Grifols SA (GRFS) Risk Factors

Our business exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and an even greater risk when we commercially sell any products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in: - decreased demand for our products and any product candidates that we may develop;- injury to our reputation;- withdrawal of clinical trial participants;- costs to defend the related litigation;- substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;- loss of revenue; and - the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop. Like many plasma fractionators, we have been, and may in the future be, involved in product liability or related claims relating to our products, including claims alleging the transmission of disease through the use of such products. Plasma is a biological matter that is known to be capable of transmitting viruses and pathogens, whether known or unknown. Therefore, our plasma and plasma derivative products, if donors are not properly screened or if the plasma is not properly collected, tested, inactivated, processed, stored and transported, could cause serious disease and possibly death to the patient. See also "- Our ability to continue to produce safe and effective products depends on a plasma supply free of transmittable diseases." Any transmission of disease through the use of one of our products or third-party products sold by us could result in claims by persons allegedly infected by such products. Our potential product liability also extends to our Diagnostic and Hospital division products. In addition, we sell and distribute third-party products, and the laws of the jurisdictions where we sell or distribute such products could also expose us to product liability claims for those products. Furthermore, the presence of a defect in a product could require us to carry out a recall of such product. A product liability claim or a product recall could result in substantial financial losses, negative reputational repercussions and an inability to retain customers. Although we have a program of insurance policies designed to protect us and our subsidiaries from product liability claims, and we self-insure a portion of this risk, claims made against our insurance policies could exceed our limits of coverage. We intend to expand our insurance coverage as our sales grow. However, as product liability insurance is expensive and can be difficult to obtain, a product liability claim could decrease our access to product liability insurance on acceptable terms. In turn, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost and may not be able to obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. Although we have not experienced a material liability claim, we cannot assure you that we will not experience one in the future.

Technological advances have accelerated changes in recent years. Future technological developments could render our production processes uneconomical and may require us to invest substantial amounts of capital to upgrade our facilities. Such investments could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, we may not be able to fund such investments from existing funds or raise sufficient capital to make such investments.

Plasma is a raw material that is susceptible to damage. Almost immediately after its collection from a donor, plasma is stored and transported at temperatures that are at or below -20 degrees Celsius (-4 degrees Fahrenheit). Once we manufacture plasma derivative products, they must be handled carefully and kept at appropriate temperatures. Our failure, or the failure of third parties that supply, ship or distribute our plasma and plasma derivative products, to properly care for our plasma or plasma derivative products may require us to destroy some raw materials or products. If the volume of plasma or plasma derivative products damaged by such failures were to be significant, the loss of that plasma or those plasma derivative products could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The majority of our revenue depends on our access to U.S. source plasma (plasma obtained through plasmapheresis), the principal raw material for our plasma derivative products. Our ability to increase revenue depends substantially on increased access to plasma. If we are unable to obtain sufficient quantities of source plasma, we may be unable to find an alternative cost-effective source of plasma and we would be limited in our ability to maintain current manufacturing levels of plasma derivative products. As a result, we could experience a substantial decrease in net revenues or profit margins, a loss of customers, a negative effect on our reputation as a reliable supplier of plasma derivative products or a substantial delay in our production growth plans. Our current business plan envisages an increase in the production of plasma derivative products, which depends on our ability to increase plasma collections or improve product yield. The ability to increase plasma collections may be limited, our supply of plasma could be disrupted or the cost of plasma could increase substantially, as a result of numerous factors, including: - A reduction in the donor pool. Regulators in most of the largest markets for plasma derivative products, including the United States, restrict the use of plasma collected from specific countries and regions in the manufacture of plasma derivative products. For example, the appearance of the variant Creutzfeldt Jakob, or mad cow disease, resulted in the suspension of the use of plasma collected from U.K. residents and concern over the safety of blood products, which has led to increased domestic and foreign regulatory control over the collection and testing of plasma and the disqualification of certain segments of the population from the donor pool, significantly reducing the potential donor pool. The appearance of new viral strains could further reduce the potential donor pool. Also, changes in socioeconomic conditions could impact the number of donors. - Regulatory requirements. See "-Disruption of the operations of our plasma collection centers due to regulatory impediments or otherwise would cause us to become supply constrained and our financial performance would suffer."- Plasma supply sources. In recent years, there has been vertical integration in the industry as plasma derivatives manufacturers have been acquiring plasma collection centers. Any significant disruption in the supply of plasma or an increased demand for plasma may require us to obtain plasma from alternative sources, which may not be available on a timely basis.

In the United States, we regularly enter into distribution, supply and fulfillment contracts with group purchasing organizations, or GPOs, home care companies, alternate infusion sites, hospital groups and others. We are highly dependent on these agreements for the successful sale, distribution and delivery of our products. For example, we rely principally on GPOs and on our distributors to sell our immunoglobulin products. If such parties breach, terminate or otherwise fail to perform under these contracts, our ability to effectively distribute our products will be impaired and our business may be materially and adversely affected. In addition, through circumstances outside of our control, such as general economic decline, market saturation or increased competition, we may be unable to successfully renegotiate our contracts or secure terms which are as favorable to us. Furthermore, we rely in certain countries on distributors for sales of our products. Disagreements or difficulties with our distributors supporting our export business could result in a loss of sales.

We depend on a limited number of companies that supply and maintain our equipment and provide supplies such as chromatography resins, filter media, glass and stoppers used in the manufacture of our products. If our equipment should malfunction, the repair or replacement of the machinery may require substantial time and cost, which could disrupt our production and other operations. Our plasma collection centers rely on disposable goods supplied by third parties and information technology systems hosted by third parties. Our plasma collection centers cannot operate without an uninterrupted supply of these disposable goods and the operation of these systems. Alternative sources for key component parts or disposable goods may not be immediately available. And while we have experienced periodic outages of these systems, a material outage would affect our ability to operate our collection centers. Any new equipment or change in supplied materials may require revalidation by us or review and approval by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, including the EMA, which may be time-consuming and require additional capital and other resources. We may not be able to find an adequate alternative supplier in a reasonable time period, or on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. As a result, shipments of affected products may be limited or delayed. Our inability to obtain our key source supplies for the collection of plasma and manufacture of products may require us to delay shipments of products, harm customer relationships and force us to curtail operations.

In order for plasma to be used in the manufacturing of our products, the individual centers at which the plasma is collected must be licensed and approved by the regulatory authorities, such as the FDA and the EMA, of those countries in which we sell our products. When a new plasma collection center is opened, it must be inspected on an ongoing basis after its approval by the FDA and the EMA for compliance with cGMP and other regulatory requirements, and these regulatory requirements are subject to change. For example, an FDA final rule, effective May 23, 2016, addressed the collection of blood components, such as plasma, intended for transfusion or further manufacturing use, including requirements with respect to donor education, donor history and donor testing. While we believe that our centers have timely adopted the regulations, which generally reflected our existing approaches, the compliance efforts necessary for evolving requirements, such as these, may increase our costs. An unsatisfactory inspection could prevent a new center from being approved for operation or risk the suspension or revocation of an existing approval. In order for a plasma collection center to maintain its governmental approval to operate, its operations must continue to conform to cGMP and other regulatory requirements. In the event that we determine a plasma collection center did not comply with cGMP in collecting plasma, we may be unable to use and may ultimately destroy plasma collected from that center, which would be recorded as a charge to cost of goods. Additionally, if noncompliance in the plasma collection process is identified after the impacted plasma has been pooled with compliant plasma from other sources, entire plasma pools, in-process intermediate materials and final products could be impacted. Consequently, we could experience significant inventory impairment provisions and write-offs. We plan to continue to obtain our supplies of plasma for use in our manufacturing processes through collections at our plasma collection centers and through selective acquisitions or remodeling and relocations of existing centers. This strategy is dependent upon our ability to successfully integrate new centers, to obtain FDA and other necessary approvals for any centers not yet approved by the FDA, to maintain a cGMP compliant environment in all centers and to attract donors to our centers. Our ability to increase and improve the efficiency of production at our plasma collection centers may be affected by: (i) changes in the economic environment and population in selected regions where we operate plasma collection centers; (ii) the entry of competitive centers into regions where we operate; (iii) our misjudging the demographic potential of individual regions where we expect to increase production and attract new donors; (iv) unexpected facility related challenges; or (v) unexpected management challenges at select plasma collection centers.

We engage in various marketing, promotional and educational activities pertaining to, as well as the sale of, pharmaceutical products in a number of jurisdictions around the world. The promotion, marketing and sale of pharmaceutical products and medical devices is highly regulated and the sales and marketing practices of market participants such as us have been subject to increasing supervision by governmental authorities around the world, and we believe that this trend will continue. For example, the laws governing our conduct in the United States are enforceable by criminal, civil and administrative penalties. Violations of laws such as the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the Federal False Claims Act (FCA), the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) or provisions of the U.S. Social Security Act known as the "Anti-Kickback Law" and the "Civil Monetary Penalties Law," or any regulations promulgated under their authority, may result in jail sentences, fines or exclusion from federal and state programs, as may be determined by Medicare, Medicaid, the Department of Defense, other regulatory authorities and the courts. There can be no assurance that our activities will not come under the scrutiny of regulators and other government authorities or that our practices will not be found to violate applicable laws, rules and regulations or prompt lawsuits by private citizen "relators" under federal or state false claims laws. For a description of fraud and abuse laws see Item 4 of this Part I, "Information on the Company - E. Regulatory Matters - Government Regulation - United States Government Regulation - Anti-fraud and Abuse Regulation." Failure to comply with fraud and abuse laws and regulations could also result in other significant civil and criminal penalties and costs, including the loss of licenses and the inability to participate in federal and state health care programs, and could have a material adverse effect on our business. The fraud and abuse laws and regulations have been subject to heightened enforcement activity over the past few years, and significant enforcement activity has been the result of "relators" who serve as whistleblowers by filing complaints in the name of the United States (and if applicable, particular states) under applicable false claims laws, and who may receive up to 30% of total government recoveries. Even unsuccessful challenges by regulatory authorities or private relators could result in reputational harm and the incurring of substantial costs. Further, many of these laws are vague or indefinite and have not been interpreted by the courts, and have been subject to frequent modification and varied interpretation by prosecutorial and regulatory authorities, increasing the risk of noncompliance. Most states have adopted similar state false claims laws, and these state laws have their own penalties which may be in addition to FCA penalties, as well as other fraud and abuse laws. While we believe that we are substantially compliant with applicable fraud and abuse laws and regulations, and have adequate compliance programs and controls in place to ensure substantial compliance, we cannot predict whether changes in applicable law, or interpretation of laws, or changes in our services or marketing practices in response to changes in applicable law or interpretation of laws, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Failure to satisfy requirements under the FDCA can also result in penalties, as well as requirements to enter into consent decrees or orders that prescribe allowable corporate conduct. In this regard, our Los Angeles facility was previously managed pursuant to a consent decree that was entered into in February 1998 based on action by the FDA and the U.S. Department of Justice, or the DOJ, addressing FDCA violations committed by the former owner of the facility, Alpha Therapeutic Corporation, or Alpha. The consent decree provided for annual inspection of the plant by the FDA. On March 15, 2012, the United States District Court for the Central District of California entered an order vacating the consent decree on the Los Angeles facility. Adverse consequences can also result from failure to comply with the requirements of the 340B Program under the PHS Act, which extends discounts to a variety of community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants under the PHS Act. In early 2016, HRSA finalized a regulation regarding the 340B pricing methodology, providing guidelines for when civil monetary penalties may be issued for "knowing and intentional" manufacturer overcharges of 340B covered entities. Under this regulation, which became effective on January 1, 2019, manufacturers who overcharge could be subject to significant monetary penalties. Such findings could also result in negative publicity that could harm the manufacturer's reputation or cause business disruption, penalties, or CMP. Under the rule, the CMP may be up to $5,000 for each instance of overcharging a covered entity. We believe that we have complied with applicable legal requirements, but if we are ultimately required to change our sales or pricing practices with regard to the distribution of drugs under the 340B program, or if we were required to pay penalties under the applicable regulations, there would be an adverse effect on our revenues and profitability. In addition, companies in the United States, Canada and the European Union are generally restricted from promoting approved products for other indications that are not specifically approved by the competent regulatory authorities, nor can companies promote unapproved products. Improper promotion of unapproved drugs or devices or unapproved indications for a drug or device may subject us to warnings from, or enforcement action by, regulatory agencies, harm demand for our products, and subject us to civil and criminal sanctions. Further, sanctions under the FCA have recently been brought against companies accused of promoting off-label uses of drugs, because such promotion induces the use and subsequent claims for reimbursement under Medicare and other federal programs. The ACA significantly strengthened provisions of the FCA, the anti-kickback provisions of Medicare and Medicaid and other health care antifraud provisions, leading to the possibility of greatly increased qui tam suits by relators for perceived violations. Industry data indicates that a significant portion of IVIG volume may be used to fill physician prescriptions for indications not approved by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities. Violations or allegations of violations of the foregoing restrictions could materially and adversely affect our business. We are required to report detailed pricing information, net of included discounts, rebates and other concessions, to CMS for the purpose of calculating national reimbursement levels, certain federal prices and certain federal and state rebate obligations. We have established systems for collecting and reporting this data accurately to CMS and have instituted a compliance program to assure that the information collected is complete in all respects. If we report pricing information that is not accurate to the federal government, we could be subject to fines and other sanctions (including potential FCA liability) that could adversely affect our business. To market and sell our products outside of the United States, we must obtain and maintain regulatory approvals and comply with regulatory requirements in such jurisdictions. The approval procedures vary among countries in complexity and timing. We may not obtain approvals from regulatory authorities outside the United States on a timely basis, if at all, which would preclude us from commercializing products in those markets. In addition, some countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, regulate the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In these countries, pricing discussions with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. Such trials may be time consuming and expensive and may not show an advantage in efficacy for our products. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, in either the United States or the European Union, we could be adversely affected. In the United States under a provision in the ACA, referred to as the Physician Payment Sunshine Act or Open Payments Program (the "PPS Act"), we are required to report and disclose payments or other transfers of value made to certain practitioners, such as physicians and teaching hospitals. CMS publishes information from these reports on a publicly available website, including amounts transferred and healthcare provider identities. Under the PPS Act we are required to collect and report detailed information regarding certain financial relationships we have with covered healthcare providers. The PPS Act preempts similar state reporting laws, although we or our subsidiaries may also be required to report under certain state transparency laws that address circumstances not covered by the PPS Act, and some of these state laws are also ambiguous. We are also subject to foreign regulations requiring transparency of certain interactions between suppliers and their customers. While we believe we have substantially compliant programs and controls in place to comply with these reporting requirements, we cannot assure you that regulations will not require us to take additional compliance steps. Our compliance with these rules imposes additional costs on us.

We develop and manufacture pharmaceutical products in a number of jurisdictions around the world. These activities subject us to several governmental regulations mandating specific governmental approvals that are necessary for us to develop our products in the various countries in which we operate. Obtaining market approval for our products is a lengthy, costly and complex regulatory process that requires intensive preclinical and clinical data, and the approval process can vary significantly depending on the regulatory authority of each jurisdiction. Relevant health authorities may, at the time of the filing of the application for a marketing authorization, or later during their review, impose requirements that can evolve over time, including requiring additional clinical trials, and such authorities may delay or refuse to grant approval. Even where we have obtained marketing approval for a product in one or more major markets, we may need to invest significant time and resources in applying for approval in other markets, and there is no assurance that we will be able to obtain such approval. In recent years, health authorities have become increasingly focused on product safety and on the risk/benefit profile of pharmaceutical products, which could lead to more burdensome and costly approval processes and negatively affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval for products under development. For example, the FDA and the EMA have been implementing strict requirements for approval, particularly in terms of the volume of data needed to demonstrate a product's efficacy and safety. In the United States, our main market, even with the changes in the ACA to accelerate the regulatory process for certain products, including biosimilars, it is still a lengthy, costly and complex regulatory process. The ACA introduced a new abbreviated regulatory approval pathway for biological products found to be "biosimilar" to or "interchangeable" with a biological "reference product" previously licensed under a Biologics License Applications (BLA). This abbreviated approval pathway is intended to permit a biosimilar product to come to market more quickly and less expensively by relying to some extent on the data generated by the reference product's sponsor, and the FDA's previous review and approval of the reference product. The law provides that no biosimilar application may be accepted for FDA review until four years after the date the reference product was first licensed by the FDA, and that the FDA may not make approval of an application effective until 12 years after the reference product was first licensed. The law also includes an extensive process for the innovator biologic and biosimilar manufacturer to litigate patent infringement, validity, and enforceability, which could increase costs of protecting our reference products. Once approved, biosimilars likely would compete with, and in some circumstances may be deemed under applicable laws to be "interchangeable with," the previously approved reference product. The extent to which a biosimilar product, once approved, will be substituted for any of our products, in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. The FDA is actively seeking to encourage the entry of biosimilars into the marketplace, including issuing, in July 2018, its Biosimilar Action Plan, intended to enhance the speed of the biosimilar development and approval processes. We expect in the future to face greater competition from biosimilar products, including a possible increase in patent challenges, all of which could adversely affect our financial performance. Regarding access to our products, the ACA established and provided significant funding for a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to coordinate and fund Comparative Effectiveness Research, as those terms are defined in the ACA. While the stated intent of Comparative Effectiveness Research is to develop information to guide providers to the most efficacious therapies, outcomes of Comparative Effectiveness Research could influence the reimbursement or coverage for therapies that are determined to be less cost effective than others. Should any of our products be determined to be less cost effective than alternative therapies, the levels of reimbursement for these products, or the willingness to reimburse at all, could be impacted, which could materially impact our financial results.

We engage in various manufacturing, processing, marketing and sales activities pertaining to pharmaceutical products in a number of jurisdictions around the world. These activities subject us to several governmental regulations mandating multiple types of controls over pricing and general operations in the various countries in which we operate. The growth of overall healthcare costs as a percentage of gross domestic product in many countries means that governments and payers are under intense pressure to control spending even more tightly. In the United States, which is our main market, implementation of the ACA and trends in recent years in the healthcare industry has included significant changes including a shift towards managed or value-based care, collective purchasing agreements, consolidation in office-based healthcare providers, and other cost-saving, revenue and payment reduction measures with respect to, for example, several government healthcare programs that cover our products, including Medicaid, Medicare Parts B and D and the 340B Program. These trends could have a material adverse impact on our financial performance. For more details of these measures see Item 4 of this Part I, "Information on the Company - E. Regulatory Matters - Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement." Global emphasis on healthcare cost containment exerts significant pressures on the pricing of our products and on our ability to obtain and maintain reimbursement rates to cover our products, which may adversely affect our business. The availability of federal funds to pay for our products under Medicaid and Medicare Part B programs requires that we extend discounts under the 340B Program, and changes to this program under the ACA could adversely affect our financial performance. The 340B Program extends discounts to a variety of community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants from the 340B Program, as well as hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of certain low income individuals, and the ACA expanded the number of qualified 340B entities eligible to purchase products for outpatient use, adding certain cancer centers, children's hospitals, critical access hospitals and rural referral centers. The 340B Program price, or ceiling price, cannot exceed the AMP (as reported to CMS under the Medicaid drug rebate program) less the Medicaid unit rebate amount. We have entered into a pharmaceutical pricing agreement (PPA), with the government in which we have agreed to participate in the 340B Program by charging eligible entities no more than the ceiling price for drugs intended for outpatient use. Evolving requirements with respect to this program continue to be issued by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) the federal agency responsible for oversight of the 340B Program, which creates uncertainty. We expect the healthcare industry will continue to be subject to increasing pricing and cost containment pressures in 2021 and beyond. These pricing and cost containment pressures may impact the reimbursement rates for our products and have an adverse effect on our business. We believe that we meet the requirements of the 340B Program, and are continuing to review and monitor these and other developments affecting the 340B Program. Continuing efforts of certain regulatory and legislative bodies, as well as the United States Congress, are focused on pricing and reimbursement. The outcome of these continuing discussions remains uncertain, but may have a potential negative impact on our business.

We engage in various manufacturing, processing, marketing and sales activities pertaining to pharmaceutical products in a number of jurisdictions around the world. These activities subject us to several governmental regulations governing our global operations. The laws and regulations of the many jurisdictions that govern our business and operations are subject to varying and evolving interpretations that affect our ability to comply, and future changes, additions, and enforcement approaches, including in light of political changes. For example, in the United States, President Biden's administration has authorized and encouraged a freeze on certain federal regulations that have been published but are not yet effective, as well as a review of all federal regulations issued during President Trump's administration. Changes with respect to the applicable laws and regulations may require us to update or revise our operations, services, marketing practices, and compliance programs and controls, and may impose additional and unforeseen costs on us, pose new or previously immaterial risks to us, or may otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business. There can be no assurance that current and future government regulations will not adversely affect our business, and we cannot predict new regulatory priorities, the form, content or timing of regulatory actions, and their impact on the health care industry and on our business and operations.

The manufacturing processes for our products are governed by detailed written procedures and governmental regulations that set forth cGMP requirements for blood, blood products and other products. Our quality operations unit monitors compliance with these procedures and regulations, and the conformance of materials, manufacturing intermediates and final products to their specifications. Failure to adhere to established procedures or regulations, or to meet a specification, could require that a product or material be rejected and destroyed. Our adherence to cGMP regulations and the effectiveness of our quality systems are periodically assessed through inspections of our facilities by the FDA, and analogous regulatory authorities of other countries. If deficiencies are noted during an inspection, we must take action to correct those deficiencies and to demonstrate to the regulatory authorities that our corrections have been effective. If serious deficiencies are noted or if we are unable to prevent recurrences, we may have to recall product or suspend operations until appropriate measures can be implemented. We are also required to report certain deviations from procedures to the FDA and even if we determine that the deviations were not material, the FDA could require us to take similar measures. Since cGMP reflects ever-evolving standards, we regularly need to update our manufacturing processes and procedures to comply with cGMP. These changes may cause us to incur costs without improving our profitability or the safety of our products. For example, more sensitive testing assays (if and when they become available) may be required or existing procedures or processes may require revalidation, all of which may be costly and time consuming and could delay or prevent the manufacturing of a product or launch of a new product. Changes in manufacturing processes, including a change in the location where the product is manufactured or a change of a third-party manufacturer, may require prior FDA review and approval or revalidation of the manufacturing processes and procedures in accordance with cGMP regulations. There may be comparable foreign requirements. Grifols received approval from the FDA to relocate existing immunodiagnostic manufacturing operations to a new consolidated manufacturing facility in Emeryville, California, or our Emeryville facility. The transition, including all FDA licensed antigens regulatory submissions, was completed in 2019. The completion of the transition allowed Grifols to transfer all 21 products to the new Emeryville facility. To validate our manufacturing processes and procedures following completion of our upgraded facilities, we must demonstrate that the processes and procedures at the upgraded facilities are comparable to those currently in place at our other facilities. To provide such a comparative analysis, both the existing processes and the processes that we expect to be implemented at our upgraded facilities must comply with the regulatory standards prevailing at the time that our expected upgrade is completed. In addition, regulatory requirements, including cGMP regulations, continually evolve. Failure to adjust our operations to conform to new standards as established and interpreted by applicable regulatory authorities would create a compliance risk that could impair our ability to sustain normal operations. Regulatory authorities, including the FDA and the EMA, routinely inspect our facilities to assess ongoing compliance with cGMP. If the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authorities find our facilities to be out of compliance, our ongoing operations or plans to expand would be adversely affected.

As a foreign private issuer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain rules under the Exchange Act, including the proxy rules under Section 14 of the Exchange Act, which impose certain disclosure and procedural requirements for proxy solicitations. Moreover, we are not required to file periodic reports and financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, as frequently or as promptly as U.S. companies with securities registered under the Exchange Act; we are not required to file financial statements prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles; and we are not required to comply with SEC Regulation FD, which imposes certain restrictions on the selective disclosure of material non-public information. In addition, our officers, directors and principal shareholders are not subject to the reporting or short-swing profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act or the rules under the Exchange Act with respect to their purchases and sales of our Class A shares or Class B shares. Accordingly, you may receive less information about us than you would receive about a company incorporated in the United States and may be afforded less protection under the U.S. federal securities laws than you would be afforded with respect to a company incorporated in the United States. If we lose our status as a foreign private issuer at some future time, we will no longer be exempt from such rules and, among other things, will be required to file periodic reports and financial statements as if we were a company incorporated in the United States. The costs incurred in fulfilling these additional regulatory requirements could be substantial. Additionally, pursuant to The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, or NASDAQ, "Listing Rules," as a foreign private issuer, we may elect to follow our home country practice in lieu of the corporate governance requirements of the NASDAQ Listing Rule 5600 Series, with the exception of those rules that are required to be followed pursuant to the provisions of NASDAQ Listing Rule 5615(a)(3). We have elected to follow Spanish practices in lieu of the requirements of the NASDAQ Listing Rule 5600 Series to the extent permitted under NASDAQ Listing Rule 5615(a)(3). See Item 16.G. of Part II, "Corporate Governance."

Our products or product candidates may infringe or be accused of infringing one or more claims of an issued patent or may fall within the scope of one or more claims in a published patent application that may be subsequently issued and to which we do not hold a license or other rights. Third parties may own or control these patents or patent applications in the United States and/or abroad. These third parties could bring claims against us or our collaborators that would cause us to incur substantial expenses and, if successful against us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if a patent infringement suit were brought against us or our collaborators, we or they could be forced to stop or delay research, development, manufacturing or sales of the product or product candidate that is the subject of the suit. If we are found to be infringing on the patent rights of a third party, or in order to avoid potential claims, we or our collaborators may choose or be required to seek a license from a third party and be required to pay license fees or royalties or both. These licenses may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we or our collaborators were able to obtain a license, the rights may be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened patent infringement claims, we or our collaborators are unable to enter into licenses on acceptable terms. There has been substantial litigation and other proceedings regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. In addition to infringement claims against us, we may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including interference proceedings declared by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time. Many of our employees were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. We take steps to ensure that our employees do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us. We may, however, be subject to claims that we or these employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, trade secrets or other proprietary information of any such employee's former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims and, even if we are successful in defending ourselves, could result in substantial costs to us or be distracting to our management. If we fail to defend any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel.

We generally seek to protect proprietary information by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors and third parties. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information, may be limited as to their term and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently developed by our competitors or other third parties. To the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to determine and enforce the scope of our proprietary rights, and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could adversely affect our competitive business position. We also rely on contractual protections with our customers, suppliers, distributors, employees and consultants and implement security measures designed to protect our trade secrets. We cannot assure you that these contractual protections and security measures will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any such breach or that our suppliers, employees or consultants will not assert rights to intellectual property arising out of such contracts. Since we rely on trade secrets and nondisclosure agreements, in addition to patents, to protect some of our intellectual property, there is a risk that third parties may obtain and improperly utilize our proprietary information to our competitive disadvantage. We may not be able to detect the unauthorized use of such information, prevent such use or take appropriate and timely steps to enforce our intellectual property rights.