Item 1A. Risk Factors

Our business is subject to various risks, including those described below. You should consider the following risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this Report, which could materially adversely affect our proposed operations, our business prospects, and financial condition, and the value of an investment in our business. There may be other factors that are not mentioned here or of which we are not presently aware that could also affect our business operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations

 We need additional financing to execute our operating plan and continue to operate as a going concern.

As required under Accounting Standards Update 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements-Going Concern (ASC 205-40), we have the responsibility to evaluate whether conditions and/or events raise substantial doubt about our ability to meet our future financial obligations as they become due within one year after the date the financial statements are issued. Based on our most recent projected cash flows, we believe that our cash and cash equivalents, even with the New Loan Agreement from Juvenescence described in Note 9 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Report, would not be sufficient to satisfy our anticipated operating and other funding requirements for the next twelve months from the date of filing of this Report. These factors raise substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern and the report of our independent registered public accountants accompanying our audited financial statements in this Report contains a qualification to such effect. Because we will continue to experience net operating losses, our ability to continue as a going concern is subject to our ability to obtain necessary capital from outside sources, including obtaining additional capital from the sale of our equity securities or assets, obtaining additional loans from financial institutions or investors, and entering into collaborative research and development arrangements or licensing some or all of our patents and know-how to third parties while retaining a royalty and other contingent payment rights related to the development and commercialization of products covered by the licenses. Any such collaborative research and development or licensing arrangements may generate significantly less revenue for us than we would receive if we were to successfully develop and market products on our own, or if we were to enter into such arrangements when our technologies and product candidates are at a later stage of development. Our continued net operating losses and the risks associated with the development of our product candidates and technologies will increase the difficulty in obtaining such capital, and there can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain such capital on favorable terms or at all. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development activities, or ultimately not be able to continue as a going concern.

Our New Loan Agreement with Juvenescence does not assure that we will be able to borrow more than $500,000 and all of the loans under the New Loan Agreement will become collateralized by our assets and those of most of our subsidiaries if we make more than two draws of funds under the New Loan Agreement.

Under the terms of the New Loan Agreement with Juvenescence described in Note 9 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Report, we will initially borrow $500,000 as an unsecured loan. Although the New Loan Agreement provides that Juvenescence may lend us up to $8 million, loans in excess of the initial $500,000 are subject to Juvenescence’s discretion and Juvenescence will require that we implement a plan prior to April 30, 2020 to reduce our spending on employee salaries and consulting fees and pay no bonuses for 2019 in order to borrow more than the initial $500,000, meaning that there is no assurance that we will be able to borrow more than the initial $500,000. Further, if we make more than two draws of funds (generally borrowing more than $1,000,000 through the two initial draws) under the New Loan Agreement, all of our borrowings under the New Loan Agreement will become collateralized by all of our assets and those of our subsidiaries ReCyte Therapeutics and Reverse Bio (the “Guarantor Subsidiaries”) under the terms of a Security and Pledge Agreement. This means that if an Event of Default, as defined in the New Loan Agreement, or other default under the Security and Pledge Agreement, were to occur after we make more than two draws of funds, Juvenescence could foreclose on its security interest and sell our assets and those of our Guarantor Subsidiaries to satisfy the unpaid principal balance of those loans plus costs incurred in connection with the Event of Default and the foreclosure and sale of the assets. As a result, we and our Guarantor Subsidiaries could lose some or all of our respective assets, leaving few if any assets available for the operation of our business or the business of our subsidiaries, or for sale for the benefit of our stockholders through a winding up of our affairs and liquidation of our assets.

If we borrow more than $500,000 under the New Loan Agreement with Juvenescence we will have to substantially restructure our plans and operations.

Although Juvenescence will retain discretion whether to fund all but the initial $500,000 draw request, as a condition to borrowing more than $500,000 under the New Loan Agreement AgeX must implement a plan during April 2020 to reduce spending on employee salaries and consulting fees (the “Restructuring Plan”) to a degree that will result in large staff reductions which may be coupled with salary reductions for certain employees who agree to a pay reduction in order to remain employed. Management believes that implementing such a Restructuring Plan would likely require the elimination of certain management and administrative personnel and most of its research personnel, which in turn would mean that AgeX would cease development of some or all of its product candidates or technologies unless research and development work could be contracted out to third party service providers within the newly imposed budgetary constraints. Accordingly, borrowing more than $500,000 under the New Loan Agreement could have a significant impact on AgeX’s pursuit of the development of the product candidates and technologies described under “Business” in this Report.

The terms of our New Loan Agreement with Juvenescence could make it more difficult for us to raise additional capital from other sources.

The New Loan Agreement with Juvenescence, among other matters: (a) requires AgeX and the Guarantor Subsidiaries to grant Juvenescence a security interest and lien on substantially all of our respective assets if AgeX makes more than two draws of funds (generally meaning if AgeX borrows more than $1,000,000); (b) requires AgeX to issue additional common stock purchase warrants to Juvenescence; (c) requires AgeX to implement a Restructuring Plan during April 2020 to reduce spending on employee salaries and consulting fees in order to make a second draw of funds (although Juvenescence will retain discretion whether to fund the draw request); and (d) prohibits AgeX and the Guarantor Subsidiaries from borrowing funds from other lenders or engaging in certain secured transactions without the consent of Juvenescence, unless we repay all amounts owed to Juvenescence under the New Loan Agreement and the $2 million we borrowed under the August 2019 Loan Facility Agreement discussed in Note 4 to our consolidated financial statements. The requirement that we implement a plan during April 2020 to reduce our spending on employee salaries and consulting fees would necessitate staffing reductions that would require a substantial curtailment of our operations, including our research and development efforts. Accordingly, the terms of the New Loan Agreement could require AgeX to make significant changes to its operations and research and development plans, which could make AgeX less attractive to new equity investors and could impair our ability to finance our operations or the operations of our Guarantor Subsidiaries from sources other than Juvenescence.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenue, we may finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements. We do not currently have any committed external source of funds other than the right to borrow $500,000 under the New Loan Agreement. We will need to seek additional capital regardless of market conditions and the terms of any financings that may be available to us.

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, or debt coupled with warrants or other equity securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder. We will need to issue shares of common stock and common stock purchase warrants to Juvenescence in connection with borrowings under the New Loan Agreement, which to the extent issued will dilute the interests of our other stockholders. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may be required to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

We are a discovery-stage development company and have incurred operating losses since our inception. We anticipate that we will incur continued losses for the foreseeable future, and we do not know if we will ever attain profitability.

We are a discovery-stage therapeutics company with a limited operating history. Since our inception in August 2017, we have incurred operating losses and negative cash flows and we expect to continue to incur losses and negative cash flow in the future. Our operating losses were $12.6 million and $11.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, and we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $86.2 million as of December 31, 2019. We have devoted most of our financial resources to research and development, including our preclinical development activities.

We expect to continue to incur significant additional operating losses for the foreseeable future if we seek to advance product candidates through preclinical and clinical development conduct clinical trials, seek regulatory approval and, if we receive FDA approval, commercialize our product candidates. Furthermore, the costs of advancing product candidates into each succeeding clinical phase tend to increase substantially over time. The total costs to advance any of our product candidates to marketing approval in even a single jurisdiction would be substantial. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with development of cell-based and drug-based therapeutics, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to begin generating revenue from the commercialization of products (other than through our LifeMap Sciences subsidiary) or achieve or maintain profitability. 

Our ability to successfully develop, commercialize and license our products and generate product revenue is subject to substantial additional risks and uncertainties. Each of our programs and product candidates will require additional preclinical and clinical development, potential regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, securing manufacturing supply, capacity and expertise, building of a commercial organization, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any operating income from product sales. As a result, we expect to continue to incur net losses and negative cash flows for the foreseeable future. These net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses, our ability raise the capital needed to continue our operations, and our ability to generate revenues. If we are unable to develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates either alone or with collaborators, or if revenues from any product candidate that receives marketing approval are insufficient, we will not achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability. If we are unable to achieve and then maintain profitability, the value of our equity securities will be materially and adversely affected.

We have not tested any of our product candidates in clinical trials. Success in early development and preclinical studies or clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained in later preclinical studies and clinical trials.

Our product candidates have never been evaluated in human clinical trials, and we may experience unexpected or adverse results in the future. We will be required to demonstrate through adequate and well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective, with a favorable benefit-risk profile, for use in their target indications before we can seek regulatory approvals for their commercial sale. Any positive results that have been observed for product candidates similar to ours in preclinical animal models may not be predictive of future clinical trials in humans. Our product candidates may also fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in later stages of clinical development even if they successfully advance through initial clinical trials. Further, some or all of our cell-based therapies under development may require the genetic modification of the pluripotent master cell banks such that the resulting cells can escape immune rejection by the intended patient. There is no certainty that said genetic modification will provide a long-term solution to transplant rejection, or that said modified cells will not cause unanticipated health risks to the patient that could delay or even halt the development of the products.

Many companies in the biotechnology industry have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development and there is a high failure rate for product candidates proceeding through clinical trials. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Even if we demonstrate statistical significance, regulatory agencies may not accept the use of the historical control. Regulatory delays or rejections may be encountered as a result of many factors, including changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development. We cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks.

We do not currently have any products on the market and have not yet generated any substantial revenues from operations.

We were established and began operations in 2017. Our operations to date have been limited to the preliminary financing and staffing of our company, developing our technology and identifying and developing our product candidates. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully commence or complete any clinical trials, including large-scale, pivotal clinical trials, obtain marketing approval, manufacture a research or commercial scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Typically, it takes about six to ten years to develop a new drug from the time it enters Phase 1 clinical trials to when it is approved for treating patients, but in many cases it may take longer. Consequently, predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing genetic medicine products. In addition, as a business with a limited operating history, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors. We will eventually need to transition from a company with a research focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

We need to successfully develop and market or license therapeutic products or technologies in order to earn revenues in sufficient amounts to meet our operating expenses. Without significant product sales or licensing fee revenues, we will not be able to operate at a profit, and we will not be able to cover our operating expenses without raising additional capital. Should we be able to successfully develop and market any therapeutic products we may not be able to receive reimbursement for them from payers, such as health insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and Medicare, or any reimbursement that we receive may be lower than we anticipate.

Our choice of product candidates and our development plans for our product candidates are subject to change based on a variety of factors, and if we abandon development of a product candidate we may not be able to develop or acquire a replacement product candidate.

We may determine to abandon the development of one or more of our product candidates, or we may change the prioritization of the development of certain product candidates, or we may select or acquire and prioritize the development of new product candidates. Our choice and prioritization of product candidates for development will be influenced by a variety of factors, including but not limited to:

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

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs and product candidates that we identify for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to timely capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.

If we do not implement the Restructuring Plan, we will need to expand our organization if we are able to raise sufficient capital to do so, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.

As of December 31, 2019, we had 21 employees. If we determine not to implement the Restructuring Plan and are able to obtain sufficient capital to expand our organization, we may have difficulty identifying, hiring and integrating new personnel. Future growth would impose significant additional responsibilities on our management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain, motivate and integrate additional employees, consultants and contractors. Also, our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Any growth of administrative resources could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenues could be reduced, and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Many of the biotechnology companies that we compete against for qualified personnel and consultants have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel and consultants, the rate and success at which we can discover and develop product candidates and operate our business will be limited.

The commercial success of any of our current or future product candidates will depend upon the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and others in the medical community.

Even with approvals from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the commercial success of our products will depend in part on the health care providers, patients, and third-party payors accepting our product candidates as medically useful, cost-effective, and safe. Any product that we bring to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and other health care providers. The clinical development, commercialization, and marketing of cell therapies are at an early-stage, substantially research-oriented, and financially speculative. To date, very few companies have been successful in their efforts to develop and commercialize cell therapies. In general, cell therapies may be susceptible to various risks, including undesirable and unintended side effects, unintended immune system responses, inadequate therapeutic efficacy, potentially prohibitive costs or other characteristics that may prevent or limit their approval or commercial use. Furthermore, the number of people who may use cell- or tissue-based therapies is difficult to forecast with accuracy. Our future success is dependent on the establishment of a large global market for cell therapies and our ability to capture a share of this market with our product candidates.

Even if we successfully develop and obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, the market may not understand or accept them. Our product candidates represent novel treatments and are expected to compete with a number of more conventional products and therapies manufactured and marketed by others, including major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The degree of market acceptance of any of our products will depend on a number of factors, including without limitation:

Even if a product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile upon approval, market acceptance of the product will initially remain uncertain. Efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the products may require significant investment and resources and may never be successful. If our products fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and other health care providers, we will not be able to generate sufficient revenue to become or remain profitable.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, we may not meet our revenue expectations and, even assuming approval of a product candidate, our business may suffer.

Our projections of the number of potential users of our product candidates in the markets we are attempting to address are based on our beliefs and estimates and include several key assumptions based on our industry knowledge, industry publications, third-party research reports and other surveys. You should bear in mind the following:

If the actual market for any of our product candidates is smaller than we expect, our revenue may be limited and it may be more difficult for us to achieve or maintain profitability.

We will face risks related to the manufacture of medical products for any product candidates that we develop.

The manufacture of medical products, and in particular biologics, is complex and requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls, none of which we presently have. Unless we are able to raise the capital required to construct our own manufacturing facilities and are able to develop the expertise to manage and operate a manufacturing facility of our own, we may need to rely on third-party manufacturers to manufacture any products that we develop. There is no assurance that we will be able to identify manufacturers on acceptable terms or at all. Regardless of whether we do our own manufacturing or rely on third parties to manufacture products for us, we will face all risks related to the manufacture of therapeutic products for use in medicine including the following risks:

In addition, we may rely on third parties to perform release testing on our product candidates prior to delivery to patients. If these tests are not appropriately conducted and test data are not reliable, patients could be put at risk of serious harm which could result in product liability suits.

If we or any third-party manufacturers that we may engage were to encounter any of these difficulties, our ability to provide our product candidates to patients in clinical trials or to the medical marketplace would be jeopardized. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, could require us to either commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely.

The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit our manufacturing facilities or those of our third-party contractors. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical study or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.

Additionally, if supply from one approved manufacturer is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines.

Further, our product candidates are manufactured by starting with established master cell banks of human embryonic cells and other cells that are cryopreserved. We will be required to expand the numbers of the pluripotent stem cell master cell banks for future use, as well as produce working cell banks from which the product will be manufactured for clinical trials, produce the relevant product under cGMP conditions, expand the number of relevant cells and cryopreserve them under cGMP conditions. We may not be able to expand the numbers of the pluripotent stem cell master cell banks to provide sufficient cells for clinical trial or for commercial scale production. We may not be able to manufacture product that meets release criteria due to sterility, identity or potency issues. We may not have access or be able to make the reagents necessary to manufacture the cells and we may not have access to an adequate supply channels to transport and distribute the products. There are also risks that the cells may be destroyed by interruption in their cryopreservation by means of natural disasters such as earthquakes, power outages, or other unexpected events, or the cells may be determined to be unacceptable as a source of human cellular therapies for reasons we cannot envision. We cannot assure you that any stability or other issues relating to the manufacture of any of our product candidates or products will not occur in the future. If any of our master cell banks are lost or destroyed, including due to systems failure in the cryopreservation processes, our planned clinical trials would be severely delayed, and we would incur significant costs associated with obtaining new supply of cell banks. Accordingly, failures or difficulties faced at any level of our supply chain could adversely affect our business and delay or impede the development and commercialization of any of our product candidates or products and could have an adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Any therapies that we 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 cell-based products for us. Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers could delay clinical development or marketing approval.

Each of these risks could delay our clinical trials, any approval of our product candidates by the FDA, or the commercialization of our product candidates, and could result in higher costs or deprive us of potential product revenue.

Any cell-based products that receive regulatory approval may be difficult and expensive to manufacture on a commercial scale.

Pluripotent stem cell and progenitor cell derived therapeutic cells have only been produced on a small scale and not in quantities and at levels of purity and viability that will be needed for wide scale commercialization. If we are successful in developing products that consist of cells or compounds derived from pluripotent stem cells or progenitor cells, we will need to develop processes and technology for the commercial production of those products. Pluripotent stem cell or progenitor cell based products are likely to be more expensive to manufacture on a commercial scale than most other drugs on the market today. The high cost of manufacturing a product will require that we charge our customers a high price for the product in order to cover our costs and earn a profit. If the price of our products is too high, hospitals and physicians may be reluctant to purchase our products and we may not be able to sell our products in sufficient volumes to recover our costs or to earn a profit.

If we fail to meet our obligations under license agreements, we may lose our rights to key technologies on which our business depends.

Our business will depend on several critical technologies that we have licensed or sublicensed from Lineage or certain Lineage subsidiaries. The license and sublicense agreements impose obligations on us, including payment obligations and obligations to pursue development and commercialization of products and technologies under the licensed patents or technology. If the licensor or sublicensor believes that we have failed to meet our obligations under a license or sublicense agreement, they could seek to limit or terminate our license rights, which could lead to costly and time-consuming litigation and, potentially, our loss of the licensed rights. In addition, certain of our licensing counterparties may terminate our license rights without cause, including Yeda in connection with the relational databases in-licensed by LifeMap Sciences. During the period of any such litigation our ability to carry out the development and commercialization of potential new products or technologies, and our ability to raise any capital that we might then need, could be significantly and negatively affected. If our license rights were restricted or ultimately lost, we would not be able to continue to use the licensed or sublicensed technology in our business.

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

Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. We are highly dependent on the development, regulatory, commercialization and business development expertise of Michael West, Ph.D., our Chief Executive Officer, as well as the other principal members of our management, scientific and clinical teams. Although we have employment agreements with our executive officers, these agreements do not prevent them from terminating their employment with us at any time. In addition, because we will rely on Juvenescence to provide the services of certain administrative and management personnel, we will not have the benefit of the full time and effort of those Juvenescence employees in the management and development of our business. We could lose the services of members of management team through the implementation of the Restructuring Plan.

If we lose one or more of our executive officers or key employees, our ability to implement our business strategy successfully could be seriously harmed. Furthermore, replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to develop, gain regulatory approval of and commercialize product candidates successfully. Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these additional key personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be engaged by entities other than us and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, our ability to develop and commercialize product candidates will be limited.

Our business and operations could suffer in the event of system failures.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters including earthquakes and tsunamis, terrorism, war, and telecommunication and electrical failures. Some of our data related to the development of our product candidates resides on Lineage’s computer servers and will be subject to the same risks described above. Further, while we are working to transfer our data from Lineage’s servers to our own servers, there is a risk that data could be lost or corrupted while in the process of being transferred, or could otherwise not be transferred to us. A loss of or damage to our data, a disruption in access to our data, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, could disrupt our operations, delay or otherwise adversely affect the development of our product candidates, significantly increase our costs, or result in delays in any future regulatory filings we may make.

In addition, our product candidates are manufactured by starting with cells that are stored in a cryopreserved master cell bank. While we believe we have adequate backup should any cell bank be lost in a catastrophic event, it is possible that we or our third-party suppliers and manufacturers could lose multiple cell banks and have our manufacturing severely impacted by the need to replace the cell banks. See “—We will face risks related to the manufacture of medical products for any product candidates that we develop.” We cannot assure you that any stability or other issues relating to the manufacture of any of our product candidates or products will not occur in the future. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of planned clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely. Any adverse developments affecting clinical or commercial manufacturing of our product candidates or products may result in shipment delays, inventory shortages, lot failures, product withdrawals or recalls or other interruptions in the supply of our product candidates or products. Accordingly, failures or difficulties faced at any level of our supply chain could adversely affect our business and delay or impede the development and commercialization of any of our product candidates or products and could have an adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Security breaches and other disruptions could compromise our information and expose us to liability, and could cause our business and reputation to suffer.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of the licensors and licensees of the patents and other intellectual property we use, and personally identifiable information of employees and consultants. The secure processing, maintenance, and transmission of this information is critical to our operations and business strategy. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance, or other disruptions. Any such breach could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost, or stolen. Any such access, disclosure, theft, or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings or liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, and could disrupt our operations and damage our reputation. Even if we do not incur an interruption of or our operations, fines, penalties, or financial liability to third parties from a security breach, we could suffer a loss of confidence in our services, which could adversely affect our business and competitive position.

Failure of our internal control over financial reporting could harm our business and financial results.

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. Internal control over financial reporting includes maintaining records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect our transactions; providing reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary for preparation of our financial statements; providing reasonable assurance that receipts and expenditures of our assets are made in accordance with management authorization; and providing reasonable assurance that unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements would be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting is not intended to provide absolute assurance that a misstatement of our financial statements would be prevented or detected. Because we are an emerging growth company and a smaller reporting issuer, we are exempt from the requirement of having our internal controls over financial reporting audited by our independent registered public accountants, which means that material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal controls that might be detected by an audit may not be detected and remedied. If we are successful in developing new medical products and technologies, the commercialization of those products and technologies will place significant additional pressure on our system of internal control over financial reporting. Any failure to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting could limit our ability to report our financial results accurately and timely or to detect and prevent fraud. See “—Risks Pertaining to Our Common Stock—Our accounting and other management systems and resources may not be adequately prepared to meet the financial reporting and other requirements to which we will be subject, and failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our business and the price of our common stock.”

The outbreak of the corona virus COVID 19 could adversely affect our operations.

The outbreak of the corona virus COVID 19 could disrupt our operations due to absenteeism by ill employees or employees who elect not to come to work due to the illness affecting other employees in our office or laboratory facilities or due to quarantines. COVID-19 illness could also impact members of our Board of Directors resulting in absenteeism from meetings of the directors or committees of directors, and making it more difficult to convene the quorums of the full Board of Directors or its committees needed to conduct meetings for the management of our affairs.

Supplies of chemical reagents and other supplies used in our laboratory could be disrupted if the manufacturers experience absenteeism due to illness of their employees or due to quarantines. Absenteeism due to corona virus illness could also impact companies that the manufacturers use to ship reagents or other supplies to us. Employee absenteeism or supply disruptions could impair our ability to conduct our day to day business. Similar disruptions could be experienced by third parties performing research and development work cooperatively with us or for us under contracts, which would also adversely affect our ability to make progress in our research and development programs. We cannot presently predict the extent to which the virus may impact our operations.

The anticipated economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have adversely impacted financial markets, resulting in high share price volatility, reduced market liquidity, and substantial declines in the market prices of the shares of most publicly traded companies, including shares of AgeX common stock. Volatile or declining markets for equities could adversely affect our ability to raise capital when needed through the sale of shares of common stock or other equity securities. While these market conditions persist when we need to raise capital, and if we are able to sell shares of our common stock under then prevailing market conditions, we might have to accept lower prices for our shares and issue a larger number of shares than might have been the case under better market conditions, resulting in significant dilution of the interests of our shareholders.

Recent changes in U.S. federal income tax law may have an adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations or financial condition.

On December 22, 2017, the United States enacted major federal tax reform legislation, Public Law No. 115-97, commonly referred to as the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“2017 Tax Act”), which enacted a broad range of changes to the Internal Revenue Code. Changes to taxes on corporations impacted by the 2017 Tax Act include, but not limited to, changing the U.S. federal tax rate on corporations to a 21 percent flat tax rate, eliminating the corporate alternative minimum tax (“AMT”), imposing additional limitations on the deductibility of interest and net operating losses, allowing any net operating loss (“NOLs”) generated in tax years ending after December 31, 2017 to be carried forward indefinitely and generally repealing NOL carrybacks, reducing the maximum deduction for NOL carryforwards arising in tax years beginning after 2017 to a percentage of the taxpayer’s taxable income, and allowing for additional expensing of certain capital expenditures. The 2017 Tax Act also puts into effect a number of changes impacting operations outside of the United States including, but not limited to, the imposition of a one-time tax “deemed repatriation” on accumulated offshore earnings not previously subject to U.S. tax, and shifts the U.S taxation of multinational corporations from a worldwide system of taxation to a territorial system. Notwithstanding the reduction in the corporate income tax rate, the overall impact of the new federal tax law is uncertain and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the newly enacted federal tax law.

We are subject to laws and regulations governing corruption, which will require us to develop, maintain, and implement costly compliance programs.

We must comply with a wide range of laws and regulations to prevent corruption, bribery, and other unethical business practices, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or FCPA, anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws in other countries, particularly China where our subsidiary LifeMap Sciences does business, including business with hospitals. The creation and implementation of international business practices compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required.

Anti-bribery laws prohibit us, our employees, and some of our agents or representatives from offering or providing any personal benefit to covered government officials to influence their performance of their duties or induce them to serve interests other than the missions of the public organizations in which they serve. Certain commercial bribery rules also prohibit offering or providing any personal benefit to employees and representatives of commercial companies to influence their performance of their duties or induce them to serve interests other than their employers. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the U.S. to comply with certain accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations. The anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA are enforced primarily by the United States Department of Justice. The SEC is involved with enforcement of the books and records provisions of the FCPA.

Compliance with these anti-bribery laws is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the anti-bribery laws present particular challenges in the medical industry because in many countries including China, hospitals are state-owned or operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees are considered foreign government officials. Furthermore, in certain countries (China in particular), hospitals and clinics are permitted to sell pharmaceuticals to their patients and are primary or significant distributors of pharmaceuticals. Certain payments to hospitals in connection with clinical studies, procurement of pharmaceuticals and other work have been deemed to be improper payments to government officials that have led to vigorous anti-bribery law enforcement actions and heavy fines in multiple jurisdictions, particularly in the U.S. and China.

It is not always possible to identify and deter violations, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations.

In the medical industry, corrupt practices include, among others, acceptance of kickbacks, bribes or other illegal gains or benefits by the hospitals and medical practitioners from manufacturers of pharmaceutical or other products, distributors or their third party agents in connection with the prescription of certain pharmaceuticals or sale of products. If our employees, affiliates, distributors or third party marketing firms violate these laws or otherwise engage in illegal practices with respect to their sales or marketing of our products or other activities involving our products, we could be required to pay damages or heavy fines by multiple jurisdictions where we operate, which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. The Chinese government has also sponsored anti-corruption campaigns from time to time, which could have a chilling effect on any future marketing efforts by us to new hospital customers. There have been recent occurrences in which certain hospitals have denied access to sales representatives from pharmaceutical companies because the hospitals wanted to avoid the perception of corruption. If this attitude becomes widespread among our potential customers, our ability to promote our products to hospitals may be adversely affected.

As we and our subsidiaries expand operations in China and other jurisdictions internationally, we will need to increase the scope of our compliance programs to address the risks relating to the potential for violations of the FCPA and other anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws. Our compliance programs will need to include policies addressing not only the FCPA, but also the provisions of a variety of anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws in multiple foreign jurisdictions, including China, provisions relating to books and records that apply to us as a public company, and include effective training for our personnel throughout our organization. The creation and implementation of anti-corruption compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required. Violation of the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws can result in significant administrative and criminal penalties for us and our employees, including substantial fines, suspension or debarment from government contracting, prison sentences, or even the death penalty in extremely serious cases in certain countries. The SEC also may suspend or bar us from trading securities on U.S. exchanges for violation of the FCPA’s accounting provisions. Even if we are not ultimately punished by government authorities, the costs of investigation and review, distraction of our personnel, legal defense costs, and harm to our reputation could be substantial and could limit our profitability or our ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates. In addition, if any of our competitors are not subject to the FCPA, they may engage in practices that will lead to their receipt of preferential treatment from foreign hospitals and enable them to secure business from foreign hospitals in ways that are unavailable to us.

Risks Related to Our Industry

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological change and the possibility that our competitors may achieve regulatory approval before us or develop therapies that are more advanced or effective than ours, which may harm our business and financial condition, and our ability to successfully market or commercialize our product candidates.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly changing technologies, competition and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We may face competition from other companies focused on therapeutics for age-related disease, which is a highly competitive environment. There are numerous biotechnology companies developing therapeutics for human aging, with each company often focusing on a specific molecular pathway within cells. For example, ResTORbio, Inc. is developing modulators of the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway to treat immunological and cardiovascular disorders. Calico Life Sciences LLC is a Google-founded research and development company aimed at identifying molecular pathways that control animal lifespan and translating these insights into novel therapeutics designed to increase human healthspan. Unity Biotechnology, Inc. focuses on cellular senescence, in particular, the use of agents that can target senescent cells for selective ablation (senolysis). Unity’s stated targeted age-related diseases include osteoarthritis as well as other ophthalmological and pulmonary diseases. Our therapeutic products in development are likely to face competition from a large number of companies and technological strategies including therapeutics intended to address our lead indications. See “Business – Competition.”

We may also face competition from large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions, government agencies and public and private research institutions. Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and gene therapy industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop or that would render any products that we may develop obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. In particular, the Ministry of Labor Health and Welfare in Japan may grant SAKIGAKE designation to a competing product candidate, which is designed to provide for faster review and approval for any such product candidate as compared to the conventional process. If any competing product candidate receives SAKIGAKE designation in Japan, it may be commercialized more quickly in Japan than any of our product candidates. Additionally, technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomic or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing any product candidates we may develop against competitors.

Any product candidates for which we intend to seek approval as biologic products may face competition sooner than anticipated.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, signed into law on March 23, 2010 (“ACA”), includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own pre-clinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product. 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 BPCIA may be fully adopted by the FDA, any such processes could have a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for our biological products.

There is a risk that any of our product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA would not qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity or that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our 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.

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the 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 clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate and it is possible that any other product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval. Neither we nor any future collaborator is permitted to market any of our product candidates in the United States until we receive regulatory approval of a biologic license application, or BLA, from the FDA. It is possible that the FDA may refuse to accept for substantive review any BLAs that we submit for our product candidates or may conclude after review of our data that our application is insufficient to obtain marketing approval of our product candidates.

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States or abroad, we or our collaborators must demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from nonclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the nonclinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. The FDA may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or it may object to elements of our clinical development program. Depending on the extent of these or any other FDA-required studies, approval of any BLA or application that we submit may be delayed by several years or may require us to expend significantly more resources than we have available.

Any therapeutic products that we and our subsidiaries may develop cannot be sold until the FDA and corresponding foreign regulatory authorities approve the products for medical use. The need to obtain regulatory approval to market a new product means that:

Approval of our product candidates may be delayed or refused for many reasons, including the following:

Of the large number of potential products in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA or foreign regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. The lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Ethical, social and legal concerns about research regarding stem cells, could result in regulations restricting or prohibiting the processes we may use. Federal and state agencies, congressional committees and foreign governments have expressed interest in further regulating biotechnology. More restrictive regulations or claims that our products are unsafe or pose a hazard could prevent us from commercializing any products. New government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, regulations, policies or guidance changed, or interpretations by agencies or courts changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be.

Regulatory requirements governing gene and cell therapy products have changed frequently and may continue to change in the future. The FDA has established the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies within its Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, or CBER, to consolidate the review of gene therapy and related products, and has established the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise the CBER in its review. Gene therapy clinical trials conducted at institutions that receive funding for recombinant DNA research from the NIH, also are potentially subject to review by the NIH Office of Science Policy’s Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, or the RAC, in limited circumstances. Although the FDA decides whether individual gene therapy protocols may proceed, the RAC public review process, if undertaken, can delay the initiation of a clinical trial, even if the FDA has reviewed the trial design and details and authorized its initiation. Conversely, the FDA can put an investigational new drug application, or IND, on clinical hold even if the RAC has provided a favorable review or an exemption from in-depth, public review. If we were to engage an NIH-funded institution, to conduct a clinical trial, that institution’s institutional biosafety committee, or IBC, as well as its institutional review board, or IRB, would need to review the proposed clinical trial to assess the safety of the trial and may determine that RAC review is needed. In addition, adverse developments in clinical trials of gene therapy products conducted by others may cause the FDA or other oversight bodies to change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates. Similarly, foreign regulatory authorities may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines.

Some of our future products may be viewed by the FDA as combination products and the review of combination products is often more complex and more time consuming than the review of other types of products.

Our future products may be regulated by the FDA as combination products. For a combination product, the FDA must determine which center or centers within the FDA will review the product candidate and under what legal authority the product candidate will be reviewed. The process of obtaining FDA marketing clearance or approval is lengthy, expensive, and uncertain, and we cannot be sure that any of our combination products, or any other products, will be cleared or approved in a timely fashion, or at all. In addition, the review of combination products is often more complex and more time consuming than the review of a product candidate under the jurisdiction of only one center within the FDA. We cannot be sure that the FDA will not select to have our combination products reviewed and regulated by only one FDA center and/or different legal authority, in which case the path to regulatory approval would be different and could be more lengthy and costly. If the FDA does not approve or clear our products in a timely fashion, or at all, our business and financial condition will be adversely affected.

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

The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the study until its conclusion. We may encounter delays in enrolling, or be unable to enroll, a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our clinical trials, and even once enrolled we may be unable to retain a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our trials. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including:

In addition, our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials in such clinical trial site.

Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment or retention may result in increased costs, program delays or both, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop our product candidates or could render further development impossible.

Even if we obtain FDA approval for any of our product candidates in the United States, we may never obtain approval for or commercialize it in any other jurisdiction, which would limit our ability to realize its full market potential.

In order to market any products in any particular jurisdiction, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements on a country-by-country basis regarding safety and efficacy. Approval by the FDA in the United States does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions. However, the failure to obtain approval in one jurisdiction may negatively impact our ability to obtain approval elsewhere. In addition, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory approval in any other country.

Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approval could result in difficulties and increased costs for us and require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials which could be costly and time consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. We do not have any product candidates approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including in international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approvals in international markets are delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of any product we develop will be unrealized.

Clinical studies are costly, time consuming and inherently risky, and we may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities

Clinical development is expensive, time consuming and involves significant risk. We cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical studies can occur at any stage of development. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include but are not limited to:

Any inability to successfully complete clinical development and obtain regulatory approval could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue. Clinical study delays could also shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow competitors to develop and bring products to market before we do and may harm our business and results of operations.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval, along with the manufacturing processes, post-approval clinical data, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, recordkeeping, export, import, advertising and promotional activities for such product, among other things, will be subject to extensive and ongoing requirements of and review by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, establishment registration and drug listing requirements, continued compliance with cGMP requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping and Good Clinical Practice, or GCP, requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval.

The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of genetic medicines to ensure they are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label use and if we market our products for uses beyond their approved indications, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label marketing. Violations of the U.S. federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, relating to the promotion of prescription drugs may lead to FDA enforcement actions and investigations alleging violations of federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws.

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

The FDA’s policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of any of our product candidates. For example, in December 2016, the 21st Century Cures Act, or Cures Act, was signed into law. The Cures Act, among other things, is intended to modernize the regulation of drugs and biologics and spur innovation, but its ultimate implementation is unclear. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. For example, certain policies of the Trump administration may impact our business and industry. Namely, the Trump administration has taken several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, FDA’s ability to engage in routine regulatory and oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. Notably, on January 30, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order, applicable to all executive agencies, including the FDA, that requires that for each notice of proposed rulemaking or final regulation to be issued in fiscal year 2017, the agency shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed, unless prohibited by law. These requirements are referred to as the “two-for-one” provisions. This Executive Order includes a budget neutrality provision that requires the total incremental cost of all new regulations in the 2017 fiscal year, including repealed regulations, to be no greater than zero, except in limited circumstances. For fiscal years 2018 and beyond, the Executive Order requires agencies to identify regulations to offset any incremental cost of a new regulation and approximate the total costs or savings associated with each new regulation or repealed regulation. In interim guidance issued by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget on February 2, 2017, the Trump administration indicates that the “two-for-one” provisions may apply not only to agency regulations, but also to significant agency guidance documents. Further, on February 24, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order requiring each agency to designate a regulatory reform officer and create a regulatory reform task force to evaluate existing regulations and make recommendations regarding their repeal, replacement or modification. It is difficult to predict how these requirements will be implemented, and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If these executive actions impose constraints on FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted.

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

Serious adverse events or undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other comparable foreign authorities. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects, toxicities or unexpected characteristics, including death.

For example, there have been significant adverse side effects in cell therapy treatments in the past, including reported cases of certain cancers. In addition to side effects that may be caused by our product candidates, the conditioning, administration process or related procedures also can cause adverse side effects, including compromise of a patient’s immune system. If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, the IRBs at the institutions in which our studies are conducted or Data Safety Monitoring Board, or DSMB, could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any such product, including during any long-term follow-up observation period recommended or required for patients who receive treatment using our products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

We face potential product liability, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability and costs. If the use or misuse of our product candidates harm patients or is perceived to harm patients even when such harm is unrelated to our product candidates, our regulatory approvals could be revoked or could otherwise be negatively impacted, and we could be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims.

The use or misuse of any product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. There is a risk that our product candidates may induce adverse events. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we commence clinical trials or obtain marketing approval for any product candidates, we intend to increase our insurance coverage to include clinical use or the sale of commercial products, as applicable; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs or medical treatments that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.

Our insurance policies are expensive and protect us only from some business risks, which leaves us exposed to significant uninsured liabilities.

We do not carry insurance for all categories of risk that our business may encounter. Some of the policies we currently maintain include general liability, employment practices liability, property, auto, workers’ compensation, umbrella, and directors’ and officers’ insurance.

Any additional product liability insurance coverage we acquire in the future, may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we intend to acquire insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our share price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business, including preventing or limiting the commercialization of any product candidates we develop.

As a public company, it can be difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we 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 us to attract and retain qualified people to serve on our Board of Directors, our board committees or as executive officers. We do not know, however, if we will be able to maintain existing insurance with adequate levels of coverage. Any significant uninsured liability may require us to pay substantial amounts, which would adversely affect our cash position and results of operations.

Our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors, and any third parties we may engage in connection with development and commercialization may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Misconduct by our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, contract research organizations, or CROs, consultants, vendors, and any third parties we may engage in connection with development and commercialization, could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violate: (i) the laws and regulations of the FDA, EMA rules and regulations and other similar regulatory requirements, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities; (ii) manufacturing standards; (iii) data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations; or (iv) laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate financial information and data. Specifically, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Activities subject to these laws could also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, creation of fraudulent data in pre-clinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and results of operations, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, other U.S. federal healthcare programs or healthcare programs in other jurisdictions, individual imprisonment, other sanctions, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations.

Government-imposed bans or restrictions and religious, moral, and ethical concerns about the use of human embryonic stem cells could prevent us from developing and successfully marketing stem cell products.

Government-imposed bans or restrictions on the use of embryos or human embryonic stem cells (“hES cells”), in research and development in the United States and abroad could generally constrain stem cell research, thereby limiting the market and demand for our products.

California law requires that stem cell research be conducted under the oversight of a SCRO Committee. Many kinds of stem cell research, including the derivation of new hES cell lines, may only be conducted in California with the prior written approval of the SCRO Committee. A SCRO Committee could prohibit or impose restrictions on the research that we plan to do. An adverse decision by a SCRO Committee, or their imposition of restrictions on a research program could adversely affect our ability to enter into co-development or licensing arrangements for the development of a product candidate.

The use of hES cells may give rise to religious, moral, and ethical issues. These considerations could lead to more restrictive government regulations or could generally constrain stem cell research, thereby limiting the market and demand for our products.

Adverse publicity regarding cell-based therapies could impact our business.

Adverse publicity due to the ethical and social controversies surrounding the use of embryonic stem cells or any adverse reported side effects from any stem cell or other cell therapy clinical trials or to the failure of such trials to demonstrate that these therapies are efficacious could materially and adversely affect our ability to raise capital, conduct and complete clinical trials and achieve market acceptance of such products, if approved. For example, research institutions, including those who may be our collaborators, may from time to time publish findings or studies regarding the human genome (such as the Human Genome Project) that adversely implicate our product candidates, including findings of cancer dependencies in cell lines used in our cell-based therapies.

The price and sale of any products that we may develop may be limited by health insurance coverage and government regulation.

Success in selling our pharmaceutical and cell-based products and medical devices may depend in part on the extent to which health insurance companies, HMOs, and government health administration authorities such as Medicare and Medicaid will pay for the cost of the products and related treatment. Until we introduce a new product into the medical marketplace, we will not know with certainty whether adequate health insurance, HMO, and government coverage will be available to permit the product to be sold at a price high enough for us to generate a profit. In some foreign countries, pricing or profitability of health care products is subject to government control, which may result in low prices for our products. In the United States, there have been a number of federal and state proposals to implement similar government controls, and new proposals are likely to be made in the future. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement in the United States, the EU or elsewhere will be available for our product candidates or any product that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future.

Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for pharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs or biologics when an equivalent generic drug, biosimilar or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our product candidates as substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the less expensive product. Even if we show improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our product candidates, pricing of existing third-party therapeutics may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our product candidates. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in our product candidates. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on our product candidates.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly-approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models in the United States for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. We cannot predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates.

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

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe and other countries have and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our product candidates may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially-reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. While it is not possible to predict or model the insurance landscape at the time any of our product candidates may receive regulatory approval, we expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed health care, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and biologics and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

Enacted and future healthcare legislation, including the ACA, may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and may affect the prices we may set.

In the United States, the EU and other jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. As a result of the adoption of the ACA in the United States, substantial changes have been made to the system for paying for healthcare in the United States. Certain provisions related to cost-savings and reimbursement measures could adversely affect our future financial performance. For example, among the provisions of the ACA, those of greatest importance to the biopharmaceutical industry includes the following:

Since its enactment, some of the provisions of the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, while certain provisions have been subject to judicial, congressional, and executive challenges. As a result, there have been delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the ACA. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld certain key aspects of the legislation, including a tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year, which is commonly known as the requirement that all individuals maintain health insurance coverage or pay a penalty, referred to as the “individual mandate.” However, as a result of tax reform legislation passed in December 2017, the individual mandate has been eliminated effective January 1, 2019. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the repeal of the individual mandate will cause 13 million fewer Americans to be insured in 2027 and premiums in insurance markets may rise.

Since January 2017, President Trump has signed two Executive Orders designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. One Executive Order directs federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the ACA to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the ACA that would impose a fiscal or regulatory burden on states, individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices. The Order requires that for each notice of proposed rulemaking or final regulation to be issued in fiscal year 2017, the applicable agency shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed, unless prohibited by law. These requirements are referred to as the “two-for-one” provisions. This Executive Order includes a budget neutrality provision that requires the total incremental cost of all new regulations in the 2017 fiscal year, including repealed regulations, to be no greater than zero, except in limited circumstances. For fiscal years 2018 and beyond, the Executive Order requires agencies to identify regulations to offset any incremental cost of a new regulation and approximate the total costs or savings associated with each new regulation or repealed regulation. In interim guidance issued by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget on February 2, 2017, the Trump administration indicates that the “two-for-one” provisions may apply not only to agency regulations, but also to significant agency guidance documents.

The second Executive Order terminates the cost-sharing subsidies that reimburse insurers under the ACA. Several state Attorneys General filed suit to stop the administration from terminating the subsidies, but their request for a restraining order was denied by a federal judge in California on October 25, 2017. The loss of the cost share reduction payments is expected to increase premiums on certain policies issued by qualified health plans under the ACA. In addition, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, has recently proposed regulations that would give states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. Litigation and legislation over the ACA are likely to continue, with unpredictable and uncertain results. We continue to evaluate the effect that the ACA and its possible repeal and replacement has on our business.

Further, on February 24, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order requiring each agency to designate a regulatory reform officer and create a regulatory reform task force to evaluate existing regulations and make recommendations regarding their repeal, replacement or modification. It is difficult to predict how these requirements will be implemented, and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2025 unless additional action is taken by Congress. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws or any other similar laws introduced in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other health care funding, which could negatively affect our customers and accordingly, our financial operations.

The costs of prescription pharmaceuticals in the United States has also been the subject of considerable debate, and members of Congress and the Trump Administration have indicated that each will address such costs through new legislative and administrative measures. To date, there have been several recent U.S. congressional inquiries and proposed state and federal legislation designed to, among other things, improve transparency in drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the costs of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. The pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is also subject to governmental control outside the United States. In these other countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our ability to generate revenues and become profitable could be impaired.

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

Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally-mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing.

In the EU, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the EU or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the EU, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than EU, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most EU member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing EU and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

In markets outside of the United States and EU, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action in the United States, the EU or any other jurisdiction. If we or any third parties we may engage are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or such third parties are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidates may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

If we fail to comply with the extensive legal and regulatory requirements affecting the health care industry, we could face increased costs, penalties and a loss of business.

Our activities, and the activities of any collaborators, distributors and other third-party providers that we may engage in the future, will be subject to extensive government regulation and oversight both in the U.S. and in foreign jurisdictions. The FDA and comparable agencies in other jurisdictions will directly regulate many of our most critical business activities, including the conduct of preclinical and clinical studies, product manufacturing, advertising and promotion, product distribution, adverse event reporting, and product risk management. Our interactions in the U.S. or abroad with physicians and other health care providers that prescribe or purchase our products will also be subject to government regulation designed to prevent fraud and abuse in the sale and use of the products and place greater restrictions on the marketing practices of health care companies. Health care companies such as ours are facing heightened scrutiny of their relationships with health care providers from anti-corruption enforcement officials. In addition, health care companies such as ours have been the target of lawsuits and investigations alleging violations of government regulation, including claims asserting submission of incorrect pricing information, impermissible off-label promotion of pharmaceutical products, payments intended to influence the referral of health care business, submission of false claims for government reimbursement, antitrust violations, and violations related to environmental matters. Risks relating to compliance with laws and regulations may be heightened if we operate globally.

Regulations governing the health care industry are subject to change, with possibly retroactive effect, including:

Violations of governmental regulation may be punishable by criminal and civil sanctions against us, including fines and civil monetary penalties and exclusion from participation in government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, as well as sanctions against executives overseeing our business. In addition to penalties for violation of laws and regulations, we could be required to repay amounts we received from government payors or pay additional rebates and interest if we are found to have miscalculated the pricing information we have submitted to the government. We cannot ensure that our compliance controls, policies and procedures will in every instance protect us from acts committed by our employees, collaborators, partners or third-party providers that would violate the laws or regulations of the jurisdictions in which we operate. Whether or not we have complied with the law, an investigation into alleged unlawful conduct could increase our expenses, damage our reputation, divert management time and attention, and adversely affect our business.

We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, and health information privacy and security laws, and if we are unable to comply with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

If we obtain FDA approval for any of our product candidates or technologies and begin commercializing those products or technologies in the United States, our operations may be subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act, and physician sunshine laws and regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing, and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws. Further, state laws differ from each other and from federal law in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Risks Related to our Dependence on Third Parties

We may become dependent on future collaborations to develop and commercialize our product candidates and to provide the regulatory compliance, sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities required for the success of our business.

We may enter into various kinds of collaborative research and development and product marketing agreements to develop and commercialize our products. The expected future milestone payments and cost reimbursements from collaboration agreements could provide an important source of financing for our research and development programs, thereby facilitating the application of our technology to the development and commercialization of our products, but there are risks associated with entering into collaboration arrangements.

The process of establishing and maintaining collaborative relationships is difficult, time-consuming and involves significant uncertainty, such as:

There is a risk that a collaboration partner might fail to perform its obligations under the collaborative arrangements or may be slow in performing its obligations. In addition, a collaboration partner may experience financial difficulties at any time that could prevent it from having available funds to contribute to the collaboration. If a collaboration partner fails to conduct its product development, commercialization, regulatory compliance, sales and marketing or distribution activities successfully and in a timely manner, or if it terminates or materially modifies its agreements with us, the development and commercialization of one or more product candidates could be delayed, curtailed, or terminated because we may not have sufficient financial resources or capabilities to continue such development and commercialization on our own.

We have no marketing, sales, or distribution resources for the commercialization of any products or technologies that we might successfully develop.

We do not have any infrastructure for the sales, marketing or distribution of our products, and the cost of establishing and maintaining such an organization may exceed the cost-effectiveness of doing so. There are significant expenses and risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, including our ability to hire, retain and appropriately incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel, and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities could delay any product launch, which would adversely impact the commercialization of any approved product candidate.

If we market products through arrangements with third parties, we may pay sales commissions to sales representatives or we may sell or consign products to distributors at wholesale prices. As a result, our gross profit from product sales may be lower than it would be if we were to sell our products directly to end users at retail prices through our own sales force. There can be no assurance we will able to negotiate distribution or sales agreements with third parties on favorable terms to justify our investment in our products or achieve sufficient revenues to support our operations.

If we are unable to build our own sales force or negotiate a collaborative relationship for the commercialization of our product candidates, we may be forced to delay the potential commercialization of such candidates or reduce the scope of our sales or marketing activities for them. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund commercialization activities ourselves, we will need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. We could enter into arrangements with collaborative partners at an earlier stage than otherwise would be ideal and we may be required to relinquish rights to our product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.

If we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates and may not become profitable and may incur significant additional losses. We will be competing with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

We do not have the ability to independently conduct clinical trials required to obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates and intend to rely on third parties to conduct, supervise and monitor our clinical trials.

We will need to rely on third parties, such as contract research organizations, data management companies, contract clinical research associates, medical institutions, clinical investigators and contract laboratories to conduct any clinical trials that we may undertake for our product candidates. We may also rely on third parties to assist with our preclinical development of product candidates.

If we outsource clinical trials, we may be unable to directly control the timing, conduct and expense of our clinical trials. However, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

We and our third-party contractors will be required to comply with the GLPs and GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and are also required by the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Economic Area and comparable foreign regulatory authorities in the form of International Conference on Harmonization guidelines for any of our product candidates that are in preclinical and clinical development. The Regulatory authorities enforce GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or our third-party contractors fail to comply with GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. Accordingly, if our third-party contractors fail to comply with these regulations or fail to recruit a sufficient number of subjects, we may be required to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

Our third-party contractors will not be our employees, and we will not control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our future clinical and nonclinical programs. These third-party contractors may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials, or other product development activities which could harm our competitive position. We face the risk of potential unauthorized disclosure or misappropriation of our intellectual property by third-party contractors, which may reduce our trade secret protection and allow our potential competitors to access and exploit our proprietary technology. If our third-party contractors do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for any other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize any product candidate that we develop. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for any product candidate that we develop would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

If our relationship with any third-party contractors terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third-party contractors or do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional third-party contractors involves substantial cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we intend to carefully manage our relationships with our third-party contractors, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and enforce patents and to protect our trade secrets, others could use our technology to compete with us, which could limit opportunities for us to generate revenues by licensing our technology and selling our products.

There is no certainty that our pending or future patent applications will result in the issuance of patents.

We acquired rights to patent applications for technology that Lineage has developed, and we may file additional new patent applications in the future seeking patent protection for new technology or products that we develop ourselves or jointly with others. However, there is no assurance that any of our licensed patent applications, or any patent applications that we may file in the future in the United States or abroad, will result in the issuance of patents.

The process of applying for and obtaining patents can be expensive and slow.

Intellectual property we may develop using grants received from the federal government are subject to rights maintained by the government.

Research and development we perform that is funded by grants from the federal government, and any intellectual property that we create using those grants, is subject to the rights maintained by the federal government.

Our patents may not protect our technologies or products from competition.

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents, if issued, on our technology and product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly in developing countries. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we may obtain patent protection, but where patent enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. The products offered by foreign competitors may compete with our products in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued or licensed patents or where any future patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing with us.

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

Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and resources from other aspects of our business. Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in major markets, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market products or license our patented technologies. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate.

We may be subject to patent infringement claims that could be costly to defend, which may limit our ability to use disputed technologies, and which could prevent us from pursuing research and development or commercialization of some of our technologies or products, require us to pay licensing fees to have freedom to operate and/or result in monetary damages or other liability for us.

The success of our business depends significantly on our ability to operate without infringing patents and other proprietary rights of others. If the technology that we use infringes a patent held by others, we could be sued for monetary damages by the patent holder or its licensee, or we could be prevented from continuing research, development, and commercialization of technologies and products that rely on that technology, unless we are able to obtain a license to use the patent. The cost and availability of a license to a patent cannot be predicted, and the likelihood of obtaining a license at an acceptable cost would be lower if the patent holder or any of its licensees is using the patent to develop or market a technology or product with which our technologies or products would compete. If we could not obtain a necessary license, we would need to develop or obtain rights to alternative technologies, which could prove costly and could cause delays in developing our technologies or products, or we could be forced to discontinue the development or marketing of any technologies and products that were developed using the technology covered by the patent.

Risks Related to Our Relationship with Juvenescence

Our Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer are not fulltime AgeX employees.

Our Chief Financial Officer is providing services to us on a part-time basis as a consultant. Because he is not a full-time employee, we may compete for his time and attention with other companies for whom he may provide services. Our Chief Operating Officer is an employee of Juvenescence and is expected to devote 85% of his time to our affairs and the balance of his time to the affairs of Juvenescence and accordingly we may compete with Juvenescence for his time and attention.

Conflicts of interest may arise from our relationship with Juvenescence, which owns a significant percentage of our common stock and is a significant creditor and will be able to substantially influence us and exert control over matters subject to stockholder approval and the election of directors.

As of March 16, 2020, Juvenescence beneficially owned approximately 43.6% of the voting power of our outstanding common stock, which will be enable them to substantially influence us and exert control through this ownership position. For example, Juvenescence will be able to exert control over or substantially influence elections of directors, approval of our equity incentive plans, amendments to our organizational documents, or approval of any merger, amalgamation, sale of assets or other major corporate transaction. Juvenescence has controlling stakes and minority investments in several other companies engaged in various aspects of the aging industry, which companies may propose collaborations with AgeX. Juvenescence has also loaned AgeX $2 million and has agreed to provide additional loans subject to certain conditions under the New Loan Agreement as described in Note 9 to the financial statements included in this Report. Juvenescence's interests may not always coincide with our corporate interests or the interests of other stockholders, and it may exercise its voting and other rights, including rights as a creditor, in a manner with which other stockholders may not agree or that may not be in the best interests of AgeX or stockholders other than Juvenescence. So long as Juvenescence continues to own a significant amount of our equity and remains a significant creditor, it will continue to be able to strongly influence and effectively control our decisions. While the directors elected by Juvenescence will be obligated to act in accordance with their fiduciary duty, they may have equity or other interests in Juvenescence and, accordingly, their interests may be aligned with Juvenescence's interests, which may not always coincide with our corporate interests or the interests of our other stockholders.

Risks Pertaining to Our Common Stock

There is a limited history to the public trading of our common stock and there is no assurance that a market for our common stock will be sustained.

Public trading of our common stock on the NYSE American began on November 29, 2018. Accordingly, there is only a limited history of the public trading of our common stock and there can be no assurance that an active market for our common stock will be sustained.

We cannot predict the prices at which our common stock may trade. The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly, depending upon many factors, some of which may be beyond our control, including, but not limited to:

Because we are engaged in the development of pharmaceutical and cell therapy products, the price of shares of our common stock may rise and fall rapidly.

The price of our common stock may rise rapidly in response to certain events, such as the commencement of clinical trials of an experimental new therapy, even though the outcome of those trials and the likelihood of ultimate FDA approval of a therapeutic product remain uncertain. Similarly, prices of our common stock may fall rapidly in response to certain events such as unfavorable results of clinical trials or a delay or failure to obtain FDA approval. Further, the failure of our earnings to meet analysts’ expectations could result in a significant rapid decline in the market price of our common stock

Because we do not pay dividends, our stock may not be a suitable investment for anyone who needs to earn dividend income.

We do not have current plans to pay any cash dividends on our common stock. The declaration, amount and payment of any future dividends on shares of common stock will be at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors may take into account general and economic conditions, our financial condition and results of operations, our available cash and current and anticipated cash needs, capital requirements, contractual, legal, tax and regulatory restrictions and implications on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiaries to us and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant. For the foreseeable future we anticipate that any earnings generated in our business will be used to finance the growth of our business and will not be paid out as dividends to our stockholders. This means that our stock may not be a suitable investment for anyone who needs to earn income from their investments.

Securities analysts may not initiate coverage or continue to cover our common stock, and this may have a negative impact on the market price of our shares.

The market price and liquidity of our common stock will depend, in part, on the research and reports that securities analysts publish about our business and our common stock. We do not have any control over these analysts. There is no guarantee that securities analysts will cover our common stock. If securities analysts do not cover our common stock, the lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of those shares. If securities analysts do cover our shares, they could issue reports or recommendations that are unfavorable to the price of our shares, and they could downgrade a previously favorable report or recommendation, and in either case our share price could decline as a result of the report. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover our shares or fails to publish regular reports on our business, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.

You may experience dilution of your ownership interests if we issue additional shares of common stock or preferred stock.

In the future, we may issue our authorized but previously unissued equity securities, resulting in the dilution of the ownership interests of our present stockholders. We are currently authorized to issue an aggregate of 105,000,000 shares of capital stock consisting of 100,000,000 shares of common stock and 5,000,000 “blank check” shares of preferred stock. As of March 16, 2020, there were 37,656,415 shares of common stock issued and outstanding, and 2,895,979 shares of common stock reserved for issuance upon the exercise of outstanding stock options or other stock-based awards under our 2017 Equity Incentive Plan. No shares of preferred stock are presently outstanding. Under the terms of the New Loan Agreement, we will issue shares of common stock and common stock purchase warrants to Juvenescence. The total number of shares of common stock that we will issue to Juvenescence will depend on whether Juvenescence elects to exercise its right to convert the principal amount of outstanding loans under the New Loan Agreement into shares of our common stock and the market price of our common stock if a conversion takes place. The total number of warrants that we will issue to Juvenescence will depend on the amount of funds we borrow under the New Loan Agreement and the market price of our common stock. See Note 9 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Report.

We may issue additional common stock or other securities that are convertible into or exercisable for common stock in order to raise additional capital, or in connection with hiring or retaining employees or consultants, or in connection with future acquisitions of licenses to technology or medical products or for other business purposes. The future issuance of any additional shares of common stock or other securities may create downward pressure on the trading price of our common stock.

We may also issue preferred stock having rights, preferences, and privileges senior to the rights of our common stock with respect to dividends, rights to share in distributions of our assets if we liquidate our company, or voting rights. Any preferred stock may also be convertible into common stock on terms that would be dilutive to holders of common stock.

We may finance a portion of our operations by organizing subsidiaries and selling shares of capital stock in those subsidiaries to private investors. Sales of subsidiary shares would reduce our ownership interest in the subsidiaries, and correspondingly dilute our shareholder’s ownership interests in our consolidated enterprise. Our subsidiaries could also have their own stock option plans and the exercise of subsidiary stock options or the sale of restricted stock under those plans would also reduce our ownership interest in the subsidiaries, with a resulting dilutive effect on the ownership interest of our shareholders in our consolidated enterprise. Subsidiaries might also issue preferred stock having rights, preferences, and privileges senior to the rights of the subsidiary common stock we hold with respect to dividends, rights to share in distributions of our assets if the subsidiary is liquidated, or voting rights. Any subsidiary preferred stock may also be convertible into common stock on terms that would be dilutive to us as a holder of subsidiary common stock.

Unless our common stock continues to be listed on a national securities exchange it will become subject to the so-called “penny stock” rules that impose restrictive sales practice requirements.

If we are unable to maintain the listing of our common stock on the NYSE American or another national securities exchange, our common stock could become subject to the so-called “penny stock” rules if the shares have a market value of less than $5.00 per share. The SEC has adopted regulations that define a penny stock to include any stock that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions, including an exception for stock traded on a national securities exchange. The SEC regulations impose restrictive sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell penny stocks to persons other than established customers and accredited investors. An accredited investor generally is a person whose individual annual income exceeded $200,000, or whose joint annual income with a spouse exceeded $300,000 during the past two years and who expects their annual income to exceed the applicable level during the current year, or a person with net worth in excess of $1.0 million, not including the value of the investor’s principal residence and excluding mortgage debt secured by the investor’s principal residence up to the estimated fair market value of the home, except that any mortgage debt incurred by the investor within 60 days prior to the date of the transaction shall not be excluded from the determination of the investor’s net worth unless the mortgage debt was incurred to acquire the residence. For transactions covered by this rule, the broker-dealer must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and must have received the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to sale. This means that if we are unable maintain the listing of our common stock on a national securities exchange, the ability of stockholders to sell their AgeX common stock in the secondary market could be adversely affected.

If a transaction involving a penny stock is not exempt from the SEC’s rule, a broker-dealer must deliver a disclosure schedule relating to the penny stock market to each investor prior to a transaction. The broker-dealer also must disclose the commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and its registered representative, current quotations for the penny stock, and, if the broker-dealer is the sole market-maker, the broker-dealer must disclose this fact and the broker-dealer’s presumed control over the market. Finally, monthly statements must be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the customer’s account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.

We are an “emerging growth company,” and may elect to comply with reduced public company reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, which could make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, and we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of $1.07 billion or more; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the first sale of our common equity securities pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” under the Exchange Act.

We could be subject to securities class action litigation.

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us because biopharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. If we face such litigation, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of our company, which may be beneficial to our stockholders, more difficult and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and our bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of our company that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, because our Board of Directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our Board of Directors. Among other things, these provisions include those establishing:

Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner.