Legal Proceedings.
−Removed: Except as disclosed below, we are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings.
−Removed: From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business.
+Added: We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings.
+Added: We were previously involved in a legal proceeding, as described below, and from time to time, we may again become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business.
Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us due to defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, negative publicity, reputational harm and other factors, and there can be no assurances that favorable outcomes will be obtained.
−Removed: On November 4, 2024, the Company announced a legal victory in the trade secrets case brought by I-Mab Biopharma in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
−Removed: The jury found in favor of the Company, rejecting all allegations of misappropriation before it.
−Removed: I-Mab Biopharma had initiated the lawsuit on March 1, 2022, alleging that the Company and its Chief Scientific Officer, Brendan Eckelman, Ph.D., improperly accessed and used proprietary information related to several of I-Mab Biopharma’s research projects during a prior arbitration proceeding involving I-Mab Biopharma, for which Dr.
−Removed: Eckelman served as an expert witness.
−Removed: However, the jury found no basis for these claims in finding in favor of the Company.
−Removed: Certain matters remain before the Court.
+Added: In November 2024, the Company was successful in the trade secrets case brought against it by I-Mab Biopharma in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, with the jury rejecting all allegations of misappropriation before it.
+Added: In January 2025, the parties reached a settlement as to all asserted claims of misappropriation, including those claims not tried to the jury.
+Added: Pursuant to that agreement, the Court dismissed the action with prejudice.
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.