PolyPid (PYPD) Risk Factors

As of March 6, 2024, our executive officers, directors and principal shareholders who own more than 5% of our outstanding Ordinary Shares, in the aggregate, beneficially own a substantial majority of our ordinary shares. As a result, if these shareholders were to act together, they would be able to exert significant influence over all matters submitted to our shareholders for approval (including a prospective acquisition or other change of control of our company), as well as our management and affairs.

If a United States person is treated as owning (directly, indirectly or constructively) at least 10% of the value or voting power of our shares, such person may be treated as a "United States shareholder" with respect to each "controlled foreign corporation" in our group (if any). Because our group includes one or more U.S. subsidiaries, we expect that certain of our non-U.S. subsidiaries will be treated as controlled foreign corporations (regardless of whether we are or are not treated as a controlled foreign corporation). A United States shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation may be required to annually report and include in its U.S. taxable income its pro rata share of "Subpart F income," "global intangible low-taxed income" and investments in U.S. property by controlled foreign corporations, whether or not we make any distributions. An individual that is a United States shareholder with respect to a controlled foreign corporation generally would not be allowed certain tax deductions or foreign tax credits that would be allowed to a United States shareholder that is a U.S. corporation. A failure to comply with these reporting obligations may subject you to significant monetary penalties and may prevent the statute of limitations with respect to your U.S. federal income tax return for the year for which reporting was due from starting. We cannot provide any assurances that we will assist investors in determining whether any of our non-U.S. subsidiaries are treated as a controlled foreign corporation or whether such investor is treated as a United States shareholder with respect to any of such controlled foreign corporations or furnish to any United States shareholders information that may be necessary to comply with the aforementioned reporting and tax paying obligations. A United States investor should consult their own advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to its investment in the shares.

As a foreign private issuer, we will be permitted, and intend, to follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of those otherwise required by the Nasdaq Stock Market for domestic U.S. issuers. Following our home country governance practices as opposed to the requirements that would otherwise apply to a U.S. company listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market may provide less protection to you than what is accorded to investors under the listing rules of Nasdaq applicable to domestic U.S. issuers. As a foreign private issuer, we will be exempt from the rules and regulations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, related to the furnishing and content of proxy statements, including the applicable compensation disclosure requirements. Nevertheless, pursuant to regulations promulgated under the Israeli Companies Law, 5759-1999, or the Israeli Companies Law, we are required to disclose the annual compensation of our five most highly compensated office holders on an individual basis. Such disclosure will not be as extensive as that required of a U.S. domestic issuer. Our officers, directors and principal shareholders will also be exempt from the reporting and short-swing profit recovery provisions contained in Section 16 of the Exchange Act. In addition, we will not be required under the Exchange Act to file reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. domestic companies whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act, and we will be exempt from filing quarterly reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act. Moreover, we will not be required to comply with Regulation FD, which restricts the selective disclosure of material information, although we intend to voluntarily adopt a corporate disclosure policy substantially similar to Regulation FD. These exemptions and leniencies will reduce the frequency and scope of information and protections to which you may otherwise have been eligible in relation to a U.S. domestic issuer. We would lose our foreign private issuer status if a majority of our shares are owned by U.S. residents and a majority of our directors or executive officers are U.S. citizens or residents or we fail to meet additional requirements necessary to avoid loss of foreign private issuer status. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher. If we are not a foreign private issuer, we will be required to file periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed and extensive than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. We may also be required to modify certain of our policies to comply with accepted governance practices associated with U.S. domestic issuers. Such conversion and modifications will involve additional costs. In addition, we would lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements on U.S. stock exchanges that are available to foreign private issuers.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or the JOBS Act, and we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. For as long as we remain an emerging growth company we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not "emerging growth companies." These exemptions include: - not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting;         - Section 107 of the JOBS Act, which provides that an "emerging growth company" can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, for complying with new or revised accounting standards. This means that an "emerging growth company" can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have elected to delay such adoption of new or revised accounting standards. As a result of this adoption, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with the public company effective date;         - not being required to comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor's report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements;         - reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation; and         - exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of: (i) the last day of our fiscal year during which we have total annual gross revenues of at least $1.235 billion; (ii) December 31, 2025; (iii) the date on which we have, during the previous three-year period, issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a "large accelerated filer" under the Exchange Act. We have opted out of the extended transition period made available to emerging growth companies to comply with newly adopted public company accounting requirements. When we are no longer deemed to be an emerging growth company, we will not be entitled to the exemptions provided in the JOBS Act discussed above. We cannot predict if investors will find our Ordinary Shares less attractive as a result of our reliance on exemptions under the JOBS Act. If some investors find our Ordinary Shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our Ordinary Shares and our share price may be more volatile.

Israeli corporate law regulates mergers, requires tender offers for acquisitions of shares above specified thresholds, requires special approvals for transactions involving directors, officers or significant shareholders and regulates other matters that may be relevant to such types of transactions. For example, a merger may not be consummated unless at least 50 days have passed from the date on which a merger proposal is filed by each merging company with the Israel Registrar of Companies and at least 30 days have passed from the date on which the shareholders of both merging companies have approved the merger. In addition, a majority of each class of securities of the target company must approve a merger. Moreover, a tender offer for all of a company's issued and outstanding shares can only be completed if the acquirer receives positive responses from the holders of at least 95% of the issued share capital. Completion of the tender offer also requires approval of a majority of the offerees that do not have a personal interest in the tender offer, unless, following consummation of the tender offer, the acquirer would hold at least 98% of the Company's outstanding shares. Furthermore, the shareholders, including those who indicated their acceptance of the tender offer, may, at any time within six months following the completion of the tender offer, claim that the consideration for the acquisition of the shares does not reflect their fair market value, and petition an Israeli court to alter the consideration for the acquisition accordingly, unless the acquirer stipulated in its tender offer that a shareholder that accepts the offer may not seek such appraisal rights, and the acquirer or the company published all required information with respect to the tender offer prior to the tender offer's response date. Furthermore, Israeli tax considerations may make potential transactions unappealing to us or to our shareholders whose country of residence does not have a tax treaty with Israel granting tax relief to such shareholders from Israeli tax. For example, Israeli tax law does not recognize tax-free share exchanges to the same extent as U.S. tax law. With respect to mergers, Israeli tax law allows for tax deferral in certain circumstances but makes the deferral contingent on the fulfillment of a number of conditions, including, in some cases, a holding period of two years from the date of the transaction during which sales and dispositions of shares of the participating companies are subject to certain restrictions. Moreover, with respect to certain share swap transactions, the tax deferral is limited in time, and when such time expires, the tax becomes payable even if no disposition of the shares has occurred. These provisions could delay, prevent or impede an acquisition of us or our merger with another company, even if such an acquisition or merger would be beneficial to us or to our shareholders.

The rights and responsibilities of the holders of our Ordinary Shares are governed by our amended and restated articles of association and by Israeli law. These rights and responsibilities differ in some material respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders in U.S. companies. In particular, a shareholder of an Israeli company has a duty to act in good faith and in a customary manner in exercising its rights and performing its obligations towards the company and other shareholders, and to refrain from abusing its power in such company, including, among other things, in voting at a general meeting of shareholders on matters such as amendments to a company's amended and restated articles of association, increases in a company's authorized share capital, mergers and acquisitions and related party transactions requiring shareholder approval, as well as a general duty to refrain from discriminating against other shareholders. In addition, a shareholder who is aware that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a vote at a meeting of the shareholders or to appoint or prevent the appointment of a director or executive officer in the company has a duty of fairness toward the company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness. See "Item 6.C. Board Practices- Duties of Shareholders" for additional information. There is limited case law available to assist us in understanding the nature of these duties or the implications of these provisions. These provisions may be interpreted to impose additional obligations and liabilities on holders of our Ordinary Shares that are not typically imposed on shareholders of U.S. companies.

The trading price of our Ordinary Shares is likely to be volatile. The stock market in general, and the market for pharmaceutical companies in particular, has experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies, which has resulted in decreased stock prices for many companies notwithstanding the lack of a fundamental change in their underlying business models or prospects. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our Ordinary Shares, regardless of our actual operating performance. As a result of this volatility, you may not be able to sell your Ordinary Shares at or above the price you paid. The following factors, in addition to other risk factors described in this section, may have a significant impact on the market price of our Ordinary Shares: - inability to obtain the approvals necessary to commence further clinical trials;         - unsatisfactory results of clinical trials, whether final or interim;         - announcements of regulatory approvals or the failure to obtain them, or specific label indications or patient populations for their use, or changes or delays in the regulatory review process;         - announcements of therapeutic innovations or new products by us or our competitors;         - adverse actions taken by regulatory agencies with respect to our clinical trials, manufacturing supply chain or sales and marketing activities;         - changes or developments in laws or regulations applicable to any candidate product in any of our platforms;         - changes in the structure of healthcare payment systems;         - any adverse changes to our relationship with manufacturers or suppliers, especially manufacturers of candidate products;         - any intellectual property infringement actions in which we may become involved;         - announcements concerning our competitors or the pharmaceutical industry in general;         - achievement of expected product sales and profitability or our failure to meet expectations;         - our commencement of, or involvement in, litigation;         - any major changes in our Board of Directors or management;         - the impact of the war between Israel and Hamas;         - legislation in the United States or any other territory relating to the sale or pricing of pharmaceuticals; and         - coordinated buying or selling activity in our Ordinary Shares, including market manipulation. If our quarterly operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the price of our Ordinary Shares could decline substantially. Furthermore, any quarterly fluctuations in our operating results may, in turn, cause the price of our stock to fluctuate substantially. We believe that quarterly comparisons of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication of our future performance. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company's securities, securities class-action litigation often has been instituted against that company. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs to defend such claims and divert management's attention and resources, which could seriously harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The report of our independent registered public accounting firm on our audited consolidated financial statements for the period ended December 31, 2023, contains an explanatory paragraph regarding substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of the uncertainty regarding our ability to continue as a going concern. This going concern opinion could materially limit our ability to raise additional funds through the issuance of equity or debt securities or otherwise. Further reports on our consolidated financial statements may include an explanatory paragraph with respect to our ability to continue as a going concern. Until we can generate significant recurring revenues, we expect to satisfy our future cash needs through debt or equity financing. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all. If funds are not available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate research or development plans for, or commercialization efforts with respect to our products. This may raise substantial doubts about our ability to continue as a going concern.

We have no products approved for marketing in any jurisdiction and we have never generated any revenue from product sales. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory and marketing approvals necessary to commercialize, D-PLEX100 or any future product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for at least the next few years. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales will depend heavily on our ability to: - complete research and preclinical and clinical development of D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates in a timely and successful manner, including our ability to enroll patients in our ongoing SHIELD II Phase 3 trial of D-PLEX100;         - obtain regulatory and marketing approval for any product candidates for which we complete clinical trials, including, without limitation, with respect to safety and efficacy data;         - maintain and enhance a commercially viable, sustainable, scalable, reproducible and transferable manufacturing process for D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates that is compliant with cGMPs;         - establish and maintain supply and, if applicable, manufacturing relationships with third parties that can provide, in both amount and quality, adequate products to support clinical development and the market demand for D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates, if and when approved;         - launch and commercialize any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory and marketing approval, either directly by establishing commercial and medical infrastructure, and/or with collaborators or distributors;- expose and educate physicians and other medical professionals to use our products;         - obtain market acceptance, if and when approved, of D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates from the medical community and third-party payors;         - ensure our product candidates are approved for reimbursement from governmental agencies, health care providers and insurers in jurisdictions where they have been approved for marketing;         - address any competing technological and market developments that impact D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates or their prospective usage by medical professionals;         - identify, assess, acquire and/or develop new product candidates;         - negotiate favorable terms in any collaboration, licensing or other arrangements into which we may enter and perform our obligations under such collaborations;         - maintain, protect and expand our portfolio of intellectual property rights, including patents, patent applications, trade secrets and know-how;         - avoid and defend against third-party interference or infringement claims;         - attract, hire and retain qualified personnel; and         - locate and lease or acquire suitable facilities to support our clinical development, manufacturing facilities and commercial expansion. Even if D-PLEX100 or any future product candidates are approved for marketing and sale, we anticipate incurring significant incremental costs associated with commercializing such product candidates. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory agencies, domestic or foreign, or ethical committees in medical centers, to change our manufacturing processes or assays or to perform clinical, nonclinical or other types of studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if we are successful in obtaining regulatory approvals to market D-PLEX100 or any future product candidates, our revenue earned from such product candidates will be dependent in part upon the breadth of the product label, the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval for such products, the accepted price for such products, our ability to obtain reimbursement for such products at any price, whether we own the commercial rights for that territory in which such products have been approved and the expenses associated with manufacturing and marketing such products for such markets. Therefore, we may not generate significant revenue from the sale of such products, even if approved. Further, if we are not able to generate significant revenue from the sale of our approved products, we may be forced to curtail or cease our operations. Due to the numerous risks and uncertainties involved in product development, it is difficult to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, or if, we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability.

On April 5, 2022, we entered into a secured loan agreement, or the Loan Agreement, for up to $15 million with Kreos Capital VI (Expert Fund) LP, or Kreos. For more information regarding the Loan Agreement please see "Item 5.C- Liquidity and Capital Resources". Under the Loan Agreement, we granted Kreos a first priority fixed charge over all of our owned equipment and intellectual property, including without limitation, copyrights, patents, trademarks and trade names, as well as all shares we hold in PolyPid Inc. and PolyPid Pharma SRL. That means that our owned equipment, intellectual property assets and our ownership of the shares of PolyPid Inc. and PolyPid Pharma SRL are used as collateral for the loan. Additionally, PolyPid Inc. entered into a guaranty agreement with Kreos, all as security for monies borrowed by us under the Loan Agreement. Kreos may seize our owned equipment, intellectual property all shares we hold in PolyPid Inc. and PolyPid Pharma SRL if we fail to repay the loan, which could materially and adversely affect our operations. On March 29, 2023, we entered into an amendment to the Credit Line. Pursuant to this amendment, 70% of the remaining principal and interest repayments will be delayed and repaid on a monthly equal basis from August 2024 to May 2026. The amended secured loan now bears interest at a rate of 10.00%, and we will pay a restructuring fee to Kreos consisting of 1.00% on close of the amendment and an incremental 3.00% at maturity. In return for this additional deferral of repayment, Kreos has the right to receive a potential claw back payment on account of the then outstanding principal amount. This claw back mechanism will be triggered by additional incoming funds from future partnership agreement or additional financing. If triggered, the minimum claw back to be paid is $1.5 million but will not exceed $3 million. Further, the outstanding warrants Kreos received were repriced to have an exercise price of $12.60 per share.

We intend to utilize the FDA's Section 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway, and the hybrid application pathway in the EU, which is analogous to the Section 505(b)(2) pathway, to seek approval of D-PLEX100. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, also known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, added Section 505(b)(2) to the FFDCA. Section 505(b)(2) permits the filing of an NDA where at least some of the information required for approval comes from trials or studies that were not conducted by or for the applicant, and for which the applicant has not received a right of reference or use from the person by or for whom the investigations were conducted, which we believe could expedite the development program for D-PLEX100 by potentially decreasing the amount of preclinical and clinical data that we would need to generate in order to obtain FDA approval. However, while we believe that D-PLEX100 is a reformulation of an already-approved drug and, therefore, will be eligible for submission of an NDA under Section 505(b)(2), the FDA may disagree and determine that D-PLEX100 is not eligible for review under such regulatory pathway. If we are unable to pursue these regulatory pathways as anticipated, we may need to conduct additional preclinical experiments and clinical trials, provide additional data and information and meet additional standards for regulatory approval. If this were to occur, the time and financial resources required to obtain FDA approval for D-PLEX100, and complications and risks associated with D-PLEX100, would likely increase significantly. Moreover, inability to pursue the Section 505(b)(2) or similar regulatory pathway could result in new competitive products reaching the market more quickly than D-PLEX100 or any future product candidates, which would likely harm our competitive position and prospects. Even if we are allowed to pursue the Section 505(b)(2) or similar regulatory pathway, D-PLEX100 may not receive the requisite approvals for commercialization, and there is no guarantee the 505(b)(2) or similar pathway would ultimately lead to faster product development or earlier approval. In addition, notwithstanding the approval of a number of products by the FDA under Section 505(b)(2) over the last few years, certain competitors and others have objected to the FDA's interpretation of Section 505(b)(2). If the FDA's interpretation of Section 505(b)(2) is successfully challenged, the FDA may be required to change its 505(b)(2) policies and practices, which could delay or even prevent the FDA from approving any NDA that we submit under Section 505(b)(2). In addition, the pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive, and Section 505(b)(2) NDAs are subject to special requirements designed to protect the patent rights of sponsors of previously approved drugs that are referenced in a Section 505(b)(2) NDA. These requirements may give rise to patent litigation and mandatory delays in approval of our potential future NDAs for up to 30 months depending on the outcome of any litigation. It is also not uncommon for a manufacturer of an approved product to file a citizen petition with the FDA seeking to delay approval of, or impose additional approval requirements for, pending competing products. If successful, such petitions can significantly delay, or even prevent, the approval of the new product. However, even if the FDA ultimately denies such a petition, the FDA may substantially delay approval while it considers and responds to the petition. Moreover, even if D-PLEX100 or any future product candidates are approved under the Section 505(b)(2) pathway, as the case may be, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the products may be marketed or to other conditions of approval, or may contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the products.

We cannot commercialize a product candidate until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate. Even if our current or future product candidates meet safety and efficacy endpoints in pivotal clinical trials, the regulatory authorities may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee or other regulatory authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. This may include approval of a product candidate for more limited indications than requested or they may impose significant limitations in the form of warnings. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory authority policy during the period of product development, clinical trials and the review process. Regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for more limited indications than requested or they may impose significant limitations in the form of warnings or a REMS. These regulatory authorities may require precautions or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use or they may grant approval subject to the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials. In addition, regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of any of our product candidates. For example, the FDA may disagree that our Phase 3 trial evaluating D-PLEX100 is sufficient to support either NDA submissions seeking approval for the specific indications under evaluation in our ongoing and potential future Phase 3 trials or NDA submissions seeking approval for broader indications covering the prevention of SSIs. Although we intend to pursue a broad label for D-PLEX100, to date we have not had any discussions with, nor received any feedback from, the FDA with respect to the possibility of pursuing a label broader than the prevention of SSIs following abdominal surgery. Even if the FDA were to agree that these trials were sufficient to support one or more NDA submissions, the FDA may determine that the data from these trials support more narrow indications than we may propose, if the FDA were to approve such NDA submissions at all. If the FDA does not agree that our ongoing and potential future Phase 3 trials support the submission of an NDA for any indication, we will be required to conduct additional clinical trials to support our proposed indications. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates and materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In September 2022, we received confirmation from the EMA that D-PLEX100 is eligible for submission of an application for an EU Marketing Authorisation (centralized Procedure) under Article 3(2)b – Therapeutic innovation (EC) No 726/2004. The centralized process eligibility is granted to D-PLEX100 under the Therapeutic Innovation criteria which underscores that D-PLEX100 potentially provides a new alternative to patients in preventing post abdominal SSIs. However, the receipt of a confirmation from the EMA that D-PLEX100 is eligible for submission of a MAA in the EU under the EMA's centralized procedure may not eventually result in an approval by the EMA that D-PLEX100 is eligible for submission of a MAA in the EU under the Agency's centralized procedure nor result in a faster review or approval compared to product candidates considered for approval under conventional EMA national procedures and it would not assure ultimate approval by the EMA. In addition, even if D-PLEX100 is eligible for submission of a MAA in the under the Agency's centralized procedure, the EMA may later decide that the product candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification.

Our current and future operations may be directly or indirectly through our relationships with U.S. healthcare providers, patients and other persons and entities, subject to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain our business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, market, sell and distribute our products in the United States. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include: - The U.S. Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, receiving or providing any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other U.S. federal healthcare programs. The U.S. Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers, among others, on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, but the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and require strict compliance in order to offer protection.         - The U.S. federal false claims laws, including the False Claims Act, or FCA, and civil monetary penalties laws, which prohibit any person or entity from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, the U.S. federal government or knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the U.S. federal government. As a result of a modification made by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, a claim includes "any request or demand" for money or property presented to the U.S. government. In addition, manufacturers can be held liable under the FCA even when they do not submit claims directly to government third-party payors if they are deemed to "cause" the submission of false or fraudulent claims. The FCA also permits a private individual acting as a "whistleblower" to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the FCA and to share in any monetary recovery. FCA liability is potentially significant in the healthcare industry because the statute provides for treble damages and mandatory penalties per false claim or statement. Government enforcement agencies and private whistleblowers have investigated pharmaceutical companies for or asserted liability under the FCA for a variety of alleged promotional, marketing and other activities, such as providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product; providing consulting fees and other benefits to physicians to induce them to prescribe products; engaging in promotion for "off-label" uses; and submitting inflated best price information to the Medicaid Rebate Program.         - The U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, prohibits, among other actions, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services.         - The Physician Payments Sunshine Act, enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, the ACA, imposes, among other things, annual reporting requirements for covered manufacturers for certain payments and "transfers of value" provided to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners),  and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members.         - HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations established standards to protect individuals' medical records and other individually identifiable health information (collectively defined as "protected health information"). This legislation requires appropriate safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information and sets limits and conditions on the uses and disclosures that may be made of such information without an individual's authorization. HIPAA also gives individuals rights over their protected health information, and imposes, among other things, specified requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information held by covered entities, which include certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses, and their business associates, which include individuals or entities that perform services for covered entities that involve the creation, use, maintenance or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information as well as their covered subcontractors. 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 U.S. federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys' fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.         - European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers. Many states have analogous state laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, that may apply to our business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers. In addition, certain states require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry's voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government. Certain states and local jurisdictions require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers and register pharmaceutical sales representatives. Additionally, certain states also require pharmaceutical companies to file reports relating to pricing information or marketing expenditures and have laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, the ACA has strengthened these laws. For example, health care reform legislation, has among other things, amended the intent requirement of the U.S. Anti-Kickback statute and certain criminal healthcare fraud statutes. A person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it. Moreover, the ACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal anti-kickback statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. Ensuring that our internal operations and business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will likely be costly. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices, including arrangements we may have with physicians and other healthcare providers, some of whom may receive stock options as compensation for services provided, 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 were 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, disgorgement, imprisonment, possible exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could substantially disrupt our operations. If the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Under the Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now Act, or GAIN Act, the FDA may designate a product as a "qualified infectious disease product," or QIDP. In order to receive this designation, a drug must qualify as an antibacterial or antifungal drug for human use intended to treat serious or life-threatening infections, including those caused by either (1) an antibacterial or antifungal resistant pathogen, including novel or emerging infectious pathogens, or (2) a so-called "qualifying pathogen" found on a list of potentially dangerous, drug-resistant organisms established and maintained by the FDA under the GAIN Act. A sponsor must request such designation before submitting a marketing application. We requested and received QIDP designations for D-PLEX100 for the prevention of sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery, for the prevention of post-abdominal surgery incisional infection and for prevention of post-colorectal SSIs. We anticipate that the QIDP designations will provide, among other benefits, an overall increased level of communication with the FDA during the development process. The benefits of QIDP designation also include eligibility for priority review and an extension by an additional five years of any non-patent market exclusivity period awarded, such as a five-year exclusivity period awarded for a new molecular entity, or a three-year market exclusivity period awarded to an applicant whose application relies on new clinical investigations essential to the approval. This extension is in addition to any pediatric exclusivity extension that may be awarded. GAIN Act exclusivity may not be awarded if the indication for which we obtain approval does not meet the definition of a qualified infectious disease product. However, there is limited precedent for understanding the way in which the GAIN Act will be implemented. Receipt of QIDP designation in practice may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures, and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA or related exclusivity benefits.

The research, development, testing, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, approval, promotion, advertising, storage, recordkeeping, marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting and export and import of drug products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, the EMA and by foreign regulatory authorities in other countries. These regulations differ from country to country. To gain approval to market D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates, we must provide data from well-controlled clinical trials that adequately demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product for the intended indication to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority. We have not yet obtained regulatory approval to market any product candidate in the United States or any other jurisdiction. The FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies can delay, limit or deny approval of D-PLEX100 or any future product candidate for many reasons, including: - regulatory requests for additional analyses, reports, data, non-clinical and preclinical studies and clinical trials;         - our inability to demonstrate that a product candidate is safe and effective for the target indication to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies;         - the FDA's, EMA's, or other regulatory agencies' disagreement with our trial protocol, the interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials, or adequacy of the conduct and control of clinical trials;- clinical holds, other regulatory objections to commencing or continuing a clinical trial or the inability to obtain regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial in countries that require such approvals;         - the population studied in the clinical trial may not be sufficiently broad or representative to assess safety in the patient population for which we seek approval;         - unfavorable or inconclusive results of clinical trials and supportive non-clinical studies, including unfavorable results regarding safety or efficacy of a product candidate observed in clinical trials;         - our inability to demonstrate that clinical or other benefits of a product candidate outweighs any safety or other perceived risks;         - any determination that a clinical trial presents unacceptable health risks to subjects;         - our inability to obtain approval from institutional review boards, or IRBs, to conduct clinical trials at their respective sites;         - the FDA's determination that the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway is not available for a product candidate;         - the non-approval of the formulation, labeling or the specifications of a product candidate;         - the failure to accept the manufacturing processes or facilities at our manufacturing facility or those of third-party manufacturers with which we contract;         - the potential for approval policies or regulations of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies to significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval; or         - resistance to approval from the advisory committees of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies for any reason including safety or efficacy concerns. In the United States, we will be required to submit an NDA to obtain FDA approval before marketing any product candidate. An NDA must include extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to establish the product candidate's safety and efficacy for each desired indication. In the case of an NDA covered by Section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FFDCA, we may rely in part on data not developed by us and for which we have not obtained a right of reference or use, including published scientific literature or the FDA's findings of safety and/or effectiveness for a previously approved drug. The NDA must also include significant information regarding the chemistry, manufacturing and controls for the product. The FDA may further inspect our manufacturing facilities to ensure that the facilities can manufacture any product candidate and any product, if and when approved, in compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements, as well as inspect our clinical trial sites to ensure that our trials are properly conducted. Obtaining approval of an NDA is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and approval may not be obtained. Upon submission of an NDA, the FDA must make an initial determination that the application is sufficiently complete to accept the submission for filing. We cannot be certain that any submissions will be accepted for filing and review by the FDA, or ultimately be approved. If the application is not accepted for review or approval, the FDA may require that we conduct additional clinical or preclinical trials, or take other actions before it will reconsider our application. If the FDA requires additional trials or data, we would incur increased costs and delays in the marketing approval process, which may require us to expend more resources than we have available. Even if the FDA agrees that results from our SHIELD II trial evaluating D-PLEX100 for the prevention of SSIs in patients undergoing abdominal colorectal surgery with large incisions are sufficient to support the submission of an NDA, the FDA may determine that the data from this trial support a narrower indication than we may propose, if the FDA were to approve such NDA at all. In addition, the FDA may not consider any additional information to be complete or sufficient to support approval. Regulatory authorities outside of the United States, such as in the EU, also have requirements for approval of drugs for commercial sale with which we must comply prior to marketing in those areas. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of a product candidate. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and obtaining regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. However, the failure to obtain regulatory approval in one jurisdiction could have a negative impact on our ability to obtain approval in a different jurisdiction. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product candidate testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approval could require additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials, which could be costly and time consuming. Foreign regulatory approval may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. For all of these reasons, if we seek foreign regulatory approval for any product candidate, we may not obtain such approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Even if we eventually complete clinical testing and receive approval of any regulatory filing for a product candidate, the FDA may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly and potentially time-consuming additional post-approval clinical trials or subject to contraindications, black box warnings, restrictive surveillance or Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies, or REMS. Further, the FDA, EMA or other foreign regulatory authorities may also approve a product candidate for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested, and these regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of any product candidate. Following any approval for commercial sale of a product candidate, certain changes to the product, such as changes in manufacturing processes and additional labeling claims, as well as new safety information, will be subject to additional FDA notification, or review and approval. Also, regulatory approval for any product candidate may be withdrawn. To the extent we seek regulatory approval in foreign countries, we may face challenges similar to those described above with regulatory authorities in applicable jurisdictions. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval for D-PLEX100 or any future product candidate would delay or prevent commercialization of such product candidate and would thus negatively impact our business, results of operations and prospects.

If our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies and submission of safety, efficacy and other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and comparable requirements outside of the United States. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The FDA may also require a REMS as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could include requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. We will also be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies and to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product's approved label. As such, we may not promote our products for indications or uses for which they do not have FDA, EMA or other regulatory agency approval. The holder of an approved NDA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. We could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical trials to verify the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in general or in specific patient subsets. An unsuccessful post-marketing trial or failure to complete such a clinical trial could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval. Furthermore, any new legislation addressing drug safety issues could result in delays in product development or commercialization or increased costs to assure compliance. Foreign regulatory authorities impose similar requirements. If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, such regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency or enforcement authority may, among other things: - issue warning letters asserting that we are in violation of the law;         - seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;         - suspend or withdraw regulatory approval;         - suspend any of our ongoing clinical trials;         - refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications submitted by us or our strategic partners;         - restrict the marketing or manufacturing of our products;         - seize or detain products, or require a product recall;         - refuse to permit the import or export of our product candidates; or         - refuse to allow us to enter into government contracts. Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our product candidates. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected. The FDA's and other regulatory authorities' policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad.

Approval of a product candidate in the United States by the FDA does not ensure approval of such product candidate by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. However, the failure to obtain approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities may negatively impact our ability to obtain approval in other foreign countries. Sales of D-PLEX100 or our other product candidates outside of the United States will be subject to foreign regulatory requirements governing clinical trials and marketing approval. Even if the FDA grants marketing approval for a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries also must approve the manufacturing and marketing of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and more onerous than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. In many countries outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our product candidates, if approved, is also subject to approval. We intend to submit a marketing authorization application to the EMA for approval of D-PLEX100 in the EU, but obtaining such approval from the European Commission following the opinion of the EMA is a lengthy and expensive process. Even if a product candidate is approved, the applicable regulatory agency may limit the indications for which the product may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the product labeling or require expensive and time-consuming additional clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval. Regulatory authorities in countries outside of the United States and the EU also have requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those countries. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product candidates in certain countries. Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Also, regulatory approval for a product candidate may be withdrawn. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of D-PLEX100 or our other product candidates will be harmed and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects will be adversely affected.

Generally, for any taxable year, if at least 75% of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the value of our assets is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income, including cash, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. For purposes of these tests, passive income includes dividends, interest gains from commodities and securities transactions, the excess of gains over losses from the disposition of assets which produce passive income (including amounts derived by reason of the temporary investment of funds raised in offerings of our shares) and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. If we are characterized as a PFIC, our U.S. shareholders may suffer adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of our Ordinary Shares treated as ordinary income, rather than capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on our Ordinary Shares by individuals who are U.S. holders, and having interest charges apply to distributions by us and gains from the sales of our shares. Our status as a PFIC will depend on the nature and composition of our income and the nature, composition and value of our assets (which, assuming we are not a "controlled foreign corporation," or a CFC, under Section 957(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, for the year being tested, may be determined based on the fair market value of each asset, with the value of goodwill and going concern value determined in large part by reference to the market value of our Ordinary Shares, which may be volatile). Based upon the estimated value of our assets, including any goodwill, and the nature and estimated composition of our income and assets, we may be classified as a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2023, and in future taxable years. In particular, so long as we do not generate revenue from operations for any taxable year and do not receive any research and development grants, or even if we receive a research and development grant, if such grant does not constitute gross income for United States federal income tax purposes, we likely will be classified as a PFIC for such taxable year. Because the determination of whether we are a PFIC for any taxable year is a factual determination made annually after the end of each taxable year, there can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC in any taxable year. The tax consequences that would apply if we were classified as a PFIC would also be different from those described above if a U.S. shareholder were able to make a valid qualified electing fund, or QEF, election. At this time, we do not expect to provide U.S. shareholders with the information necessary for a U.S. shareholder to make a QEF election. Prospective investors should assume that a QEF election will not be available.

We generally enter into non-competition agreements with our employees and certain key consultants. These agreements prohibit our employees and certain key consultants, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors or clients for a limited period of time. We may be unable to enforce these agreements under the laws of the jurisdictions in which our employees work and it may be difficult for us to restrict our competitors from benefitting from the expertise our former employees or consultants developed while working for us. For example, Israeli courts have required employers seeking to enforce non-compete undertakings of a former employee to demonstrate that the competitive activities of the former employee will harm one of a limited number of material interests of the employer which have been recognized by the courts, such as the secrecy of a company's confidential commercial information or the protection of its intellectual property. If we cannot demonstrate that such interests will be harmed, we may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former employees or consultants and our ability to remain competitive may be diminished.

We rely on third- party suppliers for certain raw materials necessary to manufacture our product candidates for our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Some of these raw materials are difficult to source. Because there are a limited number of suppliers for these raw materials, we may need to engage alternate suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials, and if approved, ultimately for commercial sale. In several cases, we rely on a sole provider, and there may be a need to identify additional providers in the future. We do not have any control over the availability of raw materials. If we or our manufacturers are unable to purchase these raw materials on acceptable terms, at sufficient quality levels, or in adequate quantities, if at all, the development and commercialization of our product candidates or any future product candidates, would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply, which would impair our ability to meet our development objectives for our product candidates or generate revenues from the sale of any approved products. Even following our establishment of our own cGMP-compliant manufacturing capabilities, we intend to continue to rely on third- party suppliers for these raw materials, which will continue to expose us to manufacturing risks including: - reduced control for certain aspects of manufacturing activities;         - termination or nonrenewal of manufacturing and service agreements with third parties in a manner or at a time that is costly or damaging to us; and         - disruptions to the operations of our third-party manufacturers and service providers caused by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy of the manufacturer or service provider. Certain of our raw material suppliers will be required to become cGMP-compliant and establish a drug master file for the applicable ingredient before we can submit our NDA for D-PLEX100. If these suppliers do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or manufacture our raw materials in accordance with regulatory requirements, we will not be able to submit our NDA as planned or complete, or may be delayed in completing, the clinical trials required for approval of D-PLEX100. In such instances, we may need to locate an appropriate replacement third-party relationship, which may not be readily available or on acceptable terms, which would cause additional delay or increased expense prior to the approval of D-PLEX100 and would thereby have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Additionally, we have not yet entered into binding agreements with certain third-party manufacturers to produce the raw materials and products that we use to manufacture our product candidates. Although we intend to rely on third-party manufacturers for the raw materials and products to support the manufacturing of our product candidates for commercialization, we have not yet entered into agreements with certain manufacturers. We may be unable to negotiate binding agreements with the manufacturers to support our commercialization activities at commercially reasonable terms.

To date, we have invested all of our efforts and financial resources to: (i) research and develop our PLEX technology, our lead product candidate, D-PLEX100, and our preclinical and research and development programs, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, and providing general and administrative support for these operations; (ii) develop and secure our intellectual property portfolio for D-PLEX100 and our PLEX technology and (iii) invest in our current manufacturing facility. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize one or more of our current and future product candidates. Our product candidates' marketability is subject to significant risks associated with successfully completing current and future clinical trials, including: - our ability to complete our ongoing SHIELD II Phase 3 clinical trial of D-PLEX100 for the prevention of SSIs in patients undergoing abdominal colorectal surgery with large incisions in a timely fashion and that such Phase 3 clinical trial, even if successfully completed, will be sufficient to support approval of an NDA;         - acceptance by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies of our strategies for seeking regulatory approvals for D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates, including our proposed indications, primary and secondary endpoint assessments and measurements, safety evaluations and regulatory pathways;         - the acceptance by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies of the number, design, size, conduct and implementation of our clinical trials, our trial protocols and the interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;         - our ability to successfully complete the clinical trials of D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates, including timely patient enrollment and acceptable safety and efficacy data and our ability to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates undergoing such clinical trials;- the willingness of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies to schedule an advisory committee meeting in a timely manner in connection with our regulatory submissions, if such advisory committee meetings are required;         - the recommendation of the FDA's advisory committee to approve our applications to market D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates in the United States, and the EMA's approval to market D-PLEX100 in the EU, if such advisory committee reviews are scheduled, without limiting the approved labeling, specifications, distribution or use of the products, or imposing other restrictions;         - the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies with the safety and efficacy of D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates;         - the prevalence and severity of adverse events associated with D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates;         - the timely and satisfactory performance by third-party contractors, trial sites and principal investigators of their obligations in relation to our clinical trials;         - our success in educating medical professionals and patients about the benefits, administration and use of D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates, if approved;         - our success in educating payers and hospital administrators about the potential cost savings benefits that D-PLEX100 can deliver;         - the availability, perceived advantages, relative cost, safety and efficacy of alternative and competing treatments for the indications addressed by D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates;         - the effectiveness of our marketing, sales and distribution strategy, and operations, as well as that of any current and future licensees;         - our ability to scale, validate and maintain a commercially viable manufacturing process that is cGMP-compliant;         - our ability to obtain, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights with respect to D-PLEX100, any future product candidates and our PLEX technology; and         - changes to regulatory guidelines. Many of these clinical, regulatory and commercial risks are beyond our control. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able to advance D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates through clinical development, or to obtain regulatory approval of or commercialize any product candidates. If we fail to achieve these objectives or overcome the challenges presented above, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize D-PLEX100 and any future product candidates. Accordingly, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenues through the sale of our product candidates to enable us to continue our business. Additionally, approval of a product candidate in the United States by the FDA does not ensure approval of such product candidate by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. We may never obtain approval outside of the United States, which would limit our market opportunities and adversely affect our business.

The commercial success of our product candidates will depend upon the acceptance of the product by the medical community, including physicians, hospital administrators, healthcare third-party payors, hospital pharmacists, infectious disease specialists and patients. The degree of market acceptance of any approved product will depend on a number of factors, including: - the demonstration of clinical safety and efficacy of our product candidates in clinical trials;         - the efficacy, potential and perceived advantages of our product candidates over alternative treatments;         - the cost of treatment relative to the cost of treating SSIs;         - the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects;         - the prevalence and severity of the disease the product is designed to treat or prevent;         - product labeling or product insert requirements of the FDA or other regulatory authorities, including any limitations or warnings contained in a product's approved labeling;         - distribution and use restrictions imposed by the FDA or agreed to by us as part of a mandatory or voluntary risk management plan;         - our ability to obtain adequate reimbursement;         - the demonstration of the effectiveness of our product candidates in reducing the cost of treatment;         - the strength of marketing and distribution support;         - the timing of market introduction of competitive products;         - the availability of products and their ability to meet market demand; and         - publicity concerning our product candidates or competing products and treatments. If our product candidates are approved but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, hospital administrators, third-party payors, hospital pharmacists, infectious disease specialists and patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from the product, and we may not become or remain profitable. In addition, our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful.