NOTE 8 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation and Other Loss Contingencies

The Company records liabilities for loss contingencies arising from claims, assessments, litigation, fines, penalties and other sources when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company has no liabilities recorded for loss contingencies as of December 31, 2022.

Legal Matters

Action Against Former Executive of KBL

On September 1, 2021, the Company initiated legal action in the Chancery Court of Delaware against Dr. Marlene Krauss, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and director (“Dr. Krauss”) and two of her affiliated companies, KBL IV Sponsor, LLC and KBL Healthcare Management, Inc. (collectively, the “KBL Affiliates”) for, among other things, engaging in unauthorized monetary transfers of the Company’s assets, non-disclosure of financial liabilities within the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements, issuing shares of stock without proper authorization; and improperly allowing stockholder redemptions to take place. The Company’s complaint alleges causes of action against Dr. Krauss and/or the KBL Affiliates for breach of fiduciary duties, ultra vires acts, unjust enrichment, negligence and declaratory relief, and seeks compensatory damages in excess of $11,286,570, together with interest, attorneys’ fees and costs. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its legal actions.

On October 5, 2021, Dr. Krauss and the KBL Affiliates filed an Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint (the “Krauss Counterclaims”) against the Company and twelve individuals who are, or were, directors and/or officers of the Company, i.e., Marc Feldmann, Lawrence Steinman, James N. Woody, Teresa DeLuca, Frank Knuettel II, Pamela Marrone, Lawrence Gold, Donald A. McGovern, Jr., Russell T. Ray, Richard W. Barker, Shoshana Shendelman and Ozan Pamir (collectively, the “Third-Party Defendants”).  On October 27, 2021, the Company and Ozan Pamir filed an Answer to the Krauss Counterclaims, and all of the other Third-Party Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss as to the Third-Party Complaint.

On January 28, 2022, in lieu of filing an opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, Dr. Krauss and the KBL Affiliates filed a Motion for leave to file amended counterclaims and third-party complaint, and to dismiss six of the current and former directors previously named, i.e., to dismiss Teresa DeLuca, Frank Knuettel II, Pamela Marrone, Russell T. Ray, Richard W. Barker and Shoshana Shendelman.  The Motion was granted by stipulation and, on February 24, 2022, Dr. Krauss filed an amended Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint (the “Amended Counterclaims”).  In essence, the Amended Counterclaims allege (a) that the Company and the remaining Third-Party Defendants breached fiduciary duties to Dr. Krauss by making alleged misstatements against Dr. Krauss in SEC filings and failing to register her shares in the Company so that they could be traded, and (b) the Company breached contracts between the Company and Dr. Krauss for registration of such shares, and also failed to pay to Dr. Krauss the amounts alleged to be owing under a promissory note in the principal amount of $371,178, plus an additional $300,000 under Dr. Krauss’s resignation agreement.  The Amended Counterclaims seek unspecified amounts of monetary damages, declaratory relief, equitable and injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees and costs. 

On March 16, 2022, Donald A. McGovern, Jr. and Lawrence Gold filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaims against them, and the Company and the remaining Third-Party Defendants filed an Answer to the Amended Counterclaims denying the same.  On April 19, 2022, Dr. Krauss stipulated to dismiss all of her counterclaims and allegations against both Donald A. McGovern, Jr. and Lawrence Gold, thereby mooting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaims against them. The Company and the Third-Party Defendants intend to continue to vigorously defend against all of the Amended Counterclaims, however, there can be no assurance that they will be successful in the legal defense of such Amended Counterclaims. In April 2022, Donald A. McGovern, Jr. and Lawrence Gold were dismissed from the lawsuit as parties. Discovery has not yet commenced in the case. The Company and the Third-Party Defendants intend to continue to vigorously defend against all of the Amended Counterclaims, however, there can be no assurance that they will be successful in the legal defense of such Amended Counterclaims. 

Action Against the Company by Dr. Krauss

On August 19, 2021, Dr. Krauss initiated legal action in the Chancery Court of Delaware against the Company.  The original Complaint sought expedited relief and made the following two claims: (1) it alleged that the Company is obligated to advance expenses including, attorney’s fees, to Dr. Krauss for the costs of defending against the SEC and certain Subpoenas served by the SEC on Dr. Krauss; and (2) it alleged that the Company is also required to reimburse Dr. Krauss for the costs of bringing this lawsuit against the Company.  On or about September 3, 2021, Dr. Krauss filed an Amended and Supplemental Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) in this action, which added the further claims that Dr. Krauss is also allegedly entitled to advancement by the Company of her expenses, including attorney’s fees, for the costs of defending against the Third-Party Complaint in the Tyche Capital LLC action referenced below, and the costs of defending against the Company’s own Complaint against Dr. Krauss as described above.  On or about September 23, 2021, the Company filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint in which the Company denied each of Dr. Krauss’ claims and further raised numerous affirmative defenses with respect thereto.

On November 15, 2021, Dr. Krauss filed a Motion for Summary Adjudication as to certain of the issues in the case, which was opposed by the Company.  A hearing on such Motion was held on December 7, 2021, and, on March 7, 2022, the Court issued a decision in the matter denying the Motion for Summary Adjudication in part and granting it in part.  The Court then issued an Order implementing such a decision on March 29, 2022. The parties are now engaging in proceedings set forth in that implementing Order. The Court granted Dr. Krauss’s request for advancement of some of the legal fees which Dr. Krauss requested in her Motion, and the Company was required to pay a portion of those fees while it objects to the remaining portion of disputed fees. These legal fees have been accrued on the Company’s balance sheet.

On October 10, 2022, Dr. Krauss filed an Application to compel the Company to pay the full amount of fees requested by Dr. Krauss for May-July 2022, and to modify the Court’s Order. The Company filed its Opposition thereto.  On January 18, 2023, Dr. Krauss filed a Second Application to compel the Company to pay the full amount of fees requested by Dr. Krauss for August-October 2022, and to modify the Court’s Order.  The Company filed its Opposition thereto.  On May 3, 2023, the Court issued an Order granting both of Dr. Krauss’s Applications for payment of the full amount of requested attorney’s fees for the months of May through October 2022.  Notwithstanding the Order, such ruling does not constitute any final adjudication as to whether Dr. Krauss will ultimately be entitled to permanently retain such advancements, and Dr. Krauss has posted an undertaking with the Court affirmatively promising to repay all such amounts if she is eventually found to be liable for the Company’s and/or the SEC’s claims against her. The Company is seeking payment for a substantial portion of such amounts from its director and officers’ insurance policy, of which no assurance can be provided that the directors and officers insurance policy will cover such amounts. See “Declaratory Relief Action Against the Company by AmTrust International” below.

Action Against Tyche Capital LLC

The Company commenced and filed an action against defendant Tyche Capital LLC (“Tyche”) in the Supreme Court of New York, in the County of New York, on April 15, 2021.  In its Complaint, the Company alleged claims against Tyche arising out of Tyche’s breach of its written contractual obligations to the Company as set forth in a “Guarantee and Commitment Agreement” dated July 25, 2019, and a “Term Sheet For KBL Business Combination With CannBioRex” dated April 10, 2019 (collectively, the “Subject Guarantee”).  The Company alleges in its Complaint that, notwithstanding demand having been made on Tyche to perform its obligations under the Subject Guarantee, Tyche has failed and refused to do so, and is currently in debt to the Company for such failure in the amount of $6,776,686, together with interest accruing thereon at the rate set forth in the Subject Guarantee.

On or about May 17, 2021, Tyche responded to the Company’s Complaint by filing an Answer and Counterclaims against the Company alleging that it was the Company, rather than Tyche, that had breached the Subject Guarantee.  Tyche also filed a Third-Party Complaint against six third-party defendants, including three members of the Company’s management, Sir Marc Feldmann, Dr. James Woody, and Ozan Pamir (collectively, the “Individual Company Defendants”), claiming that they allegedly breached fiduciary duties to Tyche with regards to the Subject Guarantee.  In that regard, on June 25, 2021, each of the Individual Company Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Tyche’s Third-Party Complaint against them.

On November 23, 2021, the Court granted the Company’s request to issue an Order of attachment against all of Tyche’s shares of the Company’s stock that had been held in escrow.  In so doing, the Court found that the Company had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of the case based on the facts alleged in the Company’s Complaint.

On February 18, 2022, Tyche filed an Amended Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint.  On March 22, 2022, the Company and each of the Individual Company Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss all of Tyche’s claims.  A hearing on such Motion to Dismiss was held on August 25, 2022, and the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss entirely as to each of the Individual Company Defendants, and also as to three of the four Counterclaims brought against the Company, only leaving Tyche’s declaratory relief claim. On September 9, 2022, Tyche filed a Notice of Appeal as to the Court’s decision, which has never been briefed or adjudicated. On August 26, 2022, Tyche filed a Motion to vacate or modify the Company’s existing attachment Order against Tyche’s shares of the Company’s stock held in escrow. The Company has filed its Opposition thereto, and the Court summarily denied such Motion without hearing on January 3, 2023.  Tyche subsequently filed a Notice of Appeal as to that denial and filed its Opening Brief on January 30, 2023.  The Company filed its opposition brief on March 2, 2023, and the matter was taken under submission by the Appellate Court.  On May 4, 2023, the Appellate Court issued its decision unanimously affirming the ruling of the lower Court in the Company’s favor. 

On January 30, 2023, the Company filed a Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment and to Dismiss Affirmative Defenses against Tyche. That motion has been fully briefed, and the Court has scheduled a hearing thereon for June 20, 2023. The Company and the Individual Company Defendants intend to continue to vigorously defend against all of Tyche’s claims; however, there can be no assurance that they will be successful in the legal defense of such claims. Written discovery proceedings and depositions have occurred among the parties.

Action Against Ronald Bauer & Samantha Bauer

The Company and two of its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Katexco Pharmaceuticals Corp. and CannBioRex Pharmaceuticals Corp. (collectively, the “Company Plaintiffs”), initiated legal action against Ronald Bauer and Samantha Bauer, as well as two of their companies, Theseus Capital Ltd. and Astatine Capital Ltd. (collectively, the “Bauer Defendants”), in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on February 25, 2022. The Company Plaintiffs are seeking damages against the Bauer Defendants for misappropriated funds and stock shares, unauthorized stock sales, and improper travel expenses, in the combined sum of at least $4,395,000 CAD [$3,248,696 USD] plus the additional sum of $2,721,036 USD. The Bauer Defendants filed an answer to the Company Plaintiffs’ claims on May 6, 2022. There can be no assurance that the Company Plaintiffs will be successful in this legal action.

Declaratory Relief Action Against the Company by AmTrust International

On June 29, 2022, AmTrust International Underwriters DAC (“AmTrust”), which was the premerger directors’ and officers’ insurance policy underwriter for KBL, filed a declaratory relief action against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Declaratory Relief Action”) seeking declaration of AmTrust’s obligations under the directors’ and officers’ insurance policy.  In the Declaratory Relief Action, AmTrust is claiming that as a result of the merger the Company is no longer the insured under the subject insurance policy, notwithstanding the fact that the fees which the Company seeks to recover from AmTrust relate to matters occurring prior to the merger. 

On September 20, 2022, the Company filed its Answer and Counterclaims against AmTrust for bad faith breach of AmTrust’s insurance coverage obligations to the Company under the subject directors’ and officers’ insurance policy, and seeking damages of at least $2 million in compensatory damages, together with applicable punitive damages. In addition, the Company brought a Third-Party Complaint against its excess insurance carrier, Freedom Specialty Insurance Company (“Freedom”) seeking declaratory relief that Freedom will also be required to honor its policy coverage as soon as the amount of AmTrust’s insurance coverage obligations to the Company have been exhausted. On October 25, 2022, AmTrust filed its Answer to the Company’s Counterclaims and, on October 27, 2022, Freedom filed its Answer to the Third-Party Complaint.

On November 22, 2022, the Company filed a Motion for Summary Adjudication against both AmTrust and Freedom. The Motion was fully briefed, and a hearing was held on March 9, 2023. The standard to prevail on a Motion for Summary Adjudication in the Court is high to prevail and requires a judge to find that there are no disputed issues of fact so that they can rule on the issues as a matter of law. In this instance the judge found three major issues could be decided as a matter of law in the Company’s favor and that one issue, the Change in Control exclusion, requires further discovery.

On April 21, 2023, the Court issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part the Company’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Specifically, the Court granted summary adjudication in favor of the Company on the following issues: (a) that the Company is, in fact, an insured under both the AmTrust and Freedom insurance policies; (b) that certain SEC subpoena related expenses for defendants Dr. Marlene Krauss, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and Director, and George Hornig, the former Chairman of the Board, are within the basic scope of coverage under both the AmTrust and Freedom insurance policies; and (c) that the Insured vs. Insured exclusion relied upon by AmTrust and Freedom is not applicable to bar any such coverage.

The Court also found that there were issues of disputed facts as to the Change in Control exclusion contained within the policies, which therefore precluded the Court from granting the remainder of the Company’s requests for summary adjudication as a matter of law. Accordingly, the Court, at this time, denied the Company’s further requests for summary adjudication and deemed that for the time being, the Change in Control issue is to be determined at the time of trial, in order to find that the policies (i) provide coverage for the fees which the Company has advanced and will advance to Dr. Marlene Krauss and George Hornig; (ii) that AmTrust has breached the policy; (iii) that AmTrust must pay such expenses of the Company; and that, once the AmTrust policy has been exhausted, (iv) Freedom will be obligated to pay such expenses of the Company pursuant to its policy. The Company intends to continue to vigorously pursue this final matter in order to establish the Company’s entitlement to full payment by both AmTrust and Freedom of the subject advancement expenses of the Company.

While the Company continues to believe it has a strong case against both AmTrust and Freedom, and believes the Court ruling in its favor in regards to the matters discussed above is a significant positive outcome for the Company, there can be no assurance that the Company will prevail in this action.

NOTE 11 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation and Other Loss Contingencies

The Company records liabilities for loss contingencies arising from claims, assessments, litigation, fines, penalties and other sources when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company has no liabilities recorded for loss contingencies as of December 31, 2022. See Potential Legal Matters – Action Against Former Executives of KBL and Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. Breach of Contract below for information related to a December 31, 2022 accrual.

Potential Legal Matters

Action Against Former Executive of KBL

On September 1, 2021, the Company initiated legal action in the Chancery Court of Delaware against Dr. Marlene Krauss, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and director (“Dr. Krauss”) and two of her affiliated companies, KBL IV Sponsor, LLC and KBL Healthcare Management, Inc. (collectively, the “KBL Affiliates”) for, among other things, engaging in unauthorized monetary transfers of the Company’s assets, non-disclosure of financial liabilities within the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements, issuing shares of stock without proper authorization; and improperly allowing stockholder redemptions to take place. The Company’s complaint alleges causes of action against Dr. Krauss and/or the KBL Affiliates for breach of fiduciary duties, ultra vires acts, unjust enrichment, negligence and declaratory relief, and seeks compensatory damages in excess of $11,286,570, together with interest, attorneys’ fees and costs. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its legal actions. As of December 31, 2022, the Company has a legal accrual of $125,255 recorded to cover the legal expenses of the former executives of KBL.

On October 5, 2021, Dr. Krauss and the KBL Affiliates filed an Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint (the “Krauss Counterclaims”) against the Company and twelve individuals who are, or were, directors and/or officers of the Company, i.e., Marc Feldmann, Lawrence Steinman, James N. Woody, Teresa DeLuca, Frank Knuettel II, Pamela Marrone, Lawrence Gold, Donald A. McGovern, Jr., Russell T. Ray, Richard W. Barker, Shoshana Shendelman and Ozan Pamir (collectively, the “Third-Party Defendants”).  On October 27, 2021, the Company and Ozan Pamir filed an Answer to the Krauss Counterclaims, and all of the other Third-Party Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss as to the Third-Party Complaint.

On January 28, 2022, in lieu of filing an opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, Dr. Krauss and the KBL Affiliates filed a Motion for leave to file amended counterclaims and third-party complaint, and to dismiss six of the current and former directors previously named, i.e., to dismiss Teresa DeLuca, Frank Knuettel II, Pamela Marrone, Russell T. Ray, Richard W. Barker and Shoshana Shendelman.  The Motion was granted by stipulation and, on February 24, 2022, Dr. Krauss filed an amended Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint (the “Amended Counterclaims”).  In essence, the Amended Counterclaims allege (a) that the Company and the remaining Third-Party Defendants breached fiduciary duties to Dr. Krauss by making alleged misstatements against Dr. Krauss in SEC filings and failing to register her shares in the Company so that they could be traded, and (b) the Company breached contracts between the Company and Dr. Krauss for registration of such shares, and also failed to pay to Dr. Krauss the amounts alleged to be owing under a promissory note in the principal amount of $371,178, plus an additional $300,000 under Dr. Krauss’s resignation agreement.  The Amended Counterclaims seek unspecified amounts of monetary damages, declaratory relief, equitable and injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees and costs. 

On March 16, 2022, Donald A. McGovern, Jr. and Lawrence Gold filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaims against them, and the Company and the remaining Third-Party Defendants filed an Answer to the Amended Counterclaims denying the same.  On April 19, 2022, Dr. Krauss stipulated to dismiss all of her counterclaims and allegations against both Donald A. McGovern, Jr. and Lawrence Gold, thereby mooting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaims against them. The Company and the Third-Party Defendants intend to continue to vigorously defend against all of the Amended Counterclaims, however, there can be no assurance that they will be successful in the legal defense of such Amended Counterclaims. In April 2022, Donald A. McGovern, Jr. and Lawrence Gold were dismissed from the lawsuit as parties. Discovery has not yet commenced in the case. The Company and the Third-Party Defendants intend to continue to vigorously defend against all of the Amended Counterclaims, however, there can be no assurance that they will be successful in the legal defense of such Amended Counterclaims. 

Action Against the Company by Dr. Krauss

On August 19, 2021, Dr. Krauss initiated legal action in the Chancery Court of Delaware against the Company.  The original Complaint sought expedited relief and made the following two claims: (1) it alleged that the Company is obligated to advance expenses including, attorney’s fees, to Dr. Krauss for the costs of defending against the SEC and certain Subpoenas served by the SEC on Dr. Krauss; and (2) it alleged that the Company is also required to reimburse Dr. Krauss for the costs of bringing this lawsuit against the Company.  On or about September 3, 2021, Dr. Krauss filed an Amended and Supplemental Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) in this action, which added the further claims that Dr. Krauss is also allegedly entitled to advancement by the Company of her expenses, including attorney’s fees, for the costs of defending against the Third-Party Complaint in the Tyche Capital LLC action referenced below, and the costs of defending against the Company’s own Complaint against Dr. Krauss as described above.  On or about September 23, 2021, the Company filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint in which the Company denied each of Dr. Krauss’ claims and further raised numerous affirmative defenses with respect thereto.

On November 15, 2021, Dr. Krauss filed a Motion for Summary Adjudication as to certain of the issues in the case, which was opposed by the Company.  A hearing on such Motion was held on December 7, 2021, and, on March 7, 2022, the Court issued a decision in the matter denying the Motion for Summary Adjudication in part and granting it in part.  The Court then issued an Order implementing such a decision on March 29, 2022. The parties are now engaging in proceedings set forth in that implementing Order. The Court granted Dr. Krauss’s request for advancement of some of the legal fees which Dr. Krauss requested in her Motion, and the Company was required to pay a portion of those fees while it objects to the remaining portion of disputed fees. These legal fees have been accrued on the Company’s balance sheet.

On October 10, 2022, Dr. Krauss filed an Application to compel the Company to pay the full amount of fees requested by Dr. Krauss for May-July 2022, and to modify the Court’s Order. The Company filed its Opposition thereto.  On January 18, 2023, Dr. Krauss filed a Second Application to compel the Company to pay the full amount of fees requested by Dr. Krauss for August-October 2022, and to modify the Court’s Order.  The Company filed its Opposition thereto.  On March 13, 2023, the Court telephonically informed the attorneys for the parties that it intended to grant both of Dr. Krauss’ Applications; however, to date, the Court has not yet issued such ruling.  Notwithstanding such apparent decision and any requirement therein by the Court for the Company to advance attorneys’ fees to Dr. Krauss, such a ruling will not constitute any final adjudication as to whether Dr. Krauss will ultimately be entitled to permanently retain such advancements. The Company is seeking payment for a substantial portion of such amounts from its director and officers’ insurance policy, of which no assurance can be provided that the directors and officers insurance policy will cover such amounts. See “Declaratory Relief Action Against the Company by AmTrust International” below.

Action Against Tyche Capital LLC

The Company commenced and filed an action against defendant Tyche Capital LLC (“Tyche”) in the Supreme Court of New York, in the County of New York, on April 15, 2021.  In its Complaint, the Company alleged claims against Tyche arising out of Tyche’s breach of its written contractual obligations to the Company as set forth in a “Guarantee And Commitment Agreement” dated July 25, 2019, and a “Term Sheet For KBL Business Combination With CannBioRex” dated April 10, 2019 (collectively, the “Subject Guarantee”).  The Company alleges in its Complaint that, notwithstanding demand having been made on Tyche to perform its obligations under the Subject Guarantee, Tyche has failed and refused to do so, and is currently in debt to the Company for such failure in the amount of $6,776,686, together with interest accruing thereon at the rate set forth in the Subject Guarantee.

On or about May 17, 2021, Tyche responded to the Company’s Complaint by filing an Answer and Counterclaims against the Company alleging that it was the Company, rather than Tyche, that had breached the Subject Guarantee.  Tyche also filed a Third-Party Complaint against six third-party defendants, including three members of the Company’s management, Sir Marc Feldmann, Dr. James Woody, and Ozan Pamir (collectively, the “Individual Company Defendants”), claiming that they allegedly breached fiduciary duties to Tyche with regards to the Subject Guarantee.  In that regard, on June 25, 2021, each of the Individual Company Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Tyche’s Third-Party Complaint against them.

On November 23, 2021, the Court granted the Company’s request to issue an Order of attachment against all of Tyche’s shares of the Company’s stock that had been held in escrow.  In so doing, the Court found that the Company had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of the case based on the facts alleged in the Company’s Complaint.

On February 18, 2022, Tyche filed an Amended Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint.  On March 22, 2022, the Company and each of the Individual Company Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss all of Tyche’s claims.  A hearing on such Motion to Dismiss was held on August 25, 2022, and the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss entirely as to each of the Individual Company Defendants, and also as to three of the four Counterclaims brought against the Company, only leaving Tyche’s declaratory relief claim. On September 9, 2022, Tyche filed a Notice of Appeal as to the Court’s decision, which has not yet been briefed or adjudicated. On August 26, 2022, Tyche filed a Motion to vacate or modify the Company’s existing attachment Order against Tyche’s shares of the Company’s stock held in escrow. The Company has filed its Opposition thereto, and the Court summarily denied such Motion without hearing on January 3, 2023.  Tyche subsequently filed a Notice of Appeal as to that denial and filed its Opening Brief on January 30, 2023.  The Company filed its opposition brief on March 2, 2023, and no hearing date has been set.

On January 30, 2023, the Company filed a Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment and to Dismiss Affirmative Defenses against Tyche. Tyche has recently filed its Opposition, and the Company will now file a reply. No hearing has yet been set on this matter. The Company and the Individual Company Defendants intend to continue to vigorously defend against all of Tyche’s claims, however, there can be no assurance that they will be successful in the legal defense of such claims. Written discovery proceedings and depositions have occurred among the parties. 

Action Against Ronald Bauer & Samantha Bauer

The Company and two of its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Katexco Pharmaceuticals Corp. and CannBioRex Pharmaceuticals Corp. (collectively, the “Company Plaintiffs”), initiated legal action against Ronald Bauer and Samantha Bauer, as well as two of their companies, Theseus Capital Ltd. and Astatine Capital Ltd. (collectively, the “Bauer Defendants”), in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on February 25, 2022. The Company Plaintiffs are seeking damages against the Bauer Defendants for misappropriated funds and stock shares, unauthorized stock sales, and improper travel expenses, in the combined sum of at least $4,395,000 CAD [$3,178,025 USD] plus the additional sum of $2,721,036 USD. The Bauer Defendants filed an answer to the Company Plaintiffs’ claims on May 6, 2022. There can be no assurance that the Company Plaintiffs will be successful in this legal action.

Declaratory Relief Action Against the Company by AmTrust International

On June 29, 2022, AmTrust International Underwriters DAC (“AmTrust”), which was the premerger directors’ and officers’ insurance policy underwriter for KBL, filed a declaratory relief action against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Declaratory Relief Action”) seeking declaration of AmTrust’s obligations under the directors’ and officers’ insurance policy.  In the Declaratory Relief Action, AmTrust is claiming that as a result of the merger the Company is no longer the insured under the subject insurance policy, notwithstanding the fact that the fees which the Company seeks to recover from AmTrust relate to matters occurring prior to the merger. 

On September 20, 2022, the Company filed its Answer and Counterclaims against AmTrust for bad faith breach of AmTrust’s insurance coverage obligations to the Company under the subject directors’ and officers’ insurance policy, and seeking damages of at least $2 million in compensatory damages, together with applicable punitive damages. In addition, the Company brought a Third-Party Complaint against its excess insurance carrier, Freedom Specialty Insurance Company (“Freedom”) seeking declaratory relief that Freedom will also be required to honor its policy coverage as soon as the amount of AmTrust’s insurance coverage obligations to the Company have been exhausted. On October 25, 2022, AmTrust filed its Answer to the Company’s Counterclaims and, on October 27, 2022, Freedom filed its Answer to the Third-Party Complaint.

On November 22, 2022, the Company filed a Motion for Summary Adjudication against both AmTrust and Freedom.  The Motion was fully briefed and a hearing was held on March 9, 2023. The Court took the matter under submission and has not yet issued a ruling. While the Company believes it has a strong case against AmTrust, there can be no assurance that the Company will prevail in this action. 

Yissum Research and License Agreement

On May 13, 2018, CBR Pharma entered into a worldwide research and license agreement with Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ltd. (“Yissum Agreement”) allowing CBR Pharma to utilize certain patent (the “Licensed Patents”). The Licensed Patents shall expire, if not earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions of the Yissum Agreement, on a country-by-country, product-by-product basis, upon the later of: (i) the date of expiration in such country of the last to expire Licensed Patent included in the Licensed Technology; (ii) the date of expiration of any exclusivity on the product granted by a regulatory or government body in such country; or (iii) the end of a period of twenty (20) years from the date of the First Commercial Sale in such country. Should the periods referred to in items (i) or (ii) above expire in a particular country prior to the period referred to in item (iii), above, the license in that country or those countries shall be deemed a license to the Know-How during such post-expiration period.

Royalties will be payable to Yissum if sales of any products which use, exploit or incorporate technology covered by the Licensed Patents (“Net Sales”) are US $500,000,000 or greater, calculated at 3% for the first annual $500,000,000 of Net Sales and at 5% of Net Sales thereafter.

Pursuant to the Yissum Agreement, if Yissum achieves the following milestones, CBR Pharma will be obligated to make the following payments:

i) $75,000 for successful point of care in animals;

ii) $75,000 for submission of the first investigational new drug testing;

iii) $100,000 for commencement of one phase I/II trial;

iv) $150,000 for commencement of one phase III trial;

v) $100,000 for each product market authorization/clearance (maximum of $500,000); and

vi) $250,000 for every $250,000,000 in accumulated sales of the product until $1,000,000,000 in sales is achieved.

In the event of an exit event (“Event”), which may be defined as either, a transaction or series of transactions under which the receipt of any consideration, monetary or otherwise by the Company or its shareholders is received in consideration for the sale of shares of the Company or shareholders, or an initial public offering (“IPO”) of the Company, but for greater certainty excludes a reorganization of the Company where the ultimate equity holders of the reorganized entity remain substantially the same as that of the Company, the Company will issue 5% of the issued and outstanding shares, on a fully diluted basis, to Yissum prior to the closing of an Event. These shares will be subject to: (a) as to half of such shares, a lock-up period ending 12 months from the Event date and as to the other half of such shares, a lock-up period ending 24 months from the Event date, and (b) in any event, any resale restrictions (including lock-ups and hold periods). See Note 12 – Stockholders’ Equity for more information on the shares issued to Yissum as part of the business combination.

CBR Pharma is also party to consulting agreements with Yissum, whereby Yissum has agreed to provide two of its employees as consultants to the Company for $100,000 per annum per person for a term of three years, commencing May 13, 2018. As of December 31, 2022, these consulting agreements have not been renewed.

On January 1, 2020, CBR Pharma entered into a first amendment to the Yissum Agreement (“First Amendment”) with Yissum, allowing CBR Pharma to sponsor additional research performed by two Yissum professors. Pursuant to the terms of the First Amendment, the Company will pay Yissum $200,000 per year plus 35% additional for University overhead for the additional research performed by each professor over an 18-month period, starting May 1, 2019. As of December 31, 2021, the Company owes no outstanding balance in connection with the Yissum Agreement (as amended). During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company recognized research and development expenses of $0 and $443,151, respectively, related to this agreement.

Additional Yissum Agreement

On November 11, 2019 (the “Effective Date”), CBR Pharma entered into a new worldwide research and license agreement with Yissum (the “Additional Yissum Agreement”), allowing CBR Pharma to obtain a license and perform the research, development and commercialization of the licensed patents (the “Licensed Patents”) in the research of cannabinoid salts relating to arthritis and pain management. Within 60 days after the end of the first anniversary of the Effective Date, Yissum will present the Company with a detailed written report summarizing the results of their research.

The Licensed Patents shall expire, if not earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions of the Additional Yissum Agreement, on a country-by-country, product-by- product basis, upon the later of: (i) the date of expiration in such country of the last to expire Licensed Patent included in the Licensed Technology; (ii) the date of expiration of any exclusivity on the product granted by a regulatory or government body in such country; or (iii) the end of a period of twenty (20) years from the date of the first commercial sale in such country. Should the periods referred to in items (i) or (ii) above expire in a particular country prior to the period referred to in item (iii), above, the license in that country or those countries shall be deemed a license to the know-how during such post-expiration period.

Pursuant to the terms of the Additional Yissum Agreement, CBR Pharma paid Yissum a non-refundable license fee of $70,000 and will pay an aggregate of $398,250 of research, development and consulting fees over the term of the Additional Yissum Agreement, as well as an annual license maintenance fee of $25,000, beginning on the first anniversary of the Effective Date.

The Company shall pay Yissum the following amounts in connection with the achievement of the following milestones:

Upon the commercialization of the license, the Company shall pay Yissum a royalty equal to 3% of the first aggregate $500,000,000 of annual net sales and 5% thereafter. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company had no balances in either accounts payable and accrued expenses, respectively, relating to the Additional Yissum Agreement. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company recorded $0 and $246,753, respectively, of research and development expenses.

Stanford License Agreement

On May 8, 2018, Katexco entered into a six-month option agreement (the “Stanford Option”) with Stanford University (“Stanford”) under which Stanford granted the Company a six-month option to acquire an exclusive license for patents (the “Licensed Patents”) which are related to biological substances used to treat auto- immune diseases. In consideration for the Stanford Option, the Company paid Stanford $10,000 (the “Option Payment”), which was creditable against the first anniversary license maintenance fee payment.

On July 25, 2018, Katexco exercised their six-month option and entered into an exclusive license agreement (the “Stanford License Agreement”) with Stanford. Pursuant to the Stanford License Agreement, beginning upon the first anniversary of the effective date, and each anniversary thereafter, the Company will pay Stanford, in advance, a yearly license maintenance fee of $20,000, on each of the first and second anniversaries and $40,000 on each subsequent anniversary, which will be expensed on a straight-line basis annually.

Furthermore, the Company will be obligated to make the following milestone payments:

i) $100,000 upon initiation of Phase II trial,

ii) $500,000 upon the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of a product (the “Licensed Product”) resulting from the Licensed Patents; and

iii) $250,000 upon each new Licensed Product thereafter.

The Stanford License Agreement is cancellable by the Company with 30 days’ notice. Royalties, calculated at 2.5% of 95% of net product sales, will be payable to Stanford. Also, the Company will reimburse Stanford for patent expenses as per the agreement. The Company paid Stanford $20,000 for the annual license maintenance fee that was recorded to prepaid expenses and is being expensed on a straight-line basis over 12 months, which had a zero balance as of December 31, 2021. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company recorded patent and license fees of $69,278 and $78,245, respectively, related to the Stanford License Agreement, which is included in general and administrative expenses on the accompanying statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

Oxford University Agreements

On September 18, 2020, CBR Pharma entered into a 3 year research and development agreement (the “3 Year Oxford Agreement”) with Oxford to research and investigate the mechanisms underlying fibrosis in exchange for aggregate consideration of $1,085,738 (£795,468), of which $109,192 (£80,000) is to be paid 30 days after the project start date and the remaining amount is to be paid in four equal installments of $244,136 (£178,867) on the six month anniversary and each of the annual anniversaries of the project start date. The agreement can be terminated by either party upon written notice or if the Company remains in default on any payments due under this agreement for more than 30 days. During the year ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company recognized $322,767 (£265,156) and $364,673 (£264,938), respectively, of research and development expenses in connection with the 3 Year Oxford Agreement.

On September 21, 2020, CBR Pharma entered into a 2 year research and development agreement (the “2 Year Oxford Agreement”) with Oxford University for the clinical development of cannabinoid drugs for the treatment of inflammatory diseases in exchange for aggregate consideration of $625,124 (£458,000), of which $138,917 (£101,778) is to be paid 30 days after the project start date and the remaining amount is to be paid every 6 months after the project start date in 4 installments, whereby $138,917 (£101,778) is to be paid in the first 3 installments and $69,456 (£50,888) is to be paid as the final installment. The agreement can be terminated by either party upon written notice or if the Company remains in default on any payments due under this agreement for more than 30 days. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company recognized $123,891 (£101,778) and $139,977 (£101,778) of research and development expenses, respectively, in connection with the 2 Year Oxford Agreement, which is reflected within accrued expenses on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company owed Oxford no monies for the 2-year agreement.

On May 24, 2021, the Company entered into a research agreement with the University of Oxford (“Oxford” and the “Fifth Oxford Agreement”), pursuant to which the Company will sponsor work at the University of Oxford to conduct a multi-center, randomized, double blind, parallel group, feasibility study of anti-TNF injection for the treatment of adults with frozen shoulder during the pain-predominant phase. As consideration, the Company agreed to make the following payments to Oxford:

The Company paid the first milestone of $97,900 (£70,546) on September 3, 2021, which was due upon signing of the Fifth Oxford Agreement, which was recorded to prepaid expenses and will be amortized over the term of the agreement on a straight-line basis. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company recorded $271,931 (£223,394) and $210,215 (£152,848), respectively, of research and development expenses and has prepaid balances of $14,233 (£11,756) and $80,852 (£58,788), respectively, related to the Fifth Oxford Agreement.

On November 2, 2021, the Company and Oxford University entered into a twenty-year licensed technology agreement of the HMGB1 molecule, which is related to tissue regeneration, whereby Oxford University agreed to license the technology to the Company for research, development and use of the licensed patents. The Company agreed to pay Oxford University for past patent costs $66,223 (£49,207), an initial License fee of $13,458 (£10,000), future royalties based on sales and milestones, and an annual maintenance fee of $4,037 (£3,000). The Company has the option to terminate the agreement after the third anniversary of the agreement. During the year ended December 31, 2022, the Company recorded $10,581 of research and development expenses related to this agreement.

Kennedy License Agreement

On September 27, 2019, 180 LP entered into a license agreement (the “Kennedy License Agreement”) with the Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research (“Kennedy”) exclusively in the U.S., Japan, United Kingdom and countries of the EU, for certain licensed patents (the “Kennedy Licensed Patents”), including the right to grant sublicenses, and the right to research, develop, sell or manufacture any pharmaceutical product (i) whose research, development, manufacture, use, importation or sale would infringe the Kennedy Licensed Patents absent the license granted under the Kennedy License Agreement or (ii) containing an antibody that is a fragment of or derived from an antibody whose research, development, manufacture, use, importation or sale would infringe the Kennedy Licensed Patents absent the license granted under the Kennedy License Agreement, for all human uses, including the diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of diseases and conditions.

As consideration for the grant of the Kennedy Licensed Patents, 180 LP paid Kennedy an upfront fee of GBP £60,000, (USD $74,000) on November 22, 2019, which was recognized as an intangible asset for the purchase of the licensed patents and is being amortized over the remaining life of the patents. 180 LP will also pay Kennedy royalties equal to (i) 1% of the net sales for the first annual GBP £1 million (USD $1,283,400) of net sales, and (ii) 2% of the net sales after the net sales are at or in excess of GBP £1 million, as well as 25% of all sublicense revenue, provided that the amount of such percentage of sublicense revenue based on amounts which constitute royalties shall not be less than 1% on the first cumulative GBP £1 million of net sales of the products sold by such sublicenses or their affiliates, and 2% on that portion of the cumulative net sales of the products sold by such sublicenses or their affiliates in excess of GBP £1 million.

The term of the royalties paid by the Company to Kennedy will expire on the later of (i) the last valid claim of a patent included in the Kennedy Licensed Patents which covers or claims the exploitation of a product in the applicable country; (ii) the expiration of regulatory exclusivity for the product in the country; or (iii) 10 years from the first commercial sale of the product in the country. The Kennedy License Agreement may be terminated without cause by providing a 90-day notice.

Petcanna Sub-License Agreement

On August 20, 2018, CBR Pharma entered into a sub-license agreement (the “Sub-License Agreement”) with its wholly owned subsidiary, Petcanna Pharma Corp. (“Petcanna”), of which the Company’s former Chief Financial Officer is a director. Petcanna is a private company with one common principal with the Company.

Pursuant to the terms of the Sub-license Agreement, the Company has granted a sub-license on the Licensed Patents to pursue development and commercialization for the treatment of any and all veterinary conditions. In consideration, Petcanna will (a) issue 450,000 common shares of its share capital (the “Petcanna Shares”) 30 days after the effective date; and (b) pay royalties of 1% of net sales. The Company will be issued 85% and Yissum will be issued 15% of the 450,000 common shares of the Petcanna subsidiary. The Petcanna shares are deemed to be founders shares with no value. The Petcanna shares have not been issued as of December 31, 2022.

360 Life Sciences Corp. Agreement - Related Party (Acquisition of ReFormation Pharmaceuticals Corp.)

On July 1, 2020, the Company entered into an amended agreement with ReFormation Pharmaceuticals, Corp. (“ReFormation”) and 360 Life Sciences Corp. (“360”), whereby 360 has entered into an agreement to acquire 100% ownership of ReFormation, on or before July 31, 2020 (“Closing Date”). The Company shares officers and directors with each of ReFormation and 360. Upon the Closing Date, 360 will make tranche payments in tranches to 180 LP in the aggregate amount of $300,000. The parties agree that the obligations will be paid by 360 to 180 LP by payments of $100,000 for every $1,000,000 raised through the financing activities of 360, up to a total of $300,000, however, not less than 10% of all net financing proceeds received by 360 shall be put towards the obligation to the Company until paid in full. This transaction closed on July 31, 2020.

On February 26, 2019, 180 LP entered into a one-year agreement (the “Pharmaceutical Agreement”) with ReFormation, a related party that shares directors and officers of 180 LP, pursuant to which the ReFormation agreed to pay 180 LP $1.2 million for rights of first negotiation to provide for an acquisition of any arising intellectual property or an exclusive licensing, partnering, or collaboration transaction to use any arising intellectual property with respect to a contemplated research agreement between the Company and Oxford (see Oxford University Agreements, above), which was signed on March 22, 2019 and therefore is the start date of the project. Of the $1.2 million receivable from Reformation pursuant to the Pharmaceutical Agreement, $0.9 million was received by the Company on March 14, 2019 and the remaining $0.3 million will be received over the one-year term of the agreement.

180 LP is recognizing the income earned in connection with the Pharmaceutical Agreement on a straight-line basis over the term of the agreement. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, 180 LP recognized no income related to the Pharmaceutical Agreement, which is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations and other comprehensive income loss. As of December 31, 2021, the Company charged the $300,000 receivable to bad debt expense.

Operating Leases

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases, and the related Accounting Standards Codification Topic 842, Leases (“ASC 842”). The new standard requires most leases to be recognized on the balance sheet as a right-of-use (“ROU”) asset and a lease liability. The right-of-use asset is initially measured at the present value of amounts expected to be paid over the lease term. Recognition of the costs of these leases on the income statement will be disaggregated and recognized as both operating expense (for the amortization of the right-of-use asset) and interest expense (for the portion of the lease payment related to interest). This standard was adopted by the Company upon issuance.

In accordance with ASC 842, the Company can elect (by asset class) not to record on the balance sheet a lease whose term is 12 months or less and does not include a purchase option that the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise. If elected, the lease would be treated like an operating lease under previous GAAP; payments would be recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term. When determining whether the lease qualifies for this election, the Company would include renewal options only if they are considered part of the lease term, i.e., those options the Company is reasonably certain to exercise. If the lease term increases to more than 12 months, or if it is reasonably certain the Company will exercise a purchase option, the Company would no longer be able to apply this practical expedient and would apply ASC 842 guidance.

With regards to the Company and its leases (of which it currently has none), the Company expects to use the practical expedient for short-term operating leases that are 12 months or less. This practical expedient has been elected as a package and will be applied consistently to all leases. Additionally, if the Company’s leases are considered operating in nature and therefore not reflected on the balance sheet, the Company will recognize the short-term lease payments as rent/lease expense on a monthly basis on the income statement.

As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company had no active leases and no lease or rent expense as of those dates.

Consulting Agreements

Nanchahal Consulting Agreement

On February 22, 2021, the Company entered into a consultancy agreement (as amended, the “Consulting Agreement”) with a related party, Prof. Jagdeep Nanchahal (the “Consultant”). The Consulting Agreement was effective December 1, 2020.

Pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Consultant 15,000 British Pounds (GBP) per month (approximately $20,800) during the term of the agreement, increasing to 23,000 GBP per month (approximately $32,000) on the date (a) of publication of the data from the phase 2b clinical trial for Dupuytren’s Contracture (RIDD) and (b) the date that the Company has successfully raised over $15 million in capital. The Company also agreed to pay the Consultant the following bonus amounts: 

The Consulting Agreement has an initial term of three years, and renews thereafter for additional three-year terms, until terminated as provided in the agreement. The Consulting Agreement can be terminated by either party with 12 months prior written notice (provided the Company’s right to terminate the agreement may only be exercised if the Consultant fails to perform his required duties under the Consulting Agreement), or by the Company immediately under certain conditions specified in the Consulting Agreement if (a) the Consultant fails or neglects efficiently and diligently to perform the services required thereunder or is guilty of any breach of its or his obligations under the agreement (including any consent granted under it); (b) the Consultant is guilty of any fraud or dishonesty or acts in a manner (whether in the performance of the services or otherwise) which, in the reasonable opinion of the Company, has brought or is likely to bring the Consultant, the Company or any of its affiliates into disrepute or is convicted of an arrestable offence (other than a road traffic offence for which a non-custodial penalty is imposed); or (c) the Consultant becomes bankrupt or makes any arrangement or composition with his creditors. If the Consulting Agreement is terminated by the Company for any reason other than cause, the Consultant is entitled to a lump sum payment of 12 months of his fee as of the date of termination.

Effective March 30, 2021, in satisfaction of amounts owed to the Consultant for 50% of Bonus 2, the Company issued 5,035 shares of the Company’s common stock to the Consultant. Additionally, on April 15, 2021, in satisfaction of amounts owed to the Consultant for an additional 19% of Bonus 2, the Company issued 1,886 of the Company’s common stock to the Consultant.

Effective August 27, 2021, in satisfaction of amounts owed to the Consultant for the remainder of Bonus 2, the Company issued 3,077 shares of the Company’s common stock to the Consultant since the Company raised $15 million in a financing transaction, as per the agreement. All issuances were made under the Company’s 2020 Omnibus Incentive Plan. See Note 12 – Stockholders’ Equity.

In December 2021, the Dupuytren’s Contracture clinical trial data was submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and Bonus 1 was paid to the Consultant.

On April 27, 2022, the Company entered into an Amendment to the Consulting Agreement, whereby upon acceptance of the data for the Phase 2b clinical trial for Dupuytren’s Contracture for publication, the Consultant’s monthly fee will increase to £23,000, provided that £4,000 of such increase will be accrued and £19,000 of such fees will be payable monthly per the payroll practices of the Company in cash effective March 1, 2022 and until the earlier of (a) November 1, 2022 or (b) the date upon which the Company has sufficient cash on hand to pay the accrued amount, which the Company expects will not be until it has raised a minimum of $15,000,000 (the “Funding Determination Date”), at which time the accrued amount will be due.

On December 28, 2022, the Company entered into an Amendment to the Consulting Agreement, whereby the Consultant’s monthly fee will increase to £35,000 beginning on January 1, 2023 until the end of the term of the agreement; if the agreement is terminated by the Company for any reason other than cause, the consultant will be entitled to a lump sum payment of 12 months of his monthly fee as of the date of termination.

Larsen Consulting Agreements

On April 29, 2021, the Company entered into a consulting agreement with Glenn Larsen, the former Chief Executive Officer of 180 LP, to act in the capacity as negotiator for the licensing of four patents. In consideration for services provided, the Company agreed to compensate Mr. Larsen with $50,000 of its restricted common stock (valued based on the closing sales price of the Company’s common stock on the date the Board of Directors approved the agreement, which shares have not been issued to date). The fully vested shares will be issued to Mr. Larsen pursuant to the 2020 Omnibus Incentive Plan, upon the Company entering into a licensing transaction with the assistance of Mr. Larsen. On November 2, 2021, the Company and Oxford University entered into a license agreement and therefore 272 shares were issued to Mr. Larsen on November 3, 2021 pursuant to the Company’s 2020 Omnibus Incentive Plan.

On February 22, 2023, the Company entered into a second consulting agreement with Glenn Larsen to provide consulting services; in consideration for the services provided, the Company agreed to compensate Mr. Larsen in the amount of $10,000 per month; the amounts owed may be settled in cash or shares of the Company’s common stock (which will be subject to the Company’s 2022 Omnibus Incentive Plan or another approved equity compensation plan) or a combination of both at the option of Mr. Larsen. No shares may be issued and cash will be the default payment method for fees until an increase in shares available in the Plan is approved and any issuance is conditioned upon the Company having sufficient shares in the Plan to be issued. Mr. Larsen is also eligible to participate in the Company’s stock option plan, subject to approval from the Board of Directors. The initial term of the agreement is for three years from the effective date of the contract and shall automatically extend for additional one-year periods. As of December 31, 2022, the Company has accrued a balance of $60,000 for consulting services payable to Mr. Larsen.

Steinman Consulting Agreement

On November 17, 2021, and effective on November 1, 2021, the Company entered into a Consulting Agreement with Lawrence Steinman, M.D., the Company’s Executive Co-Chairman (the “Consulting Agreement”). Pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, Dr. Steinman agreed to provide certain consulting services to the Company, including, but not limited to, participating in defining and setting strategic objectives of the Company; actively seeking out acquisition and merger candidates; and having primary scientific responsibility for the Company’s á7nAChR platform (collectively, the “Services”). The term of the agreement is for one year (the “Initial Term”); provided that the agreement automatically extends for additional one year periods after the Initial Term (each an “Automatic Renewal Term” and the Initial Term together with all Automatic Renewal Terms, if any, the “Term”), subject to the Renewal Requirements (described below), in the event that neither party provided the other written notice of their intent not to automatically extend the term of the agreement at least 30 days prior to the end of the Initial Term or any Automatic Renewal Term. The Term can only be extended for an Automatic Renewal Term, provided that (i) Dr. Steinman is re-elected to the Board of Directors (the “Board”) at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company immediately preceding the date that such Automatic Renewal Term begins; (ii) the Board affirms his appointment as Co-Chairman for the applicable Automatic Renewal Term (or fails to appoint someone else as Co-Chairman prior to such applicable Automatic Renewal Term) and (iii) Dr. Steinman is continuing in his role of having the responsibility for the scientific development for the Company’s á7nAChR platform (the “Renewal Requirements”). The Consulting Agreement also expires immediately upon the earlier of: (i) the date upon which Dr. Steinman no longer serves as Co-Chairman and no longer has primary scientific responsibility for our á7nAChR platform; and (ii) any earlier date requested by either (1) the Company (as evidenced by a vote of a majority of the Board (excluding Dr. Steinman) at a meeting of the Board), or (2) Dr. Steinman (as evidenced by written notice from Dr. Steinman to the Board). Additionally, the Company may terminate the Consulting Agreement immediately and without prior notice if Dr. Steinman is unable or refuses to perform the Services, and either party may terminate the Consulting Agreement immediately and without prior notice if the other party is in breach of any material provision of the Consulting Agreement.

The Company agreed to pay Dr. Steinman $225,000 per year during the term of the agreement, along with a one-time payment of $43,750, representing the difference between his old compensation and new compensation, dating back to April 1, 2021. Pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, Dr. Steinman agreed to not compete against the Company, unless approved in writing by the Board of Directors, during the term of the agreement, and also agreed to certain customary confidentiality provisions and assignment of inventions requirements. The Consulting Agreement also has a 12-month non-solicitation prohibition following its termination.

Employment Agreement of Chief Executive Officer

On February 25, 2021, the Company entered into an amended agreement with Dr. James Woody, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company (the “CEO”) (the “A&R Agreement”), dated February 24, 2021, and effective November 6, 2020, which replaced the CEO’s prior agreement with the Company. Pursuant to the A&R Agreement, the CEO agreed to serve as an officer of the Company for a term of three years, which is automatically renewable thereafter for additional one-year periods, unless either party provides the other at least 90 days written notice of their intent to not renew the agreement. The CEO’s annual base salary under the agreement will initially be $450,000 per year, with automatic increases of 5% per annum.

As additional consideration for the CEO agreeing to enter into the agreement, the Company awarded him options to purchase 70,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, which have a term of 10 years, and an exercise price of $88.60 per share (the closing sales price on the date the board of directors approved the grant (February 26, 2021)). The options as subject to the Company’s 2020 Omnibus Incentive Plan and vest at the rate of (a) 1/5th of such options on the grant date; and (b) 4/5th of such options vesting ratably on a monthly basis over the following 36 months on the last day of each calendar month; provided, however, that such options vest immediately upon the CEO’s death or disability, termination without cause or a termination by the CEO for good reason (as defined in the agreement), a change in control of the Company or upon a sale of the Company.

The CEO is also eligible to receive an annual bonus, with a target bonus equal to 45% of his then-current base salary, based upon the Company’s achievement of performance and management objectives as set and approved by the Board of Directors and/or Compensation Committee in consultation with the CEO. At the CEO’s option, the annual bonus can be paid in cash or the equivalent value of the Company’s common stock or a combination. The Board of Directors, as recommended by the Compensation Committee, may also award the CEO bonuses from time to time (in stock, options, cash, or other forms of consideration) in its discretion. Under the A&R Agreement, the CEO is also eligible to participate in any stock option plans and receive other equity awards, as determined by the Board of Directors from time to time. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the Company had accrued bonus balances of $313,875 and $205,500, respectively, payable to the CEO.

The A&R agreement can be terminated any time by the Company for cause (subject to the cure provisions of the agreement), or without cause (with 60 days prior written notice to the CEO), by the CEO for good reason (as described in the agreement, and subject to the cure provisions of the agreement), or by the CEO without good reason. The agreement also expires automatically at the end of the initial term or any renewal term if either party provides notice of non-renewal as discussed above.

In the event the A&R Agreement is terminated without cause by the Company, or by the CEO for good reason, the Company agreed to pay him the lesser of 18 months of salary or the remaining term of the agreement, the payment of any accrued bonus from the prior year, his pro rata portion of any current year’s bonus and health insurance premiums for the same period that he is to receive severance payments (as discussed above).

The A&R Agreement contains standard and customary invention assignment, indemnification, confidentiality and non-solicitation provisions, which remain in effect for a period of 24 months following the termination of his agreement.

On April 27, 2022, the Company entered into an Amendment to the Employment Agreement, whereby the Company will provide a 3% increase in salary and a 20% accrual of salary, until such time as the Board of Directors determines that the Funding Determination Date has occurred.

Employment Agreement of Chief Financial Officer

On February 25, 2021, the Company entered into an Employment Agreement (the “CFO Agreement”) dated February 24, 2021, and effective November 6, 2020, with the Company’s Interim Chief Financial Officer, Ozan Pamir. Pursuant to the agreement, the CFO agreed to serve as the Interim Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) of the Company for an initial salary of $300,000 per year, subject to increase to a mutually determined amount upon the closing of a new financing as well as annual increases.

As additional consideration for the CFO agreeing to enter into the agreement, the Company awarded him options to purchase 9,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, which have a term of 10 years, and an exercise price of $88.60 per share (the closing sales price on the date the board of directors approved the grant (February 26, 2021)). The options are subject to the Company’s 2020 Omnibus Incentive Plan and vest at the rate of (a) 1/5th of such options upon the grant date; and (b) 4/5th of such options vesting ratably on a monthly basis over the following 36 months on the last day of each calendar month; provided, however, that such options vest immediately upon the CFO’s death or disability, termination without cause or a termination by the CFO for good reason (as defined in the agreement), a change in control of the Company or upon a sale of the Company.

Under the agreement, the CFO is eligible to receive an annual bonus, in a targeted amount of 30% of his then salary, based upon the Company’s achievement of performance and management objectives as set and approved by the CEO, in consultation with the CFO. The bonus amount is subject to adjustment. The Board of Directors, as recommended by the Compensation Committee of the Company (and/or the Compensation Committee), may also award the CFO bonuses from time to time (in stock, options, cash, or other forms of consideration) in its discretion. Under the CFO Agreement, the CFO is also eligible to participate in any stock option plans and receive other equity awards, as determined by the Board of Directors from time to time. As of December 30, 2022 and 2021, the Company had accrued bonus balances of $139,500 and $90,000, respectively, payable to the CFO.

The agreement can be terminated any time by the Company with or without cause with 60 days prior written notice and may be terminated by the CFO at any time with 60 days prior written notice. The agreement may also be terminated by the Company with six days’ notice in the event the agreement is terminated for cause under certain circumstances. Upon the termination of the CFO’s agreement by the Company without cause or by the CFO for good reason, the Company agreed to pay him three months of severance pay.

The agreement contains standard and customary invention assignment, indemnification, confidentiality and non-solicitation provisions, which remain in effect for a period of 24 months following the termination of his agreement.

Employment Agreement of Chief Operating Officer/Chief Business Officer

On October 29, 2021, the Company entered into an Employment Agreement (the “COO/CBO Agreement”) dated October 27, 2021, and effective November 1, 2021, with Quan Vu. Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Vu agreed to serve as the Chief Operating Officer/Chief Business Officer (“COO/CBO”) of the Company for an initial salary of $390,000 per year, subject to a $10,000 increase upon completion of a $50 Million financing and a yearly increase of five percent (5%) on each start-day anniversary.

As additional consideration for the COO/CBO agreeing to enter into the agreement, the Company awarded him options to purchase 13,750 shares of the Company’s common stock, which have a term of 10 years, and an exercise price of $79.00 per share. The options are subject to the Company’s 2020 Omnibus Incentive Plan and vest ratably on a monthly basis over the following 48 months on the last day of each calendar month; provided, however, that such options vest immediately upon the COO/CBO death or disability, termination without cause or a termination by the COO/CBO for good reason (as defined in the agreement), a change in control of the Company or upon a sale of the Company.

Under the agreement, the COO/CBO is eligible to receive an annual bonus, in a targeted amount of 50% of his then salary, based upon the Company’s achievement of performance and management objectives as set and approved by the CEO, in consultation with the CFO. The annual bonus shall be paid on or before March 31 of the year following the year in which the bonus is earned. At the choice of the Executive, the annual bonus can be paid in cash or the equivalent value of the Company’s common stock or a combination of both. For calendar 2021, such Bonus payment, if any, will be prorated for approximately 2 months after the Start Date. The CEO, as approved by the Compensation Committee, may also award the Executive a bonus from time to time (in stock, options, cash, or other forms of consideration) in his discretion.

The agreement can be terminated any time by the Company with or without cause with 30 days prior written notice and may be terminated by the COO/CBO at any time with 30 days prior written notice. The agreement may also be terminated by the Company with ten days’ notice in the event the agreement is terminated for cause under certain circumstances. Upon the termination of the COO/CBO’s agreement by the Company without cause or by the COO/CBO for good reason, the Company agreed to pay him twelve months of severance pay, except if Executive separates from the Company prior to a one-year anniversary.

The agreement contains standard and customary invention assignment, indemnification, confidentiality and non-solicitation provisions, which remain in effect for a period of 24 months following the termination of his agreement.

On April 27, 2022, the Company entered into an Amendment to the Employment Agreement, whereby the Company will provide a 3% increase in salary and a 20% accrual of salary, until such time as the Board of Directors determines that the Funding Determination Date has occurred. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had an accrued bonus balance of $221,000 payable to the COO/CBO. In January 2023, Mr. Vu’s services with the Company and the agreement were terminated. See Note 15 – Subsequent Events for additional information.