EXICURE, INC.XCUR
EXICURE, INC. Commitments Disclosure
Commitments and Contingencies
The Company is subject to various claims and legal actions that arise in the ordinary course of business. Management, after consultation with legal counsel, believes that the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
As of December 31, 2025, the Company has evaluated all known contingencies and commitments, and, in the opinion of management, no accrual for loss contingencies is required in the accompanying financial statements under ASC 450.
On March 3, 2026,we received a Three Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit from Dren Bio demanding payment of unpaid rent payments of approximately $700 in connection with the sublease of our facilities situated in Redwood City or in the alternative quit and deliver up possession of the premises. Following receipt of such notice, we did not remit a payment and on March 9, 2026, Dren Bio filed a Complaint for Unlawful Detainer against GPCR USA in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, seeking restitution of possession of the premises and forfeiture of the sublease and the unpaid rent payments of approximately $700, damages and attorney’s fees. We are currently reviewing the complaint and evaluating our available defenses and potential responses.
The Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors were defendants in Colwell v. Exicure, Inc. et al., a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case No. 1:21-cv-06637) (the “Securities Class Action”). On May 26, 2023, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint generally alleging that the defendants made false statements about the results of experiments concerning the drug XCUR-FXN and asserting claims for violations of federal securities laws under Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. On October 8, 2024, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement in the Securities Class Action and set a schedule for final approval proceedings, including a final approval hearing on January 13, 2025. On January 13, 2025, the court entered final judgment approving a settlement of this litigation, which settlement included a $5,625 payment.
The settlement described above will be fully covered by insurance. However, the settlement includes a reservation of rights by the insurers against the Company for the unsatisfied portion of its self-insured retainer. As a result, the Company recorded an accrual as of September 30, 2024 for the amount of the unsatisfied retainer of approximately $1,100 needed to bridge the $2,500 retainer that the Company is liable for under its self- insured retention. On July 29, 2025, the Company entered into an agreement with the insurer to remit $1,000 in order to satisfy the remaining balance of its self-insured retention obligation and paid this on August 13, 2025.
Three related stockholder derivative lawsuits were filed against certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors and against the Company as a nominal defendant between March and April 2022 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Puri v. Giljohann, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-01083); Sim v. Giljohann, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-01217)), and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Stourbridge Investments LLC v. Exicure, Inc. et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-00526)) (collectively, the “Derivative Complaints”).
On March 18, 2022, James McNabb, through counsel, sent a written demand to the Company (the “Demand Letter”) demanding that the Board investigate certain allegations and commence proceedings on the Company’s behalf against certain of the Company’s officers and directors for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and corporate waste. The Derivative Complaints and the Demand Letter are currently stayed. On or around July 22, 2025, the parties informed the courts in which the Derivative Complaints are pending that they have reached an agreement in principle for global resolutions of the Derivative Complaints and Demand Letter. The agreement in principle remains subject to being memorialized in a formal agreement and subject to court approval. On March 18, 2026, the parties executed a formal settlement agreement. Also on March 18, 2026, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. On March 19, 2026, that court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The court also set a hearing on final approval of the settlement for June 2, 2026.
On October 3, 2023, a former employee filed a complaint against the Company and various of its former executives in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint is primarily a breach of contract claim relating to the former employee’s separation from the Company, as well as a claim for unpaid wages under the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act (“IWPCA”). The matter remains pending and settlement efforts have proven unsuccessful. The parties completed discovery depositions in December 2025. Based on information discovered in the plaintiff’s deposition, our legal counsel believes we will not be successful in our breach of contract
defense and that we will likely settle for no less than $250 to $300. As a result, we accrued $250 in 2025 for this legal settlement as of December 31, 2025. The court scheduled a settlement conference on February 5, 2026, where the parties could not agree on a settlement amount because plaintiff is now taking the position that the settlement should reflect, not just payment for the breach of contract claim, but also damages under the IWPCA, which includes 5% in monthly interest that continues to accrue without limitation. Factoring in the IWPCA claims, plaintiff contends the damages are significantly higher. The court then scheduled an ex parte conference for February 24, 2026, prior to which the parties were directed to conduct research regarding the applicability of the IWPCA. Since the parties once again could not agree on a settlement amount, the court scheduled the parties for an in-person Final Pretrial Conference on June 3, 2026. Once the Pretrial Order is finalized, the Company intends to move for partial summary judgment on the IWPCA claims. If that motion is successful, the liability will likely remain in the amount referenced above. If that motion is not successful, the liability under the IWPCA could be significantly higher.
License Agreement
On February 5, 2024, the Company entered into a patent license agreement to develop cavrotolimod for potential treatment for hepatitis with a private clinical stage biopharmaceutical company. Under the terms of the agreement, this biopharmaceutical company will receive an exclusive license in the field of hepatitis to all of the Company’s relevant patents. $500 was paid to the Company after the execution of this agreement. This payment was recognized as revenue in accordance with ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The Company will also be entitled to modest royalties on future net sales on all licensed technology during the term of the licensed patents. The Company determined that the amount of variable consideration would be constrained until the period the uncertainty related to the consideration is relieved. This patent license agreement was assigned to, and assumed by, the purchaser pursuant to this purchase agreement, but any royalties would be passed through to the Company.
Purchase Agreement
On September 27, 2024, the Company entered into and closed the sale of certain assets pursuant to an Asset Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”). The assets sold to the purchaser consist of the Company’s historical biotechnology intellectual property and other assets and include the Company’s spherical nucleic acid-related technology, research and development programs, and clinical assets (the “Sold Assets”). The Company will receive gross proceeds of $1,500 from the sale of the Sold Assets. The gross proceeds were recognized as other income. The Company will be entitled to royalties and license fees in connection with future sales or licenses derived from the Sold Assets for a period of 10 years as set out in further detail in the purchase agreement. The Company determined that the amount of variable consideration would be constrained until the period the uncertainty related to the consideration is relieved. The Company received $150 in September 2024 and $550 in October 2024. The remaining $800 was received in 2025.
Licenses of intellectual property: If the license to the Company’s intellectual property is determined to be distinct from the other performance obligations identified in the arrangement, the Company recognizes revenues from consideration allocated to the license when the license is transferred to the customer and the customer is able to use and benefit from the licenses. For licenses that are combined with other promises, the Company utilize judgment to assess the nature of the combined performance obligation to determine whether the combined performance obligation is satisfied over time or at a point in time and, if over time, the appropriate method of measuring progress for purposes of recognizing revenue. The Company evaluates the measure of progress each reporting period and, if necessary, adjusts the measure of performance and related revenue recognition.
Milestone payments: At the inception of each arrangement that includes development milestone payments, the Company evaluates the probability of reaching the milestones and estimates the amount to be included in the transaction price using the most likely amount method. If it is probable that a significant revenue reversal would not occur in the future, the associated milestone value is included in the transaction price. Milestone payments that are not within the control of the Company or the licensee, such as regulatory approvals, are not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received and therefore revenue recognized is constrained as management is unable to assert that a reversal of revenue would not be possible. The transaction price is then allocated to each performance obligation on a relative standalone selling price basis, for which the Company recognizes revenue as or
when the performance obligations under the contract are satisfied. At the end of each subsequent reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the probability of achievement of such development milestones and any related constraint, and if necessary, adjusts its estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis, which would affect collaboration revenues and earnings in the period of adjustment. To date, the Company has not recognized any milestone payment revenue from any of its collaboration agreements.
Royalties: For arrangements that include sales-based royalties, including milestone payments based on levels of sales, and the license is deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate, the Company recognizes revenue at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which some or all of the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied (or partially satisfied). To date, the Company has not recognized any royalty revenue resulting from any of its collaboration agreements.
Historical Timeline
| Fiscal Year | Filed | |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Mar 25, 2026 | Showing above |
| 2024 | Mar 18, 2025 | |
| 2023 | Jun 6, 2024 | |
| 2022 | Mar 27, 2023 | |
| 2021 | Mar 25, 2022 | |
| 2020 | Mar 11, 2021 | |
| 2019 | Mar 10, 2020 | |
| 2018 | Mar 8, 2019 | |
| 2017 | Mar 9, 2018 | |
About Commitments Disclosures
Commitments and contingencies disclosures catalog a company's off-balance-sheet obligations and legal exposures — purchase commitments, guarantee arrangements, pending litigation, and regulatory proceedings. These items represent potential future cash outflows that may not appear as liabilities on the balance sheet until they become probable and estimable.
Key signals: litigation reserves and disclosed loss ranges quantify management's estimate of legal exposure, but unquantified "reasonably possible" losses often represent the larger risk. Watch for changes in language around pending cases — shifts from "remote" to "reasonably possible" or increases in estimated loss ranges signal deteriorating outcomes. Unconditional purchase obligations and take-or-pay contracts create fixed cost structures that reduce operational flexibility. Guarantee arrangements for subsidiaries or joint ventures can create cascading obligations. Compare the total commitment schedule against projected free cash flow to assess whether the company can meet its obligations without additional financing.