Dynavax (DVAX) Risk Analysis

As we manage our production capabilities for HEPLISAV-B and CpG 1018 adjuvant to support recent market share gains and other initiatives, we have been, and in the future could be, required to make significant financial commitments at our contract manufacturing organizations ("CMOs"), including minimum purchase commitments and prepayments of purchase orders to facilitate the procurement of raw materials and the incurrence of various manufacturing costs. Because of minimum or advance purchase commitments and uncertainty about the expected demand for HEPLISAV-B or CpG 1018 adjuvant, the financial commitments we make to our CMOs to support manufacturing may not be recovered in their entirety, or at all, if our customers do not ultimately purchase from us at expected volumes, or other concessions are made by us. Capacity reservation fees are generally not recoverable if we do not use the capacity we have reserved as a result of lower than expected demand, or otherwise. Similarly, prepayments of purchase orders may not be recoverable if we do not ultimately require the entire volume subject to the applicable purchase order. As a result, we could end up making financial commitments that we never recover if demand for HEPLISAV-B or CpG 1018 adjuvant does not materialize in the volumes we are expecting or at all. This may require us to record certain charges or write-offs in one or more fiscal periods, which in turn could result in significant, unexpected fluctuations in our quarterly and annual operating results, and potentially have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, and financial condition. For example, in August and October 2022, we entered into amendments to the Clover Supply Agreement, which, among other things, modified the scope of the Clover Supply Agreement to reduce certain quantities of CpG 1018 adjuvant that we originally intended to deliver in accordance with a purchase order previously issued by Clover. As a result of the concessions made in the amendments to the Clover Supply Agreement, prior financial commitments made to certain CMOs to manufacture quantities of CpG 1018 adjuvant to fulfill the original Clover purchase order, and reduced demand for CpG 1018 adjuvant, we recorded write-offs of $13.9 million of CpG 1018 adjuvant raw materials inventory and $20.4 million of finished goods inventory during the year ended December 31, 2022. Relating to our Bio E Supply Agreement, we entered into an amendment and an assignment agreement in April 2023, pursuant to which (i) CEPI forgave the entirety of remaining amounts outstanding relating to the Bio E CEPI Advance Payments for CpG 1018 Materials allocated to Bio E and has assumed our previous rights to collect $47.4 million of Bio E accounts receivable, (ii) we collected $14.5 million from Bio E, resulting in no accounts receivable balance as of December 31, 2023 and September 30, 2024, and (iii) we derecognized a $47.4 million CEPI accrual in connection with the Bio E CEPI Advance Payments. It is possible we may have similar write-offs in the future.

Our programs, including HEPLISAV-B, incorporate TLR9 agonist CpG oligonucleotides. If any of our product candidates in clinical trials or similar products from competitors or collaborators result in serious adverse events, we may be required to delay, discontinue or modify our clinical trials or our clinical trial strategy, or significantly reevaluate strategic alternatives. If a safety risk based on mechanism of action or the molecular structure were identified, it may hinder our ability to develop our product candidates or enter into potential collaboration or commercial arrangements. Rare diseases and a numerical imbalance in cardiac adverse events have been observed in patients in our clinical trials. If adverse events are found to relate to our TLR agonist as a whole, we may be required to significantly reduce or discontinue our operations.

As our commercial operations expand, we expect that we will also need to manage additional relationships with various third parties, including sole source suppliers, distributors, collaboration partners, wholesalers and hospital customers. Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on our organization, in particular on management. Our future financial performance and our ability to successfully commercialize our HEPLISAV-B vaccine and CpG 1018 adjuvant or any new products, and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. To that end, we may not be able to manage our growth efforts effectively, and hire, train, retain and integrate additional management, administrative and sales and marketing personnel, or secure sufficient or timely supply from third party service and product providers. Any failure to accomplish any of these activities could prevent us from successfully increasing or maintaining the same level of commercial growth as we have seen in the past.

Our success depends on our ability to: - obtain and protect commercially valuable patents or the rights to patents both domestically and abroad;- operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others; and - prevent others from successfully challenging or infringing our proprietary rights. We will be able to protect our proprietary rights from unauthorized use only to the extent that these rights are covered by valid and enforceable patents for a commercially sufficient term or are otherwise effectively maintained as trade secrets. We try to protect our proprietary rights by filing and prosecuting U.S. and foreign patent applications. However, in certain cases such protection may be limited, depending in part on existing patents held by third parties, or other disclosures which impact patentability, which may only allow us to obtain relatively narrow patent protection, if any at all. In the U.S., and worldwide, legal standards relating to the validity and scope of patent claims in the biopharmaceutical field can be highly uncertain, are still evolving and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. Changes in U.S. patent and ex-U.S. patent laws could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing us and our collaborators' ability to protect our products. Our HEPLISAV-B vaccine and CpG 1018 adjuvant have no composition of matter patent protection in the United States or elsewhere. We must therefore rely primarily on the protection afforded by method of use patent claims relating to HEPLISAV-B vaccine and the use of CpG 1018 adjuvant in vaccines, and trade secret protection and confidentiality and other agreements to protect our interests in proprietary know-how related to HEPLISAV-B vaccine and CpG 1018 adjuvant. We have three issued U.S. patents relating to certain uses of HEPLISAV-B that are projected to expire in 2032. We have filed patent applications claiming compositions and methods of use of CpG 1018 adjuvant for COVID-19 and other vaccines, but we cannot provide any assurances that we will receive an issued patent for any of these patent applications or that, if issued, any of these patents will provide adequate protection for any intended use of CpG 1018 adjuvant in vaccines. In addition, we are or may be subject to co-ownership of the underlying intellectual property with our collaborators and, therefore, may not be the sole owner and be in a position to diligently control patent prosecution, or enforce our rights. If we are unable to adequately obtain patent protection or enforce our other proprietary rights relating to CpG 1018 adjuvant, we may be unable to realize any recurring commercial benefit from the development of a vaccine containing CpG 1018 adjuvant, and we may not have the ability to prevent others from developing or commercializing a vaccine containing CpG 1018 adjuvant. We also rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality and other agreements to protect our interests in proprietary know-how related to CpG 1018 adjuvant. If we or our collaborators are unable to adequately obtain, protect or enforce our proprietary rights relating to CpG 1018 adjuvant, we may be unable to realize recurring commercial benefit from the development of a vaccine containing CpG 1018 adjuvant, and we or our collaborators may not have the ability to prevent others from developing or commercializing a vaccine containing the adjuvant. Disputes or litigation may also arise with our collaborators (with us and/or with one or more third parties), including disputes over ownership rights to intellectual property, know-how or technologies developed with our collaborators. Because patent applications in the U.S. and many foreign jurisdictions typically are not published until 18 months after filing and publications of discoveries in the scientific literature lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file for protection of the inventions set forth in these patent applications or in our issued patents. Further, there could be post-grant proceedings such as inter partes review ("IPR"), post grant review ("PGR"), reexamination, reissue or opposition which could result in claims in our patents being narrowed or invalidated. Our commercial success depends significantly on our ability to operate without infringing patents and other proprietary rights of third parties. A number of pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies, as well as universities and research institutions, may have filed patent applications or may have been granted patents that cover inventions similar to the inventions owned by or licensed to us. We may not be able to determine with certainty whether patents or patent applications of other parties may materially affect our ability to make, use, offer to sell, or sell any products. If another party controls patents or patent applications covering our products, we may not be able to obtain the rights we need to those patents or patent applications in order to commercialize our products. Litigation may be necessary to enforce patents issued or licensed to us or to determine the scope or validity of another party's proprietary rights. The existence of third-party patent applications and patents could significantly reduce the coverage of the patents owned by or licensed to us and limit our ability to obtain meaningful patent protection. Litigation or any other proceedings could result in substantial costs to and diversion of effort by us, and an adverse outcome in a court or patent office could subject us to significant liabilities, require disputed rights to be licensed from other parties, or require us to cease using some of our technology. We may not prevail in these actions or proceedings if they arise. In addition, other parties may duplicate, design around or independently develop similar or alternative technologies to ours or our licensors. The risks and uncertainties that we face with respect to our patents and other proprietary rights include the following: - we may not receive an issued patent for any of our patent applications or for any patent applications that we may have exclusively licensed, now or in the future;- the pending patent applications we have filed or to which we have exclusive rights may take longer than we expect to result in issued patents;- the claims of any patents that are issued may not provide meaningful protection or may not be valid or enforceable;- we might not be able to develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable;- the patents licensed or issued to us or our collaborators may not provide a competitive advantage;- patents issued to other parties may limit our intellectual property protection or harm our ability to do business;- other parties may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate our technologies and commercialize discoveries that we attempt to patent;- other parties may design around technologies we have licensed, patented or developed;- pending patent applications or issued patents may be challenged by third parties in litigation or other proceedings, such as inter partes reviews, pre- and post-grant oppositions, reexaminations, derivation proceedings and post-grant review, in the U.S or abroad;- we may be subject to claims that our employees or consultants have used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers or clients, thus putting our intellectual property at risk;- our reliance on trade secret protection and confidentiality and other agreements may not be sufficient to protect our interests and proprietary know-how related to our products and processes; and - it may be found that we or our collaborators have not complied with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by patent offices, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated. We also rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect our interests in proprietary know-how that may not be directed to what is considered to be patentable subject matter, and for processes for which patents are difficult to enforce. We cannot be certain that we will be able to protect our trade secrets or other proprietary know-how adequately. Any disclosure of confidential data in the public domain or to third parties could allow our competitors to learn our trade secrets. If we are unable to adequately obtain or enforce proprietary rights, we may be unable to commercialize or continue to commercialize our products, enter into or maintain collaborations, generate revenues or maintain any advantage we may have with respect to existing or potential competitors.

Our current or future research and development efforts may depend in part upon our license arrangements for certain intellectual property owned by or co-owned with third parties. Our dependence on these licenses could subject us to numerous risks, such as disputes regarding the use of the licensed intellectual property and the creation and ownership of new discoveries under such license agreements. In addition, these license arrangements could require us to make timely payments to maintain our licenses and typically contain diligence or milestone-based termination provisions. Our failure to meet any obligations pursuant to such agreements could allow licensors to terminate our agreements or undertake other remedies such as converting exclusive to non-exclusive licenses if we are unable to cure or obtain waivers for such failures or amend such agreements on terms acceptable to us or at all. In addition, license agreements may be terminated or may expire by their terms, and we may not be able to maintain the exclusivity of these licenses or any rights to the underlying intellectual property. If we cannot obtain and maintain licenses that are advantageous or necessary to the development or the commercialization of our products or product candidates, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license similar technology or to find other alternatives to maintaining the competitive position of our products or product candidates. If such alternatives are not available to us in a timely manner or on acceptable terms, we may be unable to develop or commercialize certain of our products or product candidates. In the absence of a current license, we may be required to redesign our technology so it does not infringe a third-party's intellectual property (including patents), which may not be possible or could require substantial funds and time.

Many of our employees or consultants may have been previously employed in other biopharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Some of these individuals executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment or engagements. Although no claims against us are currently pending, we may be subject to claims that these employees or consultants or we have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers or clients. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. A loss of key research personnel or their work product could hamper our ability to develop and ultimately commercialize, or prevent us from developing and commercializing, our product candidates, which could severely harm our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. We may rely, in some circumstances, on trade secrets and confidentiality agreements to protect our technology. Although trade secrets are difficult to protect, wherever possible, we use confidential disclosure agreements to protect the proprietary nature of our technology. Our standard practice is to require each of our collaborators, commercial partners, employees, consultants, contractors and advisors to enter into an agreement before beginning their employment, consulting or advisory relationship with us that in general provides that the individuals must keep confidential and not disclose to other parties any of our confidential information developed or learned by the individuals during the course of their relationship with us except in limited circumstances. These agreements with employees, consultants and contractors also generally provide that we own all inventions conceived by the individuals in the course of rendering their employment or services to us. However, there can be no assurance that these agreements will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach, or that our trade secrets and/or proprietary information will not otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may also arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions, which could result in substantial costs which could severely harm our business.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications are due to be paid to the United States Patent and Trademark Office and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdictions, and in such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market.

The biopharmaceutical patent environment outside the U.S. is also uncertain. We may be particularly affected by this uncertainty since several of our product candidates or our collaborators' vaccine candidates may initially address market opportunities outside the U.S., where we may only be able to obtain limited patent protection, if any at all. For example, while many countries such as the U.S. permit method of use patents or patent claims relating to the use of drug products, in some countries the law relating to patentability of such use claims is evolving, or may prohibit certain activities, and may be unfavorably interpreted to prevent us from successfully prosecuting some or all of our pending patent applications. There are some countries that currently do not allow such method of use patents or patent claims, or that significantly limit the types of uses, claims or subject matter that are patentable. Patents are of national or regional effect. Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our products and product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the U.S. can be less extensive than those in the U.S. 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 U.S. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the U.S. or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the U.S. or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the U.S. These competitor products may compete with our products and product candidates, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. Geo-political actions in the U.S. and in foreign countries could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications or those of any current or future licensors and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of any current or future licensors. Various companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of many countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to pharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights. Various countries outside the U.S. 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. As a result, a patent owner may have limited remedies in certain circumstances, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we are 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. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license. Further, the standards applied by the USPTO, foreign patent offices and other adjudicating bodies in granting and/or adjudicating patents are not always applied uniformly or predictably. As such, we do not know the degree of future protection that we will have on our products and product candidates.

Our activities, and the activities of our agents, including some contracted third parties, are subject to extensive government regulation and oversight both in the U.S. and in foreign jurisdictions. Our interactions with physicians and others in a position to prescribe or purchase our products are subject to a legal regime designed to prevent healthcare fraud and abuse and off-label promotion. We also are subject to laws pertaining to transparency of transfers of value to healthcare providers; privacy and data protection; compliance with industry voluntary compliance guidelines; and prohibiting the payment of bribes. Relevant U.S. laws include: - the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits persons from, among other things, knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made under federal health care programs, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs;- federal false claims laws, including the False Claims Act and Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibit individuals or entities from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment to the government or its agents that are false or fraudulent;- the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and governing regulations which, among other things, prohibit off-label promotion of prescription drugs;- the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act created under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education and Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, "ACA") which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other health care professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by such physicians and their immediate family members;- the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), which created, among other things, new federal criminal statutes that prohibit knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services;- HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and their implementing regulations, which imposes certain requirements on "covered entities," including certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, and their respective "business associates" that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity as well as their covered subcontractors relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information;- the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits the payment of bribes to foreign government officials and requires that a company's books and records accurately reflect our transactions; and - foreign and state law equivalents of each of the federal laws described above, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by state health insurance programs or any third-party payor, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry's voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information on the pricing of certain drugs; state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA. In the U.S., the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, states' Attorneys General and other governmental authorities actively enforce the laws and regulations discussed above. These entities also coordinate extensively with the FDA, using legal theories that connect violations of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (such as off-label promotion) to the eventual submission of false claims to government healthcare programs. Prosecution of such promotion cases under the False Claims Act provides the potential for private parties (qui tam relators, or "whistleblowers") to initiate cases on behalf of the government and provides for significantly higher penalties upon conviction. In the U.S., pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have been the target of numerous government prosecutions and investigations alleging violations of law, including claims asserting impermissible off-label promotion of pharmaceutical products, payments intended to influence the referral of federal or state health care business, submission of false claims for government reimbursement, or submission of incorrect pricing information. Violations of any of the laws described above or any other applicable governmental regulations and other similar foreign laws may subject us, our employees or our agents to significant criminal, civil and administrative penalties, including fines, civil monetary penalties, exclusion from participation in government health care programs (including, in the U.S., Medicare and Medicaid), disgorgement, imprisonment, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the restriction or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. Additionally, whether or not we have complied with the law, an investigation into alleged unlawful conduct may cause us to incur significant expense, cause reputational damage, divert management time and attention, and otherwise adversely affect our business. While we have developed and instituted a corporate compliance program, we cannot guarantee that we, our employees, our consultants, contractors, or other agents are or will be in compliance with all applicable U.S. or foreign laws.

We have applied for, and in some cases have received, grants from various charitable, philanthropic and other organizations that, if and when received, may come with certain pricing requirements, global access requirements, reporting requirements or other covenants that require us to make the funded product available worldwide and on a nondiscriminatory basis. For example, we received such an initial grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2020 to help fund the potential scale-up of production of our CpG 1018 adjuvant that may be required in the event the CpG 1018 adjuvant is included in any approved and commercially available vaccine, whether a COVID-19 vaccine or otherwise. Covenants in these types of grants may limit the price we can charge for any funded product and may involve a license to use technology we own that is included in the funded products if we do not comply. Such price limitations or licenses, if invoked, could serve to limit the prices we charge, or our control over the manufacturing and distribution of grant-funded products. Failure to agree to such requirements, may result in us not receiving some or all of the grant.

We expect there will continue to be federal and state laws and/or regulations, proposed and implemented, that could impact our operations and business. For example, the ACA, among other things, imposes a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products. It also contains substantial provisions intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, and impose additional health policy reforms, any or all of which may affect our business. There have been executive, legal and political challenges to certain aspects of ACA. For example, President Trump signed several executive orders and other directives designed to delay, circumvent, or loosen certain requirements mandated by ACA. Concurrently, Congress considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of ACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, several bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the ACA have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 included a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the "individual mandate." In addition, the 2020 federal spending package permanently eliminated, effective January 1, 2020, the ACA-mandated "Cadillac" tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax and, effective January l, 2021, also eliminated the health insurer tax. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 among other things, amended the ACA, effective January 1, 2019, to increase from 50 percent to 70 percent the point-of-sale discount that is owed by pharmaceutical manufacturers who participate in Medicare Part D and close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the "donut hole." 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, the ACA has been subject to various health reform measures. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ("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 through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any such challenges and additional healthcare reform measures by the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business. Other legislative changes have also been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011 resulted in aggregate reductions in Medicare payments to providers of up to two percent per fiscal year, starting in 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug's average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024. In addition, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Such laws, and others that may affect our business that have been recently enacted or may in the future be enacted, may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding. Also, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently in the U.S. over pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. At the federal level, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, "Promoting Competition in the American Economy," with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden's executive order, on September 9, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare, and subjects drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated "maximum fair price" under the law, and (ii) 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. These provisions take effect progressively starting in 2023. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug pricing negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated 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 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("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. Further, on December 7, 2023, the Biden administration announced an initiative to control the price of prescription drugs through the use of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act. On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published for comment a Draft Interagency Guidance Framework for Considering the Exercise of March-In Rights which for the first time includes the price of a product as one factor an agency can use when deciding to exercise march-in rights. While march-in rights have not previously been exercised, it is uncertain if that will continue under the new framework. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, and restrictions on certain product access. In some cases, such legislation and regulations have been designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. For example, on January 5, 2024, the FDA approved Florida's Section 804 Importation Program (SIP) proposal to import certain drugs from Canada for specific state healthcare programs. It is unclear how this program will be implemented, including which drugs will be chosen, and whether it will be subject to legal challenges in the United States or Canada. Other states have also submitted SIP proposals that are pending review by the FDA. Any such approved importation plans, when implemented, may result in lower drug prices for products covered by those programs. Many EU Member States periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future or the effect any such initiatives may have on our business. However, in the future, there will likely continue to be additional proposals relating to the reform of the U.S. healthcare system, and other equivalent foreign systems, some of which could further limit coverage and reimbursement of products, including our product candidates. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, such as our U.S., European Union and Great Britain approvals of HEPLISAV-B, and are able to commercialize them as we have with HEPLISAV-B, our products may not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors and the medical community. The degree of market acceptance of HEPLISAV-B and any of our future approved products will depend upon a number of factors, including: - the indication for which the product is approved and its approved labeling;- the presence of other competing approved products;- the potential advantages of the product over existing and future treatment methods;- the relative convenience and ease of administration of the product;- the strength of our sales, marketing and distribution efforts;- the price and cost-effectiveness of the product; and - third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement and the willingness of patients to pay out-of-pocket in the absence of sufficient reimbursement by third-party payors. The FDA or other regulatory authorities could limit the labeling indication for which our product candidates may be marketed or could otherwise limit marketing efforts for our products. If we are unable to achieve approval or successfully market any of our products or product candidates, or marketing efforts are restricted by regulatory limits, our ability to generate revenue could be significantly impaired.

With respect to HEPLISAV-B and our other product candidates in development, we and our third-party manufacturers and suppliers are required to comply with applicable cGMP regulations and other international regulatory requirements. The regulations require that our products and product candidates be manufactured and records maintained in a prescribed manner with respect to manufacturing, testing and quality control/quality assurance activities. Manufacturers and suppliers of key components and materials must be named in a Biologics License Application ("BLA") submitted to the FDA for any product candidate for which we are seeking FDA approval. Additionally, third-party manufacturers and suppliers and any manufacturing facility must undergo a pre-approval inspection before we can obtain marketing authorization for any of our product candidates. Even after a manufacturer has been qualified by the FDA, the manufacturer must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to ensure full compliance with GMP. Manufacturers are subject to regular, periodic inspections by the FDA following initial approval. Further, to the extent that we contract with third parties for the manufacture of our products or product candidates, our ability to control third-party compliance with FDA requirements will be limited to contractual remedies and rights of inspection. If, as a result of the FDA's inspections, it determines that the equipment, facilities, laboratories or processes do not comply with applicable FDA regulations and conditions of product approval, the FDA may not approve the product or may suspend the manufacturing operations. If the manufacturing operations of any of the suppliers for our products or product candidates are suspended, we may be unable to generate sufficient quantities of commercial or clinical supplies of product to meet market demand, which would harm our business. In addition, if delivery of material from our suppliers is interrupted for any reason, we might be unable to ship our approved product for commercial supply or to supply our products in development for clinical trials. Significant and costly delays can occur if the qualification of a new supplier is required. Similar requirements and procedures apply outside of the United States. Failure to comply with regulatory requirements could prevent or delay marketing approval or require the expenditure of money or other resources to correct. Failure to comply with applicable requirements may also result in warning letters, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, refusal of the government to renew marketing applications and criminal prosecution, any of which could be harmful to our ability to generate revenues and to our stock price.

Our registration and commercial timelines depend on further discussions with regulatory authorities and requirements and any requests that they may make for additional data or completion of additional clinical trials. Any such requirements or requests could: - adversely affect our ability to timely and successfully commercialize or market these product candidates;- result in significant additional costs;- potentially diminish any competitive advantages for those products;- potentially limit the markets for those products;- adversely affect our ability to enter into collaborations or receive milestone payments or royalties from potential collaborators;- cause us to abandon the development of the affected product candidate; or - limit our ability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms, if at all.

We rely on our facility in Düsseldorf and third parties to perform the multiple processes involved in manufacturing hepatitis B surface antigen for use in HEPLISAV-B, the combination of the oligonucleotide and the antigens, and formulation, fill and finish. We may continue to do the same for any additional products we might add in the future through natural internal expansion of our pipeline, or in transactions with an external third-party or parties. The FDA approved our pre-filled syringe presentation of HEPLISAV-B in 2018 and we expect such presentation will be the sole presentation for HEPLISAV-B going forward. We have limited experience in manufacturing and supplying this presentation ourselves, and rely on a contract manufacturer to do so. Our contract manufacturer is the only approved provider that we have, and there can be no assurance that we or they can successfully manufacture sufficient quantities of pre-filled syringes in compliance with good manufacturing practice ("GMP") in order to meet market demand, whether because of problems with our supplier's own operations, operations of its sub-suppliers, issues with downstream supply chains or otherwise. If our contract manufacturer is unable to source components needed to complete fill and finish of our pre-filled syringes, we may be required to identify a second source which would have associated costs and regulatory requirements. Qualifying a second source could take more than a year to accomplish. If we are unable to do all this, on a timely basis or at all, our HEPLISAV-B sales could be materially and adversely impacted. Historically, we have also relied on a limited number of suppliers to produce oligonucleotides for clinical trials and a single supplier to produce (i) our CpG 1018 adjuvant for manufacture of HEPLISAV-B and for sale to our collaborators and (ii) our pre-filled syringe presentation. In 2021, we qualified a second supplier to manufacture CpG 1018 adjuvant for our COVID business. If we are unable to maintain our existing suppliers for CpG 1018 adjuvant, we would have to establish an alternate qualified manufacturing capability ourselves, which would result in significant additional operating costs and delays in manufacturing HEPLISAV-B, or CpG 1018 adjuvant, and developing and commercializing our, and potentially our collaborators', product candidates. We or other third parties may not be able to produce product at a cost, quantity and quality that are available from our current third-party suppliers, or at all. In countries outside of the U.S., we may not be able to comply with comparable foreign regulations, and our manufacturing process may be subject to delays, disruptions or quality control/quality assurance problems. Noncompliance with these regulations or other problems with our manufacturing process may limit or disrupt the commercialization of our products or our and our collaborators' product candidates and could result in significant expense.