What changed in this filing

/stocks — the workspaceLOADING

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

2020-08-06 compared with 2020-05-07 · 31 added, 35 removed, 20 unchanged (77% of the section changed)

11 unchanged sentences

the complaint.

Plaintiff’s response to the motion to dismiss was due on October 18, 2019;

however rather than file an opposition

brief, plaintiffs filed an amended stockholder derivative complaint.

In response, the plaintiff’s filed an amended stockholder derivative complaint.

Defendants’

motion to dismiss the amended complaint

was filed on December 12, 2019;

dismiss the amended complaint was filed on December 12, 2019;

plaintiff’s response was filed on January 27, 2020 and defendants’

reply was filed

on February 26, 2020.

We intend to vigorously defend ourselves and our current and former officers and directors against these

allegations and have not recorded a liability related to this derivative complaint as the outcome is not probable nor can an estimate

be made of loss, if any.

On April 2, 2019, we filed a lawsuit against

Clarus in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging that Clarus’s JATENZO®

product infringes

six of Lipocine’s issued U.S.

reply was filed on February 26, 2020.

Oral arguments on the motion to dismiss were held on July 28, 2020.

On July 30, 2020, the

court entered an order dismissing the complaint in its entirety.

April 2, 2019, we filed a lawsuit against Clarus in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging

that Clarus’s JATENZO®

product infringes six of Lipocine’s issued U.S.

and 6,923,988.

Clarus has answered

the complaint and asserted counterclaims of non-infringement and invalidity.

We answered Clarus’s counterclaims on

April 29, 2019.

The Court held a scheduling conference on August 15, 2019, a claim construction hearing on February 11, 2020 and

scheduled a five-day jury trial beginning on February 8, 2021.

On February 11, 2020, we voluntarily dismissed allegations of patent

infringement for expired U.S.

6,569,463 and 6,923,988 in an effort to streamline the issues and associated costs for

Clarus has answered the complaint and asserted counterclaims of non-infringement and invalidity.

We answered Clarus’s counterclaims on April 29, 2019.

The Court held a scheduling conference on August 15, 2019, a claim

construction hearing on February 11, 2020 and scheduled a five-day jury trial beginning on February 8, 2021.

On February 11, 2020,

we voluntarily dismissed allegations of patent infringement for expired U.S.

6,569,463 and 6,923,988 in an effort to

streamline the issues and associated costs for dispute.

The parties are currently engaged in the fact discovery phase of the lawsuit.

3 unchanged sentences

The complaint alleges that the

defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that our filing of the NDA for TLANDO to the FDA

contained deficiencies and as a result the defendants’

statements about our business and operations were false and misleading

and/or lacked a reasonable basis in violation of federal securities laws.

The lawsuit seeks certification as a class action (for

a purported class of purchasers of the Company’s securities from March 27, 2019 through November 8, 2019), compensatory

damages in an unspecified amount, and unspecified equitable or injunctive relief.

We have insurance that covers claims of this

The retention amount payable by us under our policy is $1.25 million.

We intend to vigorously defend ourselves and our

current and former officers and directors against these allegations and have not recorded a liability related to this shareholder

class action lawsuit as the outcome is not probable nor can an estimate be made of loss, if any.

defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that our filing of the NDA for TLANDO to the FDA contained

deficiencies and as a result the defendants’

statements about our business and operations were false and misleading and/or

lacked a reasonable basis in violation of federal securities laws.

The lawsuit seeks certification as a class action (for a purported

class of purchasers of the Company’s securities from March 27, 2019 through November 8, 2019), compensatory damages in an

unspecified amount, and unspecified equitable or injunctive relief.

We have insurance that covers claims of this nature.

The retention

amount payable by us under our policy is $1.25 million.

We filed a motion to dismiss this class action lawsuit on July 24, 2020.

Further, we intend to vigorously defend ourselves and our current and former officers and directors against these allegations and

have not recorded a liability related to this shareholder class action lawsuit as the outcome is not probable nor can an estimate

be made of loss, if any.

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