As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, unless the context requires otherwise, references to “Coherus,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our,” and similar references refer to Coherus BioSciences, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and our future results that are subject to the safe harbors created under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical facts contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by words such as “aim,” “anticipate,” “assume,” “attempt,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “due,” “estimate,” “expect,” “goal,” “intend,” “may,” “objective,” “plan,” “predict,” “potential,” “seek,” “should,” “strive,” “target,” “will,” “would” and other similar expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and future trends, or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology variations of such words and similar expressions, are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. In addition, any statements other than statements of historical fact areterminology. These forward-looking statements includinginclude, but are not limited to, statements regarding overall trends, operating cost and revenue trends, liquidity and capital needs and other statementsabout:

We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations about future events. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Our actual results may differ materially from those suggested by these forward-looking statements for various reasons, including those identified in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K under the heading “Risk Factors.” Given these risks and uncertainties, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements included in this report are made only as of the date hereof. Except as required under federal securities laws and the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we do not undertake, and specifically decline, any obligation to update any of these statements or to publicly announce the results of any revisions to any forward-looking statements after the distribution of this report, whether as a result of new information, future events, changes in assumptions or otherwise.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains estimates, projections, market opportunity estimates and other information concerning our industry, our business, and the markets for certain diseases, including data regarding the estimated size of those markets, and the incidence and prevalence of certain medical conditions. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections, market research or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances reflected in this information. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we obtained this industry, business, market and other data from reports, research surveys, studies and similar data prepared by market research firms and other third parties, industry, medical and general publications, government data, publicly filed reports and similar sources.

​

In addition to our internally developed portfolio of product candidates that we obtained in the Surface Acquisition, we also own two product candidates, NZV930 and GSK4381562, which are exclusively licensed to Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Inc. (“Novartis Institutes”) and GlaxoSmithKline Intellectual Property No. 4 Limited (“GSK”), respectively. We will pay 70% of all milestone- and royalty-based payments that we or our affiliates actually receive from the product candidates licensed to Novartis Institutes and GSK during the ten-year period following the entry into the Contingent Value Rights Agreement, dated September 8, 2023, by and among us and  Computershare Inc. and its affiliate Computershare Trust Company, N.A., together, as the rights agent thereunder (the “CVR Agreement”) to the holders of contingent value rights (“CVRs”).

Products and Product Candidates

Our portfolio includes the following products and product candidates:

Oncology

On October 27, 2023, we announced that LOQTORZI was approved by the FDA in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of adults with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced NPC, and as monotherapy for the treatment of adults with recurrent, unresectable, or metastatic NPC with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. LOQTORZI is an anti-PD-1 antibody that we developed in collaboration with Junshi Biosciences. We announced the launch of LOQTORZI in the U.S. on January 2, 2024.

On December 11, 2023 we announced that the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (“NCCN”) updated the clinical practice guidelines for NPC to include LOQTORZI as a preferred, category 1 first-line treatment option for adults with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced NPC when used in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine. The guidelines also recommend LOQTORZI monotherapy as the only preferred treatment in subsequent lines of therapy if disease progression on or after a platinum-containing therapy.

Immunology

We are performing a three-way pharmacokinetic (“PK”) study using Avastin drug products from the United States, Avastin drug products from China and Innovent’s biosimilarOphthalmology – Sold to bevacizumab, as well additional analytical similarity exercises prior to submitting a BLA for a biosimilar product candidate, or a 351(k) BLA,Sandoz pursuant to the FDA.

Immunology PipelineSale Transaction

Ophthalmology Pipeline

The Bioeq ranibizumab biosimilar candidate demonstrated similar binding and bioactivity as Lucentis (ranibizumab) and met its primary endpoint in a wet age-related macular degeneration (“wet AMD”) Phase 3 study. At the request of a national European health authority addressed to Bioeq’s drug substance contract manufacturer, the manufacturer moved a piece of processing equipment to a different location within the same site after the production of the Bioeq ranibizumab biosimilar candidate qualification batches was completed. The FDA requested additional manufacturing data for the equipment in its new location in the context of its review of the 351(k) BLA. As a result, Bioeq decided to withdraw its 351(k) BLA for this candidate and provide the requested data. During the first quarter of 2021, Bioeq received positive pre-BLA filing feedback from the FDA on the requested manufacturing data, and the FDA indicated support of Bioeq’s current plans to proceed with the resubmission of its 351(k) BLA during 2021.  

Small Molecule Pipeline

In February 2021,PD-1 inhibitors are expected to be the sales-leading drug class in 2032, garnering major-market sales of over $1.7 billion, and we expect these agents to be approved for both non-nasopharyngeal and nasopharyngeal drug-treatable patient populations. By the end of 2032, we expect them to be prescribed mostly in the large and commercially lucrative locoregionally advanced and recurrent or metastatic first-line setting.

Immuno-oncology agents, and the PD-1/PD-L1 class in particular, have shifted the treatment paradigm across a broad range of tumors, and across the continuum of cancer settings (metastatic to early stage). Clinical adoption of PD-1/PD-L1 therapies has been driven by the proven versatility of certain therapies within the class to be used as a monotherapy, as well as combination therapy with targeted agents such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors, chemotherapy, or other immunotherapy agents to achieve durable tumor responses and improved survival benefits, with acceptable toxicity profiles. The improved safety profile observed for approved PD-L1 therapies versus chemotherapy enables these therapies to be used as a backbone therapy in a broad array of combination regimens.

On October 27, 2023, we announced discontinuationthat LOQTORZI was approved by the FDA in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of adults with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), and as monotherapy for the treatment of adults with recurrent, unresectable, or metastatic NPC with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. LOQTORZI is an anti-PD-1 antibody that we developed in collaboration with Junshi Biosciences. We announced the launch of LOQTORZI in the U.S. on January 2, 2024.

LOQTORZI is a next-generation programmed death receptor-1 (“PD-1”) monoclonal antibody that blocks PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2 with high potency at a unique site on the PD-1 receptor, enabling the immune system to activate and kill the tumor.

NPC is a type of aggressive cancer that starts in the nasopharynx, the upper part of the developmentthroat behind the nose and near the base of CHS-2020,the skull. NPC is rare in the United States, with an annual incidence of fewer than one per 100,000 people. The five-year survival rate for all patients diagnosed with NPC is approximately 60%, however, those who are diagnosed with advanced disease have a five-year survival rate of approximately 49%.  

Due to the location of the primary tumor, surgery is rarely an option, and, before the launch of LOQTORZI, patients with localized disease were treated primarily with radiation and chemotherapy. Patients treated with chemotherapy alone experience poor prognosis: only 20% experience one-year progression-free survival; up to 50% developed distant metastasis during their disease course; and low median overall survival (“OS”) of 29 months.

Based on SEER and DRG models, we estimate that the annual drug-treatable population in the United States for NPC is approximately 2,000 patients annually. Of this group, 60% have relapsed/metastatic disease and would be candidates for LOQTORZI. 40% have localized disease that can progress to relapsed/metastatic within a 12-24 month timeframe.

On Dec. 11, 2023 we announced that the NCCN updated the clinical practice guidelines for NPC to include LOQTORZI as a preferred, category 1 first-line treatment option for adults with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced NPC when used in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine. The guidelines also recommend LOQTORZI monotherapy as the only preferred treatment in subsequent lines of therapy if disease progression on or after a platinum-containing therapy.

The NCCN recommendations were based on results of the JUPITER-02 Phase 3 study and the POLARIS-02 Phase 2 study. In the JUPITER-02 Phase 3 study, LOQTORZI combined with chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival, reducing the risk of disease progression or death by 48% compared to chemotherapy alone. LOQTORZI also demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS, with treatment resulting in a 37% reduction in the risk of death versus chemotherapy alone. In the POLARIS-02 clinical study, LOQTORZI demonstrated durable anti-tumor activity in patients with recurrent or metastatic NPC who failed previous chemotherapy, with an objective response rate of 20.5%, a disease control rate of 40%, and a median OS of 17.4 months with an acceptable safety profile.

LOQTORZI is the first FDA-approved therapy for NPC, and we believe could represent a new standard of care for treating the disease when used in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine in the first line setting or as monotherapy in the second line or greater setting. On November 27, 2023, we announced that we established a wholesale acquisition cost for LOQTORZI of $8,892.03 per single-use vial.

UDENYCA Biosimilar

We initiated United States sales of UDENYCA in January 2019, and in 2023 we recorded UDENYCA net product sales of $127.1 million. UDENYCA is currently approved by the FDA in both PFS and AI presentation, and as we announced on December 26, 2023, the FDA approved the PAS for our third pegfilgrastim presentation, UDENYCA ONBODY. UDENYCA ONBODY became commercially available in the first quarter of 2024.

PFS products currently account for approximately 56% of the overall pegfilgrastim market, which annually comprises sales of approximately 1.4 million units. Prior to the launch of UDENYCA ONBODY, approximately 43% of the remaining market was held by Neulasta Onpro®, an on-body presentation of pegfilgrastim owned by Amgen Inc. and Amgen USA Inc. (collectively “Amgen”). UDENYCA ONBODY could potentially expand the UDENYCA market opportunity into a portion of the market held by Neulasta Onpro.

Immunology Franchise Market Opportunity

YUSIMRY

In 2023, Humira revenue in the United States was approximately $12.2 billion. In December 2021, the FDA approved YUSIMRY, which we launched in the United States in July 2023. The list price of YUSIMRY at launch represented an approximately 85% discount to the list price of Humira. This pricing strategy provides physicians, patients, payers, and employers with access to low-cost, high-quality, safe and effective treatment. YUSIMRY Solutions™—our patient services platform—facilitates improved access and fast and seamless experience as patients start or switch to YUSIMRY based on a determination by their healthcare provider.

YUSIMRY is now available for sale nationwide through select retail, mail order, and specialty pharmacy channels and was the first biologic offered by Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, PBC.

For our commercial strategy with YUSIMRY, we believe that payor coverage policies and formularies dictate provider access to both Humira and adalimumab biosimilars and that a combination of factors influence formulary decision making. With the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”), in 2025 the Part D benefit will be restructured and liability for all Part D plans will significantly increase. This change in liability will shift plan costs into Part D plan bids, as opposed to costs being primarily paid through reinsurance, as is the case under the benefit today. Therefore, Part D plans may re-structure formularies to include products with low WAC prices, creating potential opportunity for YUSIMRY in 2025 to achieve broader payer coverage.

Ophthalmology Franchise – Sold to Sandoz pursuant to the Sale Transaction

CIMERLI

On August 2, 2022, the FDA approved CIMERLI as a biosimilar product interchangeable with Lucentis for the treatment of Eylea® as partneovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration, macular edema following retinal vein occlusion, diabetic macular edema, diabetic retinopathy, and myopic choroidal neovascularization. On October 3, 2022, we launched CIMERLI commercially in the United States in both 0.3 mg and 0.5 mg dosage forms.

On January 19, 2024, we entered into the Purchase Agreement by and between us and Sandoz. Pursuant to the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement, on March 1, 2024, we completed the divestiture of a realignmentour CIMERLI ophthalmology franchise through the sale of researchour subsidiary, Coherus Ophthalmology LLC, to Sandoz for upfront, all-cash consideration of $170.0 million plus an additional $17.8 million for CIMERLI product inventory and development resources towardprepaid manufacturing assets. Such consideration is subject to certain adjustments that will be finalized following the development of immuno-oncology assets including toripalimab.closing pursuant to the Purchase Agreement.

Sales and Marketing

Our strategy is to invest cash flows from our commercial biosimilars business to build a leading immuno-oncology franchise funded with cash generated from our diversified portfolio of FDA-approved therapeutics.

Following the FDA approval of LOQTORZI for NPC, the commercial launch commenced in January 2024 with our existing Oncology commercial and medical affairs teams. There are approximately 2,200 Oncologists that treat 80% of patients in the United States with NPC and Canada.90% of these physicians practice in existing UDENYCA accounts creating significant synergies in our commercial execution. Our

Oncology commercial team was built to oncologistsscale and meet the needs of our existing Oncology portfolio, as well as new indications for LOQTORZI that could come in the United States are highly concentratedfuture, pending FDA approval.

In addition to the field facing teams, Coherus has a team of strategic account managers that support the portfolio of products and addressable bywork directly with the largest accounts including group purchasing organizations, integrated delivery networks, and large clinic customers.

We have an experienced market access and patient services team that support the portfolio of Coherus’ products. This team is responsible for negotiating payer coverage with national and regional health plans and pension benefit managers (via a team of National Account Directors), servicing account specific questions regarding the billing, coding and reimbursement of Coherus’ products (via a team of Field Reimbursement Managers), and managing our relatively small commercial organization. If we are successful in gaining approval of our bevacizumab biosimilar or of toripalimabCoherus Solutions patient services hub which provides product specific coverage, reimbursement and other immuno-oncology assets, we will plan to commercialize these products alongside UDENYCA through our oncology salesco-pay support for patients and marketing team. Similarly, for our ophthalmology franchise, we anticipate that the number of accounts to drive 90% of sales volume is approximately four- to five-fold smaller than that for the oncology support of care market. As a result, we anticipate a relatively small incremental investment in additional sales force will be needed to address the ophthalmology marketplace. providers.

For a discussion of risks related to sales and marketing, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Launch and Commercialization of UDENYCA®our Products and our Other Product Candidates.”

Manufacturing

We have entered into agreements with several contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”) for the manufacture and clinical drug supply of our commercial products and productsproduct candidates. We continue to screen other contract manufacturers to meet our clinical, commercial and regulatory supply requirements on a product-by-product basis. We have and may be required again to take inventory write-downs and incur other charges and expenses for products that are manufactured in reliance on a forecast that proves to be inaccurate because we do not sell as many units as forecasted. For example, during the fourth quarter of 2023, we recorded a $47.0 million charge for the write-down of slow moving YUSIMRY inventory and the related partial recognition of certain firm purchase commitments. For a discussion of risks related to our sources and availability of supplies, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Ability to Hire and Retain Highly Qualified PersonnelPersonnel” and “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Manufacturing and Supply Chain.”

Competition

The development and commercialization of protein-based therapeutics is highly competitive. While we believe that our biologics platform, knowledge, experience and scientific resources provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources. We operate in a highly competitive environment. Such competition includes larger and better-funded pharmaceutical, generic pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies as well as originator companiescommercializing and any other firms developing the biosimilarsimmuno-oncology and biosimilar products that would compete with our products and the product candidates in our pipeline and other novel products with similar indications.pipeline.

UDENYCA®(pegfilgrastim-cbqv)LOQTORZI, following its recent launch, faces competition in the United States from Amgen (“Amgen”), Viatris Inc. (“Viatris”), Mylan N.V. (“Mylan”), Sandoz International GmbH (“Sandoz”), Pfizer Inc., and may face competition from Amneal and Fresenius, each of which has announced the development of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar.

Toripalimab, if approved, will enter a competitive market in the United States where a number of anti-PD-1 or PD-(L)1PD-L1 antibody drugs have been approved by the FDA including the following marketed products from several competitors: Keytruda^®Keytruda® (pembrolizumab) from Merck & Company, Inc. (“Merck”), Opdivo^®Opdivo® (nivolumab) from Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (“BMS”), Tecentriq^®Tecentriq® (atezolizumab) from Genentech, USA, Inc. (“Genentech”), Imfinzi^®Imfinzi® (durvalumab) from AstraZeneca Bavencio^®plc (“AstraZeneca”), Bavencio® (avelumab) from EMD Serono Inc. and Pfizer and Libtayo^®Inc. (“Pfizer”), Libtayo® (cemiplimab-rwlc) from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) and Sanofi.Sanofi S.A. (“Sanofi”), and Jemperli (dostarlimab-gxly) from GlaxoSmithKline plc (“GlaxoSmithKline”). In addition to toripalimab,LOQTORZI, multiple other competitors are seeking to develop and approve novel anti-PD-1 or PD-(L)1PD-L1 antibody drugs in the United States in the coming years, including but not limited to BeiGene, Ltd. (in collaboration with Novartis), GlaxoSmithKline PLCNovartis International AG (“Novartis”)). As the only immunotherapy approved by the FDA for the treatment of NPC, we believe LOQTORZI addresses a potentially high unmet need.

CHS-114, if approved, faces competition from programs in development specifically targeting CCR8, including those by BMS, Gilead/Jounce, Shionogi, AbbVie, Bayer, LaNova and Innovent.Immunophage.

Innovent’s bevacizumab (Avastin) may faceUDENYCA faces competition in the United States from Genentech,Amgen, Viatris Inc. (“Genentech,” the holder of rights to Avastin)Viatris”), as well as Amgen (Mvasi^TM (bevacizumab-awwb)Sandoz, Pfizer and Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Spectrum”), and also faces competition from Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Amneal”) and Pfizer (Zirabev^TM (bevacizumab-bvzr)Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (“Fresenius”), each of which has announced the approval of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar and have initiatedlaunched their products for sale in the commercial launch of an Avastin biosimilar. We may also face competition from several other companies with Avastin biosimilar candidates in development or in registration, including Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. (Samsung Bioepis”) and Viatris.United States.

Bioeq’s ranibizumab (Lucentis) biosimilar candidate may faceYUSIMRY faces competition in the United States from Genentech (the manufacturer of Lucentis). Biogen Inc. (“Biogen”) with collaborator Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. (Samsung Bioepis), and Xbrane Biopharma AB (in collaboration with STADA Arzneimittel AG and Bausch + Lomb) have each disclosed the development of a Lucentis biosimilar candidate.

candidate. As a result of continued expected competition from Humira and a large number of potential adalimumab (Humira) biosimilar competitors, we may not be able to achieve substantial topline sales for YUSIMRY in the United States.

We expect any products that we develop and commercialize directly or with partners to compete on the basis of, among other things, price and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payers. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. For a discussion of risks related to our competition, please see “Risk Factors —Factors— Risks Related to Competitive Activity.”

Collaboration and License Agreements

Distribution Agreement with Orox Pharmaceuticals B.V. (“Orox”)

In December 2012, we entered into a distribution agreement with Orox, Pharmaceuticals B.V. (“Orox”), for the commercialization of biosimilar versions of our internally developed biosimilars. Under this agreement, we granted to Orox an exclusive license to commercialize UDENYCA®UDENYCA in Latin America, except Brazil and Argentina, and CHS-1420YUSIMRY and CHS-0214 (our etanercept (Enbrel®(Enbrel^®) biosimilar candidate, for which we discontinued development)development in 2020) in Latin America, except Brazil. Under this agreement, Orox has an option, exercisable within a defined time period, to obtain an exclusive license to commercialize certain additional biosimilar products in the same field and territory. We are obligated to manufacture and supply licensed products to Orox.

We are obligated to develop licensed products and achieve regulatory approval for such products outside of the Caribbean and Latin American countries covered by the agreement by specified dates in order to support Orox’s activities under the agreement in its licensed territory. We are eligible to receive from Orox a share of gross profits in the low twenty percent range from the sale of licensed products, on a product-by-product basis.

Our agreement with Orox will expire on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis ten years after regulatory approval of such product in such country, subject to automatic three-year extensions unless Orox notifies us in writing at least 18 months in advance of the date upon which the term would otherwise expire that it does not wish to extend the term for such product in such country. Either party may terminate the agreement for material breach by the other party that is not cured within a specified time period. Orox may terminate the Agreement for convenience on a product-by-product basis at any time upon 12-months prior written notice. Each party may terminate the agreement upon bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party, and we may terminate the agreement immediately upon written notice to Orox if Orox challenges the licensed patents or commits a breach of specified provisions of the agreement.

License Agreements with Selexis SA

In April 2011 and June 2012, we entered into license agreements with Selexis SA (“Selexis”), under which Selexis granted to us royalty-bearing, non-exclusive, sublicensable licenses under Selexis’s intellectual property rights to manufacture, use and commercialize two of our biosimilar products using Selexis cell lines. In consideration for the rights granted to us under the agreements, we made cash upfront payments to Selexis and are required to make payments based upon the achievement of certain development, regulatory and commercial milestones for such biosimilar products, totaling up to €210,000 for each of the two products, or a total aggregate amount of €420,000. In addition, we are also required to pay a royalty as a percentage of revenue on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis in the low-single digits.

We may terminate each agreement at any time upon 60 days written notice to Selexis. Either we or Selexis may terminate an agreement for any material breach by the other party that is not cured within a specified time period or in the event of the other party’s insolvency. Absent earlier termination, the agreements with Selexis terminate on a country-by-country and product-by-product basis on the expiration of the last-to-expire or lapse of the valid patent claims covering such product in such country.

Settlement and License Agreements with AbbVie Inc.

OnIn January 24, 2019, we entered into three settlement and license agreements with AbbVie that grant Coherus global, royalty-bearing, non-exclusive license rights under AbbVie’s intellectual property to commercialize CHS-1420, our proposed adalimumab (Humira)

reasonable efforts to commercialize the Bioeq Licensed Products in accordance with a commercialization plan. Bioeq will manufacture and supply the Bioeq Licensed Products to us in accordance with terms and conditions specified in the Bioeq Agreement and a manufacturing and supply agreement between us and Bioeq dated as of September 29, 2022 (the “Bioeq Manufacturing Agreement”). The Bioeq Manufacturing Agreement will remain in force until the first to occur of the following: (1) the termination of the Bioeq Agreement; (2) the exercise of a right to termination by us or Bioeq for a material breach of the other party that is not cured in accordance with the Bioeq Manufacturing Agreement; and (3) the exercise of a right to termination by Bioeq if invoices are not paid in full in accordance with the Bioeq Manufacturing Agreement. Additionally, we must commit certain pre-launch and post-launch resources to the commercialization of the Bioeq Licensed Products for a limited time as specified in the agreement.Bioeq Agreement. The development, manufacturing, and commercialization of the Bioeq Licensed Products in the United States is governed by a governance committee as described in more detail in the agreement.Bioeq Agreement.

We paid Bioeq an upfront payment of €5.0 million and a milestone payment of €5.0 million. Additionally, we are obligated to pay Bioeq in the future an aggregate of up to €25.0 million in 2019. In 2022, we paid Bioeq a €2.5 million milestone payments in connection with the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones with respectpayment related to the Bioeq Licensed Products inFDA approval of the United States.CIMERLI Section 351(k) BLA. We will share a percentage of gross profits on sales of Bioeq Licensed Products in the United States with Bioeq in the lowlow- to mid fiftymid-fifty percent range.

​

The Bioeq Agreement’s initial term continues in effect for ten years after the first commercial sale of a Bioeq Licensed Product in the United States, which occurred on October 3, 2022, and thereafter renews for an unlimited period of time unless otherwise terminated in accordance with its terms. Either party may terminate the Bioeq Agreement for the other party’s material breach which is not cured within a specified time period or for the other party’s bankruptcy or insolvency-related events. Bioeq may terminate the Bioeq Agreement in certain limited circumstances for failure to obtain specified minimum market share requirements during certain windows of time, if we conduct certain commercial or advanced pre-commercial activities with respect to certain competitive products, if we challenge the validity or enforceability of the patent rights licensed to us under the Bioeq Agreement, or if we undergo a change of control with a competitor of Bioeq and do not divest certain competitive products in connection therewith. We may terminate the Bioeq Agreement for convenience with 18 months advance written notice (provided that such termination shall not become effective prior to 12 months after the first commercial sale of the first Bioeq Licensed Product in the United States). We may also terminate the Bioeq Agreement in certain circumstances of delays, or anticipated delays, in the achievement of regulatory approval of the first Bioeq Licensed Product in the United States, or if Bioeq receives certain adverse regulatory feedback from the FDA for the Bioeq Licensed Products.

The Bioeq ranibizumab biosimilar candidate demonstrated similar bindingFDA approval of CIMERLI occurred on August 2, 2022, and bioactivity as ranibizumab (Lucentis) and met its primary endpoint in a wet AMD Phase 3 study. At the request of a national European health authority addressed to Bioeq’s drug substance contract manufacturer, the manufacturer moved a piece of processing equipment to a different location within the same site after the production of the Bioeq ranibizumab biosimilar candidate qualification batches was completed. In February 2020, the FDA requested additional manufacturing data for the equipment in its new locationwe commercially launched CIMERLI in the contextUnited States on October 3, 2022. Pursuant to the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement, on March 1, 2024, we completed the divestiture of its reviewour CIMERLI ophthalmology franchise through the sale of our subsidiary, Coherus Ophthalmology LLC, to Sandoz for upfront, all-cash consideration of $170.0 million plus an additional $17.8 million for CIMERLI product inventory and prepaid manufacturing assets. Such consideration is subject to certain adjustments that will be finalized following the 351(k) BLA, and Bioeq withdrew its BLA. Duringclosing pursuant to the first quarter of 2021, Bioeq received positive pre-BLA filing feedback from the FDA on the requested manufacturing data, and the FDA indicated it was supportive of Bioeq’s current plans to proceed with the resubmission of its 351(k) BLA during 2021.Purchase Agreement.

​

License Agreement with Innovent Biologics (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.Bioeq and Genentech

​

On January 13, 2020,June 22, 2022, we entered into a license agreement with InnoventGenentech, Inc. (“Genentech”) and our partner Bioeq (the “Innovent“Genentech Agreement”) for. Under the developmentagreement, Genentech granted us and commercializationBioeq a non-exclusive, royalty-bearing, license under certain of a biosimilar version of bevacizumab (Avastin) in any dosage formits patent rights to commercially launch and presentations (the “bevacizumab Licensed

Under the terms of the Collaboration Agreement, we will paypaid $150.0 million upfront for exclusive rights to toripalimabLOQTORZI in the United States and Canada, optionsan option in these territories to Junshi Biosciences’ anti-TIGIT antibody andCHS-006, an option in these territories to a next-generation engineered IL-2 cytokine, and certain negotiation rights to two undisclosed preclinical immuno-oncology drug candidates. We will have the right to conduct all commercial activities of toripalimabLOQTORZI in the United States and Canada. We will beare obligated to pay Junshi Biosciences up to a 20% royalty on net sales of toripalimabLOQTORZI and up to an aggregate $380.0 million in one-time payments for the achievement of various milestones, including up to $290.0 million for attainment of certainregulatory and sales thresholds. Ifmilestones.

In March 2022, we exercise our options, we will be obligated to pay an option exercise fee for each of the anti-TIGIT antibody and the IL-2 cytokine ofpaid $35.0 million per program. Additionally, for each exercised option, we will

Under the A&R Adimab Agreement, we are obligated to make milestone payments and to pay specified fees upon the exercise of the Research Option or Commercialization Option. During the discovery term, we may be obligated to pay Adimab up to $0.3 million for technical milestones achieved against each biological target. Upon exercise of a Research Option, we are obligated to pay a nominal research maintenance fee on each of the next four anniversaries of the exercise. Upon the exercise of each Commercialization Option, we will be required to pay an option exercise fee of a low seven-digit dollar amount, and we may be responsible for milestone payments of up to an aggregate of $13.0 million for each licensed product that receives marketing approval. For any licensed product that is commercialized, we are obligated to pay Adimab tiered royalties of a low to mid single-digit percentage on worldwide net sales of such product. We may also partially exercise a Commercialization Option with respect to ten antibodies against a biological target by paying 65% of the option fee and later either (i) paying the balance and choosing additional antibodies for commercialization, up to the maximum number under the Commercialization Option, or (ii) foregoing the Commercialization Option entirely. For any Adimab diagnostic product that is used with or in connection with any compound or product other than a licensed antibody or licensed product, we are obligated to pay Adimab up to a low seven digits in regulatory milestone payments and low single-digit royalties on net sales. No additional payment is due with respect to any companion diagnostic or any diagnostic product that does not contain any licensed antibody. Any payments payable to Adimab as a result of any product candidates being developed pursuant to the license agreement between Surface and GSK, dated December 16, 2020, which was subsequently amended in August 2021 (as amended, the “GSK Agreement”), will be payable to Adimab directly by GSK.

The A&R Adimab Agreement will remain in effect until (a) the earlier of (i) the expiration of the Research and Commercialization Options (if they expire without exercise) and (ii) 12 months from the effective date without us providing materials that pass Adimab’s quality control; or (b) if a Research Option is exercised but the Commercialization Option is not, then upon the expiration of the last to expire research license term; or (c) upon commercialization of a product, until the end of the royalty term, which will vary on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, ending on the later of (y) the expiration of the last valid claim covering the licensed product in such country as the product is manufactured or sold, or (z) ten years after the first commercial sale of the licensed product in such country.

Either party may terminate the A&R Adimab Agreement for material breach if such breach remains uncured for a specified period of time, however, if a Research Option or Commercialization Option has been exercised and the breach only applies to the applicable target of such Research Option or Commercialization Option, then the termination right will only apply to such target. We may also terminate the A&R Adimab Agreement for any reason with prior notice to Adimab. If Adimab is bankrupt, we will be entitled to a complete duplicate of, or complete access to, all rights and licenses granted under or pursuant to the A&R Adimab Agreement.

Novartis Institutes Out-licensing Agreement

In January 2016, Surface entered into the collaboration agreement between Surface and Novartis Institutes dated January 9, 2016 which was subsequently amended in May 2016, July 2017, September 2017, and October 2018 (as amended, the “Novartis Agreement”). Pursuant to the Stock PurchaseNovartis Agreement, Surface granted Novartis Institutes a worldwide exclusive license to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize antibodies that target cluster of differentiation 73 (“CD73”). Under the Novartis Agreement, we are currently entitled to potential development milestones of $325.0 million and sales milestones of $200.0 million, as well as tiered royalties on annual net sales by Novartis Institutes ranging from high single-digit to mid-teens percentages upon the successful commercialization of NZV930. Due to the uncertainty of pharmaceutical development and the historical failure rates generally associated with drug development, we may not receive any milestone payments or any royalty payments under the Novartis Agreement. We did not recognize any revenue relating to the Novartis Agreement from September 8, 2023 through December 31, 2023.

Unless terminated earlier, the Novartis Agreement will continue in effect until neither us nor Novartis Institutes is researching, developing, manufacturing or commercializing NZV930. Novartis Institutes may terminate the Novartis Agreement for any or no reason upon prior notice to the Company within a specified time period. Either party may terminate the Novartis Agreement in full if an undisputed material breach is not cured within a certain period of time or upon notice of insolvency of the other party. To the extent Novartis Institutes terminates for convenience, or we terminate for Novartis Institutes’ uncured material breach, Novartis Institutes will grant us, on mutually agreeable financial terms, an exclusive, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual and royalty-bearing license with respect to intellectual property controlled by Novartis Institutes that is reasonably necessary to research, develop, manufacture or commercialize NZV930.

GSK Out-licensing Agreement

In December 2020, Surface entered into the GSK Agreement. Pursuant to the GSK Agreement, Surface granted GSK a worldwide exclusive, sublicensable license to develop, manufacture and commercialize antibodies that target CD112R, also known as PVRIG, including the antibody GSK4381562 (the “Licensed Antibodies”). GSK is responsible for the development, manufacturing and commercialization of the Licensed Antibodies and a joint development committee was formed to facilitate information sharing. GSK is responsible for all costs

and expenses of such development, manufacturing and commercialization and is obligated to provide us with updates on its development, manufacturing and commercialization activities through the joint development committee. In March 2022, Surface earned a $30.0 million milestone payment from GSK upon the dosing of the first patient in the Phase 1 trial of GSK4381562. We are eligible to receive up to $60.0 million in additional clinical milestones and $155.0 million in regulatory milestones. In addition, we may receive up to $485.0 million in sales milestone payments. We are also eligible to receive royalties on global net sales of any approved products based on the Licensed Antibodies, ranging in percentages from high single digits to mid-teens. Due to the uncertainty of pharmaceutical development and the historical failure rates generally associated with drug development, we may not receive any milestone payments or any royalty payments under the GSK Agreement. We did not recognize license-related revenue under the GSK Agreement from September 8, 2023 through December 31, 2023.

Unless terminated earlier, the GSK Agreement expires on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis on the later of ten years from the date of first commercial sale or when there is no longer a valid patent claim or regulatory exclusivity covering such licensed product in such country. Either party may terminate the GSK Agreement for an uncured material breach by the other party or upon the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party. GSK may terminate the GSK Agreement for its convenience. We may terminate the GSK Agreement if GSK institutes certain actions related to the licensed patents or if GSK ceases development activities, other than for certain specified technical or safety reasons. In the event of termination, we would regain worldwide rights to the terminated program.

License Agreement with Vaccinex

On March 23, 2021, Surface and Vaccinex, Inc. (“Vaccinex”) entered into an exclusive product license agreement (the “Vaccinex License Agreement”) to exclusively license certain antibodies, including CHS-114. Pursuant to the terms of the Vaccinex License Agreement, we have agreeda worldwide, exclusive, sublicensable license to issue 2,491,988 unregistered sharesmake, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, have sold, import and otherwise exploit licensed products that incorporate certain Vaccinex intellectual property which covers certain antibodies (each, a “Vaccinex Licensed Product”), including the antibody CHS-114 targeting CCR8.

Under the Vaccinex License Agreement, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop, clinically test, achieve regulatory approval, manufacture, market and commercialize at least one Vaccinex Licensed Product and have the sole right to develop, manufacture and commercialize the licensed products worldwide. We are responsible for all costs and expenses of our common stock, atsuch development, manufacturing and commercialization. Pursuant to the Vaccinex License Agreement, Surface paid Vaccinex a priceone-time fee of $0.9 million. Vaccinex is eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.5 million based on achievement of certain clinical milestones and up to an aggregate of $11.5 million based on achievement of certain regulatory milestones per shareVaccinex Licensed Product. We also owe low single-digit royalties on global net sales of $20.0643,any approved licensed products. Commencing on the third anniversary of the date of the Vaccinex License Agreement and continuing until the first dosing of a Vaccinex Licensed Product in a clinical trial, we will be required to pay Vaccinex a nominal yearly maintenance fee. Since a patient was dosed with a Vaccinex Licensed Product, CHS-114, in January 2023, no yearly maintenance fees are due under the Vaccinex License Agreement.

We may terminate the Vaccinex License Agreement for convenience upon the notice period specified in the Vaccinex License Agreement. Either party may terminate the agreement for an aggregate valueuncured material breach by the other party. Vaccinex may terminate the Vaccinex License Agreement if we default on any payments owed to Vaccinex under the agreement, if we are in material breach of, approximately $50.0 million,and fail to Junshi Biosciences ascure, our development obligations, or institute certain actions related to the licensed patents. In the event of termination, all rights in the licensed intellectual property would revert to Vaccinex.

Term Sheet with Klinge Biopharma

On January 9, 2023, we announced that we entered into a portion of the considerationterm sheet (the “Term Sheet”) with Klinge Biopharma GmbH (“Klinge Biopharma”) for the Collaboration.exclusive commercialization rights to FYB203, a biosimilar candidate to Eylea® (aflibercept), in the United States. We notified Klinge Biopharma that we do not intend to pursue the transaction contemplated by the Term Sheet.

Intellectual Property

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to avoid infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. Additionally, our commercial success may depend on our ability to obtain and maintain proprietary protection for our technologies where applicable and to prevent others from infringing our proprietary rights. We seek to protect our proprietary technologies by, among other methods, filing U.S.United States and international patent applications on these technologies, inventions and improvements that are important to our

business. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our proprietary position.

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in countries in which they are obtained. In most countries, including the U.S.,United States, the patent term is generally 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application in the applicable country. In the U.S.,United States, a patent’s term may, in certain cases, be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the U.S.United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) in examining and granting a patent or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over a commonly owned patent or a patent naming a common inventor and having an earlier expiration date.

In the normal course of business, we pursue patent protection for inventions related to our product candidates. We own a patent portfolio of 25 patent families related to our biosimilar product candidates. Each patent family includes United States patent applications and/or issued patents, and some include foreign counterparts to certain of the U.S.United States patents and patent applications. Our patent portfolio includes issued or pending claims directed to formulations, methods of manufacturing biological proteins, and drug products and devices, including their methods of use and methods of manufacture.

In a merger completed February 12, 2014, we acquired InteKrin Therapeutics Inc. (“InteKrin”) and its small molecule PPAR-g modulator, CHS-131, which is being developed for the treatment of NASH.

InteKrin has an exclusive license from Amgen to a portfolio of four patent families related to CHS-131, each of which includes U.S. patents and some include foreign counterparts to certain of the U.S. patents. The licensed patent portfolio includes issued claims directed to PPAR-γ modulating molecules and therapeutic product compositions that are expected to expire in 2020 and 2021, as well as certain salt forms and polymorphic forms directed to PPAR-g modulating molecules that are expected to expire in 2024. Additionally, we and our subsidiary InteKrin own a portfolio of 23 patent families related to CHS-131, each of which includes U.S. patent applications and/or issued patents, and some include foreign counterparts to certain of the U.S. patents and patent applications. This patent portfolio includes issued or pending claims directed to PPAR-g agonist pharmaceutical compositions, and methods of treating disorders including diabetes, multiple sclerosis, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, blood cancers, bone disorders, Huntington’s disease, and progressive supranuclear palsy.

Upon the first FDA approval for a CHS-131 product, we intend to seek a Hatch-Waxman patent term extension of CHS-131 related patents. A Hatch-Waxman patent term extension can only be applied to a patent that is not expired at the time of FDA approval. Additionally, any such extension cannot be longer than five years and the total patent term, including the extension period, must not exceed fourteen years following FDA approval. For a discussion of risks related to our proprietary technology and processes, please see “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Intellectual Property.”

although the IND must also include the results of preclinical testing and animal testing assessing the toxicology, PK,pharmacokinetic, pharmacology and PDpharmacodynamic characteristics of the product along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long-term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted.

An IND must become effective before U.S.United States clinical trials may begin. A 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND is required prior to the commencement of clinical testing in humans. If during the 30-day waiting period the FDA raises concerns or questions related to the proposed clinical studies, the sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before clinical studies can begin. If the FDA has neither commented on nor questioned the IND within this 30-day period, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug or biologic to healthy volunteers or patients with the condition under investigation, all under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCP requirements, which are designed to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the

biological products, the PHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other criteria, the sponsor must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency and purity of the final biological product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the biological product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life. Additionally, for both NDA and BLA products, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its proposed shelf-life.

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, detailed information regarding the investigational product is submitted to the FDA in the form of a BLA or NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA or NDA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of the product, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”)PDUFA as amended, each original BLA or NDA must be accompanied by a significant user fee. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, such as where a waiver is necessary to protect the public health, where the fee would present a significant barrier to innovation, where the product candidate has received orphan drug designations for the sought indication or where the applicant is a small business submitting its first human therapeutic application for review.

Even if a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific indications and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. The FDA may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing, or dispensing in the form of a risk management plan, or otherwise limit the scope of any approval. In addition, the FDA may require post marketing clinical trials, sometimes referred to as “Phase 4” clinical trials, designed to further assess a biological product’s safety and effectiveness, and testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized.

Abbreviated Licensure Pathway of Biological Products as Biosimilar under Section 351(k)

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), amended the PHSA and created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be highly similar to aan FDA-licensed reference biological product. The BPCIA attempts to minimize duplicative testing and thereby lower development costs and increase patient access to affordable treatments. Thus, an application for licensure of a biosimilar product pursuant to a Section 351(k) BLA must include information demonstrating biosimilarity based upon the following, unless the FDA determines otherwise:

FDA approval is required before a biosimilar may be marketed in the U.S. However, complexities associated with the large and intricate structures of biological products and the process by which such products are manufactured pose significant hurdles to the FDA’s implementation of the 351(k) approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA. For example, theUnited States. The FDA has discretion over the kind and amount of scientific evidence — laboratory, preclinical and/or clinical — required to demonstrate biosimilarity to a licensed biological product. The FDA intends to consider the totality of the evidence provided by a sponsor to support a demonstration of biosimilarity, and recommends that sponsors use a stepwise approach in the development of their biosimilar products. Biosimilar product applications thus may not be required to duplicate the entirety of preclinical and clinical testing used to establish the underlying safety and effectiveness of the reference product. However, the FDA may refuse to approve a biosimilar application if there is insufficient information to show that the active ingredients are the same or to demonstrate that any impurities or differences in active ingredients do not affect the safety, purity or potency of the biosimilar product. In addition, as with original BLAs, biosimilar product applications will not be approved unless the product is manufactured in facilities designed to assure and preserve the biological product’s safety, purity and potency.

The submission of an application via the Section 351(k) pathway does not guarantee that the FDA will accept the application for filing and review, as the FDA may refuse to accept applications that it finds are incomplete. The FDA will treat a biosimilar application or supplement as incomplete if, among other reasons, any applicable user fees assessed under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendment of 2017 have not been paid. In addition, the FDA may accept an application for filing but deny approval on the basis that the sponsor has not demonstrated

Under the FFDCA and its implementing regulations, the FDA is charged with assigning a center with primary jurisdiction, or a lead center, for review of a combination product. The designation of a lead center generally eliminates the need to receive approvals from more than one FDA component for combination products, although it does not preclude consultations by the lead center with other components of the FDA. The determination of which center will be the lead center is based on the “primary mode of action” of the combination product. Thus, if the primary mode of action of a drug-device combination product is attributable to the drug product, the FDA center responsible for premarket review of the drug product would have primary jurisdiction for the combination product. The FDA has also established an Office of Combination Products to address issues surrounding combination products and provide more certainty to the regulatory review process. That office serves as a focal point for combination product issues for agency reviewers and industry. It is also responsible for developing guidance and regulations to clarify the regulation of combination products, and for assignment of the FDA center that has primary jurisdiction for review of combination products where the jurisdiction is unclear or in dispute.

A combination product with a biologic primary mode of action generally would be reviewed and approved pursuant to the biologic licensure processes under the PHSA. In reviewing the BLA or Section 351(k) BLA for such a product, however, FDA reviewers in the drug center could consult with their counterparts in the device center to ensure that the device component of the combination product met applicable requirements regarding safety, purity, potency, durability and performance. In addition, under FDA regulations, combination products are subject to cGMP requirements applicable to both drugs and devices, including the Quality System regulations applicable to medical devices.

Advertising and Promotion

Once an NDA, original BLA, or Section 351(k) BLA is approved, a product will be subject to continuing post-approval regulatory requirements, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion and reporting of adverse experiences with the product. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of biologics, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. Failure to comply with these regulations can result in significant penalties, including the issuance of warning letters directing a company to correct deviations from FDA standards, a requirement that future advertising and promotional materials be pre-cleared by the FDA and federal and state civil and criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Biologics and drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. After approval, most changes to the approved product, including changes in indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new marketing application or supplement to the approved marketing application before the change can be implemented. A supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing supplements as it does in reviewing original application. There are also continuing annual program user fee requirements for marketed products.

Adverse Event Reporting and GMP Compliance

Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports are required following FDA approval of a marketing application. The FDA also may require post-market testing, including Phase 4 testing, implementation of a REMS, andand/or surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or the FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, manufacture,manufacturing, packaging, labeling, storage and distribution procedures must continue to conform to cGMPs after approval. Manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals,

request product recalls or impose marketing restrictions through labeling changes or product removals if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered.

Penalties Law can result in civil money penalties for each wrongful act, assessment of three times the amount claimed for each item or service and exclusion from the federal healthcare programs.

Federal and state government price reporting laws require manufacturers to calculate and report complex pricing metrics to government programs. Such reported prices may be used in the calculation of reimbursement and/or discounts on marketed products.

party payers are increasingly examining the medical necessity and cost effectiveness of medical products and services in addition to safety and efficacy and, accordingly, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved therapeutics. In addition, the U.S.United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could further limit our net revenue and results. A significant portion of our sales are subject to substantial discounts to list price, including rebates we may be required to pay to Medicaid agencies or discounts we may be required to pay to 340B covered entities. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for our product candidatesUDENYCA, YUSIMRY, LOQTORZI or other products for which we receive regulatory approval or a decision by a third-party payer to not cover our product candidatesproducts could reduce physician utilization of our products and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition.

TheGovernment Price Reporting

Medicaid is a joint federal and state program for low-income and disabled beneficiaries. Medicare is a federal program that is administered by the federal government covering individuals age 65 and over as well as those with certain disabilities. Under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (“MDRP”), as a condition of having federal funds available for our covered outpatient drugs under Medicaid and under Medicare Part B, we must enter into, and have entered into, an agreement with the Secretary of Health and Human Services to pay a rebate to state Medicaid programs for each unit of our covered outpatient drugs dispensed to a Medicaid beneficiary and paid for by the state Medicaid program. Medicaid rebates are based on pricing data that we are required to report on a monthly and quarterly basis to the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) adopted, effective January 1, 2018, a, the federal agency that administers the MDRP and Medicare programs. For the MDRP, these data include the average manufacturer price (“AMP”) for each drug and, in the case of innovator products, the Best Price, which represents the lowest price available from us to any wholesaler, retailer, provider, health maintenance organization, nonprofit entity, or governmental entity in the United States in any pricing structure, calculated to include all applicable sales and associated rebates, discounts and other price concessions. In connection with Medicare Part B, rulewe must provide CMS with Average Sales Price (“ASP”) information on biosimilara quarterly basis. CMS uses this information to compute Medicare Part B payment rates, which consist of ASP plus a specified percentage. If we become aware that our MDRP submissions for a prior period were incorrect or have changed as a result of recalculation of the pricing data, we must resubmit the corrected data for up to three years after those data originally were due. If we fail to provide information timely or are found to have knowingly submitted false information to CMS, we may be subject to civil monetary penalties and coding, whichother sanctions, including termination from the MDRP.

Federal law requires that each biosimilara manufacturer that participates in the MDRP also participate in the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program in order for federal funds to be available for the same reference product be issuedmanufacturer’s drugs under Medicaid and Medicare Part B. The 340B program is administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (“HRSA”) and requires us to agree to charge statutorily defined covered entities no more than the 340B “ceiling price” for our covered outpatient drugs when used in an outpatient setting. 340B covered entities include a unique Q-code for Medicare reimbursement purposesvariety of community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants from the payment amount forPublic Health Service, as well as hospitals that serve a billing code that describesdisproportionate share of low-income patients. The 340B ceiling price is calculated using a biosimilarstatutory formula, which is based on the average salesAMP and rebate amount for the covered outpatient drug as calculated under the MDRP. In general, products subject to Medicaid price (“ASP”) specificreporting and rebate liability are also subject to each biosimilar.

Healthcare Reformthe 340B ceiling price requirement. We must report 340B ceiling prices to HRSA on a quarterly basis, and HRSA publishes them to 340B covered entities. HRSA has finalized regulations regarding the calculation of the 340B ceiling price and the imposition of civil monetary penalties on manufacturers that knowingly and intentionally overcharge covered entities for 340B eligible drugs. HRSA has also finalized an administrative dispute resolution process through which 340B covered entities may pursue claims against participating manufacturers for overcharges.

In March 2010, the ACA was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financedorder to be eligible to have drug products paid for with federal funds under Medicaid and Medicare Part B and purchased by both governmentalcertain federal agencies and private insurers in the United States, and significantly affected the pharmaceutical industry. The ACA containedgrantees, a number of provisions, including those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement adjustments and fraud and abuse changes. Additionally, the ACA subjected biologic products to potential competition by lower-cost biosimilars; increased the minimum level of Medicaid rebates payable by manufacturers of brand name drugs from 15.1% to 23.1%; imposed a non-deductible annual fee on pharmaceutical manufacturers or importers who sell “branded prescription drugs” to specified federal government programs; and addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or Texas District Court Judge, ruled that the entire Affordable Care Act is invalid based primarily on the fact that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 repealed the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA, on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year, which is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the District Court’s decision that the individual mandate was unconstitutional but remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case, although it is unclear how the Supreme Court will rule. It ismanufacturer must also unclear how other efforts, if any, to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA will impact the law.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted, including aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which was temporarily suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, and reduced payments to several types of Medicare providers.

Moreover, there has recently been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. Individual statesparticipate in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) Federal Supply Schedule (“FSS”) pricing program. Under the VA FSS program, we must report the Non-Federal Average Manufacturer Price (“Non-FAMP”) for our covered drugs to the VA and charge certain federal agencies no more than the Federal Ceiling Price, which is calculated based on Non-FAMP using a statutory formula. These four agencies are the VA, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Public Health Service (including the Indian Health Service). We must also pay rebates on products purchased by military personnel and dependents through the TRICARE retail pharmacy program. If a manufacturer participating in the FSS program fails to provide timely information or is found to have also become increasingly activeknowingly submitted false information, the manufacturer may be subject to civil monetary penalties.

Individual states continue to consider and have enacted legislation to limit the growth of healthcare costs, including the cost of prescription drugs and combination products. A number of states have either implemented or are considering implementation of drug price transparency legislation. Requirements under such laws include advance notice of planned price increases, reporting price increase amounts and factors considered in implementing regulations designedtaking such increases, wholesale acquisition cost information disclosure to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product accessprescribers, purchasers, and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

state agencies, and new product notice and reporting. Such legislation could limit the price or payment for certain drugs, and a number of states are authorized to impose civil monetary penalties or pursue other enforcement mechanisms against manufacturers for the untimely, inaccurate, or incomplete reporting of drug pricing information or for otherwise failing to comply with drug price transparency requirements.

Healthcare Reform, including the IRA

The United States federal and state governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to regulate the healthcare industry, including legislation that seeks to indirectly or directly regulate pharmaceutical drug pricing. Most significantly, on August 16, 2022, the IRA was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations. HHS has issued and will continue to issue guidance implementing the IRA, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. While the impact of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined, it is likely to be significant. In particular, if a product becomes subject to the IRA negotiation provision and related price cap, that may significantly alter the economic rationale for developing and commercializing a biosimilar.

Environment

We are subject to a number of laws and regulations that require compliance with federal, state, and local regulations for the protection of the environment. The regulatory landscape continues to evolve, and we anticipate additional regulations in the near future. Laws and regulations are implemented and under consideration to mitigate the effects of climate change mainly caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Our business is not energy intensive. Therefore, we do not anticipate being subject to a cap and trade system, carbon emissions tax or other mitigation measure that would materially impact our capital expenditures, operations or competitive position. The building where our headquarters is located in Redwood City, California, has been awarded LEED Gold Certification from the United States Green Building Council.

Employees and Human Capital ResourcesManagement

On March 3, 2023, we committed to a plan to reduce our workforce to focus resources on strategic priorities including the commercialization of our diversified product portfolio and development of innovative immuno-oncology product candidates. We initiated a reduction in force impacting approximately 50 full-time and part-time employees effective March 10, 2023 for most of these employees.

As of December 31, 2020,2023, we had 317306 full-time and part-time employees. All were located in the United States and none of our employees were represented by a labor union. We have not experienced any work stoppages and believe we have good relations with our employees and contractors. Our guiding principles are anchored on the goals of being able to recruit, incentivize, retain and integrate talented employees who can develop, implement, and drive long-term value creation strategies.

Compensation and Benefits 

​

We believe our base salaries are fair and competitive with the external labor markets in which our employees work and are reviewed on a regular basis. We offer incentive programs that provide bonus opportunities to encourage and reward participants for our achievement of financial and other key performance metrics and strengthen theconnection between pay and performance. We also grant equity compensation awards that vest over time through our long-term incentive plan to employees to align such employees’ incentives with our long-term strategic objectives and the interests of our stockholders.

​

We also offer competitive benefits to our employees, including paid vacation and holidays, family leave, disability insurance, life insurance, healthcare, dental and vision coverage, dependent care flexible spending accounts, a 401(k) plan with a company match, and an Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Additionally, we offer an Employee Assistance Program (“EAP”) that includes professional support for employees to balance the stress of personal and professional demands.

​

Inclusion and Diversity

​

People are a critical component of our efforts to drive growth and deliver value for stockholders. One of the ways we have put people at the center of our business is by continuing to work toward a more inclusive and diverse workplace where each person feels respected, valued and seen and can be the best version of themselves. We believe that having a truly diverse workplace helps our company to achieve the best results, including by striving for diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, nationality, disability status, veteran status and other factors. We launched our Diversity and Inclusion Program to our employees in 2020 and intend to continue implementation of the program in 2024. As of December 31, 2023, ethnically diverse employees represented approximately 37% of our employees and women composed 49% of our employees. We donate to non-profit organizations such as Life Science Cares, an organization focused on eliminating the impact of poverty on our neighbors. Our human capital resources objectives include, asChief Executive Officer also serves on the Board of Advisors of Life Science Cares.

​

Health and Safety

​

We are committed to a safe workplace for our employees and have implemented health and safety management processes, including training and awareness, into our operations. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented additional safety measures for the protection of our employees, including work-from-home measures for applicable identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existingemployees and additional employees. The principal purposescleaning and protective measures. We require that all employees are fully vaccinated for COVID-19 and recommend they get all booster shots recommended by the United States Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. We react to emergencies on an ongoing basis to protect our equity incentive plansemployees.

​

Training, Development and Engagement

​

Through our online learning platform, we deliver a variety of required learning modules, including those modules tied to our Code of Business Conduct, unlawful harassment and anti-corruption policies, which are to attract, retaincompleted periodically by all team members. We also have Performance Management Training and motivate selected employees, consultants and directors through the granting of equity awards and cash-based performance bonus awards.Interview Training programs for our managers. We have a highly collaborative, engaging company environment.

​

Additional Information

We view our operations and measure our business as one reportable segment operating primarily in the U.S.United States. See Note 2“Note 1. Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” in the Notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhereConsolidated Financial Statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information. Additional information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors.”

We were incorporated in Delaware in September 2010. We completed the initial public offering of our common stock in November 2014. Our common stock is currently listed on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “CHRS.”

Our principal executive offices are located at 333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600, Redwood City, CA 94065, and our telephone number is (650) 649-3530.

You may find on our website at http://www.coherus.com electronic copies of our annual reportreports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.1934 on our website at https://www.coherus.com free of charge. We also periodically release and publicize press releases to the public that are also available on our website’s section entitled “News” which we use as a recognized channel of distribution for our investors and other people interested in our company. The SEC maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Such filings are placed on our website as soon as reasonably possible after they are filed with the SEC. Our most recent charter for our audit, compensation, and nominating and corporate governance committees and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics are available on our website as well. Any waiver of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics may be made only by our board of directors. Any waiver of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for any of our directors or executive officers must be disclosed on a Current Report on Form 8-K within four business days, or such shorter period as may be required under applicable regulation.law.

You can read our SEC filings over the Internet at the SEC’s web-site at www.sec.gov. You may also read and copy any document we file with the SEC at its public reference facilities at 100 F Street, N.E., Room 1580, Washington, D.C. 20549. You may also obtain copies​

​

​

if additional product candidates beyond UDENYCA®in addition to our current products gain regulatory approval and are commercialized, we may not remain profitable.

Our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

However, our operating or investing plans may change as a result of many factors that may currently be unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

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

To the extent that we continue to generate taxable losses, unused losses will carry forward to offset future taxable income, if any, until such unused losses expire. Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a rolling three-year period), such corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards (“NOLs”) and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. We have experienced ownership changes in the past and may experience ownership changes in the future (some of which changes are outside our control). As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs to offset such taxable income may be subject to limitations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our use of accumulated state tax attributes. 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. As a result, even as we attained profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.

Risks Related to Launch and Commercialization of UDENYCA®our Products and our Other Product Candidates

We have a limited operating history in an emerging regulatory environment on which to assess our business.

We are a biotherapeuticsbiopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history in an emerging regulatory environment of biosimilar and immuno-oncology products. Although we have received upfront payments, milestone and other contingent payments and/or funding for development from some of

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs to commercialize any such product. Our expenses could increase beyond our expectations if we are required by the FDA, the EMA,European Medical Agency (the “EMA”), other regulatory agencies, domestic or foreign, or by any unfavorable outcomes in intellectual property litigation filed against us, to change our manufacturing processes or assays or to perform clinical, nonclinical or other types of studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. In cases where we are successful in obtaining additional regulatory approvals to market one or more of our product candidates, our revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval, the number of biosimilar or immuno-oncology competitors in such markets, the accepted price for the product, the ability to get reimbursement at any price, the nature

Market acceptance of UDENYCA®, and our otherany future product candidates, if approved, will not be fully known until after it isthey are launched and may be negatively affected by a potential poor safety experience and the track record of other biosimilar and immuno-oncology products and product candidates. OurFurther, continued market acceptance of UDENYCA, LOQTORZI and YUSIMRY, and any future product candidates that may be approved, depends on our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payers on the benefits of theour products and product candidates mayand will require significant resources may be under-resourcedfrom us and we have significantly less resources compared to large, well-funded pharmaceutical entities andentities. Given the resource disparity, our outreach may have little success or may never be successful. If our products or any future product candidates that are approved but fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers and others in the medical community, we will not be able to generate sufficient revenue to remain profitable.sustain profitability.

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 U.S.,United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the U.S.United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payers in the United States and abroad to control healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for UDENYCA®our products or any of our product candidates. While cost containment practices generally benefit biosimilars, severe cost containment practices may adversely affect our product sales. Furthermore, the impact of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry generally is currently unknown. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of UDENYCA®our products and any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes.

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected.

(“Mylan”),(avelumab) from EMD Serono Inc. and Cinfa Biotech S.L. (“Cinfa,” a subsidiary of Mundipharma), as well asPfizer, and Libtayo® (cemiplimab-rwlc) from Regeneron and Sanofi, and Jemperli (dostarlimab-gxly) from GlaxoSmithKline. In addition to LOQTORZI, multiple other smaller companies. We are currently aware that such competitors are engagedseeking to develop and approve novel anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 antibody drugs in the United States in the coming years, including but not limited to BeiGene, Ltd. (in collaboration with Novartis). As the only immunotherapy approved by the FDA for the treatment of NPC, we believe LOQTORZI addresses a potentially high unmet need.

CHS-114, if approved, faces competition from programs in development specifically targeting CCR8, including those by Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Gilead/Jounce, Shionogi, AbbVie, Bayer, LaNova and commercialization of biosimilar product candidates to pegfilgrastim (Neulasta), ranibizumab (Lucentis), bevacizumab (Avastin), adalimumab (Humira) and aflibercept (Eylea).Immunophage;

UDENYCA®UDENYCA faces competition in the United States from Amgen, Mylan (with partner Biocon Ltd.),Viatris, Sandoz, Pfizer, and maySpectrum, and is expected to face completioncompetition from Amneal and Fresenius, companies thateach of which has announced the developmentapproval of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar.biosimilar and have launched their products for sale in the United States.

Our ranibizumab (Lucentis) biosimilar candidate licensed from Bioeq may faceYUSIMRY, following our launch in July 2023, faces competition in the United States from GenentechAbbVie (the manufacturerholder of Lucentis). Biogen Inc. (“Biogen”rights to Humira), Amgen (Amjevita^TM (adalimumab-atto)) with collaborator, Sandoz (Hyrimoz^TM (adalimumab-adaz)), Samsung Bioepis Co.(Hadlima^TM (adalimumab-bwwd)), Ltd. (Samsung Bioepis)Pfizer (Abrilada^TM (adalimumab-afzb)), and Xbrane Biopharma AB (in collaboration with STADA Arzneimittel AG and Bausch + Lomb) have each disclosed the development for a Lucentis biosimilar candidate.

Our bevacizumab (Avastin) biosimilar candidate licensed from Innovent may face competition in the United States from Genentech (the manufacturer of Avastin)Boehringer Ingelheim (Cyltezo^TM (adalimumab-adbm)) as well as Amgen and Pfizer, each of which have initiated the commercial launch of an Avastin biosimilar.

Similarly, CHS-1420, our adalimumab (Humira) biosimilar may face competition from AbbVie (the manufacturer of Humira) as well as manufacturers of Humira biosimilars such as Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Sandoz and Samsung Bioepis. There are five adalimumab biosimilar products FDA-approved in the United States and FujifilmViatris / Biocon (Hulio® (adalimumab-fkjp)), Alvotech Holdings S.A. and Fresenius, are companieseach a company that have eachhas disclosed development plans for a Humira biosimilar candidate. As a result of continued expected competition from Humira and a large number of potential adalimumab (Humira) biosimilar competitors, we may not be able to achieve substantial topline sales for CHS-1420YUSIMRY in the United States, if approved.States.

These companies may also have greater brand recognition and more experience in conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of products and marketing and commercializing products once approved.

Additionally, many manufacturers of originator products have increasingly 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:

seeking state law restrictions on the substitution of biosimilar products at the pharmacy without the intervention of a physician or through other restrictive means such as excessive recordkeeping requirements or patient and physician notification;

​

UDENYCA®Our products and our other biosimilar product candidates, if approved, could face price competition from other products or biosimilars of the same reference products for the same indication. This price competition could exceed our capacity to respond, detrimentally affecting our market share and revenue as well as adversely affecting the overall financial health and attractiveness of the market for the biosimilar.

Competitors in the biosimilar market have the ability to compete on price with healthcare providers, and through PBMs, payers and their third-party administrators, IDNs and hospitals who exert downward pricing pressure on our priceproduct offerings. It is possible our biosimilar competitors’ compliance with price discounting demands in exchange for market share or volume requirements could exceed our capacity to respond in kind and reduce market prices beyond our expectations. There could be similar price competition in the immuno-oncology market that could adversely affect our results in the future. Such practices may limit our ability to increase market share and may also impact profitability.

We face intense competition and rapid technological change and the possibility that our competitors may develop therapies that are similar, more advanced, less costly, easier to administer or more effective than ours, which may adversely affect our financial condition and our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and more experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Additional mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical industry may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. As a result, these companies may obtain regulatory approval more rapidly than we are able to and may be more effective in selling and marketing their products. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidate that we may develop; they may also obtain patent protection that could block our products; and they may obtain regulatory approval, product commercialization and market penetration earlier than we do. Our competitors may have products that are easier to administer than our products, which could adversely affect our results, such as due to the observed trend that a large number of patients demonstrate a preference to administer medication at home due to COVID-19 or other factors. Biosimilar or immuno-oncology product candidates developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical, less desirable or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing our product candidates against competitors.

If other biosimilars of bevacizumab (Avastin)competitors to LOQTORZI (in indications besides NPC), ranibizumab (Lucentis), aflibercept (Eylea) or adalimumab (Humira),casdozokitug and CHS-114 are approved and successfully commercialized before our product candidates for these originator products,LOQTORZI (in indications besides NPC), casdozokitug and CHS-114, our business would suffer.

We expect otherThere are a number of companies to seek approval to manufacture and market biosimilar versions of Avastin, Lucentis, Eyleathat currently commercialize PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies or Humira.are developing such compounds for commercialization in the United States. If other biosimilars of these branded biologicscompetitors to LOQTORZI (in indications besides NPC), casdozokitug and CHS-114 are approved and successfully commercialized before our biosimilar candidates,LOQTORZI (in indications besides NPC), casdozokitug and CHS-114, we may never achieve meaningful market share for these products, our revenue would be reduced and, as a result, our business, prospects and financial condition could suffer. For instance, Mylan received FDA approval for its pegfilgrastim biosimilar in June 2018, and in July 2018, Mylan initiated the commercialization in the United States of this biosimilar. Furthermore, in September 2018, the EC granted marketing authorization to UDENYCA® and to a pegfilgrastim biosimilar candidate from Intas. In November and December 2018, the EC granted marketing authorizations to three additional pegfilgrastim biosimilar candidates from Sandoz, Mylan and Cinfa. In June 2019, the E.U. granted marketing authorization to a pegfilgrastim biosimilar candidate from USV Biologics.

If an improved version of an originator product, such as Neulasta Humira, Lucentis or Eylea,Humira, is developed or if the market for the originator product significantly declines, sales or potential sales of our biosimilar product candidatesproducts may suffer.

Originator companies may develop improved versions of a reference product as part of a life cycle extension strategy and may obtain regulatory approval of the improved version under a new or supplemental BLA submitted to the applicable regulatory authority. Should the originator company succeed in obtaining an approval of an improved biologic product, it may capture a significant share of the collective reference product market in the applicable jurisdiction and significantly reduce the market for the reference product and thereby the potential size of the market for our biosimilar product candidates.products. In addition, the improved product may be protected by additional patent rights that may subject our follow-on biosimilar to claims of infringement.

Biologic reference products may also face competition as technological advances are made that may offer patients a more convenient form of administration or increased efficacy or as new products are introduced. External developments can also result in changing preferences for convenient forms of administration of products that may impact our business. As new products are approved that compete with the reference product to our biosimilar product candidates,products, sales of the reference originator product may be adversely impacted or rendered obsolete. If the market for the reference product is impacted, we may lose significant market share or experience limited market potential for our approved biosimilar products or product candidates, and the value of our product pipeline could be negatively impacted.products. As a result of the above factors, our business, prospects and financial condition could suffer.

​

Any product candidates for which we intend to seek approval as original biologic products may face competition sooner than anticipated.

Our development of novel biologic product candidates, such as casdozokitug and CHS-114, subjects us to additional risks relating to biosimilar competition. In particular, under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product.

We believe that LOQTORZI and any of our future product candidates approved under an original BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to Congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, could be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

Risks Related to Our Ability to Hire and Retain Highly Qualified Personnel

We are highly dependent on the services of our key executives and personnel, including our President and Chief Executive Officer, Dennis M. Lanfear, and if we are not able to retain these members of our management or recruit additional management, clinicalproduct development and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.

We are highly dependent on the principal members of our management and scientific and technical staff. The loss of service of any of our management or key scientific and technical staff could harm our business. In addition, we are dependent on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified additional management, clinicalproduct development and scientific personnel. If we are not able to retain our management, particularly our President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Lanfear, and to attract, on acceptable terms, additional qualified personnel necessary for the continued development of our business, we may not be able to sustain our operations or grow.

Our future performance will also depend, in part, on our ability to successfully integrate newly hired executive officers into our management team and our ability to develop an effective working relationship among senior management. Our failure to integrate these individuals and create effective working relationships among them and other members of management could result in inefficiencies in the development and commercialization of our product candidates, harming future regulatory approvals, sales of our product candidates and our results of operations. Additionally, we do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees.

We will need to expand and effectively manage our managerial, scientific, operational, financial, commercial and other resources in order to successfully pursue our clinicalproduct development and commercialization efforts. Our success also depends on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management and scientifictechnical personnel. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified management and scientific and clinicalproduct development personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses, particularly those located in the San Francisco Bay Area. We also use equity compensation as a part of a comprehensive compensation package for our personnel. The majority of our outstanding options have exercise prices that are above our current stock price. If we are not able to attract, retain and motivate necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will significantly impede the achievement of our development objectives, our ability to raise additional capital and our ability to implement our business strategy.

We willmay need to expand our organization, particularly due to employee turnover, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth,turnover, which could disrupt our operations.

As of December 31, 2020,2023, we had 317306 full-time and part-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop and evolve from time to time, and as we expectexperience turnover, we may need to needhire additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial, legal and other resources.people in the future. Our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growthhiring activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansionduring a period of our operations,employee turnover, which

may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of our current and potential future product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth,turnover, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenue could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy.reduced. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Risks Related to Reliance on Third-Party VendorsThird Parties

We rely on third parties to conduct our nonclinical and clinical studies and perform other tasks for us. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party CROsclinical research organizations (“CROs”) to monitor and manage data for our ongoing nonclinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our nonclinical and clinical studies and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs and other vendors are required to comply with cGMP, good clinical practices (“GCP”),GCP, and Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”),GLP, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the EEA and comparable foreign

may not be able to achieve such transfer or do so in a timely manner. Moreover, the availability of contract manufacturing services for protein-based therapeutics is highly variable and there are periods of relatively abundant capacity alternating with periods in which there is little available capacity. If our need for contract manufacturing services increases during a period of industry-wide production capacity shortage, we may not be able to produce our product candidates on a timely basis or on commercially viable terms. Although we will plan accordingly and generally do not begin a clinical study unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete such study, any significant delay or discontinuation in the supply of a product candidate for an ongoing clinical study due to the need to replace a third-party manufacturer could considerably delay completion of our clinical studies, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates, which could harm our business and results of operations.

Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance, the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party and the possible termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us. In addition, third partythird-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP or similar regulatory requirements outside the U.S.United States. Our failure or the failure of our third partythird-party manufacturers to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates or any other product candidates or products that we may develop. Any failure or refusal to supply the components for our product candidates that we may develop could delay, prevent or impair our clinical development or commercialization efforts. If our contract manufacturers were to breach or terminate their manufacturing

Moreover, any disputes with our licensees and collaboration partners will substantially divert the attention of our senior management from other business activities and will require us to incur substantial costs associated with litigation or arbitration proceedings. If we cannot maintain successful license and collaboration arrangements, our business, financial condition and operating results may be adversely affected.

We currently engage single suppliers for manufacture, clinical trial services, formulation development and product testing of our product candidates. The loss of any of these suppliers or vendors could materially and adversely affect our business.

For UDENYCA®our products and our product candidates, we currently engage a distinct vendor or service provider for each of the principal activities supporting our manufacture and development of these products, such as manufacture of the biological substance present in each of the products, manufacture of the final filled and finished presentation of these products, as well as laboratory testing, formulation development and clinical testing of these products. For example, in December 2015, we entered into a strategic manufacturing agreement with KBI Biopharma, Inc. for long-term commercial manufacturing of UDENYCA®. Because we currently have engaged a limited number of back-up suppliers or vendors for these single-sourced services, and although we believe that there are alternate sources that could fulfill these activities, we cannot assure you that identifying and establishing relationships with alternate suppliers and vendors would not result in significant delay in the development of our product candidates. Additional delays or cost increases could occur due to the direct or indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Additionally, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative service providers on commercially reasonable terms or at all. A delay in the development of our product candidates, or having to enter into a new agreement with a different third party on less favorable terms than we have with our current suppliers, could have a material adverse impact on our business.

We and our collaboration partners and contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing our product candidates. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not continue to meet regulatory requirements or may not be able to meet supply demands.

All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical studies or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturers for our product candidates, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We, our collaboration partners, or our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a Section 351(k) BLA, original BLA, NDA or MAA on a timely basis and must adhere to GLP and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA and other regulatory agencies through their facilities inspection program. Some of our contract manufacturers may have never produced a commercially approved pharmaceutical product and therefore have not obtained the requisite regulatory authority approvals to do so. The facilities and quality systems of some or all of our collaboration partners and third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance

These factors could cause us to incur additional costs and could cause the delay or termination of clinical studies, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our clinical studies may be delayed or we could lose potential revenue.

The structure of complex proteins used in protein-based therapeutics is inherently variable and highly dependent on the processes and conditions used to manufacture them. If we are unable to develop manufacturing processes that achieve a requisite degree of biosimilarity to the originator drug, and within a range of variability considered acceptable by regulatory authorities, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for our biosimilar products.

Protein-based therapeutics are inherently heterogeneous and their structures are highly dependent on the production process and conditions. Products from one production facility can differ within an acceptable range from those produced in another facility. Similarly, physicochemical differences can also exist among different lots produced within a single facility. The physicochemical complexity and size of biologic therapeutics create significant technical and scientific challenges in the context of their replication as biosimilar products.

The inherent variability in protein structure from one production lot to another is a fundamental consideration with respect to establishing biosimilarity to an originator product to support regulatory approval requirements. For example, the glycosylation of the protein, meaning the manner in which sugar molecules are attached to the protein backbone of a therapeutic protein when it is produced in a living cell, is critical to therapeutic efficacy, half-life, efficacy and even safety of the therapeutic and is therefore a key consideration for biosimilarity. Defining and understanding the variability of an originator molecule in order to match its glycosylation profile requires significant skill in cell biology, protein purification and analytical protein chemistry. Furthermore, manufacturing proteins with reliable and consistent glycosylation profiles at scale is challenging and highly dependent on the skill of the cell biologist and process scientist.

There are extraordinary technical challenges in developing complex protein-based therapeutics that not only must achieve an acceptable degree of similarity to the originator molecule in terms of characteristics such as the unique glycosylation pattern, but also the ability to develop manufacturing processes that can replicate the necessary structural characteristics within an acceptable range of variability sufficient to satisfy regulatory authorities.

Drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment for clinical trials, the ability of enrolled patients to complete our studies or result in potential product liability claims. We currently carry product liability insurance and we are required to maintain product liability insurance pursuant to certain of our license agreements. We believe our product liability insurance coverage is sufficient in light of our current clinical programs; however, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could adversely affect our results of operations and business. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in impairment of our business reputation, withdrawal of clinical study participants, costs due to related litigation, distraction of management’s attention from our primary business, initiation of investigations by regulators, substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants, the inability to commercialize our product candidates and decreased demand for our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale.

Additionally, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

Our research, development and commercialization activities may infringe or otherwise violate or be claimed to infringe or otherwise violate patents owned or controlled by other parties. The companies that originated the products for which we intend to introduceintroduced biosimilar versions, such as Amgen, AbbVie and Genentech, and Regeneron, as well as other competitors (including other companies developing biosimilars) have developed, and are continuing to develop, worldwide patent portfolios of varying sizes and breadth, many of which are in fields relating to our business, and it may not always be clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. We are aware of third-party patents or patent applications with claims, for example, to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. While we have conducted freedom to operate analyses with respect to UDENYCA®our products and our product candidates, including our in-licensed biosimilar candidates, as well as our pipeline candidates, we cannot guarantee that any of our analyses are complete and thorough, nor can we be sure that we have identified each and every patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant or necessary to the commercialization of our product candidates. Moreover, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents covering our product candidates. With respect to products we are evaluating for inclusion in our future biosimilar product pipeline, our freedom to operate analyses, including our research on the timing of potentially relevant patent expirations, are ongoing.

was held on May 8, 2019. On July 29, 2019, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion affirming the District Court’s judgment in our favor. The Federal Circuit held that the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel barred Amgen from succeeding on its infringement claim and affirmed the District Court’s dismissal. In a Joint Status Report, dated September 20, 2019, Amgen stated that it does not intend to further appeal the Federal Circuit’s decision. On October 11, 2019, we filed a Motion for Attorneys’ Fees with the District Court. Amgen filed its Answering Brief in Opposition on November 8, 2019. On November 22, 2019, we filed our Reply Brief with the District Court. On November 30, 2020, the District Court issued an order denying the Company’sour motion.

On January 24, 2019, we entered into settlement and license agreements with AbbVie, thatwhich grant us global, royalty-bearing, non-exclusive license rights under AbbVie’s intellectual property to commercialize CHS-1420, our proposed adalimumab (Humira) biosimilar.YUSIMRY. The global settlements resolveresolved all the pending disputes between the parties related to CHS-1420.YUSIMRY. Under the U.S.United States settlement, our license period in the United States commencescommenced on July 1, 2023.

We may be involved in lawsuits or IPR proceedings to protect or enforce our patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

We may discover that competitors are infringing our issued patents. Expensive and time-consuming litigation may be required to abate such infringement. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. If we or one of our collaboration partners were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including but not limited to lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone involved in the prosecution of the patent withheld relevant or material information related to the patentability of the

We are a party to certain non-exclusive intellectual property license agreements with certain vendors (pertaining to mammalian cell lines) and with AbbVie (pertaining to AbbVie’s intellectual property related to CHS-1420)YUSIMRY) that are important to our business, and we expect to enter into additional license agreements in the future. Our existing license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements or we are subject to a bankruptcy, we may be required to make certain payments to the licensor, we may lose the license or the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we would not be able to develop or market products covered by the license. Additionally, the milestone and other payments associated with these licenses will make it less profitable for us to develop our product candidates.

Our ability to market our biosimilar products in the United States may be significantly delayed or prevented by the BPCIA patent dispute resolution mechanism.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, Title VII, Subtitle A of the Patent Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119, Sections 7001-02 signed into law March 23, 2010, and codified in 42 U.S.C. §262, (the “BPCIA”),BPCIA created an elaborate and complex patent dispute resolution mechanism for biosimilars that, if we choose to implement it, could prevent us from launching our product candidates in the United States or could substantially delay such launches. However, even if we elect not to implement this mechanism, the launch of our products in the United States could still be prevented or substantially delayed by intellectual property disputes with originator companies that market the reference products on which our biosimilar products are based.

The BPCIA establishes a patent disclosure and briefing process between the biosimilar applicant and the originator that is demanding and time-sensitive. While certain aspects of this process are still being tested in the federal courts, the U.S.United States Supreme Court, as discussed further below, recently ruled in 2017 that this process is not mandatory, such that a biosimilar applicant may elect to engage in this process, but is not required to do so. The following is an overview of the patent exchange and patent briefing procedures established by the BPCIA for biosimilar applicants that elect to employ them:

Circuit for further consideration. On December 14, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided that state law claims are preempted by the BPCIA on both field and conflict grounds.

A significant legal risk for a biosimilar applicant that pursues regulatory approval under the Section 351(k) regulatory approval route and also elects to engage in the above-described BPCIA patent exchange mechanism, is that the process could result in the initiation of patent infringement litigation prior to FDA approval of a Section 351(k) application, and such litigation could result in blocking the market entry of the biosimilar product. However, even if biosimilar applicants opt out of the BPCIA patent exchange process, originators will still have the right to assert patent infringement as a basis to enjoin a biosimilar product launch. Thus, whether or not we engage in the BPCIA patent exchange process, there is risk that patent infringement litigation initiated by originators could prevent us indefinitely from launching our biosimilar products.

The legal and strategic considerations weighing for or against a decision to voluntarily engage in the BPCIA patent exchange process are complex and will differ on a product-by-product basis. If we decide to engage in the BPCIA patent exchange process, preparing for and conducting the patent exchange, briefing and negotiation process outlined above will require extraordinarily sophisticated legal counseling and extensive planning, all under extremely tight deadlines. Moreover, it may be difficult for us to secure or retain such legal support if large, well-funded originators have already entered into engagements with highly qualified law firms or if the most highly qualified law firms choose not to represent biosimilar applicants due to their long-standing relationships with originators.

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA, EMA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and the regulatory approval requirements for biosimilars are evolving. If we and our collaboration partners are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The research, development, testing, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, approval, promotion, advertising, storage, marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting and export and import of biologic and biosimilar products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States, by the EMA and EEA Competent Authorities in the European Economic Area (“EEA”), and by other regulatory authorities in other countries, where regulations differ from country to country. Neither we nor any existing or future collaboration partners are permitted to market our product candidates in the United States until we and our collaboration partners receive approval from the FDA, or in the EEA until we and our collaboration partners receive EC or EEA Competent Authority approvals.

The time required to develop new products or obtain approval for new products by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable, may take many years following the completion of clinical studies and depends upon numerous factors. Further, applications to the Human Genetic Resources Administration of China (HGRAC) required for any activities, including development activities and data sharing with our partners in China, may result in product development delays. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or the decision not to approve an application. For example, during FDA’s review of Bioeq’s 351(k) BLA for its ranibizumab (Lucentis) biosimilar, the FDA requested that Bioeq submit additional manufacturing data

to obtain regulatory approval for these products could adversely affect our operating results by restricting or significantly delaying our introduction of new biosimilars.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process and we may encounter substantial delays in our clinical studies or may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities.

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we (and/or our collaboration partners)partners, or both, as the case may be, must conduct clinical studies to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical study process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical studies of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical studies. Product candidates that have shown promising results in early-stage clinical studies may still suffer significant setbacks in subsequent registration clinical studies. There is a high failure rate for product candidates proceeding through clinical studies, and product candidates in later stages of clinical studies may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical studies. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical studies due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier studies. Nonclinical and clinical data are also often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. We do not know whether any clinical studies we may conduct for our product candidates will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety to obtain regulatory approval. Furthermore, biosimilar clinical studies must use originator products as comparators, and such supplies may not be available on a timely basis to support such trials.

We cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical studies can occur at any stage of testing, and our future clinical studies may not be successful. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include but are not limited to:

Any inability to successfully complete nonclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. For example,

If we alteredencounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

Patient enrollment is a significant factor in the manufacturing processestiming of clinical trials, and the timing of our clinical trials will depend, in part, on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in our trials, as well as completion of required follow-up periods. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for CHS-1420 and will need to provide data to the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities demonstrating that the change in manufacturing process has not changed theour product candidate. Ifcandidates if we are unable to make that demonstrationlocate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials to such trial’s conclusion as required by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities,authorities. Some of the conditions for which we could facemay plan to evaluate our product candidates are rare diseases with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. The eligibility criteria of our clinical trials, once established, may further limit the pool of available trial participants.

​

Patient enrollment in clinical trials may be affected by other factors, including:

Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies targeting these same diseases are recruiting clinical trial patients from these patient populations, which may make it more difficult to fully enroll any clinical trials. 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 failmay require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to obtain regulatory approval to marketfor the sale of our product which could significantly harm our business.candidates.

The development, manufacture and commercialization of biosimilar products under various global regulatory pathways pose unique risks.

We and our collaboration partners intend to pursue market authorization globally. In the United States, an abbreviated pathway for approval of biosimilar products was established by the BPCIA, enacted on March 23, 2010, as part of the ACA. The BPCIA established this abbreviated pathway under sectionSection 351(k) of the PHSA. Subsequent to the enactment of the BPCIA, the FDA issued guidance documents regarding the demonstration of biosimilarity and interchangeability as well as the submission and review of biosimilar applications. Moreover, market acceptance of biosimilar products in the United States is unclear. Numerous states are considering or have already enacted laws that regulate or restrict the substitution by state pharmacies of biosimilars for originator products already licensed by the FDA. Market success of biosimilar products will depend on demonstrating to patients, physicians, payers and relevant authorities that such products are similar in quality, safety and efficacy as compared to the reference product.

We will continue to analyze and incorporate into our biosimilar development plans any final regulations issued by the FDA, pharmacy substitution policies enacted by state governments and other applicable requirements established by relevant authorities. The costs of development and approval along with the probability of success for our biosimilar product candidates, will be dependent upon the application of any laws and regulations issued by the relevant regulatory authorities.

Biosimilar products may also be subject to extensive originator-controlled patent portfolios and patent infringement litigation, which may delay and could prevent the commercial launch of a product. Moreover, the BPCIA prohibits the FDA from accepting an application for a biosimilar candidate to a reference product within four years of the reference product’s licensure by the FDA. In addition, the BPCIA provides innovative biologics with 12 years of exclusivity from the date of their licensure, during which time the FDA cannot approve any application for a biosimilar candidate to the reference product.

The BPCIA is complex and continues to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation and meaning are evolving and remain subject to significant uncertainty. Future implementation decisions by the FDA could result in delays in the development or commercialization of our product candidates or increased costs to assure regulatory compliance and could adversely affect our operating results by restricting or significantly delaying our ability to market new biosimilar products. Moreover, the Trump administration has taken several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, the FDA’s ability to engage in routine regulatory and oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. It is difficult to predict how these Executive Orders will be interpreted and implemented, and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to continue implementing the BPCIA and engage in its other regulatory authorities under the FDA. If these executive actions impose restrictions on the FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted.

Under current E.U. regulations, an application for regulatory approval of a biosimilar drug cannot be submitted in the E.U. until expiration of an eight-year data exclusivity period for the reference (originator) product, measured from the date of the reference product’s initial marketing authorization. Furthermore, once approved, the biosimilar cannot be marketed until expiration of a ten-year period following the initial marketing authorization of the reference product, such ten-year period being extendible to 11 years if the reference product received approval of an additional therapeutic indication, within the first eight years following its initial marketing authorization, representing a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies.

delays aan FDA determination that a second or subsequent biosimilar product is interchangeable with that originator product for any condition of use until the earlier of: (1) one year after the first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable product; (2) 18 months after resolution of a patent infringement suit instituted under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6) against the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product, based on a final court decision regarding all of the patents in the litigation or dismissal of the litigation with or without prejudice; (3) 42 months after approval of the first interchangeable product, if a patent infringement suit instituted under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6) against the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product is still ongoing; or (4) 18 months after approval of the first interchangeable product if the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product has not been sued under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6). Thus, a determination that another company’s product is interchangeable with the originator biologic before we obtain approval of our corresponding biosimilar product candidates may delay the potential determination that our products are interchangeable with the originator product, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations and delay, prevent or limit our ability to generate revenue.

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs or we may not be able to identify, develop or commercialize additional product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations.

Risks Related to Our Compliance with Applicable Laws

Healthcare legislative reform measures, including the IRA, may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval for and commercialize our products, affect the prices we may set, and have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, (together the “ACA”),ACA, was passed, which substantially changed the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers and significantly impactshas impacted and continues to impact the U.S.United States pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things, addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturersmodified the AMP definition under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculatedMDRP for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected increasedand not generally distributed through the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturersretail channel; expanded rebate payments under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the

of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures, such as a single reimbursement code for biosimilar products.

We expect that healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product candidates.

In the E.U., similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the E.U. or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the E.U., including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than E.U., law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most E.U. member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing E.U. and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In markets outside of the U.S.United States and E.U., reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare laws, including fraud and abuse, false claims and physician payment transparency laws. If we are unable to comply or have not fully complied with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Our operations are directly or indirectly through our customers subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act and physician sunshine laws and regulations. These laws impact, among other things, sales, marketing and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws.

Efforts to ensure that our operations and business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. If we are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired.

If we participate in and then fail to comply with our reporting and payment obligations under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program or other governmental pricing programs in the United States, we could be subject to additional reimbursement requirements, penalties, sanctions and fines which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

With the approval of UDENYCA®, we nowWe participate in thegovernmental programs that impose drug price reporting, payment, and other compliance obligations on pharmaceutical manufacturers. Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, Medicare Coverage Gap Discount Program andis a number of otherjoint federal and state program for low-income and disabled beneficiaries. Medicare is a federal program that is administered by the federal government covering individuals age 65 and over as well as those with certain disabilities. Medicare Part B reimburses physicians who administer our products. Under the MDRP, as a condition of having federal funds available for our covered outpatient drugs under Medicaid and under Medicare Part B, we must enter into, and have entered into, an agreement with the Secretary of Health and Human Services to pay a rebate to state Medicaid programs for each unit of our covered outpatient drugs dispensed to a Medicaid beneficiary and paid for by the state Medicaid program. Medicaid rebates are based on pricing programsdata that we are required to report on a monthly and quarterly basis to CMS, the federal agency that administers the MDRP and Medicare programs. For the MDRP, these data include the AMP for each drug and, in the case of innovator products, the Best Price, which represents the lowest price available from us to any wholesaler, retailer, provider, health maintenance organization, nonprofit entity, or governmental entity in the United States in any pricing structure, calculated to include all applicable sales and associated rebates, discounts and other price concessions. In connection with Medicare Part B, we must provide CMS with ASP information on a quarterly basis. CMS uses this information to compute Medicare Part B payment rates, which consist of ASP plus a specified percentage. If we become aware that our MDRP submissions for a prior period were incorrect or have changed as a result of recalculation of the pricing data, we must resubmit the corrected data for up to three years after those data originally were due. Pursuant to the IRA, the AMP and ASP figures we report will also be used to compute rebates under Medicare Part D and Medicare Part B triggered by price increases that outpace inflation. If we fail to provide information timely or are found to have knowingly submitted false information to CMS, we may be subject to civil monetary penalties and other sanctions, including termination from the MDRP.

Federal law requires that any company that participates in the MDRP also participate in the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program in order for federal funds to obtain coveragebe available for the manufacturer’s drugs under Medicaid and Medicare Part B. The 340B program is administered by the HRSA and requires us to agree to charge statutorily defined covered entities no more than the 340B “ceiling price” for our covered drugs when used in an outpatient setting. These 340B covered entities include a variety of community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants from the Public Health Service, as well as hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients. The 340B ceiling price is calculated using a statutory formula, which is based on the AMP and rebate amount for the covered outpatient drug as calculated under the MDRP. In general, products subject to Medicaid price reporting and rebate liability are also subject to the 340B ceiling price requirement. We must report 340B ceiling prices to HRSA on a quarterly basis, and HRSA publishes them to 340B covered entities. HRSA has finalized regulations regarding the calculation of the 340B ceiling price and the imposition of civil

productmonetary penalties on manufacturers that knowingly and intentionally overcharge covered entities for 340B eligible drugs. HRSA has also finalized an administrative dispute resolution process through which 340B covered entities may pursue claims against participating manufacturers for overcharges.

In order to be eligible to have drug products paid for with federal funds under Medicaid and Medicare Part B and purchased by certain government healthcare programs.federal agencies and grantees, a pharmaceutical manufacturer must also participate in VA FSS pricing program. Under the VA FSS program, we must report the Non-FAMP for our covered drugs to the VA and charge certain federal agencies no more than the Federal Ceiling Price, which is calculated based on Non FAMP using a statutory formula. These programs generally require us tofour agencies are the VA, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Public Health Service (including the Indian Health Service). We must also pay rebates on products purchased by military personnel and dependents through the TRICARE retail pharmacy program. If a manufacturer participating in the FSS program fails to provide timely information or provide discountsis found to certain private purchasers or government payers in connection with our products when dispensed to beneficiaries of these programs. In some cases, such as withhave knowingly submitted false information, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing and rebate calculations that we report on a monthly and quarterly basis to the government agencies that administer the programs. The terms, scope and complexity of these government pricing programs change frequently. Wemanufacturer may also have reimbursement obligations or be subject to penalties if we failcivil monetary penalties.

Individual states continue to provide timelyconsider and accuratehave enacted legislation to limit the growth of healthcare costs, including the cost of prescription drugs and combination products. A number of states have either implemented or are considering implementation of drug price transparency legislation that may prevent or limit our ability to take price increases at certain rates or frequencies. Requirements under such laws include advance notice of planned price increases, reporting price increase amounts and factors considered in taking such increases, wholesale acquisition cost information disclosure to the government, pay the correct rebates or offer the correct discounted pricing. Changes toprescribers, purchasers, and state agencies, and new product notice and reporting. Such legislation could limit the price or payment for certain drugs, and a number of states are authorized to impose civil monetary penalties or pursue other enforcement mechanisms against manufacturers for the untimely, inaccurate, or incomplete reporting of drug pricing information or rebatefor otherwise failing to comply with drug price transparency requirements. If we are found to have violated state law requirements, of these programs would affect our obligationswe may become subject to pay rebatespenalties or offer discounts. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs and the complexity of compliance, will be time-consuming, andother enforcement mechanisms, which could have a material adverse effect on our resultsbusiness.

Pricing and rebate calculations vary across products and programs, are complex, and are often subject to interpretation by us, governmental or regulatory agencies, and the courts, which can change and evolve over time. Such pricing calculations and reporting, along with any necessary restatements and recalculations, could increase costs for complying with the laws and regulations governing the MDRP and other governmental programs, and under the MDRP could result in an overage or underage in Medicaid rebate liability for past quarters. Price recalculations under the MDRP also may affect the ceiling price at which we are required to offer products under the 340B program. Civil monetary penalties can be applied if we are found to have knowingly submitted any false price or product information to the government, if we are found to have made a misrepresentation in the reporting of operations.ASP, if we fail to submit the required price data on a timely basis, or if we are found to have charged 340B covered entities more than the statutorily mandated ceiling price. CMS could also terminate our Medicaid drug rebate agreement, in which case federal payments may not be available under Medicaid or Medicare Part B for our covered outpatient drugs. We cannot assure you that our submissions will not be found by CMS or other governmental agencies to be incomplete or incorrect.

​

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.

The market price of our common stock has been highly volatile since our Initial Public Offering (“IPO”) and the intraday sales price per share has ranged from $8.05$1.43 to $38.10 per share during the period from November 6, 2014 through February 19, 2021December 31, 2023 and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. These factors include those discussed in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and others such as:

Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial condition, our ability to raise additional capital to fund our operations, our ability to operate our business, our ability to react to changes in the economy or our industry and our ability to pay our debts and could divert our cash flow from operations for debt payments.

Our leverage and debt service obligations could adversely impact our business, including by:

Any of the foregoing factors could have negative consequences on our financial condition and results of operations.

This indebtedness could be due sooner upon the triggering of certain covenants in our debt agreements and or upon the occurrence of an event of default. If and when our indebtedness becomes due, if we do not have sufficient cash or access to capital to pay such indebtedness, we will default on our obligations which will adversely harm our business. We entered into a Loan Agreement that contains affirmative and negative covenants that restrict our operations, including, among other restrictions, the requirement to maintain minimum trailing twelve-month net sales in an amount that began at $200.0 million in the first quarter of 2022 and increases to $210.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. Beginning in the second quarter of 2024 and continuing through the quarter ended December 31, 2026, the requirement is to maintain minimum trailing twelve-month net sales of $125.0 million. In addition, there is a requirement to maintain a minimum trailing twelve-month net sales for LOQTORZI tested quarterly at the end of each quarter commencing with the quarter ended December 31, 2024. Further, the Loan Agreement includes certain other affirmative covenants and negative covenants, including, covenants and restrictions that among other things, restrict our ability to incur liens, incur additional indebtedness, make investments, engage in certain mergers and acquisitions or asset sales, and declare dividends or redeem or repurchase capital stock. We may need to request additional waivers from time to time with respect to the Loan Agreement and if we are unable to obtain a waiver that we need it could materially impact our business and financial results.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.

If our existing stockholders sell or indicate an intention to sell substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market after the lock-up and other legal restrictions on resale lapse, the market price of our common stock could decline. In addition, we may authorize our sales agent to sell our common stock from time to time as part of the ATM Offering. As of December 31, 2020,2023, there were approximately 72.5112.2 million shares of common stock outstanding. Of these shares, the shares of our common stock sold in our IPO, our underwritten follow-on offering, pursuant to our at-the-market equity offering program and in private placement transactions are currently freely tradable, without restriction (except as otherwise applicable), in the public market.

In addition, as of December 31, 2020,2023, approximately 23.330.6 million shares of common stock that are either subject to outstanding options and restricted stock units or reserved for future issuance under our equity incentive plans were eligible or may become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting schedules and Rule 144 and Rule 701 under the Securities Act. Certain of our outstanding options have exercise prices that are above our current stock price. See the tables describing our outstanding stock options in Note 12. Stock-Based Compensation and Employee Benefits to our financial statements included in this report. If these additional shares of common stock are sold or if it is perceived that they will be sold in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline.

Future sales and issuances of our common stock or rights to purchase common stock, including pursuant to our equity incentive plans and convertible notes, could result in additional dilution of the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our stock price to fall.

We have needed and anticipate we will need additional capital in the future to continue our planned operations. To the extent that we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience substantial dilution. Similar to prior or ongoing financing transactions like the ATM Offering or the exchange of our shares for shares of outstanding stock of Surface as part of the acquisition of Surface, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. If we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in more than one transaction, investors may be materially diluted by subsequent sales. These sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights superior to our existing stockholders. Any future debt financing may involve covenants that restrict our operations, including, among other restrictions, limitations on our ability to incur liens or additional debt, pay dividends, redeem our stock, make certain investments, and engage in certain merger, consolidation, or asset sale transactions. In addition, if we raise additional funds through licensing arrangements, it may be necessary to grant potentially valuable rights to our product candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Pursuant to our 2014 Equity Incentive Award Plan (the “2014 Plan”), our management is authorized to grant stock options and other equity-based awards to our employees, directors and consultants. Under the 2014 Plan, the number of shares of our common stock initially reserved for issuance is 2,300,000 plus the number of shares remaining available for future awards under the 2010 Plan. The number of shares available for future grant under the 2014 Plan will be increased by (i) the number of shares pursuant to outstanding awards under the 2010 Plan that are forfeited or lapse unexercised and which following the effective date are not issued under the 2010 Plan and (ii) an annual increase on the first day of each fiscal year beginning in 2015 and ending in 2024, equal to 4% of the shares of stock outstanding as of the last day of the preceding fiscal year, or such smaller number of shares as determined by our board of directors. Pursuant to our 2014 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“2014 ESPP”), eligible employees are able to acquire shares of our common stock at a discount to the prevailing market price, and an aggregate of 320,000 shares are initially available for issuance under the 2014 ESPP. The number of shares available for issuance under the 2014 ESPP will automatically increase on the first day of each fiscal year beginning in 2015 and ending in 2024, equal to 1% of the shares of common stock outstanding on the last day of the immediately preceding fiscal year or such smaller number of shares as determined by our board of directors. If our board of directors elects to increase the number of shares available for future grant under the 2014 Plan or the 2014 ESPP, our stockholders may experience additional dilution, which could cause our stock price to fall. Pursuant to our 2016 Employment Commencement Incentive Plan (the “2016 Plan”), our management is authorized to grant stock options and other equity-based awards to our new employees. The 2016 Plan is designed to comply with the inducement exemption contained in Nasdaq’s Rule 5635(c)(4), which provides for the grant of non-qualified stock options, restricted stock units, restricted stock awards, performance awards, dividend equivalents, deferred stock awards, deferred stock units, stock payment and stock appreciation rights to a person not previously an employee or director, or following a bona fide period of non-employment, as an inducement material to the individual’s entering into employment with us. As of December 31, 2020,2023, we reserved for future issuance under the 2016 Plan a total of 0.21.8 million shares of common stock for new employees. The 2016 Plan does not provide for any annual increases in the number of shares available.

In February 2016, we issued and sold $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 8.2% senior convertible notes due March 2022 (the “2022 Convertible Notes”). The holders may convert their 2022 Convertible Notes at their option at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding March 31, 2022. Upon conversion of the 2022 Convertible Notes by a holder, the holder will receive shares of our common stock, together, if applicable, with cash in lieu of any fractional share. The initial conversion rate is 44.7387 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of convertible notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $22.35 per share, and is subject to adjustment in certain events.

In April 2020, we issued and sold $230.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 1.5% senior convertible notes due April 2026 (the “2026 Convertible Notes”). The holders may convert their 2026 Convertible Notes at their option at any time prior to the close of business on the second scheduled trading day immediately before April 15, 2016.2026. Upon conversion of the 2026 Convertible Notes by a holder, the holder will receive shares of our common stock, together, if applicable, with cash in lieu of any fractional share. The initialSince inception, the conversion rate isprice has been 51.9224 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of convertible notes,the 2026 Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initialrepresents a conversion price of approximately $19.26 per share of common stock.

Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry, such as actual events or concerns involving liquidity, defaults, or non-performance by financial institutions or transactional counterparties, could adversely affect our business operations, financial condition, results of operations and is subjectprospects.

Our cash and cash equivalents are deposited or invested with several banks and other financial institutions. Actual events involving reduced or limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds, have in the past and may in the future lead to adjustmentmarket-wide liquidity problems. For example, in certain events.March 2023, Silicon Valley Bank was closed and taken over by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and subsequently had all of its customer deposits and other liabilities and substantially all loans and other assets acquired by First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company. We had approximately $117.7 million of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of December 31, 2023 with the majority held by custodians or in money market mutual funds that are not bank deposits. Our bank deposits are primarily held in accounts at three large banks that we believe to be stable at this time. Actual and perceived stability of banks can change from time to time and adverse perceptions by customers or investors about the banks where we deposit money could result in a material and adverse effect on our ability to access necessary cash. Investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including

higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources, could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to access funds for our basic operating expenses, financial obligations, payroll or fulfill our other important obligations. Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity, business operations, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock so any returns will be limited to the value of our stock.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain any future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to theany appreciation of their stock.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us or increase the cost of acquiring us, even if doing so would benefit our stockholders or remove our current management.