Item 1A. Risk Factors

RISK FACTORS

We are subject to various risks and uncertainties in the course of our business. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below and the other information in this report before making an investment in our Class A common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (“common stock”). Our business, financial condition, results of operations, or prospects could be materially and

Table of Contents

adversely affected if any of these risks occurs, and as a result, the market price of our common stockcould decline and you could lose all or part of your investment. This report also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. See “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Our actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including those set forthbelow.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Financial Position

We have a limited operating history and have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future. If we ever achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain it.

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. Pharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. Old AEON was originally incorporated in 2012 but did not begin focusing its efforts and financial resources on the clinical development and regulatory approval of ABP-450 for therapeutic indications until 2019. The operating history upon which investors must evaluate our business and prospects is limited. Consequently, any predictions about our future success, performance or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of commercial operations. In addition, as an organization, we have limited experience and have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome many of the risks and uncertainties frequently encountered by companies in the biopharmaceutical market. To date, we have not obtained any regulatory approvals for ABP-450 or generated any revenue from product sales relating to ABP-450. On May 16, 2024, we announced the discontinuation of our Phase 2 double blind study of ABP-450 in the treatment of episodic migraine and chronic migraine, which had previously completed enrollment and dosing of patients, and ceased enrollment and dosing of patients in our open label extension study related to such study, in order to implement certain cash preservation measures while the Company continues to evaluate its strategic options. On July 9, 2024, we announced a strategic reprioritization to seek regulatory approval of ABP-450 as a biosimilar product in the United States through submission of a BLA under Section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act, or a Section 351(k) BLA, using AbbVie Inc.’s product Botox® as the reference product, for all of the indications for which Botox® is approved, other than the cosmetic uses for which we do not hold development or commercialization rights. We held an initial meeting with the FDA in the third quarter of 2024 during which we obtained feedback from the FDA on the next steps to develop a Botox® biosimilar. We commenced analytical studies in the fourth quarter of 2024 to prepare for a BPD Type 2a meeting with the FDA that was held on January 21, 2026, to review the results from the studies.

Because we have not yet received regulatory approvals, we are not permitted to market ABP-450 for any use in the United States or in any other territory, and as such, we have not generated any revenue from sales of ABP-450 to date. We have recorded a loss from operations of $12.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, mainly due to loss from operations of $16.3 million and gain on fair value of contingent consideration of $3.5 million. We have recorded operating income of $73.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, mainly due to gain on fair value of contingent consideration of $100.8 million and operating expenses of $27.8 million. As of December 31, 2025, we had $3.0 million in cash and cash equivalents. As a result of our ongoing losses, as of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $470.8 million. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase as we continue to seek regulatory approval for, and begin to commercialize, ABP- 450, if approved. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenues. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity (deficit) and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with drug development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, if at all, we will be able to achieve profitability. Even if we achieve profitability in the future, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, may adversely affect the market price of common stock and our ability to raise capital and continue operations.

Our management has concluded that uncertainties around our ability to raise additional capital raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. We will require additional financing to fund our future operations. Any failure to obtain additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our operations.

We have concluded that we do not have sufficient cash to fund our operations and to meet our obligations as they become due within one year from the date that our consolidated financial statements are issued and as a result, there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is an issue raised as a result of ongoing operating losses and a lack of financing commitments to meet cash requirements, and is subject to our ability to generate a profit or obtain appropriate financing from outside sources, including obtaining additional funding from the sale of our securities or obtaining loans

Table of Contents

from third parties where possible. We will need to raise additional capital to fund our operations. We cannot assure you that we will be able to raise additional capital on commercially reasonable terms or at all. The perception that we may not be able to continue as a going concern may materially limit our ability to raise additional funds through the issuance of new debt or equity securities or otherwise and no assurance can be given that sufficient funding will be available when needed to allow us to continue as a going concern. This perception may also make it more difficult to operate our business due to concerns about our ability to meet our contractual obligations. If we cannot continue as a going concern, we may have to liquidate our assets and may receive less than the value at which those assets are carried on our financial statements, and it is likely that our stockholders may lose some or all of their investment in us.

We expect that we will continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future in order to complete development of and seek regulatory approval for ABP-450 as a biosimilar to Botox®, identify future potential therapeutic applications for ABP-450 and establish sales and marketing capabilities to commercialize ABP-450 across any approved indications.

As of the date of this Report, we expect to have sufficient cash to fund our operating plan into the third quarter of 2026. We have based these estimates, however, on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could spend our available capital resources much faster than we currently expect or require more capital to fund our operations than we currently expect. Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including:

● costs of operating as a public company.

If we raise additional capital through marketing and distribution arrangements or other collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish certain valuable rights to our product candidate(s), technologies, future revenue streams or research programs or may have to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we raise additional capital through public or private equity offerings or offerings of securities convertible into our equity, the ownership interest of stockholders will be diluted and the terms of any such securities may have a preference over our common stock. Debt financing, receivables financing and royalty financing may also be coupled with an equity component, such as warrants to purchase our capital stock, which could also result in dilution of our existing stockholders’ ownership, and such dilution may be material.

Furthermore, if we raise additional capital through debt financing, we will have increased fixed payment obligations and may be subject to covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt or making capital expenditures to meet specified financial ratios, and other operational restrictions, any of which could restrict our ability to commercialize ABP-450 or to operate as a business and may result in liens being placed on our assets. If we were to default on any of our indebtedness, we could lose such assets. Additional funding may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. The global credit and financial markets have experienced volatility and disruptions recently, including diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates, and uncertainty about economic

Table of Contents

stability. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly or more dilutive.

Our future success depends entirely on obtaining U.S. regulatory approval and successfully commercializing ABP-450 as a proposed biosimilar to Botox®, and the biosimilar licensure pathway for a botulinum toxin product is uncertain.

Our future success currently depends entirely on the successful and timely development, licensure and commercialization of ABP-450, our only product candidate. We do not have any products approved for sale and we may never be able to develop and commercialize a marketable product. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approval for ABP-450, or if we experience material delays in doing so, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.

The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing and distribution of biological products are subject to extensive regulation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States. We currently plan to pursue licensure for ABP-450 in the United States under the abbreviated pathway for biosimilar biological products under section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act. Under this pathway, we must demonstrate that ABP-450 is biosimilar to a single FDA-licensed reference product under a stepwise approach, which typically relies on extensive comparative analytical and functional characterization, together with nonclinical testing and clinical investigations, to the extent warranted. The FDA has substantial discretion to determine the nature and extent of data required to support a section 351(k) BLA, including whether and to what extent additional clinical studies are necessary.

The FDA has not licensed a biosimilar or interchangeable biological product referencing Botox® to date. As a result, FDA’s expectations for demonstrating biosimilarity for a botulinum toxin product may be uncertain and may evolve during the course of development and review. The process of preparing, submitting and obtaining approval of a section 351(k) BLA is expensive, time-consuming and inherently uncertain, and can be delayed, limited, or denied for many reasons, including the following:

In addition, the complexity of biological products and the scientific and technical challenges associated with demonstrating high similarity may require significant time and resources. Comparative analytical assessment for a biosimilar product typically requires sensitive, orthogonal methods and sufficient lots of both the proposed product and the reference product. Differences observed during analytical similarity assessment or functional characterization may require additional scientific justification, increased testing, manufacturing changes, new or revised specifications, additional comparability data, or other remediation, any of which could delay development, increase costs, or prevent submission or approval of a Section 351(k) BLA.

Clinical investigations are inherently uncertain and can be delayed, suspended or terminated. Prior to our strategic reprioritization to pursue a biosimilar pathway, our Phase 2 clinical trials for episodic and chronic migraine did not meet their respective primary endpoints and were discontinued. The FDA may consider our prior clinical experience in determining the clinical or other data it will

Table of Contents

require for ABP-450’s development and potential licensure, which could lead the FDA to require additional studies or other data to address residual uncertainty or other concerns. Even if we believe our planned analytical and clinical program is appropriate, the FDA may require additional pre-approval or post-approval studies, may object to elements of our development program, or may require that our program be altered.

Even if we demonstrate biosimilarity for ABP-450 and obtain approval of ABP-450 in one indication, the FDA may not permit extrapolation to additional indications approved for the reference product and may require additional data to support licensure for one or more indications. Any limitation on the indications for which ABP-450 is licensed (for example, exclusion of certain therapeutic indications or constraints on the patient populations eligible for treatment) could materially reduce the commercial opportunity for ABP-450.

In addition to nonclinical and clinical requirements, FDA licensure will depend on the adequacy of our manufacturing and quality systems and those of any third-party manufacturers. We rely on third parties, including Daewoong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., for manufacturing ABP-450. The FDA will evaluate whether manufacturing facilities, methods and controls comply with cGMP and are adequate to preserve identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. If the FDA identifies deficiencies during inspections or in our CMC information, it may delay, limit, or deny licensure, require additional remediation or validation work, or require other changes that could materially delay development and commercialization.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval, we may never be able to successfully commercialize ABP-450. Commercial success will depend on, among other things, physician and patient acceptance, payer coverage and reimbursement, contracting dynamics, formulary positioning, competitive responses by the reference product sponsor and other market participants, and our ability to build or access commercialization capabilities. Medicare Part B and other payor reimbursement methodologies (including those based on average sales price (ASP)) are complex and subject to change, and unfavorable coverage or reimbursement decisions, changes in reimbursement methodologies, or other policy developments could materially adversely affect the adoption, pricing, and commercial prospects for ABP-450.

If we are unable to develop and validate a robust comparative analytical similarity and CMC package for ABP-450 consistent with the FDA’s expectations for a 351(k) biosimilar BLA, we may be delayed or prevented from submitting or obtaining approval of a 351(k) BLA, and our business would be materially adversely affected.

Our ability to obtain U.S. licensure for ABP-450 under section 351(k) depends on demonstrating, that ABP-450 is highly similar to an FDA-licensed reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components and that there are no clinically meaningful differences in safety, purity and potency. Comparative analytical and functional characterization and a complete, robust CMC package are generally the foundation of a Section 351(k) BLA submission. If we cannot generate, interpret, or adequately justify the comparative analytical data the FDA expects, or if the FDA determines our control strategy does not assure consistent product quality, we may be required to conduct additional studies, modify our manufacturing process, delay submission of a Section 351(k) BLA, or may be unable to obtain approval.

Demonstrating analytical similarity may be particularly challenging for botulinum toxin products. The potency units of botulinum toxin products are specific to the preparation and assay method utilized and are not interchangeable across products, reflecting the importance and complexity of potency and functional assays and reference standards for this product class. Quantitating the active component and relevant impurities at very low concentrations and correlating those measurements to biological activity may require highly sensitive, validated analytical methods. Developing, qualifying, and validating a set of sensitive and specific assays, including orthogonal methods, to characterize the product and support similarity, may be technologically challenging, time-consuming and costly. The FDA may require additional method development or validation work, additional reference product lots, additional comparability analyses, alternative analytical approaches, or different acceptance criteria.

Our analytical program also depends on obtaining sufficient quantities and lots of the U.S.-licensed reference product for comparative testing, method qualification, and, if required, clinical investigations. Reference product supply constraints, controlled distribution channels, changes in list or net pricing, and other factors may limit our ability to obtain representative lots across time and within shelf life. If we cannot obtain adequate reference product supply, or if the lots we can obtain are not representative, our ability to characterize reference product variability or define appropriate similarity ranges may be compromised and the FDA may not accept our data package.

Table of Contents

In certain circumstances, biosimilar sponsors may seek to use a comparator product approved outside the United States or non-U.S. clinical data to support aspects of development. If we pursue any such approach, the FDA may require additional scientific justification and “bridging” analyses, including three-way comparisons among ABP-450, the U.S.-licensed reference product, and any non-U.S.-licensed comparator product, and the FDA could reject the relevance of such data. Any additional bridging work may be time-consuming and expensive and could delay development and submission.

Even if we obtain adequate reference product supply, natural lot-to-lot variability, potential manufacturing changes over time by the reference product sponsor, and differences in storage, handling, or aging may contribute to variability in analytical results. We must account for such variability when establishing our comparative analytical assessment and setting specifications. If our analytical assessments identify differences that the FDA determines are clinically meaningful or otherwise raise residual uncertainty, the FDA may require additional nonclinical or clinical studies—including clinical pharmacology, immunogenicity, or comparative clinical efficacy studies—to support biosimilarity or to support extrapolation to additional indications.

Stability and comparability also present risk. Differences in stability profiles, aggregation, impurities, container closure performance, or degradation pathways—whether real or apparent based on method limitations—could require reformulation, additional stability work, new specifications, or changes to manufacturing controls. In addition, if we or our manufacturers make changes in manufacturing processes, quality systems, raw materials, sites, or equipment, we may need to generate additional comparability data to demonstrate that the product remains consistent with the material evaluated in our analytical program and any clinical investigations. These requirements could be heightened for a biosimilar program because the analytical similarity determination is a central basis for licensure.

We rely on third parties, including Daewoong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., for manufacturing ABP-450. Our ability to generate a consistent analytical comparability package and to support a Section 351(k) BLA also depends on the ability of our manufacturers to produce ABP-450 consistently and in compliance with cGMP, and the FDA may inspect manufacturing facilities in connection with a BLA. Manufacturing deviations, out-of-specification results, control strategy deficiencies, or inspection findings could require remediation, cause delays, result in batch failures or supply interruptions, or prevent submission or approval of a BLA.

If we cannot demonstrate satisfactory analytical similarity and CMC robustness, we may experience delays, incur substantial costs, be forced to narrow the indications or conditions of use we pursue, or be unable to obtain licensure under Section 351(k). Any such outcome could materially harm our commercialization plans and competitive position and could adversely affect coverage, reimbursement, and market adoption dynamics for ABP-450, particularly in settings where physician-administered biologics are sensitive to reimbursement and pricing methodologies.

Clinical development for a proposed biosimilar product involves a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, including extensive comparative analytical work and potentially clinical investigations; we may incur greater costs than we anticipate or encounter substantial delays or difficulties in our studies.

We may not commercialize, market, promote or sell any product candidate, including ABP-450, in the United States unless and until we obtain regulatory approval from the FDA, and we may never receive such approval. Our current strategy is focused on pursuing a BLA for ABP-450 under the abbreviated pathway for biosimilar biological products under Section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act. Although the biosimilar pathway differs from the stand-alone 351(a) pathway, it remains an expensive, time-consuming and uncertain process that may take several years and requires significant management attention and financial resources.

To obtain licensure under section 351(k), we must demonstrate that ABP-450 is biosimilar to a single FDA-licensed reference product. Clinical development is generally required to demonstrate biosimilarity.

Clinical investigations are expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete, and are uncertain as to outcome. In addition, biosimilar development depends heavily on sophisticated analytical testing and method development, including establishing and validating assays and specifications that are sufficiently sensitive to detect potentially clinically meaningful differences. We cannot guarantee that our analytical studies or clinical investigations will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure can occur at any stage, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in testing have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory approval.

Table of Contents

The results from preclinical studies or early clinical investigations of a product candidate may not predict the results of later investigations, and interim results are not necessarily indicative of final results. Product candidates in later stages may fail to show the desired characteristics despite having progressed through earlier testing. In particular, while we have conducted clinical studies evaluating ABP-450 in patients with cervical dystonia and migraines, we do not know whether ABP-450 will perform as expected in future clinical investigations designed to support a biosimilar submission.

Moreover, data generated during a biosimilar program may be susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. Differences observed during comparative analytical assessment or in clinical pharmacology, immunogenicity, safety or comparative clinical studies could result in the need for additional studies, additional manufacturing work, or changes to our development strategy, any of which could delay or prevent our ability to obtain regulatory approval. For example, our Phase 2 clinical trials for episodic and chronic migraine did not meet their respective primary endpoints. As a result, in May 2024, we announced the discontinuation of our Phase 2 clinical trials for episodic and chronic migraine, in part to implement cash preservation measures. The FDA may consider our prior clinical experience in determining the clinical or other data it will require for ABP-450’s development and licensure, which could lead the FDA to require additional studies or other data to address residual uncertainty or other concerns.

We do not know whether our planned clinical investigations will be completed on schedule, if at all. We may experience numerous unforeseen events prior to, during, or as a result of analytical studies and clinical investigations that could delay or prevent our ability to receive regulatory approval or to commercialize ABP-450 or any other product candidate, including the following:

● subjects experiencing severe or serious unexpected adverse events;

Table of Contents

Any inability to successfully complete our analytical and clinical development program could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue from future product sales or other sources. In addition, if we make manufacturing, formulation or process changes to ABP-450, change facilities, or modify our analytical methods or specifications, we may need to generate additional comparability, stability, analytical, and/or clinical data to bridge our modified product candidate to earlier versions or to demonstrate that such changes do not adversely affect the basis for biosimilarity.

Clinical and analytical delays could also allow competitors to bring competing products to market before we do, reduce the time available for us to execute a commercial launch strategy, and otherwise impair our ability to successfully commercialize ABP-450, which may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Additionally, if results of our analytical studies or clinical investigations are inconclusive or if there are safety concerns or serious adverse events associated with ABP-450, we may be delayed in obtaining regulatory approval, not obtain regulatory approval at all, obtain approval only in narrower indications or patient populations than intended, obtain approval with labeling that includes significant restrictions or safety warnings, be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements, have regulatory authorities withdraw or suspend approval, impose restrictions on distribution in the form of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS), be sued, or experience damage to our reputation.

Our product development costs will increase if we experience delays in analytical testing, clinical investigations, manufacturing scale-up, or obtaining regulatory approvals. Further, we, the FDA, a foreign regulatory authority (if applicable), an ethics committee or an IRB may suspend our clinical investigations at any time if it appears that we are failing to conduct a study in accordance with regulatory requirements (including GCP), that we are exposing participants to unacceptable health risks, or if the FDA finds deficiencies in our current or planned investigational new drug applications (INDs) or the conduct of these studies. Therefore, we cannot predict with certainty the schedule for commencement and completion of future analytical studies or clinical investigations, including any planned pivotal study, and delays could negatively impact the commercial prospects of ABP-450 and delay our ability to generate revenue.

Additionally, certain of our scientific advisors or consultants who receive compensation from us are likely to be investigators for our future clinical investigations. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical study site and the utility of the clinical investigation itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval or rejection of our marketing applications and may ultimately lead to denial of regulatory approval of ABP-450.

Enrollment and retention of patients in clinical studies is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be delayed, made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside our control. If we experience delays or difficulties in enrolling patients in clinical studies, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in our clinical studies is critical to our success. We may encounter difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical studies and may compete against other clinical studies for the same pool of potential patients, thereby delaying or preventing development and potential regulatory approval of ABP-450. Patient enrollment in clinical trials may be affected by other factors, including:

● size and nature of the targeted patient population;

● severity of the disease or condition under investigation;

● perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study;

● patient referral practices of physicians;

● the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment;

● proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients;

Table of Contents

● our ability to engage with patient communities and advocacy groups;

● continued enrollment of prospective patients by clinical trial sites; and

We also rely on, and will continue to rely on, CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and preclinical studies. Though we have entered into agreements governing their services, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for ABP-450 and any other product candidate and jeopardize our ability to obtain regulatory approval. Furthermore, even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining enrollment of such patients in our clinical trials.

ABP-450 may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent its regulatory approval, limit its commercial potential or result in significant negative consequences following any potential regulatory approval.

During the conduct of clinical studies, patients report changes in their health, including illnesses, injuries and discomforts, to their doctor. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not the product candidate being studied caused or contributed to these conditions and regulatory authorities may draw different conclusions from us and require additional testing to confirm these determinations, if they occur. Any adverse events or undesirable side effects caused by, or other unexpected properties of, ABP-450 could cause us, any future collaborators, IRB, or ethics committee or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical studies of ABP-450 and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities.

In addition, it is possible that as we test ABP-450 in further clinical studies, or as use of ABP-450 becomes more widespread if it receives regulatory approval, that illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other adverse events that were not observed in earlier studies conducted by us, or, in the case of ABP-450, by others using the same botulinum toxin, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous studies, will be reported by subjects or patients. Many times, side effects are only detectable after investigational products are tested in large-scale pivotal studies or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. If additional clinical experience indicates that ABP-450 has side effects or causes serious or life-threatening side effects, the development of ABP-450 may fail or be delayed. Additionally, there is the risk that as botulinum toxins other than ABP-450 are approved for and studied in connection with a broader range of diseases and conditions and across a more diverse population, additional safety signals and other adverse events may be identified. All botulinum toxin products are required to include a class labeling that contains a boxed warning related to safety and we could be required to include additional warnings on our product labeling, if approved.

Additionally, if ABP-450 or any other product candidate receives regulatory approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result. For example, the FDA could require us to adopt a REMS to ensure that the benefits of treatment with such product candidate outweigh the risks for each potential patient, which may include, among other things, a communication plan to health care practitioners, patient education, extensive patient monitoring or distribution systems and processes that are highly controlled, restrictive and more costly than what is typical for the industry. We may also be required to engage in similar actions, such as patient education, certification of health care professionals or specific monitoring, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any product that we develop. Other potentially significant negative consequences associated with adverse events include:

● regulatory authorities may withdraw or change their approvals of a product;

● we may be required to change the way a product is administered;

● a product may become less competitive, and our reputation may suffer.

Table of Contents

Any of these events could diminish the usage or otherwise limit the commercial success of our product candidates and prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of ABP-450, if approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities.

We announced a strategic pivot to pursue regulatory approval for ABP-450 utilizing a 351(k) biosimilar pathway. Obtaining regulatory approvals under this novel approach may prove difficult, or even impossible, for a variety of reasons.

On July 9, 2024, we announced a strategic reprioritization to pursue submission of a Section 351(k) BLA for ABP-450, using AbbVie Inc.’s product Botox® as a proposed reference product, for which we would seek approval for all of the indications for which Botox® is approved, other than the cosmetic uses. To obtain regulatory approval for the commercial sale of ABP-450 as biosimilar product, we will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, among other things, that ABP-450 is highly similar to a biological reference product already licensed by the FDA pursuant to an approved BLA, notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components, and that it has no clinically meaningful differences as compared to the reference product in terms of the safety, purity and potency of the product.

The potential to leverage the biosimilar pathway for a neurotoxin is untested, as no biosimilar has been approved utilizing Botox® as the reference product. Among other things, Section 351(k) BLAs must include an assessment of toxicity and a clinical study or studies sufficient to demonstrate safety, purity, and potency in one or more appropriate conditions of use for which the reference product is licensed and for which licensure is sought for the proposed biological product. The amount of toxin in a single vial of Botox® is miniscule and comparing toxicity vial-to-vial, which could be required by the FDA, may prove prohibitively difficult.

We plan to pursue the biosimilar pathway for ABP-450 because this pathway offers the potential to obtain FDA approvals for all FDA-approved indications for the reference product. If we are successful in demonstrating the biosimilarity of ABP-450 to Botox® and obtain regulatory approval with respect to one indication, we believe the FDA could also approve ABP-450 for one or more indications currently listed on Botox®’s FDA-approved labeling without our having to conduct additional clinical trials for ABP-450, provided that the FDA determines that ABP-450 relies on a similar mechanism of action to Botox® with respect to each such indication. However, even if we are able to demonstrate that ABP-450 is biosimilar to Botox® with respect to one indication, the FDA may nevertheless determine that certain of Botox® existing approved indications do not rely on a clearly established similar mechanism of action, which would limit our ability to seek approvals for ABP-450 without conducting additional trials. For example, pending FDA feedback, we plan to conduct a single pivotal clinical study in patients with cervical dystonia. And the FDA could determine that a clinical study in cervical dystonia, a muscular disorder, even if successful, will not support a Section 350(k) BLA seeking approval for ABP-450 as a biosimilar in patients with migraine, a neurological disorder, or any of the other therapeutic (non-cosmetic) indications for which Botox® is currently approved. Moreover, negative or ambiguous results from clinical trials of ABP-450 in certain patient populations, including the results from our Phase 2 trials, could adversely affect our ability to pursue certain indications in any Section 351(k) BLA. In addition, pursuant to our agreement with Daewoong, we do not have the rights to develop and commercialize ABP-450 for any of the cosmetic indications for which Botox® has been approved, which further limits the market potential for ABP-450, even if we are successful in pursuing a biosimilar pathway.

Additionally, even if the FDA allows us to pursue a biosimilar pathway for ABP-450, and even if we are successful in demonstrating biosimilarity for ABP-450 to the satisfaction of the FDA, many manufacturers of reference biological products have used legislative, regulatory and other means, such as litigation, to delay regulatory approval and to seek to restrict competition from manufacturers of biosimilars. These efforts may include or have included:

Table of Contents

In addition, any of these factors could prevent us from obtaining market acceptance for or otherwise successfully commercializing ABP-450, if approved as a biosimilar product.

Even if ABP-450 receives regulatory approval as a biosimilar or otherwise, it may fail to achieve the broad degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Even if ABP-450 receives regulatory approval, it may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. The commercial success of ABP-450, if approved, will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by physicians. The degree of market acceptance of any product candidate, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to:

● the effectiveness of sales and marketing efforts;

● the strength of our relationships with patient communities;

● the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments and therapies;

● our ability to offer such product for sale at competitive prices;

● the strength of marketing and distribution support;

● the presence or perceived risk of potential product liability claims;

● the prevalence and severity of any side effects; and

● any restrictions on the use of the product together with other medications.

Our efforts to educate physicians, patients, third party payors and others in the medical community on the benefits of our product candidates, if approved, may require significant resources and may never be successful.

If ABP-450 fails to gain market acceptance, this will have a material adverse impact on our ability to generate revenues to provide a satisfactory, or any, return on our investments. Even if some therapeutic indications achieve market acceptance, the market may prove not to be large enough to allow us to generate significant revenues.

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must prioritize the regulatory approval for ABP-450 utilizing a 351(k) biosimilar pathway and evaluate the development of certain therapeutic uses of ABP-450; these decisions may prove to be wrong and may adversely affect our business.

While we have shifted our focus to the development and potential commercialization of ABP-450 as a biosimilar to Botox®, a key element of our future strategy is to identify additional conditions for which ABP-450 may warrant further development. However, there can be no assurances that we will be successful in identifying such conditions, such as gastroparesis and PTSD. Even if we are successful in identifying conditions that could potentially be treated with ABP-450, we may experience difficulties in identifying a proper treatment regimen, or we may fail to successfully develop ABP-450 or secure regulatory approval for such conditions.

Table of Contents

Efforts to identify and pursue additional potential therapeutic uses of ABP-450 require substantial technical, financial and human resources, regardless of whether they are ultimately successful. Because we have limited financial and personnel resources, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with potential target indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential or a greater likelihood of success.

Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential therapeutic uses of ABP-450 that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

Even if we receive regulatory approval for ABP-450, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense, limit or prohibit commercial distribution, prevent continued investigation and research and subject us to penalties if we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. Additionally, ABP-450, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.

For any regulatory approvals that we may receive for our ABP-450, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for our product candidates 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 ongoing compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials. In addition, manufacturers of biological products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMPs and other applicable regulations and standards. In addition, any regulatory approvals we may receive will require the submission of periodic reports to regulatory authorities and ongoing surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product. Such approvals may also contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. For example, the FDA may require a Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could include requirements for a medication guide, physician training and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools.

If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. In addition, failure to comply with FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory requirements may subject our company to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including:

● the commencement of criminal investigations and prosecutions;

● the suspension of any ongoing clinical studies;

● injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

Table of Contents

Regulatory policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of ABP-450. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow to 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 be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, given the similarity of ABP-450 to Jeuveau®, any adverse developments with respect to Jeuveau®, including adverse events or changes in regulatory status, may also directly impact the development, commercialization or regulation of ABP-450, if approved.

Even if we receive regulatory approval, coverage and adequate reimbursement may not be available for ABP-450, which could make it difficult for us to sell the product profitably.

Market acceptance and sales of ABP-450, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for the product and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed care organizations and other private health insurers.

Obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor.

Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. While no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for ABP-450 will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. Therefore, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement, for the product or any related treatments. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a therapy does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Each payor determines whether or not it will provide coverage for a therapy, what amount it will pay the manufacturer for the therapy and on what tier of its formulary it will be placed. The position on a payor’s list of covered drugs and biological products, or formulary, generally determines the co-payment that a patient will need to make to obtain the therapy and can strongly influence the adoption of such therapy by patients and physicians. Patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers prescribing such services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our products. In addition, because ABP-450 may be required to be physician-administered, separate reimbursement for the product itself may or may not be available. Instead, the administering physician may only be reimbursed for providing the treatment or procedure in which our product is used.

There may be significant delays in obtaining such coverage and reimbursement for newly approved products, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a product will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, intellectual property, manufacture, sale and distribution expenses. Interim reimbursement levels for new products, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the product and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost products and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for products may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors, by any future laws limiting pharmaceutical prices and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of product from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States.

Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Inadequate coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product for which we obtain regulatory approval. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize ABP-450.

Table of Contents

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

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

Recently, CMS has commenced the third cycle of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program established under the IRA, which is associated with the IPAY 2028 and, for the first time, may include drugs payable under Medicare Part B in addition to drugs covered under Medicare Part D. On January 27, 2026, CMS published the list of 15 selected drugs for IPAY 2028, which includes Botox®. CMS has stated that negotiations with participating manufacturers for this third cycle will occur during 2026 and that any negotiated MFPs will be effective beginning January 1, 2028, and CMS has issued program guidance describing the timing and milestones for the negotiation process, including the exchange of manufacturer-specific data, CMS offers and counteroffers, and publication of negotiated prices. Selection of Botox® for IPAY 2028 and any resulting MFP may affect reimbursement, utilization, contracting, pricing and access dynamics for botulinum toxin therapies, including therapies administered in physician offices and reimbursed under Medicare Part B, and could impact the size, attractiveness, and economics of the therapeutic Botox® market and related competitive markets, which could affect the pricing we may receive if approved. CMS’ Negotiation Program guidance indicates that, if CMS later determines that the statutory criteria for bona fide generic or biosimilar competition are met for a selected drug, the drug may be removed from the selected drug list and the MFP may cease to apply in subsequent years, subject to timing mechanics in CMS guidance.

Enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our products and may affect the prices we may set.

In the United States and other foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the ACA, was enacted, which substantially changes the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among the provisions of the ACA, those of greatest importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries include the following:

Table of Contents

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011 has, among other things, led to aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers, which, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2032, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, unless additional action is taken by Congress. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. In addition, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminated the statutory cap on drug manufacturers’ Medicaid drug rebate liability, beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price. These laws and any laws enacted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other health care funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers and accordingly, our financial operations.

Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D continue to penalize price increases that outpace inflation; and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program. The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. The full impact of the IRA on the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined but is likely to be significant.

Under the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program established under the IRA, CMS published the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs covered under Part D, which went into effect in January 2026, and for the subsequent 15 drugs, which will first be effective in 2027. CMS has also commenced the third cycle of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, which is associated with the IPAY 2028 and, for the first time, may include drugs payable under Medicare Part B in addition to drugs covered under Medicare Part D. On January 27, 2026, CMS published the list of 15 selected drugs for IPAY 2028, which includes Botox®. CMS has stated that negotiations with participating manufacturers for this third cycle will occur during 2026 and that any negotiated MFPs will be effective beginning January 1, 2028, and CMS has issued program guidance describing the timing and milestones for the negotiation process, including the exchange of manufacturer-specific data, CMS offers and counteroffers, and publication of negotiated prices. Selection of Botox® for IPAY 2028 and any resulting MFP may affect reimbursement, utilization, contracting, pricing and access dynamics for botulinum toxin therapies, including therapies administered in physician offices and reimbursed under Medicare Part B, and could impact the size, attractiveness, and economics of the therapeutic Botox® market and related competitive markets.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted in July 2025, imposes significant reductions in the funding of the Medicaid program. Such reductions are expected to decrease the number of persons enrolled in Medicaid and reduce the services covered by Medicaid, which could adversely affect our sales of any product candidate that we commercialize.

In 2026, the U.S. government also launched TrumpRx, a federal initiative to enable patients to gain access to certain prescription drugs at reduced costs based on pricing available in other countries (i.e., most-favored-nation pricing). In addition, the Trump administration is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the United States. While it is unclear whether and how the Trump proposals will be implemented, the Trump policies are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and on our ability to receive adequate revenues for any product candidate that we commercialize. On the one hand, President Trump has threatened to impose significant tariffs on pharmaceutical manufacturers that do not adopt pricing policies such as most favored nation pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the United States to the lowest price in a group of other countries. In response, multiple

Table of Contents

manufacturers have entered into confidential pricing agreements with the federal government. On the other hand, the Trump administration is pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies and published two proposed regulations in December 2025, referred to as Globe and Guard. If finalized, these regulations would implement mandatory payment models under which manufacturers of eligible drugs would be required to pay rebates to the federal government on a portion of the units of their drugs that are reimbursed by Medicare, with the rebate amount based on most favored nation pricing. While the impact of the Globe and Guard proposed regulations, if finalized, cannot yet be determined, it is likely to be significant. Even regulatory proposals or executive actions that are ultimately deemed unlawful could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business.

We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for ABP-450, if approved, or additional pricing pressures.

Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access, marketing cost disclosure, drug price reporting and other transparency measures. Some states have enacted legislation creating so-called prescription drug affordability boards with the goal of imposing price limits on certain drugs in these states, and at least one state board is imposing an upper payment limit. States are also seeking to implement general, across the board price caps for pharmaceuticals, or are seeking to regulate drug distribution. Some measures are designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our products or put pressure on our product pricing.

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

ABP-450, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to effectively compete may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration and expansion.

The pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive and requires an ongoing, extensive search for technological innovation. It also requires, among other things, the ability to effectively discover, develop, test and obtain regulatory approvals for novel products, as well as the ability to effectively commercialize, market and promote approved products, including communicating the effectiveness, safety and value of products to actual and prospective customers and medical professionals. Numerous companies are engaged in the development, manufacture and marketing of products competitive with those that we are developing.

Our primary competitors for ABP-450 in the injectable botulinum toxin pharmaceutical market for therapeutic use are:

Table of Contents

We are also aware of competing botulinum toxins currently being developed or commercialized in the United States, European Union, Asia, South America and other markets. While some of these products may not meet United States regulatory standards, the companies operating in these markets may be able to produce products at a lower cost than United States and European manufacturers. In addition to the injectable botulinum toxin dose forms, we are aware that other companies are developing topical botulinum toxins for therapeutic indications. We will also face competition in our target therapeutic markets from other pharmaceutical products.

As more companies develop new intellectual property in our markets, the possibility of a competitor acquiring patent or other rights that may limit our products or potential products increases, which could lead to litigation. In addition to product development, testing, approval and promotion, other competitive factors in the pharmaceutical industry include industry consolidation, product quality and price, product technology, reputation, customer service and access to technical information.

If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities on our own or through third parties, we will be unable to successfully commercialize ABP-450, if approved, or generate product revenue.

We do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure and have little experience in the sale, marketing, or distribution of pharmaceutical products. To successfully commercialize ABP-450, if approved, in the United States and other jurisdictions we may seek to enter, we will need to build out our sales and marketing capabilities, either on our own or with others. The establishment and development of our own commercial team or the establishment of a contract sales force to market ABP-450 will be expensive and time-consuming and may divert significant management focus and resources, potentially delaying any product launch. Moreover, we cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully develop this capability, given that we have no experience as a company in commercializing products. We may seek to enter into collaborations with other entities to utilize their established marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into or maintain such agreements on favorable terms or at all. We can provide no assurance that any future collaborators will provide effective sales forces or marketing and distribution capabilities. We compete with many companies that currently have extensive, experienced and well-funded marketing and sales operations to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel, and will have to compete with those companies to recruit, hire, train and retain any of our own marketing and sales personnel. We will likely also face competition if we seek third parties to assist us with the sales and marketing efforts of ABP-450. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

We will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.

As of December 31, 2025, we had eight employees. If ABP-450 receives regulatory approval, we expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of research, development, regulatory affairs, sales, marketing and distribution. In addition, we also expect to hire additional personnel in order to operate as a public company. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities, and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. In addition, we must effectively integrate, develop and motivate a growing number of new employees, and maintain the beneficial aspects of our corporate culture. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our development and strategic objectives or disrupt our operations.

We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on third parties, including independent organizations, advisors and consultants, and CROs to provide certain services to support and perform our operations. There can be no assurance that the services of these third parties will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed, or that we can find qualified replacements. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality, accuracy or quantity of the services provided, in particular the services provided by our CROs, is compromised for any reason, our clinical studies may be delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain, or may be substantially delayed in obtaining, regulatory approval of ABP-450 or otherwise advance our business. There can be no assurance that we will be able to manage our existing consultants or find other suitable outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all.

Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, vendors and other agents may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

Table of Contents

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, vendors and other agents may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates applicable regulations, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to regulatory agencies, manufacturing standards, and federal and state healthcare laws and regulations. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. We could face liability under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and similar state laws. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, referrals, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Misconduct by these parties could also involve the improper use of individually identifiable information, including, without limitation, information obtained in the course of clinical studies, which could result in significant regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. Further, should violations include promotion of unapproved (off-label) uses of one or more of our products, we could face significant regulatory sanctions for unlawful promotion, as well as substantial penalties under the federal False Claims Act, or FCA, and similar state laws. Similar concerns could exist in jurisdictions outside of the United States as well. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, imprisonment, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of noncompliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our potential international operations will expose us to risks, and failure to manage these risks may adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

We expect to have operations both inside and outside the United States if ABP-450 is approved for commercial sale in multiple jurisdictions. International operations are subject to a number of inherent risks, and our future results could be adversely affected by a number of factors if we seek and obtain the necessary approvals, including:

● differing existing or future regulatory and certification requirements;

● difficulties in enforcing contracts;

● difficulties and costs of staffing and managing non-United States operations;

● more stringent data protection standards in some countries;

● regulatory concerns limiting ability to import or export products;

● foreign currency exchange rates;

Table of Contents

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of ABP-450.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of ABP-450 and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our products. Even a successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

● decreased demand for ABP-450;

● termination of clinical study sites or entire study programs;

● injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;

● withdrawal of clinical study participants or cancellation of clinical studies;

● significant costs to defend the related litigation;

● a diversion of management’s time and our resources;

● substantial monetary awards to study participants or patients;

● loss of revenue;

● the inability to commercialize any products we develop; and

● a decline in our share price.

Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies also have various exclusions and deductibles, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts. Moreover, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses. If and when we obtain approval for marketing ABP-450, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of ABP-450; however, we may be unable to obtain this liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms.

If we fail to attract and keep senior management and key scientific personnel, we may be unable to successfully develop ABP-450, conduct our clinical studies and commercialize ABP-450.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management. We believe that our future success is highly dependent upon the contributions of our senior management, particularly Robert Bancroft, our Chief Executive Officer, as well as other members of our senior management team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, completion of our planned clinical studies or the commercialization of ABP-450 or any future products we develop.

In addition, we could experience difficulties attracting and retaining qualified employees in the future. For example, competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceuticals field is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required by our industry. We may not be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, to the extent we hire personnel from competitors, we may be subject to allegations that they have been improperly solicited or that they have divulged proprietary or other confidential information or that their former employers own their research output.

Our business involves the use of hazardous materials, and we and our third-party manufacturer and supplier must comply with environmental laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we do business.

Table of Contents

Our R&D and manufacturing activities in the future may, and Daewoong’s manufacturing and supplying activities presently do, involve the controlled storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials, including botulinum toxin type-A, a key component of ABP-450, and other hazardous compounds. We and Daewoong are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at Daewoong’s facilities pending their use and disposal. We and Daewoong cannot eliminate the risk of contamination, which could cause an interruption of Daewoong’s manufacturing processes, our commercialization efforts or our business operations and could cause environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. Although we believe that the safety procedures utilized by Daewoong for handling and disposing of these materials generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, this may not eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In such an event, we may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed our resources, and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent.

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by one or more 5% shareholders over a rolling three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, and other pre-change tax attributes, such as research tax credits, to offset its post- change taxable income or income tax liabilities, as applicable, may be limited. As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the Company had federal net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards of $140.5 million and $112.1 million, respectively, which will begin to expire in 2036. The Company had state NOLs of $141.1 million and $140.5 million as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively, which will begin to expire in 2034. As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the Company has federal R&D credit carryforwards of $7.1 million and $6.9 million, respectively, which will begin to expire in 2039. As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the Company also has California R&D credit carryforwards of $5.2 million and $5.0 million, respectively, which have an indefinite carryforward period. We may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs to offset federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOLs is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed.

Changes in tax laws may impact our future financial position and results of operations.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, or interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us, any of which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. We are currently unable to predict whether such changes will occur and, if so, the ultimate impact on our business. To the extent that such changes have a negative impact on us or our suppliers, including as a result of related uncertainty, these changes may materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Risks Related to our Reliance on Third Parties

We rely on the Daewoong Agreement to provide us exclusive rights to commercialize and distribute ABP-450 in certain territories. Any termination or loss of significant rights, including exclusivity, under the Daewoong Agreement would materially and adversely affect our development or commercialization of ABP-450.

Pursuant to the Daewoong Agreement, we have secured an exclusive license from Daewoong, a South Korean pharmaceutical manufacturer, to import, distribute, promote, market, develop, offer for sale and otherwise commercialize and exploit ABP-450 for therapeutic indications in certain territories including the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Russia, Commonwealth of Independent States and South Africa. The Daewoong Agreement imposes on us obligations relating to exclusivity, territorial rights, development, regulatory approval, commercialization, payment, diligence, sublicensing, intellectual property protection and other matters. For example, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain regulatory approval of ABP-450 and obtain from Daewoong all of our product supply requirements for ABP-450. In addition, under the Daewoong Agreement, we are required to submit our commercialization plan to a Joint Steering Committee, or JSC, comprised of an equal number of development and commercial representatives from Daewoong and us, for review and input.

Table of Contents

Although the Daewoong Agreement provides us with final decision-making power regarding the marketing, promotion, sale and/or distribution of ABP-450, any disagreement among the JSC would be referred to Daewoong’s and our respective senior management for resolution if the JSC is unable to reach a decision within thirty days, which may result in a delay in our ability to implement our commercialization plan or harm our working relationship with Daewoong. Further, under the Daewoong Agreement, we may not purchase, sell or distribute any injectable botulinum toxin that is launched in the covered territories after the effective date of the Daewoong Agreement other than ABP-450 in a covered territory or sell ABP-450 outside a covered territory.

The initial term of the Daewoong Agreement will expire on the later of December 20, 2029 or the fifth anniversary of our receipt of approval from the relevant governmental authority necessary to market and sell ABP-450 in any of the aforementioned territories. The Daewoong Agreement will renew for unlimited additional three-year terms after the expiration of the initial term. We or Daewoong may terminate the Daewoong Agreement if the other party breaches any of its duties or obligations and such breach continues without cure for ninety days, or thirty days in the case of a payment default, or, if such breach is not capable of being cured, immediately by delivery of written notice. The Daewoong Agreement will terminate without notice upon our bankruptcy or insolvency or if we assign our business or the Daewoong Agreement in whole or in part for the benefit of creditors. On March 19, 2024, we entered into a Fourth Amendment to the Daewoong Agreement (the “Daewoong Agreement Amendment”) with Daewoong, which amends the Daewoong Agreement to provide that Daewoong may terminate the Daewoong Agreement if, over any six- month period, (a) we cease to commercialize ABP-450 in each of the territories specified in the License Agreement (as defined below) and (b) we cease to advance any clinical studies of ABP-450 in any such territories. The Daewoong Agreement Amendment also provides that, in the event that the License Agreement is terminated for the foregoing reasons, Daewoong will have the right to purchase all Know-How (as defined in the License Agreement) related to ABP-450 for a price of $1.00 (the “Termination Purchase Right”). The Termination Purchase Right will terminate and expire upon Daewoong’s sale of 50% of its common stock, including common stock held by its affiliates and common stock that would be issued upon an Automatic Conversion or Optional Conversion of the New Convertible Notes (as defined in the New Convertible Notes).

We will be the sole owner of any marketing authorization we pursue related to therapeutic indications of ABP-450 in a covered territory. This will include ownership of any BLA that we may submit to the FDA, MAA that we may submit to the EMA, NDS that we may submit to Health Canada, and any other approvals that we may receive in a covered territory. However, if we do not renew the Daewoong Agreement following any initial or renewal term, or if Daewoong terminates the Daewoong Agreement due to a breach by us, we are obligated to transfer our rights in such marketing authorizations to Daewoong.

If we breach any material obligations, or use the intellectual property licensed to us in an unauthorized manner, we may be required to pay damages to Daewoong and Daewoong may have the right to terminate our license. Any termination or loss of rights under the Daewoong Agreement would materially and adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize ABP-450, which in turn would have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects. If we were to lose our rights under the Daewoong Agreement, we believe it would be difficult or impossible for us to find an alternative supplier of a botulinum toxin type-A complex. In addition, to the extent the alternative supplier has not secured regulatory approvals in a jurisdiction, we would have to expend significant resources, including performing additional clinical studies, to obtain regulatory approvals that may never be obtained or require several years to obtain, which could significantly delay commercialization. We may be unable to raise additional capital to fund our operations during this extended time on terms acceptable to us or at all. If we were to commercialize ABP-450 and later experience delays as a result of a dispute with Daewoong, the demand for ABP-450 could be materially and adversely affected.

We currently rely solely on Daewoong to manufacture ABP-450, and as such, any production or other problems with Daewoong could adversely affect us. The manufacture of biologics is complex and Daewoong may encounter difficulties in production that may impact our ability to provide supply of ABP-450 for clinical studies, our ability to obtain regulatory approval, or our ability to obtain commercial supply of our products, which, if approved, could be delayed or stopped.

We have no experience in biologic manufacturing and do not own or operate, and we do not expect to own or operate, facilities for product manufacturing, storage and distribution, or testing. We depend solely upon Daewoong to manufacture ABP-450. Any failure or refusal by Daewoong to supply ABP-450 could delay, prevent or impair our clinical development or commercialization efforts. The Daewoong Agreement also provides for a fixed price related to the supply of ABP-450 for ten years or for five years after the receipt of regulatory approvals, and if a change in price were to occur, it could impair our ability to obtain necessary quantities of ABP-450. Although alternative sources of supply may exist, the number of third-party suppliers with the necessary manufacturing and regulatory expertise and facilities is limited, and it could be expensive and take a significant amount of time to arrange for alternative suppliers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. New suppliers of any product candidate would be required to qualify under applicable regulatory requirements and would need to have sufficient rights under applicable intellectual property laws

Table of Contents

to the method of manufacturing the product candidate. Obtaining the necessary FDA approvals or other qualifications under applicable regulatory requirements and ensuring non- infringement of third-party intellectual property rights could result in a significant interruption of supply and could require the new manufacturer to bear significant additional costs which may be passed on to us. We will also need to verify, such as through a manufacturing comparability study, that any new contract manufacturing organization or manufacturing process will produce our product candidate according to the specifications previously submitted to the FDA or another regulatory authority. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of clinical suppliers which could require conducting additional clinical studies.

In addition, there are risks associated with large scale manufacturing for clinical studies or commercial scale including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, compliance with cGMP, lot consistency and timely availability of raw materials. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for ABP-450, there is no assurance that Daewoong will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential commercial launch of the product or to meet potential future demand. If Daewoong is unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical studies, including preclinical studies, or for commercialization, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our reliance on Daewoong entails additional risks, including reliance on Daewoong for regulatory compliance and quality assurance, the possible breach of the Daewoong Agreement by Daewoong, and the possible termination or nonrenewal of the Daewoong Agreement at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us. Our failure, or the failure of Daewoong, to comply with applicable regulations, such as cGMP, which includes, among other things, quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation, could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of the product candidate or drugs, import alerts or detentions preventing import of product into the United States or other territories, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of ABP-450. Our dependence on Daewoong also subjects us to all of the risks related to Daewoong’s business, which are all generally beyond our control. Daewoong’s ability to perform its obligations under the Daewoong Agreement is dependent on its operational and financial health, which could be negatively impacted by several factors, including changes in the economic, political and legislative conditions in South Korea and the broader region in general and the ability of Daewoong to continue to successfully attract customers and compete in its market. Daewoong’s lack of familiarity with, or inability to effectively operate, the facility and produce products of consistent quality, may harm our ability to compete in our market.

In addition, we are ultimately responsible for distribution of products under any authorization or approval we hold to investigate or market ABP-450. We do not own a manufacturing facility and we have never supervised manufacturing operations, but we have regulatory obligations to review batch records and release of the investigational product for our clinical studies. Further, we will have similar regulatory obligations if the product is marketed and could be held responsible for any distribution of adulterated or misbranded ABP-450, even if caused by Daewoong’s noncompliance. If Daewoong’s facility were to be damaged, destroyed or otherwise unable to operate or comply with regulatory requirements, whether due to earthquakes, fire, floods, hurricanes, storms, tornadoes, other natural disasters, employee malfeasance, terrorist acts, political unrest, power outages or otherwise, or if operations at the facility were disrupted for any other reason, such an event could negatively affect our ongoing preclinical studies and clinical studies and, if ABP-450 is approved, jeopardize Daewoong’s ability to manufacture ABP-450 as promptly as we or our customers expect or possibly at all. If an event occurred that prevented Daewoong from using all or a significant portion of its manufacturing facility due to damaged critical infrastructure, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for Daewoong to supply enough ABP- 450 to continue our business for a substantial period of time.

A material breach by us of the terms of our license and settlement agreement with Medytox, Inc. could have a material adverse effect on our business.

In May 2021, Medytox, Inc., or Medytox, brought a case against Old AEON in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, or the Medytox Litigation, alleging, among other things, that Daewoong stole Medytox’s botulinum toxin bacterial strain, or the BTX strain, and misappropriated certain trade secrets of Medytox, including the process used to manufacture ABP-450 using the BTX strain, and that our and Daewoong’s activities conducted in the United States gave rise to liability for misappropriation of trade secrets. Medytox sought, among other things, (i) actual, consequential and punitive damages, (ii) a reasonable royalty, as appropriate, (iii) disgorgement of any proceeds or profits, (iv) injunctive relief prohibiting us from using

Table of Contents

Medytox’s trade secrets to manufacture, offer to sell, or sell therapeutic BTX products, including ABP-450, and (v) attorneys’ fees and costs.

The Medytox Litigation was another step in an ongoing dispute involving Medytox and Allergan, on the one side, and Evolus, Daewoong and us on the other side. In June 2017, Medytox brought a civil lawsuit of a similar nature against Evolus, Daewoong and Old AEON in the Superior Court of the State of California, which we refer to as the Superior Court Litigation, and a separate lawsuit in October 2017 against Daewoong in South Korea, which we refer to as the Korea Litigation. The lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of the State of California alleged claims substantially similar to the Medytox Litigation and was subsequently stayed on grounds of forum non conveniens, because the underlying facts that gave rise to the complaint occurred in South Korea, among other reasons. We are not a party to the Korea Litigation. In April 2018, the Superior Court of the State of California dismissed Medytox’s suit against Daewoong without prejudice on the basis that Medytox had brought a substantially similar proceeding against Daewoong in South Korea, and continued a stay of the case as to us and Evolus. In February 2021, the Superior Court of the State of California dismissed Medytox’s suit against Old AEON without prejudice, following Medytox’s filing of a notice of settlement of the case based on a settlement it entered with Evolus.

Additionally, in January 2019, Allergan and Medytox filed a complaint against Daewoong and Evolus with the United States International Trade Commission, or the United States ITC, alleging that the BTX strain used in Evolus’ Jeuveau® product is manufactured based on misappropriated trade secrets of Medytox and therefore its importation is an unfair act. The Administrative Law Judge issued a final determination in December 2020. The final determination concluded that a violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 had occurred, and the United States ITC issued a limited exclusion order forbidding entry of Jeuveau® into the United States for 21 months and a cease and desist order prohibiting Daewoong and Evolus from engaging in the importations, sale for importation, marketing, distribution, offering for sale, the sale after the importation of, or other transfers of Jeuveau® within the United States for 21 months. The 21-month ban was stayed as a result of a settlement agreement between Evolus and Medytox in February 2021.

Effective June 21, 2021, Old AEON entered into a settlement and license agreement with Medytox, or the Medytox Settlement Agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, Medytox agreed (a) to dismiss all claims against us in the Medytox Litigation, (b) to pursue dismissal of the appeals related to the December 2020 final determination of the United States ITC and agreed that as a result of such dismissal the final determination would be vacated, (c) to file appropriate documents in the Korea Litigation and related actions in support of the terms of the settlement, and (d) not to revive or otherwise pursue the Superior Court Litigation with respect to us. In addition, Medytox granted us a non-exclusive, royalty bearing license to Medytox’s botulinum toxin strain and specific trade secrets alleged to have been misappropriated in the litigation to commercialize and manufacture specific botulinum neurotoxin products including ABP-450 worldwide, with the exception of South Korea. In exchange for the license, we issued Medytox 26,680,511 shares of Old AEON common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, and agreed to pay Medytox single-digit royalties on the net sales of licensed products for 15 years following our first $1.0 million in commercial sales of neurotoxin products.

Medytox can terminate the Medytox Settlement Agreement if we materially breach any material provision of the agreement, either immediately upon written notice if the breach is incurable or after 60 days if capable of remedy. Additionally, Medytox may terminate the Medytox Settlement Agreement with 15 days of written notice if we or our affiliates or sublicensees challenge the validity, enforceability, scope, or protected status of Medytox’s botulinum strain and specific trade secrets alleged to have been misappropriated in the litigation. If the Medytox Settlement Agreement were terminated, Medytox would be able to revive the Medytox Litigation and other claims against us, and may seek an injunction or other ruling against us in the Korea Litigation, any one of which could result in us losing access to ABP-450 and the manufacturing process and require us to negotiate a new license with Medytox for continued access to ABP-450. We may not be able to successfully negotiate such license on terms acceptable to us or at all. If we are unable to license ABP-450, we may not be able to find a replacement product candidate on a timeline favorable to us, if at all, without expending significant resources and being required to seek additional regulatory approvals, which would be uncertain, time consuming and costly.

We rely, and will continue to rely, on third parties, CROs and consultants to conduct all of our preclinical studiesandclinicalstudies.Ifthesethirdpartiesorconsultantsdonotsuccessfullycarryouttheircontractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval forABP-450.

We do not currently have the ability to independently conduct any preclinical studies or clinical studies. We rely, and will continue to rely, on medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories, collaborative partners and other third parties, such as CROs, to conduct preclinical studies and clinical studies on ABP-450. The third parties with whom we currently or may in the

Table of Contents

future contract for execution of any of our preclinical studies and clinical studies play a significant role in the conduct of these studies and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. However, these third parties are not our employees, and except for contractual duties and obligations, we have limited ability to control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to any of our current or future programs. Although we rely on these third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical studies, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical studies is conducted in accordance with the investigational plan and protocol. Moreover, the FDA and other similar regulatory authorities require us to observe both good laboratory practices, or GLP, and animal welfare requirements for preclinical studies, and to comply with GCPs for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of clinical studies to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate, and that the study subjects are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical studies. Our reliance on CROs and other third parties does not relieve us of these regulatory and legal responsibilities. Regulatory authorities enforce GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs or trial sites fail to comply with applicable GLP, GCP or other requirements, the data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications, if ever. Furthermore, our clinical trials must be conducted with materials manufactured in accordance with cGMP regulations. Failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

In addition, the execution of preclinical studies and clinical studies, and the subsequent compilation and analysis of the data produced, requires coordination among various parties. In order for these functions to be carried out effectively and efficiently, it is imperative that these parties communicate and coordinate with one another. Moreover, these third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, some of which may compete with us. If the third parties or consultants conducting our clinical studies do not perform their contractual duties or obligations, experience work stoppages, do not meet expected deadlines, terminate their agreements with us or need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the preclinical or clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to GLPs, or our clinical study protocols or GCPs, or for any other reason, we may need to conduct additional clinical studies or enter into new arrangements with alternative third parties, which could be difficult, costly or impossible, and our preclinical studies and clinical studies may be extended, delayed or terminated or may need to be repeated. Further, any noncompliance that results in data integrity issues could put any regulatory approval we receive at risk of withdrawal, and could subject us to regulatory sanctions due to failure to adequately oversee the third parties we rely upon. If any of the foregoing were to occur, we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, regulatory approval for and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize ABP-450.

Public health outbreaks, epidemics or pandemics (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) may materially and adversely affect our business and operations.

Actual or threatened public health outbreaks, epidemics or pandemics may in the future adversely affect, among other things, our research and development efforts, clinical trial operations, manufacturing and supply chain operations, administrative personnel, third-party service providers, and business partners.

Economic and health conditions in the United States and across most of the globe continue to change rapidly and may materially affect us economically. While the potential economic impact brought by, and the duration of, public health outbreaks may be difficult to assess or predict, a continuing widespread pandemic could result in significant disruption of global financial markets, reducing our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. In addition, a recession or market correction resulting from a future public health outbreak could materially affect our business and the value of our common stock. The ultimate impact of the outbreak is highly uncertain and subject to change. We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, our clinical trials, healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these effects could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Wemayusethird-partycollaboratorstohelpusdevelop,validateorcommercializeanynewproducts,andour abilitytocommercializesuchproductscouldbeimpairedordelayedifthesecollaborationsareunsuccessful.

We may license or selectively pursue strategic collaborations for the development, validation and commercialization of ABP-450. In any third-party collaboration, we would be dependent upon the success of the collaborators in performing their responsibilities and their continued cooperation, and we would have limited control over the amount and timing of resources and effort that our collaborators would dedicate to the development or commercialization of our product candidates. Our collaborators may not cooperate with us or perform their obligations under our agreements with them at all or as expected. Our collaborators may choose to pursue alternative technologies in preference to those being developed in collaboration with us. The development, validation and

Table of Contents

commercialization of our current and future product candidates may be delayed if collaborators fail to conduct their responsibilities in a timely manner or in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements or if they breach or terminate their collaboration agreements with us. Our collaborators could also independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates, fail to properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, exposing us to litigation. Disputes with our collaborators could also impair our reputation or result in development and commercialization delays, decreased revenues and could cause litigation expenses.

In addition, we may face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical studies, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for ABP-450 or our future product candidates, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering ABP-450 or our future product candidates to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge, and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document.

We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of ABP-450 or our future product candidates, reduce or delay development programs, delay potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop and commercialize ABP-450 or our future product candidates or bring them to market and generate revenue.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

If we or any of our current or future licensors, including Daewoong, are unable to maintain, obtain or protect intellectual property rights related to ABP-450 and any future product candidates we may develop, or if the scope of any protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to seek, obtain and maintain intellectual property protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our technologies. We and Daewoong currently rely upon a combination of trademarks, trade secret protection, confidentiality agreements and proprietary know- how. Additionally, Daewoong has obtained a United States patent related to its proprietary botulinum toxin manufacturing process. We also intend to protect our proprietary technology and methods by, among other things, filing for and obtaining United States and foreign patent applications related to our proprietary technology, inventions, methods of use, and improvements that are important to the development and implementation of our business. However, due to existing patent eligibility laws, we do not expect to obtain patent protection for the composition of matter for botulinum toxin, as it is produced by Clostridium botulinum, a gram-positive, rod-shaped, anaerobic, spore-forming, motile bacterium with the ability to produce the botulinum toxin. Although we only own one issued patent covering our migraine injection paradigm (U.S. Patent No. 11,826,405), we do not own any other issued patents, but we have filed certain provisional and non-provisional patent applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, related to other novel and proprietary methods of utilizing ABP-450 for therapeutic purposes. These patent applications may fail to result in any issued patents with claims that cover ABP-450, in the United States or in other foreign countries, and the patents, if issued, may be declared invalid or unenforceable.

The patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complex, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. We may not be able to obtain or maintain patent applications and patents due to the subject matter claimed in such patent applications and patents being in disclosures in the public domain. In addition, it is possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our R&D output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our R&D output, such as our employees and third-party consultants, any of these parties may breach these agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent any third party from using any of our technology that is in the public domain to compete with ABP-450 and any future product candidates.

Table of Contents

Other parties have developed technologies that may be related to or competitive to our own technologies and such parties may have filed or may file patent applications, or may have obtained or may obtain patents, claiming inventions that may overlap or conflict with those claimed in our patent applications or any future issued patents. We may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to ABP-450 and any future product candidates. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and in other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether the inventors of our pending patent applications were the first to make the inventions claimed in those patent applications, or that they were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. If a third party can establish that we were not the first to make or the first to file for patent protection of such inventions, our patent applications may not issue and any patents, if issued, may be challenged and invalidated or rendered unenforceable.

Even in the event our non-provisional patent applications are granted, or if we in-license issued patent rights from third parties, the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability and any such patents may be challenged in courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad and later declared invalid or unenforceable. For example, we may be subject to a third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO challenging the validity of one or more claims of any such patents. A third party may also claim that any such patents are invalid or unenforceable in a litigation. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. An adverse result in any legal proceeding could put any such patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could allow third parties to commercialize our products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, we may become involved in derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings and other similar proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings) challenging the validity, priority or other features of patentability of any such patent rights. Challenges to our patent rights may result in loss of patent rights, exclusivity, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the scope and duration of the patent protection of ABP-450 or future product candidates. Such challenges also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Furthermore, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of botulinum toxins, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after they are commercialized. As a result, our patent applications, even if issued, may not provide us with adequate and continuing patent protection sufficient to exclude others from commercializing products similar to ABP-450 or future product candidates, including biosimilar versions of such products.

Even if they are unchallenged, our pending patent applications, if issued, may not provide us with any meaningful protection or prevent competitors from designing around our patent claims to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or therapeutics in a non-infringing manner. If the patent protection provided by our patent applications, if issued, is not sufficiently broad to impede such competition, our ability to successfully commercialize ABP-450 and future product candidates could be negatively affected, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Under the Daewoong Agreement, we license the trademark for Nabota® associated with ABP-450 from Daewoong; however, we may ultimately pursue alternative trademarks and branding for ABP-450. Our or Daewoong’s trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information and those of our future licensors could be disclosed or competitors could otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we or any of our current or future licensors may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our or their intellectual property both in the United States and internationally. If we or any of our current or future licensors are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to ABP-450 to third parties, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could adversely affect our business.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, trademarks, confidentiality agreements and proprietary know-how, we may in the future rely upon in-licensed or acquired patents or proprietary technology for the development of ABP-450. We may not be able to in-license third party patents necessary to commercialize ABP-450 on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, which could

Table of Contents

materially harm our business. Even if we are able to in-license any such necessary intellectual property, it could be on nonexclusive terms, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same intellectual property licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have licensed, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign ABP-450 or future product candidates, or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis, and we may have to abandon development of ABP-450 or future product candidates which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Additionally, the strength of any patents that issue from our non-provisional patent applications or that we may in-license from third parties in the technology and healthcare fields involves complex legal and factual questions and has, in recent years, been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of any patent rights in such fields can be uncertain. Our pending patent applications and any patent applications that we may in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover ABP-450, in the United States or in other foreign countries, and the issued patents that we may in-license may be declared invalid or unenforceable.

We are reliant on the ability of Daewoong, as the licensor of our only product candidate, to maintain its intellectual property and protect its intellectual property against misappropriation, infringement or other violation. We may not have primary control over Daewoong’s or our future licensors’ patent prosecution activities. Furthermore, we may not be allowed to comment on prosecution strategies, and patent applications currently being prosecuted may be abandoned by the patent owner without our knowledge or consent.

With respect to patents that are issued to our licensors, or patents that may issue on patent applications, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed or invalidated. As a licensee, we are reliant on Daewoong and our future licensors to defend any third-party claims. Our licensors may not defend or prosecute such actions as vigorously or in the manner that we would have if entitled to do so, and we may be impacted by any judgment or settlement resulting from such actions. Also, a third party may challenge the validity of our in-licensing transactions. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, any of our future in-licensed patents and patent applications may not adequately protect the licensors or our intellectual property or prevent others from designing around their or our claims.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or violation, or challenges related to the invalidity or unenforceability of any issued patents we may obtain or in-license may prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations.

Our commercial success depends in part on our and any of our future collaborators avoiding infringement, misappropriation or other violation of the intellectual property and related proprietary rights of third parties. Competitors and other entities that possess intellectual property rights related to the use of botulinum toxins in the fields of neurology and gastroenterology have developed large portfolios of patents and patent applications in fields relating to our business. In particular, there are patents held by third parties that relate to the treatment with botulinum toxin-based products. There may also be patent applications that have been filed but not published that, when issued as patents, could be asserted against us. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the technology, medical device and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions and inter partes reexamination proceedings before the USPTO. Numerous United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we plan to develop ABP-450. As the technology, medical device and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidate may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties, regardless of their merit.

There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of ABP-450. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, may be confidential for 18 months or more after filing and can be revised before issuance, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result

Table of Contents

in issued patents that ABP-450 or any future product candidates may infringe. It is difficult for industry participants, including us, to identify all third-party patent rights that may be relevant to ABP-450 and future product candidates because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. We may fail to identify relevant patents or patent applications or may identify pending patent applications of potential interest but incorrectly predict the likelihood that such patent applications may issue with claims of relevance to our technology or incorrectly conclude their invalidity or unenforceability. In addition, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover ABP-450 or future product candidates and third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. Even if we believe claims brought against us are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such United States patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such United States patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such United States patent or find that ABP-450 or future product candidates did not infringe any such claims. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of ABP-450, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize ABP-450 unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents or until such patents expire. Similarly, if any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our methods of use, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize ABP-450 unless we obtain a license or until such patent expires. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

In addition to claims of patent infringement, third parties may bring claims against us asserting misappropriation or other violations of proprietary technology or other information in the development, manufacture and commercialization of ABP-450. Defense of such a claim would require dedicated time and resources, which time and resources could otherwise be used by us toward the maintenance of our own intellectual property and the development and commercialization of ABP-450 or for operational upkeep and manufacturing of our product. 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 have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. We have been, and may in the future become, party to, or be threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation where our competitors or other third parties may assert claims against us, alleging that our therapeutics, manufacturing methods, formulations, administration methods or delivery devices infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate their intellectual property rights, including patents and trade secrets. For example, in the past, Medytox asserted that we and Daewoong were employing their proprietary technology without authorization, and other third parties may make similar assertions about us or any of our current or future licensors, including Daewoong, in the future. For more information regarding our litigation with Medytox, please see “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties — A material breach by us of the terms of our license and settlement agreement with Medytox, Inc. could have a material adverse effect on our business.”

Likewise, any patents that may issue from our pending patent applications or any future in-licensed patents and pending patent applications may also be subject to priority, validity, inventorship and enforceability disputes in court or before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad. If we or any of our licensors are unsuccessful in any of these proceedings, such patents and patent applications may be narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, we may be required to obtain licenses from third parties, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or we may be required to cease the development, manufacture and commercialization of ABP-450 or future product candidates. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Parties making claims against us or any of our current or future licensors may request and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize ABP-450. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business which time and resources could otherwise be used by us toward the maintenance of our own intellectual property and the development and commercialization of ABP-450 or for operational upkeep and manufacturing of our product. In the event of a successful claim of infringement, misappropriation or other violation of a third party’s intellectual property, we or any of our current or future licensors may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties which may not be commercially available, or pay royalties or redesign our infringing products or manufacturing processes, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research, manufacture clinical study supplies or allow commercialization of ABP-450. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize ABP-450, which could harm our business significantly.

Table of Contents

Similarly, third-party patents could exist that might be enforced against our products, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property or the patents and other intellectual property of our licensors, which could be expensive and time-consuming.

Competitors may infringe our intellectual property, including any future patents we may acquire, or any future patents or other intellectual property licensed to us by our licensors, including Daewoong. As a result, we or any of our current or future licensors may be required to file infringement claims to stop third-party infringement or unauthorized use. Even if resolved in our favor, this can be unpredictable, expensive, particularly for a company of our size, and time-consuming and may cause us to incur significant expenses and distract our scientific and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or any of our current or future licensors is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover its technology or that the factors necessary to grant an injunction against an infringer are not satisfied.

An adverse determination of any litigation or other proceedings could put one or more of such patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly. Interference, derivation or other proceedings brought at the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority or patentability of inventions with respect to any of our future patent applications or those of our licensors or collaborators. Litigation or USPTO proceedings brought by us or any of our current or future licensors may fail or may be invoked against us or our licensors by third parties. Even if we are successful, domestic or foreign litigation or USPTO or foreign patent office proceedings may result in substantial costs and distraction to our management or the management of any of our current or future licensors, including Daewoong. We may not be able, alone or with any of our current or future licensors or collaborators, to prevent misappropriation of our proprietary rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect such rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or proceedings. In addition, during the course of this kind of litigation or proceedings, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments or public access to related documents. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, the market price for our common stock could be significantly harmed. 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.

Most of our competitors are larger than we are and have substantially greater resources. They are, therefore, likely to be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation or other intellectual property proceedings longer than we could. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property. In addition, the uncertainties associated with the initiation and continuation of litigation or other intellectual property proceedings could compromise our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical studies, continue our internal research programs, or in-license needed technology, or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our rights to develop and commercialize ABP-450 and future product candidates are subject, in part, to the terms and conditions of licenses granted to us by others, including Daewoong. If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are heavily reliant upon our license from Daewoong to certain proprietary technology that is important or necessary to the development of ABP-450 and future product candidates. Additionally, further development and commercialization of ABP-450 and future product candidates may require us to enter into additional license or collaboration agreements. For more information regarding our reliance on Daewoong and future collaboration agreements, please see “Risk Factors — Reliance on Third Parties.”

Our current and any future licenses may not provide us with exclusive rights to use the licensed intellectual property and technology or may not provide us with exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize ABP-450 and future product candidates. As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors or other third parties from developing and commercializing competitive products, including in territories covered by our licenses.

Table of Contents

In some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the maintenance, prosecution, preparation, filing, enforcement, defense or litigation of patents and patent applications that we license from or license to third parties and are reliant on our licensors or licensees to do so. We thus cannot be certain that activities such as patent maintenance and prosecution by our licensors have been or will be conducted consistent with our best interests or in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. It is possible that our licensors’ infringement proceedings or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves or may not be conducted in accordance with our best interests. If our licensors fail to maintain such patents or patent applications, or lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize future product candidates that are the subject of such licensed rights and our right to exclude third parties from commercializing competing products could be adversely affected. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In spite of our efforts, our current and future licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our obligations under our license agreements and might therefore terminate such license agreements, thereby removing or limiting our ability to develop and commercialize products and technology covered by these license agreements. Disputes may arise with respect to our current or future licensing agreements, including disputes relating to:

● our financial or other obligations under the license agreements;

● the sublicensing of patent and other rights;

● the priority of invention of patented technology.

For example, the Daewoong Agreement does not contain provisions regarding the ownership of any intellectual property that results from inventions or improvements related to ABP-450. There could be disputes in the future related to the inventorship or ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from our improvements to ABP-450 and future related product candidates, although we believe we are the sole owner of our intellectual property and have developed it independently of Daewoong.

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize ABP-450 and future product candidates. If our licenses are terminated, we may lose our rights to develop and market ABP-450 and future product candidates, lose patent protection for ABP-450 and future product candidates, experience significant delays in the development and commercialization of ABP-450 and future product candidates, or incur liability for damages. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties, including our competitors, to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses and to compete with ABP-450 and future product candidates.

Furthermore, if the Daewoong Agreement or any future licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents or other intellectual property rights fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors or other third parties would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical or competitive to ours and we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of ABP-450 and future product candidates. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we license prevent or impair our ability to maintain other licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize ABP-450 and future product candidates. In addition, certain of these license agreements may not be assignable by us without the consent of the respective licensor, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to engage in certain transactions. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our license agreements are, and future license agreements are likely to be, complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our

Table of Contents

financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents relating to ABP-450 and any future product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside 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; a patent owner may have limited remedies, and in some cases foreign authorities may even force us to grant a compulsory license to competitors or other third parties. As such, we or our licensors may not be able to obtain patent protection for ABP-450 and future product candidates outside the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from using our inventions in all countries outside the United States or from selling or importing products 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 further, may export otherwise 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 our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement any of our patents that may issue from our pending patent applications, or the marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents 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 or our licensors may not prevail in any lawsuits that we or our licensors 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.

In addition, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in domestic and foreign intellectual property laws.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to seeking patent protection for our product candidates, including ABP-450, we and our licensors also rely on trade secrets protection to protect our and their unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, in order to maintain our and their competitive positions.

We and our licensors seek to protect our trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, collaborators, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We have entered into invention assignment agreements with our current employees. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we or our licensors have taken to protect our respective proprietary technologies will be effective.

AEON US Equity

AEON · 10-K · period ended 2025-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors

AEON US Equity☆

AEON · 10-K · period ended 2025-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors

AEON US Equity