payments are expected to be as follows as of August 31, 2022 (in thousands):

Fiscal Year

Amount

2023 (9 months remaining)

$

133

2024

182

2025

185

2026

169

Total operating lease payments

669

Less: imputed interest

(147)

Present value of operating lease liabilities

$

522

Supplemental information related to operating leases was as follows:

August 31, 2022

Weighted average remaining lease term

3.6

years

Weighted average discount rate

10.0

%

Distribution and Licensing Commitments

Refer to Note 10, Commitments and Contingencies, in the 2022 Form 10-K for information.

Legal Proceedings

As of August 31, 2022, the Company did not record any legal accruals related to the outcomes of the matters described below. It may not be possible to determine the outcome of these proceedings, including the defense and other litigation-related costs and expenses that may be incurred by the Company, as the outcomes of legal proceedings are inherently uncertain. Therefore, it is possible that the ultimate outcome of any proceeding, if in excess of a recognized accrual, if any, could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Securities Class Action Lawsuit

On March 17, 2021, a stockholder filed a putative class-action lawsuit (the “March 17, 2021 lawsuit”) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against the Company and certain current and former officers. The complaint generally alleges the defendants made false and misleading statements regarding the viability of leronlimab as a potential treatment for COVID-19. On April 9, 2021, a second stockholder filed a similar putative class action lawsuit in the same court, which the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on July 23, 2021. On August 9, 2021, the court appointed lead plaintiffs for the March 17, 2021 lawsuit. On December 21, 2021, lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which is brought on behalf of an alleged class of those who purchased the Company’s common stock between March 27, 2020 and May 17, 2021. The amended complaint generally alleges that the Company and certain current and former officers violated Sections 10(b) and/or 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making purportedly false or misleading statements concerning, among other things, the safety and efficacy of leronlimab as a potential treatment for COVID-19, the Company’s CD10 and CD12 clinical trials, and its HIV BLA. The amended complaint also alleges that the individual defendants violated Section 20A of the Exchange Act by selling shares of the Company’s common stock purportedly while in possession of material nonpublic information. The amended complaint seeks, among other relief, a ruling that the case may proceed as a class action and unspecified damages and attorneys’ fees and costs. On February 25, 2022, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On June 24, 2022, lead plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint. The second amended complaint is brought on behalf of an alleged class of those who purchased the Company’s common stock between March 27, 2020 and March 30, 2022, makes similar allegations, names the same defendants, and asserts the same claims as the prior complaint, adds a claim for alleged violation of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(a) and (c) promulgated thereunder, and seeks the same relief as the prior complaint. The Company and the individual defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing in the complaint and intend to vigorously defend the matter. Since this case is in an early stage where the number of plaintiffs is not known, and the claims do not specify an amount of damages, the Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the lawsuit and cannot reasonably estimate the potential loss or range of loss the Company may incur.

2021 Shareholder Derivative Lawsuits

On June 4, 2021, a stockholder filed a purported derivative lawsuit against certain of the Company’s current and former officers, certain current and former Board members, and the Company as a nominal defendant, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Two additional shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed against the same defendants in the same court on June 25, 2021 and August 18, 2021, respectively. The court has consolidated these three lawsuits for all purposes (“Consolidated Derivative Suit”). On January 20, 2022, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint. The consolidated complaint generally alleges that the director defendants breached their fiduciary duties by allowing the Company to make false and misleading statements regarding, among other things, the safety and efficacy of leronlimab as a potential treatment for COVID-19, the Company’s CD10 and CD12 clinical trials, and its HIV BLA, and by failing to maintain an adequate system of oversight and controls. The consolidated complaint also asserts claims against one or more individual defendants for waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, contribution for alleged violations of the federal securities laws, and for breach of fiduciary duty arising from alleged insider trading. The consolidated complaint seeks declaratory and equitable relief, an unspecified amount of damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs. The Company and the individual defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing in the complaints and intend to vigorously defend the litigation. In light of the fact that the Consolidated Derivative Suit is in an early stage and the claims do not specify an amount of damages, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the Consolidated Derivative Suit and cannot reasonably estimate the potential loss or range of loss the Company may incur.

Securities and Exchange Commission and Department of Justice Investigations

The Company has received subpoenas from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) requesting documents and information concerning, among other matters, leronlimab, the Company’s public statements regarding the use of leronlimab as a potential treatment for COVID-19, HIV, and triple-negative breast cancer, related communications with the FDA, investors, and others, litigation involving former employees, the Company’s retention of investor relations consultants, and trading in the

Company’s securities. Certain Company executives have received subpoenas concerning similar issues and may be interviewed by the DOJ or SEC in the future. The SEC informed the Company that its inquiry should not be construed as an indication that any violations of law have occurred or that the SEC has any negative opinion of any person, entity or security The Company is cooperating fully with these non-public, fact-finding investigations, and as of the date of this filing, the Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome and cannot reasonably estimate the potential possible loss or range of loss, if any.

Amarex Dispute

On October 4, 2021, the Company filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief and a motion for a preliminary injunction against NSF International, Inc. and its subsidiary Amarex Clinical Research LLC (“Amarex”), the Company’s former CRO. Over the past eight years, Amarex provided clinical trial management services to the Company and managed numerous clinical studies of the Company’s drug product candidate, leronlimab. On December 16, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a preliminary injunction requiring Amarex to provide the Company with access to all of its materials in the possession of Amarex. The court also granted CytoDyn the right to conduct an audit of Amarex’s work for CytoDyn. That case has been administratively closed. The Company simultaneously filed a demand for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association. The arbitration demand alleges that Amarex failed to perform services to an acceptable professional standard and failed to perform certain services required by the parties’ agreements. Further, the demand alleges that Amarex billed the Company for services it did not perform. The Company contends that, due to Amarex’s failures, it has suffered avoidable delays in obtaining regulatory approval of leronlimab and has paid for services not performed. Amarex has counterclaimed alleging that CytoDyn has failed to pay invoices due under the contract between the parties. In light of the fact that this dispute is in an early stage, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the lawsuit and cannot reasonably estimate the potential loss or range of loss that the Company may incur.