What changed in this filing

/stocks — the workspaceLOADING

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

2021-05-13 compared with 2020-11-16 · 28 added, 13 removed, 1 unchanged (98% of the section changed)

In addition, on September 2, 2020,

a putative class action lawsuit, Chapman v.

Fennec Pharmaceuticals Inc., was filed against the Company, Rostislav Raykov and Robert

Andrade, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.

The complaint alleges that prior to the

receipt of the Complete Response Letter from the FDA, Fennec made materially false and misleading statements or omissions and

failed to disclose material adverse facts about Fennec’s business operations and prospects.

The Company believes that the

suit is without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously.

Defendants are not required to respond to the lawsuit until the

court appoints a lead plaintiff and a post-appointment complaint is filed or designated.

The Company has not recorded a liability

as of September 30, 2020 because a potential loss is not probable or reasonably estimable given the preliminary nature of

Legal Proceedings.

On September 2, 2020, a putative class action

lawsuit, Chapman v.

Fennec Pharmaceuticals Inc., was filed against us, our Chief Executive Officer, Rostislav Raykov, and our Chief Financial

Officer, Robert Andrade, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.

The complaint alleged that prior

to our August 10, 2020 receipt of a CRL from the FDA concerning our NDA for PEDMARK TM , we made materially false or misleading

statements and failed to disclose material facts about the status of our PEDMARK TM manufacturing facility, its compliance with

current good manufacturing practices, and the impact its status and compliance would have on regulatory approval for PEDMARK TM

On December 3, 2020, the court appointed a lead plaintiff to represent the putative class.

On February 1, 2021, the lead plaintiff

filed an amended complaint.

The amended complaint added members of our board of directors as defendants, asserts a putative class period

from December 10, 2018 through August 10, 2020, makes allegations similar to those in the original complaint, and claims the

defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On March 3, 2021, defendants filed a motion to dismiss

the amended complaint.

On April 2, 2021, plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion.

On April 16, 2021, defendants filed a reply brief

in support of the motion.

The court has not scheduled argument or issued an order on the motion.

We believe that the suit is without merit and

intend to defend it vigorously.

We cannot predict the outcome of this suit.

Failure by us to obtain a favorable resolution of the suit

could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have not recorded a liability

as of March 31, 2021, because we believe a potential loss is not probable or reasonably estimable given the preliminary nature of

the proceedings.

Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.

What changed 10-Q

Item 1. Legal Proceedings