Aurinia Pharmaceuticals (AUPH) Risk Factors

We are subject to the FCPA regulations of the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control, and other anti-corruption, anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws around the world where we conduct activities, including, if approved in such countries, the sale of LUPKYNIS. We face significant risks and liability if we fail to comply with the FCPA and other anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws that prohibit companies and their employees and third-party business partners, such as distributors or resellers, from authorizing, offering or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or benefits to foreign government officials, political parties or candidates, employees of public international organizations including healthcare professionals, or private-sector recipients for the corrupt purpose of obtaining or retaining business, directing business to any person, or securing any advantage. We rely on various third parties for certain services outside the United States, including continued development of LUPKYNIS and the commercialization of LUPKYNIS. We may be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of these third parties and intermediaries, our employees, representatives, contractors, partners, and agents, even if we do not explicitly authorize such activities. Any violation of the FCPA, other applicable anti-bribery, anti-corruption laws, and anti-money laundering laws could result in whistleblower, adverse media coverage, investigations, loss of export privileges, severe criminal or civil sanctions and, in the case of the FCPA, suspension or debarment from U.S. government contracts, which could harm our reputation, business, operating results and prospects. In addition, responding to any enforcement action or related investigation may result in a diversion of management's attention and resources and significant defense costs and other professional fees.

To help patients afford LUPKYNIS, we have implemented a patient support program. These types of programs, designed to assist patients in affording pharmaceuticals, have become the subject of scrutiny. In recent years, some pharmaceutical manufacturers were named in class action lawsuits challenging the legality of their patient support programs and their support of independent charitable patient support foundations in connection with such programs under a variety of federal and state laws. Our patient support program could become the target of similar litigation. In addition, certain state and federal enforcement authorities and members of Congress have initiated inquiries about co-pay assistance programs. Some state legislatures have also been considering proposals that would restrict or ban co-pay coupons. In addition, there has been regulatory review and enhanced government scrutiny of donations by pharmaceutical manufacturers to patient assistance programs operated by charitable foundations. For example, the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (OIG) has established specific guidelines permitting pharmaceutical manufacturers to make donations to charitable organizations which provide co-pay assistance to Medicare patients, provided that such organizations are bona fide charities, are entirely independent of and not in any way controlled or influenced by the manufacturer, provide aid to applicants on a first-come basis according to consistent financial criteria, and do not link aid to use of a donor's product. If we establish a program to donate to independent charitable patient support foundations and our vendors or donation recipients are deemed to fail to comply with laws or regulations in the operation of these programs, we could be subject to damages, fines, penalties or other criminal, civil or administrative sanctions or enforcement actions. Further, numerous organizations, including pharmaceutical manufacturers, have received subpoenas from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and other enforcement authorities seeking information related to their patient assistance programs and support, and certain of these organizations have entered into, or have otherwise agreed to, significant civil settlements with applicable enforcement authorities. In connection with these civil settlements, the U.S. government has and may in the future require the affected companies to enter into complex corporate integrity agreements that impose significant reporting and other requirements on those companies. We cannot ensure that our compliance controls, policies and procedures will be sufficient to protect against acts of our employees, business partners or vendors that may potentially violate the laws or regulations of the jurisdictions in which we operate. Regardless of whether we have complied with the law, a government investigation could negatively impact our business practices, harm our reputation, divert the attention of management and increase our expenses.

We are subject to additional healthcare statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we conduct our business. Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of LUPKYNIS. Our future arrangements with third-party payors and customers will expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell, and distribute LUPKYNIS. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, the following: - the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made under federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;- the FCA imposes civil penalties, including through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, against individuals or entities for, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA. We can be held liable under the FCA even when we do not submit claims directly to government payors if we are deemed to "cause" the submission of false or fraudulent claims;- the U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) imposes criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program regardless of the payor (e.g., public or private), or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;- the U.S. federal physician payment transparency requirements, sometimes referred to as the "Sunshine Act" under the ACA require manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children's Health Insurance Program to report to the Department of Health and Human Services information related to covered health care provider payments and other transfers of value and the ownership and investment interests of such healthcare providers (as defined by the statute) and their immediate family members;- HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH) and its implementing regulations, which also imposes obligations on certain covered entity healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their business associates that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys' fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions;- the federal false statements statute, which prohibits knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing, or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items, or services (similar to the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation);- consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers;- the U.S. federal Civil Monetary Penalties law, which prohibits, among other things, offering or transferring remuneration to a federal healthcare beneficiary that a person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary's decision to order or receive items or services reimbursable by the government from a particular provider or supplier; and - analogous state laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws that may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by nongovernmental third-party payors, including private insurers; and some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry's voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not pre-empted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. In the United States, to help patients who have no or inadequate insurance access to LUPKYNIS, we have a patient support program that we administer in conjunction with our patient support program vendor. If we or our vendors are deemed to fail to comply with relevant laws, regulations, or evolving government guidance in the operation of these programs, we could be subject to damages, fines, penalties or other criminal, civil or administrative sanctions or enforcement actions. We cannot ensure that our compliance controls, policies, and procedures will be sufficient to protect against acts of our employees, business partners, or vendors that may violate the laws or regulations of the jurisdictions in which we operate. Regardless of whether we have complied with the law, a government investigation could impact our business practices, harm our reputation, divert the attention of management, increase our expenses, and reduce the availability of assistance to our patients. Ensuring that our future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations, including anticipated activities to be conducted by our sales team, were to be found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

The FDA and other agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) closely regulate and monitor the post-approval marketing and promotion of products to ensure that they are marketed and distributed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA and DOJ impose stringent restrictions on manufacturers' communications regarding off-label use. If we market LUPKYNIS in a manner inconsistent with our approved labeling and indication, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label marketing. Violations of the federal FDCA and other statutes, including the False Claims Act (FCA), relating to the promotion and advertising of prescription drugs may lead to investigations and enforcement actions alleging violations of federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws, which violations may result in the imposition of significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties. The manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, and recordkeeping for LUPKYNIS will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with GMP and GCP for clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, 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 result in, among other things: - restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of our product, withdrawal of the product from the market, or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;- fines, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;- product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and - injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. There can be no assurance that we will be able to adapt to changes in existing requirements, adopt new requirements or policies, or maintain regulatory compliance. If we fail to maintain compliance, we may lose marketing approval, which would harm our business, prospects, and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

After a regulatory body, such as the FDA, approves a drug or biologic for marketing, the product's sponsor must comply with several post-marketing obligations that continue until the product is discontinued. These post-marketing obligations include the reporting of adverse events to the agency within specified timeframes, the submission of product-specific annual reports that include changes in the distribution, manufacturing, and labeling information, and notification when a drug product is found to have significant deviations from its approved manufacturing specifications (among others). Our ongoing compliance with these types of mandatory reporting requirements could result in additional requests for information from regulatory bodies that govern our products and, depending on the scope of a potential product issue that a regulatory body may decide to pursue, could potentially also result in a request from the agency to conduct a product recall or to strengthen warnings and/or revise other label information about the product. Regulatory bodies may also require or request the withdrawal of the product from the market. Any of these post-marketing regulatory actions could materially affect our sales and increase our costs and, therefore, have the potential to adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

To market any products outside of the United States, we and Otsuka or other potential future partners must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval procedures vary among countries and may require additional pre-clinical studies, clinical trials, or additional administrative review periods, which could result in significant delays, difficulties, and costs for us. While we have obtained approval by the EC and MHRA, specific jurisdictions covered by those approvals (and approvals in other jurisdictions) also require additional regulatory approvals, such as pricing and reimbursement approval, before sales can commence in those jurisdictions. Not all of those jurisdictions have provided all such approvals to date. In addition, our failure to obtain regulatory approval in any country may delay or have negative effects on the process for regulatory approval in other countries. If regulatory approval is obtained it may not be as broad as what was obtained in other jurisdictions. We have limited experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we or our current or future partners fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of LUPKYNIS could be harmed.

Our future performance may be impacted by our ability to generate royalty or other revenues (such as commercial and regulatory milestones and product revenue) from licenses (such as the license granted to Otsuka) and the successful commercialization of LUPKYNIS. We anticipate that some of our revenues in the future may be derived from products licensed to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Accordingly, these revenues will depend, in large part, upon the success of these companies, and our operating results may fluctuate substantially due to reductions and delays in their research, development, and marketing expenditures. These reductions and delays may result from factors that are not within our control, including: a.changes in economic conditions;b.changes in the regulatory environment, including governmental pricing controls affecting health care and health care providers;c.pricing pressures;d.other factors affecting research and development spending; and e.change in strategy of our business partners. The failure of Otsuka or future licensing partners could harm our business or results of operations and the global reputation of LUPKYNIS.

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of product candidates in human clinical trials, and an even greater risk in connection with our commercialization of LUPKYNIS. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that LUPKYNIS causes injuries, then we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit of eventual outcome, liability claims may result in: a.decreased demand for LUPKYNIS;b.injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;c.withdrawal of clinical trial participants;d.significant costs to defend the related litigation;e.substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;f.loss of revenue; and g.the inability to, or restrictions on our ability to, commercialize any approved product. Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage, it may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. The obligation to pay any product liability claim in excess of whatever insurance we can acquire, or the recall of or limitation on our ability to commercialize LUPKYNIS as a result of product liability concerns, could harm our business, financial condition, and future prospects.

Litigation and regulatory proceedings are inherently uncertain, and adverse rulings could occur, including monetary damages, or an injunction stopping us from manufacturing or selling certain products, engaging in certain business practices, or requiring other remedies. We may be subject to allegations through press, social media, the courts or other mediums that may or may not be founded. We may be required to respond to or defend against these claims and/or allegations, which will divert resources away from our principal business. There can be no assurance that our defense of such claims and/or allegations would be successful, and we may be required to make material settlements. An unfavorable outcome or settlement may harm our business, LUPKYNIS, results of operations, financial condition, and corporate reputation. In addition, regardless of outcome,investigations, allegations of wrongdoing, and litigation can be costly, time-consuming, and disruptive to our business and operations.

If we do not secure registrations for our trademarks, we may encounter more difficulty in enforcing them against third parties than we otherwise would, which could adversely affect our business. During trademark registration proceedings in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, we may receive rejections. We will be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, but we may not be able to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings.

As is the case with other pharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry involve both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries could increase those uncertainties and costs. The first-to-file provisions of the current United States patent system only became effective on March 16, 2013. Accordingly, it is not yet clear what, if any, impact those provisions will have on the operation of our business. The implementation and interpretation of new patent laws could make it more difficult to obtain patent protection for our inventions and increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition, there have been recent proposals for additional changes to the patent laws of the U.S. and other countries that, if adopted, could impact our ability to obtain patent protection for our proprietary technology or our ability to enforce our proprietary technology. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the United States courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

Filing, prosecuting, and defending our intellectual property rights in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, time consuming, distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities and might be unsuccessful. Our intellectual property rights in some countries outside of the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Further, licensing partners may not prosecute patents in certain jurisdictions in which we may obtain commercial rights, thereby precluding the possibility of later obtaining patent protection in these countries. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing product made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and may also export infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with LUPKYNIS, and our intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our intellectual property rights or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our proprietary rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our proprietary rights at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Competitors or commercial supply companies or others may infringe our patents and other intellectual property rights. To counter such infringement, we may advise such companies of our intellectual property rights, including, in some cases, intellectual property rights that provide protection for our product, and demand that they stop infringing those rights. Such demand may provide such companies the opportunity to challenge the validity of certain of our intellectual property rights, or the opportunity to seek a finding that their activities do not infringe our intellectual property rights. We may also be required to file infringement actions, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In an infringement proceeding, a defendant may assert, and a court may agree with a defendant, that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the intellectual property at issue. An adverse result in any litigation could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could impact the price of our common shares. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could harm our ability to compete in the marketplace.

An unfavorable outcome in an interference or opposition proceeding or a conflict with the intellectual property of others could preclude us or our collaborators or licensees from making, using or selling product using the technology, or require us to obtain license rights from third parties. It is not known whether any prevailing party would offer a license on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. Further, any such license could require the expenditure of substantial time and resources and could harm our business. If such licenses are not available, we could encounter delays or prohibition of the development or introduction of LUPKYNIS. We may need to enter into license agreements in the future. As part of discovery and development activities, we routinely evaluate in-licenses from academic and research organizations. Future license agreements might impose various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, and other obligations on us. If there is any conflict, dispute, disagreement or issue of non-performance between us and our licensing partners (such as Otsuka) regarding our rights or obligations under the licensing agreement, we may owe damages, our licensor may have a right to terminate the affected license, and our and our partner's ability to utilize the affected intellectual property in our drug discovery and development efforts, and our ability to ensure into collaboration or marketing agreements for an affected product, may be adversely affected.

We have no experience in drug formulation or manufacturing and do not intend to establish our own manufacturing facilities. For example, we are using the following third parties for manufacturing and encapsulation: - Lonza is currently the sole source manufacturer of our drug substance; and - Catalent is solely providing services with respect to encapsulating LUPKYNIS for our commercial and clinical supply, clinical labeling and global distribution for clinical trial purposes. If we are unable to continue our relationships with one or more of our third-party contractors, in particular where those third-party contracts are one of our sole providers, we could experience delays in commercialization and development efforts as we locate and qualify new contractors. Our reliance on a limited number of third-party manufacturers exposes us to the following risks: - We may be unable to identify third-party manufacturers on acceptable terms or at all because the number of potential manufacturers is limited, and the FDA must approve any replacement manufacturer. This approval could require new testing and compliance inspections. In addition, a new third-party manufacturer would have to be educated in, or develop substantially equivalent processes for, production of LUPKYNIS after receipt of FDA approval. - Our third-party manufacturers might be unable to formulate and manufacture LUPKYNIS in the volume and of the quality required to meet our clinical and/or commercial needs. - Our third-party manufacturers may not perform as agreed or may not remain in the contract manufacturing business for the time required to supply our clinical trials or to successfully produce, store, and distribute LUPKYNIS for commercialization, as applicable. - The facilities used by our third-party manufacturers to manufacture LUPKYNIS must be approved by the FDA. - If any third-party manufacturer makes improvements in the manufacturing process for LUPKYNIS, we may not own, or may have to share, the intellectual property rights to the innovation. Each of these risks could delay the commercialization of LUPKYNIS, or result in higher costs or deprive us of potential product revenue. Any disruption or loss of these relationships could delay our development and commercialization efforts and our business could be harmed.

We depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as contract research organizations or CROs, universities and medical institutions, to conduct clinical trials under agreements with us. These collaborators are not our employees and we cannot control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements, including GCP requirements, and the applicable protocol. If we, or any of our CROs or third party contractors, fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials. 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 current GMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials or make us subject to fines or regulatory penalties, which would materially adversely affect our business.