UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

OR

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from _____  to _____

Commission File Number: 001-38599

Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc.
 
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Delaware
 
82-3827296
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
 
(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)
     
30 Technology Drive, Warren, NJ
 
07059
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
 
(Zip Code)

(908) 941-1900
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
 
Title of each class
 
Trading Symbol(s)
 
Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share
 
AQST
 
NASDAQ Global Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:       None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  ☐ Yes  ☒ No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  ☐ Yes  ☒ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. ☒ Yes  ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). ☒ Yes  ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Large accelerated filer  ☐
Accelerated filer ☐
Non-accelerated filer  ☒
Smaller reporting company ☒
 
Emerging growth company ☒

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  ☐ Yes  ☒ No

As of June 30, 2020, the last day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $102.3 million based on the closing price of the registrant’s common stock on such date.

The number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s par value $0.001 common stock as of the close of business on March 5, 2021 was 36,213,969.

The registrant intends to file a definitive proxy statement pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with its 2021 Annual Meeting of Shareholders within 120 days of the end of its fiscal year ended December 31, 2020.  Portions of such definitive proxy statement are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



Table of Contents

   
Page No.
  3
Item 1.
4
Item 1A.
22
Item 1B.
58
Item 2.
58
Item 3.
58
Item 4.
59
     
 
59
Item 5.
59
Item 6.
60
Item 7.
61
Item 7A.
72
Item 8.
72
Item 9.
72
Item 9A.
72
Item 9B.
72
     
 
73
Item 10.
73
Item 11.
80
Item 12.
88
Item 13.
90
Item 14.
92
     
 
93
Item 15.
93

PART I

Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K and certain other communications made by us include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  Words such as “believe,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “expect,” “estimate,” “intend,” “may,” “will,” or the negative of those terms, and similar expressions, are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the advancement and related timing of Libervant and AQST-108-SF through the regulatory and development pipeline; the focus on growing the Company’s commercial sales of Sympazan® and continuing to manufacture Suboxone® and other licensed products; the ability to address the concerns identified in the FDA’s Complete Response Letter dated September 25, 2020 regarding the New Drug Application for Libervant and obtain FDA approval of Libervant for U.S. market access; clinical trial timing and plans for AQST-108-SF; the 2021 financial outlook; and business strategies, market opportunities, and other statements that are not historical facts.  These forward-looking statements are also subject to the uncertain impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic on our business including with respect to our clinical trials including site initiation, patient enrollment and timing and adequacy of clinical trials; on regulatory submissions and regulatory reviews and approvals of our product candidates; pharmaceutical ingredients and other raw materials supply chain, manufacture and distribution; sale of and demand for our products; our liquidity and availability of capital resources, customer demand for our products and services; customers’ ability to pay for goods and services; and ongoing availability of an appropriate labor force and skilled professionals.  Given these uncertainties the Company is unable to provide assurance that operations can be maintained as planned prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

These forward-looking statements are also based on our current expectations and beliefs and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements.  Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, risks associated with the Company’s development work, including any delays or changes to the timing, cost and success of our product development activities and clinical trials and plans; risk of delays in regulatory advancement through the FDA of Libervant and our other drug candidates or failure to receive approval, including the failure to receive orphan drug exclusivity; risk that a competitor obtains other FDA marketing exclusivity that blocks U.S. market access for Libervant or any of our other product candidates; risk inherent in commercializing a new product (including technology risks, financial risks, market risks and implementation risks and regulatory limitations); risks and uncertainties concerning the revenue stream from the monetization of the Company’s royalty rights for the product KYNMOBI®, as well as the achievement of royalty targets worldwide or in any jurisdiction and certain other commercial targets required for contingent payments under the KYNMOBI monetization transaction; risk of development of our sales and marketing capabilities; risk of sufficient capital and cash resources, including access to available debt and equity financing and revenues from operations, to satisfy all of our short-term and longer-term cash requirements and other cash needs, at the times and in the amounts needed; risk of failure to satisfy all financial and other debt covenants and of any default; risk related to government claims against Indivior for which we license, manufacture and sell Suboxone® and which accounts for the substantial part of our current operating revenues; risks related to the outsourcing of certain marketing and other operational and staff functions to third parties; risk of the rate and degree of market acceptance of our product and product candidates; the success of any competing products including generics, risk of the size and growth of our product markets; risk of compliance with all FDA and other governmental and customer requirements for our manufacturing facilities; risks associated with intellectual property rights and infringement claims relating to the Company’s products; risk of unexpected patent developments; risk of legislation and regulatory actions and changes in laws or regulations affecting our business; risk of loss of significant customers; risks related to legal proceedings including patent infringement, securities, investigative, product safety or efficacy and antitrust litigation matters; risk of product recalls and withdrawals; the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on our business; uncertainties related to general economic, political, business, industry, regulatory and market conditions and other unusual items; and other uncertainties affecting the Company including those described in the “Risk Factors” section and in other sections included in this Annual Report on Form10-K, in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and in our Current Reports on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).  Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as the date made.  All subsequent forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. The Company assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements, or outlook or guidance after the date of this Annual Report whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required by applicable law.  Readers should not rely on the forward-looking statements included in this Annual Report as representing our views as of any date after the date of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these statements. These factors include the matters discussed and referenced in Part I-Item 1A. Risk Factors of this Form 10-K.

Item 1.
Business

References

Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation, was formed effective on January 1, 2018 via the conversion of MonoSol Rx, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and predecessor to Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., into a C corporation and a simultaneous name change to Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. (referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as the “January 2018 Conversion”). Our principal executive offices are located at 30 Technology Drive, Warren, New Jersey 07059 and our telephone number is 908-941-1900. Unless the context otherwise indicates, references to “Aquestive”, “AQST”, “we”, the “Company”, “us” and “our” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refers to Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc.

Overview

We are a pharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing differentiated products which leverage our proprietary PharmFilm® technology to meet patients’ unmet medical needs and to solve patients’ therapeutic problems. We have five products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), both proprietary and out-licensed, as well as a late-stage proprietary product pipeline focused on the treatment of central nervous system, or CNS, diseases and an earlier stage pipeline including treatment of anaphylaxis. Our licensees market their products in the U.S. and in some instances outside the U.S. The Company markets its proprietary product in the U.S.  We believe that our proprietary and licensed products address the needs of these patient populations and the shortcomings of available treatments create opportunities for the development and commercialization of meaningfully differentiated medicines.

Our largest commercialized licensed product to date is Suboxone®, a sublingual film formulation of buprenorphine and naloxone, for the treatment of opioid dependence.  We have a sole and exclusive worldwide agreement with our licensee for this product, Indivior Inc., to manufacture Suboxone. In early 2019, certain third-party pharmaceutical companies launched, at risk, generic film products for buprenorphine-naloxone. As of January 31, 2021, Suboxone branded products retain approximately 40% of film market share as generic film-based products have penetrated this market.  Indivior accounted for 57% of our total revenues during fiscal year 2020.  Our total revenue mix is expected to shift in coming years to a higher proportionate share of proprietary product sales as we continue to grow Sympazan® revenues and pursue the launch of other products in our pipeline, assuming FDA approvals.

We manufacture all of our licensed and proprietary products at our FDA, Australian Government Department of Health’s Therapeutics Goods Administration, or TGA, and Drug Enforcement Agency, or DEA, inspected facilities and anticipate that our current manufacturing capacity is sufficient for commercial quantities of our products and product candidates currently in development. We have produced over 2.2 billion doses of Suboxone since 2010. Not all collaborative or licensed products of the Company that may be commercially launched in the future will necessarily be manufactured by us, such as the case with KYNMOBI®.

PharmFilm® – Our Oral Film Technology

We are presently the worldwide leader in oral film drug delivery and manufacturing, having historically supplied the substantial majority of the world’s oral films for prescription pharmaceutical use, and we have the capability to produce more than one billion commercial doses a year. We developed our PharmFilm® technology to provide meaningful clinical and therapeutic advantages over other existing dosage forms and, in turn, to improve the lives of patients and caregivers. PharmFilm® is protected by our patent portfolio, which currently includes at least 250 issued patents worldwide, of which at least 45 are U.S. patents, and more than 90 pending patent applications worldwide. Several of the patents in this intellectual property portfolio are utilized in each of our proprietary pipeline products. We are continuing to develop additional intellectual property and know-how related to the applications and engineering of PharmFilm® alone or in combination with other technologies to create product capabilities that have compelling value propositions.

PharmFilm® is comprised of proprietary polymer compositions that serve as film formers to hold active pharmaceutical ingredients, or APIs, and excipients in place. Proprietary and patent-protected compositions, formulations and manufacturing techniques and technology are employed to ensure that the API is distributed uniformly throughout the film and that target absorption levels are achieved. Our proprietary technology and manufacturing processes enable PharmFilm® to be engineered to fit a variety of target product profiles in order to best address unmet patient needs present within specific disease states. PharmFilm®, which is similar in thickness and size to a postage stamp, can be administered via buccal, sublingual or lingual oral delivery.


We believe the innovative nature of our drug delivery platform has the potential to offer a number of meaningful advantages to patients, caregivers and physicians compared to current standard of care therapies, including:


preferred alternative to more invasive drug administration methods such as injection, rectal or nasal applications;


faster, or at least equivalent, onset of action;


ease of administration and availability (no device required, no gel to transport);


direct absorption into the bloodstream reducing or avoiding “first pass” effects in the liver;


reduced gastrointestinal, or GI, side effects;


positive dosing outcomes, especially for patients with physical (e.g., dysphagia) or psychological barriers to other methods of drug administration;


stable, durable, portable and quick dissolving (with or without water);


customizable delivery routes for tailored pharmacokinetic, or PK, profiles (buccal, sublingual or lingual); and


customizable taste profiles.

We chose to initially focus our development efforts on the CNS market because we believe the application of PharmFilm® is particularly valuable and relevant to patients suffering from certain CNS disorders to meet patients’ unmet medical needs and to solve patients’ therapeutic problems. We believe there remains significant opportunity to develop additional products in the CNS market. Additionally, our know-how and proprietary position have broad application beyond CNS, and we plan to explore the applications of PharmFilm® in other disease areas.

Our Product Portfolio and Pipeline

The following table outlines our pipeline of products and product candidates.


Sympazan®, Zuplenz®, PharmFilm® and the Aquestive logo are registered trademarks of Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. All other registered trademarks referenced herein are the property of their respective owners.

Proprietary Growth Drivers

Proprietary CNS Product Portfolio

We have initially focused our proprietary product pipeline on certain difficult to treat CNS diseases. Our PharmFilm® technology allows us to develop medicines that offer non-invasive delivery, customized suitability for patients with dysphagia, or trouble swallowing, can be administered without water and ensures consistent therapeutic dosing. We believe that these characteristics will permit us to achieve the desired patient outcomes, while potentially reducing the total cost of patient care.

Our two most advanced assets within our proprietary CNS portfolio, focused in epilepsy, are as follows:


Sympazan® – an oral soluble film formulation of clobazam used for the treatment of seizures associated with a rare, intractable form of epilepsy known as Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, or LGS, was approved by the FDA on November 1, 2018.  We commercially launched Sympazan in December 2018. Sympazan was launched as a precursor and complement to our product candidate LibervantTM and continues to progress on key performance metrics including prescriber growth, repeat prescribers, quarterly growth in retail shipments and covered lives. We developed Sympazan as an alternative to the Onfi® brand and generic clobazam products, which were previously only available in either tablet form or liquid suspensions. LGS patients often have difficulty swallowing pills and large volume suspensions lead to uncertain and inconsistent dosing. These challenges increase the burden of care, particularly for patients that have difficulty swallowing or who may be combative or resistant during treatment administration. We believe that Sympazan addresses these treatment obstacles because it is mucoadhesive, dissolves rapidly and cannot be easily spit out.


Libervant™ – a buccally, or inside of the cheek, administered soluble film formulation of diazepam is our most advanced proprietary investigational product candidate, which we intend to self-commercialize, subject to FDA approval for U.S. market access.  Aquestive is developing Libervant as an alternative to device-dependent rescue therapies currently available to patients with refractory epilepsy, which are a rectal gel and newly approved nasal sprays. In late September 2020, we received a complete response letter (“CRL”) from the FDA focusing on dosing issues in certain weight groups. At a Type A meeting with the FDA in November, the FDA confirmed that these issues may be addressed by utilizing modeling and simulations for an updated dosing regimen. The Company resubmitted a revised weight-based dosing regimen with modeling and simulations in December 2020. As recently announced, the FDA provided feedback on the December submission which provided clarity regarding the information that the Agency expected to see in the Company’s population pharmacokinetic model and safety data as it relates specifically to the patient population included in the studies. The Company will be working on the NDA to provide a resubmission in a form that the Company believes will be acceptable to the FDA. Based upon the FDA’s feedback at the Type A meeting as well as further guidance from the Agency, the Company continues to believe that no further clinical studies are necessary. The Company expects to resubmit its NDA at the end of the second quarter of 2021. Once the NDA is resubmitted, the Company anticipates a six month review process.  We are seeking to demonstrate that Libervant will, if approved by the FDA, represent a “major contribution to patient care” within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance, as compared to available treatment options, as the first, non-device delivered, oral diazepam-based product available to manage seizure clusters in epilepsy patients. However, overcoming the orphan drug marketing exclusivity is difficult to establish, with limited precedent, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree with our position seeking to overcome such marketing exclusivity and approve Libervant for U.S. market access. Further, there can be no assurance that a competitor will not obtain other FDA marketing exclusivity that blocks U.S. market access for Libervant. Any failure to obtain FDA approval of and to demonstrate clinical superiority for Libervant would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations in 2021 and later. More details on this product approval are described in the “Competition” section of this Item I. Business of this Form 10-K.
 

Complex Molecule Portfolio

We have also developed a proprietary pipeline of complex molecule-based products as alternatives to invasively administered standard of care injectable therapeutics addressing large market opportunities beyond CNS indications.

The active programs in our complex molecule portfolio are:


AQST-108-Sublingual Film (or SF) – using Aquestive’s proprietary PharmFilm® technologies, is a “first of its kind” oral sublingual film formulation delivering systemic epinephrine that is in development for the treatment of anaphylaxis. The Company submitted an IND for AQST-108-SF to the FDA on June 23, 2020.  The FDA confirmed that the drug candidate will be reviewed under the 505(b)(2) regulatory approval pathway. We expect that this pathway will provide the means to more expedient and less costly development and filing. We recently completed a second pharmacokinetic (PK) trial for AQST-108-SF. The Phase 1 study featured a 4-treatment crossover design that compared the pharmacokinetics, safety and pharmacodynamics of epinephrine administered in a sublingual film to that of epinephrine administered via both subcutaneous and intramuscular injections in 28 healthy adult subjects.  Based on top-line results, AQST-108-SF was generally well-tolerated, with adverse events observed that are consistent with the known adverse events profile for epinephrine. AQST-108-SF also achieved a similar time to maximal concentrations, or Tmax, when compared to both the subcutaneous and intramuscular injections of epinephrine. The first PK trial for AQST-108-SF was a single ascending dose study that compared pharmacokinetics, safety and pharmacodynamics of epinephrine administered in a sublingual film at ascending dose levels in 6-12 healthy adult subjects per dose level. In this study AQST-108-SF was generally well tolerated, with adverse events observed that are consistent with the known adverse events profile for epinephrine. The data from both this Phase 1 PK trial and the previous trials collectively demonstrate that AQST-108-SF can consistently deliver epinephrine sublingually and, after receiving AQST-108-SF, all subjects had measurable plasma concentrations of epinephrine. We have already submitted our dossier to Health Canada for a third Phase 1 PK trial and plan on commencing the study as soon as we receive the necessary documentation.  Epinephrine is the standard of care in the treatment of anaphylaxis and is currently administered via subcutaneous or intramuscular injection. The current market leader is a single-dose, pre-filled automatic injection device. As a result of administration via subcutaneous or intramuscular injection, many patients and their caregivers are reluctant to use currently available products, resulting in increased hospital visits and overall cost of care to treat anaphylactic events. The data from the Company’s previously completed Phase 1 dose escalation study demonstrated that AQST-108-SF achieved similar ranges of mean values of maximum concentration (Cmax) and time to reach maximum concentration (Tmax) to that reported for injectables provided a greater total exposure (AUC0-t; area under the curve) than that reported for the injectables and had less interpatient variability when compared to the degree of variation (CV%) data reported for injectables, and was well tolerated, with no study participants discontinuing participation due to an adverse event. We believe that, as a result of its sublingual administration, AQST-108-SF will improve patient compliance and lower the total cost of care.


AQST-305-SF – is a sublingual film formulation of octreotide, a small peptide that has a similar pharmacological profile to natural somatostatin, for the treatment of acromegaly, as well as severe diarrhea and flushing associated with carcinoid syndrome.  Acromegaly is a hormone disorder that results in the overproduction of growth hormone in middle-aged adults. Octreotide is the standard of care for the treatment of acromegaly.  The current market leader, Sandostatin®, is administered via deep subcutaneous or intramuscular injections once a month.  This monthly treatment regimen can result in loss of efficacy toward the end of the monthly treatment cycle.  We are developing AQST-305 as a non-invasive, pain-free alternative to Sandostatin to reduce treatment burden, healthcare costs and the potential loss of efficacy in the treatment cycle.  AQST-305 has shown promising preclinical and human proof of concept results.  While we focus our efforts on Libervant and AQST-108-SF in the short-term, we have taken the necessary steps to prepare AQST-305-SF for additional research trials.

Licensed Commercial Products and Product Candidates

Our portfolio also includes products and product candidates that we have licensed, or will seek to license, or for which we have licensed our intellectual property for commercialization. In the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, our licensed product portfolio generated $40.2 million and $49.7 million in revenue to Aquestive, respectively. Those products include:


Suboxone® – a sublingual film formulation of buprenorphine and naloxone, respectively an opioid agonist and antagonist, that is marketed in the United States and internationally for the treatment of opioid dependence. Suboxone Sublingual Film was launched by our licensee, Indivior Inc., or Indivior, in 2010. Suboxone Sublingual Film is the most prescribed branded product in its category and was the first sublingual film product for the treatment of opioid dependence. We are the sole and exclusive supplier and manufacturer of Suboxone Sublingual Film and have produced over 2.2 billion doses of Suboxone since its launch in 2010.  As of January 31, 2021, Suboxone branded products retain approximately 40% film market share as generic film-based products have penetrated this market.  We have filed patent infringement lawsuits against certain companies relating to generic film-based products for buprenorphine-naloxone.  More details regarding these lawsuits are described in Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies.


Exservan® (riluzole) – has been developed, utilizing our proprietary PharmFilm technology, for the treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).  We believe that Exservan, via our orally administered dosage form, can bring meaningful assistance to patients who are diagnosed with ALS and face difficulties swallowing traditional forms of medication. Exservan was approved by the FDA on November 22, 2019. During the fourth quarter of 2019, we announced the grant of a license to Zambon S.p.A. for the development and commercialization of Exservan Oral Film in the European Union (EU) for the treatment of ALS. Zambon is a multinational pharmaceutical company with a focus on the CNS therapeutic area. Under the terms of the license agreement, an upfront payment was paid to Aquestive for the development and commercialization rights of Exservan in the EU, and Aquestive will be paid development and sales milestone payments and low double-digit royalties on net sales of the product in the EU.  Zambon is responsible for the regulatory approval and marketing of Exservan in the countries where Zambon seeks to market the product, and Aquestive will be responsible for the development and manufacture of the product.

In January 2021, we announced our exclusive license to Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Holdings America, Inc. (“MTHA”) for the commercialization in the United States of Exservan.  MTHA is a multinational pharmaceutical company with a focus on patients with ALS. Under the terms of the MTHA license agreement, upfront payments were paid to Aquestive with additional payments due upon the occurrence of certain milestone events in advance of launch.  Aquestive will also be paid double-digit royalties on net sales of the product in the United States and will earn revenue pursuant to the exclusive supply agreement. The product is expected to launch in mid-2021. Exservan may potentially fulfill a critical need for ALS patients, given it can be administered safely and easily, twice daily, without water.


KYNMOBI®– a sublingual film formulation of apomorphine, which is a dopamine agonist developed to treat episodic off-periods in Parkinson’s disease. We licensed our intellectual property to Cynapsus Therapeutics, Inc., a company that was acquired by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., or Sunovion, for the commercialization of KYNMOBI under an Agreement dated April 1, 2016, as amended (the “Sunovion License Agreement”).  KYNMOBI was approved by the FDA on May 21, 2020 and commercially launched by Sunovion in September 2020. On November 3, 2020, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Monetization Agreement”) with MAM Pangolin Royalty, LLC, an affiliate of Marathon Asset Management (“Marathon”).  Under the terms of the Monetization Agreement, we sold all of our contractual rights to receive royalties and milestone payments due under the Sunovion License Agreement related to Sunovion’s apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®. Through December 31, 2020, the Company received $50.0 million in gross proceeds pursuant to the Monetization Agreement, inclusive of an upfront payment of $40.0 million and the achievement of the first milestone payment of $10.0 million. Under the Monetization Agreement, additional aggregate contingent payments of up to $75.0 million may be due the Company upon the achievement of worldwide royalty and other commercial targets within a specified timeframe, which could result in total potential gross proceeds under the Monetization Agreement of $125.0 million.


Zuplenz – an oral soluble film formulation of ondansetron, a 5-HT antagonist approved for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy and post-operative recovery. Ondansetron is available as branded and generic products as intravenous injections, intramuscular injections, orally dissolving tablets, oral solution tablets, and film. We licensed commercial rights for Zuplenz to Hypera in Brazil. We licensed commercial rights for Zuplenz to Fortovia Therapeutics (previously Midatech Pharma PLC) in the United States, Canada, and China. Fortovia launched Zuplenz in the United States in 2015. We had been the sole and exclusive manufacturer of Zuplenz for Fortovia. On August 31, 2020 Fortovia filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding in the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.  On January 29, 2021, the Bankruptcy Court approved an agreement pursuant to which the license and supply agreement between Aquestive and Fortovia was terminated, and all rights to commercialize Zuplenz returned to us, effective January 30, 2021. While not expected to be a material product for the Company, we are seeking a new partner to commercialize Zuplenz in the United States.

Market Overview

Epilepsy

Epilepsy is a chronic CNS disorder characterized by recurrent seizure activity. There are 3.4 million people in the United States suffering from epilepsy. According to IQVIA data, antiepileptic medications generated billions of dollars of sales in the United States in 2019. The direct (medical) and indirect (lost wages and productivity) annual costs associated with epileptic patients in the United States are significant.

Epilepsy treatment regimens typically consist of chronic and acute management therapies. Chronic medicines are used on a daily basis to suppress seizure activity. Approximately 1.2 million of those 3.4 million people suffering from epilepsy will continue to suffer with breakthrough seizures and may require an acute (rescue) management strategy. Patients are routinely prescribed antiepileptic drugs, or AEDs, as “maintenance” therapy to control chronic seizure activity. Most AEDs specifically target neuronal excitation or neuronal inhibitory pathways. There are currently more than 20 AEDs approved for use in the United States, and therapeutic choice depends on the epileptic syndrome being considered. Patients are routinely prescribed benzodiazepines as “rescue” therapy for the management of acute seizure emergencies.

Rescue therapies are administered as needed in the event of an acute seizure to rapidly terminate seizure activity. One of the most effective benzodiazepines currently available for the treatment of acute seizures is diazepam. Diazepam has historically been marketed as a product administered rectally and more recently, a nasal spray product was introduced to the market.  Although the rectal gel has been the preferred drug prescribed by physicians, its rectal administration presents a particular challenge for patients. As a result, only approximately 100,000 patients out of 1.2 million potential patients who could benefit from this treatment currently use this therapy. The remaining sufferers either pursue less effective treatments or forego treatment altogether. We have been developing Libervant as an alternative to the device-dependent rescue therapies currently available to patients with refractory epilepsy.  See “Our Product Portfolio and Pipeline” above and “Competition” below in this Item 1. Business of this Form 10-K for additional information concerning the Libervant FDA approval process and market access issues.

There are multiple epileptic syndromes including LGS, which is a rare, intractable form of epilepsy affecting approximately 48,000 patients in the United States. Patients with LGS are often drug resistant, predisposing them to recurrent seizures, and are typically prescribed a combination of antiepileptic medications, which often includes clobazam. Clobazam (branded name Onfi) is available in both a tablet and suspension formulation.  Generic versions of the clobazam tablet and suspension formulation are available to patients, as well. Clobazam generated combined sales revenue of $263 million with more than 658,000 prescriptions filled in 2020. Sympazan was developed to reduce the burden associated with drug administration and cost.

Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a severe systemic allergic reaction that can be triggered by certain foods, medications, insect stings and latex, among other allergens. Signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis typically occur within seconds or minutes of exposure and may include low blood pressure, skin rash or itching, constriction of the airway and difficulty breathing and nausea and vomiting. If not treated immediately, anaphylaxis can lead to death due to airway restriction or cardiac arrest. Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening systemic allergic reaction, with an estimated incidence of 50 to 112 episodes per 100,000 people per year. The frequency of hospital admissions for anaphylaxis has increased 500-700% in the last 10-15 years. The most common causes of reactions that can include anaphylaxis are medications, foods (such as peanuts), and venom from insect stings. Because anaphylaxis can progress quickly, the ability to administer a reliable and accurate dose of epinephrine as quickly as possible following a reaction is critical for patient recovery and survival.

Treatment of anaphylaxis typically consists of an intramuscular injection of epinephrine administered at the earliest opportunity, followed by additional intramuscular or intravenous injections as needed. While generic versions of epinephrine are currently available, they are provided as a vial of medication administered via syringes, as well as several auto-injector products. A branded form of epinephrine known as the EpiPen®, which utilizes a proprietary auto-injector device administered through a deep intramuscular injection, represents over 60% of the current branded market on a prescription volume basis. People with known allergies and who are at risk for anaphylaxis are advised to carry an auto-injector with them at all times and self-administer at the first signs of an anaphylactic reaction. Auto-injectors can be inconvenient to transport and many patients and caregivers dislike injections as a delivery method. In addition, in the past, manufacturing issues that resulted in injector malfunctions had led to patient concern regarding the reliability of auto-injectors.  Proper dosing and the ability to effectively administer epinephrine in a timely, reliable manner is critical for patients experiencing anaphylaxis as well as other acute allergic reactions. However, we believe that the inability to administer complex molecules via oral administration has limited the development of treatments that have the potential to provide significant patient benefit. We designed AQST-108-SF, a “first of its kind” oral sublingual film formulation delivering systemic epinephrine that is in development as a rescue medicine for the treatment of anaphylaxis using Aquestive’s proprietary PharmFilm® technologies, to improve patient compliance and lower the total cost of care. We believe there is a market opportunity for a non-injectable, easier to administer product with a fast onset of action. A product with this profile would enable patients to conveniently and rapidly self-administer a reliable and accurate dose of epinephrine during an anaphylactic reaction, which we believe will improve patient compliance. Subject to our achieving regulatory approval of this product candidate, which we cannot assure, we believe AQST-108-SF has the potential to reduce the treatment burden currently associated with intramuscular injections and may lower costs to the healthcare system associated with anaphylaxis, such as hospitalizations, due to inaccurate or untimely dosing.

Manufacturing and Product Supply

We operate two manufacturing and primary packaging facilities located in Portage, Indiana, where we currently manufacture proprietary CNS products, as well as our licensed products, Suboxone and Exservan, on an exclusive basis. These facilities are expected to have a combined capacity to accommodate the production of our proprietary and licensed products, as well as our pipeline product candidates, without any current need for additional infrastructure. We will continue to consider our anticipated facilities and infrastructure needs as our product development grows. We have produced over 1.0 billion doses in the last four years. As a company, our research and development laboratories are registered with the DEA for Schedule II-V drugs.

We are subject to various regulatory requirements, such as the regulations of the FDA, the DEA, the EU and other foreign health authorities such as the TGA. We are required to register our facilities and adhere to current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) standards. These standards require manufacturers to follow elaborate design, testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance procedures throughout the entire manufacturing process. Our facilities have undergone inspections by the FDA, DEA, TGA, and several quality assurance inspections by pharmaceutical companies for cGMP compliance. In each case, the facilities have passed inspection and are subject to periodic re-inspection. Failure to comply with these and other statutory and regulatory requirements subjects a manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory action, including warning letters, the seizure or recall of products, injunctions, consent decrees placing significant restrictions on or suspending manufacturing operations and civil and criminal penalties. Adverse events with the product or product complaints must be reported and could result in the imposition of market restrictions through labeling changes or in product removal. Product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory requirements is not maintained or if problems concerning safety or efficacy of the product occur following approval.

We purchase our raw materials, including active pharmaceutical ingredients, from qualified, approved vendors both domestically and internationally. While we typically source raw materials from the lowest cost provider whenever possible, we continue to pursue a multi-supplier strategy for all of our critical raw materials, where available or appropriate. Our product packaging foil is supplied by a single manufacturer. Such manufacturer utilizes multiple manufacturing facilities for production of our packaging foil. We may enter into more formal supply agreements in the future as production volumes increase and are more predictive.

Subject to the supervision of our internal clinical development staff, we use third-party contract research organizations, or CROs, to administer and conduct many aspects of our planned clinical trials including monitoring and managing data, and we will rely upon such CROs, as well as medical institutions, clinical investigators and consultants, to conduct our trials in accordance with our clinical protocols. We intend for such CROs to play a significant role in the subsequent collection and analysis of data from such trials.  Additionally, we continue to outsource secondary packaging and third-party logistics for our proprietary products.

Competition

We compete with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that develop and commercialize therapeutics for the treatment of a broad range of disease areas and indications. Additionally, we compete with companies that utilize advanced drug administration platforms, such as oral, injectable, intranasal, transdermal patch and pulmonary delivery, to create improved therapeutics over current standards of care. This industry is highly competitive and new products and technologies evolve and come to market at a rapid pace. The companies operating in this market include multinational organizations, established biotechnology companies, single product pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, and generic drug companies. Many of the larger, established organizations currently have commercialization capabilities in-house, and may have partnership or license agreements in place with smaller companies for commercialization rights. These companies may develop new drugs to treat the indications that we target or seek to have existing drugs approved for the treatment of the indications that we target.

We will compete with commercialized products in all markets for which we have approval and are seeking approval.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid evolution and advancements of technologies, intense competition and strong defense of intellectual property.  Any products and product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.  Key product features that would affect our ability to effectively compete with other therapeutics include the efficacy, safety and convenience of our products and the ease of use and effectiveness of any companion diagnostics.  The level of generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors will also significantly affect the pricing and competitiveness of our products.

On January 10, 2020, a competitor of Aquestive obtained FDA approval of its diazepam nasal spray drug candidate and was granted orphan-drug-exclusivity for this drug commencing as of January 10, 2020.  A company that obtains FDA approval for a designated orphan drug receives orphan market exclusivity for that drug for the designated indication for a period of seven years from the grant date in the United States.  This orphan drug exclusivity approval prevents a subsequent product seeking FDA approval from being marketed in the United States during the exclusivity period for the same active moiety for the same orphan drug indication except in the case where the drug candidate sponsor is able to demonstrate, and the FDA concludes, that the later drug is “clinically superior” to the approved products (e.g., safer, more effective, or providing a major contribution to patient care) within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance.  In assessing whether a drug candidate sponsor has demonstrated that its drug candidate provides a “major contribution to patient care” over and above the currently approved drugs, which is evaluated by the FDA on a case by case basis, there is no single objective standard and the FDA may, in appropriate circumstances, consider such factors as convenience of treatment location, duration of treatment, patient comfort, reduced treatment burden, advances in ease and comfort of drug administration, longer periods between doses, and potential for self-administration.  We are seeking to demonstrate that Libervant will, if approved by the FDA for U.S. market access, represent a “major contribution to patient care” within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance, to manage seizure clusters in epilepsy patients.  However, such a demonstration to overcome such seven-year market exclusivity is difficult to establish, with limited precedent, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree with our position seeking to overcome such marketing exclusivity and approve Libervant for U.S. market access. There is also a risk that a competitor could obtain other FDA marketing exclusivity that blocks U.S. market access for Libervant. Any failure to obtain FDA approval of and to demonstrate clinical superiority for Libervant would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations in 2021 and later.

Material Agreements

Commercial Exploitation Agreement with Indivior

In August 2008, we entered into a Commercial Exploitation Agreement with Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (with subsequent amendments collectively, the “Indivior License Agreement”). Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, Inc. was later succeeded to in interest by Indivior Inc. Pursuant to the Indivior License Agreement, we have agreed to manufacture and supply Indivior’s requirements of Suboxone for both inside and outside the United States on an exclusive basis.

Under the terms of the Indivior License Agreement, we are required to manufacture Suboxone in accordance with cGMP standards and according to the specifications and processes set forth in the related quality agreements with Indivior. Additionally, we are required to obtain Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (“API”) for the manufacture of Suboxone directly from Indivior. The Indivior License Agreement specifies a maximum annual threshold quantity of Suboxone that we are obligated to fill and requires Indivior to provide us with a forecast of its requirements at various specified times throughout the year.

The Indivior License Agreement provides for payment by Indivior of a purchase price per unit that is subject to adjustment based on our ability to satisfy minimum product thresholds. Additionally, in the event Indivior purchases certain large quantities of Suboxone during a specified period, Indivior will be entitled to scaled rebates on its purchases.

In addition to the purchase price for the Suboxone supplied, Indivior is required to make certain single digit percentage royalty payments tied to net sales (as provided for in the Indivior License Agreement) in each of the United States and in the rest of the world subject to annual maximum amounts limited to the life of the related United States or international patents.  In 2012, Indivior exercised its right to buy out its future royalty obligations for sales within the United States under the Indivior License Agreement. Indivior remains obligated to pay royalties for all sales outside the United States.

The Indivior License Agreement contains customary contractual termination provisions, including with respect to a filing for bankruptcy or corporate dissolution, an invalidation of  intellectual property surrounding Suboxone, and commission of a material breach of the Indivior License Agreement by either party. Additionally, Indivior may terminate the Indivior License Agreement if the FDA or other applicable regulatory authority declares our manufacturing site to no longer be suitable for the manufacture of Suboxone or Suboxone is no longer suitable to be manufactured due to health or safety reasons. The initial term of the Indivior License Agreement was seven years from the commencement date. Thereafter, the Indivior License Agreement automatically renews for successive one-year periods, unless either party provides the other with written notice of its intent not to renew at least one year prior to the expiration of the initial or renewal term.

Supplemental Agreement with Indivior

On September 24, 2017, we entered into an agreement with Indivior (the “Indivior Supplemental Agreement”). Pursuant to the Indivior Supplemental Agreement, we conveyed to Indivior all existing and future rights in the settlement of various ongoing patent enforcement legal actions and disputes related to the Suboxone product. We also conveyed to Indivior the right to sublicense manufacturing and marketing capabilities to enable an Indivior licensed generic buprenorphine product to be produced and sold by parties unrelated to Indivior or us. Under the Indivior Supplemental Agreement, we are entitled to receive certain payments from Indivior commencing on the date of the agreement through January 1, 2023. Through February 20, 2019, the date of launch of the competing generics of Dr. Reddy’s Labs and Alvogen, we received an aggregate of $40.75 million from Indivior under the Indivior Supplemental Agreement. Further payments under the Indivior Supplemental Agreement are suspended until adjudication of related patent infringement litigation is finalized. If such litigation is successful, in addition to the amounts already received as described in the foregoing, we may receive up to an additional $34.25 million consisting of (i) up to $33.0 million in the aggregate from any combination of (a) performance or event-based milestone payments and (b) single digit percentage royalties on net revenue earned by Indivior on sales of Suboxone and (ii) the additional $1.25 million that was earned through the issuance of additional process patent rights to us. The aggregate payments under this Indivior Supplemental Agreement are capped at $75.0 million.

All payments made by Indivior to us pursuant to the Indivior Supplemental Agreement are in addition to, and not in place of, any amounts owed by Indivior to us pursuant to the Indivior License Agreement. Indivior’s payment obligations under the Indivior Supplemental Agreement are subject to certain factors affecting the market for Suboxone and may terminate prior to January 1, 2023 in the event certain contingencies relating to that market occur.

Indivior is our largest customer and the combined revenue received from Indivior pursuant to the Indivior License Agreement and the Indivior Supplemental Agreement represented 57% of our total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020 and 86% of the total revenue in 2019.

License Agreement with Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

In April 2016, we entered into a license agreement with Cynapsus Therapeutics Inc. (which was later succeeded to in interest by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc, or Sunovion), referred to as the Sunovion License Agreement, pursuant to which Sunovion obtained an exclusive, worldwide license (with the right to sub-license) to certain intellectual property, including existing and future patents and patent applications, covering all oral films containing apomorphine for the treatment of off episodes in Parkinson’s disease patients.  Sunovion used this intellectual property to develop its apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®, which was approved by the FDA on May 21, 2020 and commercially launched by Sunovion in September 2020.  The FDA approval triggered Sunovion’s obligation to remit payment of $4.0 million (the “FDA Approval Milestone Payment”) which was received in September 2020 and is included in License and royalty revenues for the year ended December 31, 2020.

In consideration of the rights granted to Sunovion under the Sunovion License Agreement, we have received aggregate payments totaling $22.0 million to date. In addition to the upfront payment of $5.0 million we have also earned an aggregate of $17.0 million in connection with specified regulatory and development milestones in the United States and Europe (the “Initial Milestone Payments”). As a result of the Monetization Agreement, we are no longer entitled to receive the remaining contingent royalty or milestone payments related to  the net sales thresholds of KYNMOBI..  During the second quarter of 2020, we recorded revenues of $8.0 million for minimum royalties due under the Sunovion License Agreement, reflected in License and royalty revenues for year-ended December 31, 2020.

Effective March 16, 2020, we entered into a first amendment (the “First Amendment”) to the Sunovion Agreement. The Amendment provides for the following: (i) inclusion of the United Kingdom and any other country currently in the European Union (EU) that later withdraws as a member country of the EU for the purpose of determining the satisfaction of the condition triggering the obligation to pay the third milestone due under the Sunovion License Agreement, (ii) extension of the date after which Sunovion has the right to terminate the Sunovion License Agreement for convenience from December 31, 2024 to March 31, 2028, (iii) modification of the effective inception date of the first minimum royalty due from Sunovion to us from January 1, 2020 to April 1, 2020, and (iv) modification of the termination provisions to reflect our waiver of our right to terminate the Sunovion License Agreement in the event that KYNMOBI® was not commercialized by January 1, 2020. The Sunovion License Agreement will continue until terminated by Sunovion in accordance with the termination provisions of the First Amendment. The Sunovion License Agreement continues (on a country-by-country basis) until the expiration of all applicable licensed patents. Upon termination of the Sunovion License Agreement, all rights to intellectual property granted to Sunovion to develop and commercialize apomorphine-based products will revert back to us.

Effective as of October 23, 2020, we entered into a Second Amendment to the Sunovion License Agreement for the purpose of clarifying the rights and obligations of the parties with respect to the prosecution and maintenance of the patents covered under the Sunovion License Agreement and to provide that, on and after March 31, 2028, in respect of any jurisdiction or jurisdictions covered under the Sunovion License Agreement, Sunovion may terminate its rights to the licensed Patents under the Sunovion License Agreement upon 180 days prior written notice.

Purchase and Sale Agreement with Marathon - KYNMOBI® Monetization

On November 3, 2020, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Monetization Agreement”) with MAM Pangolin Royalty, LLC, an affiliate of Marathon Asset Management (“Marathon”).  Under the terms of the Monetization Agreement, we sold all of our contractual rights to receive royalties and milestone payments due under the Sunovion License Agreement related to Sunovion’s apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®. Through December 31, 2020, the Company received $50.0 million in gross proceeds pursuant to the Monetization Agreement, inclusive of an upfront payment of $40.0 million and the achievement of the first milestone payment of $10.0 million. Under the Monetization Agreement, additional aggregate contingent payments of up to $75.0 million may be due the Company upon the achievement of worldwide royalty and other commercial targets within a specified timeframe, which could result in total potential gross proceeds under the Monetization Agreement of $125.0 million.

Agreement to Terminate CLA with KemPharm

In March 2012, the Company entered into an agreement with KemPharm, Inc. (“KemPharm”), to terminate a Collaboration and License Agreement entered into by the Company and KemPharm in April 2011. Under this termination arrangement, we have the right to participate in any and all value that KemPharm may derive from the commercialization or any other monetization of KemPharm’s KP 415 and KP 484 compounds or their derivatives. Among these monetization transactions are those related to any business combinations involving KemPharm and collaborations, royalty arrangements, or other transactions from which KemPharm may realize value from these compounds. During September 2019, we received $1.0 million from our 10% share of milestone payments received by KemPharm under its licensing of KP 415 and KP 484 to a third party.  We also received a payment of $0.5 million under this arrangement during June 2020 in connection the FDA’s acceptance of a NDA filing for KP 415. On March 2, 2021 KemPharm announced FDA approval of KP 415 (AZTARYSTM) a new once-daily treatment for ADHD.  Our share of the milestone payments associated with KP 415 approval and the achievement of certain targeted labeling goals may reach $4.8 million.

Intellectual Property

We currently seek, and intend to continue seeking, patent protection whenever commercially reasonable for any patentable aspects of our product candidates and related technology or any new products or product candidates we acquire in the future. Where our intellectual property is not protected by patents, we may seek to protect it through other means, including maintenance of trade secrets and careful protection of our proprietary information.

In addition, we intend to seek orphan drug exclusivity in jurisdictions in which it is available. A prerequisite to orphan drug exclusivity in the United States and in the EU is orphan drug designation. An orphan drug designation may be granted where a drug is developed specifically to treat a rare or uncommon medical condition. If a product which has an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, meaning that the applicable regulatory authority may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in certain very limited circumstances, for a period of 7 years in the United States and 10 years in the EU . Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent competitors from developing or marketing different drugs for the indication protected by exclusivity, or the same drug for a different indication.

Patents

Our patent portfolio currently comprises at least 250 issued patents worldwide, of which at least 45 are U.S. patents, and more than 90 pending patent applications worldwide. These issued patents and pending patent applications provide both process of making and composition of matter protection for our PharmFilm® technology and products and product candidates, including Suboxone and our PharmFilm® formulations of tadalafil, diazepam, clobazam, riluzole, epinephrine and octreotide. These patents and, if issued as patents, pending patent applications will likely expire between 2022 and 2040. The pending patent applications filed in 2017 will provide composition of matter and process of making protection for our PharmFilm® dosage formulations of diazepam, epinephrine and octreotide and, if issued as patents, will likely expire by 2040. The projected expiration dates exclude any patent term adjustment or patent term extension.

PharmFilm® – Our Oral Film Technology

Our PharmFilm® technology is covered by at least 8 patent families. These patent families provide process, composition of matter protection for our PharmFilm® technology, and comprise at least 50 issued patents worldwide, of which at least 19 are U.S. patents, and related pending patent applications worldwide. The patents and pending patent applications, if issued as patents, will likely expire between 2022 and 2040, excluding any patent term adjustment or patent term extension.

The PharmFilm® technology patents and/or patent applications also generically and specifically protect the technology utilized in the products and product candidates in our CNS programs, our complex molecule programs, as well as our licensee programs. For example, encompassed within our platform technology patents and/or patent applications is specific coverage directed to PharmFilm dosage formulations of CNS molecules such as diazepam. Also encompassed within our platform technology is coverage for our complex molecule program which includes molecules such as epinephrine. Our platform technology patents and/or patent applications further cover the products Suboxone and Zuplenz, as well as our formulations of the molecules apomorphine and tadalafil, which are part of our licensed  programs. The expiration dates for patents covering these products and product candidates, and for pending applications if issued as patents, extend from 2022 to 2040, excluding any patent term adjustment or patent term extension.

We note that several of our issued patents are or have been involved in administrative proceedings, such as reexamination and inter partes review at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, and opposition at the European Patent Organization, or EPO.

Certain of our patents and patent applications, if granted, will be published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, or a 505(b)(2) NDA. If any of these potential generic competitors claim that their product will not infringe our listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, then they must send notice to us once the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA has been accepted for filing by the FDA. We may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification, which would automatically prevent the FDA from approving the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant.

The rest of our patent portfolio largely relates to patents and applications owned by us and directed to our product development portfolio and other product candidates and related compositions and/or manufacturing processes.

Trade Secrets and Other Proprietary Information

We seek to protect our proprietary information, including our trade secrets and proprietary know-how, by requiring our employees, consultants and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of their employment or engagement. These agreements generally provide that all confidential information developed or made known during the relationship with us be kept confidential and not be disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances, nor used outside the scope of their employment. In the case of our employees, the agreements also typically provide that all inventions resulting from work performed for us, utilizing our property or relating to our business and conceived or completed during employment shall be our exclusive property to the extent permitted by law. Where appropriate, agreements we obtain with our consultants also typically contain similar assignment of invention provisions. Further, we generally require confidentiality agreements from third parties that receive our confidential information. There can be no assurance, however, that these agreements will provide meaningful protection or adequate remedies for our trade secrets in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of such information.

Trademarks

We also rely on trademarks to develop and maintain our competitive position. Our trademarks or registered trademarks are filed in the United States and other select geographical areas.

Regulatory

FDA Approval Process

In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable FDA or other requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending applications, clinical holds, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, withdrawal of product from the market, injunctions, fines, civil penalties and criminal prosecution.

FDA approval is required before any new drug or dosage form, including a new use of a previously approved drug, can be marketed in the United States. The process required by the FDA before a new drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves:


completion of preclinical laboratory and animal testing and formulation studies in compliance with the FDA’s current good laboratory practice, or GLP, regulations;


submission to the FDA of an Investigational New Drug, or IND, application for human clinical testing which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin in the United States;


approval by an independent institutional review board, or IRB, at each clinical trial site before each trial may be initiated;


performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with current good clinical practices, or GCP, to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug product for each intended use;


submission to the FDA of a New Drug Application, or NDA;


satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the facility or facilities at which the product is manufactured to assess compliance with the FDA’s current good manufacturing, or cGMP, regulations to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity;


satisfactory completion of a potential review by an FDA advisory committee, if applicable; and


FDA review and approval of the NDA.

The preclinical and clinical testing and approval process takes many years and the actual time required to obtain approval, if any, may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease.

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as animal studies to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLPs. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND application along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long-term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND application is submitted.

The IND application automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions relating to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the clinical trial on a clinical hold, including concerns that human research subjects will be exposed to unreasonable health risks. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. A separate submission to an existing IND application must also be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development. Further, an independent institutional review board, or IRB, covering each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and informed consent information for subjects before the trial commences at that site and it must monitor the study until completed. The FDA, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions. Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator in accordance with GCP requirements, which includes the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent in writing for their participation in any clinical trial. Sponsors of clinical trials generally must register and report, at the NIH-maintained website ClinicalTrials.gov, key parameters of certain clinical trials. For purposes of an NDA submission and approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in the following sequential phases, which may overlap or be combined:

Phase 1
In Phase 1, through the initial introduction of the drug into healthy human subjects or patients, the drug is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence on effectiveness.
   
Phase 2
 
Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the drug for a particular indication, dosage tolerance and optimum dosage, and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks.
   
Phase 3
 
Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain the additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the drug. In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug. A single Phase 3 trial with other confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in rare instances where the study is a large multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible.

After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The NDA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture and controls. Under federal law, the submission of most NDAs is subject to a substantial application user fee, and applicant under an approved NDA is also subject to an annual program fee for each prescription drug product, which beginning in Fiscal Year 2018 replaced the product and establishment fees.

The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information and is subject to payment of additional user fees. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs through a two-tiered classification system, Standard Review and Priority Review. Priority Review designation is given to drugs that offer major advances in treatment or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. The FDA endeavors to review applications subject to Standard Review within ten to twelve months, whereas the FDA’s goal is to review Priority Review applications within six to eight months.

The FDA may refer applications for proprietary drug products or drug products which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP requirements. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing process and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications and the NDA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the drug is safe and effective in the indication studied.

After the FDA evaluates the NDA and the manufacturing facilities and possibly conducts a sponsor inspection, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the NDA and may require substantial additional testing, or information, in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA may ultimately decide that an application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If, or when, the deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The review by the FDA is two months for a Class I resubmission and six months for a Class 2 resubmission.  An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications.

As a condition of NDA approval, the FDA may require a REMS, or Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. If the FDA determines a REMS is necessary during review of the application, the drug sponsor must agree to the REMS plan at the time of approval. A REMS may be required to include various elements, such as a medication guide or patient package insert, a communication plan to educate healthcare providers of the drug’s risks, limitations on who may prescribe or dispense the drug, or other elements to assure safe use, such as special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient registries. In addition, the REMS must include a timetable to periodically assess whether the REMS plan is effective. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of a drug.

Moreover, product approval may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the drug’s safety or efficacy, and the FDA has the authority to prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of these post-marketing programs. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing. Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label, and, even if the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved indications for use for the product or impose other conditions, including labeling or distribution restrictions or other risk-management mechanisms.

Further changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before the change can be implemented, which may require us to develop additional data or conduct additional preclinical studies and clinical trials. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses similar procedures in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs.

Post-Approval Requirements

Ongoing adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports are required following FDA approval of an NDA. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, REMS, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or the FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging, and labeling procedures must continue to conform to cGMPs and NDA specifications after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with FDA and obtain licenses from certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by FDA, during which the agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs or other applicable laws, such as adverse event recordkeeping and reporting. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and training and compliance efforts in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs or other applicable laws, such as adverse event recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Regulatory authorities may require remediation, withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems or new concerns are subsequently discovered. In addition, other regulatory action, including, among other things, warning letters, the seizure of products, injunctions, consent decrees placing significant restrictions on or suspending manufacturing operations, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution may be pursued.

In addition, any distribution of prescription drug products must comply with the U.S. Prescription Drug Marketing Act, or PDMA, a part of the FDCA. In addition, Title II of the Federal Drug Quality and Security Act of 2013, known as the Drug Supply Chain Security Act or the DSCSA, has imposed new “track and trace” requirements on the distribution of prescription drug products by manufacturers, distributors, and other entities in the drug supply chain. These requirements are being phased in over a ten-year period. The DSCSA ultimately will require product identifiers (i.e., serialization) on prescription drug products in order to establish an electronic interoperable prescription product system to identify and trace certain prescription drugs distributed in the United States. The DSCSA replaced the prior drug “pedigree” requirements under the PDMA and preempts existing state drug pedigree laws and regulations. The DSCSA also establishes new requirements for the licensing of wholesale distributors and third-party logistic providers. These licensing requirements preempt states from imposing licensing requirements that are inconsistent with, less stringent than, directly related to, or otherwise encompassed by standards established by the FDA pursuant to the DSCSA. Until the FDA promulgates regulations to address the DSCSA’s new national licensing standard, current state licensing requirements typically remain in effect.

The Hatch-Waxman Amendments

ANDA Approval Process

The Hatch-Waxman Amendments established abbreviated FDA approval procedures for drugs that are shown to be equivalent to drugs previously approved by the FDA through its NDA process. Approval to market and distribute these drugs is obtained by submitting an ANDA to the FDA. An ANDA is a comprehensive submission that contains, among other things, data and information pertaining to the active pharmaceutical ingredient, drug product formulation, specifications and stability of the generic drug, as well as analytical methods, manufacturing process validation data and quality control procedures. Premarket applications for generic drugs are termed abbreviated because they generally do not include preclinical and clinical data to demonstrate safety and effectiveness. Instead, a generic applicant must demonstrate that its product is bioequivalent to the innovator drug. In certain situations, an applicant may obtain ANDA approval of a generic product with a strength or dosage form that differs from a referenced innovator drug pursuant to the filing and approval of an ANDA Suitability Petition. The FDA will approve the generic product as suitable for an ANDA application if it finds that the generic product does not raise new questions of safety and effectiveness as compared to the innovator product. A product is not eligible for ANDA approval if the FDA determines that it is not equivalent to the referenced innovator drug, if it is intended for a different use, or if it is not subject to an approved Suitability Petition. However, such a product might be approved under an NDA, with supportive data from clinical trials.

505(b)(2) NDAs

As an alternative path to FDA approval for modifications to formulations or uses of products previously approved by the FDA, an applicant may submit an NDA under Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA. Section 505(b)(2) was enacted as part of the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and permits the filing of an NDA where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies not conducted by, or for, the applicant. If the 505(b)(2) applicant can establish that reliance on FDA’s previous findings of safety and effectiveness is scientifically appropriate, it may eliminate the need to conduct certain preclinical or clinical studies of the new product. The FDA may also require companies to perform additional studies or measurements, including clinical trials, to support the change from the approved branded reference drug. The FDA may then approve the new product candidate for all, or some, of the label indications for which the branded reference drug has been approved, as well as for any new indication sought by the 505(b)(2) applicant.

Orange Book Listing

In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, including a 505(b)(2) NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA certain patents with claims that cover the applicant’s product. Upon approval of an NDA, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the Orange Book. Any applicant who files an ANDA seeking approval of a generic equivalent version of a drug listed in the Orange Book or a 505(b)(2) NDA referencing a drug listed in the Orange Book must certify to the FDA that (i) no patent information on the drug product that is the subject of the application has been submitted to the FDA; (ii) such patent has expired; (iii) the date on which such patent expires; or (iv) such patent is invalid or will not be infringed upon by the manufacture, use or sale of the drug product for which the application is submitted. This last certification is known as a paragraph IV certification. A notice of the paragraph IV certification must be provided to each owner of the patent that is the subject of the certification and to the holder of the approved NDA to which the ANDA or 505(b)(2) application refers. The applicant may also elect to submit a “section viii” statement certifying that its proposed label does not contain (or carves out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent.

If the reference drug NDA holder and patent owners assert a patent challenge directed to one of the Orange Book listed patents within 45 days of the receipt of the paragraph IV certification notice, the FDA is prohibited from approving the application until the earlier of 30 months from the receipt of the paragraph IV certification, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the applicant. The ANDA or 505(b)(2) application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the branded reference drug has expired as described in further detail below.

Non-Patent Exclusivity

In addition to patent exclusivity, the holder of the NDA for the listed drug may be entitled to a period of non-patent related exclusivity, during which the FDA cannot review, or in some cases, approve an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application that relies on the listed drug. For example, a company may obtain five years of non-patent exclusivity upon NDA approval of a new chemical entity, or NCE, which is a drug that contains an active moiety that has not been approved by the FDA in any other NDA. An “active moiety” is defined as the molecule or ion responsible for the drug substance’s physiological or pharmacologic action. During the five-year exclusivity period, the FDA cannot accept for filing any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug or any 505(b)(2) NDA for the same active moiety and that relies on the FDA’s findings regarding that drug, except that FDA may accept an application for filing after four years if the follow-on applicant makes a paragraph IV certification.

A drug, including one approved under Section 505(b)(2), may obtain a three-year period of exclusivity for a particular condition of approval, or change to a marketed product, such as a new formulation of a previously approved product, if one or more new clinical studies (other than bioavailability or bioequivalence studies) was essential to the approval of the application and was conducted/sponsored by the applicant. Should this occur, the FDA would be precluded from approving any ANDA or 505(b)(2) application for the protected modification until after that three-year exclusivity period has run. However, unlike NCE exclusivity, the FDA can accept an application and begin the review process during the exclusivity period.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

The Orphan Drug Act provides incentives for the development of products intended to treat rare diseases or conditions. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug or biological product available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. If a sponsor demonstrates that a drug is intended to treat rare diseases or conditions, the FDA will grant orphan designation for that product for the orphan disease indication. Orphan designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan product designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation, however, does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

Orphan drug designation provides manufacturers with research grants, tax credits and eligibility for orphan drug exclusivity. If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval of the active moiety for that disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which for seven years prohibits the FDA from approving another product with the same active ingredient for the same indication, except in limited circumstances. If a drug designated as an orphan product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than the orphan indication for which it received the designation, it will not be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan exclusivity will not bar approval of another product under certain circumstances, including if a subsequent product with the same active ingredient for the same indication is shown to be clinically superior to the approved product on the basis of greater efficacy or safety, or providing a major contribution to patient care, or if the company with orphan drug exclusivity is not able to meet market demand. Further, the FDA may approve more than one product for the same orphan indication or disease as long as the products contain different active ingredients. Moreover, competitors may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity. As a result, even if one of our product candidates receives orphan exclusivity, we may still be subject to competition. Orphan exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same drug or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease.

Anti-Kickback and False Claims Laws and Other Regulatory Matters

In the United States, we are subject to complex laws and regulations pertaining to healthcare “fraud and abuse,” including, but not limited to, the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the Federal False Claims Act, and other state and federal laws and regulations. The Federal Anti-Kickback Statute makes it illegal for any person, including a prescription drug manufacturer (or a party acting on its behalf) to knowingly and willfully solicit, receive, offer, or pay any remuneration that is intended to induce the referral of business, including the purchase, order, or prescription of a particular drug, for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. Violations of this law are punishable by up to five years in prison, criminal fines, administrative civil money penalties, and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. In addition, many states have adopted laws similar to the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Some of these state prohibitions apply to the referral of patients for healthcare services reimbursed by any insurer, not just federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.

The Federal False Claims Act prohibits anyone from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, for payment to federal programs (including Medicare and Medicaid) claims for items or services, including drugs, that are false or fraudulent, claims for items or services not provided as claimed, or claims for medically unnecessary items or services. Although we would not submit claims directly to payors, manufacturers can be held liable under these laws if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers or promoting a product off-label. In addition, our future activities relating to the reporting of wholesaler or estimated retail prices for our products, the reporting of prices used to calculate Medicaid rebate information and other information affecting federal, state and third-party reimbursement for our products, and the sale and marketing of our products, are subject to scrutiny under this law. For example, pharmaceutical companies have been found liable under the Federal False Claims Act in connection with their off-label promotion of drugs. Penalties for a False Claims Act violation include three times the actual damages sustained by the government, plus mandatory civil penalties of between $10,000 and $25,000 for each separate false claim, the potential for exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs, and, although the Federal False Claims Act is a civil statute, conduct that results in a False Claims Act violation may also implicate various federal criminal statutes. In addition, private individuals can bring actions under the Federal False Claims Act and certain states have enacted laws modeled after the Federal False Claims Act.

In addition to the privacy and security requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, (which we refer to collectively as HIPAA), HIPPA also expanded and created several additional federal crimes, including healthcare fraud and false statements relating to healthcare matters. The healthcare fraud statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors. The false statements statute prohibits knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation, or making or using any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services.

There are also an increasing number of state laws with requirements for manufacturers and/or marketers of pharmaceutical products. Some states require the reporting of expenses relating to the marketing and promotion of drug products and the reporting of gifts and payments to individual healthcare practitioners in these states. Other states prohibit various marketing-related activities, such as the provision of certain kinds of gifts or meals. Still other states require the reporting of certain pricing information, including information pertaining to and justification of price increases, or prohibit prescription drug price gouging. In addition, states such as California, Connecticut, Nevada, and Massachusetts require pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs and/or marketing codes. Many of these laws contain ambiguities as to what is required to comply with the laws. In addition, as discussed below, a similar federal requirement requires manufacturers to track and report to the federal government certain payments made to physicians and teaching hospitals made in the previous calendar year. These laws may affect our sales, marketing and other promotional activities by imposing administrative and compliance burdens on us. In addition, given the lack of clarity with respect to these laws and their implementation, our reporting actions could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent state, and soon federal, authorities.

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act, implemented as the Open Payments Program, and its implementing regulations, requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to CMS information related to certain payments made in the previous calendar year and other transfers of value to physicians and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members.

In addition, HIPAA, and its implementing regulations impose certain obligations on entities subject to the law, such as health plans and most healthcare providers, and their business associates who provide certain services involving the use or disclosure of HIPAA protected health information on their behalf, with respect to the privacy and security of such protected health information. Further, most states have enacted laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts in certain circumstances, such as specific disease states.

Compliance with such laws and regulations will require substantial resources. Because of the breadth of these various fraud and abuse laws, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. Such a challenge could have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In the event governmental authorities conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations, they may impose sanctions under these laws, which are potentially significant and may include civil monetary penalties, damages, exclusion of an entity or individual from participation in government health care programs, criminal fines and individual imprisonment, additional reporting requirements if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other settlement to resolve allegations of violations of these laws, as well as the potential curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Further, we may be subject to contractual damages and reputational harm as result of such non-compliance. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity.

International Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, we are and will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations regarding development, approval, commercial sales and distribution of our products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and can involve additional product testing and additional review periods, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required to obtain FDA approval. The requirements governing, among other things, the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country. Regulatory approval in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may negatively impact the regulatory process in others. If we fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution. In the European Union, or EU, we may seek marketing authorization under either the centralized authorization procedure or national authorization procedures.

Centralized procedure. The European Medicines Agency, or EMA, implemented the centralized procedure for the approval of human medicines to facilitate marketing authorizations that are valid throughout the EU. This procedure results in a single marketing authorization issued by the European Commission following a favorable opinion by the EMA that is valid across the European Union, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. The centralized procedure is compulsory for human medicines that are: derived from biotechnology processes, such as genetic engineering, contain a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative disorders or autoimmune diseases and other immune dysfunctions, and officially designated orphan medicines. For medicines that do not fall within these categories, an applicant has the option of submitting an application for a centralized marketing authorization to the EMA, as long as the medicine concerned is a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation, or if its authorization would be in the interest of public health.

National authorization procedures. There are also two other possible routes to authorize medicinal products in several European Union countries, which are available for investigational medicinal products that fall outside the scope of the centralized procedure: the decentralized procedure and the mutual recognition procedure. Under the decentralized procedure, an applicant may apply for simultaneous authorization in more than one EU country for medicinal products that have not yet been authorized in any EU country and that do not fall within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure. Under the mutual recognition procedure, a medicine is first authorized in one EU Member State, in accordance with the national procedures of that country. Following a national authorization, the applicant may seek further marketing authorizations from other EU countries under a procedure whereby the countries concerned agree to recognize the validity of the original, national marketing authorization.

In the EU, medicinal products designated as orphan products benefit from financial incentives such as reductions in marketing authorization application fees or fee waivers and 10 years of market exclusivity following medicinal product approval. For a medicinal product to qualify as orphan: (i) it must be intended for the treatment, prevention or diagnosis of a disease that is life-threatening or chronically debilitating; (ii) the prevalence of the condition in the EU must not be more than five in 10,000 or it must be unlikely that marketing of the medicine would generate sufficient returns to justify the investment needed for its development; and (iii) no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition concerned can be authorized, or, if such a method exists, the medicine must be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.

United States Healthcare Reform

Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or, collectively, the PPACA, substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers and significantly impacted the pharmaceutical industry. Changes that may affect our business include those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement changes, benefits for patients within a coverage gap in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, or commonly known as the donut hole in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% (increased to 70% pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, effective as of 2019) point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, rules regarding prescription drug benefits under the health insurance exchanges, changes to the Medicaid Drug Rebate program, expansion of the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing discount program, or 340B program, fraud and abuse, and enforcement. These changes impacted existing government healthcare programs and are resulting in the development of new programs, including Medicare payment for performance initiatives and improvements to the physician quality reporting system and feedback program.

Some states have elected not to expand their Medicaid programs to individuals with an income of up to 133% of the federal poverty level, as is permitted under the PPACA. For each state that does not choose to expand its Medicaid program, there may be fewer insured patients overall, which could impact our sales of products for which we receive regulatory approval, business and financial condition. Where new patients receive insurance coverage under any of the new Medicaid options made available through the PPACA, the possibility exists that manufacturers may be required to pay Medicaid rebates on drugs used under these circumstances, a decision that could impact manufacturer revenues.

Since its enactment, there have been numerous judicial, administrative, executive, and legislative challenges to certain aspects of the PPACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the PPACA in the future. Various portions of the PPACA are currently undergoing legal and constitutional challenges in the United States Supreme Court, the Trump administration issued various Executive Orders which eliminated cost-sharing subsidies and various provisions that would impose a fiscal burden on states or a cost, fee, tax, penalty or regulatory burden on individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices; and Congress has introduced several pieces of legislation aimed at significantly revising or repealing the PPACA. It is unclear whether the PPACA will be overturned, repealed, replaced, or further amended.

Moreover, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the PPACA was enacted. In August 2011, then President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals for spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, including the BBA, will remain in effect. Pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act, these reductions are suspended from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  As the legislation currently stands, the reductions went back into effect January 2021 and will remain in effect through 2030 unless additional Congressional action is taken.  Further, in January 2013, then President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

In addition, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. On July 24, 2020, President Trump signed four Executive Orders directing the Secretary of HHS to: (1) eliminate protection under an Anti-Kickback Statute safe harbor for certain retrospective price reductions provided by drug manufacturers to sponsors of Medicare Part D plans or pharmacy benefit managers that are not applied at the point-of-sale; (2) allow the importation of certain drugs from other countries through individual waivers, permit the re-importation of insulin products, and prioritize finalization of FDA’s December 2019 proposed rule to permit the importation of drugs from Canada; (3) ensure that payment by the Medicare program for certain Medicare Part B drugs is not higher than the payment by other comparable countries (depending on whether pharmaceutical manufacturers agree to other measures); and (4) allow certain low-income individuals receiving insulin and epinephrine purchased by a Federally Qualified Health Center, or FQHC, as part of the 340B drug program to purchase those drugs at the discounted price paid by the FQHC. On October 1, 2020, the FDA issued its final rule allowing importation of certain prescription drugs from Canada. On September 13, 2020, President Trump signed an Executive Order directing HHS to implement a rulemaking plan to test a payment model, pursuant to which Medicare would pay, for certain high-cost prescription drugs and biological products covered by Medicare Part B, no more than the most-favored-nation price (i.e., the lowest price) after adjustments, for a pharmaceutical product that the drug manufacturer sells in a member country of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development that has a comparable per-capita gross domestic product. While some proposed measures will require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, Congress has indicated that they will continue to pursue new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. With the election of a new Presidential administration, it is unclear at this time to predict what legislative initiatives the President and Congress may propose related to drug pricing. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that the PPACA, as currently enacted or as it may be amended or replaced in the future, and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future could have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our ability to maintain or increase sales of products for which we receive regulatory approval or to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

Coverage and Reimbursement

The commercial success of our products and product candidates, if and when approved, is partially dependent on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from public (i.e., federal and state government) and private (i.e., commercial) payors. These third‑party payors may deny coverage or reimbursement for a product or therapy, either in whole or in part, if they determine that the product or therapy was not medically appropriate or necessary. Also, third‑party payors will continue to control costs by limiting coverage through the use of formularies and other cost‑containment mechanisms, and the amount of reimbursement for particular procedures or drug treatments.

As discussed above, the cost of pharmaceuticals continues to generate substantial governmental and third‑party payor interest. We expect that the pharmaceutical industry will experience pricing pressures, given the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of managed care organizations, and additional regulatory and legislative proposals. Our results of operations and business could be adversely affected by current and future third‑party payor policies, as well as healthcare legislative reforms.

Additionally, we must offer discounted pricing or rebates on purchases of pharmaceutical products under various federal and state healthcare programs, including: the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, Medicare Part B Program and Medicare Part D Coverage Gap Discount Programs, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ Federal Supply Schedule Program, and the Health Resources and Services Administration’s 340B Drug Pricing Program. We must also report specific prices to government agencies under healthcare programs, such as the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and Medicare Part B Program. The calculations necessary to determine the prices reported are complex and the failure to report prices accurately may expose us to penalties.

Some third‑party payors also require pre‑approval of coverage for new or innovative drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. While we cannot predict whether any proposed cost‑containment measures will be adopted or otherwise implemented in the future, including any changes to any Medicare reimbursement program, these requirements or any announcement or adoption of such proposals could have a material adverse effect on our ability to obtain adequate prices for our product candidates and to operate profitably.

In international markets, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies. There can be no assurance that our products will be considered medically reasonable and necessary for a specific indication, that our products will be considered cost‑effective by third‑party payors, that an adequate level of reimbursement will be available, or that the third‑party payors’ reimbursement policies will not adversely affect our ability to sell our products profitably.

Additional information regarding these programs is discussed under the heading “If we are unable to achieve and maintain adequate levels of coverage and reimbursement for our products or product candidates, if approved, their commercial success may be severely hindered” in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Other Regulation

We are also subject to various laws and regulations regarding laboratory practices, the experimental use of animals, and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances in connection with our research. While we believe we are in compliance with applicable environmental and other regulations, in each of these areas, as above, the FDA and other government agencies have broad regulatory and enforcement powers, including, among other things, the ability to levy fines and civil penalties, suspend or delay issuance of approvals, seize or recall products, and withdraw approvals, any one or more of which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Employees and Human Capital

As of December 31, 2020, we had 187 colleagues employed at the Company (including contract and temporary workers).  All of these colleagues are located in the U.S. Of these colleagues, 19 are directly involved in research and development, 88 are involved in manufacturing operations, 80 are involved in commercialization and sales and general and administrative activities.

We are subject to local labor laws and regulations with respect to our employees in the jurisdictions in which they are employed. These laws principally concern matters such as paid annual vacation, paid sick days, length of the workday and work week, minimum wages, pay for overtime, and insurance for workers’ compensation.

Our colleagues are not represented by a labor union. We do not have individual written employment contracts with most of our colleagues and based on feedback generally believe that our colleagues are engaged and see Aquestive as an attractive workplace.

Our values - compliance, collaboration, integrity and high performance - are built on the foundation that the colleagues we hire and the way we treat one another promote creativity, innovation and productivity, which spur the Company’s success. Providing market competitive pay and benefit programs, opportunities to participate in the success they help create, while engaging colleagues in important dialog regarding organizational performance, we create a culture of inclusion in which all colleagues have the opportunity to thrive.

Item 1A.
Risk Factors

Investing in our common stock involves significant risk and investors should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all other information included or referenced in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  There are numerous and varied risks, known and unknown, that may prevent us from achieving our goals.  The risks described below are not the only ones we will face.  In addition to the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, any of the factors set forth below could significantly and negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects and the trading price of our stock. This section contains forward-looking statements. You should refer to the explanation of the qualifications and limitations on forward-looking statements beginning on page 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  The dollar amounts presented in this section are depicted in thousands.

Summary of Risk Factors

Material risks that may affect our business, operating results and financial condition include, but are not necessarily limited to, those relating to:


we have incurred significant operating losses since inception and cannot assure you that we will ever achieve or sustain profitability;


our business and operations may be adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic;


we may fail to obtain regulatory approvals to market our products in the United States or in other countries;


we may fail to obtain orphan drug status or other marketing exclusivity approvals for our product candidates;


we will need to raise substantial funds in the future, and these funds may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. A failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed could force us to delay, limit, scale back or cease some or all operations;


the development of pharmaceutical products involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome.  We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of any product;


if our competitors are better able to develop and market products for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the central nervous system that are safer, more effective, less costly, easier to use or otherwise more attractive than our Pharmfilm technology, our business will be adversely impacted;


even if our products are approved for commercial sale, if we are unable to expand our sales and marketing infrastructure, we may not be successful in commercializing our products in the United States;


our ability to commercialize our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement will be available from government and health administration authorities, private health maintenance organizations and health insurers, and other healthcare payors;


we have entered into, and may enter into collaborations, licensing arrangements, joint ventures, strategic alliances or partnerships with third-parties that may not result in the development of commercially viable products or the generation of significant future revenues;


we are and will be dependent on third-party contract research organizations to conduct all of our clinical trials.  If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or regulatory obligations or meet expected deadlines, if the third parties need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our preclinical development activities or clinical trials may be extended, delayed, suspended or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates;


our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel;


our ability to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology is uncertain;


we may be subject to damages resulting from claims that we, or our employees, have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of our competitors or are in breach of non-competition or non-solicitation agreements with our competitors;


our products and operations are subject to extensive governmental regulation, and failure to comply with applicable requirements could cause our business to suffer; and


if we issue more shares of our Common Stock to raise capital, our current stockholders will incur substantial dilution.

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Need for Additional Capital

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We have a limited operating history and, to date we have focused primarily on developing a broad product portfolio.

Some of our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources before we are able to receive regulatory approvals, implement commercialization strategies and begin generating revenue from product sales. Our commercialization efforts for our self-developed product and product candidates are still in their early stages and we may not generate substantial revenue from sales of our self-developed product and product candidates in the near term, if ever.

We have devoted most of our financial resources to product development. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity and debt securities, proceeds from our debt facilities, and from revenues from certain product licenses and collaborations and from our self-developed product. The extent of future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future expenditures and our ability to generate revenue.

The development, regulatory approval process, and commercialization of drug candidates involve significant risk and significant uncertainty, including matters over which we have no control.  Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical product development, we are unable to fully predict the timing or amount of our expenses. We expect to incur substantial expenses going forward, which we expect will increase as we expand our development, commercialization activities and product portfolio. Some of the expenses we expect  to incur going forward include:


conducting clinical trials of our product candidates;


seeking regulatory approval for any of our product candidates that successfully complete clinical development;


commercialization activities, including product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution, for our products, if approved;


maintaining, expanding and protecting our intellectual property portfolio;


acquiring or in-licensing new technologies or development-stage or approved products;


adding clinical, scientific, operational, financial, sales, marketing, medical and management information systems personnel, including personnel to support our product development and commercialization efforts and to support our transition to operations as a public company; and


experiencing incremental costs due to delays or encountering any issues with any of the above, including, but not limited to, failed or not fully successful trials, complex results, safety issues or other regulatory challenges.

We expect to continue to incur net losses for at least the next few years as we pursue the development, commercialization and marketing of our proprietary product candidates. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from period to period, depending on regulatory approval developments concerning both our late-stage and earlier-stage product candidates, the timing of our planned clinical trials and expenditures on our other research and development, as well as our commercialization activities. We expect our expenses will continue to be substantial in 2021 and future periods as we continue, subject to any delay as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, to:


focus on the approval of Libervant for marketing in the U.S. and, subsequently, if approved, which we cannot assure, its commercialization,


continue to clinically develop AQST-108-SF along the 505(b)(2) approval pathway, having begun PK clinical trials during the third quarter of 2020, subject to any delay from the coronavirus pandemic; and


continue to grow Sympazan revenues as a precursor and complement to the eventual launch of Libervant, if approved for U.S. market access, which we cannot assure.

We expect to continue to manage the timing and level of expenses in light of the declining Suboxone revenues, offset in part by increasing revenue contributions from Sympazan, while focusing on the development and commercialization of Libervant and AQST-108-SF and their subsequent commercialization, if approved by the FDA for U.S. market access.

Until we become profitable, if ever, we expect to need to raise significant additional capital in the future through equity or debt issuances, or both, to continue to manage our expenses to extend our capital runway, in order to further the development, regulatory approval, commercialization and marketing of our products and product candidates, and to conduct our business. We have no committed sources of additional capital, and there can be no assurance that such needed capital or debt financing will be available on favorable terms, or at all. We may seek to obtain additional capital in the future through the issuance of our common stock, through other public or private equity or debt financings, through potential non-dilutive capital raising events that may result from royalty streams that may be realizable from our licensed products or licensed intellectual property, through collaborations or licensing arrangements with other companies, and through the sale of assets, including product, product candidates, plants or other tangible assets, or by other means, if available. We may not be able to raise additional capital or other funding on terms acceptable to us, or at all, and any failure to raise capital as and when needed could compromise our ability to execute on our business plan and cause us to delay or curtail our operations until such funding is received. To the extent that we raise additional funds by issuance of equity securities, our stockholders would experience dilution, and debt financings, if available (and subject to all of the existing restrictions and conditions under the Indenture) may involve increased restrictive covenants and increased fixed payments or may otherwise further constrain our financial flexibility. To the extent that we raise additional funds through collaborative or licensing arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish some rights to our intellectual property or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. In addition, payments made by potential collaborators or licensees generally will depend upon our achievement of negotiated development and regulatory milestones. Failure to achieve these milestones may harm our future capital position.

We will need substantial additional capital to fund our operations, which may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all.

The Company’s cash requirements for 2021 and beyond include expenses related to continuing development and clinical evaluation of its products, manufacture and supply costs, costs of regulatory filings, patent prosecution expenses and litigation expenses, expenses related to commercialization of our products, as well as costs to comply with the requirements of being a public company operating in a highly regulated industry. As of December 31, 2020, we had $31.8 million of cash and cash equivalents.

On November 3, 2020, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Monetization Agreement”) with MAM Pangolin Royalty, LLC, an affiliate of Marathon Asset Management (“Marathon”).  Under the terms of the Monetization Agreement, we sold all of our contractual rights to receive royalties and milestone payments due under the Sunovion License Agreement related to Sunovion’s apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®. KYNMOBI®, an apomorphine film therapy for the treatment of off episodes in Parkinson’s disease patients, received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on May 21, 2020. In exchange for the sale of these rights, we received an upfront payment of $40.0 million and an additional payment of $10.0 million  through the achievement of the first milestone. We have received an aggregate amount of $50.0 million through December 31, 2020 under the Monetization Agreement.

Under the Monetization Agreement, additional aggregate contingent payments of up to $75.0 million may be due to us upon the achievement of worldwide royalty and other commercial targets within a specified timeframe, which could result in total potential proceeds of $125.0 million.

With the upfront proceeds of the monetization, we repaid $22.5 million of the Senior Secured Notes due 2025 (the “12.5% Notes”), and issued $4.0 million of new 12.5% Notes in lieu of paying a prepayment premium on the early repayment of the 12.5% Notes, reducing the aggregate principal balance of 12.5% Notes outstanding to $51.5 million.  In addition, the holders of the 12.5% Notes agreed to extend to December 31, 2021 our ability to access, at our option, an additional $30.0 million of 12.5% Notes re-openers under the Indenture.  The first $10.0 million senior notes re-opener represents a commitment of such amount by current holders of 12.5% Notes, at our option, contingent upon FDA approval of our product candidate Libervant.  A second $20.0 million senior notes re-opener represents a right, at our option, to market to current holders of our 12.5% Notes, and/or other lenders, additional senior notes up to such amount, contingent upon FDA approval of Libervant for U.S. market access.  If and to the extent that we access these re-openers, we will grant warrants to purchase up to 714,000 shares of common stock, with the strike price calculated based on the 30-day volume weighted average closing price of our common stock at the warrant grant date.  In addition, as of the closing of this transaction, we issued to the holders of the 12.5% Notes warrants to purchase 143,000 shares of our common stock.

We may not be able to raise additional capital or secure other funding on terms acceptable to us, or at all, and any failure to raise additional capital or other funding as and when needed for our cash requirements would have a negative impact on our business, financial condition and prospects and on our ability to execute and achieve our business plan.

If adequate funds are not available for our liquidity needs and cash requirements as and when needed, or at all, we may be required to reduce staff, significantly delay, significantly scale back or even discontinue some or all of our research and development programs and clinical and other product development activities, reduce our planned commercialization efforts, enter into potential funding arrangements on unattractive terms, and otherwise significantly reduce our cash spend and adjust our operating plan, and we would need to seek to take other steps intended to improve our liquidity, any of which would likely have a material adverse effect on our business, stock price and our relationships with third parties with whom we have business relationships, at least until additional funding is obtained.  We also may be required to evaluate additional licensing opportunities, if any become available, of our proprietary products and product candidate programs that we currently plan to self-commercialize or explore other potential liquidity opportunities or other alternatives or options or strategic alternatives, including the sale of assets, although we cannot be assured that any of these actions would be available at all or available on reasonable terms.  If we do not have sufficient funds to continue operations, we could be required to seek bankruptcy protection or other alternatives that would likely result in our stockholders losing most if not all of their investment in us.

We may sell additional equity, incur debt or raise funds through licensing arrangements to fund our operations, which may result in dilution to our stockholders, impose restrictions on our business or require us to relinquish proprietary rights.

As of December 31, 2020, Aquestive has experienced a history of net losses and the Company’s accumulated deficits totaled $186,257 which have been partially funded by gross margins from sales of commercialized licensed and proprietary products, license fees, milestone and royalty payments from our commercial licensees and co-development parties, and with the balance of the related funding requirements met by the Company’s equity and debt offerings, including the 12.5% Notes. In 2019, the Company raised funding totaling $52.2 million, consisting of net proceeds of $13.1 million from the refinancing of debt in July 2019, $37.3 million from the public offering of 8,050,000 common shares in December 2019, and $1.8 million from the exercise of warrants in connection with the debt financing.

The Company began utilizing its “At-The-Market” (ATM) facility in November 2020 which has generated net cash of approximately $6.1 million as of December 31, 2020.  This facility has approximately $18.5 million available at December 31, 2020.

Until such time, if ever, that we can generate sufficient revenue to fully fund our operations, we would need to seek additional capital and cash resources through public or private equity or debt financings, third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements, as well as other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements, or any combination of these approaches. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the stockholders’ existing ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of existing stockholders. Debt financings may be coupled with an equity component, such as warrants to purchase shares of our common stock, which could also result in dilution of existing stockholders’ ownership. The incurrence of additional indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and could also result in certain increased restrictive covenants (most if not all of which currently exist under our existing debt facilities), such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights or sell assets, and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business and continue to result in liens being placed on all of our assets and intellectual property. If we were to default on such indebtedness, we could lose all such assets and intellectual property and our ability to operate our business.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, or strategic alliance, marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may need to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, product candidates or future revenue streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Even if we can generate revenues from our operations in the future, our revenues and operating income is likely to fluctuate significantly from year-to-year or quarter-to-quarter and create volatility in our stock price.

Even if we are able to generate future revenues, our results of operations would likely continue to vary significantly from year-to-year and quarter-to-quarter. Variations may result from, among other factors:


the timing of FDA or any other regulatory approval, delay in any FDA or other regulatory approvals, or failure to obtain any such FDA or other regulatory approvals;


competitor’s product candidates obtaining FDA or other regulatory approval, which may include orphan drug market exclusivity for seven years in the U.S., before our product has received any such regulatory approval and/or orphan drug exclusivity;


the timing of process validation for particular product candidates;


the timing of product launches and market acceptance of such launched products;


changes in the timing of and the amount we spend to research, develop, acquire, license or promote new product candidates;


the timing, amount we spend on, and outcome of our research, development, preclinical studies and clinical trial programs;


serious or unexpected health or safety concerns related to our products or product candidates;


the introduction of new branded and generic products by others that render our product candidates obsolete, subject to greater competition or noncompetitive;


our ability to maintain selling prices and gross margins on our commercial products;


our ability to comply with complex governmental regulations applicable to many aspects of our business;


changes in coverage and reimbursement policies of health plans and other health insurers, including changes to Medicare, Medicaid and similar government healthcare programs;


increases in the cost of raw materials used to manufacture our commercial products and product candidates;


manufacturing and supply interruptions, including product rejections or recalls due to failure to comply with manufacturing specifications or current Good Manufacturing Practices;


timing of revenue recognition related to our collaboration agreements;


our ability and the significant cost to protect our intellectual property and avoid infringing the intellectual property of others and any adverse developments in any related legal proceeding or in other legal proceeding of any nature; and


the outcome and cost of existing or possible future litigation with third parties.

Our level of indebtedness and significant debt service obligations could constrain our ability to invest in our business and make it more difficult for us to fund our operations.

We have substantial debt and substantial debt service obligations. At December 31, 2020, we had an aggregate principal amount of $51.5 million of outstanding indebtedness, represented by the 12.5% Notes. In the future, we may need to borrow additional funds.

Because of our indebtedness:


we may have difficulty satisfying our obligations with respect to our existing indebtedness including the repayment of such indebtedness;


we may have difficulty obtaining financing in the future (and we have substantial restrictions on incurring any additional indebtedness under our current debt instruments) for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions or other purposes;


we will need to use a substantial portion of our available cash flow to pay interest and principal on our debt, which will reduce the amount of money available to finance our operations and other business activities;


we may be more vulnerable to general economic downturns and adverse industry conditions;


if cash flows from product sales and revenues from licensed product or collaborative arrangements are insufficient to satisfy our obligations with respect to our existing indebtedness, we may be forced to seek to sell assets (subject to obtaining consent under the Indenture) or seek additional capital, which we may not be able to accomplish on favorable terms, if at all;


we could be limited in our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and in our industry in general;


we could be placed at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt, less debt restriction or less restrictive debt covenants;


our failure to comply with the financial and other restrictive covenants in our debt instruments which, among other things, limits our ability to incur additional debt and sell or dispose of assets, could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, would have a material adverse effect on our business or prospects; and


our tangible and intangible assets, including our intellectual property, are subject to first priority liens and may be used to satisfy our outstanding debt.

We intend to satisfy our current and future debt service obligations with our existing cash and cash equivalents and potential access to other funding. However, we may not have sufficient funds, and may be unable to arrange for additional financing, to pay the amounts due under the Indenture and 12.5% Notes or any other debt instruments we may enter into. Failure to make required debt service payments or comply with other covenants under our existing debt facilities or such other debt instruments would result in an event of default and acceleration of amounts due, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are dependent upon the commercial success of our licensed and self-commercialized products and other licensing activities to generate revenue for the near future.

Although we are in the process of testing and developing proprietary product candidates and may seek to acquire rights in other approved drugs, we anticipate that our ability to generate revenue and to become profitable in the near future will depend upon the continued commercial success of Suboxone, Exservan, KYNMOBI® and Sympazan, our ability to license Zuplenz, and our ability to commercialize our product candidate Libervant subject to FDA approval including our ability to demonstrate that Libervant will, if approved by the FDA for U.S. market access, represent a “major contribution to patient care” within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance, as compared to available treatment options. There is no assurance that we will become commercially successful to the extent necessary to become profitable. If our current products are not commercially successful, our ability to generate manufacturing and sale margins and licensing or royalty revenues will be impaired. Without those revenues, our ability to continue planned development initiatives and commercialization efforts would be limited. Due to our dependence on the commercial success of our products, delays or setbacks in the commercial success of any of these products would likely materially adversely affect our business, prospects, results and operations and financial consideration.

A substantial portion of our revenues is derived from a single customer and license and any loss or material reduction in revenues from such significant customer would adversely affect our business.

Historically, a substantial portion of our revenues in each quarter and year has been derived from a single customer and this trend is expected to continue while we continue to develop, seek regulatory approval of and seek to commercialize our proprietary products and product candidates.  If revenues from such key customer were to decline significantly, it would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In April 2019, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that a federal grand jury sitting in the Western District of Virginia had criminally indicated Indivior PLC, or Indivior, for which we exclusively manufacture and supply Suboxone film products and license certain of our intellectual property, in connection with Indivior’s allegedly deceptive and misleading marketing and distribution practices in its distribution and sale of Suboxone film products, dating back a number of years, and seeking a monetary judgment of not less than $3 billion.  Indivior has denied the claims and publicly stated that it intends to contest the allegations vigorously.  Indivior accounted for approximately 57% of our revenues for 2020 and approximately 86% of our revenues for 2019 and we believe in the future will continue to account for a substantial part of our revenues.  On July 24, 2020, Indivior disclosed a $600 million settlement and disposition of this matter with the U.S. Department of Justice.  We cannot assess whether this settlement and disposition will have a material adverse financial impact on our business, prospects, liquidity, financial condition and operating results.

Further, the Indivior License Agreement under which we manufacture and supply Suboxone to Indivior on an exclusive basis, may be terminated should certain causes or events occur.  For example, either party may terminate the relationship in connection with a material breach by the other party of its contractual obligations.  Indivior may also terminate the Indivior License Agreement if the FDA or other applicable regulatory authority declares our manufacturing site to no longer be suitable for the manufacture of Suboxone or Suboxone is no longer suitable to be manufactured due to health or safety reasons.  In addition, the  Indivior Licensing Agreement currently has a one-year term, subject to automatic one-year renewals unless either party provides the other party with twelve months’ prior notice of non-renewal.  As a result, there can be no assurance that either party will not terminate the Indivior License Agreement either due to any future breach of obligation, other termination cause or event, or notice of non-renewal.  Any such termination would have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, capital position and prospects.

Indivior has ceased production of the authorized generic product of Suboxone which can be expected to continue to have a material impact on our manufactured product sales and revenues.

In early 2019, certain third-party pharmaceutical companies launched at risk, generic film products for buprenorphine-naloxone.  Also, in early 2019 Indivior began to market and sell an authorized generic sublingual film product for Suboxone, which we also exclusively manufactured and supplied. In October 2019, Indivior publicly announced its intention to cease production of the authorized generic sublingual film product.

Indivior accounted for approximately 57% of our annual revenues in fiscal year 2020.  As a result of Indivior’s decision to cease production of the authorized generic sublingual film product, our manufacturing and supply revenue for that product has ceased, which has and we believe will continue to have a material negative impact on our manufacture and supply revenues and our results of operations.  Although branded Suboxone has continued to retain meaningful market share, we have planned for the erosion of this sunsetting branded product over time, which will further affect our total revenues and our results from operations.

We are currently involved in antitrust litigation in connection with the launch of Suboxone Sublingual Film and any adverse decisions in such litigation could impair our ability to raise addition capital and significantly harm our business.

We are named as a defendant in antitrust litigation brought against us and Indivior. The litigation involves allegations that we have engaged in conduct intended to interfere with the introduction of generic drug products that would compete with our product, Suboxone, in the marketplace. We have denied any wrongdoing and are defending the litigation. However, depending on the outcome of the litigation, including whether or not any judgements are entered against us or Indivior and, if so, the extent of those judgements, our ability to earn revenues from Suboxone may be impaired, which may affect our business, profitability, prospects, financial condition ability to generate sufficient revenues, and our ability to raise additional funding. Moreover, regardless of the merits of any claim, the continued legal and other costs arising from these judicial proceedings may result in substantial additional expenses and divert management’s time and attention away from our other business operations, which could also significantly harm our business. For more information, please see Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies.

KYNMOBI® is commercialized by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., therefore, there is no assurance that we will receive additional contingent payments pursuant to the Monetization Agreement in the amount or at the time we have planned, or at all, and any failure to receive such payments would have a material adverse impact on our financial position and capital needs.

On November 3, 2020, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Monetization Agreement”) with MAM Pangolin Royalty, LLC, an affiliate of Marathon Asset Management (“Marathon”).  Under the terms of the Monetization Agreement, we sold all of our contractual rights to receive royalties and milestone payments due under the Sunovion License Agreement related to Sunovion’s apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®. KYNMOBI®, an apomorphine film therapy for the treatment of off episodes in Parkinson’s disease patients, received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on May 21, 2020. In exchange for the sale of these rights, we received an upfront payment of $40.0 million and an additional payment of $10.0 million  through the achievement of the first milestone. We have received an aggregate amount of $50.0 million through December 31, 2020 under the Monetization Agreement.

Under the Monetization Agreement, additional aggregate contingent payments of up to $75.0 million may be due to us upon the achievement of worldwide royalty and other commercial targets within a specified timeframe, which could result in total potential proceeds of $125.0 million.

With the upfront proceeds of the monetization, we repaid $22.5 million of the 12.5% Notes, and issued $4.0 million of new 12.5% Notes in lieu of paying a prepayment premium on the early repayment of the 12.5% Notes, reducing the aggregate principal balance of 12.5% Notes outstanding to $51.5 million.

We cannot be assured of receiving any additional contingent payments under the Monetization Agreement.

Risks Related to Development and Commercialization of Our Products and Product Candidates

We will be required to demonstrate to the FDA that our drug candidate LibervantTM provides a “major contribution to patient care” relative to the approved drugs with the same active moiety for the same indication, and there can be no assurance that we will be successful.

We are developing Libervant as an alternative to device-dependent rescue therapies currently available to patients with refractory epilepsy, which are a rectal gel and newly approved nasal sprays.  We completed the rolling submission of our NDA filing with the FDA for Libervant on November 27, 2019, our NDA for Libervant was accepted by the FDA on February 10, 2020, and a PDUFA goal date of September 27, 2020 was provided by the FDA.  On January 10, 2020 Neurelis, Inc. obtained FDA approval of its drug candidate Valtoco® (diazepam nasal spray). We are seeking to demonstrate that Libervant will, if approved by the FDA for U.S. market access, represent a “major contribution to patient care” within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance, as compared to available treatment options, as the first, non-device delivered, oral diazepam-based product available to manage seizure clusters in epilepsy patients.  However, overcoming the orphan drug marketing exclusivity is difficult to establish, with limited precedent, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree with our position seeking to overcome such market exclusivity and approve Libervant for U.S. market access.  A company that obtains FDA approval for a designated orphan drug receives market exclusivity for that drug for the designated indication for a period of seven years from the grant date in the United States.  This orphan drug exclusivity approval may prevent a subsequent product seeking FDA approval from being marketed in the United States during the exclusivity period for the same active moiety for the same orphan drug indication except in the case where the drug candidate sponsor is able to demonstrate, and the FDA concludes, that the later drug is “clinically superior” to the approved products (e.g., safer, more effective, or providing a major contribution to patient care) within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance.  In assessing whether a drug candidate sponsor has demonstrated that its drug candidate provides a “major contribution to patient care” over and above the currently approved drugs, which is evaluated by the FDA on a case by case basis, there is no one objective standard and the FDA may, in appropriate circumstances, consider such factors as convenience of treatment location, duration of treatment, patient comfort, reduced treatment burden, advances in ease and comfort of drug administration, longer periods between doses, and potential for self-administration.

If the FDA does not approve our NDA for Libervant, or the continued development of Libervant is significantly delayed or terminated, our business and results of operations could be significantly adversely affected.

We completed the rolling submission of our NDA filing with the FDA for Libervant on November 27, 2019, our NDA for Libervant was accepted by the FDA on February 10, 2020, and a PDUFA goal date of September 27, 2020 was provided by the FDA.  However, on September 25, 2020, we received a Complete Response Letter (CRL) from the FDA for Libervant.  The FDA issues a CRL to indicate that the review cycle for an application is complete but the application cannot be approved in its current form.  In the CRL, the FDA cited that, in a study submitted by the Company with the NDA, certain weight groups showed a lower drug exposure level than desired. In a Type A meeting with the FDA in November, the FDA confirmed that these issues may be addressed by utilizing modeling and simulations for an updated dosing regimen.  The Company resubmitted a revised weight-based dosing regimen with modeling and simulations in December 2020. As recently announced, the FDA provided guidance on the December submission which clarified the information that the Agency expected to see in the Company’s population pharmacokinetic model to be included in the resubmitted NDA. Based upon the FDA’s feedback at the Type A meeting as well as further guidance from the Agency, the Company continues to believe that no further clinical studies are necessary.  The Company expects to resubmit its NDA late in the second quarter of 2021. Once the NDA is resubmitted, the Company anticipates a six month review process.  The FDA did not include in the CRL any indication regarding approval of U.S. market access for Libervant.  Any failure to obtain FDA approval of, and to demonstrate clinical superiority for, Libervant would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations in 2021 and later.

We cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully develop our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Prior to receiving approval to commercialize any of our drug products, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA and/or other regulatory authorities in the U.S. and other countries, that our particular product candidates are both safe and effective. For each drug product, we must demonstrate its efficacy and monitor its safety throughout the process. If development within these parameters is unsuccessful, our business could be harmed, and our stock price could be adversely affected.

We currently have multiple product candidates in preclinical and clinical development. Our business depends primarily on the successful clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates. Before our product candidates can be marketed, the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory agencies must approve our applicable NDA or comparable regulatory submissions. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is very uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. Further, positive results from earlier stage clinical trials may not be predictive of later clinical trials or other regulatory developments. In addition, many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in later stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early stage development, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Also, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials nonetheless failed to obtain FDA approval. Even after successful completion of clinical testing, there is a risk that the FDA may request further information from us, disagree with our findings or otherwise undertake a lengthy review of our submission. We also face hurdles and setbacks by reason of competitors’ drug candidates obtaining FDA or other regulatory approvals, including orphan drug market exclusivity, prior to our obtaining FDA or other regulatory approval of our similar drug candidate. Even if the FDA approves our NDA, we may be unable to successfully commercialize our products and product candidates.

In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to the numerous factors, including changes in clinical trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, adherence to the dosing regimen, and other clinical trial protocols, and the rate of dropout among clinical participants.  If we fail to produce positive results in our planned preclinical studies or clinical trials of any of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for our product candidates and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, would be materially adversely affected.

It is also possible that the FDA will not approve an application that we may submit, or our product candidates may not obtain appropriate regulatory approvals necessary for us to commence clinical trials for our product candidates. Any delay or failure in obtaining required approvals could have a material adverse effect on our business. This process from development to commercialization can take many years and will likely require the expenditure of substantial resources beyond the proceeds we currently have on hand, without any guarantee or assurance that we will be successful with regulatory approval, or commercial success, of such product candidate.

Even if we obtain approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for our current and future product candidates, any approval might contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, or may be subject to burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approval, or any approval contains significant limitations, we may not be able to obtain sufficient funding or generate sufficient revenue to continue the development of that product candidate or any other product candidate that we may in-license, develop or acquire in the future.

If we do not obtain market exclusivity for our certain of our products, including orphan drug exclusivity, our business may be harmed.

We intend to seek exclusivity for certain of our product candidates, including orphan drug exclusivity for Libervant. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States.

Generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a period of market exclusivity, which precludes the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same disease for seven years. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an application for marketing approval.

A company that first obtains FDA approval for a designated orphan drug for the designated rare disease or condition receives orphan drug market exclusivity for that drug for the designated disease for a period of seven years in the United States. This orphan drug exclusivity prevents the FDA from approving another application to market a drug containing the same active moiety for the same orphan indication, except in very limited circumstances, including when the FDA concludes that the later drug is safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care within the meaning of FDA regulations and guidance. In addition, a designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation.

Even if we receive orphan drug designation for one or more of our drug candidates, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for the orphan-designated indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing product candidates. If any of these other pharmaceutical companies obtains approval of an NDA before we are able to receive approval for one or more of our drug candidates with the same active moiety for the same indication, we would be barred from marketing that product in the United States during the seven-year orphan drug exclusivity period, unless we could demonstrate that such drug candidate is clinically superior to the approved products or satisfies one of the other limited exceptions to such orphan drug exclusivity.

Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition or a drug with the same active moiety can be approved for a different indication. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. In addition, even if we intend to seek orphan drug designation for any of our product candidates or indications, we may never receive such designations or obtain orphan drug exclusivity.

Also, overcoming the orphan drug marketing exclusivity is difficult to establish, with limited precedent, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree with our position seeking to overcome such marking exclusivity and approve Libervant for U.S. market access with orphan drug exclusivity. If we fail to receive such extensions or exclusive rights, our ability to prevent competitors from manufacturing, marketing and selling competing products will be materially impaired, and our results of operations and financial condition may be significantly adversely affected.

Clinical trials may be delayed, suspended or terminated for many reasons, which will increase our expenses and delay the time it takes to develop our product candidates.

We may experience delays in our ongoing or future preclinical trials, and we do not know whether future preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll an adequate number of patients on time or be completed on schedule.  The commencement and completion of clinical trials for our clinical product candidates may be delayed suspended or terminated as a result of many factors, including:


the FDA disagreeing as to the design, protocol or implementation of our clinical studies;


the delay or refusal of regulators or institutional review boards, or IRBs, to authorize us to commence a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;


changes in regulatory requirements, policies and guidelines;


delays or failure to reach an agreement on acceptable terms with prospective clinical research organizations, or CROs, and clinical trial sites;


the inability to enroll or delays enrolling a sufficient number of patients in trials, particularly in orphan indications, to observe statistically significant treatment effects in the trial;


having clinical sites deviate from the trial protocol;


negative or inconclusive results from ongoing preclinical studies or clinical trials, which may require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials or to abandon projects that we had expected to be promising;


reports from preclinical testing of other similar therapies that raise safety or efficacy concerns;


regulators or IRBs requiring that we or our investigators suspend or terminate clinical research for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or safety concerns, among others;


lower than anticipated retention rates of patients and volunteers in clinical trials;


our CROs or clinical trial sites failing to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, deviating from the protocol or dropping out of a trial;


delays in establishing the appropriate dosage levels; and


exceeding budgeted costs due to difficulty in accurately predicting costs associated with clinical trials.

If we experience delays in the commencement or completion of any clinical trial of our product candidates, or if any clinical trials suspended or terminated, our costs may substantially increase and the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenue from sales of any product candidate will be delayed or not realized at all.  Significant preclinical study or clinical trial delays also could shorten the period during which we have exclusive rights to commercialize a product candidate or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize a product candidate.

We have directly marketed just a single product, Sympazan. With this limited experience, we may lack the necessary expertise, personnel and resources to successfully commercialize this product or our other products that must first receive regulatory approval, either on our own or together with collaborators.

We rely on our third-party licensees to commercialize our two licensed products, Suboxone and Exservan, and to date have only marketed, through our own efforts and with the services of third-party outsourcing vendors including contract sales personnel, our first self-developed product, Sympazan, launched in December 2018. Thus, we have a very limited history of direct experience in commercializing product candidates, and we have no long-term experience upon which to measure our ability or success in commercializing a product or our ability to make predictions about financial results or prospects of any product. To achieve commercial success of our existing product as well as our product candidates, if any more are approved, we are in the process of continuing to develop our own sales, marketing and supply capabilities, including through third-party outsourcing and contract sales personnel.

Our ongoing commercial strategy for our products and product candidates involves the development of a commercial infrastructure that spans multiple jurisdictions and is dependent upon our ability to continue to build an infrastructure that is capable of implementing our commercial product launch strategy. The establishment and development of our commercial infrastructure will continue to be expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to develop our commercial infrastructure successfully or in a timely manner or at all. Doing so will require a high degree of coordination and compliance with laws and regulations in numerous territories, including in the United States, each state, and other countries in which we do business, including restrictions on advertising practices, enforcement of intellectual property rights, restrictions on pricing or discounts, transparency laws and regulations, and unexpected changes in regulatory requirements and tariffs. If we are unable to effectively coordinate such activities or comply with such laws and regulations, our ability to commercialize our products and product candidates in the United States and other jurisdictions in which they are or may be available will be materially adversely affected.

Factors that may affect our ability to commercialize our products and product candidates on our own include: recruiting and retaining adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel, including both internally and through contractual third-party outsourcing arrangements, cultivating effective relationships with third-party physicians and overall pharmaceutical industry payors, obtaining access to or persuading adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe our product candidates and other unforeseen costs associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization. Maintaining a sales and marketing organization requires significant investment and resources, is time-consuming and could delay or impair the launch of our product candidates. We may not be able to build an effective sales and marketing organization in the United States or other key global markets. We also intend to enter into strategic licenses with third parties to commercialize our product candidates outside of the United States. We may have difficulty establishing relationships with third parties on terms that are acceptable to us, or in all of the regions where we wish to commercialize our products, or at all. If we are unable to build our own distribution and marketing capabilities or to find suitable licensees for the commercialization of our products and product candidates, we may have difficulties generating revenue from them and our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects and the trading price of our stock may be materially adversely affected.

Our commercial success depends upon attaining significant market acceptance of our products and product candidates, if approved, among patients, physicians, pharmacists and the medical community.

It is possible that we may not complete development of our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for those product candidates. Even if we do complete development and obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our product candidates may not gain market acceptance among patients, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, the medical community or third-party payors, which is critical to commercial success. Market acceptance of our products and any product candidate for which we receive approval depends on a number of factors, including:


the timing of market introduction of the product candidate as well as competitive products;


the clinical indications for which the product candidate is approved;


the potential and perceived advantages of such product candidate over alternative treatments;


favorable pricing and the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third-party payors and government authorities;


relative convenience and ease of administration;


any negative publicity related to our or our competitors’ products that include the same active ingredient;


the prevalence and severity of adverse side effects, including limitations or warnings contained in a product’s FDA-approved labeling; and


the effectiveness of sales and marketing efforts.

Even if a potential product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile in clinical trials, market acceptance of the product will not be known until a period of time after it is launched. If our products or product candidates, if approved, fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by patients, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, the medical community or third-party payors, we will be unable to generate significant revenues, and we may not become or remain profitable.

In addition, the potential market opportunities for our product candidates are difficult to estimate.  Our estimates of the potential market opportunities are predicated on several key assumptions such as industry knowledge and publications, third-party research reports or analyses and other analytical information.  While we believe that our internal assumptions are reasonable, these assumptions may be inaccurate.  If any of the assumptions proves to be inaccurate, then the actual market for our product candidates could be smaller than our estimates of the potential market opportunity.  If the actual market for our product candidates is smaller than we expect, or if the products fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, health care payors and patients, our revenue from product sales may be limited and we may be unable to achieve or maintain profitability.

Further, we may not be able to hire or contract for a sales force that is sufficient in size or has adequate expertise in the medical markets that we intend to target.  Any failure or delay in the development of our sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of our products.

Regulatory approval for any approved product is limited by the FDA to those specific indications and conditions for which clinical safety and efficacy have been demonstrated, and any allegations of our failure to comply with such approved indications could limit our sales efforts and have a material adverse effect on our business.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. These regulations include standards and restrictions for direct-to-consumer advertising, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, promotional activities involving the internet and off-label promotion. Any regulatory approval that the FDA grants is limited to those specific diseases and indications for which a product is deemed to be safe and effective by the FDA. In addition to the FDA approval required for new formulations, any new indication for an approved product also requires FDA approval. If we are not able to obtain FDA approval for any desired future indications for our products and product candidates, our ability to effectively market and sell our products may be reduced and our business may be materially adversely affected.

While physicians in the U.S. may choose and are generally permitted to prescribe drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those tested in clinical trials and approved by the regulatory authorities, our ability to promote our products is narrowly limited to those indications that are specifically approved by the FDA. These “off-label” uses are common across medical specialties and may constitute an appropriate treatment for some patients in varied circumstances. Regulatory authorities in the U.S. generally do not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. Regulatory authorities do, however, restrict communications by pharmaceutical companies on the subject of off-label use. If our promotional activities fail to comply with the FDA’s regulations or guidelines, we may be subject to warnings from, or enforcement action by, these authorities. In addition, our failure to follow FDA rules and guidelines relating to promotion and advertising may cause the FDA to issue warning letters or untitled letters, bring an enforcement action against us, suspend or withdraw an approved product from the market, require a recall or institute fines, or could result in disgorgement of money, operating restrictions, injunctions or criminal prosecution, any of which could materially harm our reputation and our business significantly.

We could incur substantial costs and disruption to our business and delays in the launch of our product candidates if our competitors and/or collaborators bring legal actions against us, which could harm our business and operating results.

We cannot predict whether our competitors or potential competitors, some of whom we collaborate with, may bring legal action against us based on our research, development and commercialization activities, as well as any product candidates or products resulting from these activities, claiming, among other things, infringement of their intellectual property rights, breach of contract, false or disparaging statements about another company’s products or product candidates, or other legal theories. To date we have been subject to a number of claims of this nature.  In defending such lawsuits, whether or not they are with or without merit or are ultimately determined in our favor, we would continue to face costly litigation and diversion of technical and management personnel. These lawsuits could hinder our ability to enter the market early with our product candidates and thereby hinder our ability to influence usage patterns when fewer, if any, of our potential competitors have entered the market, which could adversely impact our potential revenue from such product candidates. Some of our competitors have substantially greater resources than we do and could be able to sustain the cost of litigation to a greater extent and for longer periods of time than we can. Furthermore, an adverse outcome of a dispute may require us: to pay damages, potentially including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a party’s patent or other intellectual property rights; to cease making, licensing or using products that are alleged to incorporate or make use of the intellectual property of others; to expend additional development resources to reformulate our products or prevent us from marketing a product; and to enter into potentially unfavorable royalty or license agreements in order to obtain the rights to use necessary technologies.

Guidelines and recommendations published by government agencies can reduce the use of our products or product candidates.

Government agencies promulgate regulations and guidelines applicable to certain drug classes which may include our products and product candidates. Regulations and guidelines of government agencies may relate to such matters as usage, dosage, route of administration and use of concomitant therapies. Regulations or guidelines suggesting the reduced use of certain drug classes which may include our products and product candidates or the use of competitive or alternative products as the standard of care to be followed by patients and healthcare providers could result in decreased use of our products or product candidates or negatively impact our ability to gain market acceptance and market share. For example, Suboxone, which treats opioid addiction, has as one of its active ingredients an opioid, buprenorphine. Revisions to regulations or guidelines suggesting the reduced use of opioid drugs such as buprenorphine could result in decreased use of Suboxone.

We face significant competition from other pharmaceutical companies, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.

The pharmaceutical industry is intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. We expect to have competitors both in the United States and internationally, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and universities and other research institutions. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. As a result, these companies may obtain regulatory approval more rapidly than we are able and may be more effective in selling and marketing their products. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these companies. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis drug products or drug administration technologies that are more effective than our products or product candidates. In addition, our competitors may file citizen petitions with the FDA in an attempt to persuade the FDA that our product candidates, or the clinical studies that support their approval, contain deficiencies. Such actions by our competitors could delay or even prevent the FDA from approving any NDA that we submit under Section 505(b)(2) or other filing pathways.

We believe that our ability to successfully compete will depend on, among other things:


the efficacy and safety of our products and product candidates;


the time it takes for our product candidates to complete preclinical and clinical development and receive marketing approval;


our ability to maintain a good relationship with regulatory authorities;


our ability to commercialize and market any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval;


the price of our products relative to pricing of branded or generic competitors;


whether coverage and adequate levels of reimbursement are available under private and governmental health insurance plans, including Medicare and Medicaid;


our ability to protect intellectual property rights related to our products and product candidates;


our ability to manufacture on a cost-effective basis and sell commercial quantities of our products and product candidates that receive regulatory approval; and


acceptance by physicians and other healthcare providers of any of our products and product candidates that receive regulatory approval.

If our competitors’ market products that are more effective, safer or less expensive than our product candidates, or that reach the market sooner than our product candidates, we may enter the market too late in the cycle and may not achieve commercial success. In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapid technological change. Because we have limited research and development capabilities, it may be difficult for us to stay abreast of the rapid changes in each technology. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change, we may be unable to compete effectively. Technological advances or products developed by our competitors may render our technologies or product candidates obsolete, less competitive or not economical.

If we are unable to achieve and maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors for our products or product candidates, if approved, their commercial success may be severely hindered.

Our ability to commercialize our product candidates successfully will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement are available for our product candidates, once approved, from third-party payors, including governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial health insurers and managed care organizations, and how quickly we obtain such coverage and reimbursement, if we are able to obtain it at all. Third-party payors determine which medications they will cover and establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement decisions by third-party payors depend upon a number of factors, including, among other things, each third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:


a covered benefit under its health plan;


appropriate and medically necessary for the specific condition or disease;


cost effective; and


neither experimental nor investigational.

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for our product candidates from third-party payors may be a time consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data, including results from expensive pharmacoeconomic studies, beyond the data required to obtain marketing approval, to each third-party payor. There is no guarantee that we will be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement.

Cost containment is a primary concern of the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere as well as for governmental authorities. Third-party payors are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for medical products and services. Third-party payors may deny reimbursement for covered products if they determine that a medical product was not used in accordance with third-party payor coverage policies, such as required procedures for cost-effective diagnosis methods and other conditions that must be met before the third-party payor will provide coverage for use of a product. For example, insurers may establish a “step-edit” system that requires a patient to first use a lower price alternative product prior to becoming eligible for reimbursement of a higher price product. Third-party payors also may refuse to reimburse for drugs, procedures and devices deemed to be experimental, or that are prescribed for an unapproved indication. It is also possible that a third-party payor may consider our products or product candidates as substitutable by less expensive therapies and only offer to reimburse patients for the less expensive product.  Even if we show improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our products or product candidates, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our products or product candidates.  These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on investment in product development.  Further, third-party payors may also limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. Further, some third-party payors challenge the prices charged for medical products and may impose price controls or require that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices.

Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time-consuming and costly.  No uniform policy for coverage reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the United States.  Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor.  As a result, the coverage determination process is generally a time-consuming and costly process that requires us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.  Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases on short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely.

The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Levels of reimbursement may also decrease in the future, and future legislation, regulation or reimbursement policies of third-party payors may adversely affect the reimbursement available for and the pricing of our product candidates, once approved, which in turn, could negatively impact the demand for our product candidates. If payors are not adequately reimbursed for our product candidates, they may reduce or discontinue purchases of them, which would result in a significant shortfall in achieving revenue expectations and negatively impact our business, prospects and financial condition.

Our relationships with customers, physicians, and third-party payors will be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, health information privacy and security laws, and other healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of our existing proprietary product, any licensed products we are currently marketing and any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, principal investigators, consultants, customers and third-party payors may subject us to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws and other healthcare laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil and criminal false claims laws and the law commonly referred to as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and regulations promulgated thereunder. These laws will impact, among other things, our clinical research programs and our proposed sales, marketing and educational programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy laws by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct or may conduct our business. The laws that will affect our operations include, but are not limited to:


the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, in return for the purchase, recommendation, leasing or furnishing of an item or service reimbursable under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand, and prescribers, purchasers and formulary managers on the other. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended, or the PPACA, amended the intent requirement of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. A person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it;


federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including, without limitation, the False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalty laws which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment or approval from Medicare, Medicaid or other government payors that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. The PPACA provides, and recent government cases against pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers support, the view that federal Anti-Kickback Statute violations and certain marketing practices, including off-label promotion, may implicate the False Claims Act;


the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which created  federal criminal statutes that prohibit a person from knowingly and willfully executing a scheme or making false or fraudulent statements to defraud any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the payor (e.g., public or private);


HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, which imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information without appropriate authorization on entities subject to the rule, such as health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and certain healthcare providers, and their respective business associates who provide services involving the creation, use or disclosure of HIPAA protected health information;


federal transparency laws, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which is part of the PPACA, that require certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to: (i) payments or other “transfers of value” made to physicians and teaching hospitals; and (ii) ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members, with such information being made publicly available through a searchable website;


state and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws; state laws that require manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, marketing expenditures, or pricing information; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or to adopt compliance programs as prescribed by state laws and regulations, or that otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers; and state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and


state and foreign laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws.

It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

The risk of our being found in violation of these laws is increased by the fact that many of them have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and the provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. The shifting compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance and/or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements.

Recently enacted and future healthcare reform legislation or regulation may increase the difficulty and cost for us and any future collaborators to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and may adversely affect the prices we, or they, may obtain and may have a negative impact on our business and results of operations.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could, among other things, prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability, or the ability of any future collaborators, to profitably sell any products for which we, or they, obtain marketing approval. Among policymakers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. We expect that current laws, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we, or any future collaborators, may receive for any approved products. In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the PPACA. Among the provisions of the PPACA of importance to our business, including our ability to commercialize and the prices we may obtain for any of our products and product candidates that are approved for sale, are the following:


an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs, although this fee does not apply to sales of certain products approved exclusively for orphan indications;


expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer’s Medicaid rebate liability;


expansion of manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum rebate for both branded and generic drugs and revising the definition of “average manufacturer price,” or AMP, for calculating and reporting Medicaid drug rebates on outpatient prescription drug prices and extending rebate liability to prescriptions for individuals enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans;


addition of more entity types eligible for participation in the Public Health Service 340B drug pricing program, or the 340B program;


establishment of  the Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program by requiring manufacturers to provide a 50% point-of-sale-discount off the negotiated price of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D;


the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or BBA, that among other things, increased the manufacturer’s subsidy under this program from 50% to 70% of the negotiated price, beginning in 2019;


a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and


establishment of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation within CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug spending.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the PPACA was enacted. For example, beginning April 1, 2013, Medicare payments for all items and services, including drugs and biologics, were reduced by 2% under the sequestration (i.e., automatic spending reductions) required by the Budget Control Act of 2011, as amended by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. Subsequent legislation, including the BBA, extended the 2% reduction, on average, to 2027, subject to additional Congressional action. Sequestration may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and, if we obtain regulatory approvals, may otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for our product candidates or the frequency with which our product candidates may be prescribed or used if approved. Additional changes that may affect our business include the expansion of new programs such as Medicare payment for performance initiatives for physicians under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, or MACRA, which is required to be fully implemented in 2019.  At this time, it is unclear how the introduction of the Medicare quality payment program will impact overall physician reimbursement and their choice of medications to use.

Further, legislative changes to or regulatory changes under the PPACA remain possible in the U.S. Congress and under the Biden administration. The nature and extent of any legislative or regulatory changes to the PPACA, including repeal and replacement initiatives, are uncertain at this time. It is possible that the PPACA repeal and replacement initiatives, if enacted into law, could ultimately result in fewer individuals having health insurance coverage or in individuals having insurance coverage with less generous benefits, including limited coverage for drugs. While Congress has not passed repeal legislation, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the TCJA, which was signed into law by President Trump, includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the PPACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” In addition, the BBA, amended the PPACA to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole.” The scope of potential future legislation to modify or repeal and replace the PPACA provisions is highly uncertain in many respects. We continue to evaluate the potential impact of the PPACA and its possible repeal or replacement on our business.

The costs of prescription pharmaceuticals in the United States have also been the subject of considerable discussion in the United States, and members of Congress and the administration have stated that they will address such costs through new legislative and administrative measures. This focus has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. At the federal level, the Trump administration’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2019 and 2020 contained further drug price control measures that could be enacted during the budget process or in other future legislation, including, for example, measures to permit Medicare Part D plans to negotiate the price of certain drugs under Medicare Part B, to allow some states to negotiate drug prices under Medicaid, and to eliminate cost sharing for generic drugs for low-income patients. Further, the Trump administration released a “Blueprint”, or plan, to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contain additional proposals to increase drug manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products, and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. The Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has started the process of soliciting feedback on some of these measures and, at the same, is immediately implementing others under its existing authority. While some proposed measures will require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, Congress and the Trump administration indicated that they would continue to pursue new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that we may experience more rigorous coverage criteria and additional downward pricing pressure as the result of these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our drugs. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

The pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is also subject to governmental control outside the United States. In these countries, pricing negotiations 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 candidates to other available product candidates. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our ability to generate revenues and become profitable could be impaired.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party contract research organizations, or CROs, to monitor and manage data for our preclinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with FDA laws and regulations regarding current good clinical practice, or GCP, which are also required by the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Economic Area and comparable foreign regulatory authorities in the form of International Conference on Harmonization, or ICH, guidelines for all of our products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce GCP through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCP, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under the current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, regulations. While we have agreements governing activities of our CROs, we have limited influence over their actual performance. In addition, portions of the clinical trials for our product candidates are expected to be conducted outside of the United States, which will make it more difficult for us to monitor CROs and visit clinical trial sites and will force us to rely heavily on CROs to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and compliance with applicable regulations, including GCP. Failure to comply with applicable regulations in the conduct of the clinical trials for our product candidates may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

Some of our CROs have an ability to terminate their respective agreements with us if, among other reasons, it can be reasonably demonstrated that the safety of the subjects participating in our clinical trials warrants such termination, if we make a general assignment for the benefit of our creditors or if we are liquidated. If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our preclinical and clinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. Consequently, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase substantially and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed significantly.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we strive to manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We rely on limited sources of supply for our thin film foil, and any disruption in the chain of supply may impact production and sales and cause delay in developing and commercializing our proprietary PharmFilm® Technology product candidates.

We currently have relationships with two third-parties for the manufacture of our thin film foil. Because of the unique equipment and process for manufacturing our thin film foil, transferring manufacturing activities for our foil to an alternate supplier would be a time-consuming and costly endeavor, and there are only a limited number of manufacturers that we believe are capable of performing this function for us. Switching thin film foil suppliers may involve substantial cost and could result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines. If any of our thin film foil manufacturers breach or terminate their agreements with us, we would need to identify an alternative source for the thin film foil manufacture and supply of foil to us for the development and commercialization of the applicable products. Identifying an appropriately qualified source of alternative thin film foil supply for any one or more of these product candidates could be time consuming, and we may not be able to do so without incurring material delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates, or in satisfying our manufacturing and supply commitments and obligations for our licensed products and our commercialized self-developed products, which could harm our financial position, the commercial potential for our products, and our results of operations, as well as to result in a default in our supply commitments and obligations. Any alternative thin film foil vendor would also need to be qualified through an NDA supplement which could result in further delay. The FDA or other regulatory agencies outside of the United States may also require additional studies if we appoint a new manufacturer for supply of our product candidates that differs from the manufacturer used for clinical development of such product candidates. For our other product candidates, we expect that only one supplier will initially be qualified as a vendor with the FDA. If supply from the approved vendor is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply.

These factors could cause the delay of clinical trials, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of our approved products and product candidates, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing them successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to deliver the required commercial quantities of components and active pharmaceutical ingredient on a timely basis and at commercially reasonable prices, and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, we would likely be in default in our supply obligations, which could result in the termination of our supply obligations, our incurring potential default damages and our loss of significant revenues.

We rely on third parties to manufacture active pharmaceutical ingredients, or API, for our product candidates, and we intend to rely on third parties to manufacture the API for any other approved products. The commercialization of any of our products could be stopped, delayed or made less profitable if those third parties fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of API or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices or fail to maintain or achieve satisfactory regulatory compliance.

We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to manufacture API for our licensed products, our existing proprietary product and our product candidates, and control only certain aspects of their activities.

Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it could delay our proprietary product candidate programs and commercialization activities. Our reliance on these third parties reduces our control over these activities but does not relieve us of our responsibility to ensure compliance with all required legal, regulatory and scientific standards and any applicable trial protocols or our obligations under our product supply commitments and obligations. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our studies in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated study plans and protocols, we will not be able to complete, or may be delayed in completing, clinical trials required to support future regulatory submissions and approval of our product candidates and we would likely be in default in our supply commitments and obligations, which could result in the termination of our supply obligations, our incurring potential default damages and our loss of significant revenues.

Our products and product candidates are highly reliant on very complex sterile techniques and personnel aseptic techniques. The facilities used by us, and by our third-party API manufacturers, to manufacture our products and product candidates must maintain a compliance status acceptable to the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit our NDA to the FDA. If we or any of our third-party API manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the applicable regulatory authorities’ strict regulatory requirements, or pass regulatory inspection, we or they will not be able to secure or maintain regulatory approval for the manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of third-party API manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. Further, as we scale up manufacturing of our product candidates and conduct required stability testing, product, packaging, equipment and process-related issues may require refinement or resolution in order for us to proceed with our planned clinical trials and obtain regulatory approval for commercialization of our product candidates. In the future, for example, we may identify impurities in the product manufactured by us or for us for commercial supply, which could result in increased scrutiny by the regulatory agencies, delays in our clinical program and regulatory approval, increases in our operating expenses, or failure to obtain or maintain approval for our products and product candidates. If the FDA or any other applicable regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our products or if they withdraw any such approval in the future, or if our suppliers or third-party manufacturers decide they no longer want to manufacture our products, we would need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our products or product candidates and which could also result in default in our supply commitments and obligations, our incurring potential default damages and our loss of significant revenues.

More generally, we and our API manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, may often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up and validating initial production. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product, quality assurance testing, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. Additionally, we and our API manufacturers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If we or our manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to comply with their contractual obligations, our ability to manufacture our products, or to make our product candidates available for clinical trials and development purposes or to further commercialize any of our products and product candidates in the United States, would be jeopardized. Any delay or interruption in our ability to meet commercial demand may result in the loss of significant potential revenues and could adversely affect our ability to gain market acceptance for approved products as well as a potential default of our supply commitments or obligations. In addition, any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely. Additionally, if supply from one approved API manufacturer is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply. Regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and would likely result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines and disrupt our supply commitment and obligations.

The occurrence of any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

The design, development, manufacture, supply, and distribution of our products and our product candidates is highly regulated and technically complex.

All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical trials or commercial sale are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP and equivalent foreign standards. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. The development, manufacture, supply, and distribution of our products and our product candidates is highly regulated and technically complex. We, along with our third-party providers, must comply with all applicable regulatory requirements of the FDA and foreign authorities.

We, or our API and component manufacturers, must supply all necessary documentation in support of our regulatory filings for our product candidates on a timely basis and must adhere to the FDA’s good laboratory practices, or GLP, and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program, and the equivalent standards of the regulatory authorities in other countries. Any failure by us or by our third-party API or component manufacturers to comply with cGMP or failure to scale-up manufacturing processes, including any failure to deliver sufficient quantities of product candidates in a timely manner, could lead to a delay in, or failure to obtain, regulatory approval of any of our product candidates. Our facilities and quality systems and the facilities and quality systems of some or all of our third-party API and component manufacturers must also pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of our product candidates or any of our other potential products. In addition, the regulatory authorities in any country may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our product candidates or our other potential products or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. If these facilities and quality systems do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, FDA approval of our product candidates, or the equivalent approvals in other jurisdictions, will not be granted.

Regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, inspect our manufacturing facilities or those of our third-party suppliers or contractors. If any such inspection identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third-party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical trial or commercial sales of our approved products or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business. If we or any of our third-party API or component manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending NDA for a new drug product or revocation of a pre-existing approval. As a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed resulting in a significant loss of revenues and results and resulting in a potential default in our supply commitments or obligations, which could lead to termination of our supply obligations our incurrence of default damages and our loss of significant revenues.

We may not be successful in establishing development and commercialization collaborations, which could adversely affect, and potentially prohibit, our ability to develop our product candidates.

Because developing pharmaceutical products, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, establishing manufacturing capabilities and marketing approved products are expensive, we continue to explore collaborations or licensing arrangements with third parties that have available resources and experience both in the United States and in territories outside of the United States. We continue to explore selective collaborations with third parties for development and commercialization of our product candidates both in and outside of the United States. We may, however, be unable to advance the development and/or commercialization of our products and product candidates in territories outside of the United States, which may limit the market potential for certain product candidates outside the U.S.

In situations where we enter into a development and commercial collaborative arrangement for a product or product candidate, we may also seek to establish additional collaborations for development and commercialization in territories outside of those addressed by the first collaborative arrangement for such product candidate. There are a limited number of potential licensees, and we expect to face competition in seeking appropriate licensees. If we are unable to enter into any development and commercial collaborations and/or sales and marketing arrangements on acceptable terms, if at all, we may be unable to successfully develop and seek regulatory approval for our product or product candidates and/or effectively market and sell approved products, if any, in all of the territories outside of the United States where it may otherwise be valuable to do so.

Whether we reach an agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors.  Those factors may include the likelihood of approval by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, the potential market for the product candidate, the costs and complexities of delivering such product candidate to patients, competing products, and industry and market conditions generally.  Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document.

We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all.  If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain significant additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all.  If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

We rely on third parties to perform many essential services for Sympazan and any other products that we commercialize, including services related to sales, marketing, customer service support, warehousing and inventory program services, distribution services, contract administration and chargeback processing services, accounts receivable management and cash application services, and financial management and information technology services. If these third parties fail to perform as expected or to comply with legal and regulatory requirements, our ability to commercialize Sympazan and other products we commercialize will be significantly impacted and we may be subject to regulatory sanctions.

We have entered into agreements with third-party service providers to perform a variety of functions related to the sale and distribution of our self-developed products, including Sympazan, key aspects of which are out of our direct control. These service providers provide key services related to sales, marketing, customer service support, warehousing and inventory program services, distribution services, contract administration and chargeback processing services, accounts receivable management and cash application services, financial management and information technology services. In addition, our inventory is stored at a warehouse maintained by a third party service provider. We substantially rely on the provider as well as other third-party providers that perform services for us. If these third-party service providers fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, fail to meet expected deadlines or otherwise do not carry out their contractual duties to us, or encounter damage or disruption at their facilities, our ability to deliver product to meet commercial demand would be significantly impaired. In addition, we may engage third parties to perform various other services for us relating to adverse event reporting, safety database management, fulfillment of requests for medical information regarding our product candidates and related services. If the quality or accuracy of the data maintained by these service providers is insufficient, we could be subject to regulatory sanctions.

We may not be successful in maintaining development and commercialization collaborations, and any collaborators may not devote sufficient resources to the development or commercialization of our product candidates or may otherwise fail in development or commercialization efforts, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and successfully commercialize certain of our products and product candidates and our financial condition and operating results.

When we establish collaborative arrangements, such collaboration may not ultimately be successful, which could have a negative impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. If we collaborate with a third-party for development and commercialization of a product or product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that product candidate to the third-party. It is possible that a third-party collaborator may not devote sufficient resources to the development or commercialization of our product or product candidate or may otherwise fail in development or commercialization efforts, in which event the development and commercialization of such product or product candidate could be delayed or terminated and our business could be substantially harmed. In addition, the terms of any collaboration or other arrangement that we establish may not prove to be favorable to us or may not be perceived as favorable, which may negatively impact the trading price of our common stock. In some cases, we may be responsible for continuing development of a product or product candidate or research program under a collaboration, and the payment we receive from our licensee may be insufficient to cover the cost of this development. Moreover, collaborations and sales and marketing arrangements are complex and time consuming to negotiate, document and implement, and they may require substantial resources to maintain.

We are subject to a number of additional risks associated with our dependence on collaborations with third parties, the occurrence of which could cause our collaborative arrangements to fail, including that:


we may be required to undertake the expenditure of substantial operational, financial and management resources;


we may be required to issue equity securities that would dilute our stockholders’ percentage of ownership;


we may be required to assume substantial actual or contingent liabilities;


strategic collaborators could terminate the arrangement or allow it to expire, which would delay the development and commercialization and may substantially increase the cost of developing and commercializing our products and product candidates;


business combinations of a strategic collaborator or significant changes in a strategic collaborator’s business strategy may affect a strategic collaborator’s willingness or ability to complete its obligations under any arrangement;


strategic collaborators could decide to move forward with a competing product or product candidate developed either independently or in collaboration with others, including our competitors;


collaborators may not perform their obligations as expected;


clinical trials conducted as part of any of these collaborations may not be successful;


collaborators may not actively or aggressively pursue development and commercialization of any product candidates that seek to achieve, or that achieves, regulatory approval;


we may not have access to or may be restricted from disclosing, certain information regarding product candidates being developed or commercialized under a collaboration;


a collaborator with marketing and distribution rights to one or more of our product candidates that achieve regulatory approval may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of any such product candidate; and


collaborators may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability.

If any such collaborations do not result in the successful development and commercialization of product candidates, or if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, the development or commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed and our business and prospects harmed.  All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization apply to the activities of our existing and future collaborators.

Additionally, conflicts may arise between us and our third-party collaborators, such as conflicts concerning the interpretation of clinical data, the achievement of milestones, the interpretation of financial provisions or the ownership of intellectual property developed during the collaboration. For example, our existing revenue streams are largely dependent on Indivior, which holds the global commercialization rights to our approved product, Suboxone. During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, Indivior represented 57% and 86% of our total revenue, respectively. If any such conflicts were to arise with Indivior or any such third party could act in its own self-interest, which may be averse to our interests. Any such disagreement between us and a third-party collaborator could result in one or more of the following, each of which could delay or prevent the development or commercialization of our product or product candidates and harm our business:


reductions in the payment of royalties or other payments we believe are due pursuant to the applicable collaborative arrangement;


actions taken by a third-party collaborator inside or outside our collaboration which could negatively impact our rights or benefits under our collaboration;


unwillingness on the part of a third-party collaborator to keep us informed regarding the progress of its development and commercialization activities or to permit public disclosure of the results of those activities; and


decision by our third-party collaborator to terminate or significantly reduce the relationship.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Industry

We will need to expand our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.

Our Company has been rapidly growing based upon the number of products and product candidates in our pipeline, and we expect to continue to grow over the next number of years. As our Company matures, we expect to expand our employee base to increase our managerial, scientific and engineering, operational, sales, marketing, financial and other resources and to hire more consultants and contractors. Future growth would impose significant additional responsibilities on our management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain, motivate and integrate additional employees, consultants, contractors and contract employees. Also, our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Future growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of our existing or future product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenue could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our products and product candidates, if approved, and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

In addition, our expected continuing growth in our management team adds increased expense which we must absorb, without necessarily having commensurate growth in our revenues. Also, to date, we have only directly marketed one product in the market. If we commercialize and directly market Libervant, this could require a significant upfront expense and create a rapid growth in our workforce. This increase in expense may negatively impact our results of operations and may add to our need for additional funds.

Our products and, if approved, product candidates, may give rise to potential product liability claims or false marketing claims, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability.

As a pharmaceutical company, we operate in a market that is subject to significant risk of liability. The sales of our approved products and of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval and the use of our product candidates in clinical trials, if any, exposes us to the risk of product liability claims alleging adverse effects from such products or product candidates and false marketing claims relating to the commercialization of such products or product candidates. Product liability or false marketing claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our product candidates, or governmental agencies. Suboxone, which treats opioid addiction, has as one of its active ingredients an opioid, buprenorphine. There can be no assurance that we will not become the target of claims relating to opioid addiction as have companies that market opioids. Any product liability claims or false marketing claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and future growth prospects. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims or false marketing claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims or false marketing claims may result in:


impairment of our business reputation;


withdrawal of clinical study participants;


substantial costs due to litigation;


distraction of management’s attention from our primary business;


substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants;


the inability to commercialize our products or product candidates; and


decreased demand for our products or product candidates, if approved for commercial sale.

We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage, and our existing or any future insurance policies or our own resources may not sufficiently cover claims for damages that we may receive in the future.

Our business exposes us to potential product liability and other liability risks that are inherent in clinical development, manufacturing, marketing, sale and use of human therapeutic products. It is generally necessary for us to secure certain levels of insurance as a condition for the conduct of clinical trials and any sale or use of our products. We have procured product liability insurance with respect to the sale of our approved products and all clinical trials performed to date for which we were responsible (i.e., in respect of our internal product pipeline). Further, we may seek to expand our insurance coverage for our approved products and our marketing and commercialization of such products as well as any future approved products as well as other risks related to our business.

Our current product liability insurance coverage may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at an acceptable cost to us or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could materially adversely affect our results of operations and business.

We rely significantly on information technology and any failure, inadequacy, interruption or security lapse of that technology, including any cybersecurity incidents, could harm our ability to operate our business effectively.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of third parties with which we contract are vulnerable to damage from cyber-attacks, computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. We have previously been the target of a phishing attack that resulted in unauthorized access to email.  While our systems have been secured and strengthened, there can be no assurance that we will not experience cyber-attacks in the future, suffer indirect consequences from cyber-attack on a third-party, or fail to anticipate, identify or offset such threats of potential cyber-attacks or security breaches in a timely manner.  This is especially so considering the nature of cyber-attack techniques, which change frequently, can be difficult to detect for extended periods of time and often are not recognized until they succeed.  System failures, accidents or security breaches could cause interruptions in our operations and could result in a material disruption of our product development and clinical activities and business operations, in addition to possibly requiring substantial expenditures of resources to remedy. The loss of product development or clinical trial data could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and our development programs and the development of our product candidates could be delayed.

Business interruptions at our manufacturing facilities could delay us in the process of developing our product candidates.

Our headquarters are located in Warren, New Jersey and we have manufacturing facilities in Portage, Indiana. If we encounter any disruptions to our operations at these sites or one were to shut down for any reason, including by fire, natural disaster, such as a hurricane, tornado or severe storm, power outage, systems failure, labor dispute or other unforeseen disruption, then we may be prevented from effectively operating our business. Our coverage for natural disasters may be somewhat limited for floods or earthquakes and we may not carry sufficient business interruption insurance for any unexpected events to compensate us for losses that may occur. Any losses or damages we incur could have a material adverse effect on our business operations.

Our research and development activities could be affected or delayed as a result of possible restrictions on animal testing.

Certain laws and regulations require us to test our product candidates on animals before initiating clinical trials involving humans. Animal testing activities have been the subject of controversy and adverse publicity. Animal rights groups and other organizations and individuals have attempted to stop animal testing activities by pressing for legislation and regulation in these areas and by disrupting these activities through protests and other means. To the extent the activities of these groups are successful, our research and development activities may be interrupted, delayed or become more expensive.

Our operations involve hazardous materials and we and third parties with whom we contract must comply with environmental laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we do business.

As a pharmaceutical company, we are subject to environmental and safety laws and regulations, including those governing the use of hazardous materials. The cost of compliance with health and safety regulations is substantial. Our business activities involve the controlled use of hazardous materials. Our research and development activities involve the controlled storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials, including the components of our product candidates and other hazardous compounds. We and manufacturers and suppliers with whom we may contract are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at our and our manufacturers’ facilities pending their use and disposal. We cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials, which could cause an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. We cannot guarantee that that the safety procedures utilized by third-party manufacturers and suppliers with whom we may contract will comply with the standards prescribed by laws and regulations or will eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In such an event, we may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed our resources and U.S. federal and state or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and/or interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of our future compliance. We do maintain environmental liability insurance coverage to mitigate our exposure in the event of an accident or environmental discharge. In the event that we may be held liable for any consequential damage and any resulting claims for damages, which may exceed our insured limits and financial resources, we may incur costs that may materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and prospects, and the value of our shares.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

If the FDA does not conclude that our product candidates satisfy the requirements for the 505(b)(2) regulatory approval pathway, or if the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates under Section 505(b)(2) are not as we expect, the approval pathway for our product candidates will likely take significantly longer, cost significantly more and encounter significantly greater complications and risks than anticipated, and in any case may not be successful.

We intend to seek FDA approval through the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for each of our product candidates described in this report. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, also known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, added Section 505(b)(2) to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA. Section 505(b)(2) permits the filing of an NDA where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies that were not conducted by or for the applicant.

If the FDA does not allow us to pursue the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for our product candidates as anticipated, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials, provide additional data and information and meet additional standards for regulatory approval. If this were to occur, the time and financial resources required to obtain FDA approval for our product candidates would likely substantially increase. Moreover, the inability to pursue the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway could result in new competitive products reaching the market faster than our product candidates, which could materially adversely impact our competitive position and prospects. Even if we are permitted to pursue the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for a product candidate, we cannot assure you that we will receive the requisite or timely approvals for commercialization of such product candidate.

In addition, notwithstanding the approval of a number of products by the FDA under Section 505(b)(2) over the last few years, certain competitors and others have objected to the FDA’s interpretation of Section 505(b)(2). We expect that our competitors could file citizens’ petitions with the FDA in an attempt to persuade the FDA that our product candidates, or the clinical studies that support their approval, contain deficiencies. If the FDA’s interpretation of Section 505(b)(2) is successfully challenged, the FDA may be required to change its Section 505(b)(2) policies and practices, which could delay or even prevent the FDA from approving any NDA that we submit under Section 505(b)(2).

Our products or product candidates may cause adverse effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval or limit the scope of any approved label or market acceptance, cause us to suspend or discontinue clinical trials, abandon product candidates, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

As with many pharmaceutical and biological products, treatment with our products or product candidates may produce undesirable side effects or adverse reactions or events. Although the nature of our products or product candidates as containing active ingredients that have already been approved means that the side effects arising from the use of the active ingredient or class of drug in our products or product candidates is generally known, our products or product candidates may still cause undesirable side effects. These could be attributed to the active ingredient or class of drug or to our unique formulation of such products or product candidates, or other potentially harmful characteristics. Such characteristics could cause us, our IRBs, clinical trial sites, the FDA or other regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay, denial or withdrawal of regulatory approval, which may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Further, if any of our products cause serious or unexpected side effects after receiving market approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:


regulatory authorities may withdraw their approval of the product or impose restrictions on its distribution;


the FDA may require implementation of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS;


regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, such as warnings or contraindications;


we may be required to change the way the product is administered or conduct additional clinical studies;


we could be sued and held liable for substantial damages for harm caused to patients; and


our reputation may suffer.

Any of the above described events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product or product candidate, significantly affect our revenues and profitability from such products, and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our products and product candidates.

Our business is subject to extensive regulatory requirements and our approved products and product candidates that obtain regulatory approval will be subject to ongoing and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize such products.

Even after a product is approved, we will remain subject to ongoing FDA and other regulatory requirements governing the labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, advertising, promotion, import, export, record-keeping and reporting of safety and other post-market information. The holder of an approved NDA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events, or AEs, and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the NDA. The holder of an approved NDA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws. In addition, the FDA may impose significant restrictions on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or on the conditions of approval. For example, a product’s approval may contain requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product, or the imposition of a REMS program.

The holder of an NDA is subject to payment of user fees and adherence to commitments made in the NDA. A manufacturer is also subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMPs. If we or a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions relative to that product or the manufacturing facility, including requiring product recall, notice to physicians, withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we or our products or product candidates or our manufacturing facilities fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:


issue warning letters or untitled letters asserting that we are in violation of the law;


impose restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product;


seek an injunction or impose civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, assess monetary fines, require disgorgement, consider exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs and require curtailment or restructuring of our operations;


suspend or withdraw regulatory approval;


suspend any ongoing clinical trials;


refuse to approve a pending NDA or supplements to an NDA submitted by us;


seize product; or


refuse to allow us to enter into government contracts.

Similar post-market requirements may apply in foreign jurisdictions in which we may seek approval of our products. Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to market our products or commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues.

In addition, the FDA’s regulations, policies or guidance may change and new or additional statutes or government regulations in the United States and other jurisdictions may be enacted that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates or further restrict or regulate post-approval activities. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse government regulation that may arise from pending or future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are not able to achieve and maintain regulatory compliance, we may not be permitted to market our products and/or product candidates, which would materially adversely affect our ability to generate revenue and achieve or maintain profitability.

We are required to obtain regulatory approval for each of our products in each jurisdiction in which we intend to market such products, and the inability to obtain such approvals would limit our ability to realize their full market potential.

In order to market products outside of the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. However, the failure to obtain regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may adversely impact our ability to obtain regulatory approval in another jurisdiction. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approval could result in difficulties and costs for us and require additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials which could be costly and time consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approval in international markets is delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be harmed.

If we fail to develop, acquire or in-license other product candidates or products, our business and prospects will be limited.

Our long-term growth strategy is to develop and commercialize a portfolio of product candidates in addition to our existing products and product candidates. We may also acquire or in-license early to mid-stage new chemical entities, or NCEs. Although we have internal research and development capacity that we believe will enable us to make improvements to existing compounds, we do not have internal drug discovery capabilities to identify and develop entirely new chemical entities or compounds. As a result, our primary means of expanding our pipeline of product candidates is to develop improved formulations and administration methods for existing FDA-approved products and/or select and acquire or in-license product candidates for the treatment of therapeutic indications that complement or augment our current targets, or that otherwise fit into our development or strategic plans on terms that are acceptable to us. Developing new formulations of existing products or identifying, selecting and acquiring or in-licensing promising product candidates requires substantial technical, financial and human resources expertise. Efforts to do so may not result in the actual development, acquisition or in-license of a particular product candidate, potentially resulting in a diversion of our management’s time and the expenditure of significant resources with no resulting benefit. If we are unable to add additional product candidates to our pipeline, our long-term business and prospects will be limited.

Public concern regarding the safety of any of our drug products could result in the inclusion of unfavorable information in our labeling or require us to undertake other activities that may entail additional costs.

Considering widely publicized events concerning the safety risk of certain drug products, the FDA, members of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, medical professionals and the general public have raised concerns about potential drug safety issues. These events have resulted in the withdrawal of drug products, revisions to drug labeling that further limit use of the drug products and the establishment of risk management programs that may, for example, restrict distribution of drug products after approval. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, or FDAAA, grants significant expanded authority to the FDA, much of which is aimed at improving the safety of drug products before and after approval. In particular, the FDAAA authorizes the FDA to, among other things, require post-approval studies and clinical trials, mandate changes to drug labeling to reflect new safety information and require risk evaluation and mitigation strategies for certain drugs, including certain currently approved drugs. The FDAAA also significantly expands the federal government’s clinical trial registry and results databank, which we expect will result in significantly increased government oversight of clinical trials. Under the FDAAA, companies that violate these and other provisions of the new law are subject to substantial civil monetary penalties, among other regulatory, civil and criminal penalties. The increased attention to drug safety issues may result in a more cautious approach by the FDA in its review of data from our clinical trials. Data from clinical trials may receive greater scrutiny, particularly with respect to safety, which may make the FDA or other regulatory authorities more likely to require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. If the FDA requires us to provide additional clinical or preclinical data for any of our approved drug products, the indications for which that product candidate was approved may be limited or there may be specific warnings or limitations on dosing, and our efforts to commercialize any approved product may be otherwise adversely impacted.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights of any of our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our products and our product candidates. The issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, strength and commercial value of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover the products, if approved, or product candidates in the United States or in foreign countries or territories. If this were to occur, early generic competition could be expected against our products, if approved, and our product candidates in development. There may be relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications which could invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing based on a pending patent application. In particular, because the active pharmaceutical ingredients in many of our product candidates have been on the market as separate products for many years, it is possible that these products have previously been used off-label in such a manner that such prior usage would affect the validity of our patents or our ability to obtain patents based on our patent applications.

The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming. We or our licensors may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications for a commercially reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions. It is also possible that we or our licensors may fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them. Moreover, depending on the terms of any future in-licenses to which we may become a party, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology in-licensed from third parties. Therefore, these patents and patent applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce or which we choose not to seek to patent, and any other elements of our drug development and reformulation processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. Although we generally require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and we generally seek to have all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors or other third parties. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA is considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, and there is no guarantee that we will have any such enforceable trade secret protection, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may enjoy only limited geographical protection with respect to certain patents and we may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing and prosecuting patent applications and defending patents covering our products, if approved, or product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors may use our and our licensors’ technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we and our licensors have patent protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the United States or Europe. These products may compete with our products or product candidates, and our and our licensors’ patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

In addition, we may decide to abandon national and regional patent applications before grant. The examination of each national or regional patent application is an independent proceeding. As a result, patent applications in the same family may issue as patents in some jurisdictions, such as in the United States, but may issue as patents with claims of different scope or may even be refused in other jurisdictions. It is also quite common that depending on the country, the scope of patent protection may vary for the same product candidate or technology.

The laws of some jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws or rules and regulations in the United States and Europe, and many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in such jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in other jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing as patents, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license. Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in our expected significant markets, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our product candidates. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates in all of our expected significant foreign markets. If we or our licensors encounter difficulties in protecting, or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting, the intellectual property rights important for our business in such jurisdictions, the value of these rights may be diminished, and we may face additional competition from others in those jurisdictions.

Some countries also have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In those countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patents. If we or any of our licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired.

Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

Our ability to obtain patents is highly uncertain because, to date, some legal principles remain unresolved, there has not been a consistent policy regarding the breadth or interpretation of claims allowed in patents in the United States and the specific content of patents and patent applications that are necessary to support and interpret patent claims is highly uncertain due to the complex nature of the relevant legal, scientific and factual issues. Changes in either patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection. For example, on September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, only became effective in March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act has also introduced procedures making it easier for third parties to challenge issued patents, as well as to intervene in the prosecution of patent applications. Finally, the Leahy-Smith Act contains new statutory provisions that still require the USPTO to issue new regulations for their implementation and it may take the courts years to interpret the provisions of the new statute.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce existing patents or patents that we might obtain in the future. Similarly, changes in patent law and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions or changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce existing patents or patents that we may obtain in the future. Accordingly, it is too early to tell what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business and the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. An inability to obtain, enforce and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition.

Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. For example, if the issuance to us, in a given country, of a patent covering an invention is not followed by the issuance, in other countries, of patents covering the same invention, or if any judicial interpretation of the validity, enforceability, or scope of the claims in, or the written description or enablement, in a patent issued in one country is not similar to the interpretation given to the corresponding patent issued in another country, our ability to protect our intellectual property in those countries may be limited. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may materially diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

We are currently, and in the future will likely continue to be, involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which are expensive, require us to expend substantial financial resources, are time consuming, may continue for many years for one or more claims and may be unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of any licensors and potential licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we have been, and in the future may be, required to file infringement claims, which are expensive and time-consuming. For example, beginning in August 2013, we filed patent infringement lawsuits against six generic companies in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware for the approval by the FDA of generic versions of Suboxone Sublingual Film in the United States. Of these, cases against three of the six generic companies have been resolved. We are also seeking to enforce our patent rights in multiple cases as further described in Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies.

In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or our licensors is not valid or is unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing.

Interference proceedings invoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our collaborators or licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be significantly harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our bringing or defending litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees from our core business. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

As described in Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies to our consolidated financial statements, a number of our issued patents are involved in litigations. In addition to the challenges we face in those litigations, a number of our issued patents are or have been involved in administrative proceedings, such as reexamination and inter partes review at the USPTO and opposition at the EPO. There can be no assurance that all claims of the challenged patents will be upheld or that the patents challenged by us will be found infringed. We may lose any of the challenged patents entirely, or we may have to amend the scope of claims to an extent which may be considered insufficient to cover our products or product candidates. If any of those scenarios were to occur, we might lose our competitive advantage in our market, and our business could be materially affected.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock. For more information, please see Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies to our consolidated financial statements.

Third parties may commence legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a negative impact on the success of our business.

Our commercial success depends, in part, upon our ability, and the ability of our existing and future collaborators, to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates, if approved, and use our proprietary technologies without alleged or actual infringement, misappropriation or other violation of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There have been many lawsuits and other proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries.  Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates.  In addition, patent holding companies that focus solely on extracting royalties and settlements by enforcing patent rights may target us.

We may have been and in the future may become party to or be threatened with adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates and technology, which may include interference or derivation proceedings, post grant review and inter partes review before the USPTO or similar adversarial proceedings or litigation in any jurisdiction.  Similarly, we or our licensors or collaborators have initiated, and in the future may initiate, such proceedings or litigation against third parties, which may include challenging the validity or scope of intellectual property rights controlled by third parties.  Third parties have asserted and in the future may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit.  There is a risk that additional third parties may choose to engage in litigation with us to enforce or to otherwise assert their patent rights against us.  Even if we believe any of those claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, and the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product or product candidates unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be invalid or unenforceable.  Similarly, if any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our technology, holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product or product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be invalid, unenforceable or not infringed by our product or technology.  In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.  Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us.  Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need or may choose to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates.  We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all.  In such event, we may be unable to further practice our technologies or develop and commercialize any of our product candidates at issue, which could significantly harm our business.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates, if approved.  Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial litigation expense and a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business.  Third parties making such claims may have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to these legal actions than we or our licensors or collaborators can.  In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

The patents and patent applications that we have covering our products and product candidates are limited to specific formulations and manufacturing processes, and our market opportunity for our products and product candidates may be limited by the lack of patent protection for the active ingredients and by competition from other formulations and manufacturing processes, as well as administration methods that may be developed by competitors.

We have obtained and continue to seek to obtain patent protection for our manufacturing technology, drug administering technology and our products and product candidates, including specific formulations and manufacturing processes, which may not be as effective as composition of matter coverage in preventing work-arounds by competitors. As a result, generic products that do not infringe the claims of our issued patents covering formulations and processes are, or may be, available while we are marketing our products. Competitors who obtain the requisite regulatory approval will be able to commercialize products with the same active ingredients as our products or product candidates so long as the competitors do not infringe any process, use or formulation patents that we have developed for our products or product candidates, subject to any regulatory exclusivity we may be able to obtain for our products.

The number of patents and patent applications covering products containing the same active ingredient as our products or product candidates indicates that competitors have sought to develop and may seek to commercialize competing formulations that may not be covered by our patents and patent applications. The commercial opportunity for our products or product candidates could be significantly harmed if competitors are able to develop and commercialize alternative formulations of our products or product candidates that are different from ours and do not infringe our issued patents covering our products or use of our products.

Suboxone, Zuplenz, Sympazan and Exservan have been approved by the FDA, and we anticipate that other product candidates may be approved by the FDA in the future. As additional products of ours are on the market, one or more third parties may also challenge the patents that we control covering our products, which could result in the invalidation or unenforceability of some or all of the relevant patent claims of our issued patents covering our products.

If we or one of our licensees initiated legal proceedings against a third-party to enforce a patent covering one of our products or product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim, and have in certain existing proceedings counterclaimed, that the patent covering our product or product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are common, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third-party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post-grant review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our patent counsel and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business. For more information, please see Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies to our consolidated financial statements.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our owned and licensed patents and/or applications and any patent rights we may own or license in the future. We rely on our outside counsel or our licensees to monitor the status of these fees so that we may make required payments of these fees when due to non-U.S. patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply and we are also dependent on our licensors to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to our licensed intellectual property. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market which could harm our business.

Our drug development strategy relies heavily upon the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway, which requires us to certify that we do not infringe upon third-party patents covering approved drugs. Such certifications typically result in third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, the defense of which will be costly and time-consuming, and an unfavorable outcome in any litigation may prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts which would harm our business.

Litigation or other proceedings to enforce or defend intellectual property rights are often complex in nature, may be very expensive and time-consuming, may divert our management’s attention from other aspects of our business and may result in unfavorable outcomes that could adversely impact our ability to launch and market our product candidates, or to prevent third parties from competing with our products and product candidates.

There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions and inter party reexamination proceedings before the USPTO. Numerous United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we and our collaborators are developing product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

Our commercial success depends in large part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties for existing approved drug products. Because we utilize the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for the approval of our products and product candidates, we rely in whole or in part on studies conducted by third parties related to those approved drug products. As a result, upon filing with the FDA for approval of our product candidates, we will be required to certify to the FDA that either: (1) there is no patent information listed in the FDA’s Orange Book with respect to our NDA; (2) the patents listed in the Orange Book have expired; (3) the listed patents have not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (4) the listed patents are invalid or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of our proposed drug product. When we submit a paragraph IV certification to the FDA, a notice of the paragraph IV certification must also be sent to the patent owner once our 505(b)(2) NDA is accepted for filing by the FDA. The third-party may then initiate a lawsuit against us to defend the patents identified in the notice. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of receipt of the notice automatically prevents the FDA from approving our NDA until the earliest of 30 months or the date on which the patent expires, the lawsuit is settled, or the court reaches a decision in the infringement lawsuit in our favor. If the third-party does not file a patent infringement lawsuit within the required 45-day period, our NDA will not be subject to the 30-month stay.

In addition to paragraph IV litigation noted above, third-party owners of patents may generally assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations or methods of manufacture related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending or subsequently filed patent applications which may later result in issued patents that may be infringed by our products or product candidates. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our product candidates, including the formulation, any method or process involved in the manufacture of any of our product candidates, any molecules or intermediates formed during such manufacturing process or any other attribute of the final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize our product candidates unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to operate without infringing the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot assure you that our business, products, product candidates and methods do not or will not infringe the patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties.

Parties making claims against us may request and/or obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates on a temporary or permanent basis. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, involves substantial litigation expense and could be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products or manufacturing processes, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research, manufacture clinical trial supplies or allow commercialization of our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize one or more of our products or product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our products or product candidates, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.

We may also be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. We may be subject to ownership disputes in the future arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates and companion diagnostic. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation generally involves substantial costs and can be a distraction to management and other employees.

If we are not able to obtain adequate trademark protection or regulatory approval for our brand names, we may be required to re-brand affected products, which could cause delays in getting such product to market, substantively impact successful commercialization of any such product and substantially increasing our costs.

To protect our rights in any trademark we use or intend to use for our products or our product candidates, we may seek to register such trademarks. Trademark registration is territory-specific and we must apply for trademark registration in the United States as well as any other country where we intend to commercialize our product or product candidates. Failure to obtain trademark registrations may place our use of the trademarks at risk or make them subject to legal challenges, which could force us to choose alternative names for our product or product candidates. In addition, the FDA and other regulatory authorities outside the United States conduct independent reviews of proposed product names for pharmaceuticals, including an evaluation of the potential for confusion with other pharmaceutical product names for medications. These regulatory authorities may also object to a proposed product name if they believe the name inappropriately makes or implies a therapeutic claim. If the FDA or other regulatory authorities outside the United States object to any of our proposed product names, we may be required to adopt alternative names for our product or product candidates. If we adopt alternative names, either because of our inability to obtain a trademark registration or because of objections from regulatory authorities, we would lose the benefit of our existing trademark applications. As a result, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to adopt a new product name that would be registrable under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA and other regulatory authorities, which could adversely impact our product brand identity and successful commercialization of any product and increase our costs. Furthermore, we may not be able to build a successful brand identity for a new trademark in a timely manner or at all, which would limit our ability to commercialize our product or our product candidates.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. The following examples are illustrative:


others may be able to make products that are similar to our products or product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or have exclusively licensed;


we or any potential future licensors might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions;


others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights;


it is possible that our pending patent applications will not lead to issued patents;


issued patents that we own or have exclusively licensed may be held invalid or unenforceable as a result of legal challenges by our competitors;


issued patents that we own or have exclusively licensed may not provide coverage for all aspects of our products or product candidates in all countries;


our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets;


we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable; and


the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business.

Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock

Our quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly, and these fluctuations could cause our stock price to decline.

We expect our operating results to continue to be subject to significant quarterly and annual fluctuations. These fluctuations could cause our stock price to decline. Our net loss and other operating results will be affected by numerous factors, including:


whether the FDA requires us to complete additional, unanticipated studies, trials or other activities prior to approving any of our current and future product candidates, which would likely delay any such approval;


our execution of other collaborative, licensing or similar arrangements and the timing of payments we may make or receive under these arrangements;


variations in the level of expenses related to our future development programs;


any product liability or intellectual property infringement lawsuit in which we may become involved;


delays in obtaining, failure to obtain, or adverse developments in obtaining, FDA and other regulatory approval of our product candidates;


other regulatory developments affecting any of our other current and future product candidates, or the product candidates of our competitors; and


if any of our current or future product candidates receive regulatory approval, the level of underlying demand for such product candidate and wholesaler buying patterns.

If our quarterly or annual operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Furthermore, any quarterly or annual fluctuations in our operating results may, in turn, cause the price of our stock to fluctuate substantially.

Our principal stockholder and management own a significant percentage of our stock and may have the ability to effectively influence matters subject to stockholder approval.

As of December 31, 2020, our executive officers and directors beneficially owned approximately 10.4% of our outstanding common stock. In addition, Bratton Capital Management L.P. beneficially owned, directly, approximately 33.3% of our outstanding common stock as of December 31, 2020.  Therefore, these stockholders may have, through their respective ownership positions, the ability to effectively influence or control matters requiring stockholder approval, including elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents or approval of any merger, sale of assets or other major corporate transaction. This may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you may believe are in your best interest as one of our stockholders.

We may incur substantial costs relating to “excess parachute payments” under Sections 280G and 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

We entered into employment agreements with Keith Kendall, our Chief Executive Officer, and A. Mark Schobel, our Chief Innovation and Technology Officer, pursuant to which they are each entitled to receive an additional tax indemnification payment, or a “gross-up” payment, if the payments and benefits under their respective employment agreements or any other benefits plans and programs trigger excise tax liability under Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, for “excess parachute payments.” Under Sections 280G and 4999 of the Code, the excise tax is triggered by change in control-related payments that, in general, equal or exceed three times Mr. Kendall’s or Mr. Schobel’s, as applicable, average annual taxable compensation over the five calendar years preceding the change in control. The excise tax equals 20% of the amount of the payment in excess of Mr. Kendall’s or Mr. Schobel’s, as applicable, average taxable compensation over the preceding five calendar year period (i.e., the excess parachute payments). In addition to providing Mr. Kendall or Mr. Schobel with a tax gross-up payment, we may not take a federal tax deduction for Mr. Kendall’s and/or Mr. Schobel’s excess parachute payments.

If an “excess parachute payment” is made to Mr. Kendall and/or Mr. Schobel, we may incur substantial costs related to a change in control of the Company due to the gross-up payment and the lost federal tax deduction for Mr. Kendall’s and/or Mr. Schobel’s excess parachute payments.

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

We have incurred substantial losses since the inception of our company and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, if ever. Under the newly enacted federal income tax law, to the extent that we continue to generate taxable losses in 2019 and in future years, such unused losses will carry forward to offset future taxable income, if any, but our deductibility of such losses in a future year is generally limited to 80% of taxable income. Furthermore, under Section 382 of the Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes, such as research tax credits, to offset its post-change income may be further limited. We believe that, with our initial public offering, we may have triggered an “ownership change” limitation. In addition, we have experienced and may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, including an ownership change as a result of the combined effect of our initial public offering and future equity offerings. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards to offset United States federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us.

We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock so any returns will be limited to the value of our stock.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to the appreciation of their stock.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire us, or may increase the cost of acquiring us, even if doing so would benefit our stockholders, or remove our current management.

Some provisions of our charter documents and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management. These provisions include:


authorizing the issuance of “blank check” preferred stock, the terms of which may be established and shares of which may be issued without stockholder approval;


limiting the removal of directors by the stockholders;


creating a classified board of directors;


establishing a supermajority stockholder vote requirement for amending certain provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and of our amended and restated bylaws;


prohibiting stockholder action by written consent, thereby requiring all stockholder actions to be taken at a meeting of our stockholders;


eliminating the ability of stockholders to call a special meeting of stockholders; and


establishing advance notice requirements for nominations for election to the board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon at stockholder meetings.

These provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management. In addition, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which generally prohibits a Delaware corporation from engaging in any of a broad range of business combinations with an interested stockholder for a period of three years following the date on which the stockholder became an interested stockholder, unless such transactions are approved by our board of directors. This provision could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control, whether or not it is desired by or beneficial to our stockholders. Further, other provisions of Delaware law may also discourage, delay or prevent someone from acquiring us or merging with us.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation designates the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that, subject to limited exceptions, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws, any action to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws or any other action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation described above. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find these provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

General Risk Factors

Our business may be adversely affected by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

Beginning in late 2019, the outbreak of COVID-19 has evolved into a global pandemic.  Depending upon the length and severity of the pandemic or any resurgence, which cannot be predicted, we may experience disruptions that could materially and adversely impact our business including:


Various aspects of our clinical trials, including delays or difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials, in clinical trial site initiation, and in recruiting clinical site investigators and clinical site staff; increased rates of patients withdrawing from clinical trials; diversion of healthcare resources away from the conduct of clinical trials; interruption of key clinical trial activities such as clinical trials site data monitoring due to limitations on travel imposed or recommended by federal or state governments; impact on employees and others or interruption of clinical trial visits or study procedures which may impact the integrity of subject data and clinical study endpoints; and interruption or delays in the operations of the U.S. FDA, and comparable foreign regulatory agencies, which may impact regulatory review and approval timelines.


If any third-party in our supply chain for any materials, including active pharmaceutical ingredients and other raw materials supply, which we need for our product candidates for our clinical trials and for the approved products we manufacture and distribute, are adversely impacted by restrictions resulting from the coronavirus pandemic, including staffing shortages, production slowdowns, or disruptions in freight and other transportation services and delivery distribution systems, our supply chain may be disrupted, limiting our ability to manufacture our product candidates for our clinical trials, conduct our research, development and clinical operations, and manufacture, distribute and sell our approved products.
 

We have closed our business office and requested most of our colleagues located there to work from home, restricted full-time on-site staff generally to those colleagues who must perform essential activities on-site and implemented staggered schedules for full-time on-site staff in our research and development laboratory in order to reduce risk of transmission.  Our increased reliance on colleagues and other third parties on whom we rely working from home or having health issues may negatively impact productivity and has limited our in-person commercialization activities for our existing approved proprietary product and would limit commercial launch activities for any new approved product, or disrupt, delay, or otherwise adversely impact our business.  In addition, this could increase our cybersecurity risk, create data accessibility concerns, and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations.  Our colleagues conducting research and development activities might not be able to access our laboratory or manufacturing facilities for an extended period of time as a result of any further closure of our facilities as well as the possibility of further governmental restrictions.  As a result, this could delay timely completion of preclinical activities, including completing Investigational New Drug (IND)/Clinical Trial Application (CTA) enabling studies or our ability to select future development candidates, and initiation of clinical or other of our development programs and production and delivery of our products.
 

The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory agencies may experience disruptions, have slower response times or be under-resourced to continue to monitor our clinical trials or to conduct required activities and review of our product candidates seeking regulatory review and such disruptions could materially affect the development, timing and approval of our product candidates.
 

The coronavirus pandemic may impact the requirements of our customers and growth of our approved products.  For example, Indivior, our significant customer for Suboxone, had announced that it anticipated coronavirus impact on its product sales.   Further, sales force expansion may not be as productive during a time when a significant number of interactions are virtual and such interactions may not be as effective as face-to-face interactions. Additionally, an increasing number of patient visits to their Healthcare Professionals have been virtual during the coronavirus pandemic which may reduce the likelihood that a change in medicine would occur which could impact Sympazan growth. We cannot accurately predict the adverse impact the coronavirus pandemic will have on orders of our approved products Suboxone and Sympazan. We also have experienced in one instance, and could in the future experience, extended customer payment cycles.
 

As a result of concerns caused by the continuing effects of the coronavirus, we may face issues and investor concerns in raising capital through sales of our common stock or other securities, or in seeking to monetize any of our licensed royalty and milestone rights.  In addition, a recession, depression or other sustained adverse market event could materially and adversely affect the financial markets, our business, the value of our common stock and our ability to obtain on favorable terms, or at all, equity or debt financing or any potential monetization of our royalty streams.
 
The coronavirus pandemic continues to evolve.  The ultimate impact of the coronavirus pandemic on us is highly uncertain and subject to change and will depend on future developments, which cannot be accurately predicted.  We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, our clinical trials, our research programs, the manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of our approved products, the healthcare system or the global economy.  Given the uncertainties, the Company is unable to provide assurance that operations can be maintained as planned prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on the principal members of our executive team referenced under Part III. Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance located elsewhere or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and other key executives, the loss of whose services may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. Any of our executive officers could leave our employment at any time. Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will also be critical to our success. Competition for skilled personnel is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in clinical studies may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit key executives or the loss of the services of any executive or key employee might impede the progress of our development and commercialization objectives.

Under applicable employment laws, we may not be able to enforce covenants not to compete.

Certain of our executive officers’ employment agreements include covenants not to compete. These agreements prohibit our executive officers, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors for a limited period. We may be unable to enforce these agreements or may not be able to enforce these agreements to their full extent under applicable law. If we cannot demonstrate that our interests would be harmed by such competitive behavior, we may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former executives and our competitiveness may be diminished.

Any failure to comply with applicable data protection and privacy laws and regulations could lead to significant penalties against us, and adversely impact our operating results.

We are subject to U.S. data protection laws and regulations, including laws and regulations that address privacy and data security. Numerous federal and state laws, including state data breach notification laws and state health information privacy laws, govern the collection, use, and disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information. Failure to comply with data protection laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions and create liability for us, which could include civil and/or criminal penalties, private litigation and/or adverse publicity that could negatively affect our operating results and business. EU member states and other countries have also adopted data protection laws and regulations which impose significant compliance obligations. In the European Union, the collection and use of personal health data has been governed by the provisions of the EU Data Protection Directive. The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) replaced the Data Protection Directive (with an enforcement date of May 25, 2018) and is designed to harmonize data privacy laws across Europe and to protect all EU citizens’ data privacy and will have a significant impact on how certain data is processed and handled. The European Union data protection laws and regulations impose strict obligations and restrictions on the ability to collect, analyze and transfer personal data, including health data clinical trials.

Any failure to comply with these laws and regulations or the manner in which they are interpreted or implemented could lead to government enforcement actions and significant penalties against us, and adversely impact our operating results.

Our employees, principal investigators, consultants and agents may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, principal investigators, consultants and agents. Misconduct by these parties could include failure to:


comply with FDA regulations or the regulations applicable in other jurisdictions;


provide accurate information to the FDA and other regulatory authorities;


comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad;


report financial information or data accurately; or


disclose unauthorized activities to us.

In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct also could involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or interactions with the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from government investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could result in the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. We may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of our employees’ former employers or other third parties. We may also be subject to claims that former employers or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. There is no guarantee of success in defending these claims and even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and other employees from our core business.

The market price of our common stock may be volatile and fluctuate substantially, which could result in substantial losses for purchasers of our common stock.

The market price of our common stock since our IPO has been and is likely to be volatile. The stock market in general and the market for biopharmaceutical or pharmaceutical companies in particular, has experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, you may not be able to sell your common stock at or above your purchase price. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including:


sales of our approved products;


results of clinical trials of our current and any future product candidates or those of our competitors;


the success or regulatory approval of competitive drugs or therapies;


regulatory or legal developments in the United States and other countries, as to both our products and product candidates and those of our competitors;


developments or disputes concerning patent applications, issued patents or other proprietary rights;


the recruitment or departure of key personnel;


the level of expenses related to our current and any future product candidates or clinical development programs;


the results of our efforts to discover, develop, acquire or in-license additional product candidates;


actual or anticipated changes in estimates as to financial results, development, clinical trials or regulatory approval timelines or recommendations by securities analysts;


our inability to obtain or delays in obtaining adequate drug supply for any approved drug or inability to do so at acceptable prices;


disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies;


significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation;


variations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us, or our failure to achieve anticipated financial results or funding;


changes in the structure of healthcare payment systems;


market conditions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors;


general economic, industry and market conditions; and


the other factors described in this “Risk Factors” section.

If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline.

The trading market for our common stock relies, in part, on the research and reports that industry and financial analysts publish about us or our business. We currently have limited research coverage by industry and financial analysts. Should any analysts then covering our business downgrade their evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline. If any analysts then covering our business cease to cover our stock, we could lose visibility in the market for our stock, which in turn could cause our stock price to decline.

We are an “emerging growth company,” and in addition, we are also a “smaller reporting company”, and we cannot be certain if the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies or smaller reporting companies will make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, and a “smaller reporting company”, as defined in Rule 405 under the Securities Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies,” including exemption from compliance with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our IPO, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

We also qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” meaning we are not an investment company, an asset-backed  issuer, or a majority-owned subsidiary of a parent company that is not a “smaller reporting company” which allows us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and certain reduced financial disclosures in our periodic reports, including this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition, we are eligible to remain a smaller reporting company, for so long as we have a public float (based on our common equity) of less than $250 million measured as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter or a public float (based on our common equity) or less than $700 million as of such date and annual revenues of less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year.  We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result of these disclosure exemptions, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can also delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. As an emerging growth company, we have elected to take advantage of the extended transition period afforded by the JOBS Act for the implementation of new or revised accounting standards and, as a result, we expect to comply with new or revised accounting standards not later than the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required for public emerging growth companies.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our common stock.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or the subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our consolidated financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our common stock.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market by our existing stockholders would cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock by our existing stockholders, including shares issued to employees and directors in respect of the termination of our Performance Unit Plans, or PUP Plans, in the public market or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that such sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock.

Certain holders of our securities are entitled to rights with respect to the registration of their shares under the Securities Act. Registration of these shares under the Securities Act have resulted in a substantial amount of these shares becoming freely tradable without restriction under the Securities Act. Any sales of securities by these stockholders could have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2.
Properties

We lease our 8,400-square-foot current production facility (Melton) in Portage, Indiana, which houses certain research and development offices and cGMP manufacturing operations. The lease contains an option to purchase the facility at any time during the lease term along with a right of first refusal to purchase the facility. In October 2017, we extended our Melton facility lease which will expire during March 2023 under the same terms and conditions as the prior lease.

We also lease a 73,000-square-foot facility (Ameriplex) in Portage, Indiana, to house additional packaging, R&D and other operations. As amended, this lease has a term that extends through September 30, 2022 and contains a renewal option that could extend the lease through September 30, 2026.

We lease our headquarters and principal laboratory in Warren, New Jersey. Pursuant to various amendments in February 2011, June 2012, May 2013, June 2018 we have secured additional space to provide growth of our laboratory facilities and to accommodate our corporate and administrative requirements. In July 2019, we entered into an Amended and Restated Lease Agreement. This extends our lease to August 2023 and maintains our space of 23,589 square feet.

Item 3.
Legal Proceedings

For more information on Legal Proceedings, see Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies.

Item 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5.
Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Market Information

Our common stock began trading on the NASDAQ Global Select Market on July 24, 2018 under the symbol “AQST”. Prior to that date there was no public market for our common stock.

Holders of Record

As of March 5, 2021, we had approximately 100 holders of record of our common stock.  Certain shares are held in “street” name and accordingly, the number of beneficial owners of such shares is not known or included in the foregoing number.  This number of holders of record also does not include stockholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

Dividend Policy

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock.  We currently intend to retain future earnings to fund the development and growth of our business.  We do not expect to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.  Any future determination to pay dividends will be made at the direction of our board of directors and will depend on then-existing conditions, including our financial conditions, operating results, contractual restrictions, capital requirements, business prospects and other factors our board of directors may deem relevant.

Recent Sale of Unregistered Securities

On November 3, 2020, the Company repurchased $22.5 million of the 12.5% Notes and issued $4.0 million of new 12.5% Notes in lieu of a prepayment premium on the early repayment of the 12.5% Notes. In connection therewith, the Company issued warrants for up to  143,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share.

The recipients of warrants acquired the securities for investment only and not with a view to or for sale in connection with any distribution thereof, and appropriate legends were affixed to the warrants issued in these transactions. The warrants were, at issuance deemed restricted securities for purposes of the Securities Act. The sale of the warrants was deemed to be exempt from registration under the Securities Act in reliance upon Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act (or Regulation D promulgated thereunder), or Rule 701 promulgated under Section 3(b) of the Securities Act.

Item 6.
Selected Financial Data

Omitted pursuant to SEC Final Rule Release No. 33-10890, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, Selected Financial Data, and Supplementary Financial Information, with respect to Item 301, effective February 10, 2021.

Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and the notes to those financial statements appearing elsewhere in the Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve significant risks and uncertainties.  As a result of many factors, such as those set forth under “Risk Factors” in Part 1 Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements. All dollar amounts are stated in thousands.

Overview

We are a pharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing differentiated products which leverage our proprietary PharmFilm® technology to meet patients’ unmet medical needs and to solve patients’ therapeutic problems. We have five products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), both proprietary and out-licensed, as well as a late-stage proprietary product pipeline focused on the treatment of central nervous system, or CNS, diseases and an earlier stage pipeline including treatment of anaphylaxis. Our licensees market their products in the US and in some instances outside the US. The company markets its proprietary product in the US.  We believe that our proprietary and licensed products address the characteristics of these patient populations and the shortcomings of available treatments create opportunities for the development and commercialization of meaningfully differentiated medicines. For a summary of our product and product candidates, please refer to Item I. Business of this Form 10-K.


Business Update Regarding COVID-19

The current COVID-19 pandemic has continued to present substantial health and economic risks, uncertainties and challenges to our business, the U.S. and global economies and financial markets.  It is not currently possible to predict how long the pandemic will last or the time it will take for the economy to return to prior levels.  The extent to which COVID-19 impacts our business, operations, clinical trials, regulatory approval process, capital, financial and monetization markets, financial results and financial condition, and those of our suppliers, distributors, customers and other third parties necessary to our business including those involved in the regulatory approval process, will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with certainty or clarity, including the duration and continuing severity of the outbreak, resurgence of the outbreak, continued or additional government actions to contain COVID-19, timing or efficacy of any vaccine, and new information that will emerge concerning the short-term and long-term impact of COVID-19.

To date, we have been able to continue to manufacture and supply our products and currently do not anticipate any significant interruption in supply, although we continue to monitor this situation closely and there is no assurance that disruptions or delay will not occur as a result of COVID-19.  We are also monitoring demand for our products, which could be negatively impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the financial condition of our customers and licensees, one of whom delayed remittance of certain payments due the Company for development services provided but ultimately made such payments.

Our office-based colleagues have generally been working from home since March 2020.  With additional protections and protocols the Company has maintained appropriate and necessary staffing levels at both our laboratory and manufacturing sites. In Q1 2020 we suspended in-person interactions by our sales and marketing personnel and engaged remotely to support our commercialization efforts.  Sales and marketing practices continue to evolve in accordance with changing local rules and regulations with predominantly virtual interactions with healthcare providers.  However, the landscape continues to change as localities reestablish and/or ease restrictions, as the case may be, with the rise and fall of new case rates and the rollout of vaccinations.

For additional information on various uncertainties and risks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, see Item Part I. Item IA. Risk Factors included in this report.

Financial Operations Overview

Revenues

Our revenues to date have been earned from our manufactured products made to order for licensees, including Suboxone and Zuplenz, as well as revenue from our self-developed, self-commercialized proprietary product, Sympazan®.  Revenues are also earned from our product development services provided under contracts with customers, and from the licensing of our intellectual property.  These activities generate revenues in four primary categories: manufacture and supply revenue, co-development and research fees, license and royalty revenue, and proprietary product sales, net.

Manufacture and Supply Revenue

Currently, we produce two licensed pharmaceutical products: Suboxone® and Zuplenz®. We are the exclusive manufacturer for these products. We manufacture based on receipt of purchase orders from our licensees, and our licensees have an obligation to accept these orders once quality assurance validates the quality of the manufactured product with agreed upon technical specifications. Our licensees are responsible for all other aspects of commercialization of these products and the Company has no role, either direct or indirect, in our customers’ commercialization activities, including those related to marketing, pricing, sales, payor access and regulatory operations.

We expect future manufacture and supply revenue from licensed products to be based on volume demand for existing licensed products, and for manufacturing and supply rights under license and supply agreements for existing or new agreements for successful product development collaborations.

Co-development and Research Fees

We work with our licensees to co-develop pharmaceutical products. In this regard, we earn fees through performance of specific tasks, activities, or completion of stages of development defined within a contractual arrangement with the relevant licensee. The nature and extent of these performance obligations, broadly referred to as milestones or deliverables, are usually dependent on the scope and structure of the project as contracted, as well as the complexity of the product and the specific regulatory approval path necessary for that product.

License and Royalty Revenue

We realize revenue from licenses of our intellectual property.  For licenses that do not require further development or other ongoing activities by us, our licensee has acquired the right to use the licensed intellectual property for self-development of their product candidate, for manufacturing, commercialization or other specified purposes, upon the effective transfer of those rights, and related revenues are generally recorded at a point in time, subject to contingencies or constraints, if any.  For licenses that may provide substantial value only in conjunction with other performance obligations to be provided by us, such as development services or the manufacture of specific products, revenues are generally recorded over the term of the license agreement.  We also earn royalties based on our licensees’ sales of products that use our intellectual property that are marketed and sold in the countries where we have patented technology rights.  Royalty revenue related to the sale of future revenue is described further in this section under Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates “Royalty Revenue and Interest Expense related to Sale of Future Revenue”.
 
Proprietary Product Sales, Net

We commercialized our first proprietary CNS product, Sympazan, in December 2018.  We currently sell Sympazan through wholesalers for distribution through retail pharmacies. Revenues from sales of proprietary product are recorded net of prompt payment discounts, wholesaler service fees, returns allowances, rebates and co-pay support redemptions, each of which are described in more detail below. These reserves are based on estimates of the amounts earned or to be claimed on the related sales. These amounts are treated as variable consideration, estimated and recognized as a reduction of the transaction price at the time of the sale. The Company includes these estimated amounts in connection with the transaction price to the extent it is probable that a significant reversal of cumulative revenue recognized for such transaction will not occur, or when the uncertainty associated with the variable consideration is resolved. The calculation of some of these items requires management to make estimates based on sales data, historical return data, contracts and other related information that may become known in the future. The adequacy of these provisions is reviewed on a quarterly basis.

Costs and Expenses

Our costs and expenses are primarily the result of the following activities: generation of manufacture and supply revenues; development of our pipeline of proprietary product candidates; and selling, general and administrative expenses, including pre-launch and post-launch commercialization efforts, intellectual property procurement, protection, prosecution and litigation expenses, corporate management functions, medical and clinical affairs administration; public company costs, share-based compensation expenses and interest on our corporate borrowings. We primarily record our costs and expenses in the following categories:

Manufacture and Supply Costs and Expenses

Manufacture and supply costs and expenses are primarily incurred from the manufacture of our commercialized licensed pharmaceutical products and for our self-developed, self-commercialized, approved proprietary product, including raw materials, direct labor and overhead costs principally in our Portage, Indiana facilities.  Our material costs include the costs of raw materials used in the production of our proprietary dissolving film and primary packaging materials. Direct labor costs consist of payroll costs (including taxes and benefits) of employees engaged in production activities. Overhead costs principally consist of indirect payroll, facilities rent, utilities and depreciation for leasehold improvements and production machinery and equipment.  These costs can increase, or decrease, based on the costs of materials, purchased at market pricing, and the amount of direct labor required to produce a product, along with the allocation of fixed overhead, which is dependent on production volume.

Our manufacture and supply costs and expenses are impacted by our customers’ supply requirements. Costs of production reflect the costs of raw materials that are purchased at market prices and production efficiency (measured by the cost of a salable unit).  These costs can increase or decrease based on the amount of direct labor and materials required to produce a product and the allocation of fixed overhead, which is dependent on the levels of production.

We expect to continue to seek to rationalize and manage costs to reflect the declining production volumes of Suboxone.  We reduced the cost of manufacturing and supply in late 2019 and continued throughout 2020 in order to recognize the declining volume of Suboxone that began in 2019 and will continue declining in 2021. We expect our manufacture and supply costs and expenses to decrease over the next several years due to the decline in Suboxone volumes as the generics in that market continue to take market share, modestly offset by the commercialization of our proprietary products, starting with Sympazan launched in December 2018.  In addition to our proprietary products coming online, we may add licensee products which may need additional resources to manufacture.  If such growth should occur for higher volume product opportunities such as Suboxone, we would incur increased costs associated with hiring additional personnel to support the increased manufacturing and supply costs arising from higher manufactured volumes from proprietary and licensed products.

Research and Development Expenses

Since our inception, we have focused significant resources on our research and development activities.  Research and development expenses primarily consist of:


employee-related expenses, including compensation, benefits, share-based compensation and travel expense;


external research and development expenses incurred under arrangements with third parties, such as contract research organizations, investigational sites and consultants;


the cost of acquiring, developing and manufacturing clinical study materials; and


costs associated with preclinical and clinical activities and regulatory operations.

We expect our research and development expenses to continue to be significant over the next several years as we continue to develop existing product candidates such as AQST-108-SF, AQST-305 and others, and we identify and develop or acquire additional product candidates and technologies.  We may hire or engage additional skilled colleagues or third parties to perform these activities, conduct clinical trials and ultimately seek regulatory approvals for any product candidate that successfully completes those clinical trials.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries, benefits, share-based compensation, commercialization and marketing costs and other related costs for executive, finance, selling and operational personnel. Other significant costs include facility and related costs not otherwise included in research and development expenses such as: professional fees for patent-related and other legal expenses, consulting, tax and accounting services; insurance; selling; market research; advisory board and key opinion leaders; depreciation; and general corporate expenses, inclusive of IT systems related costs.

A significant portion of selling, general and administrative expenses relate to the sale and marketing of our proprietary product, Sympazan.  Sympazan is the precursor and compliment to the launch of Libervant, assuming that it is approved and granted U.S. market access.  We believe there is a very high degree of overlap and correlation between prescribers of Sympazan and the likely prescribers of an approved Libervant®.  While Sympazan continues to grow, we will continue to rationalize its contribution to move towards profitability while continuing to introduce epilepsy prescribers and patients to Aquestive and PharmFilm® technology in advance of the anticipated launch of Libervant, assuming FDA approval and market access.  The current  commercial organization would begin the launch of Libervant, subject to its approval for U.S. market access, which cannot be assured, shortly after its approval.  Until a Libervant launch is certain, we do not plan to increase the costs of our commercial organization and expect to continue to improve the efficiency of the Sympazan commercial investments.

Our general and administrative costs include costs related to accounting, audit, legal regulatory, and tax-related services required to maintain compliance with exchange listing and SEC regulations, director and officer insurance costs, and investor and public relations costs.   We continue to incur significant costs in seeking to protect our intellectual property rights, including significant litigation costs in connection with seeking to enforce our rights concerning third parties’ at-risk launch of generic products.

We will continue to manage business costs to appropriately reflect the declining state of Suboxone revenue, the marketing and sales costs related to Sympazan and other external factors affecting our business, including the continuing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, as we continue to focus on our core business:


Seeking to obtain the approval and subsequent launch of Libervant, subject to approval by the FDA for U.S. market access, which cannot be assured;


Continuing the development of AQST-108-SF along the 505(b)(2) pathway; and


Growing the revenue contribution from Sympazan as a first step to position Aquestive in the epilepsy community.

Interest Expense

Interest expense consists of interest costs on our 12.5% Notes at a fixed rate of 12.5%, payable quarterly, as well as amortization of loan costs and the debt discount.  Interest expense increased in Fiscal Year 2020 as compared to Fiscal Year 2019 as the 12.5% Notes were issued in July 2019. The 12.5% Notes are discussed in Note 12, 12.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2025, to our consolidated financial statements. See Liquidity and Capital Resources below for further detail on our 12.5% Notes.

Royalty Revenue and Interest Expense related to Sale of Future Revenue

On November 3, 2020, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Monetization Agreement”) with MAM Pangolin Royalty, LLC, an affiliate of Marathon Asset Management (“Marathon”).  Under the terms of the Monetization Agreement, we sold all of our contractual rights to receive royalties and milestone payments due under the Sunovion License Agreement related to Sunovion’s apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®. KYNMOBI®, an apomorphine film therapy for the treatment of off episodes in Parkinson’s disease patients, received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on May 21, 2020. In exchange for the sale of these rights, we received an upfront payment of $40,000 and an additional payment of $10,000 through the achievement of the first milestone. We have received an aggregate amount of $50,000 through December 31, 2020 under the Monetization Agreement.

Under the Monetization Agreement, additional aggregate contingent payments of up to $75,000 may be due to us upon the achievement of worldwide royalty and other commercial targets within a specified timeframe, which could result in total potential proceeds of $125,000.

We recorded the upfront proceeds of $40,000 and subsequent first milestone of $10,000, reduced by $2,909 of transaction costs, as a liability related to the sale of future revenue that will be amortized using the effective interest method over the life of the Monetization Agreement.  As future contingent payments are received, they will increase the balance of the liability related to the sale of future revenue. Although we sold all of our rights to receive royalties and milestones, as a result of our ongoing obligations related to the generation of these royalties, we will account for these royalties as revenue. Our ongoing obligations include the maintenance and defense of the intellectual property and to provide assistance to Marathon in executing a new license agreement for KYNMOBI® in the event Sunovion terminates the  Sunovion License Agreement in one or more jurisdictions of the licensed territory under the Sunovion License Agreement.

During the second quarter of 2020, under the Sunovion License Agreement, the Company recognized $8,000 of royalty revenue and corresponding royalty receivable, related to the $1,000 annual minimum guaranteed royalty that is due in each of the next eight years. In connection with the Monetization Agreement, the Company performed an assessment under ASC 860, Transfer and Servicing to determine whether the existing receivable was transferred to Marathon and concluded that the receivable was not transferred.

As royalties are remitted to Marathon from Sunovion, the collection of the royalty receivable and balance of the liability related to the sale of future revenue will be effectively repaid over the life of the agreement.  In order to determine the amortization of the liability related to the sale of future revenue, we are required to estimate the total amount of future royalty and milestone payments to Marathon over the life of the Monetization Agreement and contingent milestone payments from Marathon to the Company.  The sum of future royalty payments less the $50,000 in proceeds received and future contingent payments will be recorded as interest expense over the life of the Monetization Agreement. At execution, the estimate of this total interest expense resulted in an effective annual interest rate of approximately 24.9%. This estimate contains significant assumptions that impact both the amount recorded at execution and the interest expense that will be recognized over the life of the Monetization Agreement.  The Company will periodically assess the estimated royalty and milestone payments to Marathon from Sunovion and contingent milestone payments from Marathon to the Company. To the extent the amount or timing of such payments is materially different from the original estimates, an adjustment will be recorded prospectively to increase or decrease interest expense.  There are a number of factors that could materially effect the amount and timing of royalty and milestone payments to Marathon from Sunovion, and correspondingly, the amount of interest expense recorded by the Company, most of which are not under our control.  Such factors include, but are not limited to, changing standards of care, the initiation of competing products, manufacturing or other delays, generic competition, intellectual property matters, adverse events that result in government health authority imposed restrictions on the use of products, significant changes in foreign exchange rates as the royalties remitted to Marathon are made in U.S. dollars (USD) while a portion of the underlying sales of KYNMOBI® will  be made in currencies other than USD, and other events or circumstances that are not currently foreseen.  Changes to any of these factors could result in increases or decreases to both royalty revenue and interest expense related to the sale of future revenue.

Interest Income and other income (expense), net

Interest income and other income (expense), net consists of earnings derived from an interest-bearing account and other miscellaneous income and expense items. The interest-bearing account has no minimum amount to be maintained in the account nor any fixed length of period for which interest is earned.

Results of Operations

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2020 and 2019

Management’s discussion and analysis of our results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 may be found in Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on March 11, 2020.

The following discussion of our results of operations explains the material drivers of these results of operations.

Revenues

The following table sets forth our revenue data for the periods indicated.

               
Change
 
   
2020
   
2019
    $     %  
(In thousands, except %)
                       
Manufacture and supply revenue
 
$
24,881
   
$
38,739
   
$
(13,858
)
   
(36
%)
License and royalty revenue
   
14,055
     
6,959
     
7,096
     
102
%
Co-development and research fees
   
1,264
     
4,042
     
(2,778
)
   
(69
%)
Proprietary product sales, net
   
5,649
     
2,869
     
2,780
     
97
%
Revenues
 
$
45,849
   
$
52,609
   
$
(6,760
)
   
(13
%)

Revenues decreased 13% or $6,760 in 2020 to $45,849 compared to $52,609 in 2019. The change is attributable to decreases in manufacture and supply revenue and in co-development and research fees partly offset increases in license and royalty revenue and proprietary product sales, net.

Manufacture and supply revenue decreased approximately 36% or $13,858 in 2020 to $24,881 as compared to $38,739 in 2019. This decrease is attributable to lower Suboxone volume in 2020 due to generic competition.

License and royalty revenue increased 102% or $7,096 in 2020 to $14,055 compared to $6,959 in 2019. The increase was primarily  due to the $8,000 of KYNMOBI® royalties recognized upon FDA approval which were partly offset by lower license fees in 2020.  License fees in 2020 included a $4,000 milestone payment earned upon the FDA approval of KYNMOBI® in May 2020 and $500 from our 10% share of milestones paid to KemPharm. License fees in 2019 included $1,000 from our 10% share of milestone payments paid to KemPharm and $4,250 in license and new patent fees derived from out licensed product Suboxone. License fees are generally driven by transfer of rights, patent performance contingencies, specific FDA or other regulatory achievements, sales levels achievements or other contingencies and milestones, and will likely fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter. All further license fees due from Indivior related to Suboxone have been suspended pending the outcome of litigation related to infringement claims against the generic products that have launched “at risk.”

Co-development and research fees decreased 69% or $2,778 in 2020 to $1,264 compared to $4,042 during the prior period 2019. The decrease was driven by the timing of the achievement of research and development performance obligations which typically fluctuate significantly one reporting period to the next.

Proprietary product sales, net increased 97%% or $2,780 in 2020 to $5,649 compared to $2,869 during the prior period. Acceptance with the medical and patient communities has steadily continued to improve following Sympazan’s launch in December 2018.

Expenses:

The following table sets forth our expense data for the periods indicated:

               
Change
 
   
2020
   
2019
    $    
%
 
(In thousands, except %)
                       
Manufacture and supply
 
$
12,964
   
$
20,361
   
$
(7,397
)
   
(36
%)
Research and development
   
19,886
     
20,574
     
(688
)
   
(3
%)
Selling, general and administrative
   
55,892
     
64,342
     
(8,450
)
   
(13
%)
Interest expense
   
11,064
     
9,318
     
1,746
     
19
%
Interest expense related to the sale of future revenue
   
1,958
     
     
1,958
     
100
%
Interest income and other income (expense), net
   
(132
)
   
(636
)
   
504
     
(79
%)
Loss on extinguishment of debt
   
     
4,896
     
(4,896
)
   
(100
)%

Manufacture and supply costs and expenses decreased 36% or $7,397 to $12,964 in 2020 compared to $20,361 in 2019.  The decrease primarily reflected lower volumes of Suboxone production.

Research and development expenses decreased 3% or $688 to $19,886 in 2020 as compared to $20,574 in 2019. Research and development expenses are driven by the timing of clinical trial and other product development activities associated with the Company’s pipeline.

Below are research and development expenses by type of cost for each period presented:

   
Year Ended December 31,
 
(In thousands)
 
2020
   
2019
 
Clinical Trials
 
$
6,435
   
$
8,742
 
Labor - R&D staff
   
4,857
     
5,177
 
Development and manufacturing
   
2,034
     
577
 
Preclinical
   
667
     
798
 
All Other R&D
   
5,893
     
5,280
 
Total
 
$
19,886
   
$
20,574
 

Selling, general and administrative expenses decreased 13% or $8,450 to $55,892 in 2020 as compared to $64,342 in 2019.  The decrease was driven by higher Sympazan sales and marketing costs in 2019 with the product launch.

Interest expense increased 19% or $1,746 to $11,064 in 2020 compared to $9,318 in 2019. This was the result of our issuance of the 12.5% Notes in July 2019, which increased the aggregate principal amount of our outstanding debt and an increase in the borrowing rates on our indebtedness, partially offset by the partial repayment of the 12.5% Notes in November 2020.  Prior to July 15, 2019, our interest expense on our previously outstanding term loan was subject to fluctuations based on one-month LIBOR and was approximately 12% to 12.5% during that earlier part of 2019.  Our 12.5% Notes carry a 12.5% fixed interest rate per annum.

Interest expense related to the sale of future revenue was $1,958 in 2020.  This amount is due to the accounting associated with the sale of future revenue related to KYNMOBI® royalties sold to Marathon on November 3, 2020 and does not represent a monetary obligation or cash output at any time during the life of the transaction. See note 14 for details.

Interest income and other income (expense), net decreased 79% or $504 in 2020 as compared to 2019.  This decrease is a result of lower interest rates and investing lower net cash balances during 2020 compared to the same period in 2019.

There was no loss on extinguishment of debt in 2020.  Loss on the extinguishment of debt was $4,896 in 2019 which represented the expenses associated with early extinguishment of our loan’s payable with Perceptive.  The amount consists of $2,944 related to the prepayment premium associated with early payment of our outstanding obligations to Perceptive along with unamortized debt discount and unamortized loan acquisition costs of $1,606 and $346, respectively.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Sources of Liquidity

As of December 31, 2020, Aquestive has experienced a history of net losses and the Company’s accumulated deficits totaled $186,257 which have been partially funded by gross margins from sales of commercialized licensed and proprietary products,  license fees, milestone and royalty payments from our commercial partners and co-development licensees, and with the balance of the related funding requirements met by the Company’s equity and debt offerings, including the Senior Secured Notes due 2025 (the “12.5% Notes”). In 2019, the Company raised funding totaling $52,226, consisting of net proceeds of $13,110 from the refinancing of debt in July 2019, $37,295 from the public offering of 8,050,000 shares of common stock in December 2019, and $1,821 from the exercise of warrants in connection with the debt financing.  We had $31,807 in cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2020.

On November 3, 2020, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Monetization Agreement”) with MAM Pangolin Royalty, LLC, an affiliate of Marathon Asset Management (“Marathon”).  Under the terms of the Monetization Agreement, we sold all of our contractual rights to receive royalties and milestone payments due under the Sunovion License Agreement related to Sunovion’s apomorphine product, KYNMOBI®. KYNMOBI®, an apomorphine film therapy for the treatment of off episodes in Parkinson’s disease patients, received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on May 21, 2020. In exchange for the sale of these rights, we received an upfront payment of $40,000 and an additional payment of $10,000 through the achievement of the first milestone. We have received an aggregate amount of $50,000 through December 31, 2020 under the Monetization Agreement.

Under the Monetization Agreement, additional aggregate contingent payments of up to $75,000 may be due to us upon the achievement of worldwide royalty and other commercial targets within a specified timeframe, which could result in total potential proceeds of $125,000.

With the upfront proceeds of the monetization, we repaid $22,500 of the 12.5% Notes, and issued $4,000 of new 12.5% Notes in lieu of paying a prepayment premium on the early repayment of the 12.5% Notes, reducing the aggregate principal balance of 12.5% Notes outstanding to $51,500.  In addition, the holders of the 12.5% Notes agreed to extend to December 31, 2021 our ability to access, at our option, and additional $30,000 of 12.5% Notes re-openers under the Indenture.  The first $10,000 senior notes re-opener represents a commitment of such amount by current holders of 12.5% Notes, at our option, contingent upon FDA approval of our product candidate Libervant.  A second $20,000 senior notes re-opener represents a right, at our option, to market to current holders of our 12.5% Notes, and/or other lenders, additional senior notes up to such amount, contingent upon FDA approval of Libervant for U.S. market access.  If and to the extent that we access these re-openers, we will grant warrants to purchase up to 714,000 shares of common stock, with the strike price calculated based on the 30-day volume weighted average closing price of our common stock at the warrant grant date.  In addition, as of the closing of this transaction, we issued to the holders of the 12.5% Notes warrants to purchase 143,000 shares of our common stock.

The Company began utilizing its “At-The-Market” (ATM) facility in November 2020 which has generated net cash of approximately $6,055 as of December 31, 2020.  This facility has approximately $18,472 available at December 31, 2020.

Cash Flows

The following table provides information regarding our cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019:
 
(In thousands)
 
2020
   
2019
 
Net cash used for operating activities
 
$
(45,459
)
 
$
(60,210
)
Net cash used for investing activities
   
(517
)
   
(663
)
Net cash provided by financing activities
   
28,457
     
49,600
 
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
 
$
(17,519
)
 
$
(11,273
)

Net Cash Used for Operating Activities

Net cash used for operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2020 of $45,459 was primarily the result of  our net loss of $55,783 partially offset by non-cash operating expenses totaling $14,737 and by use of cash from changes in operating assets and liabilities of $4,413. The non-cash operating expenses of $14,737 primarily resulted from $6,581 of share-based compensation expense and $8,156 related to other non-cash charges such as depreciation, amortization, and amortization of debt issuance costs.

Net cash used for operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2019 of $60,210 was primarily the result of our net loss of $66,246 partially offset by non-cash operating expenses totaling $17,160 and by use of cash from changes in operating assets and liabilities of $11,124. The non-cash operating expenses of $17,160 primarily resulted from $7,071 of share-based compensation expense, the $4,896 loss on the extinguishment of debt and $5,193 related to other non-cash charges such as depreciation, amortization and amortization of debt issuance costs.

Net Cash Used for Investing Activities

Net cash used for investing activities was $517 for the year ended December 31, 2020 compared to $663 for the year ended December 31, 2019.  This decrease in net cash used for investing activities was primarily attributable to timing of capital expenditures for plant and equipment purchases.

Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $28,457 for the year ended December 31, 2020 compared to $49,600 for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Net cash provided for the year ended December 31, 2020 was primarily from the net proceeds of $50,000 from the KYNMOBI® Monetization Agreement and net proceeds of $6,055 from sale of shares under the ATM facility partly offset by debt repayment including premium of $24,750.

Net cash provided for the year ended December 31, 2019 was primarily from the proceeds derived from our equity offering in December 2019 of $37,295 and the $1,821 of proceeds from the exercise of warrants by our noteholders. Additional proceeds were received from the issuance of the 12.5% Notes of $70,000 in excess of the cash used for the repayment of the $50,000 loan principal repaid to our prior term lender, the early payment premium of $2,944 and $3,946 of loan acquisition costs associated with the 12.5% Notes.  We also paid $2,827 for withholding taxes associated with tax reimbursements connected to certain share-based compensation incurred in 2019.

The Company does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2020 nor do we have any relationships with any unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities.

Funding Requirements

The Company expects that its existing cash and cash equivalents, as of December 31, 2020, together with anticipated revenues from licensed and proprietary products, ATM activity to date, and expense management activities, will be adequate to fund our expected cash requirements for the next 12 months.  In addition, the Company has potential sources of capital under its existing shelf registration statement and re-openers under its 12.5% Notes as it continues to execute its business strategy and has access to appropriate financial markets for debt or equity financings, or a combination of these potential sources of funds, although management can provide no assurance that any of these sources of funding, either individually or in combination, will be available on reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, the Company may be required to utilize available financial resources sooner than expected.  Management has based its expectation on assumptions that could change or prove to be inaccurate, either due to the impact of COVID-19 or to unrelated factors including factors arising in the capital markets, asset monetization markets, regulatory approval process, regulatory oversight and other factors.  Key factors and assumptions inherent in our planned continued operations and anticipated growth include, without limitation, those related to the following:


the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our operations, operations of our key suppliers and third-party clinical and other service providers, our colleagues and contractors and debt equity and other capital markets;


continued ability of our customers to pay, in a timely manner, for presently contracted and future anticipated orders for our manufactured goods, Suboxone and Sympazan, including effects of generics and other competitive pressures as currently envisioned;


continued ability of our customers to pay, in a timely manner, for presently contracted and future anticipated orders for provided co-development and feasibility services, as well as regulatory support services for recently licensed products, such as Exservan;


access to debt or equity markets if, and at the time, needed for any necessary future funding;


FDA approval of our key new drug candidate, Libervant, for U.S. market access;


our ability to issue up to $30,000 in additional 12.5% Notes, which is contingent upon FDA product approval and U.S. market access for Libervant;


continuing review and appropriate adjustment of our cost structure consistent with our anticipated revenues and funding;


continued growth and market penetration of Sympazan within expected commercialization cost levels for this product, including anticipated patient and physician acceptance and our ability to obtain adequate price and payment support from government agencies and other private medical insurers;


effective commercialization of within anticipated cost levels and expected ramp-up timeframes of our product candidate Libervant, if approved for U.S. market access by the FDA;


infrastructure and administrative costs at expected levels to support operations as an FDA and highly regulated public company;


a manageable level of costs for ongoing efforts to protect our intellectual property rights, including litigation costs in connection with seeking to enforce our rights concerning third parties’ “at-risk” launch of generic products;


continued compliance with all covenants under our 12.5% Notes; and


absence of significant unforeseen cash requirements.

We expect to continue to manage business costs to appropriately reflect the potential declining state of Suboxone revenue, the marketing and sales costs related Sympazan, the proceeds from the KYNMOBI® Monetization Agreement, and other external resources or factors affecting our business including, if available, any future potential issuances of additional 12.5% Notes under the Indenture, net proceeds or future equity financing, other future access to the capital markets or other potential available sources of liquidity, as well as the uncertainties associated with the coronavirus pandemic. In doing so, we plan to continue to focus on the core drivers of value for our stockholders, including, more importantly continued investments in our ongoing product development and planned commercialization activities in support of Libervant and AQST-108-SF.  Until profitability is achieved, if at all, additional capital and/or other financing or funding will be required, which could be material, to further advance the development and commercialization of Libervant and AQST-108-SF, if approved by the FDA for U.S. market access, both of which are subject to regulatory approval, and to meet our other cash requirements, including debt service.  We plan to conservatively manage our pre-launch spending as both timing and level relating to Libervant, including cost rationalization associated with marketing and selling Sympazan.  In this regard, absent spending on launch activities for Libervant, we expect to spend less on commercialization in 2021 compared to 2020.  Even as such, we expect to incur losses and negative cash flows for the foreseeable future and therefore we expect to be dependent upon external financing and funding to achieve our operating plan.

The sufficiency of our short-term and longer-term liquidity is directly impacted by our level of operating revenues and our ability to achieve our operating plan for revenues, regulatory approval in the time period planned of our late-stage proprietary products and our ability to monetize other royalty streams or other licensed rights within planned timeframes. Although we may also be entitled to further potential milestones, royalty and other payments under our Indivior Supplemental Agreement, which are suspended and may only be reinstated if Indivior successfully adjudicates or settles the related patent infringement litigation, there can be no assurance when, or if, any such payments may be realized. Our operating revenues have fluctuated in the past and can be expected to fluctuate in the future. We expect to incur significant operating losses and negative operating cash flows for the foreseeable future, and we have a significant level of debt on which we have substantial ongoing debt repayment and debt service obligations have principal repayments aggregating $2,575 related to our 12.5% Notes due in the second half of 2021. A substantial portion of our current and past revenues has been dependent upon our licensing, manufacturing and sales with one customer, Indivior, which is expected to continue while we commercialize our own proprietary products and it could take significantly longer than planned to achieve anticipated levels of cash flows to help fund our operations and cash needs from sales of our proprietary products other than Suboxone.

To the extent that we raise additional funds by issuance of equity securities, our stockholders would experience further dilution and the terms of these securities could include liquidation or other preferences (if and to the extent permitted under the Indenture) that would adversely affect our stockholders’ rights.  Our ability to secure additional equity financing could be significantly impacted by numerous factors including our operating performance and prospects, positive or negative developments in the regulatory approval process for our proprietary products, timely achievement of regulatory approval of our late-stage proprietary products, our existing level of debt which is secured by substantially all of our assets, restriction under the Indenture, and general market conditions, and there can be no assurance that we will continue to be successful in raising capital or that any such needed financing will be available, available on favorable or acceptable terms or at the times, or in the amounts needed.  Additionally, while the potential economic impact brought on by and the duration of the coronavirus pandemic is difficult to assess or predict, the significant impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the global financial markets, and on our own stock trading price, may reduce our ability to access additional capital, which would negatively impact our short-term and longer-term liquidity.

If adequate funds are not available for our short-term or longer-term liquidity needs and cash requirements as and when needed, we may be required to reduce staff, further delay, significantly scale back, or even discontinue some or all of our current or planned research and development programs and clinical and other product development activities, or reduce our planned commercialization efforts and otherwise significantly reduce our other spend and adjust our operating plan, and we would need to seek to take other steps intended to improve our liquidity. We also may be required to evaluate additional licensing opportunities, if any become available, of our proprietary product candidate programs that we currently plan to self-commercialize or explore other potential liquidity opportunities or other alternatives or options or strategic alternatives, although we cannot assure that any of these actions would be available or available on reasonable terms.

See also Part I, Item II, Risk Factors concerning the significant risks and uncertainties concerning the Company’s business, operations, financial results and capital resources associated with the impact of the global coronavirus pandemic.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

We have entered into various contractual agreements under which we have long term obligations. For more information regarding our commitments, see Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 20. Contingencies.

For more information regarding our future lease payments, see “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 9. Right of Use Assets and Lease Liabilities” for our minimum lease payments schedule.  The expected timing of our leases may be different if future years, depending on our decision to extend lease terms and/or enter into leases in preceding years.

For more information on our repayments of our 12.5% Notes, see Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 12. 12.5% Senior Secured Notes.

Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates

We have based our Management’s Discussion and Analysis of our financial condition and results of operations on our Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, in the U.S. The preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements as well as the revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments including those related to revenue recognition, inventory costs, liabilities and accruals, clinical trial expenses, share-based compensation and the valuation of deferred tax assets. We base our estimates on historical experience when available and on various other assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

While significant accounting policies are more fully described in Note 3, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, of the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this filing, we believe that the following accounting policies are those that are most critical to the significant judgements and estimates used in the preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements.

Revenue Recognition

The Company’s revenues include (i) sales of manufactured products pursuant to contracts with commercialization licensees, (ii) sales of its proprietary clobazam-based Sympazan oral film product  (iii) license and royalty revenues and (iv) co-development and research fees generally in the form of milestone payments. See Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 5 Revenues and Trade Receivables, Net for further details. Having adopted ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, effective on January 1, 2019 and applying the modified retrospective method which resulted in an adjustment totaling $2,832 to the Company’s accumulated deficit, the Company recognizes revenue to reflect the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the Company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. To achieve this core principle, a five-step model is applied that includes (1) identifying the contract with a customer, (2) identifying the performance obligation in the contract, (3) determining the transaction price, (4) allocating the transaction price to the performance obligations, and (5) recognizing when, or as, an entity satisfies a performance obligation.

Performance Obligations

A performance obligation is a promise in a contract to transfer a distinct good or service to the customer and is the unit of account in the current revenue recognition standard.  A contract’s transaction price is allocated to each distinct performance obligation and recognized as revenue when, or as, the performance obligation is satisfied.  At contract inception, we assess the goods promised in our contracts with customers and identify a performance obligation for each promise to transfer to the customer a distinct good.  When identifying our performance obligations, we consider all goods or services promised in a contract regardless of whether explicitly stated in the contract or implied by customary business practice. Our performance obligations consist mainly of transferring of goods and services identified in the contracts, purchase orders or invoices.

Manufacture and supply revenue – this revenue is derived from products manufactured exclusively for specific customers according to their strictly-defined specifications, subject only to specified quality control inspections.  Accordingly, at the point in time when quality control requirements are satisfied, revenue net of related discounts is recorded.

Proprietary product sales, net -  this net revenue is recognized when product is shipped and title passes to the customer, typically at time of delivery. At the time of sale, estimates for various revenue allowances are recorded based on historical trends and judgmental estimates. For sales of Sympazan, returns allowances and prompt pay discounts are estimated based on contract terms and historical return rates, if available, and these estimates are recorded as a reduction of receivables. Similarly determined estimates are recorded relating to wholesaler service fees, co-pay support redemptions, Medicare, Medicaid and other rebates, and these estimates are reflected as a component of accrued liabilities. Once all related variable considerations are resolved and uncertainties as to collectable amounts are eliminated, estimates are adjusted to actual allowance amounts.  Provisions for these estimated amounts are reviewed and adjusted on no less than a quarterly basis.

License and Royalty Revenue –  license revenues are determined based on an assessment of whether the license is distinct from any other performance obligations that may be included in the underlying licensing arrangement. If the customer is able to benefit from the license without provision of any other performance obligations by the Company and the license is thereby viewed as a distinct or functional license, the Company then determines whether the customer has acquired a right to use the license or a right to access the license. For functional licenses that do not require further development or other ongoing activities by the Company, the customer is viewed as acquiring the right to use the license as, and when, transferred and revenues are generally recorded at a point in time, subject to contingencies or constraints. For symbolic licenses providing substantial value only in conjunction with other performance obligations to be provided by the Company, revenues are generally recorded over the term of the license agreement. Such other obligations provided by the Company generally include manufactured products, additional development services or other deliverables that are contracted to be provided during the license term. Payments received in excess of amounts ratably or otherwise earned are deferred and recognized over the term of the license or as contingencies or other performance obligations are met.

Royalty revenue is estimated and recognized when sales under supply agreements with commercial licensees are recorded, absent any contractual constraints or collectability uncertainties. Royalties based on sales of Suboxone and Zuplenz have been recorded in this manner.

Co-development and Research Fees – co-development and research fees are earned through performance of specific tasks, activities or completion of stages of development defined within a contractual development or feasibility study agreement with a customer. The nature of these performance obligations, broadly referred to as milestones or deliverables, are usually dependent on the scope and structure of the project as contracted, as well as the complexity of the product and the specific regulatory approval path necessary for that product. Accordingly, the duration of the Company’s research and development projects may range from several months to approximately three years. Although each contractual arrangement is unique, common milestones included in these arrangements include those for the performance of efficacy and other tests, reports of findings, formulation of initial prototypes, production of stability clinical and/or scale-up batches, and stability testing of those batches. Additional milestones may be established and linked to clinical results of the product submission and/or approval of the product by the FDA and the commercial launch of the product.

Revenue recognition arising from milestone payments is dependent upon the facts and circumstances surrounding the milestone payments. Milestone payments based on a non-sales metric such as a development-based milestone (e.g., an NDA filing or obtaining regulatory approval) represent variable consideration and are included in the transaction price subject to any constraints. If the milestone payments relate to future development, the timing of recognition depends upon historical experience and the significance a third party has on the outcome. For milestone payments to be received upon the achievement of a sales threshold, the revenue from the milestone payments is recognized at the later of when the actual sales are incurred or the performance obligation to which the sales relate to has been satisfied.

Contract Assets - in certain situations, customer contractual payment terms provide for invoicing in arrears.  Accordingly, some, or all performance obligations may be completely satisfied before the customer may be invoiced under such agreements.  In these situations, billing occurs after revenue recognition, which results in a contract asset supported by the estimated value of the completed portion of the performance obligation. These contract assets are reflected as a component of other receivables within Trade and other receivables within the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

Contract Liabilities - in certain situations, customer contractual payment terms are structured to permit invoicing in advance of delivery of a good or service.  In such instances, the customer’s cash payment may be received before satisfaction of some, or any, performance obligations that are specified.  In these situations, billing occurs in advance of revenue recognition, which results in contract liabilities. These contract liabilities are reflected as deferred revenue within the Consolidated Balance Sheet.  As remaining performance obligations are satisfied, an appropriate portion of the deferred revenue balance is credited to earnings.

Liability related to sale of future revenue, royalty revenue, and interest expense

The Company treated the sale of future revenue related to KYNMOBI® as debt financing in accordance with ASC 470 Debt, amortized under the effective interest rate method over the estimated life of the related expected royalty stream. The liability related to the sale of future revenue has been initially recorded at its proceeds, net of deferred cost. The liability related to the sale of future revenue and the related interest expense are based on our current estimates of future royalties expected to be paid over the life of the arrangement.  The Company will periodically assess the expected royalty payments using a combination of internal projections and forecasts from external resources.  To the extent our future estimates of royalty payments are greater or less than previous estimates or the interest timing of such payments is materially different than its previous estimates, the Company will prospectively recognize related interest expense. Royalty revenue related to the sale of future revenue is reflected in license fees and royalties, and amortization of debt is reflected as interest expense related to the sale of future revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss. For further discussion of the sale of the future revenue, refer to Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 14, Sale of Future Revenue.

Warrants

We have issued warrants to purchase up to 2,143,000 shares of our common stock (the “Warrants”): warrants to purchase up to 2,000,000 shares of our common stock, with an exercise price of $4.25 per share (the “Initial Warrants”), and warrants to purchase up to 143,000 shares of our common stock, with an exercise price of $5.55 per share (the “Additional Warrants”). The Warrants expire on June 30, 2025 and included specified registration rights.  Management estimated the fair value of the Initial Warrants to be $6,800, and the Additional Warrants to be $735 assisted by an independent third-party appraiser. Additional Warrants were issued as part of the partial repayment of the Initial Notes which also expire on June 30, 2025 and entitle the holders thereof to purchase 143,000 of the Company’s common stock at $5.55 and include specified registration rights. The fair value of these Warrants is treated as a debt discount, amortizable over the term of the Warrants, with the unamortized portion applied to reduce the face amount of the 12.5% Notes in the Company’s balance sheet.  Additionally, since the Warrants issued do not provide warrant redemption or put rights within the control of the holders that could require the Company to make a payment of cash or other assets to satisfy the obligations under the Warrants, except in the case of a “cash change in control”, the fair value attributed to these Warrants was presented in additional-paid in capital in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Refer to Part II Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 3 “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” in the accompanying Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of recent accounting pronouncements.

Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

Item 7A is not applicable to us as a smaller reporting company and has been omitted.

Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Our financial statements, together with the report of our independent registered public accounting firm, appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K beginning on page F-1.

Item 9.
Change in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

None.

Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures.

Management’s Evaluation of our Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain disclosure controls that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) is (1) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and (2) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding our required disclosures.

As of December 31, 2020, our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act). Our management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives, and management necessarily applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.  Our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded based upon the evaluation described above that, as of December 31, 2020, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate controls over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act.  Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.  Our internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that: (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc,; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and our directors; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding the prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent misstatements.  Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies and procedures may deteriorate.

Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020.  In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organization of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”).  Based upon its assessment and those criteria, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2020.

Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm

This Annual Report on Form 10-K does not include an attestation of our registered public accounting firm due to an exemption established by the JOBS Act for “emerging growth companies”.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act), identified in connection with the evaluation of such internal control that occurred during our last fiscal quarter, that have materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Item 9B.
Other Information.

None.

PART III

Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance

DIRECTORS
Board Composition and Structure

Our business and affairs are organized under the direction of our Board of Directors, which currently consists of eight members, seven of whom are independent directors. The primary responsibilities of our Board of Directors are to provide oversight, strategic guidance and direction to our management. Our Board meets on a regular basis and additionally as required.

Our certificate of incorporation provides that our Board is divided into three classes of directors, with the classes as nearly equal in number as possible. Each of our directors identified below serves in the class indicated. Subject to any earlier resignation or removal in accordance with the terms of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, our current Class I directors will serve until the 2022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, our current Class II directors will serve until the 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, and our current Class III directors will serve until the 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders; and, in each case, until their successors are duly elected and qualified. Any additional directorships resulting from an increase in the number of directors will be apportioned by our Board among the three classes as equally as possible.

Below is a list of the names, ages and class of the individuals who currently serve as our directors.

Name
Age
Position
Class
Keith J. Kendall
63
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
I
Gregory B. Brown, M.D.
67
Director
II
John Cochran
55
Vice Chairman of the Board
II
Santo J. Costa
75
Chairman of the Board
III
Julie Krop, M.D.
54
Director
III
Nancy S. Lurker
63
Director
I
James S. Scibetta
56
Director
I
Marco Taglietti, M.D.
61
Director
III

The Board has determined that the classified Board structure is appropriate for the Company at this time. A classified board provides for stability, continuity and experience among our Board following our initial public offering. The Board believes that building a cohesive board is an important goal. In our industry in particular, the time horizon required for successful development of pharmaceutical products and product candidates makes it important that we have a Board that understands the implications of this process and has the ability to develop long-term strategies while benefiting from an in-depth knowledge of Aquestive’s business, development processes and timetables and operations. A classified board structure helps to provide continuity and stability of leadership while resisting pressure to focus on short-term results at the expense of long-term value.

Director Biographies

Information concerning our directors is set forth below. The biographical description of each director includes the specific experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that led the Board to conclude that each nominee should serve as a director.

Class III Directors (with terms expiring at the 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders)

Santo J. Costa

Santo J. Costa has served as our Board Chairman since August 2018 and has served as a member of our Board of Directors since December 2015. Since 2007, Mr. Costa has served as Of Counsel to the law firm of Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell and Jernigan, L.L.P. of Raleigh, North Carolina, specializing in corporate law for healthcare companies. Mr. Costa has served on the board of directors of Cytokinetics Inc. (Nasdaq: CYTK) since October 2010. From 1994 to 2001, he held various positions at Quintiles Transnational Corporation, including as Vice Chairman, President and Chief Operating Officer. Prior to joining Quintiles, Mr. Costa spent 23 years in the pharmaceutical industry, most recently as General Counsel and Senior Vice President, Administration with Glaxo Inc. Prior to joining Glaxo, he served as U.S. Area Counsel with Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals and as Food & Drug Counsel with Norwich Eaton Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Mr. Costa served as chairman of the board of directors of Alchemia Limited (then traded on the ASX: ACL), a biopharmaceutical company, from March 2014 to June 2015 and on the board of directors of Metabolon, Inc., a private company, from April 2013 to May 2019. He also served on the board of directors of Magor Corporation, formerly Biovest Corp. I, from March 2010 until March 2013. He also served as chairman of the board of directors of LaboPharm, Inc. from March 2006 to November 2011 and a director of OSI Pharmaceuticals from June 2006 to June 2010, as well as serving as a director at other private companies. Mr. Costa earned both a B.S. in Pharmacy and a J.D. from St. John’s University. Our Board believes that Mr. Costa’s experience in the biotechnology industry, his broad experience advising global corporations and boards of directors of publicly held companies, and his experience serving as a director of public and private companies, qualifies him to serve on our Board of Directors.

Julie Krop, M.D.

Julie Krop, M.D., has served as a member of our Board since February 2021. Since April 2020, Dr. Krop has served as Chief Medical Officer of Freeline Therapeutics Holdings plc (Nasdaq: FRLN), a clinical stage gene therapy company, and has more than 20 years of drug development experience across multiple therapeutic areas including orphan drug indications.  Dr. Krop served from 2015 to April 2020 as the Chief Medical Officer and Executive Vice President, Development of AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: AMAG), where she oversaw clinical development, medical affairs, program management, and pharmacovigilance and regulatory functions.  Prior to joining AMAG, Dr. Krop held leadership positions at Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 2012 to 2015, including Internal Medicine Development Lead and Vice President, Clinical Development, and had leadership positions at Pfizer, Inc. from 1999 to 2001, at Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 2001 to 2003, at Peptimmune from 2003 to 2006, and at Stryker Regenerative Medicine from 2006 to 2012. Dr. Krop is board certified in Internal Medicine and completed a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholar Fellowship as well as an Endocrinology fellowship at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.  Dr. Krop received both a B.A. and an M.D. from Brown University.  Our Board believes that Dr. Krop’s extensive healthcare knowledge, her extensive experience in overseeing drug development and clinical research, and her executive leadership success in the healthcare industry qualify her to serve on our Board of Directors.

Marco Taglietti, M.D.

Marco Taglietti, M.D., has served as a member of our Board since February 2021. Since 2015, Dr. Taglietti has been President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Scynexis, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCYZ), a biotechnology company pioneering innovative medicines to overcome and prevent difficult-to-treat and drug resistant infections.  From 2007 to 2014 Dr. Taglietti served in senior leadership positions at Forest Laboratories, Inc., a publicly traded pharmaceutical company, including Executive Vice President, Research and Development, and Chief Medical Officer, and also served as President of Forest Research Institute, a division of Forest Laboratories.  Prior to joining Forest Laboratories, Inc. in 2007, Dr. Taglietti held the position of Senior Vice President, Head of Global Research and Development, at Stiefel Laboratories, Inc. for three years.  He joined Stiefel Laboratories, Inc. after 12 years at Schering-Plough Corporation where he held positions of increasing responsibilities including as Vice President (Executive Level), Clinical Research for Anti-Infectives, CNS, Endocrinology and Dermatology.  Dr. Taglietti began his career at Marion Merrell Dow Research Institute.  Dr. Taglietti currently serves on the board of directors of BioNJ, Inc., a life science trade association, and was previously a director of Delcath System, Inc and NephroGenex, Inc.  He received his medical degree and board certifications from the University of Pavia in Italy.  Our Board believes Dr. Taglietti’s broad ranging experience in the pharmaceutical industry, his experience as a chief executive officer, his experience in the development of novel medicines, and his experience at public life sciences companies qualify him to serve on our Board of Directors.

Class II Directors (with Terms expiring at 2023 Annual Meeting)

Gregory B. Brown, M.D.

Gregory B. Brown, M.D., has served as a member of our Board of Directors since March 2007. Dr. Brown is currently Chief Executive Officer of Memgen, Inc., a private development-stage biotechnology company. Dr. Brown is also a co-founder at HealthCare Royalty Partners, or HCR Partners, and is a member of that firm’s Senior Advisor Board. Educated as a transplantation immunologist and trained as a thoracic and vascular surgeon, Dr. Brown practiced thoracic and vascular surgery in a community setting where he also founded and led a health maintenance organization. Before co-founding HCR Partners, Dr. Brown was a partner at Paul Capital Partners, where he co-managed that firm’s royalty investments as a member of the royalty management committee. Prior to beginning his principal investment career in 2003, Dr. Brown was co-head of investment banking and head of healthcare at Adams, Harkness & Hill (now Canaccord Genuity) and a ranked biotechnology research analyst at Vector Securities International. Dr. Brown holds a B.A. from Yale University, an M.D. from SUNY Upstate Medical Center and an M.B.A from Harvard University. Dr. Brown currently serves on the boards of the following public pharmaceutical companies: Caladrius Biosciences, Inc. (Nasdaq: CLBS) and Faron Pharmaceuticals Oy (LSN: FARN); and previously served as director of Cambrex Corporation. Our Board believes that Dr. Brown’s extensive experience in the pharmaceutical industry and investing in life sciences companies, as well as his medical and scientific background, qualifies him to serve on our Board of Directors.

John Cochran

John Cochran has served as a member of our Board of Directors since January 2004 and was appointed to serve as Vice Chairman of the Board effective April 22, 2020. Mr. Cochran has been a partner at Bratton Capital Management L.P. since October 1998 and is responsible for its private equity investments. Mr. Cochran is also a partner and Chief Operating Officer of Crestline Investors, an institutional alternative investment management firm. Prior to joining Bratton Capital Management L.P., Mr. Cochran spent 10 years with KPMG focused primarily on audit and merger and acquisition due diligence. Mr. Cochran received his B.A. in Accounting from Texas Christian University and is also a licensed certified public accountant. Our Board believes that Mr. Cochran’s private equity investment and company oversight experience, along with his strong finance and management background, qualifies him to serve on our Board of Directors.

Class I Directors (with terms expiring at the 2022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders)

Keith J. Kendall

Keith J. Kendall has served as our Chief Executive Officer and President and as a member of our Board since November 2014, after having served as our President and Chief Operating Officer from November 2011 to November 2014 and as our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 2006 to 2011. From 1999 to 2006, Mr. Kendall served in various business leadership positions for Hewlett Packard Financial Services, most recently as Vice President and Managing Director of the Americas. From 1985 to 1998, Mr. Kendall held a number of positions with AT&T Capital Corporation, including President of AT&T Credit Corporation and NCR Credit Corporation. Mr. Kendall served on the board of directors of Midatech Pharma Plc (Nasdaq: MTP) from January 2010 to December 2014. Mr. Kendall holds a B.S. from St. John’s University and an M.B.A from Pace University. Our Board believes that Mr. Kendall’s perspective and experience as our Chief Executive Officer, as well as his depth of operating and senior management experience in our industry, qualifies him to serve on our Board of Directors.

Nancy S. Lurker

Nancy S. Lurker has served as a member of our Board of Directors since April 2018. Ms. Lurker has served as President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: EYPT), a specialty biopharmaceutical company committed to developing and commercializing innovative ophthalmic products, since September 2016. Prior to assuming her position with Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals, Ms. Lurker was a freelance consultant from December 2015 to September 2016. From 2008 to December 2015, Ms. Lurker served as Chief Executive Officer and a director of PDI, Inc., a Nasdaq-listed healthcare commercialization company now named Interpace Bioscience, Inc. (Nasdaq: IDXG). From 2006 to 2007, Ms. Lurker was Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the U.S. subsidiary of Novartis AG (NYSE: NVS). In addition, Ms. Lurker also served as President and Chief Executive Officer of ImpactRx, Inc., a privately held healthcare information company. Ms. Lurker currently serves on the board of directors of the Cancer Treatment Centers of America, a privately held company. Ms. Lurker previously served as a member of the boards of directors of publicly held Auxilium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 2011 to 2015, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, plc from 2013 to 2016, Elan Corporation, plc from 2005 to 2006 and ConjuChem Biotechnologies from 2004 to 2006. Ms. Lurker currently serves on the Advisory Board of Novo Holdings A/S, Novo Nordisk Foundation’s wholly owned holding company for Novo Nordisk A/S and Novozymes A/S. Ms. Lurker received a B.S. in Biology from Seattle Pacific University and an M.B.A. from the University of Evansville. Our Board believes Ms. Lurker’s broad ranging experience in the pharmaceutical industry, her experience on the boards of directors of both public and private companies, and her track record of maximizing the potential of new therapies and successfully implementing innovative U.S. and global drug launches qualifies her to serve on our Board of Directors.

James S. Scibetta

James S. Scibetta has served as a member of our Board of Directors since April 2017. Mr. Scibetta currently serves as Chief Executive Officer and a member of the board of directors of Maverick Therapeutics, Inc., a development stage immuno-oncology company, since July 2017. Prior to Maverick, Mr. Scibetta was appointed President of Pacira Pharmaceuticals, or Pacira (Nasdaq: PCRX), in October 2015, where he oversaw commercial and medical support activities, and directed commercial manufacturing, tech transfer and research and development. Mr. Scibetta served as Pacira’s Chief Financial Officer from 2008 to 2016 where he led its 2011 initial public offering and subsequent debt and equity financings. Prior to that, Mr. Scibetta served as Chief Financial Officer of Bioenvision Inc., a commercial-stage public oncology company acquired by Genzyme, from 2006 to 2007, and Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, an oncology-focused systems biology company, from 2001 to 2006. Earlier in his career, Mr. Scibetta spent over a decade in investment banking where he was responsible for sourcing and executing transactions for a broad base of public and private healthcare and life sciences companies. Mr. Scibetta has also served as a director and chairman of the audit committee of Matinas BioPharma Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: MTNB), a biopharmaceutical company, since 2013. Mr. Scibetta received his B.S. in Physics from Wake Forest University and his M.B.A from the University of Michigan. Our Board believes that Mr. Scibetta’s extensive senior management experience in the biotechnology industry, as well as his experience on the boards of both public and private companies, qualifies him to serve on our Board of Directors.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Board Meetings, Attendance and Executive Sessions

The Board held fourteen (14) meetings during the year ended December 31, 2020. All Board members attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and the committees of the Board on which he or she served. The composition of, and number of meetings held by, each committee is set forth below under “Board Committees.”

The independent directors meet in executive sessions, without management present, periodically and as appropriate.

All directors are expected to attend our annual meetings of stockholders absent extenuating circumstances. All members of the Board who were directors at the time attended the 2020 Annual Meeting.

Board Leadership Structure

Our Board of Directors is currently chaired by Santo J. Costa, one of our independent directors. As a general policy, our Board believes that separation of the positions of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer reinforces the independence of the Board from management, creates an environment that encourages objective oversight of management’s performance and enhances the effectiveness of the Board as a whole. Mr. Kendall, our Chief Executive Officer, is also a member of the Board, which we believe promotes strategy development and execution and facilitates information flow between management and the Board. We currently expect the positions of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer to continue to be held by two individuals.

Board of Directors’ Role in Risk Oversight

While senior management has primary responsibility for managing risk, the Board as a whole has responsibility for risk oversight. One of the key functions of our Board is informed oversight of our risk management process. Relevant Board committees review specific risk areas, as discussed below, and report on their deliberations to the Board. The full Board oversees risk in several ways. Through periodic management updates on the financial and operating results of Aquestive, including its annual operating plans and strategic planning, the Board provides input to management on ordinary course, business and commercial operating risks. In addition, management reports to the Board and each committee periodically on specific material risks as they arise or as requested by individual Board members.

The Board does not have a standing risk management committee, but rather administers this oversight function directly through the Board as a whole, as well as through standing committees of our Board that address risks inherent in their respective areas of oversight. In particular, our Board is responsible for monitoring and assessing strategic risk exposure and our Audit Committee has the responsibility to consider and discuss major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control these exposures. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee monitors the effectiveness of our corporate governance practices, including whether they are successful in preventing illegal or improper conduct, and generally monitors compliance with applicable law and compliance with our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Our Compensation Committee assesses and monitors whether any of our compensation policies and programs has the potential to encourage excessive risk-taking.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Below is a list of the names, ages, positions, and a brief account of the business experience of the individuals who serve as our executive officers.

Name
Age
Position(s)
Keith J. Kendall
63
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
Daniel Barber
45
Senior Vice President - Chief Operating Officer
Peter Boyd
55
Senior Vice President - Business Process and Information Technology
Lori J. Braender
65
Senior Vice President - General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary
Kenneth Marshall
60
Senior Vice President - Chief Commercial Officer
A. Mark Schobel
65
Chief Innovation and Technology Officer
Gary H. Slatko
64
Senior Vice President - Chief Medical Officer
A. Ernest Toth, Jr.
62
Interim Chief Financial Officer
Theresa Wood
58
Senior Vice President - Human Resources and Organizational Development

Executive Officer Biographies

Keith J. Kendall |  Chief Executive Officer

Please see Mr. Kendall’s biographical information above in this Annual Report on Form 10-K under “Board of Directors - Director Biographies.”

Daniel Barber | Senior Vice President  - Chief Operating Officer

Mr. Barber joined our team in July 2007 and has been our Chief Operating Officer since May 2019. Mr. Barber has led our Strategy and Development functions since April 2014. Prior to joining our team, Mr. Barber held various positions with Quest Diagnostics in its corporate planning and international divisions. In 2010, Mr. Barber had executive oversight of our launch activities for our first two FDA approved products. Beginning in 2013, Mr. Barber helped lead our effort to develop an internal pipeline of proprietary assets. Since that time, he has had executive responsibility for our pipeline and partnership activities.

Mr. Barber received his B.A. from State University of New York at Geneseo and an M.B.A from Seton Hall University.

Peter Boyd |  Senior Vice President – Business Process and Information Technology

Mr. Boyd joined our Company in August 2013 and has led our Business Process and Information Technology functions since May 2019. Prior to his current position, Mr. Boyd led our Operations and Value Delivery functions from April 2014 to May 2019. Prior to joining us, Mr. Boyd served as Senior Director of Operations for the Americas and APJ Regions at Hewlett-Packard Company. Throughout his 15-year career at the Hewlett-Packard Company, Mr. Boyd held a variety of positions in business process improvement and in operations. Mr. Boyd received a B.A. in History from Wittenberg University and an M.B.A in Finance from Seton Hall University. Mr. Boyd also received an M.S. in Management and Urban Policy Analysis from the New School University.

Lori J. Braender |  Senior Vice President - General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary

Ms. Braender joined our Company in September 2018 as our Senior Vice President - General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary. Prior to joining us, Ms. Braender was an attorney at Day Pitney LLP for 35 years, most recently serving as a Partner and Chair of the firm’s Life Sciences Practice Group. In that role, she specialized in advising clients in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, as well as medical device companies, hospitals and healthcare institutions, on regulatory requirements, contractual arrangements, and other business considerations connected with life science and healthcare transactions. Ms. Braender received a B.S. in Business Administration from Rider University and a J.D. from Seton Hall University School of Law.

Kenneth Marshall |  Senior Vice President - Chief Commercial Officer

Mr. Marshall joined our Company in January 2018 as our Commercial Leader. Prior to that, Mr. Marshall served as U.S. President and Global Chief Marketing Officer for Aerocrine Inc. In that role, he developed the global marketing strategy and led all aspects of that company’s U.S. business. From 2008 through 2011, Mr. Marshall served as Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Ikaria, Inc., a drug and device company focused on critical care. Mr. Marshall also spent 17 years with GlaxoSmithKline and held several senior positions including Vice President of Marketing for the Neurology, Urology, Lifecycle and HIV business units. Mr. Marshall received his B.S.B.A in Marketing and Economics from Western Carolina University and M.B.A from Houston Baptist University.

A. Mark Schobel | Chief Innovation and Technology Officer

Mr. Schobel joined our team in December 2005 and has served as our Chief Innovation and Technology Officer since November 2015. Mr. Schobel served as our Chief Executive Officer and Co-President through November 2014 and served as a member of our Board from November 2005 through the completion of our initial public offering in July 2018. From 2001 to 2005, he was the Global Head of New Technology and Product Innovation for the Consumer Health Business Unit at Novartis where he pioneered thin film delivery of systemic drugs. Prior to Novartis, Mr. Schobel held various general management positions with Reed & Carnrick Pharmaceuticals, Warner-Lambert and Pharmaceutical Formulations Inc. Mr. Schobel received his B.S. in Chemistry from Fairleigh Dickinson University and has been awarded 21 patents along with having multiple patents pending in fields ranging from film drug delivery to nanoparticle delivery systems.

Gary H. Slatko, M.D. | Senior Vice President - Chief Medical Officer

Dr. Slatko has served as our Senior Vice President - Chief Medical Officer since January 2019. From 2012 to 2018, Dr. Slatko served as Office Director/Associate Director of the Office of Medication Error Prevention and Risk Management, CDER at the FDA. Prior to that, Dr. Slatko served as Chief Medical Officer at ParagonRx, an inVentiv Health company, from 2001 to 2012. Dr. Slatko previously served in senior management roles at GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca and DuPont-Merck Pharma. Dr. Slatko received his B.A. in Chemistry and Psychology from Emory University, his M.B.A. from West Chester University of Pennsylvania, and his M.D. from the University of Miami Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine. He completed an Internal Medicine residency program at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and is Board Certified.

A. Ernest Toth, Jr. | Interim Chief Financial Officer

Mr. Toth became our Interim Chief Financial Officer upon the departure at 2020 year end of our former chief financial officer. Mr. Toth had joined Danforth Advisors as a consultant in November 2020 to provide finance support and strategic consulting services to life science companies and the healthcare technology industry.  Prior to that time, Mr. Toth most recently served as Chief Financial Officer of EHE Health from September 2018 to February 2020.  Prior to joining EHE Health, he served as Global Chief Financial Officer of ArisGlobal from January 2016 to December 2016, and Global Chief Financial Officer of Synowledge from January 2015 to December 2015. Prior to Synowledge, Mr. Toth held various senior financial positions at JHP Pharmaceuticals, Valeritas, Pharmaceutical Formulations, World Power Technologies and MacAndrews & Forbes. Mr. Toth also serves as Managing Director of Bellair Advisors, LLC, a consulting and advisory firm that provides financial, strategic, operational, and commercial counsel to high growth entrepreneurial businesses. Mr. Toth received his B.S. in Accounting from Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania and his M.B.A. in Corporate Finance from Pace University.

Theresa Wood | Senior Vice President - Human Resources and Organizational Development

Ms. Wood has served as the head of our Human Resources function since September 2006. Prior to joining our team, Ms. Wood was the Director, Human Resources, for the Hewlett Packard Financial Services Americas division from 1999 to 2006. From 1995 to 1998, Ms. Wood provided consulting services to several companies in the Financial Services, Healthcare and Consumer Goods market. Prior to that, Ms. Wood spent seven years with Sea-Land Service Corp. Ms. Wood received her B.S. in Management Science and Marketing from Kean University.

Delinquent Section 16(a) Reports

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our executive officers and directors and persons who own more than 10% of a registered class of our equity securities to file initial reports of ownership and reports of changes in ownership with the SEC. Based solely on our review of the copies of such forms with respect to fiscal year 2019, we believe our directors, officers and 10% stockholders complied with all applicable filing requirements during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 with the exception of  A. Mark Schobel who filed one late Form 4 reporting two transactions.

CODE OF ETHICS

Our Board has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code of Ethics”) that applies to all of our colleagues, including our executive officers and those colleagues responsible for financial reporting, and our directors.

Our Board has also adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines that, along with our committee charters and our Code of Ethics, provide the framework for our corporate governance policies.

Copies of our Code of Ethics and our Corporate Governance Guidelines may be accessed free of charge by visiting our website at www.aquestive.com under “Investors” at “Corporate Governance: Governance Documents” or by requesting a copy via an e-mail addressed to investorrelations@aquestive.com or by written request addressed to our Corporate Secretary at our principal executive offices. To the extent required by applicable law and regulation, we intend to post on our website any amendment to, or waiver under, a provision of the Code of Ethics that applies to our executive officers and directors within the time period required.

BOARD COMMITTEES

Our Board has established an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, and a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, each of which has the composition and responsibilities described below. Members will serve on these committees until their resignation or until otherwise determined by our Board.

From time to time, the Board may establish other committees to facilitate the management of our business. In October 2019, the Board established a Disclosure Committee. The Disclosure Committee provides advice with respect to the public disclosures made by the Company to the SEC and the Company’s stockholders. Members of the Disclosure Committee include Mr. Kendall, Dr. Brown, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Scibetta and Ms. Lurker.

Each of the Audit, Compensation, and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees operates pursuant to a written charter, and each committee will review and assess the adequacy of its charter annually, submitting any changes to the Board for approval. Each of the committee charters is available on our website at www.aquestive.com under “Investors” at “Corporate Governance: Governance Documents.”

The following table describes which directors serve on each of the below standing Board committees and the number of times each committee met during 2020.

Name:
Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee
Compensation
Committee
Audit
Committee
Keith J. Kendall
       
Gregory B. Brown, M.D.
M
M
John Cochran
C
M
 
Santo J. Costa
 
C
 
Julie Krop, M.D.*
M
   
Nancy S. Lurker
 
M
M
James S. Scibetta
    
C
Marco Taglietti, M.D.*
    
M
Number of Meetings Held in 2020
6
6
7
M = Member
       
C = Chair
       

*Dr. Krop and Dr. Taglietti were first appointed to the Board in February 2021.

Set forth below are summaries of the responsibilities of each of our standing Board committees.

Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee provides oversight of our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audits of our financial statements.  Among other matters, the Audit Committee is responsible for the following:


reviewing with management and the independent registered public accounting firm the Company’s annual audited financial statements, quarterly financial statements and significant financial reporting issues in connection with the preparation of the Company’s annual and quarterly financial statements;


reviewing the Company’s major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures;


retention and oversight of the independent registered public accounting firm;


pre-approving all audit services and permitted non-audit services to be performed for the Company by its independent registered public accounting firm, subject to the de minimis exception for permitted non-audit services;


establishing procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment of any complaints received by the Company regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or audit matters, including procedures for the confidential and anonymous treatment of submission by colleagues of any such complaints; and


reviewing, approving or ratifying all related person transactions in accordance with Company policy, applicable law and SEC and Nasdaq rules and regulations.

All members of our Audit Committee meet the requirements for financial literacy under applicable rules of Nasdaq. Our Board has determined that James S. Scibetta is an audit committee financial expert as defined under applicable rules of the SEC. In making this determination, our Board has considered Mr. Scibetta’s financial experience and business background. All of the members of our Audit Committee were determined to be independent directors as defined under applicable rules of the SEC and Nasdaq.

Compensation Committee

Our Compensation Committee is responsible for the oversight of our overall compensation structure and establishes the Company’s philosophy, objectives, policies and practices in the areas of executive compensation, benefit arrangements, performance evaluations and management development. Among other matters, the Compensation Committee is responsible for the following:


obtaining the advice of any compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser to assist in carrying out its responsibilities and for conducting the related independence assessment;


approving corporate goals and objectives relating to the compensation of the CEO and other executive officers, evaluating their performance, and making appropriate recommendations for any improvement in performance;


determining and approving compensation levels of the CEO and other executive officers;


reviewing compensation provided to our non-employee directors and recommending such compensation and any changes to the Board for approval;


administering all equity compensation plans and recommending amendments to such plans to the Board for approval;


administering all cash incentive compensation plans, employee stock purchase plan, bonus plans, any deferred compensation plans, any executive severance plans and other similar programs with respect to the participation of executive officers, and authorizing and approving amendments to such plans; and


approving employment terms for executive officers, as well as any severance, change in control, indemnification, or other employment or compensation-related agreements or arrangements to be provided to executive officers.

All of the members of our Compensation Committee were determined to be independent under applicable rules of Nasdaq. Our Board has determined that each member of our Compensation Committee is a non-employee director, as defined in Exchange Act Rule 16b-3.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee oversees our corporate governance structure. Among other matters, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for the following:


identifying and recommending to the Board individuals believed to be qualified to serve as Board members;


recommending to the Board directors to serve as members and chairpersons of each standing committee and any appropriate changes to the responsibilities, size and membership of such committees;


determining, on an annual basis, the members of the Board who meet the applicable independence requirements established by the SEC and Nasdaq;


considering questions of possible conflicts of interest of directors;


generally reviewing with the Company’s chief legal officer and other appropriate legal personnel particular legal matters and compliance with applicable legal requirements and with the Code of Ethics;


reviewing our Corporate Governance Guidelines and our Code of Ethics on an annual basis and recommending amendments when appropriate;


periodically reviewing management succession plans and related procedures, including for the CEO; and


overseeing the annual self-evaluation of the Board and committees.

All members of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee were determined to be independent under the applicable rules of Nasdaq.

Policies Governing Director Nominations

Director Nomination Process

Our Board is responsible for determining candidates for nomination to our Board. The Board delegates the selection and nomination process to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, with the expectation that other members of the Board and management will be requested to take part in the process as appropriate. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for making recommendations to the Board regarding the size and composition of the Board. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will review annually with the Board the composition of the Board as a whole and will recommend, if necessary, measures so that the Board reflects the appropriate balance of knowledge, experience, skills, expertise and diversity required for the Board as a whole. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for ensuring that the composition of the Board accurately reflects the needs of our business and, in furtherance of this goal, for proposing the addition of members and the necessary resignation of members for purposes of obtaining the appropriate members, skills and perspectives. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee recommends, and the Board nominates, candidates to stand for election as directors.

Generally, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will identify candidates for director nominees in consultation with management as well as through the use of search firms or other advisors, the recommendations submitted by stockholders, and such other methods as the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee deems appropriate. Once candidates have been identified, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will confirm that the candidates meet the minimum qualifications for director nominees. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may gather information about the candidates through interviews, detailed questionnaires, background checks or any other means that it deems to be appropriate in the evaluation process. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will evaluate the qualifications and skills of director candidates, both on an individual basis and taking into account the overall composition and needs of the Board. Based on the results of the evaluation process, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will recommend candidates as director nominees for the Board’s approval. Each of Dr. Krop and Dr. Taglietti were recommended for consideration by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and approved by the Board following a review of candidates identified by a third-party search firm, which presented these director candidates for consideration following review of the backgrounds and qualifications of these and other potential candidates.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider director candidates recommended by our stockholders. Recommendations should be submitted to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, c/o the Corporate Secretary, and include at least the following information: name of the stockholder and evidence of the person’s ownership of our common stock, number of shares owned and the length of time of ownership, name of the candidate, the candidate’s employment history or a listing of his or her qualifications to be a director and the person’s written consent to be named as a director if nominated.

Stockholders may also nominate directors for election at our annual meetings of stockholders in accordance with our bylaws.

Minimum Qualifications

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will take into consideration all factors it deems relevant and appropriate when recommending candidates for the Board’s selection as nominees for the Board. These factors may include judgment, skill, diversity, experience with business and other organizations of a comparable size, the interplay of the candidate’s experience with that of the other Board members, and the extent to which a candidate would be a desirable addition to the Board and any committees of the Board. We have no formal policy regarding Board diversity; however, the Board and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believe that it is essential that Board members represent diverse viewpoints. In considering candidates for the Board, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee considers gender and ethnicity as well as a diversity of perspectives, experience and skills such that the Board as a whole represents diverse viewpoints, backgrounds and experience.

Item 11.
Executive Compensation

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Narrative Discussion of Summary Compensation Table

We are currently an “emerging growth company” and also qualify as a “smaller reporting company” under SEC rules. The following section describes the compensation we paid to our named executive officers (“NEOs”) for our fiscal years ended December 31, 2020. and 2019. Our NEOs for 2020 are:

Name:
Title:
Keith J. Kendall
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Daniel Barber
Chief Operating Officer (COO)
John T. Maxwell*
Former Chief Financial Officer (CFO)

* John Maxwell separated from the Company at year end 2020.

Compensation Philosophy and Process

Aquestive operates in a highly competitive and continually changing market. Attracting, developing and retaining qualified executives who increase stockholder value by achieving our financial and strategic growth plans and objectives remain key to our success. Our goal is to provide compensation that emphasizes pay-for-performance, rewarding those who achieve or exceed their goals, and seeking to drive long-term value for our stockholders through the use of both short-term and long-term incentive programs.

Our compensation program is designed to:


Attract, retain and motivate superior executive talent


Provide incentives that award the achievement of performance goals that directly correlate to the enhancement of stockholder value, as well as to facilitate executive retention

Align executive interests with those of stockholders through short-term and long-term incentives linked to performance

Role of the Compensation Committee. Pursuant to its charter, our Compensation Committee is charged with determining and approving the compensation and benefits of each executive officer, including our NEOs, on an annual basis, with the goal of achieving a compensation program and total compensation paid to our NEOs and other executives in line with our compensation philosophy. In determining compensation for our executive officers, the Compensation Committee considers compensation for comparable positions in the market and the historical compensation levels of our executives, each NEO’s performance as compared to our expectations and objectives, and our desire to motivate our executives to achieve short- and long-term results that are consistent with our business strategies and objectives.

As part of its review, the Compensation Committee works with its independent compensation consultant, Radford, an Aon Hewitt company (“Radford”), as well as management, to ensure the compensation program aligns with market practice and Company strategy and has a balance designed to achieve Aquestive’s business objectives. Based on the Committee’s review, as well as input and recommendations received from Radford, the Compensation Committee is responsible for approving the compensation of each NEO.

For 2020, our Compensation Committee consisted of Mr. Costa (Chair), Mr. Bratton, Mr. Cochran, and Ms. Lurker. Each member of the Compensation Committee was determined to meet the applicable independence standards of both Nasdaq and the SEC. Mr. Bratton and Mr. Cochran also brought the added perspective of representing the views of a significant stockholder with respect to our executive compensation program. As of February 2021 Dr. Julie Krop, one of our newly appointed independent directors, replaced Mr. Bratton on the Compensation Committee.

Role of Independent Compensation Consultant. In 2018, prior to our initial public offering, our Compensation Committee engaged Radford as its independent compensation consultant to provide the Committee with guidance in connection with developing and implementing Aquestive’s executive compensation program following the initial public offering.

In its role, Radford regularly attends meetings of the Compensation Committee to advise on compensation matters. Radford provides the Compensation Committee with information and advice on the design, structure and level of executive compensation, external market factors and evolving compensation trends.

Our Compensation Committee is directly responsible for the engagement and oversight of Radford. While Radford works with our management on various matters for which the Compensation Committee is responsible, our management does not direct or oversee the retention of Radford.

Role of Management. Management regularly assists the Compensation Committee by preparing information and materials for matters under consideration by the Committee. The CEO and our Senior Vice President, Human Resources are also asked to regularly attend Compensation Committee meetings to participate in discussions and provide information regarding executive performance and compensation matters. In addition, as part of its review process, the Compensation Committee meets with the CEO to discuss his recommendations regarding the compensation of each NEO (other than himself).

Annual Base Salary

Our Compensation Committee uses base salaries to recognize the experience, skills, knowledge and responsibilities required of our executive officers. The base salaries for our executive officers were initially established through review and negotiation at the time of hiring, and thereafter are periodically reviewed for possible increase, in each case taking into account the executive officer’s qualifications, experience, scope of responsibilities and competitive market compensation paid by other companies for similar positions within the industry. The chart below reflects the annual base salary rates that were in effect during 2020 approved by our Compensation Committee for each NEO. The base salary rates are based upon the recommendations and competitive analysis provided by Radford and are generally consistent with the market 50th percentile, although compensation for individual NEOs may be above or below the median based on experience, scope of position and individual performance. Base salaries are reviewed by the Compensation Committee annually based on performance and other factors.

   
Base Salary
 
Keith J. Kendall
 
$
550,000
 
Daniel Barber
 
$
410,000
 
John T. Maxwell
 
$
395,000
 

Annual Incentive Compensation

We have an annual goal-setting and review process for our executive officers that is the basis for determining potential annual bonuses for our NEOs. Our Compensation Committee sets our annual financial objectives for the year as well as strategic and operational goals which are aligned with our strategic plan and operating budget approved by the Board.

Our employment agreements with our executive officers provide that they will be eligible for annual performance-based bonuses based on achievement of the financial, strategic and operational objectives established by the Compensation Committee. Pursuant to the terms of their employment agreements, the target bonus opportunities for our NEOs expressed as a percentage of annual base salary are: Mr. Kendall, 75% and Mr. Barber, 50%. Mr. Maxwell’s target bonus opportunity was 50%. Each NEO’s annual bonus is capped at a maximum of 200% of his target bonus opportunity.

The Compensation Committee assessed Company performance for 2020 with respect to each of the strategic and operational metrics and determined achievement against those metrics. The Compensation Committee determined to award the bonus amounts to our NEOs for 2020 set forth in the Summary Compensation Table below under “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.”

Equity-Based Incentive Awards

Our equity-based awards are designed to provide our NEOs with a strong link to our long-term performance, create an ownership culture and help align the interests of our executive officers and our stockholders. Prior to the closing of our initial public offering, we adopted our 2018 Equity Incentive Plan.

2020 Long-Term Incentive Awards. The Compensation Committee determined to award long-term incentive awards in the form of stock options in order to demonstrate the Company’s pay-for-performance philosophy. Stock options are designed to motivate our NEOs to increase stockholder value as the NEO will only realize value if our stock price increases above the exercise price, which is equal to the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant. In addition, these stock options are subject to time-based vesting restrictions generally requiring our NEOs to remain in our employment during the vesting period.

Equity Grant Policy. The Compensation Committee has adopted an equity grant policy with respect to the issuance of equity awards under our 2018 Equity Incentive Plan. Among other provisions, the equity grant policy establishes parameters for the grant date of equity awards made to officers, employees and non-employee directors. Under the policy, the grant date for annual long-term incentive awards to officers and other employees is the date of the Compensation Committee’s regularly scheduled meeting in January or February each year, but if the date of such meeting is not in an open trading window, the awards will be granted effective on the second full trading date following the next public release of earnings. Pursuant to the policy, annual equity awards to our non-employee directors are granted on the date of the Company’s annual meeting of stockholders. Additionally, “off-cycle” equity awards may be granted at other times during the year for circumstances such as new hires, promotions and director appointments, during open trading windows, or if the date the Compensation Committee takes action to approve such an award is not in an open trading window, then the awards will be granted effective on the second full trading date following the next public release of earnings.

Perquisites, Health, Welfare and Retirement Benefits

All of our executive officers, including our NEOs, are eligible to participate in our employee benefit plans, including our medical, dental and vision insurance plans, in each case on the same basis as all of our other colleagues. We also provide enhanced life insurance and disability benefits to our executive officers.

We maintain a 401(k) retirement savings plan that provides eligible U.S. colleagues with an opportunity to save for retirement on a tax advantaged basis. Eligible colleagues may defer eligible compensation on a pre-tax basis, up to the statutorily prescribed annual limits on contributions under the Code. The 401(k) plan provides us with the discretion to match employee contributions. During 2020, we made 100% matching contributions on up to 6% of an employee’s eligible compensation deferred, subject to IRS limitations. These matching contributions vest in 20% increments and vest in full after an employee has attained five years of service.

We do not maintain any non-qualified deferred compensation plans at this time. We also do not maintain, and do not plan to establish, any defined benefit pension plan.

Summary Compensation Table

The following table provides information regarding the compensation provided to our NEOs during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 and 2019:

Name & Principal
Position
 
Year
 
Salary
($)
   
Bonus
($)
   
Stock
Awards
($) (1)
   
Option
Awards
($) (1)
   
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
($) (2)
   
All Other
Compensation
($) (3)
   
Total
($)
 
Keith J. Kendall
 
2020
   
550,000
   
   
   
259,364
   
450,368
   
30,686
   
1,290,418
 
Chief Executive Officer
 
2019
   
540,385
   
   
   
1,768,598
   
288,924
   
30,669
   
2,628,576
 
                                                 
Daniel Barber
 
2020
   
410,000
   
   
   
126,800
   
279,774
   
23,509
   
840,083
 
Chief Operating Officer
 
2019
   
388,846
   
   
   
555,257
   
227,780
   
23,345
   
1,195,228
 
                                                 
John T. Maxwell
 
2020
   
395,000
   
   
   
69,164
         
847,106
   
1,311,270
 
Chief Financial Officer*
 
2019
   
391,154
   
   
   
516,975
   
119,490
   
26,504
   
1,054,123
 

*
Mr. Maxwell separated from the Company effective December 31, 2020.

(1)
Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of equity awards computed in accordance with FASB ASC 718. A discussion of the assumptions used in calculating the fair value of such awards may be found in Note 17.

(2)
Represents annual incentive compensation for 2020 and 2019, paid in the first quarter of the following year.

(3)
For 2020, this column includes the following:

   
Mr. Kendall
($)
   
Mr. Barber
($)
   
Mr. Maxwell
($)
 
401(k) Company match
   
17,100
     
17,100
     
17,100
 
Disability insurance premiums
   
8,569
     
2,778
     
4,656
 
Life insurance premiums
   
5,017
     
3,631
     
4,468
 
Severance+
   
     
     
820,882
 
Total
   
30,686
     
23,509
     
847,106
 

+Severance consists of $592,500 of severance covering annual base salary for twelve months and target annual bonus payable in 12 equal installments, $197,500 payable for 2020 year target bonus, and $30,882 representing contribution of medical benefits for up to twelve months. The amount in the “All Other Compensation” column above does not include an amount $228,600 which is the difference between the option exercise price and the market value of the shares underlying the stock options granted to Mr. Maxwell in 2020 (the fair value of which stock options grant is included in the above Table under “Options Awards”), the vesting of which 2020 stock options was accelerated on separation from employment under Mr. Maxwell’s employment agreement; other stock options which accelerated upon separation from employment were not in that money upon the separation date.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End Table

The following table sets forth certain information regarding equity awards granted to our NEOs that remain outstanding as of December 31, 2020:

   
Option Awards
 
Stock Awards
 
Name
 
Number of Securities
Underlying Unexercised
Options
(#)
   
Option
Exercise
Price
 
Option
Expiration
 
Number of
Shares or
Units of
Stock
That
Have Not
Vested
   
Market
Value
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That Have
Not
Vested (1)
   
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares That
Have Not
Vested
   
Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market Value
of Unearned
Shares, or
Units That
Have Not
Vested
 
   
Exercisable
   
Unexercisable
   
($)
 
Date
   
(#)

 
($)
     
(#)

 
($)
 
Mr. Kendall
   
193,459
     
46,706
(2)
   
15.00
 
7/24/2028
           
     
     
 
     
21,784
     
6,259
(3) 
   
16.46
 
8/15/2028
   
 
   
     
     
 
     
81,250
     
243,750
(4) 
   
8.05
 
2/28/2029
   
     
     
     
 
     
     
225,000
(8)
   
1.54
 
3/16/2030
   
     
     
     
 
Mr. Barber
   
12,998
     
12,999
(6) 
   
6.54
 
4/18/2028
   
     
     
     
 
     
48,254
     
48,253
(5) 
   
15.00
 
7/24/2028
   
     
     
     
 
     
17,500
     
52,500
(4) 
   
8.05
 
2/28/2029
   
     
     
     
 
     
12,500
     
37,500
(7) 
   
4.83
 
5/9/2029
   
     
     
     
 
     
     
110,000
(8)
   
1.54
 
3/16/2030
   
     
     
     
 
Mr. Maxwell(9)
   
36,120
      0

   
15.00
 
12/31/2021
   
     
     
     
 
     
95,000
      0

   
8.05
 
12/31/2021
   
     
     
     
 
     
60,000
     
0
     
1.54
 
12/31/2021
   
     
     
     
 

(1)
Calculated using closing price of our common stock on Nasdaq on December 31, 2020 of $5.35.

(2)
Options granted on July 24, 2018. These options vest in 36 equal monthly installments beginning on August 31, 2018.

(3)
Options granted on August 15, 2018. These options vest in 36 equal monthly installments beginning on September 30, 2018.

(4)
Options granted on February 28, 2019. These options vest as follows: 25% on each of the first and second anniversaries of the grant date and 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date.

(5)
Options granted on July 24, 2018. These options vests as follows: 25% on each of the first and second anniversaries of the grant date and 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date.

(6)
Options granted on April 18, 2018. These options vests as follows: 25% on the first and second anniversaries of the grant date and 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date.

(7)
Options granted on May 9, 2019. These options vest as follows: 25% on each of the first and second anniversaries of the grant date and 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date.

(8)
Options granted March 16, 2020. These options vest as follows: 25% on each of the first and second anniversaries of the grant date and 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date.

(9)
In connection with John Maxwell’s separation from the Company, all stock options held by Mr. Maxwell vested.
Employment Agreements with our Named Executive Officers

In June and July 2019, we entered into amended and restated employment agreements with Mr. Kendall, our Chief Executive Officer, and Mr. Maxwell, our then Chief Financial Officer, and an employment agreement with Mr. Barber, our Chief Operating Officer. These agreements set forth the initial terms and conditions of each executive’s employment with us, including base salary, target annual bonus opportunity and employee benefit plan participation. These employment agreements provide for “at will” employment. The material terms of these employment agreements with our NEOs are described below and are qualified in all respects by the full terms of such agreements.

Glossary of Terms . The following terms referred to in the narrative below are generally defined in each NEO’s employment agreement as follows:


“Cause” means generally conviction or plea of nolo contendere to a felony; commission of fraud or material act of dishonesty with respect to the Company or its colleagues, customers or affiliates; failure to carry out material responsibilities of employment; material misconduct or similar behavior; a material violation of Company policy; or material breach of the executive’s obligations under his employment agreement.


“Change in Control” means generally any person or group becomes the beneficial owner of 40% or more of the Company’s outstanding voting securities; completion of a merger, consolidation or reorganization of the Company unless the stockholders before such transaction own at least a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the outstanding securities or at least a majority of the fair market value of the successor company; or a sale, transfer, liquidation or other disposition of all or substantially all of the Company’s assets.


“Change in Control Period” means generally, for Mr. Kendall, the period beginning 180 days before and ending 24 months following the effective date of a Change in Control, and for Mr. Maxwell and Mr. Barber, the period beginning 180 days before and ending 12 months following the effective date of a Change in Control.


“Good Reason” means generally a material diminution in the executive’s position or duties; a material breach by the Company of the executive’s employment agreement, including any reduction of base salary or target bonus percentage; or relocation of more than 50 miles from the Company’s headquarters.


“Permanent Disability” means generally the executive’s inability to perform the essential functions of his job with or without reasonable accommodation for a period of 150 consecutive days or an aggregate of 180 days in any 12 month period due to illness, accident or other physical or mental incapacity, as determined by a duly licensed physician.


“Severance Period” means generally, for Mr. Kendall, 18 months following termination of employment (or until the end of the initial employment term, if longer), and for Mr. Maxwell and Mr. Barber, 12 months following termination of employment.

Terms of Employment

Keith J. Kendall . The initial term of Mr. Kendall’s employment agreement was for three years ending June 30, 2021, and thereafter his employment term renews annually, unless either party gives written notice of non-renewal at least 90 days prior to the end of the then-current term. Non-renewal of his employment agreement by the Company would constitute a termination without Cause. Mr. Kendall’s base salary is subject to annual review for possible increase. Mr. Kendall’s target award opportunity under any annual incentive program that may be established by the Compensation Committee is equal to 75% of his base salary, and he is eligible to participate in our incentive plans and benefit plans as may be established or in effect from time to time.

Prior to the initial public offering, in April 2018 Mr. Kendall was issued shares of our non-voting common stock in connection with the termination of our PUP Plans equal to 5% of the issued and outstanding capital securities of the Company at the time of issue, and under the terms of his employment agreement, each share of non-voting common stock automatically became one share of voting common stock upon completion of the initial public offering. Under his employment agreement, Mr. Kendall also received stock options covering a number of shares equal to the difference between 5% of the total number of shares of our common stock outstanding following the initial public offering on a fully diluted basis, less the aggregate number of any shares of non-voting common stock and shares covered by stock options that he held immediately prior to the initial public offering, such that the total number of all of the shares of common stock and shares underlying stock options held by Mr. Kendall immediately following the initial public offering represented 5% of our shares of common stock on a fully diluted basis. In addition, upon the completion of the initial public offering, Mr. Kendall received a grant of RSUs equal to 0.47% of our total common stock outstanding following the initial public offering on a fully diluted basis, or 116,576 RSUs. The stock options vest in 36 equal monthly installments and the RSUs vest in eight equal quarterly installments, subject to accelerated vesting if his employment terminates for any reason other than a termination by the Company for Cause or a resignation by Mr. Kendall without Good Reason.

Daniel Barber. The term of Mr. Barber’s employment agreement commenced on June 26, 2018 and will continue until terminated in accordance with its terms. Mr. Barber’s base salary is subject to annual review for possible increase. For purposes of any annual incentive program established by the Compensation Committee, Mr. Barber’s target award opportunity under any annual incentive program that may be established by the Compensation Committee is equal to 50% of his base salary, and he is eligible to participate in our incentive plans and benefit plans as may be established or in effect from time to time. Prior to the initial public offering, in April 2018, Mr. Barber had been awarded shares of our non-voting common stock in connection with the termination of our PUP Plans and under the terms of his agreement, each share of non-voting common stock automatically became one share of voting common stock upon completion of the initial public offering.