Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the following risks and all of the other information set forth in this prospectus before deciding to invest in our common shares. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations would likely suffer. In such case, the trading price of our common shares could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Risks related to our financial position and need for additional capital

We have a history of significant operating losses and expect to incur significant and increasing losses for the foreseeable future; we may never achieve or maintain profitability and investors may lose their entire investment.

We incurred net losses of €2.4 million and €8.5 million for the six month period ended June 30, 2016 and 2017, respectively, and €4.9 million and €8.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2016, respectively. In addition, our accumulated deficit as of June 30, 2017 was €35.5 million. We expect our net losses to increase as we advance IFX-1 into larger and later stage clinical trials. To date, we have not commercialized any products or generated any revenues from the sale of products, and absent the realization of sufficient revenues from product sales, we may never attain profitability. We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts to research and development, including preclinical studies and clinical trials. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our shareholders’ equity and working capital.

We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

Our ability to become and remain profitable depends on our ability to generate revenue. We do not expect to generate significant revenue unless and until we are, or any future collaborator is, able to obtain marketing approval for, and successfully commercialize, one or more of our product candidates. Successful commercialization will require achievement of key milestones, including completing clinical trials of IFX-1 and any other product candidates, obtaining marketing approval for these product candidates, manufacturing, marketing and selling those products for which we, or any of our future collaborators, may obtain marketing approval, satisfying any post-marketing requirements and obtaining reimbursement for our products from private insurance or government payors.

Because of the uncertainties and risks associated with these activities, we are unable to accurately predict the timing and amount of revenues, and if or when we might achieve profitability. We and any future collaborators may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, or any future collaborators do, we may never generate revenues that are large enough for us to achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

We expect our financial condition and operating results to continue to fluctuate from quarter to quarter and year to year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. In order to succeed, we will need to transition from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of undertaking commercial activities. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications and delays, and may not be successful in such a transition.

Our failure to become and remain profitable could depress the market price of our common shares and could impair our ability to raise capital, pay dividends, expand our business, diversify our product offerings or continue our operations. If we continue to suffer losses as we have in the past, investors may not receive any return on their investment and may lose their entire investment.

We will need substantial additional funding, and if we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product discovery and development programs or commercialization efforts.

Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. For example, in the six months ended June 30, 2016 and June 30, 2017, we used €1.9 million and €5.2 million, respectively, in net cash for our operating activities, and for the years ended December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2016, we used €3.3 million and €4.9 million, respectively, in net cash for our operating activities, most of which were related to research and development activities. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we initiate new clinical trials of, initiate new research and preclinical development efforts for and seek marketing approval for, our current product candidates or any future product candidates, including those that we may acquire. In particular, we will incur significant expenses if and as we commence Phase II clinical trials of IFX-1 in HS and AAV and potentially clinical trials in other indications. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we may incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution to the extent that such sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution are not the responsibility of a future collaborator. Furthermore, following the closing of this offering, we expect to incur significant additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts.

We plan to use the net proceeds of this offering primarily to fund clinical development of IFX-1 for the treatments of HS and AAV, and of other indications, and for working capital and other general corporate purposes. We will be required to expend significant funds in order to advance the development of IFX-1, which remains in the early stages of clinical development, as well as other product candidates we may seek to develop, including IFX-2. While we intend to focus on developing IFX-1 for HS and AAV, we are also evaluating IFX-1 for a number of additional medical indications. As a result, although we may make substantial expenditures on IFX-1 for such indications, we may cease development efforts on some or all of such indications prior to approval, if any. However, any future development activities for our pipeline product candidates will depend heavily on the clinical and marketing success of IFX-1 in any indication.

The net proceeds of this offering and our existing cash and cash equivalents will not be sufficient to fund all of the efforts that we plan to undertake or to fund the completion of development of any of our product candidates. Accordingly, we will be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, royalty-based financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources. We do not have any committed external source of funds. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts and on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of IFX-1 or any of our other product candidates or potentially discontinue operations altogether. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy.

We believe that the net proceeds from this offering, together with our existing cash and cash equivalents, will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through                   .  Changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned. Our future funding requirements, both short-term and long-term, will depend on many factors, including:

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our shareholders, including purchasers of common shares in this offering, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our planned operations. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of common shares, convertible securities or other equity securities, your ownership interest may be diluted, and the terms of these securities could include liquidation or other preferences and anti-dilution protections that could adversely affect your rights as a common shareholder. In addition, debt financing, if available, may result in fixed payment obligations and may involve agreements that include restrictive covenants that limit our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, creating liens, redeeming shares or declaring dividends, that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. In addition, securing financing could require a substantial amount of time and attention from our management and may divert a disproportionate amount of their attention away from day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our management's ability to oversee the development of our product candidates.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

We have a limited operating history and no history of commercializing pharmaceutical products, which may make it difficult to evaluate the prospects for our future viability.

We commenced operations in 2008. Our operations to date have been limited to establishing our company, raising capital, developing our proprietary anti-C5a technology, identifying and testing potential product candidates and conducting clinical trials of our lead product candidate, IFX-1. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully conduct late-stage clinical trials, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Accordingly, you should consider our prospects in light of the costs, uncertainties, delays and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in the early stages of development, especially clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies such as ours. Any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products.

We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known or unknown factors in achieving our business objectives. We will eventually need to transition from a company with a development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

We expect our financial condition and operating results to continue to fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Accordingly, you should not rely upon the results of any quarterly or annual periods as indications of future operating performance.

Exchange rate fluctuations or abandonment of the euro currency may materially affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Potential future expense and revenue may be incurred or derived from outside the European Union, particularly the United States. As a result, our business and share price may be affected by fluctuations in foreign exchange rates between the euro and other currencies, particularly the U.S. dollar, which may also have a significant impact on our reported results of operations and cash flows from period to period. Currently, we do not have any exchange rate hedging arrangements in place. In addition, the abandonment of the euro by one or more members of the European Union could lead to the re-introduction of individual currencies in one or more EU member states, or in more extreme circumstances, the dissolution of the European Union. The effects on our business of the abandonment of the euro as a currency, the exit of one or more EU member states from the European Union or a potential dissolution of the European Union, are impossible to predict with certainty, and any such events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks related to the discovery, development and commercialization of our product candidates

We are at a very early stage in our development efforts, our approach of targeting C5a inhibition is novel and unproven and we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize any product candidates.

IFX-1 is a novel therapeutic antibody and its potential therapeutic benefit is unproven. There is no approved therapy inhibiting C5a activation and, as a result, the regulatory pathway for IFX-1 may present novel issues that could cause delays in development or approval. Our product candidates may not demonstrate in patients any or all of the pharmacological benefits we believe they may possess. We have not yet succeeded and may never succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety for these or any other product candidates in pivotal clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter. For example, although we have evaluated IFX-1 in preclinical studies and in early-stage clinical trials, we have not yet advanced IFX-1 into Phase III clinical development, nor have we obtained regulatory approval to sell any product based on our therapeutic approaches. Positive results from our early-stage clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of the results of our planned Phase IIb clinical trial of IFX-1 for HS. If we cannot replicate the positive results from our Phase I and Phase IIa clinical trials in our Phase IIb and Phase III clinical trials, we may be unable to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize IFX-1 for HS.

C5a inhibition to treat complement-mediated autoimmune and inflammatory diseases has not been validated. This is an unproven approach to the treatment of HS, which is our lead indication for IFX-1, and of AAV. Accordingly, our focus on treating these diseases may not result in the development of commercially viable

products. In addition, our proprietary anti-C5a technology and focus on exploring C5a inhibition may fail to result in the identification of viable additional product candidates in any indication. If we are unsuccessful in our development efforts, we may not be able to advance the development of our product candidates, commercialize products, raise capital, expand our business or continue our operations.

We are heavily dependent on the success of IFX-1, our lead product candidate, and if IFX-1 does not receive regulatory approval or is not successfully commercialized, our business will be harmed.

We currently have no products that are approved for commercial sale and may never be able to develop marketable products. We expect that a substantial portion of our efforts and expenditures over the next few years will be devoted to IFX-1, which is currently our only product candidate in active clinical development. Accordingly, our business currently depends heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of IFX-1. We cannot be certain that IFX-1 will receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized even if we receive regulatory approval for any indication, due in part because IFX-1 remains in very early stages of clinical development, and it may be years before we are in a position to seek regulatory approval for IFX-1 in any indication. Moreover, we may not be successful in our efforts to expand the approval, if any, of IFX-1 for other indications. If we were required to discontinue development of IFX-1 for any indication or if IFX-1 does not receive regulatory approval or fails to achieve significant market acceptance, we would be delayed by many years in our ability to achieve profitability, if ever.  In addition, our ability to develop additional product candidates in our pipeline could be significantly hindered. 

Clinical failure may occur at any stage of clinical development, and the results of our clinical trials may not support our proposed indications for our product candidates.

Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and we cannot be sure that the results of later clinical trials will replicate the results of prior clinical trials and preclinical testing. Moreover, success in clinical trials in a particular indication does not ensure that a product candidate will be successful in other indications, even for the same underlying disease. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry, including biotechnology companies, have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after promising results in earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials or successful later-stage trials in other related indications, including in the context of controlling complement activation through C5 and C5a inhibition. For example, while others in our industry have attempted to develop C5a-specific antibodies, there is currently no approved therapy inhibiting C5a. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events as well as lack of efficacy and patient benefit as reported by clinical trial investigators. In particular, development of antibodies that target C5a rather than C5 to control complement activation is comparatively novel, and there is currently no approved therapy specifically targeting C5a. As a result, inhibition of C5a rather than C5, which blocks signaling to the two receptors C5aR and C5L2, may have unforeseen consequences or negative results that may lead to clinical failure or withdrawal in later stages of our product candidate development. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical and initial clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including differences in patient populations, changes in trial protocols and complexities of larger, multi-center trials among others. For example, while we have recently observed positive final results from our Phase IIa clinical trial for IFX-1 in 12 HS patients, such results may not be replicated with statistical significance in future clinical trials that include larger numbers of patients with potentially different trial protocols and endpoints. A failure of a clinical trial to meet its predetermined endpoints may cause us to abandon a product candidate or an indication and may delay development of any other product candidates. Any delay in, or termination of, our clinical trials will delay the submission of the Biologics License Application, or BLA, to the FDA, the marketing authorization application to the EMA or other similar applications with other relevant foreign regulatory authorities and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize any of our product candidates and generate revenue.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do, and reducing or eliminating our commercial opportunity.

The development and commercialization of new products is highly competitive. We expect that we, and any future collaborators, will face significant competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty

pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide with respect to any of our product candidates that we, or any future collaborators, may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. For example, other pharmaceutical companies may commence development efforts for product candidates targeting the same indications as IFX-1, including HS or AAV, or any other indications we may target. See “Business—Competition.” Although we have tested and expect to further test IFX-1 in HS patients, some of whom have not responded to adalimumab, the current standard of care for HS, if IFX-1 proves to be effective and is approved for use in such patients, IFX-1 may compete with adalimumab or any other treatment approach which is currently under development in HS and obtains approval. For example, in the area of HS treatment, IFX-1 may compete with MABp1, a monoclonal antibody being developed by XBiotech Inc. targeting interleukin-1 alpha, for which XBoitech recently completed a Phase II clinical trial, as well as Bimekizumab, a monoclonal antibody blocking interleukin-17AF, for which UCB Pharma recently completed a Phase II clinical trial. In addition, in the area of AAV treatment, IFX-1 may compete with CCX168, a C5aR inhibitor being developed by Chemocentryx targeting multiple severe and rare inflammatory disorders. Though it acts through a different mechanism of action than IFX-1, CCX168 has demonstrated the potential to induce remission in AAV patients and is currently undergoing Phase III clinical trial development. There are additional drugs currently being developed for treatment of AAV which may be approved in the future. If approved for the treatment of AAV, IFX-1 would also face competition from current therapies, including corticosteroids, azathioprine, methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil or rituximab. In addition, several product candidates in development by other pharmaceutical companies targeting C5a have failed or remain in early stages of development, with future development unclear. As a result, complement-mediated treatments, such as eculizumab, currently remain focused on C5 inhibition. However, as the area of terminal complement activation further develops, particularly if IFX-1 is approved for commercialization, our competitors may seek to develop their own product candidates targeting C5a.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we, or any future collaborators, may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other marketing approval for their products before we, or any future collaborators, are able to obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we, or any future collaborators, are able to enter the market.

Many of our existing and potential future competitors have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining marketing approvals and marketing approved products than we do, and may be able to reduce the price at which they sell their products. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly if acquired by, or through collaborative arrangements with, large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, the development of our product candidates.

If clinical trials of our product candidates fail to satisfactorily demonstrate safety and efficacy to the FDA and other regulators, we, or any future collaborators, may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of these product candidates.

We, and any future collaborators, are not permitted to commercialize, market, promote or sell any product candidate in the United States without obtaining marketing approval from the FDA. Foreign regulatory authorities, such as the EMA, impose similar requirements. We, and any future collaborators, must complete extensive preclinical development and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans before we will be able to obtain these approvals.

The clinical development of our product candidates is susceptible to the risk of failure inherent at any stage of product development. It is possible that even if one or more of our product candidates has a beneficial effect, that effect will not be detected during clinical evaluation as a result of one or more of a variety of factors, including the size, duration, design, measurements, conduct or analysis of our clinical trials. Conversely, as a result of the same factors, our clinical trials may indicate an apparent positive effect of a product candidate that is greater than the actual positive effect, if any. Similarly, in our clinical trials we may fail to detect toxicity of or intolerability caused by our product candidate, or mistakenly believe that our product candidates are toxic or not well tolerated when that is not in fact the case. In addition, all of our product candidates are in early stages of development or clinical testing. For example, IFX-1, our lead product candidate, has only recently completed enrollment and dosing in an initial Phase IIa trial for HS. As a result, it may be years before any of our product candidates receives regulatory approval, if at all, and additional clinical trials may fail to demonstrate safety, efficacy or tolerability for our targeted indications.

Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or any future collaborators, and impair our ability to generate revenue from product sales, regulatory and commercialization milestones and royalties. Moreover, if we or any future collaborators are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond the trials and testing that we or they contemplate, if we or they are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing or the results of these trials or tests are unfavorable, uncertain or are only modestly favorable, or there are unacceptable safety concerns associated with our product candidates, we or any future collaborators may:

Our failure to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates and to demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates would significantly harm our business.

Our product candidates may cause or be perceived to cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or 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 by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. In addition, many of the patients that we expect to enroll in our planned clinical trial of IFX-1 for HS suffer from serious pre-existing disorders. While such disorders may lead to serious adverse events during trial periods that may be found to be unrelated to IFX-1, such events may create a negative safety perception and adversely impact market acceptance of IFX-1 following any approval. For example, in our most recent Phase IIa clinical trial of IFX-1 for HS, we observed several adverse events, even though they were judged not to be related to IFX-1 administration by the investigator.

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the Institutional Review Boards, or IRBs, or independent ethics committees at the institutions in which our studies are conducted, or the Data Safety Monitoring Board, or DSMB, could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Side effects, whether treatment-related or not, could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Moreover, clinical trials of our product candidates are conducted in carefully defined sets of patients who have agreed to enter into clinical trials. Consequently, it is possible that our clinical trials, or those of any future collaborator, may indicate an apparent positive effect of a product candidate that is greater than the actual positive effect, if any, or alternatively fail to identify undesirable side effects. If, following approval of a product candidate, we, or others, discover that the product is less effective than previously believed or causes undesirable side effects that were not previously identified, any of the following adverse events could occur:

Any of these events could harm our business and operations, and could negatively impact our share price.

Our product candidates are either chimeric or humanized antibody proteins that could cause an immune response in patients, resulting in the creation of harmful or neutralizing antibodies against these therapeutic proteins.

In addition to the safety, efficacy, manufacturing, and regulatory hurdles faced by our product candidates, the administration of proteins such as monoclonal antibodies that are chimeric or humanized, including our product candidates IFX-1 and IFX-2, respectively, can cause an immune response, resulting in the creation of antibodies against the therapeutic protein. These anti-drug antibodies can have no effect or can neutralize the effectiveness of the protein, or require that higher doses be used to obtain a therapeutic effect. Whether anti-drug antibodies will be created and how they react can often not be predicted from preclinical or even clinical studies, and their detection or appearance is often delayed. As a result, neutralizing antibodies may be detected at a later date or upon longer exposure of patients with our product candidates, such as following more chronic administration in longer lasting clinical trials. In some cases, detection of such neutralizing antibodies can even occur after pivotal clinical trials have been completed.  Therefore, there can be no assurance that neutralizing antibodies will not be detected in future clinical trials or at a later date upon longer exposure (including after commercialization). If anti-drug antibodies reduce or neutralize the effectiveness of our product candidates, the continued clinical development or receipt of marketing approval for any of our product candidates could be delayed or prevented and, even if any of our product candidates is approved, their commercial success could be limited, any of which would impair our ability to generate revenue and continue operations.

Even if we complete the necessary preclinical studies and clinical trials for IFX-1 and any other product candidates, the marketing approval process is expensive, time consuming and uncertain and may prevent us or any future collaborators from obtaining approvals for the commercialization of some or all of our product candidates. As a result, we cannot predict when or if, and in which territories, we, or any future collaborators, will obtain marketing approval to commercialize a product candidate.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, selling, marketing, promotion and distribution of products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We, and any future collaborators, are not permitted to market our product candidates in the United States or in other countries until we, or they, receive approval of a BLA from the FDA or marketing approval from applicable regulatory authorities outside the United States. Our product candidates are in various stages of development and are subject to the risks of failure inherent in drug development. We have not submitted an application for or received marketing approval for any product candidate in the United States or in any other jurisdiction. We have limited experience in conducting and managing the clinical trials necessary to obtain marketing approvals, including FDA approval of a BLA. Further, there is no prior history of regulatory approval for product candidates targeting C5a inhibition. In addition, while we intend to use HiSCR as the primary endpoint in our planned clinical trials of IFX-1 for HS, which we believe is a clinically-accepted endpoint based on the approval of adalimumab, there is no guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will permit us to do so. Further, the HiSCR response is a subjective endpoint, demonstrated if an investigator determines there has been a 50% or higher reduction of the AN count (without any increase of the abscess or draining fistula count from baseline). As a result, the regulatory pathway for IFX-1 is novel and may present unforeseen issues or delays.

The process of obtaining marketing approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. It may take many years, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. Securing marketing approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to regulatory authorities for each therapeutic indication to establish the product candidate’s safety and efficacy. Securing marketing approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the regulatory authorities. The FDA or other regulatory authorities may determine that our product candidates are not safe and effective, only moderately effective or have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that preclude our obtaining marketing approval or prevent or limit commercial use. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a drug candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. Any marketing approval we ultimately obtain may be limited or subject to restrictions or post-approval commitments that render the approved product not commercially viable. The FDA, EMA or any comparable foreign regulatory authorities may delay, limit or deny approval of IFX-1 for many reasons, including:

Of the large number of drugs in development in the pharmaceutical industry, only a small percentage result in the submission of a BLA to the FDA and even fewer are approved for commercialization. Furthermore, even if we do receive regulatory approval to market IFX-1, any such approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses or patient populations for which we may market the product. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the requisite financing to continue to fund our development programs, we cannot assure you that IFX-1 will be successfully developed or commercialized.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or other regulatory authority. The FDA or other regulatory authority may conclude that a principal investigator, potentially including because of a financial relationship with us, has a conflict of interest that has affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or other regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or other regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.

Any delay in obtaining or failure to obtain required approvals could negatively impact our ability or that of any future collaborators to generate revenue from the particular product candidate, which likely would result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely impact our share price.

If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We will be required to identify and enroll a sufficient number of patients with HS and AAV for our planned clinical trials of IFX-1 in these indications. Each of these is a rare disease or indication with a relatively small patient population. Trial participant enrollment could be limited in future trials in HS given that many potential participants may be ineligible because they are already undergoing treatment with adalimumab, particularly in the United States where we intend to seek orphan drug designation. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials required by the FDA, EMA or other foreign regulatory agencies for IFX-1 or any of our other product candidates that we pursue if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these clinical trials.

Patient enrollment is affected by other factors, including:

Further, there are only a limited number of specialist physicians who treat patients with these diseases and major clinical centers are concentrated in a few geographic regions. We also may encounter difficulties in identifying and enrolling such patients with a stage of disease appropriate for our ongoing or future clinical trials. In addition, the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for any of our clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials.

Even if one of our product candidates receives marketing approval, it may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success, in which case we may not generate significant revenues or become profitable.

Even if IFX-1 or any of our other product candidates is approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities for marketing and sale, it may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party

payors and others in the medical community. Physicians are often reluctant to switch their patients from existing therapies (such as adalimumab for the treatment of HS) even when new and potentially more effective or convenient treatments enter the market. Further, patients often acclimate to the therapy that they are currently taking and do not want to switch unless their physicians recommend switching products or they are required to switch therapies due to lack of reimbursement for existing therapies. Adalimumab is the only drug approved for the treatment of HS, and even if we are able to obtain marketing approval of IFX-1 for the treatment of HS, we may not be able to successfully convince physicians or patients to switch from adalimumab to IFX-1. Further, we may face a lack of acceptance by the physician community of the efficacy of targeting C5a to inhibit terminal complement activation compared to targeting C5, which is well established in clinical practice (such as eculizumab). In addition , IFX-1 may not be accepted by physicians or patients if we cannot demonstrate, or if IFX-1 is perceived as not having, strong duration of effect, including compared to existing treatments for HS. The duration of effect of IFX-1 has only been studied for durations less than the expected duration of any pivotal Phase III clinical trials that we may

undertake in the future. It is possible that the effects seen in shorter term clinical trials will not be replicated at later time points or in larger clinical trials. Further, even if we are able to demonstrate our product candidates’ safety and efficacy to the FDA and other regulators, safety concerns in the medical community may hinder market acceptance.  Further, the potential patient populations for our initial targeted indications, including HS and AAV, are relatively small. This could affect the rate of adoption and as a result, market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, could be much slower than anticipated.

Efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources, including management time and financial resources, and may not be successful. If any of our product candidates is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of market acceptance, we may not generate significant revenues and we may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

The failure of any of our product candidates, if approved, to find market acceptance would harm our business and could require us to seek additional financing.

Even if we, or any future collaborators, are able to commercialize any product candidate that we, or they, develop, the product may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations or third-party payor coverage and reimbursement policies, any of which could harm our business.

Patients who are provided medical treatment for their conditions generally rely on third party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their treatment. Therefore, our ability, and the ability of any future collaborators, to commercialize any of our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from third party payors including government health administration authorities and public or private health coverage insurers. Third-party payors decide which medications they will cover and establish reimbursement levels. We cannot be certain that reimbursement will be available for IFX-1 or any of our product candidates. Also, we cannot be certain that less fulsome reimbursement policies will not reduce the demand for, or the price we can charge for, our products, if approved. The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly-approved products for orphan diseases is particularly uncertain and failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for IFX-1 or any other product candidates could limit our ability to generate revenue.

If coverage and reimbursement are not available, or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we, or any future collaborators, may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us, or any future collaborators, to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our or their investments. In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors and coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require 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.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved drugs. Marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we, or any future collaborators, might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which may negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability or the ability of any future collaborators to recoup our or their investment in one or more product candidates, even if our product candidates obtain marketing approval.

The healthcare industry is acutely focused on cost containment, both in the United States and elsewhere. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications, which could affect our ability or that of any future collaborators to sell our product candidates profitably. These payors may not view our products, if any, as cost-effective, and coverage and reimbursement may not be available to our customers, or those of any future collaborators, or may not be sufficient to allow our products, if any, to be marketed on a competitive basis. Cost-control initiatives could cause us, or any future collaborators, to decrease the price we, or they, might establish for products, which could result in lower than anticipated product revenues. If the prices for our products, if any, decrease or if governmental and other third-party payors do not provide coverage or adequate reimbursement, our prospects for revenue and profitability will suffer.

There may also be delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the indications for which the drug is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for reimbursement does not imply that any drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Reimbursement rates may vary, by way of example, according to the use of the product and the clinical setting in which it is used. Reimbursement rates may also be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs or may be incorporated into existing payments for other services.

In addition, increasingly, third-party payors are requiring higher levels of evidence of the benefits and clinical outcomes of new technologies and are challenging the prices charged. We cannot be sure that coverage will be available for any product candidate that we, or any future collaborator, commercialize and, if available, that the reimbursement rates will be adequate. Further, the net reimbursement for drug products may be subject to additional reductions if there are changes to laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. An inability to promptly obtain coverage and adequate payment rates from both government-funded and private payors for any of our product candidates for which we, or any future collaborator, obtain marketing approval could significantly harm our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition.

If any product liability lawsuits are successfully brought against us or any of our collaboration partners, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.

We face an inherent risk of product liability lawsuits related to the testing of our product candidates in seriously ill patients and will face an even greater risk if our product candidates are approved by regulatory authorities and introduced commercially. Product liability claims may be brought against us or our partners by participants enrolled in our clinical trials, patients, health care providers or others using, administering or selling any of our future approved products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against any such claims, we may incur substantial liabilities.

If any of our product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we will be highly dependent upon consumer perceptions of us and the safety and quality of our products. We could be adversely affected if we are subject to negative publicity associated with illness or other adverse effects resulting from patients’ use or misuse of our products or any similar products distributed by other companies.

Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage, this insurance may not fully cover potential liabilities that we may incur. The cost of any product liability litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. We will need to increase our insurance coverage if we commercialize any product that receives marketing approval. In addition, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive. If we are unable to maintain sufficient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims, it could prevent or inhibit the development and commercial production and sale of our product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We currently have no marketing, sales or distribution infrastructure with respect to our product candidates. If we are unable to develop our sales, marketing and distribution capability on our own or through collaborations with marketing partners, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates.

We currently have no marketing, sales or distribution capabilities and have limited sales or marketing experience within our organization. If any of our product candidates is approved, we intend either to establish a sales and marketing organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize any such candidate, or to outsource this function to a third party. Either of these options would be expensive and time consuming. Some or all of these costs may be incurred in advance of any approval of our product candidates, including our lead candidate IFX-1. In addition, we may not be able to hire a sales force in the United States, Europe or other target market that is sufficient in size or has adequate expertise in the medical markets that we intend to target. These risks may be particularly pronounced due to our focus on our initial indications of HS and AAV for IFX-1, each of which is a rare disease with relatively small patient populations. Any failure or delay in the development of our or third parties’ internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of IFX-1 and other future product candidates.

With respect to our existing and future product candidates, we may choose to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment or to serve as an alternative to our own sales force and distribution systems. Our product revenue may be lower than if it directly marketed or sold any approved products. In addition, any revenue we receive will depend in whole or in part upon the efforts of these third parties, which may not be successful and are generally not within our control. If we are unable to enter into these arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any approved products. If we are not successful in commercializing any approved products, our future product revenue will suffer and we may incur significant additional losses.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

We have limited financial and managerial resources, and therefore we intend to focus on developing product candidates for specific indications that we identify as most likely to succeed, in terms of both their potential for marketing approval and commercialization. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that may prove to have greater commercial potential.

Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to the product candidate.

Clinical development 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 IFX-1 or any future product candidate we may develop.

The risk of failure for IFX-1 and any other future product candidates we may develop is high. It is impossible to predict when or if IFX-1 will prove to be effective and safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval for the treatment of HS or AAV. Additionally, before regulatory authorities grant marketing approval for IFX-1, for any future indications, or any future product candidate that we seek to develop, we will be required to conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate safety and efficacy in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is inherently uncertain as to outcome. Moreover, 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 have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their drugs.

We may experience numerous unforeseen events during or as a result of the regulatory approval process that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval from regulators or commercialize IFX-1 or any future product candidate, including:

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the institutional review boards of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the data safety monitoring board for such trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate drug revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence drug sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval.

Our product development costs will further increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring drugs to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

We plan to seek orphan drug designation for IFX-1 in HS, but we may be unable to obtain such designation or to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug status, including market exclusivity, even if that designation is granted.

We plan to seek orphan drug designation from the FDA for IFX-1 in HS and potentially in other orphan indications in which there is a medically plausible basis for its use, and we may seek orphan drug designation for other preclinical product candidates in our pipeline or that we may develop. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages, and user-fee waivers. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the FDA review and approval process. Although we intend to seek orphan drug designation for IFX-1 in HS from the FDA, we may never receive such designation. Moreover, obtaining orphan drug designation for IFX-1 in HS does not mean we will be able to obtain such designation for another indication. We do not plan to seek orphan drug designation for IFX-1 in HS in the European Union because we do not expect that the population criterion would be satisfied.

If a product that has orphan drug designation from the FDA subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a BLA, to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances such as if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Similarly, the FDA can subsequently approve a drug with the same active moiety for the same condition during the exclusivity period if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior, meaning the later drug is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Even if we were to obtain orphan drug designation for IFX-1 from the FDA, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products, and thus approval of IFX-1 could be blocked for seven years if another company obtains approval and orphan drug exclusivity for the same drug and same condition before us. If we do obtain exclusive marketing rights in the United States, they may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan designated indication and may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of the relevant patients. Further, exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition, the same drugs can be approved for different indications and might then be used off-label in our approved indication, and different drugs for the same condition may already be approved and commercially available.

Even if we obtain FDA approval of IFX-1 or any of our other product candidates, we may never obtain approval or commercialize our products outside of the United States.

In order to market any approved products outside of the United States, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding clinical trial design, safety and efficacy. If approved by the relevant governmental authorities, we expect to market IFX-1 for the treatment of HS in Europe and jurisdictions outside the United States, in part due to the relatively larger patient population that exists in Europe as compared to that in the United States. 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. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approvals could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and may require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials which would be costly and time consuming and could delay or prevent introduction of IFX-1 or any of our other product candidates in those countries. In addition, we expect to be subject to a variety of risks related to operating in foreign countries if we obtain the necessary approvals, including:

If we or our partners fail to comply with regulatory requirements or to obtain and maintain required approvals, our target market will be reduced, including if we are unable to market IFX-1 for the treatment of HS in Europe, and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed.

We are subject to extensive government regulation and the failure to comply with these regulations may have a material adverse effect on our operations and business.

Both before and after approval of any product, we and our suppliers, contract manufacturers and clinical investigators are subject to extensive regulation by governmental authorities in the United States and other countries, covering, among other things, testing, manufacturing, quality control, clinical trials, post-marketing studies, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, import and export, governmental pricing, price reporting and rebate requirements. Failure to comply with applicable requirements could result in one or more of the following actions: warning letters; unanticipated expenditures; delays in approval or refusal to approve a product candidate; product recall or seizure; interruption of manufacturing or clinical trials; operating or marketing restrictions; injunctions; criminal prosecution and civil or criminal penalties including fines and other monetary penalties; adverse publicity; and disruptions to our business. Further, government investigations into potential violations of these laws would require us to expend considerable resources and face adverse publicity and the potential disruption of our business even if we are ultimately found not to have committed a violation.

Obtaining FDA, EMA or other regulatory agency approval of our product candidates requires substantial time, effort and financial resources and may be subject to both expected and unforeseen delays, and there can be no assurance that any approval will be granted on any of our product candidates on a timely basis, if at all. The FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies may decide that our data are insufficient for approval of our product candidates and require additional preclinical, clinical or other studies or additional work related to chemistry, manufacturing and controls. If we are required to conduct additional trials or to conduct other testing of our product candidates beyond that which we currently contemplate for regulatory approval, if we are unable to complete successfully our clinical trials or other testing, or if the results of these and other trials or tests fail to demonstrate efficacy or raise safety concerns, we may face substantial additional expenses, be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates or may never obtain marketing approval.

We are also required to comply with extensive governmental regulatory requirements after a product has received marketing authorization. Governing regulatory authorities may require post-marketing studies that may negatively impact the commercial viability of a product. Once on the market, a product may become associated with previously undetected adverse effects and/or may develop manufacturing difficulties. As a result of any of these or other problems, a product’s regulatory approval could be withdrawn, which could harm our business and operating results.

Our current and future relationships with third-party payors, health care professionals and customers in the United States and elsewhere may be subject, directly or indirectly, to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, physician payment transparency, health information privacy and security and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to significant 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 any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with health care professionals, third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the federal civil False Claims Act, that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct clinical research, sell, market and distribute any drugs for which we obtain marketing approval. In addition, we may be subject to transparency laws and patient privacy regulation by the federal government and by the U.S. states and foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include the following:

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices, including our relationships with physicians and other healthcare providers, some of whom may recommend, purchase or prescribe IFX-1, if approved, 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, including, without limitation, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government

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 and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from participation in government healthcare programs, which could also materially affect our business.

Recently enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize IFX-1 and affect the prices we may obtain.

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 prevent or delay marketing approval of IFX-1, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

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 pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Affordable Care Act, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our potential product candidates are the following:

Since its enactment there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. As a result, there have been delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. In January 2017, the federal government began directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the Affordable Care Act to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the Affordable Care Act that would impose a fiscal or regulatory burden on states, individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Further, in May 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation known as the American Health Care Act, or the AHCA, which, if enacted, would amend or repeal significant portions of the Affordable Care Act. Prospects for legislative action on this bill are uncertain. Congress could consider other legislation to repeal or replace certain elements of the Affordable Care Act.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year effective April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will stay in effect through 2025, unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further 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. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our drugs, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, 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 receive for any approved drug. 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.

Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for drugs. In addition, there have been several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of IFX-1, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent drug labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements.

Even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain marketing approvals for our product candidates, the terms of approvals and ongoing regulation of our products may limit how we manufacture and market our products, which could impair our ability to generate revenue.

Once marketing approval has been granted, an approved product and its manufacturer and marketer are subject to ongoing review and extensive regulation. We, and any future collaborators, must therefore comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for any of our product candidates for which we or they obtain marketing approval. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved labeling. Thus, we and any future collaborators will not be able to promote any products we develop for indications or uses for which they are not approved.

In addition, manufacturers of approved products and those manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMPs, which include requirements relating to quality control and quality assurance as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation and reporting requirements. We, our contract manufacturers, any future collaborators and their contract manufacturers could be subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA to monitor and ensure compliance with cGMPs.

Accordingly, assuming we, or any future collaborators, receive marketing approval for one or more of our product candidates, we, and any future collaborators, and our and their contract manufacturers will continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production, product surveillance and quality control.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenues, if any.

Outside of the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations. In many countries, such as countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to varying price control mechanisms, often as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products, but monitor and control company profits. 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, or any future collaborators, may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be harmed. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in the Europe Union has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. As a result, given the relatively smaller target markets for HS and AAV, our initial indications for IFX-1, in the Europe Union and elsewhere outside the United States, any reduced reimbursement for such product candidates may be insufficient for us to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits and would adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Any of our product candidates for which we, or any future collaborators, obtain marketing approval in the future could be subject to post-marketing restrictions or withdrawal from the market and we, or any future collaborators, may be subject to substantial penalties if we, or they, fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we, or they, experience unanticipated problems with our products following approval.

Any of our product candidates for which we, or any future collaborators, obtain marketing approval, as well as the manufacturing processes, post-approval studies and measures, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for such product, among other things, will be subject to ongoing requirements of and review by the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration and listing requirements, requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping. Even if marketing approval of a product candidate is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, including the requirement to implement a REMS.

The FDA, the EMA and other regulatory authorities may also impose requirements for costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of a product. The FDA and other agencies, including the Department of Justice, closely regulate and monitor the post-approval marketing and promotion of products to ensure that they are manufactured, marketed and distributed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label use and if we, or any future collaborators, do not market any of our product candidates for which we, or they, receive marketing approval for only their approved indications, we, or they, may be subject to warnings or enforcement action for off-label marketing. Violation of the FDCA and other statutes relating to the promotion and advertising of prescription drugs may lead to investigations or allegations of violations of federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws and state consumer protection laws, including the False Claims Act.

In addition, later discovery of previously unknown adverse events or other problems with our products or their manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may yield various results, including:

Risks related to our dependence on third parties

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. If they do not perform satisfactorily, our business could be harmed.

We do not independently conduct clinical trials of any of our product candidates. We rely on third parties, such as contract research organizations, or CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and

clinical investigators, to conduct these clinical trials and expect to rely on these third parties to conduct clinical trials of any other product candidate that we develop. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us under certain circumstances. We may not be able to enter into alternative arrangements or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new contract research organization begins work. As a result, delays would likely occur, which could negatively impact our ability to meet our expected clinical development timelines and harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

Further, although our reliance on these third parties for clinical development activities limits our control over these activities, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards. For example, notwithstanding the obligations of a CRO for a trial of one of our product candidates, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA, the EMA and potentially other regulatory agencies of different countries require us to comply with requirements, commonly referred to as Good Clinical Practices, or GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. The FDA and regulatory agencies inside the European Union and other regulatory agencies enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators, clinical trial sites and IRBs. If we or our third-party contractors fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or other regulatory agencies may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our product candidates, which would delay the marketing approval process. We cannot be certain that, upon inspection, the FDA or other regulatory agencies will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCPs. We are also required to register clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, such as ClinicalTrials.gov in the United States, within certain timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

Furthermore, the third parties conducting clinical trials on our behalf are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such contractors, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time, skill and resources to our ongoing development programs. These contractors may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other drug development activities, which could impede their ability to devote appropriate time to our clinical programs. If these third parties, including clinical investigators, do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates. If that occurs, we will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates. In such an event, our financial results and the commercial prospects for any product candidates that we seek to develop could be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed, impaired or foreclosed.

We are subject to manufacturing risks, and use of third parties to manufacture our product candidates may increase the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates, products, or necessary quantities at an acceptable cost.

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities for the production of clinical or commercial quantities of our product candidates, and we lack the resources and the capabilities to do so. As a result, we currently rely on third parties for supply of IFX-1. Our current strategy is to outsource all manufacturing of our product candidates and products to third parties while conducting certain quality control tests within our in-house manufacturing processes.

The process of manufacturing our products is complex, highly regulated and subject to several risks. The process of manufacturing biologics, such as IFX-1, is extremely susceptible to product loss due to contamination, equipment failure or improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error, inconsistency in yields, variability in product characteristics and difficulties in scaling the production process. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities in which our product candidates are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination.  Further, our product candidates that have been produced and are stored for later use may degrade, become contaminated or suffer other quality defects, which may cause the affected product candidates to no longer be suitable for their intended use in clinical trials or other development activities. If the defective product candidates cannot be replaced in a timely fashion, we may incur significant delays in our development programs that could adversely affect the value of such product candidates.

We currently engage third-party manufacturers to provide the final drug product formulation of IFX-1 that is being used in our clinical trials. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture IFX-1, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement. We recently engaged a new manufacturer for clinical supply of IFX-1. There is no assurance that we will be able to timely secure needed alternative supply arrangements on satisfactory terms, or at all. Our failure to secure these arrangements as needed could have a material adverse effect on our ability to complete the development of our product candidates or, to commercialize them, if approved. There may be difficulties in scaling up to commercial quantities or optimization of processes and formulation of IFX-1 and the costs of manufacturing could be prohibitive.

Even if we are able to establish and maintain arrangements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks beyond our control, including:

If we do not maintain our key manufacturing relationships, we may fail to find replacement manufacturers or develop our own manufacturing capabilities, which could delay or impair our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our products. If we do find replacement manufacturers, we may not be able to enter into agreements with them on terms and conditions favorable to us and there could be a substantial delay before new facilities could be qualified and registered with the FDA and other foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, a change of the manufacturing facility contains inherent risks and is generally viewed as major change in the manufacturing process such that comparability studies have to be conducted to assure comparability between the before established manufacturing process and the newly established manufacturing process potentially causing delays in the drug product supply or, in case of a non-comparability of the manufactured drug product, warrant further additional pre-clinical and or clinical studies with such non-comparable drug product which may also be imposed by any regulatory agency upon review of the comparability data.

We participate in the manufacturing process with crucial quality control testing within our own laboratories, and we hold the manufacturer license for, and therefore oversee, the overall manufacturing process, and we are responsible for ensuring that this part of our business also operates according to GMP standards. Additionally, we currently hold an importing license. We therefore employ key personnel within the manufacturing process such as a head of quality assurance, a head of manufacturing, and a qualified person.

Thus, our laboratories and our quality control system and related documentation and personnel, are also subject to frequent governmental inspections to assure adherence to GMP guidelines and to maintain our manufacturing and importing license. Related to these activities, there are risks which could negatively impact our ability to meet our expected clinical development timelines and harm our business, financial condition and prospects, including but not being limited to the following risks:

Our third-party manufacturers or we may not be able to comply with the cGMP regulatory requirements applicable to IFX-1 and biologics, including applicable provisions of the FDA’s drug cGMP regulations, device cGMP requirements embodied in the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, seizures or voluntary recalls of product candidates, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly affect supplies of our product candidates. In addition, our third-party manufacturers and suppliers and we are subject to FDA and other local regulatory authority inspection from time to time. Failure by our third-party manufacturers and suppliers or us to pass such inspections and otherwise satisfactorily complete the FDA approval regimen with respect to our product candidate may result in regulatory actions such as the issuance of FDA Form 483 notices of observations, warning letters or injunctions or the loss of operating licenses. In addition, we and our third-party manufacturers and suppliers are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of waste products, and failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for such third parties. Based on the severity of the regulatory action, our clinical or commercial supply of drug and packaging and other services could be interrupted or limited, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, including our clinical research activities and our ability to develop our product candidates and market our products following approval, if any.

If any third-party manufacturer of our product candidates is unable to increase the scale of its production of our product candidates, and/or increase the product yield of its manufacturing, then our costs to manufacture the product may increase and commercialization may be delayed.

In order to produce sufficient quantities to meet the demand for clinical trials and, if approved, subsequent commercialization of IFX-1 or any of our other product candidates in our pipeline or that we may develop, our third party manufacturers will be required to increase their production and optimize their manufacturing processes while maintaining the quality of the product. The transition to larger scale production could prove difficult or costly. Further, any claims in our manufacturing process as a result of scaling up or optimization of the manufacturing, supply and fill process may result in the need to obtain regulatory approvals. If our third party manufacturers are not able to optimize manufacturing process to increase the product yield for our product candidates, or are unable to produce increased amounts of our product candidates while maintaining the quality of the product, then we may not be able to meet the demands of clinical trials or market demands, which could decrease our ability to generate profits. Difficulty in achieving commercial scale-up production or production optimization or the need for additional regulatory approvals as a result could have a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

We expect to seek to establish collaborations and, if we are not able to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans.

We expect to seek one or more collaborators for the development and commercialization of one or more of our product candidates. Likely collaborators may include large and mid-size pharmaceutical companies, regional and national pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for product candidates from foreign regulatory authorities, we may enter into strategic relationships with international biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies for the commercialization of such product candidates outside of the United States.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive 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 potential differentiation of our product candidate from competing product candidates, design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities and the regulatory pathway for any such approval, the potential market for the product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering the product to patients and the potential of competing products. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available for collaboration and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain 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.

Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. Further, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have may resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. Any collaboration agreements that we enter into in the future may contain restrictions on our ability to enter into potential collaborations or to otherwise develop specified product candidates. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense.

If we enter into collaborations with third parties for the development and commercialization of our product candidates, our prospects with respect to those product candidates will depend in significant part on the success of those collaborations.

We expect to maintain existing collaborations and enter into additional collaborations for the development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates and in certain geographies. If we entered into additional collaborations, we will have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators will dedicate to the development or commercialization of our product candidates. Our ability to generate revenues from these arrangements will depend on any future collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. In addition, any future collaborators may have the right to abandon research or development projects and terminate applicable agreements, including funding obligations, prior to or upon the expiration of the agreed upon terms.

Collaborations involving our product candidates pose a number of risks, including the following:

Risks related to our intellectual property

Our success depends on our ability to protect our intellectual property and proprietary anti-C5a technology.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent, trade secret and other intellectual property protection in the United States and other countries with respect to IFX-1 and other proprietary product candidates. If we do not adequately protect our intellectual property rights, competitors may be able to erode, negate or preempt any competitive advantage we may have, which could harm our business and ability to achieve profitability. To protect our proprietary position, we file patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel product candidates that are important to our business. The patent application and approval process is expensive and time-consuming and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner.

If the scope of the patent protection we obtain is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to prevent others from developing and commercializing technology and products similar or identical to ours. The degree of patent protection we require to successfully compete in the marketplace may be unavailable or severely limited in some cases and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, contractors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, and commercial value of our patent rights may be uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or product candidates or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and product candidates. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. For example, there can be no assurance that our issued patents contain and pending patent applications will contain, when granted, claims of sufficient breadth to cover all antibodies alleged to be a biosimilar of our product candidates. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that our issued patents will not be challenged at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, or foreign patent offices or in court proceedings, and if any such challenge were successful, the scope of our issued patent claims could be limited so as to not cover antibodies alleged to be a biosimilar of our product candidates. In addition, changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. For example, patent laws in various jurisdictions, including significant commercial markets such as Europe, restrict the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than United States law does.

Some of our future patents and patent applications may be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we would need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Furthermore, we, or any future partners, collaborators, or licensees, 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. Therefore, we may miss potential opportunities to strengthen our patent position. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Our patents covering our proprietary anti-C5a technology may be subject to challenge, narrowing, circumvention and invalidation by third parties.

Any of our patents may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented, or invalidated by third parties. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity, or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third party preissuance submission of prior art to the USPTO or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant and inter partes review, or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and product candidates. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

In addition, our competitors and other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner. For example, a third party may develop a competitive therapy that provides benefits similar to IFX-1 or other product candidates but that uses a technology that falls outside the scope of our patent protection. Our competitors may also seek approval to market generic versions of any approved products and in connection with seeking such approval may claim that our patents are invalid, unenforceable or not infringed. In these circumstances, we may need to defend or assert our patents, or both, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. In any of these types of proceedings, a court or other agency with jurisdiction may find our patents invalid or unenforceable, or that our competitors are competing in a non-infringing manner. Thus, even if we have valid and enforceable patents, these patents still may not provide protection against competing products or processes sufficient to achieve our business objectives. If the patent protection provided by the patents and patent applications we hold or pursue with respect to our product candidates is not sufficiently broad to impede such competition, our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates could be negatively affected, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We cannot be sure that we were the first to make the anti-C5a technologies claimed in our patents or patent applications or that we were the first to file for patent protection.       

Assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, currently, the first to file a patent application is generally entitled to the patent. However, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, the first to invent was entitled to the patent. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. Similarly, we cannot be certain that parties from whom we may license or purchase patent rights were the first to make relevant claimed inventions, or were the first to file for patent protection for them. If third parties have filed patent applications on inventions claimed in our patents or applications on or before March 15, 2013, an interference proceeding in the United States can be initiated by such third parties to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. If third parties have filed such applications after March 15, 2013, a derivation proceeding in the United States can be initiated by such third parties to determine whether our invention was derived from theirs.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and there can be no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining patents for which we have applied.      

Pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our future development partners will be successful in protecting our product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

Any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

It is difficult and costly to protect our intellectual property and our proprietary anti-C5a technologies, and we may not be able to ensure their protection.

Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining patent protection and trade secret protection for the composition, use and structure of our products and product candidates, the methods used to manufacture them, the related therapeutic targets and associated methods of treatment as well as on successfully defending these patents against potential third-party challenges. Our ability to protect our products and product candidates from unauthorized making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing by third parties is dependent on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents that cover these activities.

The ultimate determination by the USPTO or by a court or other trier of fact in the United States, or corresponding foreign national patent offices or courts, on whether a claim meets all requirements of patentability cannot be assured. Although our C5a inhibitor portfolio consists of three families of patent applications that we own directed to C5a inhibitors and related methods of use, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents or patent applications, in our licensed patents or patent applications or in third-party patents.

We cannot provide assurances that any of our patent applications will be found to be patentable, including over our own prior art patents, publications or other disclosures, or will issue as patents. Furthermore, given the differences in patent laws in the United States, Europe and other foreign countries, for example, the availability of grace periods for filing patent applications and what can be considered as prior art, we cannot make any assurances as to the scope of any claims that may issue from our pending and future patent applications in the United States or in other jurisdictions. Similarly, we cannot make any assurances as to the scope of any claims that may survive a proceeding initiated by a third party challenging the patentability, validity or enforceability of our patents and patent applications in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Any such challenge, if successful, could limit patent protection for our products and product candidates and/or materially harm our business.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain because legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep our competitive advantage. For example:

In addition, to the extent that we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for one of our products or product candidates or in the event that such patent protection expires, it may no longer be cost-effective to extend our portfolio by pursuing additional development of a product or product candidate for follow-on indications. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection of our anti-C5a technologies depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental 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 governmental fees on patents and applications are required to be paid to the USPTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and applications. The USPTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process and after a patent has issued. There are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Under the terms of some of our licenses, we do not have the ability to maintain or prosecute patents in the portfolio, and must therefore rely on third parties to comply with these requirements. Failure by us or our licensors to maintain protection of our patent portfolio could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

In addition, it is possible that defects of form in the preparation or filing of our patents or patent applications may exist, or may arise in the future, for example with respect to proper priority claims, inventorship, claim scope, or requests for patent term adjustments. If we fail to establish, maintain or protect such patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated. If any of our present or future partners, collaborators, licensees, or licensors, are not fully cooperative or disagree with us as to the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of any patent rights, such patent rights could be compromised. If there are material defects in the form, preparation, prosecution, or enforcement of our patents or patent applications, such patents may be invalid and/or unenforceable, and such applications may never result in valid, enforceable patents. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our products for an adequate amount of time and if we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar non-U.S. legislation for extending the term of patents covering each of our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally twenty years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available, however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with adequate and continuing patent protection sufficient to exclude others from commercializing products similar to our product candidates.

Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar legislation in the EU. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for that product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Changes to the patent law in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Recent patent reform legislation in the United States, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, could increase those uncertainties and costs. The America Invents Act was signed into law on September 16, 2011, and many of the substantive changes became effective on March 16, 2013. The America Invents Act reforms United States patent law in part by changing the U.S. patent system from a “first to invent” system to a “first inventor to file” system, expanding the definition of prior art, and developing a post-grant review system. This legislation changed United States patent law in a way that may weaken our ability to obtain patent protection in the United States for those applications filed after March 16, 2013.

Further, the America Invents Act created new procedures to challenge the validity of issued patents in the United States, including post-grant review and inter partes review proceedings, which some third parties have been using to cause the cancellation of selected or all claims of issued patents of competitors. For a patent with an effective filing date of March 16, 2013 or later, a petition for post-grant review can be filed by a third party in a nine month window from issuance of the patent. A petition for inter partes review can be filed immediately following the issuance of a patent if the patent has an effective filing date prior to March 16, 2013. A petition for inter partes review can be filed after the nine month period for filing a post-grant review petition has expired for a patent with an effective filing date of March 16, 2013 or later. Post-grant review proceedings can be brought on any ground of invalidity, whereas inter partes review proceedings can only raise an invalidity challenge based on published prior art and patents. These adversarial actions at the USPTO review patent claims without the presumption of validity afforded to U.S. patents in lawsuits in U.S. federal courts, and use a lower burden of proof than used in litigation in U.S. federal courts. Therefore, it is generally considered easier for a competitor or third party to have a U.S. patent invalidated in a USPTO post-grant review or inter partes review proceeding than invalidated in a litigation in a U.S. federal court. If any of our patents are challenged by a third party in such a USPTO proceeding, there is no guarantee that we or our licensors or collaborators will be successful in defending the patent, which would result in a loss of the challenged patent right to us.

In addition, recent court rulings in cases such as Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., BRCA1- & BRCA2-Based Hereditary Cancer Test Patent Litigation, Promega Corp. v. Life Technologies Corp. and Abbvie Deutschland GmbH v. Janssen Biotech, Inc. have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened 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 future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. Any changes to patent law in the U.S. or other jurisdictions that impairs our ability to protect IFX-1 and other product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may not be able to enforce our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting, enforcing and defending patents on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly in developing countries; thus, even in countries where we do pursue patent protection, there can be no assurance that any patents will issue with claims that cover our products.

Moreover, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in foreign intellectual property laws. Additionally, laws of some countries outside of the United States and Europe do not afford intellectual property protection to the same extent as the laws of the United States and Europe. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries, including India, China and other developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. For example, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in certain countries outside the United States and Europe. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop and market their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, if our ability to enforce our patents to stop infringing activities is inadequate. These products may compete with our products, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Agreements through which we license patent rights may not give us sufficient rights to permit us to pursue enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents (or control of enforcement or defense) of such patent rights in all relevant jurisdictions as requirements may vary.

Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and resources from other aspects of our business. Moreover, such proceedings could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing 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. Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in major markets for our products, 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 products. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Others may claim an ownership interest in our intellectual property and proprietary anti-C5a technologies which could expose us to litigation and have a significant adverse effect on our prospects.

A third party may claim an ownership interest in one or more of our, or our licensors', patents or other proprietary or intellectual property rights. A third party could bring legal actions against us and seek monetary damages and/or enjoin clinical testing, manufacturing and marketing of the affected product or products. While we are presently unaware of any claims or assertions by third parties with respect to our patents or other intellectual property, we cannot guarantee that a third party will not assert a claim or an interest in any of such patents or intellectual property. If we become involved in any litigation, it could consume a substantial portion of our resources, and cause a significant diversion of effort by our technical and management personnel. If any of these actions are successful, in addition to any potential liability for damages, we could be required to obtain a license to continue to manufacture or market the affected product, in which case we may be required to pay substantial royalties or grant cross-licenses to our patents. We cannot, however, assure you that any such license will be available on acceptable terms, if at all. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations as a result of claims of patent infringement or violation of other intellectual property rights. Further, the outcome of intellectual property litigation is subject to uncertainties that cannot be adequately quantified in advance, including the demeanor and credibility of witnesses and the identity of any adverse party. This is especially true in intellectual property cases that may turn on the testimony of experts as to technical facts upon which experts may reasonably disagree. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If we are sued for infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating intellectual property rights of third parties, such litigation could be costly and time consuming and could prevent or delay us from developing or commercializing our product candidates.

Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates without infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. Third parties may have U.S. and non-U.S. issued patents and pending patent applications relating to compounds, methods of manufacturing compounds and/or methods of use for the treatment of the disease indications for which we are developing our product candidates that may cover our product candidates or approach to complement inhibition. If any third-party patents or patent applications are found to cover our product candidates or their methods of use or manufacture, or our approach to complement inhibition, we may not be free to manufacture or market our product candidates as planned without obtaining a license, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

There is a substantial amount of intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, and we may become party to, or threatened with, litigation or other adversarial proceedings regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates, including interference and post-grant proceedings before the USPTO. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the composition, use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may be accused of infringing. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. Accordingly, third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on intellectual property rights that exist now or arise in the future. The outcome of intellectual property litigation is subject to uncertainties that cannot be adequately quantified in advance. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have produced a significant number of patents, and it may not always be clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use or manufacture. The scope of protection afforded by a patent is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our product candidates, products or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid or unenforceable, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity is difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing these proceedings, which could significantly harm our business and operating results. In addition, we may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion.

If we are found to infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate a third party's intellectual property rights, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing product candidate or product. Alternatively, we may be required to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the infringing technology and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing the infringing product candidate or product. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license 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; alternatively or additionally it could include terms that impede or destroy our ability to compete successfully in the commercial marketplace. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys' fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that our employees or we have misappropriated their intellectual property, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property and proprietary anti-C5a technology.

Many of our current and former employees and our licensors’ current and former employees, including our senior management, were previously employed at universities or at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including some which may be competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to

claims that we or these employees have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such third party. Litigation may be necessary to defend against such claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel or sustain damages. Such intellectual property rights could be awarded to a third party, and we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to commercialize our technology or products. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

In addition, while we typically require our employees, consultants and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact develops intellectual property that we regard as our own, or such agreements may be breached or alleged to be ineffective, which may result in claims by or against us related to the ownership of such intellectual property. If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights. Even if we are successful in prosecuting or defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our senior management and scientific personnel. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate our patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In any patent infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. There is also a risk that, even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court will construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover the invention. An adverse outcome in a litigation or proceeding involving one or more of our patents could limit our ability to assert those patents against those parties or other competitors, and may curtail or preclude our ability to exclude third parties from making and selling similar or competitive products. Similarly, if we were to assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks.

Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. 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 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 adversely affect the price of our common shares. Moreover, there can be no assurance that we will have sufficient financial or other resources to file and pursue such infringement claims, which typically last for years before they are concluded. Even if we ultimately prevail in such claims, the monetary cost of such litigation and the diversion of the attention of our management and scientific personnel could outweigh any benefit we receive as a result of the proceedings. Any such litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under our existing and any future intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We may be reliant upon licenses to certain patent rights and proprietary anti-C5a technology form third parties that are important or necessary to the development of our product candidates. These and other licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology and products in the future. As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive products in territories included in all of our licenses. Our licensors may have relied on third party consultants or collaborators or funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-license. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.    

In addition, the agreements under which we license patent rights may not give us control over patent prosecution or maintenance, so that we may not be able to control which claims or arguments are presented and may not be able to secure, maintain, or successfully enforce necessary or desirable patent protection from those patent rights. We cannot be certain that patent prosecution and maintenance activities by our licensors will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents. Even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we will require the cooperation of our licensors, and cannot guarantee that we would receive it and on what terms. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in any licensed patents. If we cannot obtain patent protection, or enforce existing or future patents against third parties, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Further, the agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology to or from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we license prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects. Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

In spite of our best efforts, our license counterparties might conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, which may remove our ability to develop and commercialize the product candidates and technology covered by these license agreements. If any in-licenses are terminated, competitors would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. It is possible that we may be unable to obtain any additional licenses that we require at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our product candidates, technology, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, the value of our technology could be negatively impacted and our business would be harmed.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we also rely on trade secret protection for certain aspects of our intellectual property. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We seek to protect these trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, contract manufacturers, suppliers and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with employees and certain consultants. Any party with whom we have executed such an agreement may breach that agreement and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. 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. Further, if any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent such third party, or those to whom they communicate such technology or information, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our marks of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected.

Certain of our employees and patents are subject to German law.

A number of our personnel, including our directors, work in Germany and are subject to German employment law. Inventions which may be the subject of a patent or of protection as a utility model as well as technical improvement proposals for other technical innovations that may not be the subject of a patent or of protection as a utility model made by such employees are subject to the provisions of the German Act on Employees’ Inventions ( Gesetz über Arbeitnehmererfindungen ), which regulates the ownership of, and compensation for, inventions made by employees. We face the risk that disputes may occur between us and our current or past employees pertaining to the sufficiency of compensation paid by us, allocation of rights to inventions under this act or alleged non-adherence to the provisions of this act, any of which may be costly to resolve and take up our management’s time and efforts whether we prevail or fail in such dispute. In addition, under the German Act on Employees’ Inventions, certain employees retain rights to patents they invented or co-invented and disclosed to us prior to October 1, 2009. While we believe that all of our current and past German employee inventors have subsequently assigned to us their interest in patents they invented or co-invented, there can be no assurance that all such assignments are fully effective and we may be required under German law to compensate such employees for the use of the patents. If we are required to pay compensation or face other disputes under the German Act on Employees’ Inventions, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

If any of our current or past employees obtain or retain ownership of any inventions or related intellectual property rights that we believe we own, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights and be required to obtain and maintain licenses from such employees to such inventions or intellectual property rights, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or may be non-exclusive. If we are unable to obtain and maintain a license to any such employee’s interest in such inventions or intellectual property rights, we may need to cease the development, manufacture, and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates we may develop. In addition, any loss of exclusivity of our intellectual property rights could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products. Any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Risks related to employee matters and managing growth

We only have a limited number of employees to manage and operate our business.

As of June 30, 2017, we had 17 full-time or part-time employees. Our focus on the development of IFX-1 requires us to optimize cash utilization and to manage and operate our business with limited personnel. We cannot assure you that we will be able to hire additional employees and/or retain adequate staffing levels to develop IFX-1 or run our operations or to accomplish all of the objectives that we otherwise would seek to accomplish.

We depend heavily on our executive officers and directors, and the loss of their services would materially harm our business.

Our success depends, and will likely continue to depend, upon our ability to hire and retain the services of our current executive officers, directors, principal consultants and others. We are highly dependent on the management, development, clinical, financial and business development expertise of Professor Niels Riedemann, our Chief Executive Officer, Professor Renfeng Guo, our Chief Scientific Officer, Arnd Christ, our Chief Financial Officer and Dr. Othmar Zenker, our Chief Medical Officer. In addition, we have established relationships with universities and research institutions which have historically provided, and continue to provide, us with access to research laboratories, clinical trials, facilities and patients. Our ability to compete in the biotechnology and pharmaceuticals industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel.

Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. Any of our personnel may terminate their employment at will. If we lose one or more of our executive officers or other key employees, our ability to implement our business strategy successfully could be seriously harmed. Furthermore, replacing executive officers or other key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to develop, gain marketing approval of and commercialize products successfully.

Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these additional key employees on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions.

We rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific, strategic, regulatory and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed by other entities and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with those entities that may limit their availability to us. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain highly qualified personnel, our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates will be limited.

Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, collaborators and contract research organizations may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could cause significant liability for us and harm our reputation.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, collaborators and contract research organizations may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by those parties could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: (i) FDA regulations or similar regulations of comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities, (ii) manufacturing and clinical trial conduct standards, (iii) federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations and similar laws and regulations established and enforced by comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities, and (iv) laws that require the reporting of

financial information or data accurately. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter 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 governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws, standards 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 have a significant impact on our business and results of operations, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

We expect to expand our organization, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

We expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of clinical development and regulatory affairs, as well as to support our public company operations. To manage these growth activities, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Our management may need to devote a significant amount of its attention to managing these growth activities. Moreover, our expected growth could require us to relocate to a different geographic area of the country. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion or relocation of our operations, retain key employees, or identify, recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Our inability to manage the expansion or relocation of our operations effectively 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. Our expected growth could also require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of additional product candidates. If we are unable to effectively manage our expected growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate revenues could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy, including the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates.

Cyber-attacks or other failures in telecommunications or information technology systems could result in information theft, data corruption and significant disruption of our business operations.

We utilize information technology, or IT, systems and networks to process, transmit and store electronic information in connection with our business activities. As use of digital technologies has increased, cyber incidents, including deliberate attacks and attempts to gain unauthorized access to computer systems and networks, have increased in frequency and sophistication. These threats pose a risk to the security of our systems and networks, the confidentiality and the availability and integrity of our data. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in preventing cyber-attacks or successfully mitigating their effects. Similarly, there can be no assurance that our collaborators, CROs, third-party logistics providers, distributors and other contractors and consultants will be successful in protecting our clinical and other data that is stored on their systems. Any cyber-attack or destruction or loss of data could have a material adverse effect on our business and prospects. In addition, we may suffer reputational harm or face litigation or adverse regulatory action as a result of cyber-attacks or other data security breaches and may incur significant additional expense to implement further data protection measures.

Risks related to our common shares, this offering and our status as a public company

An active trading market for our common shares may not develop or be sustainable. If an active trading market does not develop, investors may not be able to resell their shares at or above the initial public offering price and our ability to raise capital in the future may be impaired.

Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our common shares. The initial public offering price for our common shares will be determined through negotiations with the underwriters. This price may not reflect the price at which investors in the market will be willing to buy and sell our shares following this offering. Although we

have applied to list our common shares on The Nasdaq Global Market, or NASDAQ, an active trading market for our shares may never develop or, if developed, be maintained following this offering. If an active market for our common shares does not develop or is not maintained, it may be difficult for you to sell shares you purchase in this offering without depressing the market price for the shares or at all. An inactive trading market may also impair our ability to raise capital to continue to fund operations by selling shares and may impair our ability to acquire other companies or technologies by using our shares as consideration.

If you purchase common shares in this offering, you will suffer immediate dilution in the net tangible book value of your investment.

The initial public offering price of our common shares is substantially higher than the net tangible book value per common share. Therefore, if you purchase common shares in this offering, you will pay a price per share that substantially exceeds our net tangible book value per share after this offering. Based on the assumed initial public offering price of $         per share (€          per share), which is the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, you will experience immediate dilution of $          per share (€         per share, representing the difference between our pro forma net tangible book value per share after giving effect to this offering and the assumed initial public offering price). Purchasers of common shares in this offering will have contributed approximately      % of the aggregate price paid by all purchasers of our shares and will own approximately        % of our common shares outstanding after this offering, excluding any of our common shares that they may have acquired prior to this offering. Furthermore, if the underwriters exercise their overallotment option to purchase additional common shares or our previously issued options to acquire common shares at prices below the assumed initial public offering price are exercised, you will experience further dilution. For additional information on the dilution that you will experience immediately after this offering, see the section titled “Dilution.”

The trading price of our common shares is likely to be highly volatile, which could result in substantial losses for purchasers of our common shares in this offering, and a decline in our share price and invite securities litigation against our company or our management.

Our share price is likely to be highly volatile. The stock market in general and the market for smaller pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in particular have 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 shares at or above the initial public offering price and you may lose some or all of your investment. The market price for our common shares may be influenced by many factors, including:

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company and its management following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for biopharmaceutical companies, which have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us or members of our management to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources from our business.

Future sales, or the possibility of future sales, of a substantial number of our common shares could adversely affect the price of the shares and dilute shareholders.

Future sales of a substantial number of our common shares, or the perception that such sales will occur, could cause a decline in the market price of our common shares. Following the closing of this offering and based on the midpoint of the price range stated on the front cover of this prospectus, we will have                  common shares outstanding (assuming no exercise of the underwriters’ overallotment option to purchase additional shares). See “Corporate reorganization.” This includes the common shares to be sold in this offering, which may be resold in the public market immediately without restriction, unless purchased by our affiliates. Approximately           % of the common shares outstanding after this offering are expected to be held by existing shareholders. Substantially all of these common shares will be subject to the lock-up agreements described in the “Underwriting” section of this prospectus. If, after the end of such lock-up agreements, or upon the release of any of such shares by the underwriters, these shareholders sell substantial amounts of common shares in the public market, or the market perceives that such sales may occur, the market price of our common shares and our ability to raise capital through an issue of equity securities in the future could be adversely affected.

We also plan to register all common shares that we may issue under our equity compensation plans. Once we register these shares, they can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance and once vested, subject to volume limitations applicable to affiliates and the lock-up agreements. If these additional shares are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the trading price of our common shares could decline.

We have broad discretion in the use of the net proceeds from this offering and may invest or spend the proceeds in ways with which you do not agree and in ways that may not yield a return on your investment.

Although we currently intend to use the net proceeds from this offering in the manner described in the section titled “Use of proceeds” in this prospectus, our management will have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds from this offering and could spend the proceeds in ways that do not improve our results of operations or enhance the value of our common shares. For example, we intend to use the net proceeds from this offering, together with cash and cash equivalents on hand, to pursue the approval of our product candidates for a number of indications, some of which may never reach approval. You will not have the opportunity to influence our decisions on how to use our net proceeds from this offering. The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses that could harm our business, cause the price of our common shares to decline and delay the development of our product candidates. Pending their use, we may invest the net proceeds from this offering in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value.

We are a foreign private issuer and, as a result, we are not subject to U.S. proxy rules and are subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a U.S. domestic public company.

We will report under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (i) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act, (ii) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time and (iii) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, or current reports on Form 8-K, upon the occurrence of specified significant events. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until four months after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from the Regulation Fair Disclosure, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status which would then require us to comply with the Exchange Act’s domestic reporting regime and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

We are a foreign private issuer and therefore we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. If in the future we are not a foreign private issuer as of the last day of the second fiscal quarter in any fiscal year, we would be required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure, current reporting requirements and proxy solicitation rules of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. In order to maintain our current status as a foreign private issuer, either (a) a majority of our common shares must be either directly or indirectly owned of record by non-residents of the United States or (b)(i) a majority of our directors and executive officers may not be United States citizens or residents, (ii) more than 50% of our assets cannot be located in the United States and (iii) our business must be administered principally outside the United States. If we were to lose this status, we would be required to comply with the Exchange Act reporting and other requirements applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We may also be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and stock exchange rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us if we are required to comply with the reporting requirements applicable to a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher than the costs we would incur as a foreign private issuer. As a result, we expect that a loss of foreign private issuer status would increase our legal and financial compliance costs and would make some activities highly time consuming and costly. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified directors.

As a foreign private issuer and as permitted by the listing requirements of NASDAQ, we follow certain home country governance practices rather than the corporate governance requirements of the NASDAQ.

We will be a foreign private issuer. As a result, in accordance with the listing requirements of NASDAQ we will rely on home country governance requirements and certain exemptions thereunder rather than relying on the corporate governance requirements of NASDAQ. In accordance with Dutch law and generally accepted business practices, our Articles of Association do not provide quorum requirements generally applicable to general meetings of shareholders. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(c), which requires an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock. Although we must provide shareholders with an agenda and other relevant documents for the general meeting of shareholders, Dutch law does not have a regulatory regime for the solicitation of proxies and the solicitation of proxies is not a generally accepted business practice in the Netherlands, thus our practice will vary from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(b). In addition, we have opted out of shareholder approval requirements, as included in the Nasdaq Listing Rules, for the issuance of securities in connection with certain events such as the acquisition of shares or assets of another company, the establishment of or amendments to equity-based compensation plans for employees, a change of control of us and certain private placements. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirements of Nasdaq Rule 5635, which generally requires an issuer to obtain shareholder approval for the issuance of securities in connection with such events. For an overview of our corporate governance principles, see “Description of share capital and articles of association—Corporate governance.” Accordingly, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to these NASDAQ requirements.

We are an “emerging growth company” and, as a result of the reduced disclosure and governance requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our common shares may be less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act and we intend to take advantage of some of the exemptions from reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including:

We cannot predict if investors will find our common shares less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common shares and our share price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. 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 closing of this offering, (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 shares that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30th, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

Under Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. Given that we currently report and expect to continue to report under IFRS as issued by the IASB, we will not be able to avail ourselves of this extended transition period and, as a result, we will adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required by the IASB.

We will incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.

As a public company, and particularly after we are no longer an “emerging growth company,” we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of NASDAQ and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. We expect that we will need to hire additional accounting, finance and other personnel in connection with our becoming, and our efforts to comply with the requirements of being, a public company and our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time towards maintaining compliance with these requirements. These requirements will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, we expect that the rules and regulations applicable to us as a public company may make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, which could make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors. We are currently evaluating these rules and regulations, and cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs. These rules and regulations are often subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices.

If we fail to implement effective internal controls over financial reporting, such failure could result in material misstatements in our financial statements, cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial and other public information and have a negative effect on the trading price of our common shares.

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 required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires management of public companies to develop and implement internal controls over financial reporting and evaluate the effectiveness thereof. If we fail to design and operate effective internal controls, it could result in material misstatements in our financial statements, impair our ability to raise revenue, result in the loss of investor confidence in the reliability of our financial statements and subject us to regulatory scrutiny and sanctions, which in turn could harm the market value of our common shares.

We will be required to disclose changes made in our internal controls and procedures and our management will be required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. However, for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404. We could be an “emerging growth company” for up to five years after this offering. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.

We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our share capital in the foreseeable future. Accordingly, shareholders must rely on capital appreciation, if any, for any return on their investment.

We have never declared nor paid cash dividends on our share capital. We currently plan to retain all of our future earnings, if any, to finance the operation, development and growth of our business. In addition, the terms of any future debt or credit agreements and any restrictions imposed by applicable law may preclude us from paying dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common shares will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common shares.

Concentration of ownership of our common shares among our existing executive officers, directors and principal shareholders may prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions.

Upon the closing of this offering, our executive officers, directors and current beneficial owners of 5% or more of our common shares and their respective affiliates, will, in the aggregate, beneficially own approximately          % of our outstanding common shares. As a result, such holders will be able to control, and these other persons, acting together, would be able to significantly influence all matters requiring shareholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, any merger, consolidation, sale of all or substantially all of our assets, or other significant corporate transactions.

Some of these persons or entities may have interests different than yours. For example, because many of these shareholders purchased their shares at prices substantially below the price at which shares are being sold in this offering and have held their shares for a longer period, they may be more interested in selling our company to an acquirer than other investors, or they may want us to pursue strategies that deviate from the interests of other shareholders.

See “Principal shareholders” elsewhere in this prospectus for more information regarding the ownership of our outstanding common shares by our executive officers, directors and principal shareholders and their affiliates.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our share price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common shares will likely depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not have any control over these analysts. We do not currently have research coverage, and there can be no assurance that analysts will cover us, or provide favorable coverage. Securities or industry analysts may elect not to provide research coverage of our common shares after this offering, and such lack of research coverage may negatively impact the market price of our common shares. In the event we do have analyst coverage, if one or more analysts downgrade our common shares, change their opinion of our common shares or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our share price would likely decline. In addition, if one or more analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.

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

Our ability to utilize our net operating losses, or NOLs, is currently limited, and may be limited further, under Section 8c of the Körperschaftsteuergesetz (German Corporation Income Tax Act or KStG) and Section 10a of the Gewerbesteuergesetz (German Trade Tax Act or GewStG). These limitations apply if a qualified ownership change, as defined by Section 8c KStG, occurs and no exemption is applicable. Generally, a qualified ownership change occurs if more than 25% of the share capital or the voting rights are directly or indirectly transferred to a shareholder or a group of shareholders within a period of five years. A qualified ownership change may also occur in case of a transaction comparable to a transfer of shares or voting rights or in case of an increase in capital leading to a respective change in the shareholding. In the case of such a qualified ownership change tax loss carry forwards, consisting of the NOLs in the same percentage as the ownership change, cannot be utilized. If the percentage of the aforementioned ownership change/change in voting rights exceeds 50%, tax loss carry forwards expire in full. To the extent that the tax loss carry forwards exceed hidden reserves ( stille Reserven ) taxable in Germany, they may be further utilized despite a qualified ownership change. In case of a qualified ownership change within a group, tax loss carry forwards will be preserved if certain conditions are satisfied.

Please note that according to a decision of the Federal Constitutional Court dated 29 March 2017 – 2 BvL 6/11, the present Section 8c para. 1 sentence 1 KStG is not in line with the German constitution. Thus, Section 8c para. 1 sentence 1 KStG needs to be amended. At the moment it is unclear when the German legislature will present a draft bill reflecting the required changes to the present Section 8c para. 1 sentence 1 KStG.

As of December 31, 2016, we had NOL carry forwards for German tax purposes of € 19.2 million available. Future changes in share ownership may also trigger an ownership change and, consequently, a Section 8c KStG, or a Section 10a GewStG limitation. Any limitation may result in the expiration of a portion or the complete tax operating loss carry forwards before they can be utilized. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carry forwards to reduce German income tax may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future cash tax liability to us.

We may become taxable in a jurisdiction other than Germany and this may increase the aggregate tax burden on us.

Since incorporation we intend to have, on a continuous basis, our place of effective management in Germany. We will therefore be a tax resident of Germany under German national tax law. By reason of our incorporation under Dutch law, we are also deemed tax resident in the Netherlands under Dutch tax law. However, based on our current management structure and current tax laws of the United States, Germany and the Netherlands, as well as applicable income tax treaties, and current interpretations thereof, we should be tax resident solely in Germany for the purposes of the convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands for the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes on income of 2012. However, we may become subject to limited income tax liability in other countries with regard to the income generated in the respective other country, for example, due to the existence of a permanent establishment or a permanent representative.

The applicable tax laws or interpretations thereof may change. Furthermore, whether we have our place of effective management in Germany and are as such tax resident in Germany is largely a question of fact and degree based on all the circumstances, rather than a question of law, which facts and degree may also change. Changes to applicable laws or interpretations thereof and changes to applicable facts and circumstances (for example, a change of board members or the place where board meetings take place), may result in us becoming a tax resident of a jurisdiction other than Germany. As a consequence, our overall effective income tax rate and income tax expense could materially increase, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects, which could cause our share price and trading volume to decline. However, if there is a double tax treaty between Germany and the respective other country the double taxation of income may be avoided. Thus, the detrimental tax effects should be mitigated by the application of the respective double tax treaty.

Although we do not expect to be a “passive foreign investment company,” or a PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes in 2017, if we were a PFIC U.S. shareholders may be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), we will be a PFIC for any taxable year in which, after the application of certain look-through rules with respect to subsidiaries, either (i) 75% or more of our gross income consists of passive income or (ii) 50% or more of the average quarterly value of our assets consists of assets that produce, or are held for the production of, passive income. Passive income includes, among other things, dividends, interest, certain non-active rents and royalties, and capital gains. Based on our current operations, income, assets and certain estimates and projections, including as to the relative values of our assets and the treatment of our grants received as gross income that is not passive income, we do not expect to be a PFIC for our 2017 taxable year. However, there can be no assurance that the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) will agree with our conclusion. In addition, whether we will be a PFIC in 2017 or any future years is uncertain because, among other things, (i) we currently own, and will own after the closing of this offering, a substantial amount of passive assets, including cash, (ii) the valuation of our assets that generate non-passive income for PFIC purposes, including our intangible assets, is uncertain and may vary substantially over time, (iii) the treatment of grants as income for U.S. federal income tax purposes is unclear, and (iv) the composition of our income may vary substantially over time. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will not be a PFIC for any taxable year.

If we are a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. investor holds common shares, we would continue to be treated as a PFIC with respect to that U.S. investor for all succeeding years during which the U.S. investor holds common shares, even if we ceased to meet the threshold requirements for PFIC status, unless certain exceptions apply. Such a U.S. investor may be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences, including (i) the treatment of all or a portion of any gain on disposition as ordinary income, (ii) the application of a deferred interest charge on such gain and the receipt of certain dividends and (iii) compliance with certain reporting requirements. We do not intend to provide the information that would enable investors to make a qualified electing fund election (a “QEF Election”) that could mitigate the adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences should we be classified as a PFIC.

For further discussion, see “Taxation — Material U.S. federal income tax considerations for U.S. holders of common shares.”

If we pay dividends, we may need to withhold tax on such dividends payable to holders of our shares in both Germany and the Netherlands.

As an entity incorporated under Dutch law, but with its place of effective management in Germany (and not in the Netherlands), our dividends are generally subject to German dividend withholding tax and not Dutch withholding tax. Dutch dividend withholding tax will be required to be withheld from dividends if and when paid to Dutch resident holders of our shares (and non-Dutch resident holders of our shares that have a permanent establishment in the Netherlands to which their shareholding is attributable). We will approach Dutch Revenue to apply for a tax ruling confirming that no withholding of any Dutch dividend tax is applicable at all (as the dividend withholding tax can generally be credited against a Dutch resident shareholder’s income tax anyway). Should we not obtain the tax ruling, we will be required to identify our shareholders in order to assess whether there are Dutch residents (or non-Dutch residents with a permanent establishment to which the shares are attributable) in respect of which Dutch dividend tax has to be withheld. Such identification may not always be possible in practice. If the identity of our shareholders cannot be assessed upon a payment of dividend, withholding of both German and Dutch dividend tax from such dividend may occur.

Upon the closing of this offering, we will be a Dutch public company with limited liability. The rights of our shareholders may be different from the rights of shareholders in companies governed by the laws of U.S. jurisdictions and may not protect investors in a similar fashion afforded by incorporation in a U.S. jurisdiction.

Upon the closing of this offering, we will be a public company with limited liability ( naamloze vennootschap ) organized under the laws of the Netherlands. Our corporate affairs are governed by our Articles of Association and by the laws governing companies incorporated in the Netherlands. A further summary of applicable Dutch company law is contained in this prospectus under “Description of share capital and articles of association.” However, there can be no assurance that Dutch law will not change in the future or that it will serve to protect investors in a similar fashion afforded under corporate law principles in the United States, which could adversely affect the rights of investors.

The rights of shareholders and the responsibilities of directors may be different from the rights and obligations of shareholders and board members in companies governed by the laws of U.S. jurisdictions. In the performance of its duties, our executive officers and board of directors are required by Dutch law to consider the interests of our company, its shareholders, its employees and other stakeholders, in all cases with due observation of the principles of reasonableness and fairness. It is possible that some of these parties will have interests that are different from, or in addition to, your interests as a shareholder. See “Description of share capital and articles of association—comparison of Dutch corporate law and our articles of association and U.S. corporate law—corporate governance.”

For more information, we have provided summaries of relevant Dutch corporation law and of our Articles of Association under “Description of share capital and articles of association.”

Provisions of our Articles of Association or Dutch corporate law might deter acquisition bids for us that might be considered favorable and prevent, delay or frustrate any attempt to replace or remove the members of our board of directors.

Under Dutch law, various protective measures are possible and permissible within the boundaries set by Dutch law and Dutch case law. Our governance arrangements include several provisions that may have the effect of making a takeover of our company more difficult or less attractive. In this respect, our general meeting of shareholders is expected to grant, prior to the closing of this offering, the right to an independent foundation under Dutch law, or protective foundation, to acquire preferred shares pursuant to a call option agreement, or the call option agreement, to be entered into between us and such foundation prior to the closing of this offering. This call option under the call option agreement shall be continuous in nature and can be exercised repeatedly on multiple occasions.

If the protective foundation exercises the call option pursuant to the call option agreement, an amount of preferred shares up to 100% of our issued capital held by others than the protective foundation, minus one share, will be issued to the protective foundation. These preferred shares will be issued to the protective foundation under the obligation to pay up to 25% of their nominal value upon issuance. In order for the protective foundation to finance the issue price in relation to the preferred shares, the protective foundation is expected to enter into a finance arrangement with a bank. As an alternative to securing financing with a bank, subject to applicable restrictions under Dutch law, the call option agreement provides that the protective foundation may request us to provide, or cause our subsidiaries to provide, sufficient funding to the protective foundation to enable it to satisfy the payment obligation (or part thereof) in cash and/or to charge an amount equal to the payment obligation (or part thereof) against our profits and/or reserves in satisfaction of such payment obligation.

The protective foundation’s articles of association provide that it will promote and protect the interests of the company, the business connected with the company and the company's stakeholders from time to time, and repressing possible influences which could threaten the strategy, continuity, independence and/or identity of the company or the business connected with it, to such an extent that this could be considered to be damaging to the aforementioned interests. These influences may include a third party acquiring a significant percentage of our common shares, the announcement of an unsolicited public offer for our common shares, shareholder activism, other concentration of control over our common shares or any other form of undue pressure on us to alter our strategic policies. The protective foundation shall be structured to operate independently of us.

If the protective foundation were to exercise its call option, the preferred shares to be issued pursuant thereto would be issued against the obligation to pay up to 25% of their nominal value. The voting rights of our shares are based on nominal value and, as we expect our common shares to trade substantially in excess of nominal value, preferred shares issued at 25% of their nominal value can carry significant voting power for a substantially reduced price compared to the price of our common shares and thus can be used as a defensive measure. These preferred shares will have both a liquidation and dividend preference over our common shares and will accrue cash dividends at a pre-determined rate. The protective foundation would be expected to require us to cancel its preferred shares once the perceived threat to the company and its stakeholders has been removed or sufficiently mitigated or neutralized. However, subject to the same limitations described above, the protective foundation would continue to have the right to exercise the call option in the future in response to a new threat to the interests of us, our business and our stakeholders from time to time.

In addition, certain provisions of our Articles of Association may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us or effect a change in our board of directors. These provisions include: a provision that our directors are appointed on the basis of a binding nomination prepared by our board of directors which can only be overruled by a two-thirds majority of votes cast representing more than 50% of our issued share capital; a provision that our directors may only be removed by the general meeting of shareholders by a two-thirds majority of votes cast representing more than 50% of our issued share capital (unless the removal is proposed by the board in which case a simple majority of the votes can be sufficient); and a requirement that certain matters, including an amendment of our Articles of Association, may only be brought to our shareholders for a vote upon a proposal by our board of directors.

We are not obligated to and do not comply with all the best practice provisions of the Dutch Corporate Governance Code. This may affect your rights as a shareholder.

Upon the closing of this offering, we will be a Dutch public company with limited liability ( naamloze vennootschap ) and we will be subject to the Dutch Corporate Governance Code, or DCGC. The DCGC contains both principles and best practice provisions that regulate relations between the board of directors and the shareholders (such as the general meeting of shareholders). The DCGC is based on a “comply or explain” principle. Accordingly, companies are required to disclose in their annual reports, filed in the Netherlands, whether they comply with the provisions of the DCGC. If they do not comply with those provisions (for example, because of a conflicting NASDAQ requirement), the company is required to give the reasons for such non-compliance.

The DCGC applies to all Dutch companies listed on a government-recognized stock exchange, whether in the Netherlands or elsewhere, including NASDAQ. We do not comply with all the best practice provisions of the DCGC. For a complete list of these DCGC best practices that we do not comply with, see “Description of share capital and articles of association.” This may affect your rights as a shareholder and you may not have the same level of protection as a shareholder in a Dutch company that fully complies with the DCGC.

Claims of U.S. civil liabilities may not be enforceable against us.

We are incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands, and our headquarters is located in Germany. Substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. The majority of our directors and executive officers reside outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce against them or us in U.S. courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States.

There is currently no treaty between the United States and the Netherlands for the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. Therefore, a final judgment for the payment of money rendered by any federal or state court in the United States based on civil liability, whether or not predicated solely upon the U.S. federal securities laws, would not be enforceable in the Netherlands unless the underlying claim is relitigated before a Dutch court of competent jurisdiction. Under current practice, however, a Dutch court will generally, subject to compliance with certain procedural requirements, grant the same judgment without a review of the merits of the underlying claim if such judgment (i) is a final judgment and has been rendered by a court which has established its jurisdiction vis-à-vis the relevant Dutch companies or Dutch company, as the case may be, on the basis of internationally accepted grounds of jurisdiction, (ii) has not been rendered in violation of principles of proper procedure ( behoorlijke rechtspleging ), (iii) is not contrary to the public policy of the Netherlands, and (iv) is not incompatible with (a) a prior judgment of a Netherlands court rendered in a dispute between the same parties, or (b) a prior judgment of a foreign court rendered in a dispute between the same parties, concerning the same subject matter and based on the same cause of action, provided that such prior judgment is capable of being recognized in the Netherlands. Dutch courts may deny the recognition and enforcement of punitive damages or other awards.

Moreover, a Dutch court may reduce the amount of damages granted by a U.S. court and recognize damages only to the extent that they are necessary to compensate actual losses or damages. Enforcement and recognition of judgments of U.S. courts in the Netherlands are solely governed by the provisions of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure. Based on the foregoing, there can be no assurance that U.S. investors will be able to enforce any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities.

The United States and Germany currently do not have a treaty providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment or declaratory judgments given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in Germany. German courts may deny the recognition and enforcement of a judgment rendered by a U.S. court if they consider the U.S. court not to be competent or the decision to be in violation of German public policy principles. For example, judgments awarding punitive damages are generally not enforceable in Germany. A German court may reduce the amount of damages granted by a U.S. court and recognize damages only to the extent that they are necessary to compensate actual losses or damages.

In addition, actions brought in a German court against us, our directors, our executive officers and the experts named herein to enforce liabilities based on U.S. federal securities laws may be subject to certain restrictions. In particular, German courts generally do not award punitive damages. Litigation in Germany is also subject to rules of procedure that differ from the U.S. rules, including with respect to the taking and admissibility of evidence, the conduct of the proceedings and the allocation of costs. German procedural law does not provide for pre-trial discovery of documents, nor does Germany support pre-trial discovery of documents under the 1970 Hague Evidence Convention. Proceedings in Germany would have to be conducted in the German language and all

documents submitted to the court would, in principle, have to be translated into German. For these reasons, it may be difficult for a U.S. investor to bring an original action in a German court predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws against us, our directors, our executive officers and the experts named in this prospectus.

Based on the lack of a treaty as described above, U.S. investors may not be able to enforce against us or directors, executive officers or certain experts named herein who are residents of or possessing assets in the Netherlands, Germany, or other countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.