Item 3. Legal Proceedings
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Bioventus shareholder litigation
On January 12, 2023, the Company and certain of its current and former directors and officers were named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit filed in the Middle District of North Carolina (the “Court”), Ciarciello v. Bioventus Inc., No. 1:23– CV – 00032-CCE-JEP (M.D.N.C. 2023). The complaint asserted violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act and generally alleges that the Company failed to disclose certain information regarding rebate practices, its business and financial prospects, and the sufficiency of internal controls regarding financial reporting. The complaint seeks damages in an unspecified amount. On April 12, 2023, the Court appointed Wayne County Employees’ Retirement System as lead plaintiff. The plaintiff’s amended consolidated complaint was filed with the Court on June 12, 2023. On July 17, 2023, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint raising a number of legal and factual deficiencies with the amended consolidated complaint. In response to the defendants’ motion to dismiss, the lead plaintiff filed a second amended complaint on July 31, 2023. The defendants moved to dismiss the second amended complaint on August 21, 2023, which the Court granted in part and denied in part on November 6, 2023. The Court dismissed the plaintiff’s Securities Act claims, but allowed the plaintiff’s Exchange Act claims to proceed into discovery.
On July 15, 2024, a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement (the “Settlement Agreement”) by and between the lead plaintiff and the defendants was filed with the Court and the Court preliminarily approved the Settlement Agreement on August 13, 2024. The Court entered judgment on December 18, 2024, granting final approval of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and dismissing all claims against the defendants, including the Company. The parties settled without any admission of liability or wrongdoing by any party. The settlement amount of $15.3 million, together with interest earned thereon, has been paid by the defendants and/or the defendant’s insurers. The Company incurred $13.8 million of net shareholder litigation costs (including estimated settlement and reimbursement) during the year ended December 31, 2024 under the Settlement Agreement, which were recorded in selling, general and administrative expense within the consolidated condensed statements of operations and comprehensive loss.
On October 4, 2023, certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers were named as defendants in a derivative shareholder lawsuit (in which the Company is a nominal defendant) filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Grogan, on behalf of Bioventus Inc., v. Reali, et al. , No. 1:23-CV-01099-RGA (D. Del. 2023). The complaint asserts violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, breaches of fiduciary duties and related state law claims, and a claim for contribution, and generally alleges the same purported misconduct as alleged in the Ciarciello case. On January 12, 2024, the Court agreed to stay this case pending resolution of the Ciarciello case.
On February 9, 2024, another plaintiff filed a derivative shareholder lawsuit against certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers (in which the Company is a nominal defendant) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Sanderson, on behalf of Bioventus Inc., v. Reali, et al. , No. 1:24-cv-00180-RGA (D. Del. 2024). Like the Grogan case, this case asserts violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, breaches of fiduciary duties and related state law claims, and a claim for contribution, and generally alleges the same purported misconduct as alleged in the Ciarciello case. On May 1, 2024, the parties filed a stipulation to consolidate the two derivative matters and stay them on terms similar to those entered in the Grogan case. On May 2, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware granted the stipulation and ordered the consolidation of the Sanderson and Grogan cases, captioned In re Bioventus Inc. Derivative Litigation , Case No.: 1:23-cv-01099-RGA. The Court also stayed the consolidated case. Following resolution of the Ciarciello case, on December 30, 2024, the plaintiffs in the consolidated case filed an amended complaint asserting the same claims as in the Grogan case against certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers. On January 6, 2025, the Court entered a scheduling order, under which the defendants had until March 3, 2025, to file a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On February 21, 2025, the parties submitted a joint stipulation to stay the proceedings to allow the parties time to negotiate a settlement, which the company expects to be in the form of governance reforms.
On July 31, 2024, another plaintiff filed a derivative complaint against certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors, naming Bioventus as a nominal defendant only, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, captioned Vince v. Reali , No. 1:24-cv-006390CCEJEP (M.D.N.C. 2024). Like the Grogan case, the Vince case asserts violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, contribution, and waste and generally alleges the same purported misconduct as alleged in the in the Ciarciello case. On November 11, 2024, the defendants filed a motion to transfer the Vince case to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, pursuant to the forum selection clause in Bioventus’s certificate of incorporation. On January 14, 2025, the Court granted the motion and transferred the Vince case to the District of Delaware. On February 14, 2025, the plaintiff requested voluntary dismissal of the Vince case without prejudice and the Court granted the request that same day.
66
Table of Contents
On February 20, 2025, plaintiff Jeffrey Vince refiled a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint against certain of Bioventus’ current and former officers and directors, naming Bioventus as a nominal defendant only, in Delaware Chancery Court, captioned Jeffrey Vince v. Kenneth M. Reali et al ., C.A. No. 2025-0192-LWW (Del. Ch.). Like his prior complaint, which he voluntarily dismissed, Vince asserts breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, contribution, and waste, and generally alleges the same purported misconduct as alleged in the Ciarciello case. The Defendants have not yet been served.
On February 26, 2025, plaintiff James Bouchereau filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint against certain of Bioventus’s current and former officers and directors, naming Bioventus as a nominal defendant only, in Delaware Chancery Court, captioned James Bouchereau v. Kenneth M. Reali et al ., C.A. No. 2025-___-___ (Del. Ch.). The complaint is identical to the Vince complaint and asserts breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, contribution, and waste, and generally alleges the same purported misconduct as alleged in the Ciarciello case. The Defendants have not yet been served.
On February 6, 2025, purported stockholder Jae Hyung Jung served a litigation demand, requesting that the Board take action against certain directors and officers for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, gross mismanagement, unjust enrichment, waste, aiding and abetting in connection with the same conduct at issue in the litigations. On February 7, 2025, the same purported stockholder, Jung, served a settlement demand, requesting that the Company adopt certain corporate governance reforms and agree to certain monetary payments. The Company has not yet responded to either demand.
The Company believes the claims alleged in the above derivative matters lack merit and intends to defend itself vigorously. Except as described above, the outcomes of these matters are not presently determinable, and any loss is neither probable nor reasonably estimable.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not Applicable.
PART II