On July 22, 2015, the Company announced the Phase 3 EYEGUARD-B study of gevokizumab in patients with Behçet’s disease uveitis, run by its partner Servier, did not meet the primary endpoint of time to first acute ocular exacerbation.

On August 6, 2015, the Company announced it intends to reduce future external spending on the EYEGUARD program and implement organizational changes in the second half of 2015.  The Company is continuing to evaluate the size and scope of the organizational changes and, consequently is unable to determine the impact on the Company’s financial statements.

Legal Proceedings

On July 24, 2015, a purported securities class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 3:15-cv-3425) against the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Medical Officer.  The complaint asserts that all defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and SEC Rule 10b-5, by making materially false or misleading statements regarding the Company’s EYEGUARD-B study between November 6, 2014 and July 21, 2015. The plaintiffs also allege that Messrs. Varian and Rubin violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.  The plaintiffs seek class certification, an award of unspecified compensatory damages, an award of reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, and other further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Based on a review of the allegations, the Company believes that the plaintiffs’ allegations are without merit, and intends to vigorously defend against the claims.

On July 29, 2015, Medpace, Inc. (“Medpace”) filed a claim against the Company in the Ohio Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County.  The complaint seeks to recover payment for services allegedly provided by Medpace to the Company during 2012-2013 in connection with preparation of a new drug application and seeks damages of approximately $465,000 (inclusive of claimed contractual pre-judgement interest).  The Company contests that Medpace is entitled to any payment in connection with the services allegedly provided and is in the process of preparing an answer to the complaint.