Gemini will require additional capital to finance its operations, which may not be available to it on acceptable terms, or at all. As a result, Gemini may not complete the development and commercialization of GEM103 or any other product candidates.

As a research and development company, Gemini’s operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. Gemini expects its research and development expenses to increase substantially in connection with its ongoing activities, particularly as Gemini advances GEM103 into later-stage clinical development.

As of September 30, 2020, Gemini had $13.2 million of cash and cash equivalents. Gemini believes that the net proceeds from the Business Combination and the PIPE transaction, together with its existing cash and cash equivalents, will fund its projected operating requirements through at least the next 12 months. Its forecast of the period of time through which its financial reserves will adequately support its operations is a forward-looking statement and involves risks and uncertainties, and actual results could vary as a result of a number of factors, including the factors discussed elsewhere in this “Risk factors” section. Gemini has based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and Gemini could utilize its available capital resources sooner than Gemini currently expects. Its future funding requirements, both short and long-term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

•        the initiation, progress, timing, costs and results of nonclinical studies and clinical trials for GEM103 or any other product candidates Gemini may develop, including any COVID-19-related delays or other effects on its development programs;

•        the outcome, timing and cost of seeking and obtaining regulatory approvals from the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities, including the potential for such authorities to require that Gemini performs more nonclinical studies or clinical trials than those that Gemini currently expects or change their requirements on studies that had previously been agreed to;

•        the cost to establish, maintain, expand, enforce and defend the scope of its intellectual property portfolio, including the amount and timing of any payments Gemini may be required to make, or that Gemini may receive, in connection with licensing, preparing, filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing any patents or other intellectual property rights;

•        the effect of competing technological and market developments;

•        market acceptance of any approved product candidates, including product pricing, as well as product coverage and the adequacy of reimbursement by third-party payors;

•        the cost of acquiring, licensing or investing in additional businesses, products, product candidates and technologies;

•        the cost and timing of selecting, auditing and potentially validating a manufacturing site for commercial-scale manufacturing;

•        the cost of establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for any product candidates for which Gemini may receive regulatory approval and that Gemini determines to commercialize; and

•        its need to implement additional internal systems and infrastructure, including financial and reporting systems.

Gemini does not have any committed external source of funds or other support for its development efforts and Gemini cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Until Gemini can generate sufficient revenue to finance its cash requirements, which Gemini may never do, Gemini expects to finance its future cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements, and other marketing or distribution arrangements. If Gemini raises additional funds through public or private equity offerings, the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect its stockholders’ rights. Further, to the extent that Gemini raises additional capital through the sale of common stock or securities convertible or exchangeable into common stock, your ownership interest will be diluted. If Gemini raises additional capital through debt financing, Gemini could be subject to fixed payment obligations and may be subject to covenants limiting or restricting its ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If Gemini raises additional capital through marketing and distribution arrangements or other collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, Gemini may have

to relinquish certain valuable rights to its product candidates, technologies, future revenue streams or research programs or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. Gemini also could be required to seek collaborators for one or more of its product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or relinquish its rights to product candidates or technologies that Gemini otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize itself. If Gemini is unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or acceptable terms, Gemini may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of one or more of its product candidates or one or more of its other research and development initiatives. Any of the above events could significantly harm its business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of its common stock to decline.

Gemini is heavily dependent on the success of GEM103, its lead product candidate.

Gemini currently has no products that are approved for commercial sale and may never be able to develop marketable products. Gemini expects that a substantial portion of its efforts and expenditures over the next several years will be devoted to its lead product candidate, GEM103. Accordingly, its business currently depends heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval, and commercialization of GEM103. GEM103 is currently being tested in a Phase 2a clinical trial in genetically defined patients with dry age-related macular degeneration, or AMD. Gemini cannot be certain that GEM103 will successfully complete clinical trials, receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized even if Gemini receives regulatory approval. If Gemini is required to discontinue development of GEM103 or if GEM103 does not receive regulatory approval or fails to achieve significant market acceptance, Gemini would be substantially delayed in its ability to achieve profitability, if ever.

The research, testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, approval, sale, marketing, and distribution of GEM103 is, and will remain, subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities. Failure to obtain regulatory approval for GEM103 will prevent Gemini from commercializing and marketing GEM103.

Further, its Phase 2a clinical trial of GEM103 and other future clinical trials may not be able to replicate the results from its preclinical studies or past clinical trials of GEM103. To the extent any of foregoing has not occurred, its expected development time and development costs for GEM103 may be increased.

Even if Gemini is able to successfully obtain approval from the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities for GEM103, any approval might contain significant limitations related to use, including limitations on the stage of disease GEM103 is approved to treat, as well as restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications. Furthermore, even if Gemini obtains regulatory approval for GEM103, Gemini will still need to develop a commercial infrastructure or develop relationships with collaborators to commercialize, establish a commercially viable pricing structure and obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government healthcare programs otherwise. If Gemini, or any future collaborators, are unable to successfully commercialize GEM103, Gemini may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue its business.

If Gemini is not successful in discovering, developing, receiving regulatory approval for and commercializing GEM103 or other product candidates, its ability to expand its business and achieve its strategic objectives would be impaired.

Although Gemini plans to devote a majority of its resources to the continued preclinical and clinical testing and potential approval of GEM103 for the treatment of patients with AMD, another key element of its strategy is to discover, develop and commercialize a portfolio of products. Gemini is seeking to do so through its internal discovery programs, but its resources are limited, and those that Gemini have are geared towards preclinical and clinical testing and seeking regulatory approval of GEM103 for the treatment of patients with AMD. Gemini may also explore strategic collaborations for the development or acquisition of new product candidates, but Gemini may not be successful in entering into such relationships. GEM103 is its only product candidate in clinical stages of development. Research programs to identify product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources, regardless of whether any product candidates are ultimately identified. Its research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for many reasons, including:

•        the research methodology used may not be successful in identifying potential product candidates;

•        competitors may develop alternatives that render its product candidates obsolete;

•        product candidates Gemini develop may nevertheless be covered by third parties’ patents or other exclusive rights;

•        a product candidate may, on further study, be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate it is unlikely to be effective or otherwise does not meet applicable regulatory criteria;

•        a product candidate may not be capable of being produced in commercial quantities at an acceptable cost, or at all;

•        an approved product may not be accepted as safe and effective by trial participants, the medical community or third-party payors; and

•        intellectual property or other proprietary rights of third parties for product candidates Gemini develop may potentially block its entry into certain markets or make such entry economically impracticable.

If Gemini fails to develop and successfully commercialize other product candidates, its business and future prospects may be harmed and its business will be more vulnerable to any problems that Gemini encounters in developing and commercializing its product candidates.

GEM103 and any other product candidates must undergo rigorous clinical trials and regulatory approvals, and success in nonclinical studies or earlier-stage clinical trials may not be indicative of results in future clinical trials.

GEM103 and any other product candidates will be subject to rigorous and extensive clinical trials and extensive regulatory approval processes implemented by the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities. The approval process is typically lengthy and expensive, and approval is never certain. Gemini has limited experience in conducting the clinical trials required to obtain regulatory approval. Gemini may not be able to conduct clinical trials at preferred sites, enlist clinical investigators, enroll sufficient numbers of participants or begin or successfully complete clinical trials in a timely fashion, if at all. Its planned clinical trials may be insufficient to demonstrate that its potential products will be active, safe or effective. Additional clinical trials may be required if clinical trial results are negative or inconclusive, which will require us to incur additional costs and significant delays.

Success in preclinical studies and earlier-stage clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will generate the same results or otherwise provide adequate data to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of a product candidate. In addition, the design of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support approval of a product, and flaws in the design of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced. Because Gemini has limited experience designing clinical trials, Gemini may be unable to design and execute a clinical trial to support regulatory approval. In addition, there is a high failure rate for drugs and biologics proceeding through clinical trials. In fact, many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in nonclinical studies and earlier-stage clinical trials. Similarly, the outcome of nonclinical studies may not predict the success of clinical trials. Moreover, data obtained from nonclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. In addition, Gemini may experience regulatory delays or rejections as a result of many factors, including due to changes in regulatory policy during the period of development of its product candidates. Any such delays could negatively impact its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

From time to time, Gemini may publish interim “top-line” or preliminary data from its clinical trials. Preliminary or interim data from clinical trials that Gemini may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or interim data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data Gemini previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm its business and financial prospects.

Additionally, several of its planned and ongoing clinical trials utilize an “open-label” trial design. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved biologic, drug, or placebo. Most typically, open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the

physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. The results from an open-label trial may not be predictive of future clinical trial results with any of its product candidates for which Gemini includes an open-label clinical trial when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control.

Gemini is subject to many manufacturing risks, any of which could substantially increase its costs, delay clinical programs and limit supply of its products.

Gemini has contracted with a third party manufacturer to make new drug substance to support future clinical trials and for commercial sale, if approved. Its contract manufacturer may not be able to adopt, adapt or scale up the manufacturing process in a timely manner to support its future clinical trials. The process of manufacturing its product is complex, highly regulated and subject to several risks, including:

•        the manufacturing process is susceptible to product loss due to contamination by adventitious microorganisms, equipment failure, improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error and improper storage conditions. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields and quality as well as other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in its products or in the manufacturing facilities in which its products are made, the manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and eliminate the contamination;

•        the manufacturing facilities in which its products are made could be adversely affected by equipment failures, labor and raw material shortages, financial difficulties of its contract manufacturers, natural disasters, power failures, local political unrest and numerous other factors; and

•        any adverse developments affecting manufacturing operations for its products may result in shipment delays, inventory shortages, lot failures, product withdrawals or recalls or other interruptions in the supply of its products. Gemini may also have to record inventory write-offs and incur other charges and expenses for products that fail to meet specifications, undertake costly remediation efforts or seek more expensive manufacturing alternatives.

The manufacture of GEM103 and other product candidates require significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of these products sometimes encounter difficulties in production, especially during scale-up from the manufacturing process used for early clinical trials to a validated process needed for pivotal clinical studies and commercial launch. These problems include failure to meet target production costs and yields, sub-par quality control testing, including stability of the product, quality assurance system failures, operator error and shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. Gemini cannot assure you that any product quality issues relating to the manufacture of GEM103 or any other product candidates will not occur in the future.

Gemini does not have and Gemini does not currently plan to acquire or build the facilities or internal capabilities to manufacture bulk drug substance or filled drug product for use in clinical trials or commercialization. To a large extent, that makes us dependent on the goodwill of its contract manufacturing partners to quickly fix deviations that will inevitably occur during the manufacturing of its product. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial materials could delay the completion of clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials altogether.

Its business could be adversely affected by the effects of health epidemics, including the recent COVID-19 pandemic, in regions where third parties for which Gemini relies have significant research, development or manufacturing facilities, concentrations of clinical trial sites or other business operations, causing disruption in supplies and services.

Its business could be adversely affected by health epidemics in regions where third parties for which Gemini relies, such as CROs or CMOs, have concentrations of clinical trial sites or other business operations, and could cause significant disruption in the operations of third-party manufacturers and CROs upon whom Gemini relies. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization, or WHO, announced a global health emergency because of SARS-CoV-2, a new strain of novel coronavirus originating in Wuhan, China, and the risks to the international community as the virus spread

globally beyond its point of origin. In March 2020, the WHO declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic, which continues to spread throughout the world. The spread of this pandemic has caused significant volatility and uncertainty in U.S. and international markets. This could result in an economic downturn and may disrupt its business and delay its clinical programs and timelines.

Quarantines, shelter-in-place and similar government orders, or the perception that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations could occur, related to COVID-19 pandemic or other infectious diseases, could impact personnel at third-party manufacturing facilities in the United States and other countries, or the availability or cost of materials, which would disrupt its supply chain. Any manufacturing supply interruption of materials could adversely affect its ability to conduct ongoing and future research and manufacturing activities.

In addition, its clinical trials may be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical site initiation and patient enrollment may be delayed due to prioritization of healthcare system resources toward the COVID-19 pandemic. Some patients may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly, Gemini’s clinical trial operations may be adversely impacted due to increased difficulty to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-19 pandemic.

The spread of COVID-19 pandemic, which has caused a broad impact globally, may materially affect Gemini economically. While the potential economic impact brought by, and the duration of, COVID-19 pandemic may be difficult to assess or predict, a widespread pandemic could result in significant disruption of global financial markets, reducing its ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect its liquidity. In addition, a recession or market correction resulting from the spread of COVID-19 pandemic could materially affect its business and the value of its common stock.

The global pandemic of COVID-19 continues to rapidly evolve. The ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic or a similar health epidemic is highly uncertain and subject to change. Gemini does not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on its business, its clinical trials, healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these effects could have a material impact on its operations.

Gemini may encounter difficulties in managing its growth, which could adversely affect its operations.

As of November 30, 2020, Gemini had 29 full-time and part-time employees. As Gemini continues development and pursues the potential commercialization of its product candidates, Gemini will need to expand its financial, development, regulatory, manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities for us. As its operations expand, Gemini expects that it will need to manage additional relationships with various strategic collaborators, suppliers and other third parties. Its future financial performance and its ability to develop and commercialize its product candidates and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on its ability to manage any future growth effectively.

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

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for Gemini 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 its reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by Gemini conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, or any subsequent testing by its independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in its internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to its financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in its reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of its stock.

Gemini will be required to disclose changes made in its internal controls and procedures on a quarterly basis and its management will be required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. However, for as long as Gemini is an emerging growth company, or EGC, its independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of its internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404. An independent assessment

of the effectiveness of its internal controls over financial reporting could detect problems that its management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in its internal controls over financial reporting could lead to restatements of its financial statements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.

Gemini’s disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.

Gemini’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to reasonably assure that information required to be disclosed by it in reports Gemini files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or Exchange Act, is accumulated and communicated to management, recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. Gemini believes that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in its control system, misstatements or insufficient disclosures due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

Gemini must attract and retain highly skilled employees in order to succeed. If Gemini is not able to retain its current senior management team and its scientific advisors or continue to attract and retain qualified scientific, technical and business personnel, its business will suffer.

To succeed, Gemini must recruit, retain, manage and motivate qualified clinical, scientific, technical and management personnel and Gemini faces significant competition for experienced personnel. If Gemini does not succeed in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, particularly at the management level, it could adversely affect its ability to execute its business plan and harm its operating results. Gemini is dependent on the members of its management team and its scientific advisors for its business success, including its Chief Executive Officer, Jason Meyenburg, its Chief Technology Officer, Scott Lauder, Ph.D., its Chief Medical Officer, Marc Uknis, M.D., and its interim Chief Financial Officer, Gregg Beloff. Gemini does not maintain “key person” insurance for any of its key personnel. An important element of its strategy is to take advantage of the research and development expertise of its current management. Gemini currently has employment agreements with all of its executive officers. Its employment agreements with its executive officers are terminable by them without notice and some provide for severance and change in control benefits. The loss of any one of its executive officers could result in a significant loss in the knowledge and experience that Gemini, as an organization, possesses and could cause significant delays, or outright failure, in the development and further commercialization of its product candidates.

There is intense competition for qualified personnel, including management in the technical fields in which Gemini operates and Gemini may not be able to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the successful research, development and commercialization of its product candidates. In particular, Gemini has experienced a very competitive hiring environment in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where Gemini is headquartered. Many of the other pharmaceutical companies that Gemini competes against for qualified personnel has greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than Gemini does. They also may provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high-quality candidates than what Gemini has to offer. If Gemini is unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel, the rate and success with which Gemini can discover and develop product candidates and its business will be limited.

Its employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

Gemini cannot ensure that its compliance controls, policies, and procedures will in every instance protect us from acts committed by its employees, agents, contractors, or collaborators that would violate the law or regulation, including, without limitation, healthcare, employment, foreign corrupt practices, environmental, competition, and patient privacy and other privacy laws and regulations. Such improper actions could subject us to civil or criminal investigations, and monetary and injunctive penalties, and could adversely impact its ability to conduct business, operating results, and reputation.

Gemini is exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other illegal activity by its employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct that fails to comply with the laws enforced by the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities, fails to provide true, complete and accurate information to the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities, fails to comply with manufacturing standards Gemini has established, fails to comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws in the United States and similar foreign laws, or fails to report financial information or data accurately or to disclose unauthorized activities to us. If Gemini obtains FDA approval of any of its product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, its potential exposure under these laws will increase significantly, and its costs associated with compliance with these laws are also likely to increase. Additionally, Gemini is subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. These laws may impact, among other things, its current activities with principal investigators and research patients, as well as proposed and future sales, marketing and education programs. If any such actions are instituted against us, and Gemini is not successful in defending itself or asserting its rights, those actions could have a significant impact on its business, 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 its operations, any of which could adversely affect its ability to operate its business and its results of operations. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions Gemini takes to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from government investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us and Gemini is not successful in defending itself or asserting its rights, those actions could result in significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, and the curtailment or restructuring of its operations.

Enrollment and retention of patients in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside its control, significant competition for recruiting patients with AMD in clinical trials.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in its clinical trials is critical to its success. Gemini may encounter delays in enrolling, or be unable to enroll, a sufficient number of patients to complete any of its clinical trials, and even once enrolled Gemini may be unable to retain a sufficient number of patients to complete any of its trials.

Factors that may generally affect patient enrollment include:

•        the size and nature of the patient population;

•        the number and location of clinical sites where patients are to be enrolled;

•        competition with other companies for clinical sites or patients;

•        the eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial;

•        the design of the clinical trial;

•        inability to obtain and maintain patient consents;

•        risk that enrolled participants will drop out before completion; and

•        competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new products that may be approved for the indications Gemini is investigating.

In addition, if any significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of its future clinical trials, it may make it more difficult for Gemini to recruit patients to its clinical trials and patients may drop out of its trials, or Gemini may be required to abandon the trials or its development efforts of one or more product candidates altogether. Its inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for its clinical trials would result in significant delays, which would increase its costs and have an adverse effect on Gemini.

Gemini faces substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than us.

The biotechnology industry is intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. Its competitors include multinational pharmaceutical companies, specialized biotechnology companies and universities and other research institutions. A number of pharmaceutical companies, as well as large and small biotechnology companies such as Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and IVERIC bio are pursuing the development or marketing of pharmaceuticals that target AMD. It is also probable that the number of companies seeking to develop products and therapies for the treatment of serious eye diseases, such as AMD, will increase. Many of its competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, human and other resources than Gemini does and may be better equipped to develop, manufacture and market technologically superior products. In addition, many of these competitors has significantly greater experience than Gemini has in undertaking nonclinical studies and human clinical trials of new pharmaceutical products and in obtaining regulatory approvals of human therapeutic products. Accordingly, its competitors may succeed in obtaining FDA approval for superior products. In addition, many competitors have greater name recognition and more extensive collaborative relationships. Smaller and earlier-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies.

Its competitors may obtain regulatory approval of their products more rapidly than Gemini does or may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit its ability to develop or commercialize its product candidates. Its competitors may also develop drugs that are more effective, more convenient, more widely used and less costly or have a better safety profile than its products and these competitors may also be more successful than Gemini is in manufacturing and marketing their products. If Gemini is unable to compete effectively against these companies, then Gemini may not be able to commercialize its product candidates or achieve a competitive position in the market. This would adversely affect its ability to generate revenue. Its competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, management and commercial personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, its programs.

Gemini’s business and operations would suffer in the event of computer system failures, cyber-attacks or deficiencies in its or related parties’ cyber security.

Given its limited operating history, Gemini is still in the process of implementing its internal security measures. Its internal computer systems and those of current and future third parties on which Gemini rely may fail and are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses and unauthorized access. Its information technology and other internal infrastructure systems, including corporate firewalls, servers, leased lines and connection to the Internet, face the risk of systemic failure that could disrupt its operations. While Gemini has not, to its knowledge, experienced any such material system failure or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in its operations, it could result in a material disruption of its development programs and its business operations. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in its regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase its costs to recover or reproduce the data. Likewise, Gemini relies on third parties for the manufacture of its product candidates and to conduct clinical trials, and similar events relating to their computer systems could also have a material adverse effect on its business. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, its data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, Gemini could incur liability, its competitive position could be harmed and the further development and commercialization of its product candidates could be hindered or delayed.

Comprehensive tax reform legislation could adversely affect its business and financial condition.

The “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” or the Tax Act, significantly revised the Code. The Tax Act, among other things, includes a reduction of the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21%, a limitation of the tax deduction for net interest expense to 30% of adjusted earnings (except for certain small businesses), a limitation of the deduction for net operating losses, or NOLs, to 80% of current year taxable income and an elimination of NOL carrybacks (though any such NOLs may be carried forward indefinitely), and modifying or repealing many business deductions and credits (including reducing the business tax credit for certain clinical testing expenses incurred in the testing of certain drugs for rare diseases or conditions generally referred to as “orphan drugs”). Additionally, on March 27, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or the CARES Act, which, among other things, suspends the 80% limitation on the deduction for NOLs in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2021, permits a 5-year carryback of NOLs arising in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and

before January 1, 2021, and generally caps the limitation on the deduction for net interest expense at 50% of adjusted taxable income for taxable years beginning in 2019 and 2020. Gemini continues to examine the impact this tax reform legislation may has on its business. Gemini urges investors to consult with their legal and tax advisers regarding the implications of the Tax Act and the CARES Act on an investment in its common stock.

Gemini might not be able to utilize a significant portion of its U.S. NOL carryforwards and U.S. research and development tax credit carryforwards.

As of December 31, 2019, Gemini had U.S. federal and state NOL carryforwards of $66.5 million and $65.1 million, respectively, and U.S. federal and state research and development tax credit carryforwards of $2.1 million and $0.7 million, respectively. If not utilized, such NOL carryforwards and research and development credits will expire at various dates beginning in 2037 (with the exception of $58.9 million, which has no expiration date) and 2039, respectively. Gemini does not anticipate generating revenue from sales of products for the foreseeable future, if ever, and Gemini may never achieve profitability. These NOL and tax credit carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. Under the Tax Act, unused losses generated in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely, and generally may not be carried back to prior taxable years, except that, under the CARES Act a 5-year carryback of NOLs arising in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2021 is permitted. Additionally, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020, the deductibility of such U.S. federal NOLs is limited to 80% of its taxable income in any future taxable year. In addition, under Section 382 of the Code, the amount of benefits from its NOL carryforwards may be impaired or limited if Gemini incurs a cumulative ownership change of more than 50% over a three-year period. Gemini may have experienced ownership changes in the past and may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of the Business Combination and subsequent shifts in its stock ownership, some of which are outside its control. As a result, its use of U.S. federal NOL carryforwards could be limited. State NOL carryforwards may be similarly limited. Any such disallowances may result in greater tax liabilities than Gemini would incur in the absence of such a limitation and any increased liabilities could adversely affect its business, results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

Gemini uses and generates materials that may expose it to material liability.

Gemini’s research programs involve the use of hazardous materials and chemicals, which are currently only handled by third parties. Gemini is subject to foreign, federal, state and local environmental and health and safety laws and regulations governing, among other matters, the use, manufacture, handling, storage and disposal of hazardous materials and waste products. Gemini may incur significant costs to comply with these current or future environmental and health and safety laws and regulations. In addition, Gemini cannot completely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from hazardous materials and may incur material liability as a result of such contamination or injury. In the event of an accident, an injured party may seek to hold us liable for any damages that result. Any liability could exceed the limits or fall outside the coverage of its workers’ compensation, property and business interruption insurance and Gemini may not be able to maintain insurance on acceptable terms, if at all. Gemini currently carries no insurance specifically covering environmental claims.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this subsection “— Risks Related to Government Regulation” to “we”, “us” and “our” generally refer to Gemini in the present tense or the Combined Entity from and after the Business Combination.

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable. Its inability to obtain regulatory approval for GEM103 or any other product candidate would substantially harm its business.

The time required to obtain approval from the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of nonclinical studies and clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s development and may vary among jurisdictions.

GEM103 or its other product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval from the FDA or an applicable foreign regulatory authority for many reasons, including:

•        disagreement with the design or implementation of its clinical trials;

•        failure to demonstrate that a product candidate is safe and effective for its proposed indication;

•        failure of clinical trials to meet the level of statistical significance required for approval;

•        failure to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;

•        disagreement with its interpretation of data from nonclinical studies or clinical trials;

•        the insufficiency of data collected from clinical trials of its product candidates to obtain regulatory approval;

•        failure to obtain approval of the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with whom Gemini contract for clinical and commercial supplies; or

•        changes in the approval policies or regulations that render its nonclinical and clinical data insufficient for approval.

The FDA or an applicable foreign regulatory authority may require more information, including additional nonclinical or clinical data to support approval, which may delay or prevent approval and its commercialization plans, or Gemini may decide to abandon the development program for other reasons. If Gemini were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of its product for fewer more limited indications than Gemini request, may require labeling or a Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings, precautions, or contraindications, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate.

Failures or delays in the commencement or completion of, or ambiguous or negative results from, Gemini’s ongoing and planned clinical trials of its product candidates could result in increased costs to us and could delay, prevent, or limit its ability to generate revenue and continue its business.

Gemini does not know whether its Phase 2a clinical trial or any of its planned clinical trials will be completed on schedule, if at all, as the commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed or prevented for a number of reasons, including, among others:

•        the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities may not authorize Gemini’s or its investigators to commence its planned clinical trials or any other clinical trials Gemini may initiate, or may suspend its clinical trials, for example, through imposition of a clinical hold, and may request additional data to permit allowance of its investigational new drug, or IND;

•        delays in filing or receiving allowance of additional IND applications that may be required;

•        lack of adequate funding to continue its clinical trials and nonclinical studies;

•        negative results from its ongoing nonclinical studies;

•        delays in reaching or failing to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical study sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and study sites;

•        the inability of CROs to perform under these agreements, including due to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic on their workforce;

•        inadequate quantity or quality of a product candidate or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials, for example delays in the manufacturing of sufficient supply of finished drug product;

•        difficulties obtaining ethics committee or Institutional Review Board, or IRB, approval to conduct a clinical study at a prospective site or sites;

•        challenges in recruiting and enrolling subjects to participate in clinical trials, the proximity of subjects to study sites, eligibility criteria for the clinical study, the nature of the clinical study protocol, the availability of approved effective treatments for the relevant disease, and competition from other clinical study programs for similar indications;

•        severe or unexpected drug-related side effects experienced by subjects in a clinical trial;

•        Gemini may decide, or regulatory authorities may require us, to conduct additional nonclinical or clinical trials or abandon product development programs;

•        delays in validating, or inability to validate, any endpoints utilized in a clinical trial;

•        the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with its clinical study design and its interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after it has reviewed and commented on the design for its clinical trials; and

•        difficulties retaining subjects who has enrolled in a clinical trial but may be prone to withdraw due to rigors of the clinical trials, lack of efficacy, side effects, personal issues, or loss of interest.

Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. In addition, a clinical study may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities, the IRBs at the sites where the IRBs are overseeing a clinical study, a data and safety monitoring board, or DSMB, overseeing the clinical study at issue or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including, among others:

•        failure to conduct the clinical study in accordance with regulatory requirements or its clinical protocols;

•        inspection of the clinical study operations or study sites by the FDA or other regulatory authorities that reveals deficiencies or violations that require us to undertake corrective action, including in response to the imposition of a clinical hold;

•        unforeseen safety issues or safety signals, including any that could be identified in its ongoing nonclinical studies or clinical trials, adverse side effects or lack of effectiveness;

•        changes in government regulations or administrative actions;

•        problems with clinical supply materials; and

•        lack of adequate funding to continue clinical trials.

Any inability to successfully complete nonclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair its ability to generate revenue. In addition, if Gemini makes changes to a product candidate, such as changes to the formulation, Gemini may need to conduct additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials to bridge or demonstrate the comparability of its modified product candidate to earlier versions, which could delay its clinical development plan or marketing approval for its product candidates. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which Gemini may have the exclusive right to commercialize its product candidates or allow its competitors to bring products to market before Gemini does, which could impair its ability to successfully commercialize its product candidates and may harm its business and results of operations.

Gemini has limited experience in conducting clinical trials and has never obtained approval for any product candidates and may be unable to do so successfully.

As a company, Gemini has limited experience in designing, conducting or completing clinical trials and has never progressed a product candidate through to regulatory approval. In part because of this lack of experience, its clinical trials may require more time and incur greater costs than Gemini anticipates. Gemini cannot be certain that the planned clinical trials will begin or conclude on time, if at all. Large-scale trials will require significant additional financial and management resources. Any performance failure on the part of such third parties could delay the clinical development of its product candidates or delay or prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval or commercializing its product candidates, depriving us of potential product revenue and resulting in additional losses.

The advancement of healthcare reform may negatively impact its ability to profitably sell its product candidates, if approved.

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions has enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of its product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect its ability to profitably sell any product for which Gemini obtains marketing approval. Changes in regulations, statutes or the interpretation of existing regulations could impact its business in the future by requiring, for example: (i) changes to its manufacturing arrangements; (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling; (iii) the recall or discontinuation of its products; or (iv) additional record-keeping requirements.

In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act, was enacted, which includes measures that has significantly changed the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act have yet to be implemented, and there have been judicial, congressional, and executive branch challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. Since January 2017, President Trump has signed two Executive Orders and other directives designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the Affordable Care Act. One Executive Order directs 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. The second Executive Order terminates the cost-sharing subsidies that reimburse insurers under the Affordable Care Act. Several state Attorneys General filed suit to stop the Trump administration from terminating the subsidies, but their request for a restraining order was denied by a federal judge in California on October 25, 2017. Further, on June 14, 2018, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the federal government was not required to pay more than $12 billion in Affordable Care Act risk corridor payments to third-party payors who argued were owed to them. The effects of this gap in reimbursement on third-party payors, the viability of the Affordable Care Act marketplace, providers, and potentially its business, are not yet known.

Congress has also considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of the Affordable Care Act. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, two bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the Affordable Care Act has been signed into law. The Tax Act included a provision which repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Affordable Care Act on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On January 22, 2018, President Trump signed a continuing resolution on appropriations for fiscal year 2018 that delayed the implementation of certain Affordable Care Act-mandated fees, including the so-called “Cadillac” tax on certain high cost employer-sponsored insurance plans, the annual fee imposed on certain health insurance providers based on market share, and the medical device excise tax on non-exempt medical devices. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or the BBA, among other things, amended the Affordable Care Act, effective January 1, 2019, to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole.” In July 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain Affordable Care Act qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the Affordable Care Act risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of federal district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. Moreover, CMS issued a final rule in 2018 that will give states greater flexibility, starting in 2020, in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may has the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the Affordable Care Act for plans sold through such marketplaces. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or the Texas District Court Judge, ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the Affordable Care Act, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the Tax Act, the remaining provisions of the Affordable Care Act are invalid as well. While the Texas District Court Judge, as well as the Trump Administration and CMS, has stated that the ruling will has no immediate effect, it is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals and other efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act will impact the Affordable Care Act and its business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. In August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals in spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction, which triggered the

legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of, on average, 2% per fiscal year through 2025 unless Congress takes additional action. These reductions were extended through 2027 under the BBA. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Recently, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there has been several recent U.S. congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. At the federal level, the Trump administration’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2019 contained further drug price control measures that could be enacted during the 2019 budget process or in other future legislation, including, for example, measures to permit Medicare Part D plans to negotiate the price of certain drugs under Medicare Part B, to allow some states to negotiate drug prices under Medicaid, and to eliminate cost sharing for generic drugs for low-income patients. Additionally, the Trump administration released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has already started the process of soliciting feedback on some of these measures and, at the same time, is immediately implementing others under its existing authority. For example, in September 2018, CMS announced that it will allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option to use step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2019, and in October 2018, CMS proposed a new rule that would require direct-to-consumer television advertisements of prescription drugs and biological products, for which payment is available through or under Medicare or Medicaid, to include in the advertisement the Wholesale Acquisition Cost, or list price, of that drug or biological product. On January 31, 2019, the HHS Office of Inspector General, proposed modifications to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute discount safe harbor for the purpose of reducing the cost of drug products to consumers which, among other things, if finalized, will affect discounts paid by manufacturers to Medicare Part D plans, Medicaid managed care organizations and pharmacy benefit managers working with these organizations. Although a number of these, and other proposed measures may require additional authorization to become effective, Congress and the Trump administration has each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures has increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

Gemini expects that the healthcare reform measures that has been adopted and may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that Gemini receives for any approved product and could seriously harm its future revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private third-party payors.

Further, on May 30, 2018, the Trickett Wedler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017, or the Right to Try Act, was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to request access to certain investigational new drug products that has completed a Phase I clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. There is no obligation for a pharmaceutical manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.

There has been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals at the foreign, federal and state levels directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize its product. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from product candidates that Gemini may successfully develop and for which Gemini may obtain regulatory approval and may affect its overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates.

Gemini’s relationships with customers and third-party payors will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, transparency and other healthcare laws and regulations, which, if violated, could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which Gemini obtains marketing approval. Its current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which Gemini researches, and if approved, markets, sells and distributes its products. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, include the following:

•        the federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits persons from, among other things, knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, the referral of an individual for the furnishing or arranging for the furnishing, or the purchase, lease or order, or arranging for or recommending purchase, lease or order, of any good or service for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare and Medicaid;

•        federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws, including the federal False Claims Act, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, prohibit individuals or entities from, among other things knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government or a government contractor, grantee, or other recipient of federal funds, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government;

•        the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, imposes criminal liability for knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense or knowingly and willfully making false statements relating to healthcare matters;

•        HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their implementing regulations, imposes obligations on certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses, known as covered entities, as well as their business associates, which are individuals and entities that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;

•        the federal Open Payments program, created under Section 6002 of the Affordable Care Act and its implementing regulations, requires manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to CMS information related to “payments or other transfers of value” made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians (as defined above) and their immediate family members; and

•        analogous state, local, and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers; state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers; state and foreign laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, marketing expenditures or drug prices; state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state and foreign laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Efforts to ensure that its business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that its business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If its operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, Gemini may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, and the curtailment or restructuring of its operations. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom Gemini expects to do business is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, that person or entity may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Failure to comply with health and data protection laws and regulations could lead to government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect its operating results and business.

Gemini and any potential collaborators may be subject to federal, state, and foreign data protection laws and regulations (i.e., laws and regulations that address privacy and data security). In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA), that govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to its operations or the operations of its collaborators. The state of California, for example, recently adopted the CCPA, which will come into effect beginning in January 2020. The CCPA has been characterized as the first “GDPR-like” privacy statute to be enacted in the United States because it mirrors a number of the key provisions of the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, or EU GDPR. The CCPA establishes a new privacy framework for covered businesses by creating an expanded definition of personal information, establishing new data privacy rights for consumers in the State of California, imposing special rules on the collection of consumer data from minors, and creating a new and potentially severe statutory damages framework for violations of the CCPA and for businesses that fail to implement reasonable security procedures and practices to prevent data breaches. In addition, Gemini may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which Gemini obtains clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA, as amended by HITECH. Depending on the facts and circumstances, Gemini could be subject to civil, criminal, and administrative penalties if Gemini knowingly obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA.

Compliance with U.S. and international data protection laws and regulations, including the EU GDPR and other EU data protection laws, could require us to take on more onerous obligations in its contracts, restrict its ability to collect, use and disclose data, or in some cases, impact its ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil, criminal and administrative penalties), private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect its operating results and business. Moreover, clinical trial subjects, employees and other individuals about whom Gemini or its potential collaborators obtain personal information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may limit its ability to collect, use and disclose the information. Claims that Gemini has violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws, or breached its contractual obligations, even if Gemini is not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm its business.

Clinical development is uncertain and Gemini’s clinical trials for GEM103 and any other product candidates may experience delays, which would adversely affect its ability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize these programs on a timely basis or at all, which would have an adverse effect on its business.

Gemini cannot be sure that Gemini will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for its preclinical programs on the timelines Gemini expects, if at all. To proceed with its development plans and ultimately commercialization, Gemini may need to conduct and meet regulatory requirements for preclinical and clinical studies. For therapeutic applications, the FDA may require additional extensive preclinical and other studies. Gemini cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcomes of its preclinical testing and studies and cannot predict if the FDA or other regulatory authorities will accept its proposed clinical programs or if the outcomes of its preclinical testing and studies will

ultimately support the further development of its programs. As a result, there is no assurance that Gemini will be able to submit INDs or similar applications on the timelines Gemini expects, if at all, and Gemini cannot be sure that submission of an IND or similar applications will result in the FDA or other regulatory authorities allowing a clinical trial design to begin. For example, Gemini plans to use its IND for GEM103 in dry AMD to run a trial of GEM103 in wet AMD, however, Gemini has not yet met with the FDA to discuss such plans, and the FDA may reject such plans.

Even if Gemini is able to obtain regulatory approvals for its product candidates, if they exhibit harmful side effects after approval, its regulatory approvals could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted, and Gemini could be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims.

Clinical trials are conducted in representative samples of the potential patient population which may has significant variability. Even if Gemini receives regulatory approval for GEM103 or any of its other product candidates, Gemini will have tested them in only a small number of patients during its clinical trials. Clinical trials are by design based on a limited number of subjects and of limited duration for exposure to the product used to determine whether, on a potentially statistically significant basis, the planned safety and efficacy of any product candidate can be achieved. As with the results of any statistical sampling, Gemini cannot be sure that all side effects of its product candidates may be uncovered, and it may be the case that only with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the product candidate for a longer duration, may a more complete safety profile be identified. Further, even larger clinical trials may not identify rare serious adverse effects or the duration of such studies may not be sufficient to identify when those events may occur. If its applications for marketing are approved and more patients begin to use its product, new risks and side effects associated with its products may be discovered. There have been other products that have been approved by the regulatory authorities but for which safety concerns has been uncovered following approval. Such safety concerns have led to labelling changes or withdrawal of products from the market, and any of its product candidates may be subject to similar risks. Additionally, Gemini may be required to conduct additional nonclinical and clinical trials, require additional warnings on the label of its products, reformulate its product or make changes, create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients and obtain new approvals for its and its suppliers’ manufacturing facilities for GEM103 and any other product candidates. Gemini might have to withdraw or recall its products from the marketplace. Gemini may also experience a significant drop in the potential sales of its products if and when regulatory approvals for such products are obtained, experience harm to its reputation in the marketplace or become subject to lawsuits, including class actions. Any of these results could decrease or prevent any sales of its approved products or substantially increase the costs and expenses of commercializing and marketing its products.

Even if its product candidates receive regulatory approval, they will remain subject to extensive regulatory scrutiny and may still face future development and regulatory difficulties.

Even if Gemini obtains regulatory approval for a product candidate, regulatory authorities may still impose significant restrictions on its product candidates, including their indicated uses or marketing, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies. Further, even if Gemini obtains regulatory approval for a product candidate, it would be subject to ongoing requirements by the governing the manufacture, quality control, further development, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, import, export, advertising, promotion, recordkeeping and reporting of safety and other post-market information.

The FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities will continue to closely monitor the safety profile of any product even after approval. If the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities become aware of new safety information after approval of its product candidates, they may require labeling changes or establishment of a REMS or similar strategy, impose significant restrictions on a product’s indicated uses or marketing or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance.

In addition, manufacturers of drug and biologic products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, regulations and standards. If Gemini or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us,

including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. If Gemini, its product candidates or the manufacturing facilities for its product candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, or undesirable side effects caused by such products are identified, a regulatory agency may:

•        issue safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings about such product;

•        mandate modifications to promotional materials or require us to provide corrective information to healthcare practitioners;

•        require that Gemini conduct post-marketing studies;

•        require us to enter into a consent decree, which can include imposition of various fines, reimbursements for inspection costs, required due dates for specific actions and penalties for noncompliance;

•        seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;

•        suspend marketing of, withdraw regulatory approval of or recall such product;

•        suspend any ongoing clinical studies;

•        refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to applications filed by us;

•        suspend or impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements; or

•        seize or detain products, refuse to permit the import or export of products or require us to initiate a product recall.

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit its ability to commercialize its products and generate revenue.

Advertising and promotion of any product candidate that obtains approval in the United States will be heavily scrutinized by the FDA, the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General, state attorneys general, members of Congress and the public. Violations, including promotion of its products for unapproved (or off-label) uses, are subject to enforcement letters, inquiries and investigations, and civil and criminal sanctions by the government. Additionally, applicable foreign regulatory authorities will heavily scrutinize advertising and promotion of any product candidate that obtains approval outside of the United States.

In the United States, engaging in the impermissible promotion of its products for off-label uses can also subject us to false claims litigation under federal and state statutes, which can lead to civil and criminal penalties and fines and agreements that materially restrict the manner in which a company promotes or distributes drug and biologic products. These false claims statutes include the federal False Claims Act, which allows any individual to bring a lawsuit against a pharmaceutical company on behalf of the federal government alleging submission of false or fraudulent claims, or causing to present such false or fraudulent claims, for payment by a federal program such as Medicare or Medicaid. If the government prevails in the lawsuit, the individual will share in any fines or settlement funds. Since 2004, these federal False Claims Act lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies has increased significantly in volume and breadth, leading to several substantial civil and criminal settlements regarding certain sales practices promoting off-label product uses involving fines in excess of $1 billion. This growth in litigation has increased the risk that a pharmaceutical company will has to defend a false claim action, pay settlement fines or restitution, agree to comply with burdensome reporting and compliance obligations and be excluded from Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state healthcare programs. If Gemini does not lawfully promote its approved products, Gemini may become subject to such litigation and, if Gemini does not successfully defend against such actions, those actions may has a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

The FDA’s policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of its product candidates. If Gemini is slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if Gemini is not able to maintain regulatory compliance, Gemini may lose any marketing approval that Gemini may have obtained, which would adversely affect its business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

Healthcare insurance coverage and reimbursement may be limited or unavailable for its product candidates, if approved, which could make it difficult for us to sell its product candidates profitably.

The success of its product candidates, if approved, depends on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors including governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial payors, and health maintenance organizations. Gemini cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for, or accurately estimate the potential revenue from, its product candidates or assure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that Gemini may develop.

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. Coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors is critical to new product acceptance.

Third-party payors decide which products and treatments they will cover and the amount of reimbursement. Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

•        a covered benefit under its health plan;

•        safe, effective and medically necessary;

•        appropriate for the specific patient;

•        cost-effective; and

•        neither experimental nor investigational.

In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors. As a result, obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a third-party payor is a time consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost effectiveness data for the use of its products on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by CMS, an agency within HHS, as CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private third-party payors tend to follow Medicare coverage and reimbursement limitations to a substantial degree, but also has their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. Even if Gemini obtains coverage for a given product, the resulting reimbursement payment rates might not be adequate for us to achieve or sustain profitability or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high.

Its failure to obtain regulatory approval in international jurisdictions would prevent Gemini from marketing its product candidates outside the United States.

Even if its products are approved for marketing in the United States, in order to market and sell its products in other jurisdictions, Gemini must obtain separate marketing approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. The approval procedure varies among countries and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain approval may differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The regulatory approval process outside the United States generally includes all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. In addition, in many countries outside the United States, Gemini must secure product reimbursement approvals before regulatory authorities will approve the product for sale in that country. Obtaining applicable foreign regulatory authorities and compliance with applicable foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for it and could delay or prevent the introduction of its products in certain countries. Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries and regulatory approval in one country does not ensure approval in any other country, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may has a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others.

Also, regulatory approval for its product candidates may be withdrawn if Gemini fails to comply with regulatory requirements, if problems occur after the product candidate reaches the market or for other reasons. If Gemini fails to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and fail to receive applicable marketing approvals,

its target market will be reduced and its ability to realize the full market potential of its product candidates will be harmed and its business will be adversely affected. Gemini may not obtain applicable foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions. Approval by one regulatory authority outside the United States does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions or by the FDA. If Gemini fails to obtain approval of its product candidates by applicable foreign regulatory authorities, Gemini will be unable to commercialize its product in that country, and the commercial prospects of that product candidate and its business prospects could decline.

Gemini is subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws, and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal standards could impair its ability to compete in domestic and international markets. Gemini can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm its business.

Gemini is subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in the countries in which Gemini conducts activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. Gemini may engage third parties to sell its products sell its products outside the United States, to conduct clinical trials, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations, and other regulatory approvals. Gemini has direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities, and other organizations. Gemini can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of its employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators, even if Gemini does not explicitly authorize or has actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences.

Changes in funding for the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new or existing product candidates from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal functions on which the operation of its business may rely, which could negatively impact its business.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency has fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which its operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect its business. For example, over the last several years, including beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, has had to furlough critical FDA, SEC and other government employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process its regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on its business. Further, upon completion of the Business Combination and in its operations as a public company, future government shutdowns could impact its ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue its operations.

Separately, in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020 the FDA announced its intention to postpone most foreign inspections of manufacturing facilities and products, and subsequently, on March 18, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to temporarily postpone routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. On July 10, 2020, FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA intends to use this risk-based assessment system to

identify the categories of regulatory activity that can occur within a given geographic area, ranging from mission critical inspections to resumption of all regulatory activities. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process its regulatory submissions, which could has a material adverse effect on its business. For example, as of June 23, 2020, the FDA noted it is continuing to ensure timely reviews of applications for medical products during the COVID-19 pandemic in line with its user fee performance goals; however, FDA may not be able to continue its current pace and review timelines could be extended.

If the FDA becomes unable to continue its current level of performance, Gemini could experience delays and setbacks for its product candidates and for any approvals Gemini may seek which could adversely affect its business.

GEM103 and other product candidates for which Gemini intends to seek approval as biologic products may face competition sooner than anticipated.

GEM103 is a biological product candidate. Gemini believes that any of its product candidates approved in the United States as a biological product under a Biologics License Application, or BLA, should qualify for the 12-year period of regulatory exclusivity. The enactment of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, as part of the Affordable Care Act, created an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biological products. The abbreviated regulatory pathway establishes legal authority for the FDA to review and approve biosimilar biologics, including the possible designation of a biosimilar as “interchangeable” based on its similarity to an existing brand product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product cannot be approved by the FDA until 12 years after the original branded product was approved under a BLA. Certain changes, however, and supplements to an approved BLA, and subsequent applications filed by the same sponsor, manufacturer, licensor, predecessor in interest, or other related entity do not qualify for the 12-year exclusivity period. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation, and meaning are subject to uncertainty. While it is uncertain when such processes intended to implement the BPCIA may be fully adopted by the FDA, any such processes could has a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for its biological products.

However, there is also a risk that this exclusivity could be changed in the future. For example, this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or through other actions, including future proposed budgets, international trade agreements and other arrangements or proposals. The extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of its reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. It is also possible that payers will give reimbursement preference to biosimilars over reference biologics, even absent a determination of interchangeability.

To the extent that Gemini does not receive any anticipated periods of regulatory exclusivity for GEM103 and other product candidates or the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities approve any biosimilar, interchangeable, or other competing products to GEM103 and other product candidates, it could has a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations, stock price and prospects.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this subsection “— Risks Related to Intellectual Property” to “we”, “us” and “our” generally refer to Gemini in the present tense or the Combined Entity from and after the Business Combination.

Gemini’s success depends upon its ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection for its products and technologies. It is difficult and costly to protect its proprietary rights and technology, and Gemini may not be able to ensure their protection.

Gemini’s commercial success depends in part on its ability to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection for GEM103 and its other product candidates, proprietary patient screening technologies and their uses as well as Gemini’s ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others. Gemini generally seeks to protect its proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to its product

candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses that are important to Gemini’s business. Gemini also seeks to protect its proprietary position by acquiring or in-licensing relevant issued patents or pending applications from third parties. Finally, Gemini maintains its non-patented, but proprietary technologies, as company trade secrets.

Pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless, and until, patents issue from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover the technology. There can be no assurance that Gemini’s patent applications or the patent applications of Gemini’s licensors will result in patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection against competitors with similar technology, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around or invalidated by third parties.

Even issued patents may later be found invalid or unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. The degree of future protection for Gemini and Gemini licensors’ proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect Gemini’s rights or permit it to gain or keep any competitive advantage. These uncertainties and/or limitations in Gemini’s ability to properly protect the intellectual property rights relating to its product candidates could have a material adverse effect on Gemini’s financial condition and results of operations.

Gemini currently does not have any company-owned or in-licensed patents covering GEM103. Although Gemini is pursuing pending patent applications on GEM103, these applications may not issue as patents and as a result Gemini may not be able to prevent biosimilars to GEM103 from entering the market when the market exclusivity period has expired. Gemini cannot be certain that the claims in U.S. pending patent applications, corresponding international patent applications and patent applications in certain foreign territories, or those of our licensors, will be considered patentable by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), courts in the United States or by the patent offices and courts in foreign countries, nor can Gemini be certain that the claims in its issued patent or its licensor’s issued patents will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that Gemini or any of our potential future collaborators will be successful in protecting its product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

•        the USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent process, the noncompliance with which can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, and partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction;

•        patent applications may not result in any patents being issued;

•        patents may be challenged, invalidated, modified, revoked, circumvented, found to be unenforceable or otherwise may not provide any competitive advantage;

•        Gemini’s competitors, many of whom have substantially greater resources than Gemini does and many of whom have made significant investments in competing technologies, may seek or may have already obtained patents that will limit, interfere with or eliminate Gemini’s ability to make, use and sell its potential product candidates;

•        there may be significant pressure on the U.S. government and international governmental bodies to limit the scope of patent protection both inside and outside the United States for disease treatments that prove successful, as a matter of public policy regarding worldwide health concerns; and

•        countries other than the United States may have patent laws less favorable to patentees than those upheld by U.S. courts, allowing foreign competitors a better opportunity to create, develop and market competing product candidates.

The patent prosecution process is also expensive and time-consuming, and Gemini or its licensors may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions where protection may be commercially advantageous. It is also possible that Gemini or its licensors will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection.

In addition, although Gemini enters into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, outside scientific collaborators,

CROs, third-party manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection.

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 intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Gemini may be unable to obtain intellectual property rights or technology necessary to develop and commercialize its product candidates.

Several third parties are actively researching and seeking and obtaining patent protection in the AMD field, and there are issued third-party patents and published third-party patent applications in these fields. Although no third party has asserted a claim of patent infringement against us as of the date of this prospectus, a third party may hold proprietary rights that could prevent Gemini’s product candidates from being marketed. For example, Gemini is aware of an issued European patent expiring in 2026 that claims an isolated CFH polypeptide which could be alleged to cover GEM103. While Gemini believes that the expiration date of this patent will be prior to European launch of GEM103, there is a possibility that commercial manufacturing or product launch in Europe would predate the patent expiration. If commercial manufacturing or product launch in Europe predates the patent expiration, and in the event that this patent is successfully asserted against us, such litigation may negatively impact our ability to commercialize GEM103 in France, Germany, Ireland, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Switzerland or the United Kingdom. Gemini may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to its product candidates and technologies.

Depending on what patent claims ultimately issue and how courts construe the issued patent claims, as well as depending on the ultimate formulation and method of use of its product candidates, Gemini may need to obtain a license under such patents. There can be no assurance that such licenses will be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If a third party does not offer us a necessary license or offers a license only on terms that are unattractive or unacceptable to us, Gemini might be unable to develop and commercialize one or more of its product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, even if Gemini obtains licenses to such intellectual property, but subsequently fail to meet its obligations under its license agreements, or such license agreements are terminated for any other reasons, Gemini may lose its rights to in-licensed technologies.

The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that Gemini may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. Gemini also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on its investment, or at all. If Gemini is unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights Gemini has, Gemini may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under any license, collaboration or other agreements, including the license agreement with Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation related to anti-CFH agonistic antibodies, we may be required to pay damages and could lose intellectual property rights that are necessary for developing and protecting our product candidates.

Gemini is dependent on patents, know-how and proprietary technology in-licensed from Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation. Its commercial success depends upon its ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell its product candidates and use its and its licensor’s proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation may have the right to terminate the license agreement in full in the event Gemini materially breach or default in the performance of any of the obligations under the license agreement. A termination of the license agreement with Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation could result in the loss of significant rights and could harm its ability to commercialize its product candidates.

Disputes may also arise between Gemini and Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation, as well as any future potential licensors, regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:

•        the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;

•        whether and the extent to which its technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;

•        its right to sublicense patent and other rights to third parties under collaborative development relationships;

•        its diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to its development and commercialization of its product candidates and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations;

•        the inventorship and ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by its licensors and us and its partners; and

•        the priority of invention of patented technology.

If disputes over intellectual property that Gemini has licensed prevent or impair its ability to maintain its current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, Gemini may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates.

In addition, the Research Collaboration and License Agreement under which Gemini currently licenses intellectual property is complex, and certain provisions may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what Gemini believes to be the scope of its rights to the relevant intellectual property, or increase what Gemini believes to be its financial or other obligations under the Research Collaboration and License Agreement, either of which could has a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that Gemini has licensed prevent or impair its ability to maintain its current licensing arrangement on commercially acceptable terms, Gemini may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

Gemini is generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that Gemini licenses, as Gemini is for intellectual property that Gemini owns, which are described below. If Gemini or its licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, its ability to commercialize products could suffer.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect its competitive position on its product candidates for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering its product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, Gemini may be open to competition from competitive products. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting its product candidates might expire before or shortly after Gemini or its partners commercialize those candidates. As a result, its owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to its products.

Gemini may not be able to protect its intellectual property rights throughout the world.

The legal protection afforded to inventors and owners of intellectual property in countries outside of the United States may not be as protective or effective as that in the United States and Gemini may, therefore, be unable to acquire and enforce intellectual property rights outside the United States to the same extent as in the United States. Whether filed in the United States or abroad, its patent applications may be challenged or may fail to result in issued patents.

Currently, Gemini does not own or have in-licensed issued patents covering GEM103. Any future patents Gemini obtains may not be sufficiently broad to prevent others from practicing its technologies or from developing or commercializing competing products. Furthermore, others may independently develop or commercialize similar or alternative technologies or drugs, or design around its patents. Its patents may be challenged, invalidated, circumvented

or narrowed, or fail to provide us with any competitive advantages. In many foreign countries, patent applications and/or issued patents, or parts thereof, must be translated into the native language. If its patent applications or issued patents are translated incorrectly, they may not adequately cover its technologies; in some countries, it may not be possible to rectify an incorrect translation, which may result in patent protection that does not adequately cover its technologies in those countries.

Filing, prosecuting, enforcing and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and its intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States are less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and certain state laws in the United States. Consequently, Gemini and its licensor may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing its and its licensor’s inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using its and its licensor’s inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use its and its licensor’s technologies in jurisdictions where Gemini has not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where Gemini and its licensor have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with its product candidates its and its licensor’s patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology. This could make it difficult for us and Gemini’s licensor to stop the infringement of its and its licensor’s patents or the marketing of competing products in violation of Gemini’s and its licensor’s proprietary rights, generally. Proceedings to enforce Gemini’s and its licensor’s patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert its and its licensor’s efforts and attention from other aspects of its business, could put Gemini’s and its licensor’s patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could place Gemini’s and its licensor’s patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against Gemini’s or its licensor. Gemini or its licensor may not prevail in any lawsuits that Gemini or its licensor initiates and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful.

The requirements for patentability differ in certain countries, particularly developing countries. For example, China has a heightened requirement for patentability and, specifically, requires a detailed description of medical uses of a claimed drug. In addition, India, certain countries in Europe and certain developing countries, including Thailand, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, Gemini and its licensor may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if Gemini or its licensor are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit its potential revenue opportunities. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. Accordingly, Gemini and its licensor’s efforts to enforce intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that Gemini owns or licenses.

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

Periodic maintenance and annuity fees on issued United States patents and most foreign patent applications and patents must be paid to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, and foreign patent agencies, respectively, in order to maintain such patents and patent applications. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application, examination and issuance processes. While an inadvertent lapse can, in some cases, be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance 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. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If Gemini or its licensor fails to maintain the patents and patent applications covering its product candidates, its competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products or technology, which would have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

Gemini may become involved in lawsuits or other proceedings to protect or enforce its intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful and have a material adverse effect on the success of its business.

Third parties may infringe Gemini’s or its licensor’s patents or misappropriate or otherwise violate its or its licensor’s intellectual property rights. In the future, Gemini or its licensor may initiate legal proceedings to enforce or defend Gemini’s or its licensor’s intellectual property rights, to protect its or its licensor’s trade secrets or to determine the validity or scope of intellectual property rights Gemini owns or controls. Also, third parties may initiate legal proceedings against Gemini or its licensor to challenge the validity or scope of intellectual property rights Gemini owns, controls or to which Gemini has rights. For example, generic or biosimilar drug manufacturers or other competitors or third parties may challenge the scope, validity or enforceability of Gemini’s or its licensor’s patents, requiring Gemini or its licensor to engage in complex, lengthy and costly litigation or other proceedings. These proceedings can be expensive and time-consuming and many of its or its licensor’s adversaries in these proceedings may have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to prosecuting these legal actions than Gemini can. Moreover, the outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. Accordingly, despite Gemini’s or its licensor’s efforts, Gemini or its licensor may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating intellectual property rights Gemini owns, controls or has rights to, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States. Litigation could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources, which could harm its business and financial results. In addition, if Gemini or its licensor initiated legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering a product candidate, the defendant could counterclaim that such patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. In an infringement or declaratory judgment proceeding, a court may decide that a patent owned by or licensed to us is invalid or unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that Gemini’s or its licensor’s patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of Gemini’s or its licensor’s patents at risk of being invalidated, narrowed, held unenforceable or interpreted in such a manner that would not preclude third parties from entering the market with competing products.

Third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the USPTO, or opposition, derivation, revocation reexamination, or inter partes review, or other pre-issuance or post-grant proceedings or other patent office proceedings or litigation in the United States or other jurisdictions provoked by third parties or brought by Gemini or its licensor, may be necessary to determine the inventorship, priority, patentability or validity of inventions with respect to Gemini’s or its licensor’s patents or patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could leave its technology or product candidates without patent protection, allow third parties to commercialize its technology or product candidates and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or could require Gemini or its licensor to obtain license rights from the prevailing party in order to be able to manufacture or commercialize its product candidates without infringing third-party patent rights. Its business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer Gemini or its licensor a license on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Even if Gemini or its licensor obtains a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving its competitors access to the same technologies licensed to Gemini or its licensor. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by Gemini’s or its licensor’s patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize product candidates. Even if Gemini successfully defends such litigation or proceeding, Gemini may incur substantial costs and it may distract its management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on its ability to raise the funds necessary to continue its clinical trials, continue its research programs, license necessary technology from third parties, or enter into collaborations.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of its confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, many foreign jurisdictions have rules of discovery that are different than those in the United States and which may make defending or enforcing its or its licensor’s patents extremely difficult. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of shares of our common stock.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings against Gemini alleging that Gemini infringes their intellectual property rights or Gemini may initiate legal proceedings against third parties to challenge the validity or scope of intellectual property rights controlled by third parties, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of its business.

Gemini’s commercial success depends upon its ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell any product candidates that Gemini may develop and use its proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Third parties may initiate legal proceedings against Gemini or its licensor alleging that Gemini or its licensor infringes their intellectual property rights or Gemini or its licensor may initiate legal proceedings against third parties to challenge the validity or scope of intellectual property rights controlled by third parties, including in oppositions, revocations, reexaminations, inter partes review or derivation proceedings before the USPTO or its counterparts in other jurisdictions. These proceedings can be expensive and time-consuming and many of its or its licensor’s adversaries in these proceedings may have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to prosecuting these legal actions than Gemini or its licensor can.

An unfavorable outcome in any such proceeding could require Gemini or its licensor to cease using the related technology or developing or commercializing its product candidates, or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

Gemini could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if Gemini is found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing its product candidates or force us to cease some of its business operations, which could materially harm its business.

Gemini performs searches of patent and scientific databases in order to identify documents that may be of potential relevance to the freedom-to-operate and/or patentability of its product candidates. In general, such searches are conducted based on keywords, sequences, inventors/authors and assignees/entities to capture U.S. and European patents and patent applications, PCT publications and scientific journal articles.

The patent landscape around its GEM103 product candidate is complex, and Gemini may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to its product candidates and technologies. Although no third party has asserted a claim of patent infringement against us as of the date of this prospectus, a third party may hold proprietary rights that could prevent Gemini’s product candidates from being marketed. For example, Gemini is aware of an issued European patent expiring in 2026 that claims an isolated CFH polypeptide which could be alleged to cover GEM103. While Gemini believes that the expiration date of this patent will be prior to European launch of GEM103, there is a possibility that commercial manufacturing or product launch in Europe would predate the patent expiration. If commercial manufacturing or product launch in Europe predates the patent expiration, and in the event that this patent is successfully asserted against us, such litigation may negatively impact our ability to commercialize GEM103 in France, Germany, Ireland, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Switzerland or the United Kingdom. Moreover, it is possible that Gemini is or may become aware of patents or pending patent applications that Gemini thinks do not relate to its product candidates or that Gemini believes are invalid or unenforceable, but that may nevertheless be interpreted to encompass its product candidates and to be valid and enforceable. As to pending third-party applications, Gemini cannot predict with any certainty which claims will issue, if any, or the scope of such issued claims. If any third party intellectual property claims are asserted against us, even if Gemini believes the claims are without merit, there is no assurance that a court would find in its favor, e.g., on questions of infringement, validity, enforceability or priority. A court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could materially and adversely affect Gemini’s ability and the ability of its licensor to commercialize any product candidates Gemini may develop and any other product candidates or technologies covered by the asserted third-party patents. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, Gemini would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. If any such third-party patents (including those that may issue from such applications) were successfully asserted against Gemini or its licensor or other commercialization partners and Gemini were unable to successfully challenge the validity or enforceability of any such asserted patents, then Gemini or its licensor and other commercialization partners may be prevented from commercializing its product candidates, or may be required to pay significant damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if Gemini is found to willfully infringe the asserted patents, or obtain a license to such patents, which may not be available on commercially

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.

The degree of future protection afforded by its intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect Gemini’s business or permit Gemini to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:

•        others may be able to make products that are similar to any product candidates Gemini may develop or utilize similar technology but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that Gemini licenses or may own in the future;

•        Gemini, or its current or future collaborators, might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patents and pending patent applications that Gemini licenses or may own in the future;

•        Gemini, or its current or future collaborators, might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of its or their inventions;

•        others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of its technologies without infringing its owned or licensed intellectual property rights;

•        it is possible that Gemini’s pending patent applications or those that it may own in the future will not lead to issued patents;

•        issued patents that Gemini holds rights to may be held invalid or unenforceable, including as a result of legal challenges by its competitors;

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

•        Gemini may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable;

•        the patents of others may harm its business; and

•        Gemini may choose not to file a patent application in order to maintain certain trade secrets or know-how, and a third party may subsequently file a patent covering such intellectual property.

Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Patents that ultimately issue that cover its product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or the USPTO.

If Gemini or its licensing partner initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent, if obtained, covering its product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering its product candidates, as applicable, is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. These types of mechanisms include inter partes review, post grant review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). These types of proceedings could result in revocation or amendment to its patents such that they no longer cover its product candidates. The outcome for any particular patent following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, Gemini cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which Gemini, its patent counsel and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, or if Gemini is otherwise unable to adequately protect its rights, Gemini would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on its product candidates. A loss of patent protection for its product candidates could have a material adverse impact on its ability to commercialize or license its technology and product candidates and, resultantly, on its business, financial condition, prospects and results of operations.

Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing its ability to protect its product candidates.

As is the case with other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, Gemini’s success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry involves technological and legal complexity, and obtaining and enforcing biotechnology patents is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances, weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations or ruling that certain subject matter is not eligible for patent protection. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to its and its licensor’s 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 decisions by Congress, the federal courts, the USPTO and equivalent bodies in foreign jurisdictions, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken its and its licensor’s ability to obtain new patents or to enforce existing patents and patents Gemini and its licensor may obtain in the future.

Patent reform laws, such as the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, as well as changes in how patent laws are interpreted, could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of its and its licensor’s patent applications and the enforcement or defense of its or its licensor’s issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the filing and prosecution strategies associated with patent applications, including a change from a “first-to-invent” to a “first-inventor-to-file” patent system, and may also affect patent prosecution and litigation, such as by allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. The USPTO has developed regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act and, in particular, the “first-inventor-to-file” provisions, became effective in 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will has on the operation of its business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of its or its licensor’s patent applications and the enforcement or defense of its or its licensor’s issued patents, all of which could has a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Reliance on Third Parties

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this subsection “— Risks Related to Reliance on Third Parties” to “we”, “us” and “our” generally refer to Gemini in the present tense or the Combined Entity from and after the Business Combination.

Gemini will rely on third parties to conduct its clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines or comply with regulatory requirements, Gemini may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of or commercialize any potential product candidates.

Gemini will depend upon third parties, including independent investigators, to conduct its clinical trials under agreements with universities, medical institutions, CROs, strategic partners and others. Gemini expects to has to negotiate budgets and contracts with CROs and trial sites, which may result in delays to its development timelines and increased costs.

Gemini will rely heavily on third parties over the course of its clinical trials, and, as a result, will have limited control over the clinical investigators and limited visibility into their day-to-day activities, including with respect to their compliance with the approved clinical protocol. Nevertheless, its reliance on third parties does not relieve Gemini of its regulatory responsibilities and it will be responsible for ensuring that each of its trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards. Gemini and these third parties are required to comply with good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities for product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical investigators and trial sites. If Gemini or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in its clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to suspend or terminate these trials or perform additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials before

approving its marketing applications. Gemini cannot be certain that, upon inspection, regulatory authorities will determine that any of its clinical trials comply with the GCP requirements. In addition, its clinical trials must be conducted with products produced under cGMP requirements and may require a large number of patients. Its failure or any failure by these third parties to comply with these applicable regulations or to recruit a sufficient number of patients may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, its business may be implicated if any of these third parties violates federal or state fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.

The third parties who may conduct its future clinical trials will not be its employees and, except for remedies that may be available to us under its agreements with those third parties, Gemini cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to its ongoing nonclinical and clinical programs. These third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including Gemini’s competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other product development activities, which could affect their performance on its behalf. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to its clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, its clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and Gemini may not be able to complete development of, obtain regulatory approval of or successfully commercialize its product candidates in a timely manner or at all. As a result, its financial results and the commercial prospects for its product candidates would be harmed, its costs could increase and its ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

If any of its relationships with these third-party CROs or others terminate, Gemini may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or other third parties or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO begins work. As a result, delays may occur, which can materially impact its ability to meet its desired clinical development timelines. Though Gemini carefully manages its relationships with its CROs, there can be no assurance that Gemini will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on its business, financial condition and prospects.

If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure (including by clinical sites or investigators) to adhere to its clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, its clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and Gemini may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize its product candidates. As a result, its results of operations and the commercial prospects for its product candidates would be harmed, its costs could increase substantially and its ability to generate revenues could be delayed significantly.

Gemini contracts with third parties for the manufacture of its product candidates for nonclinical testing and expects to continue to do so for clinical trials and for commercialization. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that Gemini will not have sufficient quantities of its product candidates or products, if approved, or that such supply will not be available to us at an acceptable cost, which could delay, prevent or impair its development or commercialization efforts.

Gemini does not have any manufacturing facilities. Gemini currently relies, and expect to continue to rely, on third-party manufacturers for the manufacture of its product candidates for nonclinical and clinical testing and for commercial supply of any of these product candidates for which Gemini obtains marketing approval. Reliance on third-party manufacturers may expose us to different risks than if Gemini were to manufacture product candidates itself. Any disruption in supply from any supplier or manufacturing location, including on account of the COVID-19 pandemic, could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. To the extent any issues arise with its third-party manufacturers, Gemini may be unable to establish any agreements with any other third-party manufacturers or to do so on acceptable terms. Even if Gemini is able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

•        the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party;

•        the possible termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us; and

•        reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance, quality assurance and safety and pharmacovigilance reporting.

Third-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP regulations or applicable foreign regulatory requirements. Its failure, or the failure of third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or medicines, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of its product candidates and harm its business and results of operations.

Any product candidates that Gemini may develop may compete with other product candidates and products for access to manufacturing facilities. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that might be capable of manufacturing for us.

Any performance failure on the part of its existing or future manufacturers could delay clinical development or marketing approval. Gemini does not currently have arrangements in place for redundant supply for bulk drug substances. If any one of its current contract manufacturers cannot perform as agreed, Gemini may be required to replace that manufacturer. Although Gemini believes that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture its product candidates, Gemini may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement.

Its current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of its product candidates may adversely affect its future profit margins and its ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

The manufacture of Gemini’s product candidates is complex and Gemini may encounter difficulties in production. If Gemini or any of its third-party manufacturers encounter such difficulties, or fails to meet rigorously enforced regulatory standards, its ability to provide supply of its product candidates for clinical trials or its products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or stopped, or Gemini may be unable to maintain a commercially viable cost structure.

The processes involved in manufacturing its product candidates are complex, expensive, highly-regulated, and subject to multiple risks. Further, as product candidates are developed through nonclinical studies to late-stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause its product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials.

In addition, the manufacturing process for any products that Gemini may develop is subject to FDA and other applicable foreign regulatory authority approval processes and continuous oversight, and Gemini will need to contract with manufacturers who can meet all applicable FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including, for example, complying with cGMPs, on an ongoing basis. If Gemini or its third-party manufacturers are unable to reliably produce products to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, Gemini may not obtain or maintain the approvals Gemini needs to commercialize such products. Even if Gemini obtains regulatory approval for any of its product candidates, there is no assurance that either Gemini or its contract manufacturers will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product, or to meet potential future demand. Any of these challenges could delay completion of clinical trials, require bridging or comparability nonclinical or clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical study costs, delay approval of its product candidates, impair commercialization efforts, increase its cost of goods, and has an adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects.

Gemini may seek to establish collaborations, and, if Gemini is not able to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, Gemini may have to alter its development and commercialization plans.

Gemini may pursue collaborations in order to develop and commercialize GEM103 and other product candidates. Gemini face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Whether Gemini reaches a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon its 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 design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and

complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products and the existence of uncertainty with respect to its ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborators may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for its product candidates.

Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have been a significant number of business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators.

Gemini may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If Gemini is unable to do so, Gemini may have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which Gemini is seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of its other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities or increase its expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at its own expense. If Gemini elects to increase its expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on its own, Gemini may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If Gemini does not have sufficient funds, Gemini may not be able to further develop its product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

Risks Related to Commercialization

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this subsection “— Risks Related to Commercialization” to “we”, “us” and “our” generally refer to Gemini in the present tense or the Combined Entity from and after the Business Combination.

Even if Gemini commercializes its product candidates, these products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which could harm its business.

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new drugs and biologics vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a product 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, Gemini might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay or limit its commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which could negatively impact the revenue Gemini generates from the sale of the product in that particular country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder its ability to recoup its investment in one or more product candidates, even if its product candidates obtain marketing approval.

Its ability to commercialize any products successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from third-party payors such as government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Third-party payors determine which medications they will cover and establish reimbursement levels. Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. Gemini cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that Gemini commercializes and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which Gemini obtains marketing approval, if any. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, Gemini may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which marketing approval is obtained, if any.

There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and biologics, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid

for in all cases or at a rate that covers its costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs and biologics, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover its costs and may only be temporary. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the product and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost products and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for products may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs and biologics from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Its inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable reimbursement rates third-party payors for any approved products that Gemini develops could have a material adverse effect on its operating results, its ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and its overall financial condition.

If, in the future, Gemini is unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market any product candidates Gemini may develop, Gemini may not be successful in commercializing those product candidates if and when they are approved.

Gemini does not currently have an infrastructure for the sales, marketing, and distribution of pharmaceutical products. In order to market its product candidates, if approved by the FDA or any other regulatory body, Gemini must build its sales, marketing, managerial, and other non-technical capabilities, or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. There are risks involved with both establishing its own commercial capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training a sales force or reimbursement specialists is expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which Gemini recruits a sales force and establishes marketing and other commercialization capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, Gemini would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and its investment would be lost if Gemini cannot retain or reposition its commercialization personnel.

If Gemini enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing, commercial support, and distribution services, its product revenue or the profitability of product revenue may be lower than if Gemini were to market and sell any products Gemini may develop itself. In addition, Gemini may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to commercialize its product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. Gemini may have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market its products effectively and they could expose its company to regulatory enforcement and legal risk in the execution of their sales and commercialization activities. If Gemini does not establish commercialization capabilities successfully, either on its own or in collaboration with third parties, Gemini will not be successful in commercializing its product candidates if approved.

If Gemini is unable to establish adequate sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, or if Gemini is unable to do so on commercially reasonable terms, its business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects will be materially adversely affected.

Gemini’s product candidates may not achieve adequate market acceptance among physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Even if Gemini’s product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain adequate market acceptance among physicians, patients, third-party payors, pharmaceutical companies and others in the medical community. Demonstrating the safety and efficacy of its product candidates and obtaining regulatory approvals will not guarantee future revenue. Its commercial success also depends on coverage and adequate reimbursement of its product candidates by third-party payors, including government payors and private insurers, which may be difficult or time-consuming to obtain, may be limited in scope and may not be obtained in all jurisdictions in which Gemini may seek to market its products. Third-party payors closely examine medical products to determine whether they should be covered by reimbursement and, if so, the level of reimbursement that will apply. Gemini cannot be certain that third-party payors will sufficiently reimburse sales of its product, or enable us to sell its product at a profitable price. Similar concerns could also limit the reimbursement amounts that health insurers or government agencies in other countries are prepared to pay for its products. In many regions outside the United States where Gemini may pursue regulatory approvals and market its products, the pricing of prescription drugs is controlled by the government or regulatory agencies.

Regulatory agencies in these countries could determine that the pricing for its products should be based on prices of other commercially available products for the same disease, rather than allowing Gemini to market its products at a premium as new drugs. The degree of market acceptance of any of its approved product candidates will depend on a number of factors, including:

•        the efficacy and safety profile of the product candidate as demonstrated in clinical trials;

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

•        the clinical indications for which the product candidate is approved;

•        acceptance of the product candidate as a safe and effective treatment by clinics and patients;

•        the potential and perceived advantages of the product candidate over alternative treatments, including any similar generic treatments;

•        the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments;

•        the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement and pricing by third-party payors;

•        the relative convenience and ease of administration;

•        the frequency and severity of adverse events;

•        the effectiveness of sales and marketing efforts; and

•        unfavorable publicity relating to its product candidates.

Sales of medical products also depend on the willingness of physicians to prescribe the treatment, which is likely to be based on a determination by these physicians that the products are safe, therapeutically effective and cost effective. In addition, the inclusion or exclusion of products from treatment guidelines established by various physician groups and the viewpoints of influential physicians can affect the willingness of other physicians to prescribe the treatment. Gemini cannot predict whether physicians, physicians’ organizations, hospitals, other healthcare providers, government agencies or private insurers will determine that its product is safe, therapeutically effective and cost effective as compared with competing treatments. If any product candidate is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by such parties, Gemini may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from that product candidate and may not become or remain profitable.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and to limit commercialization of any products that Gemini may develop and insurance coverage may not be adequate.

Gemini faces an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of its product candidates in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk if Gemini commercialize any resulting products. Product liability claims may be brought against us by subjects enrolled in its clinical trials, patients, their family members, healthcare providers or others using, administering or selling its products. If Gemini cannot successfully defend itself against claims that its product candidates or products that Gemini may develop caused injuries, Gemini could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

•        decreased demand for any product candidates or products that Gemini may develop;

•        termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs;

•        injury to its reputation and significant negative media attention;

•        withdrawal of clinical trial participants;

•        significant costs to defend the related litigation;

•        substantial monetary awards to trial subjects or patients;

•        loss of revenue;

•        diversion of management and scientific resources from its business operations;

•        the inability to commercialize any products that Gemini may develop; and

•        a decline in its stock price.

Its clinical trial liability insurance coverage may not adequately cover all liabilities that Gemini may incur. Gemini may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. Its inability to obtain product liability insurance at an acceptable cost or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or delay the commercialization of any products or product candidates that Gemini develop. Gemini intend to expand its insurance coverage for products to include the sale of commercial products if Gemini obtains marketing approval for its product candidates in development, but Gemini may be unable to obtain commercially reasonable product liability insurance for any products approved for marketing. Large judgments have been awarded in lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. If Gemini is sued for any injury caused by its products, product candidates or processes, its liability could exceed its product liability insurance coverage and its total assets. Claims against us, regardless of their merit or potential outcome, may also generate negative publicity or hurt our ability to obtain physician adoption of its product or expand its business.

Risks Related to FS Development and the Business Combination

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this subsection “— Risks Related to FS Development and Combination” to “we”, “us” and “our” generally refer to FS Development in the present tense or the Combined Entity from and after the Business Combination.

FS Development’s Sponsor, directors and officers have interests in the Business Combination which may be different from or in addition to (and which may conflict with) the interests of its stockholders.

FS Development’s Sponsor, officers and directors and their respective affiliates and associates have interests in and arising from the Business Combination that are different from, or in addition to, (and which may conflict with) the interests of FS Development’s public stockholders, which could result in a real or perceived conflict of interest. These interests include, among other things, the interests listed below:

•        If we are unable to complete our initial business combination by August 14, 2022, we will: (i) cease all operations except for the purpose of winding up, (ii) as promptly as reasonably possible but not more than ten business days thereafter, redeem 100% of the outstanding Public Shares, at a per-share price, payable in cash, equal to the aggregate amount then on deposit in the Trust Account, including interest earned on the funds held in the Trust Account and not previously released to FS Development to pay its taxes (less up to $100,000 of interest to pay dissolution expenses), divided by the number of then outstanding Public Shares, which redemption will completely extinguish public stockholders’ rights as stockholders (including the right to receive further liquidating distributions, if any), subject to applicable law, and (iii) as promptly as reasonably possible following such redemption, subject to the approval of FS Development’s remaining stockholders and the Board, dissolve and liquidate, subject in each case to FS Development’s obligations under Delaware law to provide for claims of creditors and the requirements of other applicable law .

•        There will be no liquidating distributions from the Trust Account with respect to the Founders Shares if we fail to complete a business combination within the required period. Our Sponsor purchased the Founders Shares prior to the FS Development IPO for an aggregate purchase price of $25,000, and transferred 30,000 Founders Shares to each of Mr. Carey, Dr. Dubin and Dr. Pakianathan.

•        Simultaneously with the closing of the FS Development IPO, FS Development consummated the sale of 441,500 Private Placement Shares at a price of $10.00 per share in a private placement to our Sponsor. If we do not consummate a business combination transaction by August 14, 2022, then the proceeds from the sale of the Private Placement Shares will be part of the liquidating distribution to the public stockholders and the shares held by the Sponsor will be worthless.

•        Our Sponsor, officers and directors will lose their entire investment in us if we do not complete a business combination by August 14, 2022. Certain of them may continue to serve as officers and/or directors of FS Development after the Closing. As such, in the future they may receive any cash fees, stock options or stock awards that the Board determines to pay to its directors and/or officers.

•        Our Sponsor, officers and directors collectively (including entities controlled by officers and directors) have made an aggregate average investment per share of $0.799 (including the Founders Shares and Private Placement Shares) as of the consummation of the FS Development IPO. As a result of the significantly lower investment per share of our Sponsor, officers and directors as compared with the investment per share of our public stockholders, a transaction which results in an increase in the value of the investment of our Sponsor, officers and directors may result in a decrease in the value of the investment of our public stockholders.

•        Our initial stockholders and our officers and directors have agreed to waive their rights to liquidating distributions from the Trust Account with respect to their Founders Shares and Private Placement Shares if FS Development fails to complete a business combination by August 14, 2022.

•        In order to protect the amounts held in the Trust Account, the Sponsor has agreed that it will be liable to us if and to the extent any claims by a vendor for services rendered or products sold to us, or a prospective target business with which we have entered into a transaction agreement, reduce the amount of funds in the Trust Account. This liability will not apply with respect to any claims by a third party who executed a waiver of any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies held in the Trust Account or to any claims under our indemnity of the underwriters of the offering against certain liabilities, including liabilities under the Securities Act.

•        Following the Closing, our Sponsor would be entitled to the repayment of any working capital loan and advances that have been made to FS Development and remain outstanding. As of the date of this proxy statement/prospectus, our Sponsor has not made any advances to us for working capital expenses. If we do not complete an initial business combination within the required period, we may use a portion of our working capital held outside the Trust Account to repay the working capital loans, but no proceeds held in the Trust Account would be used to repay the working capital loans.

•        Following the Closing, we will continue to indemnify our existing directors and officers and will maintain a directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy.

•        Upon the Closing, subject to the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement, our Sponsor, our officers and directors and their respective affiliates may be entitled to reimbursement for any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses related to identifying, investigating and consummating an initial business combination, and repayment of any other loans, if any, and on such terms as to be determined by FS Development from time to time, made by our Sponsor or certain of our officers and directors to finance transaction costs in connection with an intended initial business combination.

See “Business Combination Proposal — Interests of FS Development’s Directors and Officers and Others in the Business Combination” for additional information on interests of FS Development’s directors and executive officers.

These financial interests of the Sponsor as well as FS Development’s directors and officers may have influenced their motivation in identifying and selecting Gemini as a business combination target, and their decision to approve the Business Combination. In considering the recommendations of the Board to vote for the proposals, its stockholders should consider these interests.

Activities taken by FS Development’s affiliates to purchase, directly or indirectly, Public Shares will increase the likelihood of approval of the Business Combination Proposal and the other Proposals and may affect the market price of the FS Development’s securities.

FS Development’s Sponsor, directors, officers, advisors or their affiliates may purchase shares in privately negotiated transactions either prior to or following the Closing, although they are under no obligation to do so. None of FS Development’s Sponsor, directors, officers, advisors or their affiliates will make any such purchases when such parties are in possession of any material non-public information not disclosed to the seller or during a restricted period under

Regulation M under the Exchange Act. Although none of FS Development’s Sponsor, directors, officers, advisors or their affiliates currently anticipate paying any premium purchase price for such Public Shares, in the event such parties do, the payment of a premium may not be in the best interest of those stockholders not receiving any such additional consideration. There is no limit on the number of shares that could be acquired by FS Development’s Sponsor, directors, officers, advisors or their affiliates, or the price such parties may pay, subject to compliance with applicable law and Nasdaq rules.

If such transactions are effected, the consequence could be to cause the Business Combination to be approved in circumstances where such approval could not otherwise be obtained. Purchases of shares by the persons described above would allow them to exert more influence over the approval of the Business Combination Proposal and other proposals and would likely increase the chances that such Proposals would be approved. If the market does not view the Business Combination positively, purchases of Public Shares may have the effect of counteracting the market’s view, which would otherwise be reflected in a decline in the market price of FS Development’s securities. In addition, the termination of the support provided by these purchases may materially adversely affect the market price of FS Development’s securities. In addition, if such purchases are made, the public “float” of FS Development Class A Common Stock and the number of beneficial holders of FS Development Class A Common Stock may be reduced, possibly making it difficult to obtain or maintain the quotation, listing or trading of FS Development Class A Common Stock on a national securities exchange.

Other than as expressly stated herein, there are no current commitments, plans or intentions to engage in any such transactions and no terms or conditions for any such transaction have been formulated. None of the funds in the Trust Account will be used to purchase shares in such transactions.

FS Development did not obtain an opinion from an independent investment banking or accounting firm, and consequently, there can be no assurance from an independent source that the price FS Development is paying for is fair to FS Development from a financial point of view.

FS Development is not required to obtain an opinion from an independent investment banking or accounting firm that the price FS Development is paying in connection with the Business Combination is fair to FS Development from a financial point of view. The Board did not obtain a third-party valuation or fairness opinion in connection with its initial determination to approve and recommend the Business Combination. Accordingly, investors will be relying solely on the judgment of the Board in valuing Gemini’s business, and assuming the risk that the Board may not have properly valued the Business Combination.

The Sponsor has agreed to vote in favor of the Business Combination, regardless of how FS Development’s public stockholders vote.

Unlike some other blank check companies in which the initial stockholders agree to vote their Founders Shares in accordance with the majority of the votes cast by the public stockholders in connection with an initial business combination, the holders of the Founders Shares, pursuant to the Parent Support Agreement, have agreed, among other things, to vote their shares in favor of the Business Combination. Our initial stockholders own approximately 22.3% of our outstanding shares prior to the Business Combination. As a result, FS Development would need only 4,303,264, or approximately 27.7%, of the 15,535,250 shares of FS Development Common Stock to be voted in favor of the Business Combination in order to have the Business Combination approved. Accordingly, it is more likely that the necessary stockholder approval will be received than would be the case if the Sponsor agreed to vote its Founders Shares in accordance with the majority of the votes cast by FS Development’s public stockholders.

FS Development has no operating history and is subject to a mandatory liquidation and subsequent dissolution requirement. If FS Development is unable to consummate a business combination, including the Business Combination, its public stockholders may be forced to wait more than 24 months before receiving distributions from the Trust Account.

FS Development is a development stage blank check company, and it has no operating history and is subject to a mandatory liquidation and subsequent dissolution requirement. FS Development has until August 14, 2022 to complete a business combination. FS Development has no obligation to return funds to investors prior to such date unless (i) it consummates a business combination prior thereto or (ii) it seeks to amend its Current Charter prior to consummation of a business combination, and only then in cases where investors have sought to convert or sell their shares to FS

Development. Only after the expiration of this full time period will public stockholders be entitled to distributions from the Trust Account if FS Development is unable to complete a business combination. Accordingly, investors’ funds may be unavailable to them until after such date and to liquidate their investment, public security holders may be forced to sell their Public Shares, potentially at a loss.

Following the Closing, the Combined Entity’s only significant asset will be ownership of 100% of Gemini and such ownership may not be sufficient to pay dividends or make distributions or loans to enable it to pay any dividends on its Common Stock.

Following the Closing, the Combined Entity will have no direct operations and no significant assets other than the ownership of 100% of Gemini. The Combined Entity will depend on Gemini for distributions, loans and other payments to generate the funds necessary to meet the Combined Entity’s financial obligations, including expenses related to operating as a publicly traded company, and to pay any dividends with respect to its Common Stock. In addition, there are legal and contractual restrictions in agreements governing current and future indebtedness of Gemini under its loan and security agreement with SVB. The earnings from, or other available assets of, Gemini, may not be sufficient to pay dividends or make distributions or loans to enable the Combined Entity to pay any dividends on its Common Stock.

Subsequent to the Closing, FS Development may be required to take write-downs or write-offs, restructuring and impairment or other charges that could have a significant negative effect on its financial condition, results of operations and stock price, which could cause you to lose some or all of your investment.

Although FS Development has conducted due diligence on Gemini, FS Development cannot assure you that this diligence revealed all material issues that may be present in Gemini’s business, that it would be possible to uncover all material issues through a customary amount of due diligence, or that factors outside of FS Development’s and Gemini’s control will not later arise. As a result, FS Development may be forced to later write-down or write-off assets, restructure its operations, or incur impairment or other charges that could result in losses. Even if FS Development’s due diligence successfully identifies certain risks, unexpected risks may arise and previously known risks may materialize in a manner not consistent with FS Development’s preliminary risk analysis. Even though these charges may be non-cash items and may not have an immediate impact on FS Development’s liquidity, the fact that FS Development reports charges of this nature could contribute to negative market perceptions about the Combined Entity’s or FS Development’s securities. In addition, charges of this nature may cause FS Development to be unable to obtain future financing on favorable terms or at all. Accordingly, any FS Development stockholder who chooses to remain a stockholder of the Combined Entity following the Business Combination could suffer a reduction in the value of their shares. Such stockholders are unlikely to have a remedy for such reduction in value unless they are able to successfully claim that the reduction was due to the breach by FS Development’s officers or directors of a duty of care or other fiduciary duty owed to them, or if they are able to successfully bring a private claim under securities laws that the proxy solicitation relating to the Business Combination contained an actionable material misstatement or material omission.

Our actual financial position and results of operations may differ materially from the unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information included in this proxy statement/prospectus may not be indicative of what FS Development’s actual financial position or results of operations would have been.

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information in this proxy statement/prospectus is presented for illustrative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of what FS Development’s actual financial position or results of operations would have been had the Business Combination been completed on the dates indicated. See the section titled “Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Combined Financial Information” for more information.

If third parties bring claims against FS Development or if FS Development files a bankruptcy petition or an involuntary bankruptcy petition is filed against FS Development that is not dismissed, the proceeds held in trust could be reduced and the per-share redemption price received by stockholders may be less than $10.00 (which was the offering price in our initial public offering).

FS Development’s placing of funds in trust may not protect those funds from third party claims against FS Development. Although FS Development will seek to have all vendors and service providers (except for our independent registered public accounting firm) FS Development engages and prospective target businesses FS Development negotiates with execute agreements with FS Development waiving any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies held

in the Trust Account for the benefit of FS Development’s public stockholders, they may not execute such agreements. Furthermore, even if such entities execute such agreements with FS Development, they may seek recourse against the Trust Account. Additionally, a court may not uphold the validity of such agreements. Accordingly, the proceeds held in trust could be subject to claims which could take priority over those of FS Development’s public stockholders.

Additionally, if FS Development is forced to file a bankruptcy case or an involuntary bankruptcy case is filed against FS Development’s which is not dismissed, the proceeds held in the Trust Account could be subject to applicable bankruptcy law, and may be included in FS Development’s bankruptcy estate and subject to the claims of third parties with priority over the claims of FS Development’s stockholders. To the extent any bankruptcy claims deplete the Trust Account, FS Development may not be able to return to FS Development’s public stockholders at least $10.00 (which was the offering price in our initial public offering). As a result, if any such claims were successfully made against the Trust Account, the funds available for FS Development’s initial business combination, including the Business Combination, and redemptions could be reduced to less than $10.00 per Public Share.

FS Development’s stockholders may be held liable for claims by third parties against FS Development to the extent of distributions received by them.

The Current Charter provides that FS Development will continue in existence only until April 14, 2022. If FS Development has not completed a business combination by such date, FS Development will (i) cease all operations except for the purpose of winding up, (ii) as promptly as reasonably possible but not more than ten business days thereafter, redeem 100% of the outstanding Public Shares, at a per-share price, payable in cash, equal to the aggregate amount then on deposit in the Trust Account, including interest earned on the funds held in the Trust Account and not previously released to FS Development to pay its taxes (less up to $100,000 of interest to pay dissolution expenses), divided by the number of then outstanding Public Shares, which redemption will completely extinguish public stockholders’ rights as stockholders (including the right to receive further liquidating distributions, if any), subject to applicable law, and (iii) as promptly as reasonably possible following such redemption, subject to the approval of FS Development’s remaining stockholders and the Board, dissolve and liquidate, subject in each case to FS Development’s obligations under Delaware law to provide for claims of creditors and the requirements of other applicable law.

If FS Development is forced to file a bankruptcy case or an involuntary bankruptcy case is filed against FS Development which is not dismissed, any distributions received by stockholders could be viewed under applicable debtor/creditor and/or bankruptcy laws as either a “preferential transfer” or a “fraudulent conveyance.” As a result, a bankruptcy court could seek to recover all amounts received by FS Development’s stockholders. Furthermore, because FS Development intends to distribute the proceeds held in the Public Shares to FS Development’s public stockholders promptly after expiration of the time FS Development has to complete an initial business combination, this may be viewed or interpreted as giving preference to FS Development’s public stockholders over any potential creditors with respect to access to or distributions from FS Development’s assets. Furthermore, the Board may be viewed as having breached their fiduciary duties to FS Development’s creditors and/or may have acted in bad faith, and thereby exposing itself and FS Development to claims of punitive damages, by paying public stockholders from the Trust Account prior to addressing the claims of creditors. FS Development cannot assure you that claims will not be brought against it for these reasons.

FS Development’s ability to successfully effect the Business Combination and to be successful thereafter will be totally dependent upon the efforts of its key personnel, including Gemini’s key personnel, all of whom are expected to join FS Development following the Business Combination. While FS Development intends to closely scrutinize any individuals it engages after the Business Combination, it cannot assure you that its assessment of these individuals will prove to be correct.

FS Development’s ability to successfully effect the Business Combination is dependent upon the efforts of FS Development’s key personnel, including key personnel of Gemini. Although FS Development expects all of such key personnel to remain with Gemini following the Business Combination, it is possible that FS Development will lose some key personnel, the loss of which could negatively impact the operations and profitability of the Combined Entity. While FS Development intends to closely scrutinize any individuals it engages after the Business Combination, it cannot assure you that its assessment of these individuals will prove to be correct. These individuals may be unfamiliar with the requirements of operating a public company which could cause FS Development to have to expend time and resources helping them become familiar with such requirements. This could be expensive and time-consuming and could lead to various regulatory issues which may adversely affect its operations. Additionally, FS Development

cannot assure you that FS Development will be successful in integrating and retaining such key personnel, or in identifying and recruiting additional key individuals FS Development determines may be necessary following the Business Combination.

A market for FS Development’s securities may not continue, which would adversely affect the liquidity and price of its securities.

Following the Business Combination, the price of FS Development’s securities may fluctuate significantly due to the market’s reaction to the Business Combination and general market and economic conditions. An active trading market for FS Development’s securities following the Business Combination may never develop or, if developed, it may not be sustained. In addition, the price of FS Development’s securities after the Business Combination can vary due to general economic conditions and forecasts, FS Development’s general business condition and the release of FS Development’s financial reports. Additionally, if FS Development’s securities are not listed on, or become delisted from the Nasdaq for any reason, and are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, an inter-dealer automated quotation system for equity securities that is not a national securities exchange, the liquidity and price of FS Development’s securities may be more limited than if FS Development were quoted or listed on the NYSE American, LLC, the Nasdaq or another national securities exchange. You may be unable to sell your securities unless a market can be established or sustained.

There can be no assurance that FS Development will be able to comply with the continued listing standards of the Nasdaq.

FS Development Class A Common Stock is expected to be listed on Nasdaq following the Business Combination. FS Development’s continued eligibility for listing may depend on the number of shares that are redeemed. If, after the Business Combination, the Nasdaq delists FS Development’s securities from trading on its exchange for failure to meet the listing standards, FS Development and its stockholders could face significant material adverse consequences including:

•        a limited availability of market quotations for FS Development’s securities;

•        a determination that FS Development Class A Common Stock is a “penny stock” which will require brokers trading in its FS Development Class A Common Stock to adhere to more stringent rules, possibly resulting in a reduced level of trading activity in the secondary trading market for FS Development Class A Common Stock;

•        a limited amount of analyst coverage; and

•        a decreased ability to issue additional securities or obtain additional financing in the future.

Our directors may decide not to enforce the indemnification obligations of our Sponsor, resulting in a reduction in the amount of funds in the Trust Account available for distribution to our public stockholders.

In the event that the proceeds in the Trust Account are reduced below the lesser of (i) $10.00 per share and (ii) the actual amount per public share held in the Trust Account as of the date of the liquidation of the Trust Account if less than $10.00 per public share due to reductions in the value of the trust assets, in each case less taxes payable, and our Sponsor asserts that it is unable to satisfy its obligations or that it has no indemnification obligations related to a particular claim, our independent directors would determine whether to take legal action against our Sponsor to enforce its indemnification obligations. While we currently expect that our independent directors would take legal action on our behalf against our Sponsor to enforce its indemnification obligations to us, it is possible that our independent directors in exercising their business judgment and subject to their fiduciary duties may choose not to do so in any particular instance. If our independent directors choose not to enforce these indemnification obligations, the amount of funds in the Trust Account available for distribution to our public stockholders may be reduced below $10.00 per public share.

If the Business Combination’s benefits do not meet the expectations of investors, stockholders or financial analysts, the market price of FS Development’s securities may decline.

If the benefits of the Business Combination do not meet the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the market price of FS Development’s securities prior to the Closing may decline. The market values of FS Development’s securities at the time of the Business Combination may vary significantly from their prices on the date the Merger Agreement was executed, the date of this proxy statement/prospectus, or the date on which FS Development’s stockholders vote

on the Business Combination. Because the number of shares to be issued pursuant to the Merger Agreement is fixed and will not be adjusted to reflect any changes in the market price of FS Development Class A Common Stock, the market value of FS Development stock issued in the Business Combination may be higher or lower than the value of these shares on an earlier date.

In addition, following the Business Combination, fluctuations in the price of FS Development’s securities could contribute to the loss of all or part of your investment. Accordingly, the valuation ascribed to Gemini and FS Development Class A Common Stock in the Business Combination may not be indicative of the actual price that will prevail in the trading market following the Business Combination. If an active market for FS Development’s Class A Common Stock develops and continues, the trading price of FS Development’s Class A Common Stock following the Business Combination could be volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond FS Development’s control. Any of the factors listed below could have a material adverse effect on your investment in FS Development’s Class A Common Stock and FS Development’s Class A Common Stock may trade at prices significantly below the price you paid for them. In such circumstances, the trading price of FS Development’s Class A Common Stock may not recover and may experience a further decline.

Factors affecting the trading price of the Combined Entity’s securities following the Business Combination may include:

•        actual or anticipated fluctuations in the Combined Entity’s quarterly financial results or the quarterly financial results of companies perceived to be similar to the Combined Entity;

•        changes in the market’s expectations about the Combined Entity’s operating results;

•        success of competitors;

•        the Combined Entity’s operating results failing to meet the expectation of securities analysts or investors in a particular period;

•        changes in financial estimates and recommendations by securities analysts concerning the Combined Entity or the market in general;

•        operating and stock price performance of other companies that investors deem comparable to the Combined Entity;

•        the Combined Entity’s ability to develop product candidates;

•        changes in laws and regulations affecting the Combined Entity’s business, including any changes that affect development of Gemini’s product candidates, including GEM103, Gemini’s lead product candidate;

•        commencement of, or involvement in, litigation involving the Combined Entity;

•        changes in the Combined Entity’s capital structure, such as future issuances of securities or the incurrence of additional debt;

•        the volume of shares of the Combined Entity’s securities available for public sale;

•        any major change in the board or management;

•        sales of substantial amounts of Common Stock by FS Development’s directors, executive officers or significant stockholders or the perception that such sales could occur; and

•        general economic and political conditions such as recessions, interest rates, fuel prices, international currency fluctuations and acts of war or terrorism.

Broad market and industry factors may materially harm the market price of the Combined Entity’s securities irrespective of its operating performance. The stock market in general and the Nasdaq in particular have experienced price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the particular companies affected. The trading prices and valuations of these stocks, and of the Combined Entity’s securities, may not be predictable. A loss of investor confidence in the market for biopharmaceutical stocks or the stocks of other companies which investors perceive to be similar to the Combined Entity could depress the Combined Entity’s stock

price regardless of the Combined Entity’s business, prospects, financial conditions or results of operations. A decline in the market price of the Combined Entity’s securities also could adversely affect the Combined Entity’s ability to issue additional securities and the Combined Entity’s ability to obtain additional financing in the future.

Following the Business Combination, if securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about the Combined Entity, its business, or its market, or if they change their recommendations regarding the Combined Entity’s securities adversely, the price and trading volume of the Combined Entity’s securities could decline.

The trading market for the Combined Entity’s securities will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about FS Development, its business, its market, or its competitors. Securities and industry analysts do not currently, and may never, publish research on FS Development or the Combined Entity. Because the Business Combination will result in Gemini being acquired by a special purpose acquisition company, research coverage from industry analysts may be limited. If no securities or industry analysts commence coverage of the Combined Entity, FS Development’s stock price and trading volume could be negatively impacted. If any of the analysts who may cover the Combined Entity change their recommendation regarding FS Development’s stock adversely, provide more favorable relative recommendations about FS Development’s competitors or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about the Combined Entity’s business, the price of the Combined Entity’s securities would likely decline. If any analyst who may cover the Combined Entity were to cease coverage of the Combined Entity or fail to regularly publish reports on it, FS Development could lose visibility in the financial markets, demand for the Combined Entity’s securities could decrease, which could cause its stock price or trading volume to decline.

The future sales of shares by existing stockholders and future exercise of registration rights may adversely affect the market price of the Combined Entity’s common stock.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of the Combined Entity’s common stock in the public market could occur at any time. If the Combined Entity’s stockholders sell, or the market perceives that the Combined Entity’s stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of the Combined Entity’s common stock in the public market, the market price of the Combined Entity’s common stock could decline.

Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement to be entered into in connection with the Business Combination, certain stockholders of FS Development and Gemini can each demand that the Combined Entity register their registrable securities under certain circumstances and will each also have piggyback registration rights for these securities. In addition, following the Closing, the Combined Entity is required to file and maintain an effective registration statement under the Securities Act covering such securities and certain other securities of the Combined Entity. The registration of these securities will permit the public sale of such securities, subject to certain contractual restrictions imposed by the Registration Rights Agreement and the Merger Agreement. The presence of these additional shares of common stock trading in the public market may have an adverse effect on the market price of the Combined Entity’s securities.

FS Development’s public stockholders will experience immediate dilution as a consequence of, among other transactions, the issuance of FS Development Class A Common Stock as consideration in the Business Combination and the PIPE Investment. Having a minority share position may reduce the influence that FS Development’s current stockholders have on the management of the Combined Entity.

It is anticipated that, upon the Closing, FS Development’s public stockholders (other than the PIPE Investment investors) will retain an ownership interest of approximately 26% in the Combined Entity, the PIPE Investment investors will own approximately 21% of the Combined Entity (such that public stockholders, including PIPE Investment investors, will own approximately 47% of the Combined Entity), the Sponsor will retain an ownership interest of approximately 7% in the Combined Entity and the Gemini Equityholders will own approximately 46% of the outstanding common stock of the Combined Entity.

The ownership percentage with respect to the Combined Entity following the Business Combination does not take into account the redemption of any shares by FS Development’s public stockholders. If the actual facts are different than these assumptions (which they are likely to be), the percentage ownership retained by FS Development’s existing stockholders in the Combined Entity will be different.

The Combined Entity expects to incur significant additional costs as a result of being a public company, which may adversely affect its operating results and financial condition.

The Combined Entity expects to incur costs associated with corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules implemented by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, or the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC and Nasdaq. Its management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, the Combined Entity expects these rules and regulations are expected to increase its accounting, legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly. In addition, the Combined Entity will incur additional costs associated with its public company reporting requirements and the Combined Entity expects those costs to increase in the future. For example, the Combined Entity will be required to devote significant resources to complete the assessment and documentation of its internal control system and financial process under Section 404, including an assessment of the design of its information systems associated with its internal controls.

To date, the Combined Entity has not conducted a review of its internal control for the purpose of providing the reports required by these rules. During its review and testing, the Combined Entity may identify deficiencies and be unable to remediate them before the Combined Entity must provide the required reports. Furthermore, if the Combined Entity fails to remediate its existing material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting or if new material weaknesses are identified or arise in the future, the Combined Entity may not detect errors on a timely basis and its consolidated financial statements may be materially misstated. the Combined Entity or its independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to conclude on an ongoing basis that the Combined Entity has effective internal control over financial reporting, which could harm its operating results, cause investors to lose confidence in its reported financial information and cause the trading price of its stock to fall. In addition, as a public company the Combined Entity will be required to timely file accurate quarterly and annual reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act. Any failure to report its financial results on an accurate and timely basis could result in sanctions, lawsuits, delisting of its shares from Nasdaq or other adverse consequences. The Combined Entity will incur significant costs to remediate any material weaknesses the Combined Entity identifies through these efforts. The increased costs will increase its net loss and may require us to reduce costs in other areas of its business or increase the prices of its products or services. The Combined Entity also expects these rules and regulations to make it more expensive for us to maintain directors’ and officers’ liability insurance and the Combined Entity may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for the Combined Entity to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on its board of directors, its board committees, or as executive officers. The Combined Entity cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs the Combined Entity may incur or the timing of such costs.

New laws and regulations, as well as changes to existing laws and regulations affecting public companies, including the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Act and rules adopted by the SEC and Nasdaq, would likely result in increased costs as the Combined Entity responds to their requirements, which may adversely affect its operating results and financial condition.

Anti-takeover provisions contained in the Proposed Charter and the Amended By-laws, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could impair a takeover attempt.

The Proposed Charter will contain provisions that may discourage unsolicited takeover proposals that stockholders may consider to be in their best interests. FS Development is also subject to anti-takeover provisions under Delaware law, which could discourage, delay, defer or prevent a merger, tender offer, proxy contest or other change of control transaction that a stockholder might consider in its best interest, including those attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares of common stock held by the Combined Entity’s stockholders. These provisions provide for, among other things:

•        a classified board with a three-year staggered term;

•        the ability of the Combined Entity’s board of directors to issue one or more series of “blank check” preferred stock;

•        certain limitations on convening special stockholder meetings;

•        advance notice for nominations of directors by stockholders and for stockholders to include matters to be considered at the Combined Entity’s annual meetings; and

•        amendment of certain provisions of the organizational documents only by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the Combined Entity’s then-outstanding shares of capital stock entitled to vote generally at an election of directors.

These anti-takeover provisions as well as certain provisions of Delaware law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire the Combined Entity, even if the third party’s offer may be considered beneficial by many of the Combined Entity’s stockholders. As a result, the Combined Entity’s stockholders may be limited in their ability to obtain a premium for their shares. If prospective takeovers are not consummated for any reason, the Combined Entity may experience negative reactions from the financial markets, including negative impacts on the price of the Combined Entity common stock. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for the Combined Entity’s stockholders to elect directors of their choosing and to cause the Combined Entity to take other corporate actions that the Combined Entity’s stockholders desire. For more information, see “Charter Amendment Proposal.”

The Business Combination is subject to conditions, including certain conditions that may not be satisfied on a timely basis, if at all.

The completion of the Business Combination is subject to a number of conditions. The completion of the Business Combination is not assured and is subject to risks, including the risk that approval of the Business Combination by FS Development stockholders is not obtained or that there are not sufficient funds in the Trust Account, in each case subject to certain terms specified in the Merger Agreement (as described under “The Business Combination Proposal — The Merger Agreement — Conditions to Closing”), or that other closing conditions are not satisfied. If FS Development does not complete the Business Combination, it could be subject to several risks, including:

•        the parties may be liable for damages to one another under the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement;

•        negative reactions from the financial markets, including declines in the price of FS Development’s Class A Common Stock due to the fact that current prices may reflect a market assumption that the Business Combination will be completed; and

•        the attention of FS Development’s management will have been diverted to the Business Combination rather than the pursuit of other opportunities in respect of an initial business combination.

For more information about the closing conditions to the Business Combination, see the section titled “The Business Combination Proposal — The Merger Agreement — Conditions to Closing.”

FS Development or Gemini may waive one or more of the closing conditions without re-soliciting stockholder approval.

Certain conditions to FS Development’s or Gemini’s obligations to complete the Business Combination may be waived, in whole or in part, to the extent legally allowed, either unilaterally or by agreement of FS Development and Gemini. In the event of a waiver of a condition, the Board will evaluate the materiality of any such waiver to determine whether amendment of this proxy statement/prospectus and re-solicitation of proxies is necessary. In the event that the Board determines any such waiver is not significant enough to require re-solicitation of its stockholders, it will have the discretion to complete the Business Combination without seeking further stockholder approval.

For more information about the closing conditions to the Business Combination, see the section titled “The Business Combination Proposal — The Merger Agreement — Conditions to Closing.”

The Amended By-laws will provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the federal district courts of the District of Massachusetts will be the exclusive forums for substantially all disputes between the Combined Entity and its stockholders, which could limit the Combined Entity’s stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with the Combined Entity or its directors, officers, or employees.

The Amended By-laws will provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for:

•        any derivative action or proceeding brought on its behalf;

•        any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty;

•        any action asserting a claim against the Combined Entity arising under the Delaware General Corporation Law, the Proposed Charter, or the Amended By-laws;

•        any action to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of the Proposed Charter or the Amended By-laws; and

•        any action asserting a claim against the Combined Entity that is governed by the internal-affairs doctrine.

This exclusive-forum provision would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the Securities Act. Furthermore, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. To prevent having to litigate claims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, the Amended By-laws provides that the federal district courts of the District of Massachusetts will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act.

These exclusive-forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with the Combined Entity or its directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against the Combined Entity and its directors, officers, and other employees. If a court were to find either exclusive-forum provision in the Amended By-laws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, it may incur additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, which could harm the Combined Entity’s business.

If the Business Combination does not qualify as a tax-free reorganization under Section 368(a) of the Code, Gemini Equityholders may incur a substantially greater U.S. federal income tax liability as a result of the Business Combination.

FS Development and Gemini intend for the Business Combination to be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a reorganization within the meaning of Section 368(a) of the Code. However, neither FS Development nor Gemini has requested, or intends to request, an opinion of tax counsel or a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, with respect to the tax consequences of the Business Combination and there can be no assurance that the companies’ position would be sustained by a court if challenged by the IRS. Accordingly, if the IRS or a court determines that the Business Combination does not qualify as a reorganization under Section 368(a) of the Code and is therefore fully taxable for U.S. federal income tax purposes, Gemini Equityholders generally would recognize taxable gain or loss on their receipt of Merger Consideration in connection with the Business Combination. For a more complete discussion of U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Business Combination, see the section titled “Certain Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations of the Business Combination to Gemini Equityholders.”

Risks Related to the Redemption

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this subsection “— Risks Related to the Redemption” to “we”, “us” and “our” generally refer to FS Development in the present tense or the Combined Entity from and after the Business Combination.

If you or a “group” of stockholders of which you are a part are deemed to hold an aggregate of 20.0% or more of FS Development Class A Common Stock issued in the FS Development IPO, you (or, if a member of such a group, all of the members of such group in the aggregate) will lose the ability to redeem all such shares of 20.0% or more of FS Development Class A Common Stock issued in the FS Development IPO.

A public stockholder, together with any of his, her or its affiliates or any other person with whom it is acting in concert or as a “group” (as defined under Section 13 of the Exchange Act), will be restricted from redeeming in the aggregate his, her or its shares or, if part of such a group, the group’s shares, of 20% or more of the shares of FS Development Class A Common Stock issued in the FS Development IPO. FS Development refers to such shares in excess of an aggregation of 20% or more of the shares issued in the FS Development IPO as “Unredeemable Shares.” In order to determine whether a stockholder is acting in concert or as a group with another stockholder, FS Development will require each public stockholder seeking to exercise redemption rights to certify to FS Development whether such stockholder is acting in concert or as a group with any other stockholder. Such certifications, together with other public information relating to stock ownership available to FS Development at that time, such as Section 13D, Section 13G and Section 16 filings under the Exchange Act, will be the sole basis on which FS Development makes the above-referenced determination. Your inability to redeem any Unredeemable Shares will reduce your influence over FS Development’s ability to

consummate the Business Combination and you could suffer a material loss on your investment in FS Development if you sell Unredeemable Shares in open market transactions. Additionally, you will not receive redemption distributions with respect to the Unredeemable Shares if FS Development consummates the Business Combination. As a result, in order to dispose of such shares, you would be required to sell your stock in open market transactions, potentially at a loss. Notwithstanding the foregoing, stockholders may challenge FS Development’s determination as to whether a stockholder is acting in concert or as a group with another stockholder in a court of competent jurisdiction.

There is no guarantee that a stockholder’s decision whether to redeem their shares for a pro rata portion of the Trust Account will put the stockholder in a better future economic position.

FS Development can give no assurance as to the price at which a stockholder may be able to sell its Public Shares in the future following the completion of the Business Combination or any alternative business combination. Certain events following the consummation of any initial business combination, including this Business Combination, may cause an increase in FS Development’s share price, and may result in a lower value realized now for a stockholder redeeming their shares than a stockholder of FS Development might realize in the future. Similarly, if a stockholder does not redeem their shares, the stockholder will bear the risk of ownership of the Public Shares after the consummation of any initial business combination, and there can be no assurance that a stockholder can sell its shares in the future for a greater amount than the redemption price set forth in this proxy statement/prospectus. A stockholder should consult the stockholder’s own tax and/or financial advisor for assistance on how this may affect his, her or its individual situation.

If FS Development’s stockholders fail to comply with the redemption requirements specified in this proxy statement/prospectus, they will not be entitled to redeem their shares of FS Development Class A Common Stock for a pro rata portion of the funds held in the Trust Account.

Holders of Public Shares are required to submit a request in writing and deliver their stock (either physically or electronically) to FS Development’s transfer agent at least two (2) business days prior to the Special Meeting in order to exercise their rights to redeem their shares for a pro rata portion of the Trust Account. Stockholders electing to redeem their shares will receive their pro rata portion of the aggregate amount then on deposit in the Trust Account, including interest earned on the funds held in the Trust Account and not previously released to it to pay the Company’s franchise and income taxes, calculated as of two (2) business days prior to the anticipated Closing. See the section titled “Special Meeting of FS Development Stockholders — Redemption Rights” for additional information on how to exercise your redemption rights.

FS Development’s stockholders who wish to redeem their shares for a pro rata portion of the Trust Account must comply with specific requirements for redemption that may make it more difficult for them to exercise their redemption rights prior to the deadline.

FS Development’s public stockholders who wish to redeem their shares for a pro rata portion of the Trust Account must, among other things as fully described in the section titled “Special Meeting of FS Development Stockholders — Redemption Rights,” tender their certificates to FS Development’s transfer agent or deliver their shares to the transfer agent electronically through the Depository Trust Company, or DTC, at least two (2) business days prior to the Special Meeting. In order to obtain a physical stock certificate, a stockholder’s broker and/or clearing broker, DTC and FS Development’s transfer agent will need to act to facilitate this request. It is FS Development’s understanding that stockholders should generally allot at least two (2) weeks to obtain physical certificates from the transfer agent. However, because FS Development does not have any control over this process or over the brokers or DTC, it may take significantly longer than two (2) weeks to obtain a physical stock certificate. If it takes longer than anticipated to obtain a physical certificate, stockholders who wish to redeem their shares may be unable to obtain physical certificates by the deadline for exercising their redemption rights and thus will be unable to redeem their shares.

The ability to execute FS Development’s strategic plan could be negatively impacted to the extent a significant number of stockholders choose to redeem their shares in connection with the Business Combination.

In the event the aggregate cash consideration FS Development would be required to pay for all shares of FS Development Class A Common Stock that are validly submitted for redemption plus any amount required to satisfy cash conditions pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement exceeds the aggregate amount of cash available to FS Development, FS Development may be required to increase the financial leverage FS Development’s business would have to support. This may negatively impact FS Development’s ability to execute on its own future strategic plan.