INmune Bio Annual Report 2021

← All annual reports

FY2021 Annual Report · INmune Bio

Loading PDF…

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

☒ ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended: December 31, 2021

☐ TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ____________ to ____________

Commission file number: 001-38793

INMUNE BIO INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Nevada
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)

47-5205835
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)

INMUNE BIO INC.
David Moss
225 NE Mizner Blvd, Suite 640
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Phone: (858) 964 3720
(Address of principal executive offices)(Zip Code)

(858) 964 3720
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class
Common Stock ($.001 par value)

Trading Symbol
INMB

Name of Market Where Traded
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant (1) has ﬁled all reports required to be ﬁled by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to ﬁle such reports), and (2) has been subject to such ﬁling
requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such
files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated ﬁler, an accelerated ﬁler, a non-accelerated ﬁler, smaller reporting company, or an
emerging growth company. See the deﬁnitions of “large accelerated ﬁler,” “accelerated ﬁler,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth
company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer
Non-accelerated filer
Emerging Growth Company

☐
☒
☒

Accelerated filer
Smaller reporting company

☐
☒

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new
or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has ﬁled a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the eﬀectiveness of its internal
control over ﬁnancial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting ﬁrm that
prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-aﬃliates of the registrant was approximately $ 157 million as of the last
business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second ﬁscal quarter (June 30, 2021), based upon the closing sale price for the registrant’s
common stock on that day as reported by the NASDAQ Capital Market. Shares of common stock held by each oﬃcer and director of the registrant on
June 30, 2021 have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates.

As of March 3, 2022, there are 17,863,095 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share outstanding.

FORM 10-K
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021

Item Number and Caption
Forward-Looking Statements

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

1.
1A.
1B.
2.
3.
4.

PART II

5.
6.
7.
7A.
8.
9.
9A.
9B.
9C.

PART III

10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

PART IV

15.
16.

Business
Risk Factors
Unresolved Staff Comments
Properties
Legal Proceedings
Mine Safety Disclosures

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
[Reserved]
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting, and Financial Disclosure
Controls and Procedures
Other Information
Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections

Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance
Executive Compensation
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
Principal Accounting Fees and Services

Exhibits
Form 10-K Summary
Signatures

PART I

Page
ii

1
37
60
60
60
60

61
61
62
72
73
74
74
74
74

75
75
75
75
75

76
78
79

All brand names or trademarks appearing in this report are the property of their respective holders. Unless the context requires otherwise, references in
this report to “INmune Bio” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to INmune Bio, Inc., a Nevada corporation.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Annual Report”) contains “forward-looking statements” Forward-looking statements reﬂect our current
view about future events. When used in this Report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “future,” “intend,” “plan,” or the negative of
these terms and similar expressions, as they relate to us or our management, identify forward-looking statements. Such statements include, but are not
limited to, statements contained in this Report relating to our business strategy, our future operating results and liquidity and capital resources outlook.
Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions regarding our business, the economy and other future conditions.
Because forward–looking statements relate to the future, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to
predict. Our actual results may diﬀer materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. They are neither statements of historical fact
nor guarantees of assurance of future performance. We caution you therefore against relying on any of these forward-looking statements. Important
factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements include, without limitation, our ability to raise capital
to fund continuing operations; our ability to protect our intellectual property rights; the impact of any infringement actions or other litigation brought against
us; competition from other providers and products; our ability to develop and commercialize products and services; changes in government regulation;
our ability to complete capital raising transactions; and other factors (including the risks contained in the section of this Annual Report entitled “Risk
Factors”) relating to our industry, our operations and results of operations. Actual results may diﬀer signiﬁcantly from those anticipated, believed,
estimated, expected, intended or planned.

Factors or events that could cause our actual results to differ may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict all of them. We
cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Except as required by applicable law, including the securities laws of the
United States, we do not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform these statements to actual results.

Item 1. Business

PART I

Our Strategy

Our objective is to develop and commercialize our product candidates to treat diseases where the innate immune system is not functioning
normally and contributing to the patient’s disease. This can be in cancer where Natural Killer (“NK”) cells are inactive and contribute to a tumor’s evasion
of the immune system and/or disease progression while expression of MUC4 and immunosuppressive cells of the tumor microenvironment proliferate to
protect the tumor from attack by the patient’s immune system or this can be other diseases such as neurologic and metabolic diseases where chronic
inﬂammation results in innate immune system dysfunction. Our initial focus will be the treatment of cancer, treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease (“AD”), and
the treatment of Treatment Resistant Depression (“TRD”). In cancer, we plan to pursue two parallel development programs: (1) with INKmune we will
initially focus on treating women with resistant disease relapse refractory ovarian carcinoma and patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (high
risk MDS); (2) with INB03, we will treat patients with cancers that express MUC4, a mucinous polyglucan on the surface of some epithelial cancer cells,
that appears to predict resistant to immunotherapy including women with MUC4 expressing HER2+ breast cancer. Our third drug candidate XPro1595
(“XPro"), targets Alzheimer’s Disease and TRD. XPro for AD has completed Phase I trials and is being prepared for Phase II trials. XPro for TRD is being
prepared for Phase II trials. During 2021, we closed our Phase II clinical trial for treatment of pulmonary complications due to COVID-19 infection as the
Company determined it was a high-risk, low reward program due to the development of vaccinations and therapies which were not available when we
started the clinical trial. The principal components of our strategy to achieve this objective are to:

●

pursue development strategies and regulatory approval pathways that allow the treatment of oncology patients with our lead product
candidates, INKmune and INB03;

● pursue development strategies and regulatory approval pathways that allow the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases in patients with our

lead product candidates, XPro;

●

adopt a product development strategy that solidiﬁes our existing intellectual property (“IP”) to prevent competition and expand our IP suite
into related immunotherapeutic areas;

provide clear value propositions to third-party payers, such as managed care companies or government programs like Medicare, to merit
reimbursement for our product candidates; and

● Collaborate with other pharmaceutical companies with respect to, among other things, our INKmune and the DN-TNF platform that includes

INB03 and XPro product candidates and other products that will benefit from development or marketing beyond our current resources.

Pursue development and regulatory approval pathways. We believe INKmune, INB03 and XPro may be approvable under pathways that are
potentially shorter than those typically available for drug products based on novel active ingredients, including as an orphan drug under the Orphan Drug
Act and approval under the Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) Accelerated Approval Program (see “Government Regulation”). We have not yet
had a discussion with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) and/or FDA regarding such designation, but plan to do so in
the future. We believe the INKmune MDS cancer program may qualify for orphan status. We believe that it would take a minimum of six months to
receive Orphan Drug status once we submit an application and a minimum of 12 months to receive a designation once we submit an application. We
might never have these discussions, submit applications under the Orphan Drug Act as the FDA Accelerated Approval Program or have these
applications approved if we do.

Adopt a two-pronged patent strategy. We are pursuing a two-pronged product development strategy that will seek to solidify our existing IP to
prevent competition and expand our IP suite into related therapeutic areas. We are conﬁdent that our core in-licensed IP (see “Intellectual Property”) will
allow us both freedom-to-operate and provide robust protection from outside competition. We will continue to invest in expanding our patent suite. We
will also seek to further to strengthen our IP position by looking to in-license IP related to our focus on the innate immune system.

Provide clear value propositions to third-party payors to merit reimbursement for our product candidates . We are designing our clinical
development programs to demonstrate compelling, competitive advantages to patients and prescribers, and to demonstrate value propositions to third-
party payors. We believe the use of INKmune and/or INB03 in patients with a high risk of tumor progression and death from tumor should prolong
survival, improve the patient’s quality of life and decrease the total cost of care for patients with these lethal malignancies. For example, ovarian cancer
patients relapse frequently. Each relapse requires a complex treatment regimen that has decreasing beneﬁts. Treatment with INKmune as an out-patient
may provide a more durable remission and limit the need for treatment-associated hospitalizations. At the patient level, we believe INKmune and INB03
therapy, once approved, should improve survival and quality of life. At the payor level, we believe INKmune, once approved, should provide more
predictable costs and outcomes. Therapies for Alzheimer’s disease are needed for medical, social and economic reasons. The cost of Alzheimer’s
disease to the government is large and growing. The cost to families and care givers is real and burdensome. We believe treatment of patients with
dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease, may provide a strategy to alter the costly dynamic of this disease in society today.

Collaborate to maximize the value of our technology . We believe there are two reasons for us to enter collaborations with other companies. The
ﬁrst is the further development of INKmune, INB03 and XPro by either providing additional innovations to the product, including combination therapy
strategies, and/or providing resources to improve the speed and breadth of the development process. The second is to optimize the commercialization of
our products either globally or regionally. The ideal partner will benefit us in both ways.

We continue to look for ways to utilize our unique capabilities to optimize clinical application of cell therapies. We believe that we have identiﬁed
a way to manufacture human mesenchymal stem cells for the medical research and biotech community that oﬀers large volumes of high-quality, low
passage human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells with minimal batch-to-batch variability. We believe this may solve the problem associated with
supplying an adequate supply of human mesenchymal stem cells for clinical applications. We have established a reliable supply of human umbilical cords
based on our agreement with the Anthony Nolan Cord Blood Bank in the United Kingdom. We have developed a validated manufacturing process that
reliably produces contract manufacturer of the clinical grade (“cGMP”) quality mesenchymal stem cells that we call CORDstrom. The manufacturing
process can be performed at a contract manufacturing site under the direction of Mark Lowdell, the Company’s CSO. We will seek academic laboratories
and biopharma companies who need a reliable source of high quality pooled human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells for research of and
development of clinical products. Once identiﬁed, we plan to act as a cGMP for the development of therapeutic products by utilizing contract
manufacturers. Because the production of the product is not continuous, we do not expect to engage a contract manufacturer until we have a customer
identiﬁed. To date, we are supporting two academic clinical trials with CORDstrom. One program is a Phase 2 trial sponsored by the Great Ormond
Street Children’s Hospital in the UK treating children with erythematous bullousa, a disﬁguring skin disease in children that is similar to a second degree
burn and the second program is treatment of system lupus in adults. Both these studies are ongoing. INmune Bio is supplying the clinical product for
treatment of these patients. The Company does not know the results of these trials until they are announced by the principle investigators at the clinical

sites. We have identiﬁed contract manufacturers in the UK that have the capability to produce cGMP stem cells. We expect the commercial arrangement
with academic laboratories or biopharma companies to be a combination of fee-for-service and licensing that does not require additional investment by
us. We will be opportunistic in pursuing therapeutic opportunities for our own portfolio with this platform in the future if resources become available. The
regulatory path for therapeutic applications of the mesenchymal stem cell products is well established and similar to the regulatory approval process for
other cell therapies. We will only be responsible for regulatory compliance related to manufacturing of the mesenchymal stem cells when the product is
being developed by a third party. When developing a therapeutic product for the Company’s commercial portfolio, the Company will be responsible for all
aspects of the regulatory process.

Overview of Immunotherapy for Cancer

The immune system has two parts, innate and adaptive. The innate immune system is the body’s ﬁrst line of defense against an infection,
providing immediate, non-speciﬁc responses to eliminate harmful cells in the body. Components of the innate immune system include cytokines,
chemokines, macrophages, neutrophils and NK cells, among others.

The adaptive immune system is often initially triggered by the innate immune system, mounts a delayed response against diseased cells and
plays a role protecting against re-infection. An adaptive immune response is highly speciﬁc to a pathogen or antigen and is developed or learned from
prior exposure. Key components of the adaptive immune system include antibodies which bind to antigens and mark them for destruction by other
immune cells, B-cells which produce these antibodies upon exposure to antigens, and T-cells which attack and eliminate the diseased cells.

The biopharmaceutical industry has made signiﬁcant advances in harnessing speciﬁc components of innate and adaptive immune systems for

therapeutic use. Some of these approaches are summarized below.

Cytokines. One of the early applications of immunotherapy is the use of cytokines, including interferons and interleukin-2 (“IL-2”). Interferons are
molecules that inhibit the growth and replication of diseased cells and stimulate innate immune cells to attack them. They have been used as standard of
care for hepatitis B and C and multiple sclerosis, and to a lesser extent, as treatment for certain cancers, including chronic myeloid leukemia, cutaneous
T-cell lymphoma, myeloma and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. However, the use of interferons has generally decreased over the years due to serious
adverse events (e.g., ﬂu-like symptoms and dramatic weight loss) and introduction of new therapies with higher eﬃcacy, better safety proﬁles and more
convenient administration although Alpha-interferon remains the treatment of choice for some hematological conditions such as polycythemia. IL-2
activates T-cells and NK cells to attack diseased cells. IL-2 has been used to treat select cancers, but due to its relatively poor safety proﬁle, physicians
often only resort to this therapy for the most advanced settings. Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha (“TNF”) is the focus of INB03. TNF biology has four
elements that include two cytokines, soluble TNF and trans-membrane TNF (“sTNF” and “tmTNF,” respectively), and two receptors, TNF Receptor 1 and
2 (“TNFR1” and “TNFR2”). The biology of TNF ligation of TNFR varies dramatically based on what elements of the TNF system that are used. sTNF
binding to TNFR1 is responsible for inﬂammation and cell death while sTNF binding to TNFR2 promotes proliferation of regulatory T cells (“Treg”). In
patients with advanced cancers, increased sTNF is not favorable to long-term survival because it promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transformation and
metastasis while making the tumor microenvironment more immunosuppressive promoting resistance to therapy. In the CNS, sTNF promotes neuronal
cell death, demyelination and synaptic pruning while tmTNF promotes nerve cell survival, improves synaptic function and stimulates remyelination. In
brief, sTNF is the “bad” TNF and tmTNF is the “good” TNF. In patients with cancer, infection or neurologic disease, blockade of tmTNF function has
negative consequences such as immunosuppression, increased infection, synaptic dysfunction and demyelination.

Antibody therapy. Antibodies exist in three formats: monoclonals (“mAbs”), oligo/polyclonal and antibody-drug conjugates. mAbs represent an
eﬀective therapeutic modality and are important to the treatment paradigm of various diseases. Drug manufacturers have leveraged mAbs’ ability to
induce an antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, or ADCC eﬀect to develop better treatments that prolong survival and quality of life of patients.
In addition, mAbs designed to inhibit speciﬁc checkpoints in the immune system have overcome in vivo immune suppression and the resulting immune
responses have led to profound therapeutic beneﬁt in some patients. However, the degree of eﬃcacy of these therapies is heavily reliant on the immune
system of patients, many of whom are severely immuno-compromised. In addition, mAbs are manufactured through a complex process that requires
puriﬁcation of cell products created from a cell line. Polyspeciﬁc antibodies, for example bi-speciﬁc antibodies, are able to target more than one antigen.
These are often used to bring and eﬀector T cell in contact with a target cell. Antibody drug conjugates are mAbs attached to a toxin, chemotherapy or
radio therapy that delivers the cancer killing payload directly to the cancer.

Dendritic Cell Therapies. This approach is designed to indirectly stimulate a patient’s T-cells by leveraging the role of dendritic cells in
presenting antigens to T-cells. Cancer vaccines are the most common application of dendritic cells. The only FDA-approved dendritic cell therapy is
PROVENGE, which entails collecting monocytes from the patient, maturing them into dendritic cells, “loading” ex vivo with the patient’s cancer antigens,
and then re-infusing in the patient. Currently, this process is cumbersome and expensive, and again, relies on an intact and eﬀective immune system of
the patient. There are additional ongoing preclinical studies and clinical trials being conducted by our competitors aimed at addressing certain of the
limitations associated with this approach. To date, current clinical results of dendritic cell therapies have been mixed.

CAR-T and TCR Therapies. T-cells recognize diseased cells by receptors engaging with antigens that are present on or inside the diseased
cells. CAR-T therapy entails genetically engineering T-cells to express synthetic CARs that direct T-cells to antigens on the surface of cancer cells. TCR
therapy modiﬁes T-cells to express high-aﬃnity tumor speciﬁc TCRs that recognize intra-cellular antigens that must be presented on the surface of target
cells. In early clinical trials, CAR-T and TCR therapies have demonstrated impressive anti-tumor activity in a narrow spectrum of hematologic cancers
and garnered signiﬁcant attention by research institutions and biopharmaceutical companies. We believe a key limitation of adaptive autologous
immunotherapy is the need to retrieve non-compromised immune cells from a cancer patient which requires a complex and costly manufacturing
process to develop the therapy. The complexity of this personalized process is reﬂected in the price of the two approved therapies. CAR-T therapies -
tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel for advanced leukemia and lymphoma respectively. The cost of a single therapy is many hundreds of
thousands of dollars. As a consequence of this need to harvest active T-cells, current Phase I clinical trials for autologous CAR-T cell therapy in large part
enroll patients from highly selected, often relatively early-stage disease in a narrow spectrum of cancers, including bulky hematological cancers. In
addition, Phase I clinical trials of CAR-T cell immunotherapy have reported severe adverse toxicities of cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity,
requiring hospitalization, pre-conditioning and, in some instances, intensive care unit admission following side eﬀects associated with cytokine release
syndrome. As a result, though our competitors continue to develop their CAR-T and TCR product candidates with the goal of addressing certain of the
limitations associated with these approaches, we believe these serious challenges may limit their potential and use in a variety of indications, including

solid tumors.

Checkpoint Inhibitors. Immune cells express proteins that are immune checkpoints that control and down-regulate the immune response.
These are best deﬁned in T lymphocytes and include PD-1, CTLA-4, TIM-3 and LAG3. Tumor cells express the ligands to these receptors. When T cells
bind the ligand to these proteins on the tumor cells, the T cell is turned oﬀ and does not attempt to attack the tumor cell. Thus, checkpoint inhibitors
(“CPI”) are part of the complex strategy used by the tumor to evade the patient’s immune system and are responsible for resistance to immunotherapy.
Biopharmaceutical companies have successfully developed CPI that block the receptor/ligand interaction to promote the adaptive immune response to
the tumor. Six CPI are currently approved, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab, and ipilimumab for a wide variety of solid
tumors including melanoma, lung, bladder, gastric cancers and others. More CPI are in development and more tumor types will be added to the list of
sensitive tumors over the next years. CPI have become the backbone of cancer therapy and are expected to be the best -selling class of drugs by 2027.

NK Cells. NK cells typically represent approximately 2% to 13% of circulating lymphocytes and are a critical component of the immune system
responsible for innate immunity. Unlike adaptive immune cells, they are ever present and ready to attack, having the inherent ability to detect and
eliminate diseased cells without the need for antigen presentation, which is why they are called “natural killers.”

NK cells bind to stress ligands expressed by the diseased cells and directly eliminate them. This binding induces NK cells to release cytokines,
including, interferons and GM-CSF, which are integral in recruiting additional innate and adaptive immune responses by the host. NK cells also represent
a critical eﬀector cell for ADCC, whereby target cells bound with human antibodies, whether made by the patient’s body or administered, are selectively
destroyed by the NK cells.

Our Innate Immune Dominant-Negative TNF product candidate

We renamed XPro, which we license from Xencor, to INB03 when it is used for cancer related indications. We will continue to call the drug XPro
when used for treatment of neuropsychiatric diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease and TRD discussed below. INB03 and XPro are the same drug with
diﬀerent names for marketing purposes. INB03 is a novel innate immune system check-point inhibitor that we believe decreases expression of MUC4 by
the tumor, an important resistance mechanism to immunotherapy, decreases proliferation of MDSC, promotes recruitment of cytotoxic T cells to the TME
and may convert immunosuppressive tumor macrophages into tumor phagocytic macrophages. In murine models, these changes make the tumor
reverse resistance to treatment with immunotherapy alone or in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) such a lapatinib. MUC4 expression is
increased by sTNF. Resistance to trastuzumab therapy by MUC4 expressing HER2+ breast and gastric cancer cells is driven by steric hinderance. By
neutralizing sTNF with INB03, MUC4 expression decreases allow trastuzumab to bind HER2/neu. The mechanism by which combination of INB03 with
TKI improves eﬃcacy over TKI alone remains under investigation. By using INB03 as part of combination therapy for cancer, we believe the patient’s
dysregulated immune response, a hallmark of cancer progression and resistance to therapy, to be converted to a coordinated immune response that can
overcome resistance mechanisms to immunotherapy. These immune responses have been studied in at least two animal models. In a murine model of
an inﬂammatory cancer, where 3-methylcholanthrese is given to mice in a subcutaneous injection that causes the development of multiple cutaneous
ﬁbrosarcoma. This model was developed by Y Akamatsu in 1967 while working at the National Cancer Institute of the NIH. In research published by
Professor Nikola Vujanovic in Cancer Immunology Research in 2016, treatment with INB03 resulted in smaller and fewer cancers with increased survival.
INB03 is an engineered PEGylated protein that neutralizes human soluble TNF, a human inﬂammatory cytokine that is increased in patients with
advanced cancer. By specifically neutralizing the cytokine, there is decreased phosphorylation of STAT3, an essential step required for the proliferation of
the MDSC population, and secretion of the immunosuppressive cytokines. The combination of decreased MDSC proliferation and decreased
immunosuppressive cytokines allows the immune system to respond to the tumor. This data was published in an article entitled Inhibition of Soluble
Tumor Necrosis Factor Prevents Chemically Induced Carcinogenesis in Mice in Cancer Immunology Research in Cancer Immunology Research 2016. In
summary, INB03 functions as an innate immune system checkpoint inhibitor by eliminating the population of MDSC that provides an immunosuppressive
shield protecting the tumor, the patient’s immune system is able to function normally to the beneﬁt of the patient – it can attack the tumor. TNF plays an
important role in breast cancer (Schillaci R, Front. Oncol., 22 April 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00584). In a murine model of trastuzumab
resistant breast cancer using JMIT-1 cells, a human cell line of HER2 positive breast cancer resistant to trastuzumab placed into immunocompromised
mice, INB03 downregulates MUC4 from the surface of the JMIT-1 HER2+ breast cancer cells to allow the trastuzumab resistant cells to become
trastuzumab sensitive (Figure A from Bruni, NYAS 2020) to decrease tumor growth (from Schillaci SABCS 2018, Figure B). JMIT-1 cells are also
resistant to lapatinib, a TKI inhibitor used as a second line therapy in women with trastuzumab resistant HER2+ breast cancer. The addition of INB03 to
lapatinib in the animal model reverses lapatinib resistance in part by decreasing expression of MUC4 (from Bruni NYAS 2020, Figure C). In addition to
decreasing resistance to trastuzumab by decreasing MUC4 expression, INB03 decreases the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (Schillaci
SABCS 2018, Bruni NYAS 2020). Recently, Dr. Schillaci reported the MUC4 expressing triple negative breast (TNBC) cancer patients have a worse
overall survival. (Schillaci SABCS 2021). These data may be relevant to all tumors that express HER2 or MUC4 including upper gastrointestinal
malignancies such as gastric and pancreatic cancer. We believe MUC4 expression is a biomarker of resistance that may dictate changes therapeutic
strategy by clinical teams

Because INB03 targets the patient’s immune system and not the tumor, we believe INB03 is an immunotherapy that can be used to treat many
types of hematologic malignancies and solid tumors as part of combination therapy. The decision to use INB03 in a patient will be based on biomarkers
that should predict that a patient will beneﬁt from treatment with the drug. We believe the ideal biomarker is easy to use and is determined before
treatment begins. MUC4 expression by epithelial tumors is an example of this type of biomarker. Our Phase I clinical trial preceded the identiﬁcation of
MUC4 as a biomarker and focused on using INB03 as monotherapy. This is a typical Phase I clinical trial design for ﬁrst-in-man trials in cancer. We
expect to use INB03 as part of combination therapy with approved cancer therapies as part of Phase II development. We do not expect to need to modify
INB03 therapy to treat each diﬀerent type of cancer, because INB03 therapy targets the immune system, not the cancer. We do expect to develop the
INB03 beyond Phase II to target a speciﬁc type of cancer to meet the current system of regulatory approval. For instance, INB03 may be approved to
treat patients with HER2+/MUC4+ breast cancer. To get subsequent approval for the treatment of patients with MUC4+ TNBC or MUC4+ pancreatic
cancer, we will need to perform a pivotal trial in patients with TNBC and pancreatic cancer respectively. After the ﬁrst regulatory approval, if and when
achieved, we believe the diﬃculty and cost of achieving these labels extensions will decline with each successive approval. At this time, we cannot
predict if patients without biomarkers of inﬂammation, elevated MDSC or cytokines, or increased expression of MUC4 will beneﬁt from treatment with
INB03. Those studies may be performed in the future, but they are not a priority.

XPro neutralizes soluble TNF in the brain in exactly the same way INB03 neutralizes soluble TNF in the tumor microenvironment but the eﬀects
of soluble TNF neutralization in the brain are diﬀerent. The cause of the destructive neuroinﬂammation in the brain are microglial and astroglial cells. The
glial cell are two of four cells in the neural unit that also includes oligodentrocytes and nerve cells. Activated microglial cells are considered the resident
macrophages of the brain. The primary role of microglial cells is to protect the neural unit from infection. When innate immune dysfunction causes chronic
inﬂammation, activated microglial cells produce soluble TNF that activates astrocytes. Activated glial cells cause nerve cell and oligodrocyte dysfunction

that results in synaptic pruning, nerve cell death and demyelination of neurons. These pathologies contribute, in part, to neurodegenerative diseases
such as AD, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, MS, Huntington’s disease, glaucoma and TBI (traumatic brain injury) may contribute to neuropsychiatric diseases
such as depression, bi-polar disease, sleep disorders, autism, schizophrenia and PTSD. In the setting of AD, microglial activation causes dendritic
pruning, synaptic dysfunction and nerve cell death that contributes to cognitive decline and the behavioral manifestations of AD including depression,
aggressiveness, sleep disorders, hallucinations and anhedonia. Elimination of microglial activation should reverse these symptoms. Because soluble TNF
is the apex cytokine in the inﬂammatory cytokine cascade, neutralization of soluble TNF with XPro should prevent glial activation and normalizes function
of the neural unit.

The Company has completed a Phase I trial using XPro to reverse neuroinﬂammation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. The trial was
performed in Australia and is partially funded by a $1M USD Part-the-Cloud Award from the Alzheimer’s Association. The clinical trial is the ﬁrst in the
Company’s development program for the treatment of dementia. The open label, dose escalation trial in patients with Alzheimer’s disease with
biomarkers of peripheral inﬂammation (one of CRP>1.5mg/L, HgbA1c>6.0, ESR>10sec or have ApoE4) treats the patients with XPro as a once-a-week
subcutaneous injection for 3 months. Patients have multiple biomarkers of neuroinﬂammation tested before and during therapy including soluble
biomarkers in blood and cerebral spinal ﬂuid, behavioral biomarkers (neuropsychiatric symptoms of AD) and neuroimaging biomarkers using MRI. The
primary goal of this short, open label study is to demonstrate that treatment with XPro decreases neuroinflammation safely and to define the dose of XPro
to use in the Phase II trial. Studies of cognitive function are performed on the patients but are not expected to show signiﬁcant change because of the
short duration of the trial and the wide range of disability in patients enrolled in the clinical trial (MMSE range: 24-12). The goal of the planned Phase II
trial will be to demonstrate the prolonged control of neuroinﬂammation in patients with dementia will help control cognitive decline. The Company plans
two Phase II trials, one each in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild AD.

The trial enrolled 18 patients at doses of 0.3, 0.6 and 1.0mg/kg given once a week as subcutaneous injection for three months. Patients in the
10mg/kg group were oﬀered extended us of the drug for up to 12 months. Three patients remained on XPro for 12 months. Preliminary data was
presented in a webinar on 13 July 2020. Neuroimaging data from six patients were presented in the ﬁgure below. In summary, treatment with XPro at
either 0.3 or 1.0mg/kg once-a-week as a subcutaneous injection (low and target dose respectively) decreased white matter free water (WMFW) as
measured by MRI. WMFW is a validated biomarker of neuroinﬂammation. Although the number of patients is low, there was a dose response with a
greater decrease in WMFW in the target dose compared to the low dose group. An analysis of inﬂammation in white matter tracts demonstrated a
signiﬁcant decrease in WMFW (40%; range 20-52%) in the arcute fasciculus, a white matter tract important in the control of language and short-term
memory (Figure D). These data suggest XPro is decreasing neuroinﬂammation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease who have biomarkers of peripheral
inflammation.

Additional data was presented on January 21, 2021. The goal of the January 21 data release was to show a correlation between the white matter
free water, a novel biomarker of inﬂammation with cerebral spinal ﬂuid (“CSF”) cytokines and chemokine levels, a traditional measure neuroinﬂammation.
CSF cytokine/chemokines were measure in 9 patients before and after 12 weeks of weekly therapy with XPro using a panel from OLINK Target 48
Cytokine (https://www.olink.com/products/olink-target-48-cytokine/), that measures 45 (Figure AD1).

In the 6 patients in the 1mg/kg per week dose, only one cytokine and chemokine, interferon gamma (INFg) did not change in the CSF of patients,
the remainder all decreased on average of 15%. Using data from all patients treated for 12 weeks (3 low dose, 6 target dose), a high correlation
(R2=.7561) between the white matter free water safe mask and the inﬂammation composite score is shown in ﬁgure AD2. The data analyzed provides
evidence that XPro decreases neuroinflammation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease.

the

CSF

We believe these data support the use of XPro to treat other diseases where neuroinﬂammation is a part of the pathophysiology of the disease.
The company studied the consequences of decreasing neuroinﬂammation in the 6 patients from target dose group (XPro 1mg/kg for 12 weeks) be
looking
platform
(https://www.proteomics.com/services/tmtcalibrator-workflow). A large data set of proteins were identiﬁed. Early analysis of the data focusing on 26 AD
related proteins demonstrated changes in inﬂammation, neuronal and synaptic proteins caused by decreasing neuroinﬂammation after treatment with
XPro (Figure AD3). The proteome also demonstrated a clear dose response with a greater number of proteins being aﬀected by the target dose
compared to low dose XPro therapy (0.3 vs 1.0 mg/kg/week for 12 weeks) (Figure AD4). The CSF proteome data is only partially analyzed. Additional
data may result from these ongoing analytics.

Calibrator™

technology

Proteome

proteome

Sciences

using

TMT

their

for

The results of the Phase I study demonstrates that XPro safely decreases neuroinﬂammation in patients with AD who have biomarkers of
peripheral inﬂammation or are ApoE4 positive when given for at least 3 months at the 1mg/kg once a week dose. Decreasing neuroinﬂammation with
XPro appears to decrease neurodegeneration and improve synaptic function and promote remyelination. The biologic characteristics suggests XPro
therapy in patients with peripheral biomarkers of inﬂammation or ApoE4 allele(s) may impact cognitive decline. Although there were anecdotes of
improved cognitive function in patients receiving the target dose of XPro, this cannot be veriﬁed because the trial was not a blinded, randomized trial.
The impact on cognition of controlling neuroinflammation with XPro will be studied in the Phase II programs.

The Company plans two Phase II trials in patients with AD with biomarkers of inﬂammation. A blinded randomized trial in patients with mild AD
plans to enroll 201 patients in a 2:1 ratio (XPro:placebo) at 1mg/kg once a week. Patients will be treated for 6 months. A patient enrichment strategy will
be used to ensure patients have neuroinﬂammation – patients must have at least two of elevated CRP, hemoglobinA1c, ESR or have an ApoE4 allele.
The primary end-point is Early/Mild Alzheimer’s Cognitive Composite (EMACC), a sensitive cognitive end-point validated for use in patients with early
AD. Secondary cognitive (ADAS-Cog13, CDR-SB and NPI) and functional (GAS, ADCS-ADL) end-points will be measured. Biomarkers of inﬂammation
using white and gray matter analytics measured by MRI DTI similar to those used in the Phase I trial will also be used. All patients will be eligible to
continue on XPro for at least 6 additional months. Clinical and MRI metrics will be followed during the extension trial.

The second Phase II trial will be a blinded randomized trial in patients with MCI in which the Company plans to enroll 60 patients in two arms in a
2:1 ratio (1mg/kg/week XPro, placebo). Patients will be treated for 3 months. Patients must have at least one ApoE4 allele to qualify for the trial. The
primary end-point is EMACC, a sensitive cognitive end-point validated for use in patients with early AD. Secondary clinical endpoints include the CDR-
SB, Cogstate Battery, E-Cog, NPI, and ADCS-ADL. Imaging endpoints of neuroinﬂammation (White matter free water), white matter integrity (apparent
ﬁber density, radial diﬀusivity), and gray matter quality (cortical disarray measurement) will be assessed via MRI. Changes in brain metabolism will be
assessed via FDG-PET. Additional secondary measures of function include EEG, and speech and language. All patients will be eligible to continue on
XPro for at least 9 additional months. Clinical and MRI metrics will be followed during the extension trial. The Company may amend the clinical trial
design from time-to-time to improve the quality of the data or the probability of success.

Eﬀective therapy for TRD is a large unmet need. Twenty percent of patients with a Major Depressive Disorder have TRD. Once third of TRD
patients have peripheral biomarkers to inﬂammation (elevated CRP). This is a large patient population. The role of TNF and anti-TNF therapeutics was
explored in a small open label clinical trial by Prof. Andrew Miller, MD of Emory University whereby it was demonstrated that patients which have
elevated TNF levels responded to treatment with infliximab (Miller, 2011).

The Company received a $2.9M USD award from the National Institute of Mental Health (“NIMH”) to treat TRD with XPro. The blinded,
randomized Phase II trial will use a biomarkers of peripheral inﬂammation to select patients with TRD for enrollment. Patients will be treated for 6 weeks.
Primary end-points include both clinical and neuroimaging measures. The ﬁnal trial design is ongoing and discussions with the FDA are not complete.
The Company anticipates receiving authorization to initiate the clinical trial in the second half of 2022.

INB03 and XPro are delivered as a subcutaneous injection, similar to an insulin treatment, given one to three times per week. Because this is a
simple subcutaneous injection similar to an insulin injection (the therapy patients give themselves for treatment of Type 1 diabetes mellitus), we expect
patients to administer the therapy to themselves and not require expensive or logistically challenging clinic visits to receive the therapy.

Three step process to preparation for INB03 and XPro for human clinical trials:

Release of INB03 and XPro drug supply

GMP DN-TNF product (INB03 and XPro) are available for clinical development after completion of release testing. The annual process for release testing
was completed in February 2018, January 2019, December 2019 and November 2020. The supply of DN-TNF product is limited, but allowed completion
of the Phase I study in Alzheimer’s disease and support of patients in the extension study. For future trials, new batches of XPro have been produced.
The Company engaged KBI Biopharma to manufacture 6 lots of XPro/INB03 at the Boulder, Colorado facility using the original master cell bank and
updated manufacturing process. Two lots have been converted into drug product using the US ﬁll/ﬁnish facility of Vetter Pharma. Two of the lots are
frozen as drug substance at -80C with a plan to convert to drug product the second half of 2023. The final two lots are frozen as a cell paste with a plan to
process to drug substance in during 2023 or 2024 as needed to support the clinical trials. We plan to use a two-step approach to improve the yield of the
drug substance from the fermentation process. We hope to improve the yield of the drug product using the existing E.coli based system. Once the new
process is validated and functional, we will perform a manufacturing campaign drug for future clinical trials. In the future, the Company may consider a
strain change to improve yield of the fermentation step further. The decision for strain improvements and strain change will be made in the future as

clinical development programs proceed.

Interaction with Regulatory Authorities Regarding INB03 and XPro Development

We have completed a Phase I trial with INB03 in oncology and a Phase I trial with XPro in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. The Phase II
program with Alzheimer’s disease will start ﬁrst half 2022. The Phase I trial with XPro in patients with Alzheimer’s disease is performed in Australia under
the regulatory authority of the TGA using the Clinical Trials Exemption (“CTX”) scheme. Our ﬁrst interaction with the regulatory body occurred in March
2018. The Company received approval to initiate the Phase I trial with INB03 in patients with advanced solid tumors on May 21, 2018. The second
interaction with the regulatory body occurred in March 2019. The Company received approval to initiate the Phase I trial with XPro in patients with
Alzheimer’s disease in May 2019 and received authorization to start the Phase II trial in patients with mild AD on January 5, 2022. Our ﬁrst interaction
with the FDA occurred in July 2020 as part of the Phase II Quellor program to treat respiratory failure in patients hospitalized with COVID19 infection. We
plan to complete the regulatory process for the Phase II clinical trials in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and Phase II TRD clinical trials with the FDA
during the first half of 2022.

INB03 Product Development Path: Proposed Phase II Studies in patients with cancer

Phase I open label study in patients with advance solid tumors has been completed. All future studies cancer will use INB03 as part of
combination therapy. Based on the results of the Phase I study and work performed and reported by Prof. Roxana Schillaci, we are planning a study of
INB03 in combination with currently approved second line therapy for treatment of tumors that express MUC4. This may include a study in women with
trastuzumab resistant HER2+ metastatic breast cancer where primary or secondary resistance to trastuzumab is common and may include women with
brain metastasis. Alternatively, the Phase II trial may include women with MUC4+ TNBC or patients with MUC4+/HER2+ gastric cancer or MUC4+
pancreatic cancer. These trials will not be initiated until the COVID-19 pandemic has run its course. We do not expect to treat patients in an oncology
INB03 Phase II trial with INB03 before 2023. Pre-clinical studies of INB03 in MUC4 expressing tumors continue.

INB03 Registration Studies and/or Partnering

We plan to pursue an eﬃcient registration strategy using INB03 to improve the lives of patients with cancer and biomarkers of inﬂammation such
as MUC4. We believe that this strategy has use across many types of solid tumors including patients who have failed CPI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors
(“TKI”) and anti-cancer antibody therapy such as trastuzumab monoclonal antibodies and trastuzumab based antibody drug conjugates. We have an
active partnering position as it relates to INB03 development in cancer, although no partnering discussion are underway at this time. We do not expect
partnering discussions to begin until Phase II data demonstrating efficacy of INB03 as part of combination therapy for cancer are available.

Our INB03 platform can be used in cancer patients in many ways. The Phase I trial suggests the drug should not be used alone to treat cancer
but used in combination with, but not limited to, other cancer therapies including cytotoxic chemotherapy, immunotherapy, radiation and surgery. We
believe that INB03 can also be used to treat many types of hematologic and epithelial cancers.

INB03 and XPro Regulatory Strategy

Drugs from the DN-TNF platform will be developed using adequately powered, well designed studies with the goal to demonstrate a meaningful
clinical beneﬁt to patients. Beyond Phase I, these will be blinded, randomized clinical trials using validated end-points that have been authorized by a
regulatory authority – the FDA, TGA, MHRA, EMA, etc. Currently, all planned studies will be performed in North America, AUS and/or the UK. Studies
will be expanded to Europe and beyond as resources permit and development needs expand. Because there are no therapies similar to INB03 or XPro
approved in any market and no therapies approved for the treatment of the diseases we are pursuing, we plan to take advantage of the regulatory
opportunities afforded to therapies that treat markets with a high unmet need. In the U.S., this includes Orphan Drug Designation and expedited programs
for approval including Accelerated Approval, Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation, and priority review (see “Government
Regulation”), and in the setting of COVID-19, Emergency Use Authorization. We cannot predict which, if any, of these programs we will beneﬁt from
without further discussions with the FDA. Similar programs exist in the EU with the EMA. We will engage the EMA once we have initiated Phase II trials
in the United States and Australia.

Immunotherapy for Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease

XPro is being developed for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Microglial activation and neuroinﬂammation are important causes of the
synaptic dysfunction and nerve cell death that causes cognitive decline in patient with dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. The relationship between β
amyloid plaques and tau neuroﬁbrillary tangles, the traditional targets in AD drug development and neuroinﬂammation is complex. We believe targeting
plaques and tangles is not an effective treatment strategy, but that targeting neuroinflammation, the common pathway leading to synaptic dysfunction and
nerve cell death, may be an eﬀective treatment strategy. Substantial pre-clinical data supports the use of XPro in murine models of AD. Substantial
indirect data supports use of XPro in humans including a decreased risk of AD in patients treated with non-selective TNF inhibitors for rheumatoid
arthritis and treatment using direct injection into paraspinous venous plexus. Because of diﬀerent mechanism of action of XPro compared to the non-
selective TNF inhibitors, we expect a lower risk of immunosuppression and demyelinating complications such as multiple sclerosis (MS). The Company
reported preliminary data on July 13, 2020 and January 21, 2021 supporting the use of XPro to decrease neuroinﬂammation in patients with Alzheimer’s
disease and biomarkers of peripheral inflammation (see above).

We completed enrollment of patients into an open label, biomarker directed, Phase I clinical trial in AUS that approaches AD as an immunologic
disease. Patients with dementia with the diagnosis of AD with biomarkers of chronic inﬂammation that includes at least one of a hs-CRP>1.5 mg/L, a
ESR>10 mm/h, a HbgA1C>6.0% or are ApoE4 positive will be treated with XPro for 12 weeks. Three dosing cohorts were preformed – 0.3, 0.6 and 1.0
mg per week as a subcutaneous injection. Patients had multiple inﬂammatory biomarkers test before therapy, at 6 weeks and at 12 weeks. Biomarkers
were reported in blood and cerebral spinal ﬂuid, MRI measures of white matter tract neuroinﬂammation, axonal quality and axon myelin, and MRI
measures of gray matter quality after XPro therapy. Cognitive end-points were not the focus of the Phase 1 clinical trial because of the wide range of
disease severity enrolled and lack of a placebo group. Patients enrolled in the Phase I trial had MMSE ranging from 24 to 12. This wide range of disease
severity at the time of enrollment and the lack of a blinded concurrent control group did not allow for determination of cognitive beneﬁt beyond several

anecdotal reports. The ﬁrst patient was enrolled in the low dose 0.3mg/kg/week cohort in the last week of November 2019. The Safety Review
Committee met by teleconference on January 7, 2020 to review the course of the patients in the ﬁrst cohort and voted to open the second cohort,
1.0mg/kg/week, to enrollment. The ﬁrst patients were enrolled in the cohort the second week of February 2020. Based on preliminary data released on
July 13, 2020 and January 21, 2021, we closed after completion of a 0.6mg/kg treatment group. We canceled plans to treat patients with 3.0mg/kg. The
data from the Phase I trial allow the Company to choose a design the Phase II trials described above.

XPro Registration Studies and/or Partnering

We plan to aggressively pursue an eﬃcient registration strategy using XPro to improve the lives of patients with ADi. We deﬁne ADi as Alzheimer’s
disease with biomarkers of inﬂammation. We believe ADi is not the only indication for XPro in neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric diseases. We plan
to pursue other indications in neurodegenerative diseases as resources become available. We have received NIMH funding to support a Phase II TRD
program that hopes to start patient enrollment in the second half of 2022. We have an active partnering position as it relates to XPro development in
neurodegenerative and neuropshyciatric diseases, although no partnering discussion are underway at this time. There are two partnering opportunities
with this novel immunotherapy for the treatment of neurologic and psychiatric diseases. The ﬁrst is a traditional partnership focused on the developing
the drug for all neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric applications. The second is a more focused partnership developing XPro as part of a
combination therapy for a company’s existing therapy. After completion of proof-of-concept Phase II studies, we will decide what the most eﬃcient
registration strategy is available to the company with XPro. We may to have biopharma partners participate in this decision making. We may also seek to
be acquired at this stage.

INKmune: Our NK cell Directed Product Candidate

INKmune is our lead product candidate that converts the patient’s resting NK cells into cancer memory like NK cells, an essential step to allow
them to participate in the immune control the patient’s cancer. We have shown this works ex vivo in human tissue cell cultures, and we believe that this
will work in vivo which is the purpose of our planned clinical trials.

Cancers grow and relapse because they evade the immune system. In many cancers, NK cells are the most important cell for the elimination of
residual disease that causes cancer relapse. NK cells target cells based on a series of complex antigens on the cancer cell surface that signal the NK
cells to activate and kill the cancer cell. NK cells develop a memory like NK cell phenotype to enhance killing of cancer cells. This phenotype requires
multiple simultaneous signals to be delivered to the NK cells. A cocktail of three cytokines, IL12, IL15 and IL18 can be used to convert a resting NK cell to
cytokine induced memory like NK cells (CIML) [Fehneger 2016 ] or by INKmune priming with INB16 (TpNK – tumor primed NK cells). Although the
intracellular biology if these two strategies has yet to be worked out, they do not appear to be identical. In summary, INKmune converts resting NK cells
in to tumor killing memory like NK cells. (Figure 1 below).

The ability of NK cells to kill tumor cells depends on the strength and duration of the cell-cell interaction. This is call avidity. The higher the avidity
the greater the tumor cell killing. Cytokine stimulation may increase avidity of NK binding to some cancer cells whereas, in all experiments to date,
INKmune priming enhances NK binding to all cancer cells tested. The relative increase in avidity to speciﬁc cancer cells is cytokine speciﬁc; as shown
below, IL15 increases NK avidity for the ovarian cancer line SKOV-3 whereas IL2 has a limited eﬀect. IL15 primed NK cells lyse SKOV-3 cells whereas
IL2 primed NK do not. INKmune primed NK (TpNK) showed the highest avidity for the tumor cells and the highest level of cytotoxicity. It is likely that the
use of multiple cytokines will achieve the same level of avidity and cytotoxicity as INKmune but studies with multiple cytokines have not yet been
performed (Figure below).

We have demonstrated TpNK killing of many tumor types in laboratory studies. Tumor priming is eﬀective regardless of the source of the NK
cells (normal volunteers or patients with cancer) and in many types of tumors – both cell lines and primary tumors from patients. The principle of TpNK
killing has also been demonstrated in two Phase I trials in patient with acute myelogenous leukemia (“AML”). These trials were not supported by us and
used a ﬁrst-generation personalized cell therapy product and treatment strategy that is diﬀerent from the INKmune product and treatment strategy. In
these trials, haplo-identical NK cells obtained from a ﬁrst degree relative by leukapheresis were primed ex-vivo using a lysate of the parent cell line from
which we derived INB16 - INKmune. Once the TpNK therapy has been produced and passed quality testing, the patient received conditioning therapy
with chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and ﬂudarabine), the primed haplo-identical NK cells were given to patients by intravenous infusion. Two Phase I
clinical trials have been performed using that first-generation adoptive cell therapy treatment strategy. An investigator initiated trial performed at the Royal
Free Hospital in London 2009 was funded by a UK charity. Fifteen patients with relapsed, high-risk AML were enrolled in the trial. Because of drop-out
due to disease progression, delays in product production and complications of conditioning therapy, only 7 of the ﬁfteen patients were treated with the
TpNK cell product. Four of seven patients showed clear beneﬁt from the treatment with the TpNK product with prolonged relapse free remission and, in
one patient, conversion of a partial remission to full remission. None of the remissions were durable; all patients ultimately died from disease progression.
The safety of the product was found to be a combination of toxicity from the chemotherapy/radiotherapy conditioning regimen and the TpNK therapy. In
general, the complications were well tolerated although did require medical intervention including prolonged periods of aplasia in two heavily pretreated
patients that resolved with supportive care. The results of this study have been published in a medical journal (PLoS One. 2015 Jun 10;10(6):e0123416.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123416. eCollection 2015). In 2013, a second open label, multi-center trial was performed in the US using the same product
and procedures but targeting a slightly diﬀerent patient population. In the second trial, 12 patients in ﬁrst remission with AML were treated with the haplo-
identical TpNK product produced using the ﬁrst generation ex-vivo priming process. After conditioning with chemotherapy alone, the patients received
TpNK in three dosing cohorts – 3x10^5, 1x10^6 or 3x10^6 TpNK per kilogram. Patients were followed for safety and relapse free survival. This trial
conﬁrmed the safety of the TpNK treatment in patients with AML and reinforced many of the eﬃcacy ﬁndings seen in the ﬁrst trial with none of the
previously experienced side eﬀects. Patients beneﬁted from haplo-identical TpNK therapy with prolonged relapse free survival including two patients that
remain in remission more than 42 months after treatment. This trial has been published. (Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018 Mar 26. pii: S1083-
8791(18)30132-0. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.03.019.) The results of the laboratory and Phase I studies provide evidence that our strategy for treating
residual disease is sensible but unproven.

Because INKmune primes NK cells to target naturally occurring antigens, we believe INKmune can be used in to treat a wide variety of cancers
including hematologic malignancy (AML, MM, CML, high risk MDS) and solid tumors (renal, prostate, breast, ovarian, pancreas and lung). We expect the
list of INKmune sensitive tumors to continue to expand.

The primary role for INKmune will be an immunotherapy targeting residual disease in patients after debulking cancer therapies such as cytotoxic
chemotherapy and surgery. At this time, we plan to give INKmune as monotherapy. We do not rule out the possibility of using INKmune as part of
combination therapy in the future. We do not expect to need to modify INKmune to treat these additional types of cancer, because we believe INKmune is
a universal cancer therapy where “one size ﬁts all”. We believe for INKmune to receive regulatory approval for each cancer indication, clinical trials will
need to be performed which demonstrate its safety and eﬀectiveness as a treatment for each such cancer. We believe the diﬃculty and cost of achieving
these labels extensions will decline with each successive approval, if and when achieved. For example, if INKmune is proven to be eﬀective therapy in
patients with ovarian cancer and high-risk MDS, we will need to perform separate pivotal trials for approval in lung, prostate or renal cancer.

Three step process to preparation for INKmune human clinical trials:

INKmune GMP scale-up for Phase I/II clinical material

The working cell banks and individual INKmune product to be used in the patients for the clinical trial have been produced at the Centre for Cell,

Gene & Tissue Therapeutics at Royal Free Hospital / University College London to full cGMP (MHRA MIA(IMP)11149). All manufacturing has been under
the direction of Professor Mark Lowdell. The Company can produce enough INKmune to complete both Phase I clinical trials in women with ovarian
cancer and in patients with high-risk MDS. We have validated storage of INKmune for up over 3 years in vapor phase nitrogen and have a fully scalable,
closed system manufacturing process in validation which can produce up to 6 patient doses per week during phase I and II trials. At intermediate scale
we can manufacture 40 doses per week in a single 80 liter bioreactor. Importantly, we have validated the storage of INKmune at -80 oC for up to 27 days
which greatly facilitates the delivery and local storage of the drug for clinical trials and post commercialization use. In contrast, as far as we know all other
NK cell therapies and T cell therapies require complex shipping of drug products in vapor phase nitrogen below -150oC and specialized arrangements for
ongoing storage at the clinical sites. We may need additional INKmune for future clinical trials.

INKmune Biomarker Development Program

We have discovered two biomarker strategies that we believe can be used to demonstrate: i) who should receive INKmune therapy; ii) if the
INKmune therapy is working; and iii) when INKmune therapy should be repeated. For the initial Phase I/II trials in patients with ovarian cancer and high-
risk MDS, we expect the biomarker testing will be performed in a single laboratory under our direction. We may develop training programs for our
standard operating procedures to ensure uniform testing of the biomarkers to facilitate expansion of the clinical programs to multiple sites. We anticipate
that, in the future, the biomarker program may be a surrogate marker for both clinical effectiveness and marketing purposes.

Interaction with Regulatory Authorities Regarding INKmune Development

The INKmune Phase I studies in high-risk MDS and ovarian cancer will be performed in the UK and US. We met with the Medicines and
Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”), the UK version of the FDA as part of a Scientiﬁc Advice Meetings in preparation for submitting the
CTA for our ﬁrst planned program. The purpose of the meeting was to explain to the MHRA our manufacturing process and clinical plan for the
development of INKmune in a Phase I relapse/refractory ovarian cancer. We plan to expand the MDS program beyond the UK. This may include sites in
the EU and the US. We will need to work with the relevant regulatory authorities as we make those expansions. We will seek regulatory approval to start
the ovarian cancer program in the US after the first cohort of patients have been treated in the UK.

INKmune Product Development Path Proposed Phase I Study in patients with ovarian cancer

Pending the resolution of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2022, we plan to initiate an open label Phase I cancer study in patients with ovarian
carcinoma. Patients will be enrolled who have a low burden of relapse refractory disease and have peripheral blood or ascites NK cells which can
respond to INKmune in a laboratory test on NK function. The study design agreed upon after discussion with the MHRA on September 12, 2017 was for
a two-step Phase I/II study but this has been modified to an classic Phase I study followed by a randomized phase II. At present we anticipate the Phase I
to be performed under the modiﬁed CTA at a single UK site, Sheﬃeld University Hospital. We expect to initiate trial by the third quarter of 2022. In the
Phase I trial, women with relapse refractory ovarian cancer will be treated with INKmune, given as an intravenous infusion in a traditional open label
study to demonstrate safety and determine the dose of INKmune to be carried into the larger Phase II portion of the study. Based on pre-clinical studies
that indicate that women with relapsed/refractory ovarian cancer have NK cells in their peritoneal cavity that response to INKmune to kill SKOV3, an NK-
resistant ovarian cell line, we believe intravenous delivery of INKmune will be therapeutically eﬀective in treating intra-peritoneal disease. The key
secondary eﬃcacy end-points to be studied are i) increased NK cell priming as determined by multicolor ﬂow cytometry of NK cells from the patient; ii)
increased NK cell killing of SKOV3 tumor in a bioassay as shown in Figure 2 below; and iii) a decrease in tumor burden as measured by CA125 levels in
the blood. Once safety and the optimal INKmune dose have been determined, a randomized study of women treated with INKmune will be compared to a
group of control patients who receive only standard of care. We expect to treat six patients in the Phase I portion of the trial, but this number can increase
by as many as 18.

INKmune Product Development Path Proposed Phase I Study in patients with high-risk MDS

During 2021, we initiated an open label Phase I cancer study in patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (“MDS”). Patients are being
enrolled who have a low burden of disease after completion of conventional therapy. At present we anticipate the Phase I to be performed at two sites UK
site and will expand into additional sites in EU and/or US during 2022. The ﬁrst patients was enrolled in the ﬁrst quarter of 2021. In the Phase I trial,
patients with detectable residual disease in bone marrow and/or peripheral blood (<15% blasts by conventional tests) will be treated with intravenous
infusions of INKmune and monitored for changes in peripheral blood NK activation, NK function and changes in residual blast counts in blood and bone
marrow. We and others have previously shown that MDS patients with inadequate NK function have statistically signiﬁcantly poorer prognosis than
matched patients with normal levels of NK function (Tsirogianni et al 2019) and we have shown in laboratory experiments that the functional activity of NK
cells from MDS patients can be enhanced by exposure to INKmune. Moreover, INKmune-primed NK cells are not inhibited by the hypoxic conditions of
the diseased bone marrow microenvironment.

The ﬁrst patient was treated in the second quarter of 2021. The patient is now more than 6 months out from therapy with INKmune. The patient,
part of the ﬁrst cohort, received 1x10^8 INKmune cells on day 1,8 and 15 as an in-patient. The patient did not require any type of conditioning therapy or
cytokine support. The patient tolerated the three infusions without any problems. The patient underwent intensive monitoring over 120 days. There are 4
observations from this ﬁrst patient. The patient has dramatically increased the number of activated, “memory-like” NK cells in circulation. Memory-like NK
cells (mlNK) are activated NK cells with a unique cell surface protein phenotype and which show enhanced lysis of tumor cell in vitro. Post treatment with
INKmune, elevated levels of mlNK cells were present in the patients in the peripheral blood for more than 119 days when trial follow-up ceased. The
patient mlNK actively kill NK resistant cancer targets in vitro. Finally, the patient has had a signiﬁcant clinical improvement with a reduction of his ECOG
score from 2 to 0 and a significant reduction in blood product support.

Two compassionate use cases have also been treated. Both were young patients with AML who had failed previous hematopoietic stem cell
transplants (HSCT). The ﬁrst compassionate-treatment patient showed such improved neutrophil and platelet counts that she was discharged from
hospital for the ﬁrst time in six months. She remains well and at home three months under the care of her clinical team. The second patient treated
compassionately had failed two high risk HSCT and entered the course of INKmune therapy with high percentage of blasts in his bone marrow. His blood
NK cells responded in differentiation into mlNK as hoped but it is too early to determine if INKmune has provide any clinical benefit.

Because both INKmune programs are being run in the UK, delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic continues to delay enrolment into the MDS

clinical trial and is delaying site initiation for the ovarian cancer trial.

INKmune Registration Studies and/or Partnering

After completion of proof-of-concept Phase II studies with INKmune, we will decide whether to continue to develop INKmune as a treatment for
ovarian carcinoma indication and/or high risk MDS. Other solid cancers are of interest including nasopharyngeal cancer (“NPC”) which is a known target
for NK cells and an important unmet clinical need in emerging markets such as mainland China. Renal cell carcinoma is also a known target for
INKmune. We expect to have biopharma partners participate in this decision. We may also seek to be acquired at this stage or partner INKmune.
Although our development strategy is focused on North America and Europe, we believe INKmune will also be attractive for markets on the Paciﬁc Rim,
South Asia and South America, but will wait for partners to help with the development in those regions, however, at this time, we are not negotiating with
any potential partners.

Importantly, we have published data demonstrating INKmune eﬃcacy at priming allogeneic NK cells ex-vivo (described above) and this includes
priming of NK cells diﬀerentiated from cord-blood derived hematopoietic stem cells (Domogala et al Cytotherapy 2017: 19:710-720). Numerous
companies are developing therapeutic strategies using cord blood derived NK cell products and one or more may wish to partner with us to potentiate
their product by co-incubation or co-administration with INKmune. We are also aware of companies developing cytokine primed NK cells (CIML) for the
treatment of cancer. We believe tumor primed NK cells are superior to ex vivo or in vivo cytokine strategies. Data to support this belief should be
presented in 2022.

INKmune Regulatory Strategy

INKmune is a new therapy for the treatment of cancer that will need to be proven safe and eﬀective by well-designed clinical trials that show a
meaningful clinical beneﬁt to patients. We believe that registration trials will need to be designed as randomized trials in patients with cancer where one
group of patients received INKmune and another receive best available care. We received advice from the MHRA on September 12, 2017 on the design
the Phase I clinical trial for ovarian cancer. And have used that advice to plan both current phase I trials. We plan to initiate the Phase I trials with
INKmune in the United Kingdom under two clinical trials authorizations (“CTA”) – one for each indication. Both trials will be expanded to sites in the US
after opening of an IND. We expect those IND’s to be open by the end of 2022. If either phase I elicits “positive” data we plan to open one or more Phase
II programs to additional sites in the United Kingdom, EU and/or US. For each regulatory jurisdiction outside of the UK, the competent regulatory authority
will need to be engaged. In the US, that is the FDA. In the EU, it will be the country speciﬁc regulatory authority. These follow-on regulatory submissions
will include data from the patients treated in the UK in the clinical trials or as part of compassionate use. Because there are no therapies similar to

INKmune approved in any market, we plan to take advantage of the regulatory opportunities aﬀorded to therapies that treat small markets with a high
unmet need. In the U.S., this includes Orphan Drug Designation and expedited programs for approval including Accelerated Approval, Breakthrough
Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation, and priority review (see “Government Regulation”). We cannot predict which of these programs we will
beneﬁt from, if any at all, without further discussions with the FDA. Similar programs exist in the EU with the European Medicines Agencies (“EMA”) and
in the UK with the MHRA.

Emerging Market Opportunity

The cancer therapy market is large, diverse and competitive. Although the concept of immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies has been
around for more than 20 years, the concept that patient derived immunosuppressive factors was a barrier to eﬀective cancer treatment was recently
recognized and had its ﬁrst therapy approved just four years ago (ipilimumab, Yervoy, BMS, March 2011). Since then, more than ﬁve additional “check
point” inhibitors have been approved, but the market is in its infancy. Most of the focus on strategies for modulating tumor-based immunosuppression
focus is on the adaptive immune system (“T-cells”). The role of, and the importance of manipulating the innate immune system has more recently
become a target of therapeutic development. NK cells are part of the innate immune system and are critical in both tumor surveillance (prevention) and
treatment (killing). MDSCs and Tumor Associated Macrophages (TAM) are part of the innate immune system that only appear in the TME of patients with
cancer. The main role of the MDSC and TAM is to protect the tumor from attack by the patient’s immune system. Because T-cell focused strategies do
not have an eﬀect on the innate immune system, patient’s receiving such treatments may fail to recruit half of the patient’s immune system, the innate
immune system, to attack the patient’s cancer. Clinicians increasingly recognize that durable responses to cancer require a coordinated attack by the
patient’s adaptive and innate immune system. Normalizing the response of the innate immune system requires eliminating the dysregulated innate
immune response that decreases the patient’s ability to see and attack the cancer as well as mechanisms the protect the cancer from immunologic
attack (eﬀector and protector function respectively). INKmune primes NK cells to enable them to attack the tumor. INB03, by decreasing the
immunosuppressive function of MDSC and TAM, will lessen the immunosuppressive shield that protects the tumor from immunologic attack and, through
NK/DC crosstalk, recruit the adaptive immune system to the ﬁght and potentially increase local innate anti-tumor eﬀects such as improved NK cell
function and anti-tumor macrophage phagocytic activity.

Challenges in the Market for Our Product Candidates

The market for new oncology therapies is busy, complicated, and rapidly evolving. We will be competing with companies that are older, larger,
better ﬁnanced and have greater experience. There are two types of drug companies – development companies and commercial companies.
Development companies take the risk of developing new products to proof-of-concept. Once proof-of-concept has been achieved, if the drug provides
clinical beneﬁt, the product is usually acquired by a commercial company, which completes the drug’s clinical development and markets the product. We
are a development company which will seek to develop products such as INKmune from the bench to the bedside to demonstrate proof-of-concept. The
goal for us is to successfully develop such products to the point where they are attractive targets for potential partners/acquirers.

According to a recent Markets and Markets report, the immunotherapy market is growing rapidly at an annual rate of over 13%. Recently, the
market is biased towards T cell-based immunotherapies including bi-speciﬁc antibody therapies, checkpoint inhibitors and CAR-T cell-based therapies.
There are substantial numbers of clinical trials that are focused on the adaptive immune system versus clinical trials that are focused on the innate
immune system for the treatment of cancer. Our challenge will be to educate partners on the value of NK cell-based therapeutic strategies. The need to
educate people of the importance of INB03 is equally challenging. At the academic and investor level, there is little recognition of the role MUC4 plays in
causing resistance to immunotherapy. The concept of adding a drug to modify the immunosuppressive environment of the TME to allow immunotherapy
to be eﬀective is also new. We will be responsible for educating them on the importance of MUC4 expression, TAM, MDSC and why INB03 may be an
important addition to the oncologist’s armamentarium. We believe educating investors and partners about new therapeutic opportunities is an easier task
than trying to diﬀerentiate our company from the many other cancer immunotherapy companies. We plan to use a combination of publication,
presentation and investor relations to promote INKmune and INB03 and to educate the clinical, biopharma and investor community on the value of these
novel therapeutic approaches.

DN-TNF Competition

To our knowledge, there are no other innate immune system check-point inhibitors in development that combine the characteristics of
neutralizing soluble TNF, decreasing the population and function of MDSC while promoting NK/DC crosstalk that expands, decreases expression of
MUC4 and recruits the adaptive immune response to attack the patient’s tumor. Lilly is developing LY3022855, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody
designed to target the CSF1R that should inhibit MDSC from receiving CSF1 signals, decreasing their survival and relieving the eﬀect of MDSC in the
tumor. Daiichi Sankyo Inc., in collaboration with Bristol Myers Squibb, is testing DS-8273a, a TRIAL-R2 agonistic antibody in combination with a PDL1
inhibitor to decrease the number of MDSC in patients with colorectal cancer. Rgenix Inc., is developing RGX-104, an orally bioavailable small molecule
immunotherapy that targets LXR (liver X Receptor). RGX-104 reportedly depletes MDSC. Syntrix Biosystems is developing SX-682. SX-682 is a small-
molecule dual-inhibitor of CXCR1 and CXCR2, the chemokine receptors pivotal to tumor metastasis, therapy-resistance, and myeloid cell suppression of
cancer surveillance by the adaptive immune system. By blocking the CXCR1/2 pathway, SX-682 may prevent recruitment of MDSC to the tumor
microenvironment. The University of Minnesota has a trivalent antibody program aimed at treating patients with advanced hematologic malignancies.
This CD16/IL-15/CD33 (161533) Tri-Speciﬁc Killer Engagers (TriKes) product may target CD33+ MDSC. Siamab Therapeutics is developing an anti-
sialyl-Tn monoclonal antibody that targets MDSC in some tumor types. Clathera Biosciences, in collaboration with Incyte, a US based biotech, is
developing CB-1158 (INCB01158), an arginase inhibitor to decreases MDSC. A Phase II clinical trial is open that combines CB-1158 with nivolumab, an
anti-PD1 CPI marketed by Bristol Myers Squib. Reata Pharmaceuticals is testing omaveloxolone (RTA 408) in the phase Ib/II REVEAL trial in
combination with either ipilimumab (Yervoy) or nivolumab (Opdivo) in patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic melanoma. Currently approved
non-selective TNF inhibitors, inﬂiximab, etanercept, adalimumab and others, are not considered direct competitors of INB03 in the treatment of cancer
because of their mechanism of action and safety side eﬀects. Non- selective TNF inhibitors block the function of both sTNF and tmTNF. Blockade of
tmTNF is immunosuppressive increasing the risk of infection and cancer in patients. This is shown in Figure 3 below where maintaining function to
tmTNF by genetic or pharmacologic means results in an immunocompetent animal that can protect itself against infection. Blockade or knock-out of both
sTNF and tmTNF results in death from infection.

INKmune Competition

Our industry is highly competitive and subject to rapid and signiﬁcant technological change. Our potential competitors include large
pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical and generic drug companies, academic institutions, government agencies and
research institutions. We believe that key competitive factors that will aﬀect the development and commercial success of our product candidates are
eﬃcacy, safety, tolerability, reliability, price, and reimbursement level. Many of our potential competitors, including many of the organizations named
below, have substantially greater ﬁnancial, technical, and human resources than we do and signiﬁcantly greater experience in the discovery and
development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of products and the commercialization of those products. Accordingly,
our competitors may be more successful than us in obtaining FDA approval for and achieving widespread market acceptance of their drugs. Our
competitors’ drugs may be more eﬀective, or more eﬀectively marketed and sold, than any drug we may commercialize and may render our product
candidates obsolete or non-competitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing any of our product candidates. We
anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new drugs enter the market and advanced technologies become available. Further, the
development of new treatment methods for the conditions we are targeting could render our drugs non-competitive or obsolete.

INKmune is an immunotherapy that harnesses the biology of NK cells for the treatment of cancer. There is a long list of immunotherapy
strategies for the treatment of cancer and the immunotherapy for cancer market is growing rapidly. There are at least three ways to classify
immunotherapy for cancer. The list below classifies immunotherapy strategies beginning with those that are most closely related to INKmune:

1. Companies in the NK cell therapy business;

2. Companies in the personalized immune-oncology business; and

3. Companies in the precision immuno-oncology business.

We are not aware of any approved treatments that are classiﬁed as NK cell therapies. We are aware of public companies in the NK cell therapy
business such as Century Therapeutics, Immunity Bio, Nkarta, Fate Therapeutics, Glycostem and others. These companies are developing products that
involve replacing or supplementing NK cells of the patient for the treatment cancer. Their product requires extensive ex-vivo cell manipulations which,
with respect to Century Therapeutics and Fate Therapeutics, may include gene therapy. The next larger group of companies are in the personalized
immuno-oncology business with products focused on T cell activation strategies. The most popular are the CAR-T cell therapies which are a patient
speciﬁc ex-vivo gene therapy approach to a single disease (for example: pediatric ALL). CAR-T therapy has become wildly popular of late and includes
many private companies, newer public companies such as Bluebird, Juno Therapeutics and Mustang Bio as well as established companies such as
Novartis and Gilead. For many of the companies, CAR-T cell therapies is their only business. For the latter two, CAR-T cell therapies is a newly in-
licensed program with marketing authorization in the US. Finally, the precision immune-oncology category also includes companies with anti-cancer
antibody products and the newer “check-point” inhibitors. Antibody therapies are all about “illuminating” the cancer to the innate immune system (NK
cells). Monoclonal antibodies were the original immunotherapy that drove the growth of well-known biopharma companies including Genentech/Roche,
Amgen, Merck and others. Each of these products is disease specific (ie: treat only HER2+ breast cancer). Modern therapeutic antibodies are much more
complicated bi-speciﬁc and tri-speciﬁc antibodies that attempt to connect the cancer with activated T-cells of the adaptive immune system. Check-point
inhibitors are currently the most rapidly expanding product category in immuno-oncology. These CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) and PD-1 inhibitors
(pembrolizumab and nivolumab) speciﬁcally block a mechanism that shields cancers from T-cell killing. The two companies in this business are Merck
(pembrolizumab) and GSK (ipilimumab and nivolumab). There are many others trying to join this promising therapeutic area including large companies
such as BMS and Roche.

There are several FDA approved drugs that improve the ability of the innate immune system (NK-cells) to treat cancer including mono-clonal
antibody therapies (for example: Rituximab®; Avastin® and Herceptin® marketed by Roche/Genentech); and “check-point” inhibitors (Yervoy® and
Opdivo®, BMS, Keytruda®, Merck and others). There is a large amount of development activity in the immune checkpoint inhibitor ﬁeld from both
pharmaceutical giants including AstraZeneca, Merck & Co, Pﬁzer, Merck KGaA, Roche, GSK, Novartis and Amgen and many start-ups, small companies
and university spin-oﬀs which have emerged in the past two years. Examples (in alphabetical order) include Agenus, Alligator Bioscience, Ambrx,
AnaptysBio, argenx, Bioceros, BioNovion, Cellerant Therapeutics, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Compugen, CureTech, Enumeral, Five Prime Therapeutics,
Genmab, GITR, ImmuNext, IOmet Pharma, iTeos Therapeutics, Jounce Therapeutics, KAHR Medical, Multimeric Biotherapeutics, Nativis, Orega
Biotech, Pelican Therapeutics, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Prima BioMed, Redx Pharma, Sorrento Therapeutics, Tesaro, TG Therapeutics, Theravectys and
ToleroTech active in the ﬁeld. The list of companies with poly-speciﬁc antibodies that attempt to link the cancer with a cytotoxic T cell is long, includes
both private and public companies (Amgen, Xencor, F-Star, Merus and many others). Finally, two CAR-T cell therapies were just approved for the
treatment of ALL – Kymriah™ (Novartis) and Yescarta™ (Gilead). We expect additional drugs to gain marketing authorization in the immune-oncology
space.

To our knowledge, there are no innate immune check-point inhibitors in development that have the unique characteristics of INB03 that
neutralize sTNF to: i) decreases the proliferation of MDSC; ii) decreasing local and systemic immunosuppression caused by MDSC by stopping
production of immunosuppressive cytokines and; iii) improving NK/DC cross-talk to recruit the adaptive immune system to fight the cancer.

Intellectual Property

We seek to protect our therapeutic programs by continuously developing patent properties covering novel compositions, formulations, purpose-
limited compositions, combination treatments, methods of medical treatment, and other inventions, whether created internally or in-licensed, in the United
States Patent & Trademark Oﬃce (the “USPTO”), the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT”),
and in patent oﬃces for various foreign jurisdictions. While each invention is unique and territories for protection are decided on a case-by-case basis, we
generally pursue patents in Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, and the United States, and sometimes in Brazil, China and/or Korea. We currently have in
our portfolio eleven (11) issued patents and forty-seven (47) pending patent applications, including both company-owned and in-licensed properties. The
following sections and corresponding tables summarize, for each of our current therapeutic programs, our pending and granted patent positions, to the
extent publicly available, as of the time of preparing this document:

DN-TNF Platform Technology (Oncology, Central Nervous System Disorders, Acute and Chronic Peripheral Diseases)

The DN-TNF Platform Technology covers a variety of dominant negative tumor necrosis factor (“DN-TNF”) variant proteins, including the
pegylated DN-TNF protein variants known as XPro, INB03, LIVNate. These DN-TNF protein variants can be considered a platform technology for treating
the underlying immune dysfunction associated with many disease manifestations. Unlike approved anti-TNF therapeutics, DNTNF selectively targets and
neutralizes soluble TNF, and is therefore not immunosuppressive. Additionally, XPro has been shown to cross the blood brain barrier after peripheral
administration, making it attractive for use in treating CNS disorders. The following table summarizes current IP covering our DN-TNF Platform
Technology:

Subject Matter / Compound
DNTNF compositions and formulations
Use of DNTNF for treating disease

INB-16 / INKmune (Oncology)

# Pending
Applications
2
31

# Issued
Patents
4
3

Geographical
Scope
global
global

Nominal Patent
Term
2024-2041
2033-2041

INKmune is a replication-incompetent derivative of our proprietary INB-16 cell line. One commercial application of INKmune includes use as a
therapeutic composition designed to enhance the ability of a patient’s own NK cells to seek, recognize and eliminate cancer. Another commercial
application of INKmune includes use as a cytokine-like (“pseudokine”) agent for enhancing NK cell killing speciﬁcity, potency, and eﬃcacy of NK cell -
based therapeutics. INKmune, as a therapeutic, is intended for provision as an I.V. -infused product containing replication-incompetent bio substrate
units, each of which is adapted to present an aggregate of protein ligands and/or receptors to a patient’s own NK cells, in vivo. Upon contacting the
patient’s NK cells, INKmune converts resting NK cells into what we call “primed” NK cells (“pNKs”). Data suggests that pNKs demonstrate enhanced
killing of tumor cells, thus INKmune may indirectly improve a patient’s own immune response to cancer. As a pseudokine agent, INKmune can be used to
contact the NK cells of an NK cell therapeutic product in vitro, e.g., during manufacturing, for enhancing characteristics of the NK cell therapeutic and
rendering an improved product. The following table summarizes current IP covering INB-16 / INKmune:

Subject Matter / Compound
INB-16 / INKmune compositions
Use of INKmune for treating disease
Use of INKmune for enhancing NK cell therapeutics

# Pending
Applications
2
10
2

# Issued
Patents
0
4
0

Geographical
Scope
global
global
global

Nominal Patent
Term
2036-2040
2036-2040
2036-2040

General IP Disclosures

Our commercial success depends in part on obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protections, where applicable, of our current and

future product candidates and the methods used to manufacture them, as well as successfully defending our patents against third-party challenges.

Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, oﬀering to sell or importing our products depends on the extent to which we have
rights under valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets that cover these activities, and whether we are able to enforce such rights. We cannot assure
you that our pending patent applications will result in issued patents, or that any or all rights will be enforceable in every jurisdiction whether or not patent
rights are sought.

International PCT patent applications cover all 152 nations which are signatories of the PCT. However, our global IP strategy generally targets
Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, and the United States, and sometimes Brazil, China and/or Korea, as targets for extending patent protection under
the PCT. Decisions regarding which countries to extend patent coverage under the PCT is taken on a case-by-case basis, subject to normal business
considerations such as value and return on investment. Given the markets for products we are developing, we consider the foregoing jurisdictions to
amount to “global” coverage as used herein as it relates to IP.

The above disclosures related to patents and patent applications are subject to change based on strategic patent portfolio building decisions,
which may include reﬁling and reissue, certain abandonments, including those in favor of continuing patent applications, maturations from provisional to
non-provisional filings, and other regular patent prosecution activities.

Trademarks

The designations INMUNE BIOTM, INB16TM, INKmuneTM, PSEUDOKINETM, and XPro TM are trademarks of INmune Bio, Inc. Some or all of

these trademarks may be protected by applications pending at the USPTO and other trademark registration authorities globally. As part of the trademark
registration process, we may be required to submit a statement of use evidencing bona ﬁde use of each mark in commerce. By nature of being in the
biopharmaceutical business, certain regulatory requirements must be met in connection with certain products and/or services prior to receiving marketing
authorization from a regulatory agency, and thus it may take some time before products and/or services are oﬀered for sale and a statement of use can
be submitted for perfecting trademark registration. For these reasons, we may be required to obtain extensions of time, or to reﬁle applications, seeking
registration of trademarks. We cannot guarantee that a given trademark application will be allowed or issued in a respective office for each jurisdiction.

IP License Agreements

Immune Ventures, LLC License Agreement

On October 29, 2015, the Company entered into an exclusive license agreement (the “INKmune License Agreement”) with Immune Ventures,
LLC (“Immune Ventures”). Pursuant to the INKmune License Agreement, we were granted an exclusive worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-bearing
license to commercialize INKmune (the “INKmune License”). In consideration for the INKmune License, we are obligated to pay Immune Ventures
certain milestone and royalty payments.

The term of the Immune Ventures Agreement began on October 29, 2015 and, if not terminated sooner pursuant to the agreement, ends on a
country-by-country basis on the date of the expiration of the last to expire patent rights where patent rights exists. Subject to granting, prosecution-related
patent term adjustments, and requirements for maintenance and renewals, the latest to expire patent is scheduled to expire on March 15, 2038 (“Natural
Expiration”). Upon Natural Expiration of the Immune Ventures Agreement, we shall have a fully paid up, perpetual, royalty-free license without further
obligation to Immune Ventures. The Immune Ventures Agreement can be terminated by Immune Ventures if, after 60 days from our receipt of notice that
we have not made a payment under the Immune Ventures Agreement we still do not make this payment. On July 18, 2018, the parties amended the
agreement under which the Company was required to achieve milestones pursuant to the agreement. On October 30, 2020, the parties executed an
additional amendment to the agreement under which the Company is required to achieve the following milestones:

Initiation of Phase II clinical trials or equivalent by October 29, 2023;
Initiation of Phase III clinical trials or equivalent by October 29, 2025; and
Filing of NDA or equivalent by October 29, 2026 or equivalent.

If we don’t achieve the above milestones, we are required to negotiate in good faith with Immune Ventures to determine how we can either
remedy the failure or achieve an alternate development. If we fail to make any required eﬀorts or if the eﬀorts do not remedy the situation within 60 days
of written notice by Immune Ventures then Immune Ventures may provide notice to terminate the license or convert it to a non-exclusive license.

University of Pittsburg License Agreement

On October 3, 2017, the Company entered into an Assignment and Assumption Agreement with Immune Ventures related to intellectual property
licensed from the University of Pittsburgh. Pursuant to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement (the “Assignment Agreement”), Immune Ventures
assigned all of its rights, obligations and liabilities under an Exclusive License Agreement between the University of Pittsburgh – Of the Commonwealth
System of Higher Education (“Licensor”) and Immune Ventures to INmune Bio (“Licensee”), (the “PITT Agreement”).

As consideration under the PITT Agreement, we are obligated to pay: (i) annual maintenance fees, (ii) royalty payments based on the sale of

products making use of the licensed technology, and (iii) milestone payments.

In 2021, the company paid $5,000 according to the PITT Agreement as an annual maintenance fee.

The PITT Agreement expires upon the earlier of: (i) expiration of the last claim of the Patent Rights forming the subject matter of the PITT

Agreement; or (ii) the date that is 20 years from the effective date of the agreement (June 26, 2037).

The Company may terminate the PITT Agreement upon 3 months prior written notice provided all payments under the license are current.
Licensor may terminate the PITT Agreement upon written notice if: (i) the Company defaults as to performance of material obligations which have not
been cured within 60 days after receiving written notice; or (ii) the Company ceases to carry out its business, becomes bankrupt or insolvent, applies for
or consents to the appointment of a trustee, receiver or liquidator of its assets or seeks relief under any law for the aid of debtors.

Xencor License Agreement

On October 3, 2017, the Company entered into a license agreement with Xencor, Inc. (“Xencor”), which has discovered and developed a
proprietary biological molecule that inhibits soluble tumor necrosis factor (the “Xencor Agreement”). During June 2021, the Company entered into the
First Amendment to License Agreement with Xencor. Pursuant to the Xencor Agreement, Xencor granted the Company an exclusive worldwide, royalty-
bearing license in licensed patent rights, licensed know-how and licensed materials (as deﬁned in the Xencor Agreement) to make, develop, use, sell and
import any pharmaceutical product that comprises, contains, or incorporates Xencor’s proprietary protein known as “XPro” that inhibits soluble tumor
necrosis factor (or all modiﬁcations, formulations and variants of the licensed protein that speciﬁcally bind soluble tumor necrosis factor) alone or in
combination with one or more active ingredients, in any dosage or formulation. The Xencor Agreement expires upon the later of: (a) the expiration of the
last to expire valid claim covering any pharmaceutical product that contains, comprises, or incorporates Xencor’s proprietary protein known as XPro alone
or in combination with one or more active ingredients, in any dosage or formulation. (“Licensed Product”) in such country or (b) ten years following the
ﬁrst sale to a third party of the licensed product in such country. Net Sales with respect to any Licensed Product is the gross amounts invoiced by us for
sales of the Licensed Products less deductions actually incurred. A valid claim is an issued, unexpired or pending claim with the patent rights that Xencor
controls as of October 3, 2017 which patent rights are necessary to make, develop, use, sell, have sold, oﬀer for sale and import a Licensed Product in
the Field (the Field means all applications for the treatment of diseases in humans) or the Product Patent Rights, which claim has not lapsed, been
abandoned, been revoked or been held to be unpatentable, invalid or unenforceable by a ﬁnal judgment of a court or other governmental agency or
competent jurisdiction from which no appeal can be or is taken within the time allowed for appeal and which has not been admitted to be invalid or

unenforceable through reissue, re-examination, disclaimer or otherwise. Product Patent Rights shall mean any and all our patent rights that are
necessary to make, develop, use, sell, have sold, oﬀer for sale and import a Licensed Product in the Field, including any improvements or patent rights
directed to the Licensed Product. Either party may terminate the Xencor Agreement upon 60 days’ (10 days for any payment default) prior written notice
to the other party after the breach of any material provision of the agreement by the other party if the breaching party has not cured the breach within the
60-day period (10-day period for any payment default) following written notice of termination by the non-breaching party. We can terminate the Xencor
Agreement upon 180 days prior written notice to Xencor. Xencor may terminate the Xencor Agreement in its entirety or with respect to any speciﬁc
Licensed Product upon written notice in the event that we contest, oppose or challenge or assist any party in contesting, opposing or challenging,
Xencor’s ownership of, or the enforceability or validity of the Patent Rights that Xencor controls as of October 3, 2017 which Patent Rights are necessary
to make develop, use, sell, have sold, oﬀered for sale and import a Licensed Product in the Field. Either party may terminate the Xencor Agreement upon
written notice to the other party upon or after the insolvency, bankruptcy, dissolution or winding up of such other party or the making or seeking to make or
arrange an assignment for the beneﬁt of creditors of such other party or the initiation of proceedings in voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy which
proceeding or action remains undismissed or unstayed for a period of more than 60 days.

In consideration of the Xencor Agreement, we agreed to royalty payments and a percentage of any payments received in exchange for a sub-

license.

University College London License Agreement – MSC

On July 19, 2019, the Company entered into license agreement with UCL Business PLC (“UCLB”) with a ten (10) year term. Pursuant to the
license agreement, the Company acquired an exclusive license (and a right to sub-license) to the technology and know-how relating to an isolation and
commercial scale expansion methodology of GMP grade human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (“MSC”).

On July 16, 2021, we provided notice of intent to terminate the agreement with UCLB, which per the agreement became eﬀective August 15,

2021.

INKmune Research and Development

We expect to use third parties to conduct our preclinical and clinical trials under the direct supervision of management.

INKmune Manufacturing

We intend to contract with third parties for the manufacture of our compounds for investigational purposes, for preclinical and clinical testing and
for any FDA approved products for commercial sale. Pre-clinical and clinical material for the early clinical trials with INKmune has been manufactured
under the direction of Mark Lowdell at a licensed Good Manufacturing Practice (“GMP”) facility. The master cell bank, working cell bank and individual
product doses were completed in July 2018. This clinical material is planned for use in the Phase I/II clinical trials in ovarian cancer. As we progress in
our clinical programs, additional working cell banks and therapeutic product will be produced from the existing master cell bank. This process takes
approximately 6 months and is not anticipated to delay the initiation of the high-risk MDS Phase I/II trials. We may transfer the manufacturing to a
different commercial contract manufacturing organization after completion of these Phase II studies.

Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells

In November 2017, we entered into a Material Transfer and License Agreement with the Anthony Nolan Cord Blood Bank (“AN”), the oldest and
largest non-directed cord blood bank in the United Kingdom for the supply the starting material for the mesenchymal stem cells - umbilical cords not
used after cord blood harvest. Mark Lowdell’s research group developed and validated a methodology for producing large numbers of clinical-grade
pooled human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stem cells (“HucMSC”). We believe the reproducible and reliable supply of large quantities of high-
quality a may solve one of the major problems associated with the development of mesenchymal stem cell therapies for medicine. We believe we are
well positioned to become a preferred manufacturing partner for companies who need MSC for clinical programs. Manufacture of HucMSC is performed
under the direction of Mark Lowdell in a licensed GMP facility that is contracted to the Company as part of existing research and development
agreements. The starting material for the HucMSC product is provided by the AN. The HucMSC product produced in this facility are fully qualiﬁed to be
used for either research or clinical trials. We have developed a validated manufacturing process that reliably produces contract manufacturer of the
clinical grade (“cGMP”) quality mesenchymal stem cells that we call CORDstrom. To date, we are supporting two academic clinical trials with
CORDstrom. One program is a in the UK treating children with erythematous bullousa, a disﬁguring skin disease in children that is similar to a second
degree burn and treatment of system lupus in adults. Both these studies are ongoing. INmune Bio is supplying the clinical product for treatment of these
patients. The Company does not know the results of these trials until they are announced by the principal investigators at the clinical sites. Currently, we
plan to supply HucMSC to third parties for their research use and in clinical trials as part of the development process for commercial pro/ducts. We may
decide to expand this agreement in the future if the commercial and/or development opportunities warrant such expansion. At the current time, we expect
this program to be funded by revenues from commercial sales. The agreement with AN terminates on November 29, 2027. AN may terminate the license
on written notice to us, if a donor withdraws consent to the continued use of umbilical cord tissue samples that were obtained by AN. Additionally, either
party may terminate the agreement on 30 days prior written notice to the other if that other party materially breach any term of the agreement and such
breaches (to the extent it is remediable) is not remedied within 30 days of the written request to the other party to do so.

Challenges in the Market for Immunotherapy Products

Government Regulation

The FDA and other federal, state, local and foreign regulatory agencies impose substantial requirements upon the clinical development,
approval, labeling, manufacture, marketing, and distribution of drug products. These agencies regulate, among other things, research and development
activities and the testing, approval, manufacture, quality control, safety, eﬀectiveness, labeling, storage, record keeping, advertising and promotion of our
product candidates. The regulatory approval process is generally lengthy and expensive, with no guarantee of a positive result. Moreover, failure to
comply with applicable FDA or other requirements may result in civil or criminal penalties, recall or seizure of products, injunctive relief including partial or

total suspension of production, or withdrawal of a product from the market.

Various regulatory authorities regulate, among other things, the research, manufacture, promotion, and distribution of drugs in the United States
under the FDA and other statutes and implementing regulations. The process required by the FDA before prescription drug product candidates may be
marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

●

completion of extensive nonclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies, all performed in accordance with the FDA’s
Good Laboratory Practice regulations;

submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, which must become eﬀective before human clinical trials may
begin;

for some products, performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with the FDA’s regulations, including
Good Clinical Practices, to establish the safety and efficacy of the product candidate for each proposed indication;

submission to the FDA of a new drug application or NDA;

satisfactory completion of an FDA preapproval inspection of the manufacturing facilities at which the product is produced to assess
compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, regulations; and

●

FDA review and approval of the NDA prior to any commercial marketing, sale or shipment of the drug.

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, eﬀort and ﬁnancial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for our

product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity in animals
and other animal studies. The results of preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted as part of an IND to
the FDA. Some preclinical testing may continue even after an IND is submitted. The IND also includes one or more protocols for the initial clinical trial or
trials and an investigator’s brochure. An IND automatically becomes eﬀective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time
period, raises concerns or questions relating to the proposed clinical trials as outlined in the IND and places the clinical trial on a clinical hold. In such
cases, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before any clinical trials can begin. Clinical trial holds also may
be imposed at any time before or during studies due to safety concerns or non-compliance with regulatory requirements. An independent institutional
review board, or IRB, at each of the clinical centers proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it
commences at that center. An IRB considers, among other things, whether the risks to individuals participating in the trials are minimized and are
reasonable in relation to anticipated beneﬁts. The IRB also approves the consent form signed by the trial participants and must monitor the study until
completed.

The FDA oﬀers several regulatory mechanisms that provide expedited or accelerated approval procedures for selected drugs in the indications
on which we are focusing our eﬀorts. These include accelerated approval under Subpart H of the agency’s NDA approval regulations, fast track drug
development procedures and priority review.

We plan to seek orphan drug designation for INKmune for the treatment of high-risk MDS if the results of the clinical trials support this activity.
The United States, European Union and other jurisdictions may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a “rare disease or condition,”
which, in the United States, is generally a disease or condition that aﬀects no more than 200,000 individuals. In the European Union, orphan drug
designation can be granted if: the disease is life threatening or chronically debilitating and aﬀects no more than 50 in 100,000 persons in the European
Union; without incentive it is unlikely that the drug would generate suﬃcient return to justify the necessary investment; and no satisfactory method of
treatment for the condition exists or, if it does, the new drug will provide a signiﬁcant beneﬁt to those aﬀected by the condition. If a product that has an
orphan drug designation subsequently receives the ﬁrst regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to
orphan exclusivity, meaning that the applicable regulatory authority may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same
indication, except in limited circumstances, for a period of seven years in the United States and 10 years in the European Union Orphan drug designation
does not prevent competitors from developing or marketing diﬀerent drugs for the same indication or the same drug for diﬀerent indications. Orphan drug
designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After orphan drug designation is granted, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential
orphan use are publicly disclosed. Orphan drug designation does not convey an advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the review and approval
process. However, this designation provides an exemption from marketing and authorization (NDA) fees. We plan to follow a similar path with INB03 or
XPro, although the precise indication cannot be determined until we are farther along in the development process.

Clinical Trials

Phase 1 clinical trials typically involve the initial introduction of the product candidate into healthy human volunteers. In Phase 1 clinical trials, the

product candidate is typically tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, excretion and pharmacodynamics.

Phase 2 clinical trials are conducted in a limited patient population to gather evidence about the eﬃcacy of the product candidate for speciﬁc,

targeted indications; to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage; and to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks.

Phase 3 clinical trials are undertaken to evaluate clinical eﬃcacy and to test for safety in an expanded patient population at geographically
dispersed clinical trial sites. The size of Phase 3 clinical trials depends upon clinical and statistical considerations for the product candidate and disease,
but sometimes can include several thousand patients. Phase 3 clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk-beneﬁt ratio of the product
candidate and provide an adequate basis for product labeling.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the product candidate to human subjects under the supervision of qualiﬁed medical investigators
according to approved protocols that detail the objectives of the study, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to
be used to monitor participant safety. Regulatory procedures diﬀer in each country we will be working in., For example, in the US, each protocol is
submitted, to the FDA as part of the IND for their review and consent before enrolling patients in the clinical trial. The US is not the only place to perform
clinical trials. Most countries have systems in place to allow academics and companies to sponsor clinical trials of novel therapies in patients. For
ﬁnancial and technical reasons, the Company will perform the Phase I clinical trials of our programs in the United Kingdom and Australia. The US will be
included in the Phase II programs. Other venues such as Europe, Canada, Japan and other Paciﬁc Rim countries may be included in the development

program in the future. The ﬁrst clinical trial with INKmune will be initiated in the United Kingdom. In the United Kingdom, the regulatory submission is
made to the MHRA for a clinical trials authorization (“CTA”). This is a multistep process. The Company had a Scientiﬁc Advice meeting with the MHRA in
September 2017 to discuss the INKmune Phase I/II trial in women with relapse/refractory ovarian cancer including trial design, manufacturing processes
and clinical trial execution. The MHRA gave recommendations on trial design, manufacturing controls and the regulatory procedures needed to initiate
the clinical trial. We received CTA approval from the MHRA for an INKmune trial in ovarian cancer on December 18, 2018. The approval allows for the
execution of the Phase I/II INKmune clinical trial in the United Kingdom. We plan to have two cancer clinics referring the 6 patients needed for the Phase
I portion of the trial. We expect the ﬁrst Phase I sites to be in the United Kingdom. If the ﬁrst cohort of the Phase I trial proceeds as planned, we expect to
expand the clinical trial in the United Kingdom and may include clinical sites in the US. Any Phase II program will start as a multi-national trial because at
least 30 patients will be required to complete the Phase II program. The additional clinical sites in the United Kingdom or US have not been identiﬁed at
this time. No additional regulatory procedures will be needed to add sites in the United Kingdom. To add sites in the US, we will need to ﬁle an IND with
the FDA. Once the FDA approves the IND, clinical sites can be opened. We have chosen relapsed/refractory ovarian cancer as the anticipated Phase 1
study for INKmune for a number of reasons. Relapsed refractory is a disease with poor treatment options. Our pre-clinical data suggests INKmune may
have advantages over other immunotherapies in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer has a sensitive and validated biomarker to measure
disease burden – CA125. This allows the Company to accurately select patients for the clinical trial and determine if INKmune therapy is eﬀective. This
provides regulatory advantages for registration of INKmune. INB03 will follow a similar development strategy, but used Australia for the Phase I
programs. In Australia, clinical trials for INB03 are performed under the clinical trials notiﬁcation (“CTN”) scheme authorized by the Therapeutic Good
Administration (“TGA”). The TGA is the equivalent agency to the FDA in the US and the MHRA in the United Kingdom. We ﬁled an Australian Clinical
Trial Notiﬁcation, or CTN, for INB03 and XPro during the second quarter of 2018 and 2019 respectively. Applications were accepted in May 2018 and
2019 to allow us to initiate the Phase I trials in cancer and Alzheimer’s disease respectively. We have completed the oncology Phase 1 open label dose
escalation trial in patients with advanced solid tumors and biomarkers of inflammation in their blood.

The Phase I trial has been completed and provided evidence of safety and a pharmacodynamic drug aﬀect, decrease of inﬂammatory
biomarkers, needed to move the program to a Phase II clinical trial in cancer. The Phase II clinical trial will combine INB03 with approved second line
therapy in patients with MUC4+ breast cancer with or without brain metastasis that have a measurable pharmacodynamic biomarker. This is a
combination trial where the addition of INB03 to approved second line therapy may provide a therapeutic alternative in a disease without any drugs
approved. The Company has not lost interest in combining INB03 with immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI), but competition for patients is ﬁerce in this
arena. Our plan is to pursue treatment of tumors that express MUC4 as our lead indication. Tumors that express MUC4 are resistant to all forms of
immunotherapy due to a combination of increased MDSC in the tumor, decrease tumor macrophage (TAM) phagocytosis, decreased inﬂammation in the
tumor (a “cold” tumor) and direct eﬀects of MUC4 and soluble TNF on HER2/neu function. If combination therapy with INB03 decreases MUC4
expression and changes the TME to make the “cold” tumor “hot”, then addition of a CPI will be warranted. At this time, the combination trial to treat
MUC4+ trastuzumab resistant HER2+ expressing cancer is our most probable registration strategy for INB03. This includes the combination of INB03
with trastuzumab antibody drug conjugate therapies such as ENHERTU (trastuzumab-deruxtecan; (Daiichi-Sankyo). Current therapies for trastuzumab
resistant cancers are used on a trial by error approach. Using MUC4 expression as a biomarker for to predict trastuzumab resistance brings a precision
medicine approach to this diﬃcult clinical scenario. Addition of INB03 to the treatment regimen for treating HER2+ cancers may convert “cold” tumors to
“hot” tumors making the eligible for treatment with CPI. Finally, the clinical development landscape for CPI combination therapies to treat CPI resistant
therapies is chaotic. The design and successful completion of a Phase II trial is not guarantee of clinical relevance or commercial viability. There are
multiple therapies on the market or in development for the treatment of trastuzumab resistant breast cancer. The most prominent are antibody conjugates
including ado-trastuzumab emtansine (Kadycycla/T-DM1, Genentech/Roche) and trastuzumab deruxtecan (Enhertu, Daiichi Sankyo). The registration
and development strategy for INB03 is multinational. The Phase II program may enroll patients in other countries, including the United States after
submitting an Investigational New Drug application, or IND, to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA. If partnering is successful at any stage of
INB03 development, we expect the partner to inﬂuence the development and regulatory decisions needed with moving the drug to commercialization.
Finally, combination therapy to treat patients resistant to trastuzumab or CPI are not the only oncology application for INB03. INB03 can be combined
with other immune-oncology therapy to improve eﬃcacy, safety or both. INB03 can be used as part of combination therapy with immuno-oncology drugs,
paired with tradition therapies such as cytotoxic chemotherapy, kinase inhibitors, cell therapies or radiation therapy. The company is pursuing pre-clinical
data in some of these areas. When and if positive developments occur, we will communicate them to our shareholders. There are other regulatory venues
that will be important for both our products – the largest and most important is Europe. In Europe, the European Medicines Agencies (“EMA”) is
responsible for authorization of clinical trials in member states. In EU, there may be a requirement to get individual country authorization at the same time
as EMA authorization. The initial development of INB03 and XPro occurred in AUS followed by trials in other regulatory jurisdictions including the US. The
development of INKmune will start in the United Kingdom followed by trials in the US. XPro is being developed for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease
under a Part-the-Cloud Award received Feb 2019. The biomarker directed Phase I trial is being performed in AUS using a regulatory strategy identical to
that used for INB03 in cancer. Regulatory approval to initiate the trial was received on February 8, 2019. XPro treats microglial activation and innate
immune dysregulation may be the cause with Alzheimer’s disease in some patients. To our knowledge, there are few companies using an anti-
inflammatory strategy for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Those companies include Denali Therapeutics (NASDAQ: DNLI); developing DNL747 that
targets critical signaling proteins in the TNF pathway that regulate inﬂammation and cell death. Alector (NASDAQ: ALEC) in partnership with Abbvie is
developing AL002 that targets TREM2 on microglial cells. Gliacure is targeting microglial cells in Alzheimer’s disease with a small molecule candidate
GC021109.

Clinical testing must satisfy extensive FDA regulations. Reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to
the FDA and safety reports must be submitted for serious and unexpected adverse events. Success in early stage clinical trials does not assure success
in later stage clinical trials. The FDA, an IRB or we may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a ﬁnding that the research
subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk.

New Drug Applications

Assuming successful completion of the required clinical trials, the results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials are
submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA. An NDA also must contain extensive manufacturing information, as well as proposed labeling for the ﬁnished
product. An NDA applicant must develop information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug and ﬁnalize a process for
manufacturing the product in accordance with cGMP. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality product within
speciﬁcations approved by the FDA. The manufacturer must develop methods for testing the quality, purity and potency of the ﬁnal product. In addition,
appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product does not undergo

unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life. Prior to approval, the FDA will conduct an inspection of the manufacturing facilities to assess compliance
with cGMP.

The FDA reviews all NDAs submitted before it accepts them for ﬁling. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA
for ﬁling. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information and is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for ﬁling. After an
application is ﬁled, the FDA may refer the NDA to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should
be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it considers them carefully when
making decisions. The FDA may deny approval of an NDA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisﬁed. Data obtained from clinical trials are not
always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data diﬀerently than we interpret the same data. The FDA may issue a complete response letter, which
may require additional clinical or other data or impose other conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA. If a product receives
regulatory approval, the approval may be signiﬁcantly limited to speciﬁc diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which
could restrict the commercial value of the product. In addition, the FDA may require us to conduct Phase 4 testing which involves clinical trials designed
to further assess a drug’s safety and effectiveness after NDA approval, and may require surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products
which have been commercialized. Once issued, the FDA may withdraw product approval if ongoing regulatory requirements are not met or if safety or
efficacy questions are raised after the product reaches the market.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA,
including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, distribution, and advertising
and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject
to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual user fee requirements for any marketed products and the establishments at which
such products are manufactured, as well as new application fees for supplemental applications with clinical data. Pharmaceutical manufacturers and their
subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced
inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with GMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us
and our third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the signiﬁcance of the change, may
require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and
impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to
expend time, money and eﬀort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory
compliance. If our future suppliers are not able to comply with these requirements, the FDA may, among other things, halt our clinical trials, require us to
recall a product from distribution, or withdraw approval of the product.

The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the
product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or
frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new
safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other
restrictions under a REMS program.

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of pharmaceutical products. A company can make only those
claims relating to safety and eﬃcacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The
FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of oﬀ-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements
can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may
prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that diﬀer from those tested by us and approved by the
FDA. Such oﬀ-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such oﬀ-label uses are the best treatment for many
patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict
manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

Our sales, promotion, medical education, clinical research and other activities following product approval will be subject to regulation by
numerous regulatory and law enforcement authorities in the United States in addition to FDA, including potentially the Federal Trade Commission, the
Department of Justice, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
and state and local governments. Our promotional and scientiﬁc/educational programs must comply with the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the civil False
Claims Act, physician payment transparency laws, privacy laws, security laws, and additional federal and state laws similar to the foregoing.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, the knowing and willing, direct or indirect oﬀer, receipt, solicitation or payment of
remuneration in exchange for or to induce the referral of patients, including the purchase, order or lease of any good, facility, item or service that would
be paid for in whole or part by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care programs. Remuneration has been broadly deﬁned to include anything of
value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced price items and services. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply
to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, formulary managers, and beneﬁciaries on the other.
Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and
safe harbors are drawn narrowly. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or
recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular
applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the
legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all its facts and circumstances. Several courts
have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of
federal healthcare covered business, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been violated. The government has enforced the federal Anti-Kickback
Statute to reach large settlements with healthcare companies based on sham research or consulting and other ﬁnancial arrangements with physicians.
Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or speciﬁc intent to violate it to have committed a violation. In addition,
the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or
fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. Many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs as well as private
payors.

Federal false claims and false statement laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, or FCA, imposes liability on persons or entities that,
among other things, knowingly present or cause to be presented claims that are false or fraudulent or not provided as claimed for payment or approval by
a federal health care program. The FCA has been used to prosecute persons or entities that “cause” the submission of claims for payment that are
inaccurate or fraudulent, by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers, promoting a product oﬀ-label, submitting claims
for services not provided as claimed, or submitting claims for services that were provided but not medically necessary. Actions under the FCA may be
brought by the Attorney General or as a qui tam action by a private individual in the name of the government. Violations of the FCA can result in
signiﬁcant monetary penalties and treble damages. The federal government is using the FCA, and the accompanying threat of signiﬁcant liability, in its
investigation and prosecution of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies throughout the country, for example, in connection with the promotion of
products for unapproved uses and other illegal sales and marketing practices. The government has obtained multi-million and multibillion dollar
settlements under the FCA in addition to individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. In addition, certain companies that were found
to be in violation of the FCA have been forced to implement extensive corrective action plans, and have often become subject to consent decrees or
corporate integrity agreements, restricting the manner in which they conduct their business.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit,
among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare beneﬁt program, including private
third-party payors; knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, ﬁctitious or fraudulent
statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare beneﬁts, items or services; and willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a
healthcare oﬀense. Like the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the Aﬀordable Care Act amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes
under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or speciﬁc intent to violate it in order to have
committed a violation.

Given the signiﬁcant size of actual and potential settlements, we expect that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to
investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws. Also, many states have similar fraud and abuse
statutes or regulations that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and
other state programs. Additionally, to the extent that our products, once commercialized, are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar
foreign laws.

In addition, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments made to physicians and other healthcare
providers. The Patient Protection and Aﬀordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the
Affordable Care Act, among other things, imposed new reporting requirements on certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies
for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with speciﬁc exceptions, for payments or other
transfers of value made by them to physicians and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their
immediate family members. Covered manufacturers are required to collect and report detailed payment data and submit legal attestation to the accuracy
of such data to the government each year. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties of up to an aggregate of $150,000
per year (or up to an aggregate of $1 million per year for “knowing failures”), for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that
are not timely, accurately and completely reported in an annual submission. Additionally, entities that do not comply with mandatory reporting
requirements may be subject to a corporate integrity agreement. Certain states also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs,
impose restrictions on covered manufacturers’ marketing practices and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other
remuneration to physicians and other healthcare professionals.

We may also be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business.
HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, imposes
speciﬁed requirements on certain health care providers, plans and clearinghouses (collectively, “covered entities”) and their “business associates,”
relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identiﬁable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security
standards directly applicable to “business associates,” deﬁned as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or
transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also increased the civil and
criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new
authority to ﬁle civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing
federal civil actions. In addition, certain states have their own laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances,
many of which differ from each other and/or HIPAA in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of pharmaceutical products depend signiﬁcantly on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement are provided by third-party
payors. Third-party payors include state and federal government health care programs, managed care providers, private health insurers and other
organizations. Although we currently believe that third-party payors will provide coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, we
cannot be certain of this. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the cost-eﬀectiveness, and reducing reimbursement for
medical products and services. In addition, signiﬁcant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. The U.S.
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. We may need to
conduct expensive clinical studies to demonstrate the comparative cost-eﬀectiveness of our products. The product candidates that we develop may not
be considered cost-eﬀective and thus may not be covered or suﬃciently reimbursed. It is time consuming and expensive for us to seek coverage and
reimbursement from third-party payors, as each payor will make its own determination as to whether to cover a product and at what level of
reimbursement. Thus, one payor’s decision to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement for a product does not assure that another payor will
provide coverage or that the reimbursement levels will be adequate. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply
that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Reimbursement may not be available or suﬃcient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive
and profitable basis.

Healthcare Reform

The United States and some foreign jurisdictions are considering or have enacted a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the
healthcare system in ways that could aﬀect our ability to sell our products proﬁtably. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and

elsewhere, there is signiﬁcant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality
and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these eﬀorts and has been signiﬁcantly
affected by major legislative initiatives.

By way of example, in March 2010, the Aﬀordable Care Act was signed into law, intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or
constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and
health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Among the provisions of the
Affordable Care Act of importance to our potential drug candidates are:

●

an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports speciﬁed branded prescription drugs and biologic agents,
apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs;

an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13.0% of the
average manufacturer price for branded and generic drugs, respectively;

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;

a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to oﬀer 50% point-of-sale discounts oﬀ
negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneﬁciaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for a manufacturer’s
outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D;

extension of a manufacturer’s Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care
organizations;

expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to oﬀer Medicaid coverage to additional
individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty
level, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer’s Medicaid rebate liability;

expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service pharmaceutical pricing program; and

a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical eﬀectiveness
research, along with funding for such research.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Aﬀordable Care Act was enacted. These changes include,
among others, the Budget Control Act of 2011, which mandates aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per ﬁscal year
eﬀective April 1, 2013, and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will remain in eﬀect through 2024 unless additional Congressional action is
taken. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced
Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals and cancer treatment centers, increased the statute of limitations period for the government
to recover overpayments to providers from three to ﬁve years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare
funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our product candidates, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

We expect that the Aﬀordable Care Act, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more
rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement, and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any
reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded 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 drugs.

Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2021, we had 10 full-time employees. We consider the intellectual capital of our employees to be an important driver of our
business and key to our future prospects. We monitor our compensation programs closely and provide what we consider to be a very competitive mix of
compensation and insurance beneﬁts for all our employees, as well as participation in our equity programs. None of our employees is subject to a
collective bargaining agreement or represented by a trade or labor union. We consider our relations with our employees to be good.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada on September 25, 2015. Our principal executive oﬃce is located at 225 NE Mizner

Blvd, Suite 640, Boca Raton FL 33432 and our telephone number is (858) 964-3720.

Item 1a. Risk Factors

Summary of Risk Factors

Below is a summary of the principal factors that make an investment in our common stock speculative or risky. This summary does not address
all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below
under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Form 10-K and our other ﬁlings with the SEC,
before making an investment decision regarding our common stock.

● We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future.

● We will require additional capital to fund our operations and if we fail to obtain necessary ﬁnancing we will not be able to complete the

development and commercialization of our product candidates.

● We are signiﬁcantly dependent on the success of our DN-TNF product platform and Natural Killer Cell Priming Platform (INKmune) and our

product candidates based on these platforms.

● We need to attract and retain highly skilled personnel; we may be unable to effectively manage growth with our limited resources.

● We depend upon our senior management and key consultants and their loss or unavailability could put us at a competitive disadvantage.

●

The biotechnology and immunotherapy industries are characterized by rapid technological developments and a high degree of competition.
We may be unable to compete with more substantial enterprises.

● We can provide no assurance that our clinical product candidates will obtain regulatory approval or that the results of clinical studies will be

favorable.

● Drug discovery and development is a complex, time-consuming and expensive process with a high rate of failure.

● We may face legal claims; legal disputes are expensive and we may not be able to afford the costs.

● We can provide no assurance of the successful and timely development of new products.

● We must comply with significant government regulations.

● We rely upon patents to protect our technology. We may be unable to protect our intellectual property rights.

●

The price of our common stock may be volatile.

The market prices for our common stock may be adversely impacted by future events.

● A limited public trading market may cause volatility in the price of our common stock.

● Our Rights Agreement contains anti-takeover provisions that could discourage, delay or prevent a change in control, which may cause our

stock price to decline.

You should carefully consider the risks described below as well as other information provided to you in this document, including information in the section
of this document entitled “Information Regarding Forward Looking Statements.” If any of the following risks actually occur, the Company’s business,
ﬁnancial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely aﬀected, the value of the Company’s Common Stock could decline, and you may
lose all or part of your investment.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

We will need additional capital. If additional capital is not available or is available at unattractive terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce the
scope of or eliminate our research and development programs, reduce our commercialization efforts or curtail our operations.

In order to develop and bring our product candidates to market, we must commit substantial resources to costly and time-consuming research, preclinical
and clinical trials and marketing activities. We anticipate that our existing cash and cash equivalents will enable us to maintain our current operations for
at least the next twelve months. We anticipate using our cash and cash equivalents to fund further research and development with respect to our lead
product candidates. We may, however, need to raise additional funding sooner if our business or operations change in a manner that consumes available
resources more rapidly than we anticipate. Our requirements for additional capital will depend on many factors, including:

●

successful commercialization of our product candidates;

the time and costs involved in obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates;

costs associated with protecting our intellectual property rights;

development of marketing and sales capabilities;

payments received under future collaborative agreements, if any; and

● market acceptance of our products, if any.

To the extent we raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities, the issuance of those securities could result in dilution to our shareholders.
In addition, if we obtain debt ﬁnancing, a substantial portion of our operating cash ﬂow may be dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on such
indebtedness, thus limiting funds available for our business activities. If adequate funds are not available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope
of or eliminate our research and development programs, reduce our commercialization eﬀorts or curtail our operations. In addition, we may be required to
obtain funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or others that may require us to relinquish rights to technologies, product candidates or
products that we would otherwise seek to develop or commercialize ourselves or license rights to technologies, product candidates or products on terms
that are less favorable to us than might otherwise be available.

The Company will require substantial additional funds to support its research and development activities, and the anticipated costs of preclinical studies
and clinical trials, regulatory approvals and eventual commercialization. Such additional sources of ﬁnancing may not be available on favorable terms, if
at all. If we do not succeed in raising additional funds on acceptable terms, we may be unable to initiate clinical trials or obtain approval of any product
candidates from the FDA and other regulatory authorities. In addition, we could be forced to discontinue product development, forego sales and

marketing eﬀorts and forego attractive business opportunities. Any additional sources of ﬁnancing will likely involve the issuance of our equity securities,
which will have a dilutive effect on our stockholders.

We face intense competition in the markets targeted by our lead product candidates. Many of our competitors have substantially greater
resources than we do, and we expect that all of our product candidates under development will face intense competition from existing or
future drugs.

We expect that all of our product candidates under development, if approved, will face intense competition from existing and future drugs marketed by
large companies. These competitors may successfully market products that compete with our products, successfully identify drug candidates or develop
products earlier than we do, or develop products that are more effective, have fewer side effects or cost less than our products, if any.

Additionally, if a competitor receives FDA approval before we do for a drug that is similar to one of our product candidates, FDA approval for our product
candidate may be precluded or delayed due to periods of non-patent exclusivity and/or the listing with the FDA by the competitor of patents covering its
newly-approved drug product. Periods of non-patent exclusivity for new versions of existing drugs such as our current product candidates can extend up
to three and one-half years. See “Business — Government Regulation.”

These competitive factors could require us to conduct substantial new research and development activities to establish new product targets, which would
be costly and time consuming. These activities would adversely affect our ability to commercialize products and achieve revenue and profits.

Competition and technological change may make our product candidates and technologies less attractive or obsolete.

We compete with established pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are pursuing other forms of treatment for the same indications we are
pursuing and that have greater ﬁnancial and other resources. Other companies may succeed in developing products earlier than us, obtaining FDA
approval for products more rapidly, or developing products that are more eﬀective than our product candidates. Research and development by others
may render our technology or product candidates obsolete or noncompetitive, or result in treatments or cures superior to any therapy we develop. We
face competition from companies that internally develop competing technology or acquire competing technology from universities and other research
institutions. As these companies develop their technologies, they may develop competitive positions that may prevent, make futile, or limit our product
commercialization efforts, which would result in a decrease in the revenue we would be able to derive from the sale of any products.

There can be no assurance that any of our product candidates will be accepted by the marketplace as readily as these or other competing treatments.
Furthermore, if our competitors’ products are approved before ours, it could be more diﬃcult for us to obtain approval from the FDA. Even if our products
are successfully developed and approved for use by all governing regulatory bodies, there can be no assurance that physicians and patients will accept
our product(s) as a treatment of choice.

Furthermore, the pharmaceutical research industry is diverse, complex, and rapidly changing. By its nature, the business risks associated therewith are
numerous and signiﬁcant. The eﬀects of competition, intellectual property disputes, market acceptance, and FDA regulations preclude us from
forecasting revenues or income with certainty or even confidence.

If we fail to protect our intellectual property rights, our ability to pursue the development of our technologies and products would be
negatively affected.

Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain patents and maintain adequate protection of our technologies and products. If we do not
adequately protect our intellectual property, competitors may be able to use our technologies to produce and market drugs in direct competition with us
and erode our competitive advantage. Some foreign countries lack rules and methods for defending intellectual property rights and do not protect
proprietary rights to the same extent as the United States. Many companies have had diﬃculty protecting their proprietary rights in these foreign
countries. We may not be able to prevent misappropriation of our proprietary rights.

We have received, and are currently seeking, patent protection for numerous compounds and methods of treating diseases. However, the patent process
is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we will be successful in protecting our products by obtaining and
defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following: patents that may be issued or licensed may be challenged, invalidated, or
circumvented, or otherwise may not provide any competitive advantage; our competitors, many of which have substantially greater resources than us and
many of which have made signiﬁcant investments in competing technologies, may seek, or may already have obtained, patents that will limit, interfere
with, or eliminate our ability to make, use, and sell our potential products either in the United States or in international markets; there may be signiﬁcant
pressure on the United States government and other international governmental bodies to limit the scope of patent protection both inside and outside the
United States for treatments that prove successful as a matter of public policy regarding worldwide health concerns; countries other than the United
States may have less restrictive patent laws than those upheld by United States courts, allowing foreign competitors the ability to exploit these laws to
create, develop, and market competing products.

Moreover, any patents issued to us may not provide us with meaningful protection, or others may challenge, circumvent or narrow our patents. Third
parties may also independently develop products similar to our products, duplicate our unpatented products or design around any patents on products we
develop. Additionally, extensive time is required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product. While extensions of patent term
due to regulatory delays may be available, it is possible that, before any of our product candidates can be commercialized, any related patent, even with
an extension, may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantages of the patent.

In addition, the United States Patent and Trademark Oﬃce (the “USPTO”) and patent oﬃces in other jurisdictions have often required that patent
applications concerning pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology-related inventions be limited or narrowed substantially to cover only the specific innovations
exempliﬁed in the patent application, thereby limiting the scope of protection against competitive challenges. Thus, even if we or our licensors are able to
obtain patents, the patents may be substantially narrower than anticipated.

Our success depends on patent applications that are licensed exclusively to us and other patents to which we may obtain assignment or licenses. We

may not be aware, however, of all patents, published applications or published literature that may aﬀect our business either by blocking our ability to
commercialize our product candidates, by preventing the patentability of our product candidates to us or our licensors, or by covering the same or similar
technologies that may invalidate our patents, limit the scope of our future patent claims or adversely affect our ability to market our product candidates.

In addition to patents, we rely on a combination of trade secrets, conﬁdentiality, nondisclosure and other contractual provisions, and security measures to
protect our confidential and proprietary information. These measures may not adequately protect our trade secrets or other proprietary information. If they
do not adequately protect our rights, third parties could use our technology, and we could lose any competitive advantage we may have. In addition,
others may independently develop similar proprietary information or techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets, which could impair any
competitive advantage we may have.

Patent protection and other intellectual property protection is crucial to the success of our business and prospects, and there is a substantial risk that
such protections will prove inadequate.

We license our patents from third party owners. If such owners do not properly maintain or enforce the intellectual property underlying such
licenses, our competitive position and business prospects could be harmed. Our licensors may also seek to terminate our license.

We are a party to a number of licenses that give us rights to third-party intellectual property that is necessary or useful to our business. To this end, we are
dependent on our licenses with Xencor, Inc., Immune Ventures, LLC and the University of Pittsburgh. Our success will depend in part on the ability of our
licensors to obtain, maintain and enforce our licensed intellectual property. Our licensors may not successfully prosecute any applications for or maintain
intellectual property to which we have licenses, may determine not to pursue litigation against other companies that are infringing such intellectual
property, or may pursue such litigation less aggressively than we would. Without protection for the intellectual property we license, other companies might
be able to oﬀer similar products for sale, which could adversely aﬀect our competitive business position and harm our business prospects. If we lose any
of our right to use third-party intellectual property, it could adversely aﬀect our ability to commercialize our technologies, products or services, as well as
harm our competitive business position and our business prospects.

We are dependent on our licensing agreement with Xencor and the termination of this agreement could a have an adverse eﬀect on our
business.

On October 3, 2017, the Company entered into a license agreement with Xencor, Inc., which has discovered and developed a proprietary biological
molecule that inhibits soluble tumor necrosis factor. Pursuant to the license agreement, Xencor granted the Company an exclusive worldwide, royalty-
bearing license in licensed patent rights, licensed know-how and licensed materials to make, develop, use, sell and import any pharmaceutical product
that comprises, contains, or incorporates Xencor’s proprietary protein known as XPro that inhibits soluble tumor necrosis factor (or all modiﬁcations,
formulations and variants of the licensed protein that speciﬁcally bind soluble tumor necrosis factor) alone or in combination with one or more active
ingredients, in any dosage or formulation. If we breach this Agreement Xencor may be able to terminate it and as a result of this terminate our business
could be negatively impacted.

Our officers and Directors own the company that we license our INKmune patent from.

On October 29, 2015, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with Immune Ventures, LLC (Immune Ventures). The license agreement relates to
our natural killer program, INKmune. Immune Ventures is owned by our President and a member of our Board of Directors, David Moss, our Chief
Financial Oﬃcer and Treasurer and Mark Lowdell, our Chief Scientiﬁc Oﬃcer. Because our oﬃcers and directors also own Immune Ventures there may
be an inherent conflict of interest which could result in unanticipated actions that adversely affect us.

We have a limited operating history, and expect to incur significant additional operating losses.

We are an early-stage company formed in September 2015 and have only a limited operating history. Therefore, there is limited historical ﬁnancial
information upon which to base an evaluation of our performance. Our prospects must be considered in light of the uncertainties, risks, expenses, and
diﬃculties frequently encountered by companies in their early stages of operations. We expect to incur substantial additional operating expenses over the
next several years as our research, development, and commercial activities increase. The amount of future losses and when, if ever, we will achieve
proﬁtability are uncertain. Our ability to generate material revenue and achieve proﬁtability will depend on, among other things, successful completion of
the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidate; obtaining necessary regulatory approvals from the FDA and international regulatory
agencies; implementing successful manufacturing, sales, and marketing arrangements; and raising suﬃcient funds to ﬁnance our activities. If we are
unsuccessful at some or all of these undertakings, our business, prospects, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

INKmune represents a novel approach to cancer treatment that creates significant challenges for us.

We believe INKmune represents a novel approach to cancer treatment. Advancing this novel therapy creates significant challenges for us, including:

● Educating medical personnel regarding the potential side effect profile of INKmune;

● Sourcing clinical and, if approved, commercial supplies for the materials used to manufacture and process our product candidates;

● Obtaining regulatory approval, as the FDA and other regulatory authorities have limited experience with commercial development of

immunotherapies for cancer; and

● Establishing sales and marketing capabilities upon obtaining any regulatory approval to gain market acceptance of a novel therapy.

Even if we are able to commercialize any product candidate that we develop, the product may become subject to unfavorable pricing
regulations, third-party payor reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives that could harm our business.

The commercial success of our product candidates will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our
product candidates will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy beneﬁt and similar healthcare management organizations, or
reimbursed by government health administration authorities (such as Medicare and Medicaid), private health coverage insurers and other third-party
payors. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates.
Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish and maintain pricing suﬃcient to
realize a meaningful return on our investment.

There is signiﬁcant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved drugs. Marketing approvals, pricing and
reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be
marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some non-U.S. markets,
prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain
marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay commercial launch of the product, possibly for
lengthy time periods, which may negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing
limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if our product candidates obtain marketing approval.

We depend on obtaining certain patents and protecting our proprietary rights.

Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain patents, maintain trade secret protection and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights
of third parties or having third parties circumvent our rights. We have ﬁled and are actively pursuing a patent application for our product candidates. The
patent positions of biotechnology, biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual
questions. Thus, there can be no assurance that our patent application will result in the issuance of a patent, that we will develop additional proprietary
products that are patentable, that any patents issued to us will provide us with any competitive advantages or will not be challenged by any third parties,
that the patents of others will not impede our ability to do business or that third parties will not be able to circumvent our patents. Furthermore, there can
be no assurance that others will not independently develop similar products, duplicate any of our products not under patent protection, or, if patents are
issued to us, design around the patented products we developed or will develop.

We may be required to obtain licenses from third parties to avoid infringing patents or other proprietary rights. No assurance can be given that any
licenses required under any such patents or proprietary rights would be made available, if at all, on terms we ﬁnd acceptable. If we do not obtain such
licenses, we could encounter delays in the introduction of products or could ﬁnd that the development, manufacture or sale of products requiring such
licenses could be prohibited.

A number of pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and research and academic institutions have developed technologies,
ﬁled patent applications or received patents on various technologies that may be related to or aﬀect our business. Some of these technologies,
applications or patents may conﬂict with our technologies or patent applications. Such conﬂict could limit the scope of the patents, if any, that we may be
able to obtain or result in the denial of our patent applications. In addition, if patents that cover our activities are issued to other companies, there can be
no assurance that we would be able to obtain licenses to these patents at a reasonable cost or be able to develop or obtain alternative technology. If we
do not obtain such licenses, we could encounter delays in the introduction of products, or could ﬁnd that the development, manufacture or sale of
products requiring such licenses could be prohibited. In addition, we could incur substantial costs in defending ourselves in suits brought against us on
patents it might infringe or in filing suits against others to have such patents declared invalid.

Much of our know-how and technology may not be patentable. To protect our rights, we plan to require employees, consultants, advisors and
collaborators to enter into conﬁdentiality agreements. There can be no assurance, however, that these agreements will provide meaningful protection for
our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information in the event of any unauthorized use or disclosure. Further, our business may be adversely
affected by competitors who independently develop competing technologies, especially if we obtain no, or only narrow, patent protection.

We are subject to various government regulations.

The manufacture and sale of human therapeutic products in the U.S. and foreign jurisdictions are governed by a variety of statutes and regulations.
These laws require approval of manufacturing facilities, controlled research and testing of products and government review and approval of a submission
containing manufacturing, preclinical and clinical data in order to obtain marketing approval based on establishing the safety and eﬃcacy of the product
for each use sought, including adherence to current cGMP during production and storage, and control of marketing activities, including advertising and
labeling.

The products we are currently developing will require signiﬁcant development, preclinical and clinical testing and investment of substantial funds prior to
its commercialization. The process of obtaining required approvals can be costly and time-consuming, and there can be no assurance that we develop
successfully this product or any future products, or that this product or any future products we develop will prove to be safe and eﬀective in clinical trials
or receive applicable regulatory approvals. Potential investors and shareholders should be aware of the risks, problems, delays, expenses and diﬃculties
which we may encounter in view of the extensive regulatory environment which controls our business.

If we are unable to keep up with rapid technological changes in our field or compete effectively, we will be unable to operate profitably.

We are engaged in a rapidly changing ﬁeld. Other products and therapies that will compete directly with the product that we are seeking to develop and
market currently exist or are being developed. Competition from fully integrated pharmaceutical companies and more established biotechnology
companies is intense and is expected to increase. Most of these companies have signiﬁcantly greater ﬁnancial resources and expertise in discovery and
development, manufacturing, preclinical and clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing than us. Smaller companies may also prove to
be signiﬁcant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large pharmaceutical and established biopharmaceutical or biotechnology
companies. Many of these competitors have significant products that have been approved or are in development and operate large, well-funded discovery
and development programs. Academic institutions, governmental agencies and other public and private research organizations also conduct research,
seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for therapeutic products and clinical development and marketing. These companies and
institutions compete with us in recruiting and retaining highly qualiﬁed scientiﬁc and management personnel. In addition to the above factors, we will face
competition based on product eﬃcacy and safety, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals, availability of supply, marketing and sales capability,
reimbursement coverage, price and patent position. There is no assurance that our competitors will not develop more eﬀective or more aﬀordable
products, or achieve earlier patent protection or product commercialization, than our own.

Other companies may succeed in developing products earlier than ourselves, obtaining FDA and European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) approvals for
such products more rapidly than we will, or in developing products that are more eﬀective than products we propose to develop. While we will seek to

expand our technological capabilities in order to remain competitive, there can be no assurance that research and development by others will not render
our technology or products obsolete or non-competitive or result in treatments or cures superior to any therapy we develop, or that any therapy we
develop will be preferred to any existing or newly developed technologies.

We may request priority review for our product candidate in the future. The FDA may not grant priority review for our product candidate.
Moreover, even if the FDA designates such product for priority review, that designation may not lead to a faster regulatory review or approval
process and, in any event, would not assure FDA approval.

We may be eligible for priority review designation for our product candidate if the FDA determines such product candidate oﬀers major advances in
treatment or provides a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. A priority review designation means that the goal for the FDA to review an
application in six months, rather than the standard review period of ten months. The FDA has broad discretion with respect to whether or not to grant
priority review status to a product candidate, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for such designation or status, the FDA may
decide not to grant it. Thus, while the FDA has granted priority review to other oncology disease products, our product candidate, should we determine to
seek priority review, may not receive similar designation. Moreover, even if our product candidate is designated for priority review, such a designation
does not necessarily mean a faster regulatory review process or necessarily confer any advantage with respect to approval compared to conventional
FDA procedures. Receiving priority review from the FDA does not guarantee approval within an accelerated timeline or thereafter.

We believe we may in some instances be able to secure approval from the FDA or comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities to use
accelerated development pathways. If we are unable to obtain such approval, we may be required to conduct additional preclinical studies or
clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, which could increase the expense of obtaining, and delay the receipt of, necessary marketing
approvals.

We anticipate that we may seek an accelerated approval pathway for our product candidates. Under the accelerated approval provisions in the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and the FDA’s implementing regulations, the FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product designed to
treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic beneﬁt over available therapies upon a determination that the product
has an eﬀect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical beneﬁt. The FDA considers a clinical
beneﬁt to be a positive therapeutic eﬀect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease, such as irreversible morbidity or mortality. For the
purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other
measure that is thought to predict clinical beneﬁt, but is not itself a measure of clinical beneﬁt. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that
can be measured earlier than an eﬀect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an eﬀect on irreversible morbidity or
mortality or other clinical beneﬁt. The accelerated approval pathway may be used in cases in which the advantage of a new drug over available therapy
may not be a direct therapeutic advantage, but is a clinically important improvement from a patient and public health perspective. If granted, accelerated
approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval conﬁrmatory studies to verify and
describe the drug’s clinical benefit. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefit, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug.

Prior to seeking such accelerated approval, we will seek feedback from the FDA and will otherwise evaluate our ability to seek and receive such
accelerated approval. There can be no assurance that after our evaluation of the feedback and other factors we will decide to pursue or submit a New
Drug Application, or NDA, for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Similarly, there can be no assurance
that after subsequent FDA feedback we will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or
approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we decide to submit an application for accelerated approval or under another expedited
regulatory designation (e.g., breakthrough therapy designation), there can be no assurance that such submission or application will be accepted or that
any expedited development, review or approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA or other non-U.S. authorities could also require us to
conduct further studies prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of
expedited development, review or approval for our product candidate would result in a longer time period to commercialization of such product candidate,
could increase the cost of development of such product candidate and could harm our competitive position in the marketplace.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome. We may incur additional costs or experience
delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidate.

Our product candidates are either in early clinical development or have not entered into clinical trials and are in development stage. Therefore, the risk of
failure of our product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if our product candidates will prove eﬀective or safe in humans or will receive
regulatory approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical
development and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and eﬃcacy of our product candidate in humans. Clinical testing is
expensive, diﬃcult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more clinical trials can
occur at any stage of testing. The clinical development of our product candidates is susceptible to the risk of failure inherent at any stage of drug
development, including failure to demonstrate eﬃcacy in a clinical trial or across a broad population of patients, the occurrence of severe or medically or
commercially unacceptable adverse events, failure to comply with protocols or applicable regulatory requirements and determination by the FDA or any
comparable non-U.S. regulatory authority that a drug product is not safe or eﬀective for its intended uses. It is possible that even if our product candidate
has a beneﬁcial eﬀect, that eﬀect will not be detected during clinical evaluation as a result of one or more of a variety of factors, including the size,
duration, design, measurements, conduct or analysis of our clinical trials. Conversely, as a result of the same factors, our clinical trials may indicate an
apparent positive eﬀect of a product candidate that is greater than the actual positive eﬀect, if any. Similarly, in our clinical trials we may fail to detect
toxicity of or intolerability caused by our product candidates, or mistakenly believe that our product candidates are toxic or not well tolerated when that is
not in fact the case.

The outcome of preclinical studies and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial
do not necessarily predict ﬁnal results. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suﬀered signiﬁcant setbacks in late-
stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in earlier development, and we cannot be certain that we will not face additional setbacks.

The design of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support approval of a product; however, ﬂaws in the design of a clinical trial may not
become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced or completed. In addition, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying

interpretations and analyses. Many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have
nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval for the product candidates. Even if we believe that the results of clinical trials for our product candidate
warrant marketing approval, the FDA or comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities may disagree and may not grant marketing approval of our product
candidate.

In some instances, there can be signiﬁcant variability in safety or eﬃcacy results between diﬀerent clinical trials of the same product candidate due to
numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, diﬀerences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and
adherence to the clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Any clinical trials that we may conduct may not
demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidate.

The results of preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of future results. Initial success in clinical trials may not
be indicative of results obtained when these trials are completed or in later-stage trials.

The results of preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of clinical trials, and the results of any early-stage clinical trials we commence may
not be predictive of the results of the later-stage clinical trials. In addition, initial success in clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when
such trials are completed. In particular, the small number of patients in our planned early clinical trials may make the results of these trials less predictive
of the outcome of later clinical trials. For example, even if successful, the results of our initial clinical trials for XPro may not be predictive of the results of
further clinical trials of this drug candidate or any of our other drug candidates. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data often are susceptible to varying
interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their drug candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical
trials nonetheless have failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. Our future clinical trials may not ultimately be successful or support further
clinical development of any of our drug candidates. There is a high failure rate for drug candidates proceeding through clinical trials. A number of
companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suﬀered signiﬁcant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving
encouraging results in earlier studies. Any such setbacks in our clinical development could materially harm our business, results of operations, ﬁnancial
condition and prospects.

Interim top-line and preliminary data from our planned clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more
patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary data from our planned clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may
complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data
become available. Preliminary or top-line data also remain subject to audit and veriﬁcation procedures that may result in the ﬁnal data being materially
diﬀerent from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the ﬁnal data are
available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our reputation and business prospects.

If clinical trials of our product candidates fail to demonstrate safety and eﬃcacy to the satisfaction of the FDA and comparable non-U.S.
regulators, we may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and
commercialization of our product candidates.

We are not permitted to commercialize, market, promote or sell any product candidate in the United States without obtaining marketing approval from the
FDA. Comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities, such as the EMA, impose similar restrictions. We may never receive such approvals. We must
complete extensive preclinical development and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidate in humans before we will be
able to obtain these approvals.

Clinical testing is expensive, diﬃcult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is inherently uncertain as to outcome. We have not
previously submitted an NDA to the FDA or similar drug approval filings to comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities for any product candidate.

Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us and impair our ability to generate revenues
from product sales, regulatory and commercialization milestones and royalties. In addition, if (1) we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or
other testing of our product candidate beyond the trials and testing than we contemplate, (2) we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our
product candidate or other testing, (3) the results of these trials or tests are unfavorable, uncertain or are only modestly favorable, or (4) there are
unacceptable safety concerns associated with our product candidate, we, in addition to incurring additional costs, may:

●

be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidate;

not obtain marketing approval at all;

obtain approval for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as we intended or desired;

obtain approval with labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or significant safety warnings, including boxed warnings;

be subject to additional post-marketing testing or other requirements; or

be required to remove the product from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

If we experience any of a number of possible unforeseen events in connection with clinical trials of any of our product candidates, potential
marketing approval or commercialization of that product candidate could be delayed or prevented.

We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent marketing approval of any of our
product candidates, including:

●

clinical trials of our product candidate may produce unfavorable or inconclusive results;

● we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or abandon product development programs;

●

the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidate may be larger than we anticipate, patient enrollment in these
clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or participants may drop out of these clinical trials at a higher rate than we anticipate;

●

data safety monitoring committees may recommend suspension, termination or a clinical hold for various reasons, including concerns about
patient safety;

regulators or institutional review boards, or IRBs, may suspend or terminate the trial or impose a clinical hold for various reasons, including
noncompliance with regulatory requirements or concerns about patient safety;

patients with serious, life-threatening diseases included in our clinical trials may die or suﬀer other adverse medical events for reasons that
may not be related to our product candidate;

participating patients may be subject to unacceptable health risks;

patients may not complete clinical trials due to safety issues, side effects, or other reasons;

changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may occur, which require us to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes;

our third-party contractors, including those manufacturing our product candidate or components or ingredients thereof or conducting clinical
trials on our behalf, may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner or at all;

●

regulators or IRBs may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;

● we may experience delays in reaching or fail to reach agreement on acceptable clinical trial contracts or clinical trial protocols with

prospective trial sites;

●

patients who enroll in a clinical trial may misrepresent their eligibility to do so or may otherwise not comply with the clinical trial protocol,
resulting in the need to drop the patients from the clinical trial, increase the needed enrollment size for the clinical trial or extend the clinical
trial’s duration;

● we may have to suspend or terminate clinical trials of our product candidate for various reasons, including a ﬁnding that the participants are

being exposed to unacceptable health risks, undesirable side effects or other unexpected characteristics of a product candidate;

●

the FDA or comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design or our interpretation of data from preclinical
studies and clinical trials;

the FDA or comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities may fail to approve or subsequently ﬁnd fault with the manufacturing processes or
facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we enter into agreements for clinical and commercial supplies;

the supply or quality of raw materials or manufactured product candidate or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of our product
candidate may be insufficient, inadequate, delayed, or not available at an acceptable cost, or we may experience interruptions in supply; and

the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or comparable non-U.S. regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering
our clinical data insufficient to obtain marketing approval.

Product development costs for us will increase if we experience delays in testing or pursuing marketing approvals and we may be required to obtain
additional funds to complete clinical trials and prepare for possible commercialization of our product candidates. We do not know whether any preclinical
tests or clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Signiﬁcant preclinical or clinical trial
delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to
bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results
of operations. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, clinical trial delays may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of our
product candidates.

If we experience delays or diﬃculties in the enrollment of patients in clinical trials, we may not achieve our clinical development on our
anticipated timeline, or at all, and our receipt of necessary regulatory approvals could be delayed or prevented.

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for INKmune our DN-TNF product platform or any other product candidate if we are unable to
locate and enroll a suﬃcient number of eligible patients to participate in clinical trials. Patient enrollment is a signiﬁcant factor in the timing of clinical
trials, and is affected by many factors, including:

●

the size and nature of the patient population;

the severity of the disease under investigation;

the proximity of patients to clinical sites;

the eligibility criteria for the trial;

the design of the clinical trial;

efforts to facilitate timely enrollment;

competing clinical trials; and

clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and risks of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies,
including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating.

Our inability to enroll a suﬃcient number of patients for our clinical trials could result in signiﬁcant delays or may require us to abandon one or more
clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, delay or halt the
development of and approval processes for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to achieve our clinical development timeline and goals,
including the dates by which we will commence, complete and receive results from clinical trials. Enrollment delays may also delay or jeopardize our
ability to commence sales and generate revenues from our product candidates. Any of the foregoing could cause the value of the Company to decline
and limit our ability to obtain additional financing, if needed.

We will need to obtain FDA approval of any proposed product brand names, and any failure or delay associated with such approval may
adversely impact our business.

A pharmaceutical product cannot be marketed in the U.S. or other countries until we have completed rigorous and extensive regulatory review
processes, including approval of a brand name. Any brand names we intend to use for our product candidates will require approval from the FDA
regardless of whether we have secured a formal trademark registration from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Oﬃce, or the USPTO. The FDA typically
conducts a review of proposed product brand names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. The FDA may also
object to a product brand name if it believes the name inappropriately implies medical claims. If the FDA objects to any of our proposed product brand
names, we may be required to adopt an alternative brand name for our product candidates. If we adopt an alternative brand name, we would lose the
beneﬁt of our existing trademark applications for such product candidate and may be required to expend signiﬁcant additional resources in an eﬀort to
identify a suitable product brand name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be
acceptable to the FDA. We may be unable to build a successful brand identity for a new trademark in a timely manner or at all, which would limit our
ability to commercialize our product candidates.

We may rely on orphan drug status to develop and commercialize our product candidates, but orphan drug designation, if obtained, may not
confer marketing exclusivity or other expected commercial benefits as anticipated.

Market exclusivity aﬀorded by orphan drug designation is generally oﬀered as an incentive to drug developers to invest in developing and
commercializing products for unique diseases that impact a limited number of patients. The FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to
treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that aﬀects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. Qualiﬁcation to
maintain orphan drug status is generally monitored by the regulatory authorities during the orphan drug exclusivity period, currently seven years from the
date of approval in the United States.

We intend to seek orphan drug designation in the United States for our product candidate for the treatment of AML and ovarian cancer and we expect to
rely on orphan drug exclusivity for our product candidate. Even if granted, orphan drug designation, and related market exclusivity, in the United States
could be lost. Further, even if we are granted orphan drug status, the FDA can still approve diﬀerent drugs for use in treating the same indication or
disease, which would create a more competitive market for us and our revenues will be diminished.

Further, for our product candidate, it is possible that another company also holding orphan drug designation for the same product candidate will receive
marketing approval for the same indication before we do. If that were to happen, our applications for that indication may not be approved until the
competing company’s period of exclusivity expires. Even if we are the ﬁrst to obtain marketing authorization for an orphan drug indication, there are
circumstances under which a competing product may be approved for the same indication during the seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, such as
if the later product is shown to be clinically superior to the orphan product, or if the later product is deemed a diﬀerent product than ours. Further, the
seven-year marketing exclusivity would not prevent competitors from obtaining approval of the same product candidate as ours for indications other than
those in which we have been granted orphan drug designation, or for the use of other types of products in the same indications as our orphan product.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our revenues may be adversely aﬀected and our
business may suﬀer. Because the target patient populations of our product candidates are small, we must be able to successfully identify
patients and capture a significant market share to achieve and maintain profitability.

We focus our research and product development on treatments for certain cancer indications. Our projections of both the number of people who have
failed other therapies or have limited medical options for such indications, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect and new
studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence. The number of patients with such diseases in the United States, Europe and elsewhere may
turn out to be lower than expected or may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our products, or new patients may become increasingly diﬃcult to
identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely aﬀect our results of operations and our business. Additionally, because our target patient
populations are small, we will be required to capture a significant market share to achieve and maintain profitability.

We may fail to comply with regulatory requirements .

Our success will be dependent upon our ability, and our collaborative partners’ abilities, to maintain compliance with regulatory requirements, including
cGMP, and safety reporting obligations. The failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in, among other things, fines, injunctions,
civil penalties, total or partial suspension of regulatory approvals, refusal to approve pending applications, recalls or seizures of products, operating and
production restrictions and criminal prosecutions.

Even if our product candidates receive marketing approval, they may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients,
third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success and the market opportunity for the product
candidates may be smaller than we estimate.

We have never commercialized a product. Even if INKmune, our DN-TNF product platform (INB03 or XPro), or any other product candidate we develop is
approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities for marketing and sale, it may nonetheless fail to gain suﬃcient market acceptance by physicians,
patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. For example, physicians are often reluctant to switch their patients from existing
therapies even when new and potentially more eﬀective or convenient treatments enter the market. Further, patients often acclimate to the therapy that
they are currently taking and do not want to switch unless their physicians recommend switching products or they are required to switch therapies due to
lack of reimbursement for existing therapies.

Eﬀorts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the beneﬁts of our product candidate may require signiﬁcant resources and may not
be successful. If our product candidate is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of market acceptance, we may not generate signiﬁcant
revenues and we may not become proﬁtable. The degree of market acceptance of INmune or any other product candidate we develop, if approved for
commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

●

the efficacy and safety of the product;

the potential advantages of the product compared to alternative treatments;

the prevalence and severity of any side effects;

the clinical indications for which the product is approved;

● whether the product is designated under physician treatment guidelines as a first-line therapy or as a second- or third-line therapy;

●

limitations or warnings, including distribution or use restrictions, contained in the product’s approved labeling;

our ability to offer the product for sale at competitive prices;

our ability to establish and maintain pricing sufficient to realize a meaningful return on our investment;

the product’s convenience and ease of administration compared to alternative treatments;

the willingness of the target patient population to try, and of physicians to prescribe, the product;

the strength of sales, marketing and distribution support;

the approval of other new products for the same indications;

changes in the standard of care for the targeted indications for the product;

the timing of market introduction of our approved products as well as competitive products and other therapies;

availability and amount of reimbursement from government payors, managed care plans and other third-party payors;

adverse publicity about the product or favorable publicity about competitive products; and

potential product liability claims.

The potential market opportunities for our product candidate are diﬃcult to estimate precisely. Our estimates of the potential market opportunities are
predicated on many assumptions, including industry knowledge and publications, third-party research reports and other surveys. While we believe that
our internal assumptions are reasonable, these assumptions involve the exercise of signiﬁcant judgment on the part of our management, are inherently
uncertain and the reasonableness of these assumptions has not been assessed by an independent source. If any of the assumptions proves to be
inaccurate, the actual markets for our product candidate could be smaller than our estimates of the potential market opportunities.

Even if we obtain regulatory approvals for INKmune and/or any product from our DN-TNF platform (INB03, XPro) those approvals and ongoing
regulation of our products may limit how we manufacture and market our products, which could prevent us from realizing the full beneﬁt of
our efforts.

If we obtain regulatory approvals, INKmune and/or the DN-TNF product platform, and the manufacturing facilities used for its production will be subject to
continual review, including periodic inspections, by the FDA and other United States and foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, regulatory authorities
may impose signiﬁcant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of INKmune or other products that we may develop. These and other factors may
significantly restrict our ability to successfully commercialize INKmune.

We and many of our vendors and suppliers will be required to comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices, or GMP, which include requirements
relating to quality control and quality assurance as well as to the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation. Furthermore, any
manufacturing facilities will need to be approved by regulatory agencies before these facilities can be used to manufacture, and they will also be subject
to additional regulatory inspections. Any material changes we may make to our manufacturing process may require approval by the FDA and state or
foreign regulatory authorities. Failure to comply with FDA or other applicable regulatory requirements may result in criminal prosecution, civil penalties,
recall or seizure of products, partial or total suspension of production or withdrawal of a product from the market.

We must also report adverse events that occur when our products are used. The discovery of previously unknown problems with INKmune, the DN-TNF
product platform or manufacturing facilities used to manufacture INKmune or the DN-TNF product platform may result in restrictions or sanctions on our
products or manufacturing facilities, including withdrawal of our products from the market. Regulatory agencies may also require us to reformulate our
products, conduct additional clinical trials, make changes in the labeling of our product or obtain re-approvals. This may cause our reputation in the
market place to suffer or subject us to lawsuits, including class action suits.

If our product candidates receive marketing approval and we, or others, later discover that the drug is less eﬀective than previously believed
or causes undesirable side effects that were not previously identified, our ability to market the drugs could be compromised.

Clinical trials of our product candidates will be conducted in carefully deﬁned subsets of patients who have agreed to enter into clinical trials.
Consequently, it is possible that our clinical trials may indicate an apparent positive eﬀect of a product candidate that is greater than the actual positive
eﬀect, if any, or alternatively fail to identify undesirable side eﬀects. If, following approval of our product candidate, we, or others, discover that the drug is
less eﬀective than previously believed or causes undesirable side eﬀects that were not previously identiﬁed, any of the following adverse events could
occur:

●

regulatory authorities may withdraw their approval of the drug or seize the drug;

● we may be required to recall the drug or change the way the drug is administered;

●

additional restrictions may be imposed on the marketing of, or the manufacturing processes for, the particular drug;

● we may be subject to fines, injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties;

●

regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, such as a “black box” warning or a contraindication;

● we may be required to create a Medication Guide outlining the risks of the previously unidentified side effects for distribution to patients;

● we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients;

●

the drug may become less competitive; and

our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could have a material and adverse effect on our operations and business.

Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval, along with the manufacturing processes, qualiﬁcation testing, post-approval
clinical data, labeling and promotional activities for such product, will be subject to continual and additional requirements of the FDA and
other regulatory authorities.

These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information, reports, registration and listing requirements, good
manufacturing practices, or GMP requirements relating to quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents,
and recordkeeping. Even if marketing approval of our product candidate is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for
which the product may be marketed or to conditions of approval, or contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the
safety or eﬃcacy of the product. The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of pharmaceutical products to ensure such
products are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling.

In addition, later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products, manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory
requirements, may lead to various adverse results, including:

●

restrictions on such products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes;

restrictions on the labeling or marketing of a product;

restrictions on product distribution or use;

requirements to conduct post-marketing clinical trials;

requirements to institute a risk evaluation mitigation strategy, or REMS, to monitor safety of the product post-approval;

● warning letters issued by the FDA or other regulatory authorities;

● withdrawal of the products from the market;

●

refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications that we submit;

recall of products, fines, restitution or disgorgement of profits or revenue;

suspension, revocation or withdrawal of marketing approvals;

refusal to permit the import or export of our products; and

injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization and have no experience in marketing products. If we are unable to establish marketing
and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may not be able to generate
product revenue.

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities and have no experience as a company in marketing products. If we develop internal
sales, marketing and distribution organization, this would require significant capital expenditures, management resources and time, and we would have to
compete with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel.

If we are unable or decide not to establish internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, we expect to pursue collaborative arrangements
regarding the sales, marketing and distribution of our products. However, we may not be able to establish or maintain such collaborative arrangements, or
if we are able to do so, their sales forces may not be successful in marketing our products. Any revenue we receive would depend upon the eﬀorts of

such third parties, which may not be successful. We may have little or no control over the sales, marketing and distribution eﬀorts of such third parties
and our revenue from product sales may be lower than if we had commercialized our product candidates ourselves. We also face competition in our
search for third parties to assist us with the sales, marketing and distribution eﬀorts of our product candidates. There can be no assurance that we will be
able to develop internal sales, marketing distribution capabilities or establish or maintain relationships with third-party collaborators to commercialize any
product in the United States or overseas.

We face substantial competition from other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and our operating results may suﬀer if we fail to
compete effectively.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We expect that we will face signiﬁcant competition from major
pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide with respect to INKmune, our DN-TNF product
platform, and any other of our product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. Speciﬁcally, due to the large unmet
medical need, global demographics and relatively attractive reimbursement dynamics, the oncology market is fiercely competitive and there are a number
of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of product candidates for
the treatment of cancer. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing technologies and drug products that are more eﬀective, have
fewer or more tolerable side eﬀects or are less costly than any product candidates that we are currently developing or that we may develop, which could
render our product candidates obsolete and noncompetitive.

We rely on key personnel and, if we are unable to retain or motivate key personnel or hire qualiﬁed personnel, we may not be able to grow
effectively.

We are dependent on certain members of our management, the loss of services of one or more of whom could materially adversely aﬀect us. In
particular, our success depends to a signiﬁcant extent upon the continued services of Dr. Raymond J. Tesi, our President and CEO. Dr. Tesi has
overseen INmune Bio since inception and provides leadership for our growth and operations strategy as well as being an inventor of our patents.
Although we have entered into an employment agreement with Dr. Tesi, if he were to nevertheless terminate his employment with us, the loss of the
services of Dr. Tesi, would have a material adverse eﬀect on our growth, revenues, and prospective business. We are also highly dependent on the other
principal members of our management and scientiﬁc team. We are not aware of any present intention of any of our key personnel to leave our company
or to retire. The loss of any of our key personnel, or the inability to attract and retain qualiﬁed personnel, may signiﬁcantly delay or prevent the
achievement of our research, development or business objectives and could materially adversely aﬀect our business, ﬁnancial condition and results of
operations.

Our ability to manage growth eﬀectively will require us to continue to implement and improve our management systems and to recruit and train new
employees. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully attract and retain skilled and experienced personnel.

Product liability lawsuits against us could divert our resources, cause us to incur substantial liabilities and limit commercialization of any
products that we may develop.

We face an inherent risk of product liability claims as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidate despite obtaining appropriate informed
consents from our clinical trial participants. We will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell any product that we may develop. For example, we
may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during clinical testing, manufacturing, marketing or
sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the
product, negligence, strict liability or a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot
successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our product
candidate. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

●

decreased demand for our product candidate or products that we may develop;

injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;

● withdrawal of clinical trial participants;

●

significant costs to defend resulting litigation;

substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;

loss of revenue;

reduced resources of our management to pursue our business strategy; and

the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop.

Although we plan to maintain general liability insurance, this insurance may not fully cover potential liabilities that we may incur. The cost of any product
liability litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. In addition, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly
expensive. If we are unable to obtain or maintain suﬃcient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost or to otherwise protect against potential product
liability claims, it could prevent or inhibit the development and commercial production and sale of our product candidate, which could adversely aﬀect our
business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

To execute our business plan, we will need to rapidly add other management, accounting, regulatory, manufacturing and scientiﬁc staﬀ. We currently

have 11 full time employees and retain the services of additional personnel on an independent contractor basis. We will need to attract, retain and
motivate a signiﬁcant number of new additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, ﬁnancial, and other personnel, as well as highly skilled
scientiﬁc and medical personnel, and to expand our capabilities to successfully pursue our research, development, manufacturing and commercialization
eﬀorts and secure collaborations to market and distribute our products. This growth may strain our existing managerial, operational, ﬁnancial and other
resources. We also intend to add personnel in our research and development and manufacturing departments as we expand our clinical trial and
research capabilities. Any inability to attract and retain qualiﬁed employees to enable our planned growth and establish additional capabilities or our
failure to manage our growth effectively could delay or curtail our product development and commercialization efforts and harm our business.

If we or any of our third-party manufacturers do not maintain high standards of manufacturing, our ability to develop and commercialize our
product candidate could be delayed or curtailed.

We and any third parties that we may use in the future to manufacture our products must continuously adhere to cGMP regulations rigorously enforced
by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. If our facilities or the facilities of third parties who produce our products do not pass a pre-approval
inspection, the FDA will not grant market approval for our product candidates. In complying with cGMP, we and any third-party manufacturers will need to
expend signiﬁcant time, money and eﬀort in production, record-keeping and quality control to assure that each component of our product candidates
meets applicable speciﬁcations and other requirements. We or any of these third-party manufacturers may also be subject to comparable or more
stringent regulations of foreign regulatory authorities. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers fail to comply with these requirements, we may be
subject to regulatory action, which could delay or curtail our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval of, and commercialize our product candidates. If
our component part manufacturers and suppliers fail to provide components of suﬃcient quality, and that meet our required speciﬁcations, our clinical
trials or commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed or halted, and we could face product liability claims. There can be no assurance
we can manufacture a scalable quantity of our product for clinical trials or commercialization.

If we or our third-party manufacturers use hazardous and biological materials in a manner that causes injury or violates applicable law, we
may be liable for damages.

Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of potentially hazardous substances, including chemical and biological materials, by
us and any third-party manufacturers. We and such manufacturers will be subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations in the United States
governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of medical and hazardous materials. Although we will seek to ensure that our procedures
for using, storing and disposing of these materials comply with legally prescribed standards, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of contamination or
injury resulting from medical or hazardous materials. As a result of any such contamination or injury, we may incur liability or local, city, state or federal
authorities may curtail the use of these materials and interrupt our business operations. In the event of an accident, we could be held liable for damages
or penalized with ﬁnes, and the liability could exceed our resources. We do not have any insurance for liabilities arising from medical or hazardous
materials. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our
research, development and production efforts, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations.

We plan to rely on third parties to conduct clinical trials for our product candidates. Any failure by a third party to meet its obligations with
respect to the clinical development of our product candidate may delay or impair our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our product
candidates.

We plan to rely on academic institutions and private oncology centers to conduct clinical trials relating to our product candidates. Our reliance on third
parties to conduct clinical trials could, depending on the actions of such third parties, jeopardize the validity of the clinical data generated and adversely
affect our ability to obtain marketing approval from the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities.

Such clinical trial arrangements will provide us with information rights with respect to the clinical data, including access to and the ability to use and
reference the data, including for our own regulatory ﬁlings, resulting from the clinical trials. If investigators or institutions breach their obligations with
respect to the clinical trials of our product candidate, or if the data proves to be inadequate, then our ability to design and conduct any future clinical trials
may be adversely affected.

Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our
responsibilities. For example, we will design our clinical trials and will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in
accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with standards, commonly referred
to as good clinical practices, or GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are
credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and conﬁdentiality of trial participants are protected. Our reliance on third parties that we do not control
will not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed
clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within speciﬁed timeframes. Failure to do so can result in ﬁnes, adverse publicity
and civil and criminal sanctions.

Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. If these third parties do not
successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our
stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidate and will not be able to, or
may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidate.

We also expect to rely on other third parties to store and distribute drug supplies for our clinical trials. Any performance failure on the part of our
distributors could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidate or commercialization of our products, producing additional
losses and depriving us of potential product revenue.

Recent legislative and regulatory activity may exert downward pressure on potential pricing and reimbursement for our products, if approved,
could materially affect our opportunity to commercialize such products.

The United States and several other jurisdictions are considering, or have already enacted, a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change
the healthcare system in ways that could aﬀect our ability to sell any of our products proﬁtably, if approved. Among policy-makers and payors in the
United States and elsewhere, there is signiﬁcant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare
costs, improving quality and/or expanding access to healthcare. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these
eﬀorts and has been signiﬁcantly aﬀected by major legislative initiatives. There have been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory
proposals at the federal and state levels directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. We cannot
predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future. The continuing eﬀorts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and

other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect:

●

the demand for any of our products, if approved;

our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for any of our products, if approved;

our ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability;

the level of taxes that we are required to pay; and

the availability of capital.

In March 2010, the Aﬀordable Care Act, or the ACA, became law in the United States (see “Business — Government Regulation”). The goal of ACA is to
reduce the cost of healthcare, broaden access to health insurance, constrain healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add
transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose taxes and fees on the health industry, impose additional health
policy reforms, and substantially change the way healthcare is ﬁnanced by both governmental and private insurers. While we cannot predict what impact
on federal reimbursement policies this legislation will have in general or on our business speciﬁcally, ACA may result in downward pressure on
pharmaceutical reimbursement, which could negatively affect market acceptance of any of our products, if they are approved.

We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. Further federal, state and foreign legislative and regulatory
developments are likely, and we expect ongoing initiatives to increase pressure on drug pricing. Such reforms could have an adverse eﬀect on
anticipated revenues from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may aﬀect our
overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates.

Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

As is the case with other pharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly on obtaining and enforcing
patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity, and therefore, is costly, time-
consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the United States has recently enacted and is currently implementing wide-ranging patent reform
legislation. Further, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have either narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or
weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future,
this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained.

In September 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the American Invents Act, or AIA, was signed into law. The AIA includes a number of
signiﬁcant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that aﬀect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also aﬀect patent litigation.
The USPTO is currently developing regulations and procedures to govern administration of the AIA, and many of the substantive changes to patent law
associated with the AIA. It is not clear what other, if any, impact the AIA will have on the operation of our business. Moreover, the AIA and its
implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent application, which could have a material adverse
effect on our business and financial condition.

An important change introduced by the AIA is that, as of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “ﬁrst-to-ﬁle” system for deciding which party
should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications are ﬁled by diﬀerent parties claiming the same invention. A third party that ﬁles a patent
application in the USPTO after that date but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the
invention before it was made by the third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to ﬁling of a patent
application. Furthermore, our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the diﬀerences between our technology
and the prior art allow our technology to be patentable over the prior art. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are
conﬁdential for a period of time after ﬁling, we cannot be certain that we were the ﬁrst to either (1) ﬁle any patent application related to our product
candidates or (2) invent any of the inventions claimed in our patents or patent applications.

Among some of the other changes introduced by the AIA are changes that limit where a patentee may ﬁle a patent infringement suit and providing
opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. This applies to all of our U.S. patents, even those issued before March 16,
2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal court necessary to
invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding suﬃcient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even
though the same evidence would be insuﬃcient to invalidate the claim if ﬁrst presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to
use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if ﬁrst challenged by the third party as a defendant in a
district court action.

The outbreak of COVID-19 may adversely affect our business and the market price of our common stock.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has broadly aﬀected the global economy, resulted in signiﬁcant travel and work restrictions in many regions and put a
signiﬁcant strain on healthcare resources. The pandemic has had, and we expect it will continue to have, an impact on our operations and on the
operations of our collaborators, third-party contractors and other entities, including governmental agencies with which we interact. We have experienced
delays in obtaining materials and supplies needed to manufacture our product candidates as a result of production shortages experienced by our
suppliers. Additionally, at times we have been subject to temporary pauses in enrollment and dosing implemented by some clinical trial sites due to
COVID-19, and some clinical trial sites have also restricted initiation of new trials at times as well as visits by sponsors and clinical research organizations
(CROs) for ongoing trials to protect both site staff and patients from possible COVID-19 exposure.

The COVID-19 pandemic, including the emergence of new variants, has impacted, and may in the future impact, the clinical development of our product
candidates if we are subject to restrictions or limitations on, or delays in, the performance of study procedures (particularly any procedures that may be
deemed non-essential), participant dosing, distribution of our product candidates or clinical trial materials, study monitoring, or site inspections and data

analysis, including as a result of changes in hospital or research institution policies, federal, state or local regulations, prioritization of hospital and other
medical resources toward pandemic eﬀorts, reduced availability of site staﬀ supporting the conduct of clinical trials, heightened risks of exposure of study
participants, principal investigators or site staﬀ to COVID-19 if an outbreak occurs in their geographic region, or other reasons related to the pandemic.
Quarantine or other travel limitations (whether voluntary or required) also may impede participant movement, aﬀect access to study sites, or interrupt
healthcare services.

Furthermore, the pandemic could cause delays in review and response times by the FDA and other regulatory agencies, or such health regulatory
agencies may refuse to accept data from our clinical trials due to mitigation strategies we implement in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and current
regulatory guidance. In addition, our ability to manufacture and ship our product candidates for our clinical trials may be impacted if we, or any third
parties which manufacture and supply materials used in either the manufacture of our product candidates or the conduct of our research and
development activities, or which perform certain testing relating to our product candidates, are adversely impacted by restrictions resulting from the
coronavirus outbreak. There is also the potential that manufacturing facilities, equipment, and materials required for manufacture or administration of our
product candidates could be commandeered under the Defense Production Act of 1950, or equivalent foreign legislation, which may make it more diﬃcult
to obtain materials, equipment, or manufacturing slots necessary for the clinical supply of our product candidates.

The extent to which the pandemic aﬀects our operations and the research and development of our product candidates will depend on continuously
changing circumstances, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with conﬁdence, such as the duration of the pandemic, including the
emergence of new variants of the virus, such as the Delta and Omicron variants, which may impact rates of infection and vaccination eﬀorts,
developments or perceptions regarding the safety of vaccines, future waves of infection, and the effectiveness of actions taken to contain the pandemic or
mitigate its impact, including vaccination campaigns. While the ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business is highly uncertain, any
negative impacts that materialize could materially adversely affect our clinical development and operations, financial performance and stock price.

A cybersecurity incident and other technology disruptions could negatively affect our business and our relationships with customers.

We use technology in substantially all aspects of our business operations. The widespread use of technology, including mobile devices, cloud computing,
and the internet, give rise to cybersecurity risks, including security breach, espionage, system disruption, theft and inadvertent release of information. Our
business involves the storage and transmission of numerous classes of sensitive and/or conﬁdential information and intellectual property, including
information relating to suppliers, private information about employees, and ﬁnancial and strategic information about us and our business partners. If we
fail to eﬀectively assess and identify cybersecurity risks associated with the use of technology in our business operations, we may become increasingly
vulnerable to such risks. Additionally, while we have implemented measures to prevent security breaches and cyber incidents, our preventative measures
and incident response eﬀorts may not be entirely eﬀective. The theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation, or release of sensitive and/or conﬁdential
information or intellectual property, or interference with our information technology systems or the technology systems of third parties on which we rely,
could result in business disruption, negative publicity, brand damage, violation of privacy laws, loss of customers, potential liability and competitive
disadvantage.

Risks Related to our Common Stock

We do not intend to pay dividends for the foreseeable future.

We have paid no dividends on our common stock to date, and we do not anticipate paying any dividends to holders of our common stock in the
foreseeable future. While our future dividend policy will be based on the operating results and capital needs of the business, we anticipate that we will
retain any earnings to ﬁnance our future expansion and for the implementation of our business plan. As an investor, you should take note of the fact that
a lack of a dividend can further affect the market value of our common stock, and could significantly affect the value of any investment in our Company.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of federal securities laws, which can be expensive and may divert resources from other projects,
thus impairing our ability grow.

We are a public reporting company and, accordingly, subject to the information and reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and other federal
securities laws, including compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”). The costs of preparing and ﬁling annual and
quarterly reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC and furnishing audited reports to stockholders would cause our expenses to be
higher than they would be if we remained privately held.

It may be time consuming, diﬃcult and costly for us to develop and implement the internal controls and reporting procedures required by the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act. We may need to hire additional financial reporting, internal controls and other finance personnel in order to develop and implement appropriate
internal controls and reporting procedures.

We are an “emerging growth company” within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and if we decide
to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our common stock
could be less attractive to investors.

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (1) the last day of the ﬁscal year during which we have total annual gross revenues of
$1.07 billion or more, (2) December 31, 2024 (the last day of the ﬁscal year following the ﬁfth anniversary of the completion of our initial public oﬀering),
(3) the date on which we have, during the previous three-year period, issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt, and (4) the date on which we
are deemed to be a “large accelerated ﬁler” under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act (i.e., the ﬁrst day of the ﬁscal
year after we have (a) more than $700.0 million in outstanding common equity held by our non-aﬃliates, measured each year on the last day of our
second fiscal quarter, and (b) been public for at least 12 months).

Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to take
advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements including exemption from compliance with the auditor attestation requirements
of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy
statements. We cannot predict if investors will ﬁnd our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors ﬁnd
our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

Our stock price may be volatile.

The market price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could ﬂuctuate widely in price in response to various factors, many of which are

beyond our control, including the following:

●

changes in our industry;

competitive pricing pressures;

our ability to obtain working capital financing;

additions or departures of key personnel;

limited “public ﬂoat” in the hands of a small number of persons whose sales or lack of sales could result in positive or negative pricing
pressure on the market price for our common stock;

sales of our common stock;

our ability to execute our business plan;

operating results that fall below expectations;

loss of any strategic relationship;

regulatory developments;

economic and other external factors;

period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results; and

inability to develop or acquire new or needed technology or products.

In addition, the securities markets have from time to time experienced signiﬁcant price and volume ﬂuctuations that are unrelated to the operating
performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also materially and adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock.

You may have difficulty trading and obtaining quotations for our common stock.

Our securities are not actively traded, and the bid and asked prices for our common stock may ﬂuctuate widely. As a result, investors may ﬁnd it diﬃcult
to dispose of, or to obtain accurate quotations of the price of, our securities. This severely limits the liquidity of the common stock and would likely reduce
the market price of our common stock and hamper our ability to raise additional capital. There is a limited market for our securities. Accordingly, investors
may therefore bear the economic risk of an investment in the Securities thereof, for an indefinite period of time.

Additional stock offerings in the future may dilute your percentage ownership of our company.

Given our plans and expectations that we may need additional capital and personnel, we may need to issue additional shares of common stock or
securities convertible or exercisable for shares of common stock, including convertible preferred stock, convertible notes, stock options or warrants. The
issuance of additional securities in the future will dilute the percentage ownership of then current stockholders.

Anti-takeover provisions in our stockholder rights plan could make a third-party acquisition of us difficult.

We have a stockholder rights plan that may have the eﬀect of discouraging unsolicited takeover proposals. Speciﬁcally, the rights issued under the
stockholder rights plan could cause signiﬁcant dilution to a person or group that attempts to acquire us on terms not approved in advance by our board of
directors. The rights plan is not intended to prevent a takeover, and we believe it will enable all our stockholders to realize the full potential value of their
investment in the Company and protect the Company and its stockholders from eﬀorts to obtain control of the Company that are inconsistent with the
best interests of the Company and its stockholders. The rights under the plan will expire on December 30, 2022, subject to a possible earlier expiration to
the extent provided in the stockholder rights plan, unless extended.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

The Company leases approximately 5,000 square feet of oﬃce space in Boca Raton, Florida from a third-party, which serves as the headquarters of the
Company. We currently pay approximately $10,000 per month for this sublease which expires in January 2027.

The Company subleases approximately 1,000 square feet of oﬃce space in La Jolla, California from a related party, which served as the former
headquarters of the Company. We pay approximately $4,000 per month for this sublease which expires in July 2024.

We believe our current facilities are suitable and adequate to meet our current needs.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We currently are not a party to any material litigation or other material legal proceedings. We may, from time to time, be subject to legal proceedings and
claims arising in the normal course of business.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES

Common Stock

Our common stock trades under the symbol “INMB” on the Nasdaq and has been publicly traded since February 4, 2019. Prior to this time, there was no
public market for our common stock.

As of December 31, 2021, there were 26 holders of record of our common stock. Because shares of our common stock are held by depositories, brokers
and other nominees, the number of beneficial holders of our shares is substantially larger than the number of record holders.

Dividend Policy

We have not declared any cash dividends on our common stock since inception and do not anticipate paying such dividends in the foreseeable future.
We plan to retain any future earnings for use in our business operations. Any decisions as to future payment of cash dividends will depend on our
earnings and financial position and such other factors as the Board of Directors deems relevant.

ITEM 6. [RESERVED]

PART II

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our ﬁnancial condition and results of operations in conjunction with our ﬁnancial statements and
notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report. In addition to historical ﬁnancial information, the following discussion and analysis contains
forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. Our actual results could diﬀer materially from those anticipated by these
forward-looking statements as a result of many factors. We discuss factors that we believe could cause or contribute to these diﬀerences below and
elsewhere in this Form 10-K, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and “Forward-Looking Statements.”

Overview

We are a clinical-stage immunotherapy company focused on developing drugs that may reprogram the patient’s innate immune system to treat disease.
We believe this may be done by targeting cells of the innate immune system that cause acute and chronic inﬂammation and are involved in the immune
dysfunction associated with chronic diseases such as cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. The Company has two therapeutic platforms – dominant-
negative TNF platform (“DN-TNF”) and the Natural Killer (“NK”) platform. The DN-TNF platform neutralizes soluble TNF (“sTNF”) without aﬀecting trans-
membrane TNF (“tmTNF”) or TNF receptors -TNFR1 and TNFR2. This unique biologic mechanism diﬀerentiates the DN-TNF drugs from currently
approved non-selective TNF inhibitors that inhibit both sTNF and tmTNF. Protecting the function of tmTNF while neutralizing the function of sTNF is a
potent anti-inﬂammatory strategy that does not cause immunosuppression or demyelination which occur in the currently approved non-selective TNF
inhibitors. Currently approved non-selective TNF inhibitors are approved to treat autoimmune disease, but are contraindicated in patients with infection,
cancer and neurologic diseases because they increase the risk of infection, cancer and demyelinating neurologic diseases, respectively; all the safety
problems are due to oﬀ-target eﬀects on inhibiting tmTNF. The NK platform targets the dysfunctional natural killer cells (“NK cells”) in patients with
cancer. NK cells are part of the normal immunologic response to cancer with important roles in immunosurveillance to prevent cancer and in preventing
relapse by eliminating residual disease. Residual disease is the cancer left behind after therapy is ﬁnished. Residual disease, can grow to cause relapse.
The NK cells of cancer patients loses the ability to bind and kill cancer cells. The strength of the bond of binding to cancer cells, called avidity, is a
necessary step NK killing of cancer cells. INKmune improves avidity of the patients NK cells to overcome the immune evasion of the patient’s cancer
cells. We believe INKmune is best used to eliminate residual disease after the patient has completed other cancer therapies. Both the DN-TNF platform
and the INKmune platform can be used to treat multiple diseases. The DN-TNF platform will be used as an immunotherapy for the treatment of cancer
and neurodegenerative disease. INKmune is being developed to treat NK sensitive hematologic malignancies and solid tumors.

We believe our DN-TNF platform can be used as a cancer therapy to reverse resistance in immunotherapy and as a CNS therapy to target glial activation
to prevent progression of Alzheimer’s disease (“AD”), and to target neuroinﬂammation in treatment resistant depression (“TRD”). The drug is named
diﬀerently for the oncology and CNS indications; INB03 or XPro, respectively, but it is the same drug product. In each case, we believe neutralizing sTNF
is a cornerstone to the treatment of these diseases. As an immunotherapy for cancer, we are using INB03 to neutralize sTNF produced by HER2+
trastuzumab resistant breast cancers to reverse resistance to therapy. sTNF causes an up-regulation of MUC4 expression that causes steric hindrance of
trastuzumab binding to the HER2/Neu receptor on HER2+ breast cancer cells. Without binding, trastuzumab is not eﬀective. In addition, INB03 changes
the immunobiology of the tumor microenvironment by decreasing the number of immunosuppressive myeloid cells, both myeloid derived suppressor cells
and tumor active macrophages, and increasing the number of cytotoxic lymphocytes in the TME. The Company has completed an open label dose
escalation trial in cancer patients with metastatic solid tumors that have failed multiple lines of therapy. The trial informs the design of the Phase II trial by
demonstrating that INB03 was safe and well tolerated, deﬁned the dose of INB03 to carry into Phase II trials, and demonstrated a pharmacodynamic
end-point. A Phase II trial is planned in women with advanced MUC4+ breast cancer with advanced disease.

Likewise, we believe the DN-TNF platform can be used to treat selected neurodegenerative diseases by modifying the brain microenvironment (BME).
The Company believes the core pathology of cognitive decline is a combination of neurodegeneration and synaptic dysfunction. XPro completed a Phase
I trial treating patients with Alzheimer’s disease that was partially funded by a Part-the-Clouds Award from the Alzheimer’s Association. We believe XPro
targets activated microglia and astrocytes of the brain that produce sTNF that promotes nerve cell loss and synaptic dysfunction, key elements in the
development of dementia. In animal models, elimination of sTNF prevents nerve cell dysfunction and reverses synaptic pruning. The Phase I trial in
patients with biomarkers of inﬂammation with AD has been completed. The open label, dose escalation trial is designed to demonstrate that XPro can
safely decrease neuroinﬂammation in patients with AD. The endpoints of the trial are measures of neuroinﬂammation and neurodegeneration in blood
and cerebral spinal ﬂuid, measures of neuroinﬂammation by measuring cytokines in the CSF and MRI by measuring white matter free water. XPro, at the
1mg/kg/week dose decreased inﬂammatory cytokines in the CSF and white matter free water in the brain demonstrating that XPro can decrease
neuroinﬂammation in patients with AD. We also studied downstream beneﬁts of decreasing neuroinﬂammation by measuring changes in the CSF
proteome and quantifying changes in novel white matter MRI biomarkers. XPro signiﬁcantly decreases biomarkers of neurodegeneration as measured by
changes in the CSF proteome including neuroﬁlament light chain, phospho Tau 217 and VILIP-1; decreases of 84%, 46% and 91% respectively after 3
months of therapy. Three months of XPro therapy improved measures of synaptic function, as measured in the CSF proteome including a 222% increase
in Contactin 2 and a 56% decrease neurogranin, proteins that contribute to improved synaptic function.

The successful completion of the Phase I trial in AD has informed the design of two Phase II trials in patients with AD; one in mild AD and the other in
MCI. The mild AD trial will be a blinded randomized trial to test if treatment of mild AD patients with neuroinﬂammation will aﬀect cognitive decline. The
Phase II trial has six important elements. Two hundred patients will be enrolled in a 2:1 ratio (XPro vs placebo). The patients will receive 1mg/kg/week as
a subcutaneous injection for six months. An enrichment strategy identical to the successful strategy used in the Phase I trial will be used to ensure
patients have neuroinflammation. Patients will need to have some combination of elevated C-reactive protein, hemoglobin A1c, erythrocyte sedimentation
rated in the blood and at least one allele of ApoE4. The primary end-point will be Early/mild Alzheimer’s Cognitive Composite (“EMACC”), a validated
cognitive measure that is more sensitive than traditional end-points used in many studies of patients with early AD. The trial will be performed in North
America and Australia, is expected to start enrolling patients in early 2022. We expect top-line clinical data to be available late-2023. All patients will be
offered to stay on therapy for at least 12 months in an extension trial. Clinical and biomarker data will be collected during the extension trial.

The second Phase II trial will be a blinded randomized trial in patients with MCI in which the Company plans to enroll 60 patients in two arms in a 2:1
ratio (1mg/kg/week XPro, placebo). Patients will be treated for 3 months. Patients must have at least one ApoE4 allele to qualify for the trial. The primary
end-point is EMACC, a sensitive cognitive end-point validated for use in patients with early AD. Secondary clinical endpoints include the CDR-SB,
Cogstate Battery, E-Cog, NPI, and ADCS-ADL. Imaging endpoints of neuroinﬂammation (White matter free water), white matter integrity (apparent ﬁber
density, radial diﬀusivity), and gray matter quality (cortical disarray measurement) will be assessed via MRI. Changes in brain metabolism will be
assessed via FDG-PET. Additional secondary measures of function include EEG, and speech and language. All patients will be eligible to continue on
XPro for at least 9 additional months. Clinical and MRI metrics will be followed during the extension trial. The Company may amend the clinical trial
design from time-to-time to improve the quality of the data or the probability of success.

Eﬀective therapy for TRD is a large unmet need. Twenty percent of patients with a Major Depressive Disorder have TRD. Once third of TRD patients
have peripheral biomarkers to inflammation (elevated CRP). This is a large patient population. The role of TNF and anti-TNF therapeutics was explored in
a small open label clinical trial by Prof. Andrew Miller, MD of Emory University demonstrated the patients have elevated TNF levels and treatment with
inﬂiximab treated their depression (Miller, 2011). The Company received a $2.9M USD award from the National Institute of Mental Health (“NIMH”) to
treat TRD with XPro. The blinded, randomized Phase II trial will use a biomarkers of peripheral inﬂammation to select patients with TRD for enrollment.
Patients will be treated for 6 weeks. Primary end-points include both clinical and neuroimaging measures. The ﬁnal trial design has is ongoing and
discussions with the FDA are not complete. The Company anticipates receiving authorization to initiate the clinical trial in the second half of 2022.

We believe that INKmune improves the ability of the patient’s own NK cells to attack their tumor. INKmune interacts with the patient’s NK cells to convert
them from inert resting NK cells into memory-like NK cells that kill the patient’s cancer cells. INKmune is a replication incompetent proprietary cell line
that is given to the patient after determining that i) the patient has adequate NK cells in their circulation and ii) those NK cells are functional when
exposed to INKmune in vitro. INKmune is designed to be given to patients after their immune system has recovered after cytotoxic chemotherapy to
target the residual disease the remains after treatment with cytotoxic therapy. We believe INKmune can be used to treat numerous hematologic
malignancies and solid tumors including leukemia, multiple myeloma, lymphoma, lung, ovary, breast, renal and prostate cancer. The Company has
initiated a Phase I trial using INKmune to treat patients with high risk MDS, a form of leukemia. One patient has been treated in the Phase I trial. In the
single patient, INKmune therapy is safe, produces memory-like NK cells that kill cancer in vitro, promotes development of cancer killing memory-like NK
cells that can be found in the patient’s circulation of 4 months. The Company will continue to enroll patients in the Phase I trial with a goal of completing
patient enrollment in 2022. The Company intends to treat women with relapsed refractory ovarian in separate Phase I trial beginning during 2022.

The Company has presented pre-clinical data on the use of DN-TNF to treat non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (“NASH”). The Company has decided to defer
the NASH program for the near future due to the complex and evolving clinical and regulatory environment. The Company may choose to reactivate the
program or abandon the program in the future.

Since our inception in 2015, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to the discovery and development of our product candidates, including
clinical trials and preclinical studies as well as general and administrative support for these operations. To date, we have generated no signiﬁcant
revenue. We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception and, as of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deﬁcit of approximately
$63.7 million. Our net losses were $30,340,000 and $12,099,000 for the year ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Substantially all of our
net losses resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated
with our operations, including stock-based compensation.

The Company is subject to risks and uncertainties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the
Company’s business is highly uncertain and diﬃcult to predict. Also, economies worldwide have also been negatively impacted by the COVID-19
pandemic, however policymakers around the globe have responded with ﬁscal policy actions to support the healthcare industry and economy as a whole.
The magnitude and overall effectiveness of these actions remain uncertain.

not and others may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly,
the ability to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staﬀ who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-
19, may adversely impact the Company’s clinical trial operations.

The severity of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Company’s business will depend on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the
duration and severity of the pandemic and the extent and severity of the impact on the Company’s service providers, suppliers, contract research
organizations (“CROs”) and the Company’s clinical trials, all of which are uncertain and cannot be predicted. As of the date of issuance of Company’s
ﬁnancial statements, the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic may materially impact the Company’s ﬁnancial condition, liquidity or results of
operations is uncertain.

As a company with less than $1.07 billion in revenue during our last ﬁscal year, we qualify as an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act. As an
emerging growth company, we may take advantage of speciﬁed reduced disclosure and other requirements that are otherwise applicable generally to
public companies. These provisions include:

●

only two years of audited ﬁnancial statements in addition to any required unaudited interim ﬁnancial statements with correspondingly
reduced “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” disclosure;

reduced disclosure about our executive compensation arrangements;

no non-binding advisory votes on executive compensation or golden parachute arrangements;

exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting; and

delaying the adoption of new or revised accounting standards that have diﬀerent eﬀective dates for public and private companies until those
standards apply to private companies.

We have elected to take advantage of the above-referenced exemptions and we may take advantage of these exemptions for up to ﬁve years or such
earlier time that we are no longer an emerging growth company. We would cease to be an emerging growth company if we have more than $1.07 billion
in annual revenues, we have more than $700 million in market value of our stock held by non-aﬃliates, or we issue more than $1 billion of non-
convertible debt over a three-year period. We may choose to take advantage of some but not all of these reduced burdens.

Components of Operating Results

Operating Expenses

Research and Development

Research and development expense consists of expenses incurred while performing research and development activities to discover and develop our
product candidates. This includes conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, manufacturing development eﬀorts and activities related to regulatory
ﬁlings for product candidates. We recognize research and development expenses as they are incurred. Our research and development expense primarily
consist of:

●

clinical trial and regulatory-related costs;

expenses incurred under agreements with investigative sites and consultants that conduct our clinical trials;

● manufacturing and testing costs and related supplies and materials; and

●

employee-related expenses, including salaries, benefits, travel and stock-based compensation

We typically use our employee, consultant and infrastructure resources across our development programs. We track outsourced development costs by
product candidate or development program, but we do not allocate personnel costs, other internal costs or external consultant costs to speciﬁc product
candidates or development programs.

We participate, through our wholly-owned subsidiary in Australia, in the Australian research and development tax incentive program, such that a
percentage of our qualifying research and development expenditures are reimbursed by the Australian government, and such incentives are reﬂected as
a reduction of research and development expense. The Australian research and development tax incentive is recognized when there is reasonable
assurance that the incentive will be received, the relevant expenditure has been incurred and the amount of the consideration can be reliably measured.

We participate, through our wholly-owned subsidiary in the United Kingdom, in the research and development program provided by the United Kingdom
tax relief program, such that a percentage of our qualifying research and development expenditures are reimbursed by the United Kingdom government,
and such incentives are reﬂected as a reduction of research and development expense. The United Kingdom research and development tax incentive is
recognized when there is reasonable assurance that the incentive will be received, the relevant expenditure has been incurred and the amount of the
consideration can be reliably measured. During 2022, the Company expects to receive a research and development tax rebate for eligible expenditures
incurred in 2021, however the Company will be ineligible for research and development tax incentives for expenditures incurred after 2021 as a result of
changes in the United Kingdom tax relief program.

Substantially all of our research and development expenses to date have been incurred in connection with our current and future product candidates. We
expect our research and development expenses to increase signiﬁcantly for the foreseeable future as we advance an increased number of our product
candidates through clinical development, including the conduct of our planned clinical trials and manufacturing drug to be used in those clinical trials. The

process of conducting clinical trials necessary to obtain regulatory approval is costly and time consuming. The successful development of product
candidates is highly uncertain. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the nature, timing or costs required to complete the remaining development of
any product candidates. This is due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development of product candidates.

The costs of clinical trials may vary significantly over the life of a project owing to, but not limited to, the following:

●

per patient trial costs;

the number of sites included in the clinical trials;

the countries in which the clinical trials are conducted;

the length of time required to enroll eligible patients;

the number of patients that participate in the clinical trials;

the number of doses that patients receive;

the cost of comparative agents used in clinical trials;

the drop-out or discontinuation rates of patients;

potential additional safety monitoring or other studies requested by regulatory agencies;

the duration of patient follow-up;

the efficacy and safety profile of the product candidate; and

the cost of manufacturing, finishing, labeling and storage drug used in the clinical trial

We do not expect any of our product candidates to be commercially available for at least the next several years, if ever. We expect to continue to incur
signiﬁcant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future, which may ﬂuctuate signiﬁcantly from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-
year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we:

●

continue research and development, including preclinical and clinical development of our existing product candidates;

potentially seek regulatory approval for our product candidates;

seek to discover and develop additional product candidates;

establish a commercialization infrastructure and scale up our manufacturing and distribution capabilities to commercialize any of our product
candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval;

●

seek to comply with regulatory standards and laws;

● maintain, leverage and expand our intellectual property portfolio;

●

hire clinical, manufacturing, scientiﬁc and other personnel to support our product candidates development and future commercialization
efforts;

add operational, financial and management information systems and personnel; and

incur additional legal, accounting and other expenses in operating as a public company.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist principally of payroll and personnel expenses, including stock-based compensation; professional fees for
legal, consulting, accounting and tax services; insurance, overhead, including rent and utilities; and other general operating expenses not otherwise
classified as research and development expenses.

Other income (expense)

Other expense consists primarily of interest expense incurred on debt in 2021. Other income primarily consists of income from a settlement in 2020.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

This management’s discussion and analysis of our ﬁnancial condition and results of operations is based on our ﬁnancial statements, which we have
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of our ﬁnancial statements requires us to
make estimates and assumptions that aﬀect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the
date of our ﬁnancial statements, as well as the reported revenues and expenses during the reported periods. We evaluate these estimates and
judgments on an ongoing basis. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent
from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

In-Process Research and Development

The Company evaluates the carrying value of indeﬁnite-lived intangible assets, which consists of in-process research and development (“IPR&D”), on an
annual basis or more frequently when indicators of impairment exist. An impairment of indeﬁnite-lived intangible assets would occur if the fair value of the
intangible asset is less than the carrying value. Intangible assets with ﬁnite lives are tested for impairment when events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be recoverable. If these facts and circumstances exist, the Company assesses for recovery by
comparing the carrying values of the assets with their future undiscounted net cash ﬂows. Signiﬁcant management judgment is required in the forecast of
future operating results that are used in the preparation of expected undiscounted cash flows.

IPR&D assets are considered to be indeﬁnite-lived until the completion or abandonment of the associated research and development projects. During the
period the assets are considered indeﬁnite-lived, they are tested for impairment. If the related project is terminated or abandoned, the Company may
have a full or partial impairment related to the IPR&D assets, calculated as the excess of their carrying value over fair value. The valuation process is
very complex and requires signiﬁcant input and judgment using internal and external sources with respect to the Company’s future revenue and expense
growth rates, changes in working capital use, the selection of an appropriate discount rate, and other assumptions and estimates.

Research and Development (“R&D”)

R&D expenses consist primarily of costs related to clinical studies and outside services, personnel expenses, and other R&D expenses. Clinical studies
and outside services costs relate primarily to services performed by clinical research organizations and related clinical or development manufacturing
costs, materials and supplies, ﬁling fees, regulatory support, and other third-party fees. Personnel expenses relate primarily to salaries, beneﬁts and
share-based compensation. R&D expenditures are charged to operations as incurred.

We recognize R&D tax credits receivable from the United Kingdom and Australian government for spending on R&D as an offset of R&D expenses.

Stock-Based Compensation

We measure and recognize compensation expense for all stock-based awards granted to service providers, employees, and directors based on the
estimated fair value of the award on the grant date. We calculate the estimated fair value of stock options on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes
option-pricing model, which is impacted by the fair value of our common stock, as well as changes in assumptions regarding a number of highly complex
and subjective variables. These variables include, but are not limited to, the market value of common stock on the grant date, the expected dividend
yield, the expected term of the awards, the risk-free interest rates and the expected common stock price volatility over the term of the option awards. The
expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of a few unrelated public companies within our industry over the most recent period commensurate
with the estimated expected term of our stock options as we have insuﬃcient historical information regarding the volatility of the share price of our
common stock. The risk-free interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the option is based on the U.S. Treasury yield in eﬀect at the time of
grant. We have never declared or paid dividends and have no plans to do so in the foreseeable future.

We recognize the fair value of stock options on a straight-line basis over the period during which a service provider is required to provide services in
exchange for the award (generally the vesting period). We account for forfeitures as they occur.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

During the periods presented, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements as defined under SEC rules.

Licensing and Collaboration Agreements

We anticipate that in-licensing, out-licensing and strategic collaborations will become an integral part of our operations, providing the company with
opportunities to leverage our partners’ expertise and capabilities to further expand the potential of our technologies, product candidates and revenue
streams.

Xencor

In October 2017, we licensed INB03 (also known as XPro) from Xencor. This exclusive, global, unrestricted license came with considerable know-how,
intellectual property, pre-clinical data, regulatory documentation and product stocks. Currently, we are focused on the immune-oncology uses of this
unique asset. In the future, we may develop the asset in a wide variety of therapeutic areas, with a variety of delivery techniques by ourselves or in
conjunction with partners.

Results of Operations

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020

(in thousands)
Revenues

General and Administrative
Research and Development
Other Expense (Income)
Net loss

December 31,
2021

Year Ended
December 31,
2020

Change

(181) $

(11) $

(170)

8,791
20,543
1,187
(30,340) $

6,321
5,918
(129)
(12,099) $

2,470
14,625
1,316
18,241

Revenues

During 2021, the Company sold MSC’s to three customers and recognized $181,000 of revenues. We recorded $11,000 of revenues in 2020 as a result
of selling MSC’s to one customer.

General and Administrative

General and administrative expenses were $8.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to $6.3 million for the year ended December
31, 2020. The increase was primarily attributable to higher professional fees ($1.0 million higher in 2021), higher stock-based compensation expense
($0.6 million higher in 2021), and higher salary expense ($0.5 million higher in 2021).

Research and Development

Research and development expenses increased to $20.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 from $5.9 million for the year ended December
31, 2020. The increase in research and development expenses during the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to 2020 is due to $5.4 million of
higher expenses for the Alzheimer’s clinical program, $1.9 million of higher expenses on the COVID-19 clinical trial, and due to the Company incurring
$5.5 million of higher manufacturing costs in connection with producing its DN-TNF product. In addition, the Company’s stock-based compensation was
$1.1 million higher in 2021 compared to 2020.

Other Expense (Income)

Other expense increased during the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to 2020 as a result of the incurring $1.0 million of interest expense from a
loan the Company obtained in June 2021. During 2020, the Company received a refund from a third-party vendor pursuant to a release and settlement
agreement of approximately $0.1 million for services provided in a previous year.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Liquidity is the ability of a company to generate funds to support its current and future operations, satisfy its obligations and otherwise operate on an
ongoing basis.

We incurred a net loss of $30,340,000 and $12,099,000 for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Net cash used in operating
activities was $28,504,000 and $8,943,000 for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Since inception, we have funded our
operations primarily with proceeds from the sales of our common stock and from the receipts of grants. As of December 31, 2021, we had cash and cash
equivalents of $74.8 million. We anticipate that operating losses and net cash used in operating activities will increase over the next few years as we
advance our products under development.

Our primary uses of capital are, and we expect will continue to be, third-party clinical and preclinical research and development services, costs incurred
to manufacture our drugs under development, compensation and related expenses, legal, patent and other regulatory expenses and general overhead
costs. We believe our use of CROs provides us with flexibility in managing our spending.

The Company incurs the majority of its research and development expenses in Australia and the United Kingdom. Fluctuations in the rate of exchange
between the United States dollar and the pound sterling as well as the Australian dollar could adversely affect our financial results, including our expenses
as well as assets and liabilities. We currently do not hedge foreign currencies but will continue to assess whether that strategy is appropriate. As of
December 31, 2021, the cash balance held by our foreign subsidiaries with currencies other than the United States dollar was approximately $0.2 million.
We do not have any material financial exposure to one customer or one country that would significantly hinder our liquidity.

As of December 31, 2021, the Company had an accumulated deficit of $63.7 million and working capital of $78.2 million. Losses have principally occurred
as a result of the substantial resources required for research and development of the Company’s products which included the general and administrative
expenses associated with its organization and product development, as well as the lack of sources of material revenues until such time as the
Company’s products are commercialized. As of December 31, 2021, we had cash and cash equivalents of $74.8 million. We believe our cash and cash
equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months following the filing date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Registered Direct Offering

During July 2021, the Company completed a registered direct oﬀering whereby the Company sold 1,818,182 shares of its common stock to investors for
net proceeds of $36.9 million.

ATM Sales Agreements

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we issued and sold 178,600 shares of common stock at an average price of $5.45 per share under the 2020
ATM agreement. The aggregate net proceeds were approximately $0.8 million after BTIG’s commission and other offering expenses.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, we issued and sold 1,439,480 shares of common stock at an average price of $20.17 per share under the
2020 ATM agreement. The aggregate net proceeds were approximately $28.4 million after BTIG’s commission and other oﬀering expenses. As of
December 31, 2021, sales of our common stock pursuant to the 2020 ATM have been completed.

During March 2021, the Company entered into the 2021 ATM agreement with BTIG, as sales agent, to establish an ATM oﬀering of up to $45 million of
common stock. During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company sold 713,192 shares at an average price per share of $21.73 for net proceeds
of approximately $14.9 million under the 2021 ATM agreement.

Term Loan

On June 10, 2021, we entered into a Loan and Security Agreement with SVB and an aﬃliate of SVB, providing for a $15.0 million term loan. The Term
Loan also provides for us to request an additional $5.0 million term loan from the Lenders, which may be granted or denied at the sole discretion of the
Lenders. The Term Loan provides for an annual interest rate equal to the greater of (i) the prime rate then in eﬀect as reported in The Wall Street Journal
plus 4.50% and (ii) 7.75% and also includes a ﬁnal payment fee equal to 6.5% of the original principal amount borrowed payable on the earlier of the

repayment of the loan in full and the maturity date. The Company used the proceeds of the term loan to fund the cash consideration for the Option
Cancellation Agreement with Xencor.

The Lincoln Park Transaction

On May 15, 2019, the Company and Lincoln Park entered into a purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company had
the right to sell to Lincoln Park up to $20.0 million in shares of the Company’s common stock, subject to certain limitations and conditions set forth in the
Purchase Agreement. During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company issued 196,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to Lincoln Park
for gross proceeds of $1,003,000. During April 2021, the Company terminated the Purchase Agreement.

Cash Flows

The following table provides information regarding our cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020:

Net cash used in operating activities
Net cash used in investing activities
Net cash provided by financing activities
Impact on cash from foreign currency translation

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents

Net Cash Used in Operating Activities

Year Ended
December 31,

2021

2020

(28,504) $
(15,000)
96,357
(10)

(8,943)
-
23,895
19

52,843 $

14,971

Our cash used in operating activities was primarily driven by our net loss.

Operating activities used $28.5 million of cash for the year ended December 31, 2021, primarily resulting from our net loss of $30.3 million, a net cash
outﬂow of $3.1 million for changes in our net operating assets and liabilities, and non-cash stock-based compensation charges of $4.8 million. The
change in our net operating assets and liabilities was primarily due to an increase in research and development tax credit receivable of $3.2 million and
an increase in prepaid expenses of $2.1 million, partially offset by an increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $2.2 million.

Operating activities used $8.9 million of cash for the year ended December 31, 2020, primarily resulting from our net loss of $12.1 million, partially oﬀset
by non-cash stock-based compensation charges of $3.1 million.

Investing Activities

Investing activities used $15.0 million of cash for the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to $0 for the year ended December 31, 2020. During the
year ended December 31, 2021, the Company paid Xencor $15.0 million to settle an option to acquire 10% of the Company’s common stock on a fully
diluted basis which was issued to acquire the Company’s acquired in-process research and development intangible asset.

Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company sold 1,439,480 shares of its common stock under its 2020 ATM agreement for net proceeds of
approximately $28.4 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company sold 713,192 shares of its common stock under the 2021 ATM agreement for net proceeds of
approximately $14.9 million.

During July 2021, the Company completed a registered direct oﬀering whereby the Company sold 1,818,182 shares of its common stock to investors for
net proceeds of $36.9 million.

During June 2021, we entered into a Loan and Security Agreement with SVB and an affiliate of SVB, providing for a $15.0 million term loan.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company received approximately 1.2 million in connection with the exercise of stock options and
warrants.

During July 2020, the Company completed an underwritten public oﬀering in which it sold 2,500,000 shares of common stock at a public oﬀering price of
$10.00 per share. Aggregate net proceeds from the underwritten public oﬀering were approximately $23.1 million, net of approximately $1.9 million in
underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company purchased 220,000 shares from an investor for approximately $1.0 million. In addition, the
Company sold 196,000 shares of its common stock to Lincoln Park for cash proceeds of approximately $1.0 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company issued and sold 178,600 shares of common stock at an average price of $5.45 per share under
the ATM agreement for net cash proceeds of approximately $0.8 million.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

We are exposed to market risk from changes in foreign currency rates.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM (PCAOB ID Number 688)

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND 2020

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021

AND 2020

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND

2020

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND 2020

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Page

F-1

F-2

F-3

F-4

F-5

F-6

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of
INmune Bio, Inc.
Boca Raton, Florida

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of INmune Bio, Inc. (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, the related
consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, changes in stockholders’ equity and cash ﬂows for each of the two years in the period
ended December 31, 2021, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “ﬁnancial statements”). In our opinion, the ﬁnancial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the ﬁnancial position of the Company as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, and the results of its operations and its cash
ﬂows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2021, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America.

Basis for Opinion

These ﬁnancial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's ﬁnancial
statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting ﬁrm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States)
(“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules
and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the ﬁnancial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not
required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over ﬁnancial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain
an understanding of internal control over ﬁnancial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the eﬀectiveness of the Company's
internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the ﬁnancial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and
performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and
disclosures in the ﬁnancial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and signiﬁcant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the ﬁnancial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

/s/ Marcum LLP

Marcum LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2017.

Houston, Texas
March 3, 2022

F-1

INMUNE BIO, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)

ASSETS

CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Research and development tax credit receivable
Other tax receivable
Prepaid expenses
Prepaid expenses – related party
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS

Operating lease – right of use assets
Other assets
Acquired in-process research and development intangible assets

TOTAL ASSETS

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

CURRENT LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities – related parties
Deferred liabilities
Operating lease, current liabilities
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES

Long-term debt, less debt discount
Long-term operating lease liabilities
Accrued liability – long-term
TOTAL LIABILITIES

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized, 0 shares issued and outstanding
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 200,000,000 shares authorized, 17,843,303 and 13,481,283 shares issued and

outstanding, respectively

Additional paid-in capital
Accumulated other comprehensive income
Accumulated deficit
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

December 31,
2021

December 31,
2020

74,810 $
4,913
591
2,278
14
82,606

726
99
16,514

21,967
1,686
113
220
-
23,986

156
-
16,514

99,945 $

40,656

3,733 $
80
474
72
4,359

14,458
704
199
19,720

1,518
34
190
34
1,776

-
126
-
1,902

18
143,921
1
(63,715)
80,225

13
72,105
11
(33,375)
38,754

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

99,945 $

40,656

See accompanying notes to these consolidated financial statements.

F-2

INMUNE BIO, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND 2020
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)

REVENUE

OPERATING EXPENSES
General and administrative
Research and development
Total operating expenses

LOSS FROM OPERATIONS

OTHER (EXPENSE) INCOME
Other (expense) income

2021

2020

181 $

8,791
20,543
29,334

6,321
5,918
12,239

(29,153)

(12,228)

(1,187)

129

Total other (expense) income

NET LOSS

Net loss per common share – basic and diluted

Weighted average number of common shares outstanding – basic and diluted

COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
Net loss
Other comprehensive (loss) income – foreign currency translation
Total comprehensive loss

(1,187)

129

(30,340) $

(12,099)

(1.88) $

(1.01)

16,130,539

11,988,492

(30,340) $
(10)
(30,350) $

(12,099)
20
(12,079)

See accompanying notes to these consolidated financial statements.

F-3

INMUNE BIO, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND 2020
(In thousands, except share amounts)

Common Stock

Amount

Additional

Paid-In

Capital

Common
Stock

Issuable

Accumulated
Other

Total

Comprehensive Accumulated Stockholders’

Income (loss)

Deficit

Equity

10,770,948 $

11 $

44,834 $

50 $

(9) $

(21,276) $

23,610

Balance as of January

1, 2020

Issuance of common
stock for cash, net

Acquisition and
retirement of
common stock
Capital contribution
Cashless exercise of

warrants

Issuance of common

stock issuable

Stock-based

compensation
Gain on foreign

currency translation

Net loss
Balance as of

2,874,600

24,905

(220,000)
-

2,400

33,335

20,000

-
-

(1,012)
216

3,112

-
-

December 31, 2020

13,481,283

72,105

Issuance of common
stock for cash, net
Settlement of Xencor

warrant for cash and
common stock
Warrants issued to
lenders as debt
inducement

Exercise of warrants
Exercise of stock

options
Stock-based

compensation
Loss on foreign

currency translation

Net loss
Balance as of

3,970,854

80,248

192,533

(15,000)

-
15,633

183,000

-
-

619
18

1,135

4,796

-
-

(50)

-
-

24,907

-
-

(1,012)
216

3,112

20
(12,099)

20
-

-
(12,099)

(33,375)

38,754

-
-

80,253

(15,000)

-
-

619
18

1,135

4,796

(10)
-

-
(30,340)

(10)
(30,340)

December 31, 2021

17,843,303 $

18 $

143,921 $

- $

1 $

(63,715) $

80,225

See accompanying notes to these consolidated financial statements.

F-4

INMUNE BIO, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND 2020
(In thousands)

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net loss
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:

Stock-based compensation
Accretion of debt discount

Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

Research and development tax credit receivable
Other tax receivable
Prepaid expenses
Prepaid expenses – related party
Other assets
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities – related parties
Deferred liabilities
Accrued liability – long-term
Operating lease liabilities

Net cash used in operating activities

CASH FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

Cash paid to Xencor to settle warrant for acquired research and development intangible assets

Net cash used in investing activities

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:

Net proceeds from the issuance of debt
Net proceeds from sale of common stock
Net proceeds from the exercise of stock options
Net proceeds from the exercise of warrants
Purchase of common stock

Net cash provided by financing activities

Impact on cash from foreign currency translation

NET INCREASE IN CASH
CASH AT BEGINNING OF YEAR
CASH AT END OF YEAR

SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOWS INFORMATION:

Cash paid for income taxes
Cash paid for interest expense

2021

2020

(30,340) $

(12,099)

4,796
126

(3,227)
(478)
(2,058)
(14)
(99)
2,215
46
284
199
46
(28,504)

(15,000)
(15,000)

14,951
80,253
1,135
18
-
96,357

3,112
-

(1,118)
(36)
(122)
26
-
1,116
(40)
191
-
27
(8,943)

-
-

-
24,907
-
-
(1,012)
23,895

(10)

52,843
21,967
74,810 $

14,971
6,996
21,967

- $
559 $

3,300 $
619 $
- $
- $

-
-

-
-
216
50

$
$

NONCASH INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES:

Common stock issued to Xencor to settle warrant issued for acquired research and development intangible assets $
$
Warrants issued to lenders as debt inducement
$
Capital contribution
$
Issuance of common stock issuable

See accompanying notes to these consolidated financial statements.

F-5

INMUNE BIO, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1 – ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Organization and Business Overview

INmune Bio, Inc. (the “Company” or “INmune Bio”) was organized in the State of Nevada on September 25, 2015, and is a clinical stage biotechnology
pharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing its product candidates to treat diseases where the innate immune system is not
functioning normally and contributing to the patient’s disease. INmune Bio has two product platforms. The DN-TNF product platform utilizes dominant-
negative technology to selectively neutralize soluble TNF, a key driver of innate immune dysfunction and mechanistic target of many diseases. DN-TNF is
currently being developed for Alzheimer’s and treatment resistant depression (XPro) and cancer (INB03). The Natural Killer Cell Priming Platform
includes INKmune aimed at priming the patient’s NK cells to eliminate minimal residual disease in patients with cancer. INmune Bio’s product platforms
utilize a precision medicine approach for the treatment of a wide variety of hematologic malignancies, solid tumors and chronic inflammation.

Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated ﬁnancial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(“US GAAP”) in the United States of America and the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

The consolidated ﬁnancial statements herein have been prepared in accordance with US GAAP and include the accounts of INmune Bio, its wholly-
owned UK subsidiary, and its wholly-owned Australia subsidiary (collectively, the “Company”). All signiﬁcant intercompany accounts and transactions
have been eliminated.

NOTE 2 – LIQUIDITY

As of December 31, 2021, the Company had an accumulated deﬁcit of $ 63,715,000 and experienced losses since its inception. Losses have principally
occurred as a result of the substantial resources required for research and development of the Company’s products, which included the general and
administrative expenses associated with its organization and product development as well as the lack of sources of revenues until such time as the
Company’s products are commercialized.

F-6

To meet its current and future obligations the Company has taken the following steps to capitalize the business and achieve its business plan:

● During July 2021, the Company completed a registered direct public oﬀering in which it sold 1,818,182 shares of common stock to investors

for estimated net proceeds of $36.9 million.

● During June 2021, the Company entered into a loan and security agreement and drew down a $ 15.0 million term loan.

● During March 2021, the Company entered into a sales agreement with BTIG, LLC (“BTIG”), as agent, to establish an At-The-Market (“ATM”)
oﬀering of up to $45 million of common stock (the “2021 ATM”), subject to certain limitations on the amount of common stock that may be
oﬀered and sold by the Company set forth in the sales agreement. The Company is required to pay BTIG a commission of 3% of the gross
proceeds from the sale of shares. The Company has sold 713,192 shares of its common stock at an average price of $ 21.73 through the
2021 ATM for net proceeds of $14.9 million.

● During April 2020, the Company entered into a sales agreement with BTIG, as sales agent, to establish an ATM oﬀering to sell up to $ 10.0
million of the Company’s common stock (the “2020 ATM”). In August 2020, the sales agreement was amended whereby the aggregate
oﬀering was increased from $10.0 million to $ 30.0 million. From April 2020 through December 2020, the Company sold 178,600 shares of
common stock at an average price of $5.45 per share for net proceeds of approximately $ 0.8 million. During the year ended December 31,
2021, the Company sold in aggregate 1,439,480 shares on common stock at an average price of $ 20.17 per share for net proceeds of $ 28.4
million. As of December 31, 2021, sales of our common stock pursuant to the 2020 ATM have been completed.

Although it is diﬃcult to predict the Company’s liquidity requirements, as of December 31, 2021, and based upon the Company’s current operating plan,
the Company believes that it will have suﬃcient cash to meet its projected operating requirements for at least the next 12 months following the ﬁling date
of this Annual Report on Form 10-K based on the balance of cash available as of December 31, 2021. The Company anticipates that it will continue to
incur net losses for the foreseeable future as it continues the development of its clinical drug candidates and preclinical programs and incurs additional
costs associated with being a public company.

NOTE 3 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Use of Estimates

Preparing ﬁnancial statements in conformity with US GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that aﬀect the reported amounts
of assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses. Actual results and outcomes may differ from management’s estimates and assumptions.

Risks and Uncertainties

In addition, the Company’s clinical trials have been aﬀected by and may continue to be aﬀected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical site initiation and
patient enrollment have and may continue to be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the COVID-19 pandemic. Some patients have
not and others may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly,
the ability to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staﬀ who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-
19, may adversely impact the Company’s clinical trial operations.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The Company
holds cash in banks in excess of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance limits. However, the Company believes risk of loss is minimal as the
cash is held by large, highly-rated financial institutions.

F-7

Research and Development Tax Incentive Receivable

The Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary in Australia, participates in the Australian research and development tax incentive program, such that
a percentage of our qualifying research and development expenditures are reimbursed by the Australian government, and such incentives are reﬂected
as a reduction of research and development expense. The Australian research and development tax incentive is recognized when there is reasonable
assurance that the incentive will be received, the relevant expenditure has been incurred and the amount of the consideration can be reliably measured.
At each period end, management estimates the reimbursement available to the Company based on available information at the time.

The Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary in the United Kingdom, participates in the research and development program provided by the United
Kingdom tax relief program, such that a percentage of our qualifying research and development expenditures are reimbursed by the United Kingdom
government, and such incentives are reﬂected as a reduction of research and development expense. The United Kingdom research and development tax
incentive is recognized when there is reasonable assurance that the incentive will be received, the relevant expenditure has been incurred and the
amount of the consideration can be reliably measured. At each period end, management estimates the reimbursement available to the Company based
on available information at the time.

Intangible Assets

The Company capitalizes costs incurred in connection with in-process research and development purchased from others if the asset has alternative uses
and such uses are not restricted under applicable license agreements; patent applications (principally legal fees), patent purchases, and trademarks
related to its cell line as intangible assets. Acquired in-process research and development costs that do not have alternative uses are expensed as
incurred. When the assets are determined to have a ﬁnite life (upon completion of the development of the in-process research and development for its
DN-TNF platform), the useful life will be determined and the in-process research and development intangible assets will be amortized.

During the fourth quarter and if business factors indicate more frequently, the Company performs an assessment of the qualitative factors aﬀecting the
fair value of our in-process research and development. If the qualitative assessment suggests that impairment is more likely than not, a quantitative
analysis is performed. The quantitative analysis involves a comparison of the fair value of the in-process research and development with the carrying
amount. If the carrying amount of the in-process research and development exceeds its fair value, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal
to that excess. During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, the Company performed a qualitative assessment of its in-process research and
development and determined that there was no impairment.

Basic and Diluted Loss per Share

Basic loss per share is computed by dividing net loss available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of outstanding common
shares during the period. Diluted loss per share gives eﬀect to all dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the period. Dilutive loss per share
excludes all potential common shares if their eﬀect is anti-dilutive. For all periods presented, there is no diﬀerence in the number of shares used to
calculate basic and diluted shares outstanding due to the Company’s net loss position.

At December 31, 2021, the Company had 4,097,000 potentially issuable shares of common stock upon the exercise of stock options and 93,866
potentially issuable shares of common stock upon the exercise of warrants.

At December 31, 2020, the Company had 3,457,000 potentially issuable shares of common stock upon the exercise of stock options and 1,955,922
potentially issuable shares of common stock upon the exercise of warrants.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue when the customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reﬂects the consideration the
Company expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. The Company recognizes revenue following the ﬁve-step model prescribed under
ASC Topic 606: (1) identify contract(s) with a customer; (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (3) determine the transaction price; (4)
allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (5) recognize revenues when (or as) the Company satisﬁes the
performance obligations. The Company records the expenses related to revenue in research and development expense, in the periods such expenses
were incurred.

F-8

The Company records deferred revenues when cash payments are received or due in advance of performance, including amounts which are refundable.

The Company’s 2021 revenues were from the sale of MSC’s to three customers. The sales were recognized when the MSC’s were delivered to the
customers.

The Company’s 2020 revenue was from the sale of MSC’s to one customer. The revenue was recognized when the MSC’s were delivered to the
customer.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company utilizes the Black-Scholes option pricing model to estimate the fair value of stock option awards at the date of grant, which requires the
input of highly subjective assumptions, including expected volatility and expected life. Changes in these inputs and assumptions can materially aﬀect the
measure of estimated fair value of our share-based compensation. These assumptions are subjective and generally require signiﬁcant analysis and
judgment to develop. When estimating fair value, some of the assumptions will be based on, or determined from, external data and other assumptions
may be derived from our historical experience with stock-based payment arrangements. The appropriate weight to place on historical experience is a
matter of judgment, based on relevant facts and circumstances. The Company accounts for forfeitures of stock options as they occur.

Research and Development

Research and development (“R&D”) costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development credits are recorded by the Company as a reduction of
research and development costs. Major components of research and development costs include cash compensation, stock-based compensation, costs of
preclinical studies, clinical trials and related clinical manufacturing, costs of drug development, costs of materials and supplies, facilities cost, overhead
costs, regulatory and compliance costs, and fees paid to consultants and other entities that conduct certain research and development activities on the
Company’s behalf.

The Company recognizes grants as contra research and development expense in the consolidated statement of operations on a systematic basis over
the periods in which the entity recognizes as expenses the related costs for which the grants are intended to compensate.

Income Taxes

The Company follows the liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized for
the estimated tax consequences attributable to diﬀerences between the ﬁnancial statement carrying values and their respective income tax basis
(temporary diﬀerences). The eﬀect on deferred income tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that
includes the enactment date.

Foreign Currency Translation

The Company’s ﬁnancial statements are presented in the U.S. dollar (“$”), which is the Company’s reporting currency, while its functional currencies are
the U.S. Dollar for its U.S. based operations, British Pound (“GBP”) for its United Kingdom-based operations and Australian Dollars (“AUD”) for its
Australian-based operations. All assets and liabilities are translated at the exchange rate on the balance sheet date, stockholders’ equity is translated at
historical rates and statement of operations items are translated at the weighted average exchange rate for the period. The resulting translation
adjustments are reported under other comprehensive income. Gains and losses resulting from the translations of foreign currency transactions and
balances are reflected in the statement of operations and comprehensive loss.

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

There were various accounting standards and interpretations issued recently, none of which are expected to a have a material impact on the Company´s
consolidated financial position, operations, or cash flows.

F-9

Reclassifications

Certain amounts from the prior period have been adjusted to conform to the current period presentation.

Subsequent Events

The Company has evaluated all transactions through the financial statement issuance date for subsequent disclosure consideration.

NOTE 4 – RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY

According to UK tax law, the Company is allowed an R&D tax credit that reduces a company’s tax bill in the UK for expenses incurred in R&D subject to
certain requirements. The Company’s UK subsidiary submits R&D tax credit requests annually for research and development expenses incurred. At
December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company recorded a research and development tax credit receivable of $3,319,000 and $833,000, respectively for
R&D expenses incurred in the UK. During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company received $814,000 and $306,000 of R&D tax
credit reimbursements, respectively from the UK.

According to AUS tax law, the Company is allowed an R&D tax credit that reduces a company’s tax bill in AUS for expenses incurred in R&D subject to
certain requirements. The Company’s Australian subsidiary submits R&D tax credit requests annually for research and development expenses incurred.
At December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company recorded a research and development tax credit receivable of $1,594,000 and $853,000, respectively, for
R&D expenses incurred in Australia. During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company received $1,296,000 and $178,000 of R&D tax
credit reimbursements, respectively from Australia.

Xencor, Inc. License Agreement

On October 3, 2017, the Company entered into a license agreement (“Xencor License Agreement”) with Xencor, Inc. (“Xencor”), which has discovered
and developed a proprietary biological molecule that inhibits soluble tumor necrosis factor. During June 2021, the Company entered into the First
Amendment to License Agreement. Pursuant to the license agreement, Xencor granted the Company an exclusive worldwide, royalty-bearing license in
licensed patent rights, licensed know-how and licensed materials (as deﬁned in the license agreement) to make, develop, use, sell and import any
pharmaceutical product that comprises, contains, or incorporates Xencor’s proprietary protein known as “XPro” that inhibits soluble tumor necrosis factor
(or all modiﬁcations, formulations and variants of the licensed protein that speciﬁcally bind soluble tumor necrosis factor) alone or in combination with one
or more active ingredients, in any dosage or formulation (“Licensed Products”). The Company believes the protein has numerous medical applications.
Such additional alternative applications of the technology are available under the Xencor License Agreement. In connection with the Xencor License
Agreement, the Company paid Xencor a one-time non-creditable and non-refundable fee of $100,000 and issued Xencor 1,585,000 shares of the
Company’s common stock with a fair value of $12,221,000. In addition, the Company issued Xencor fully vested warrants with a fair value of $ 4,193,000
to purchase an additional number of shares of common stock equal to 10% of the fully diluted company shares immediately following such purchase,
which warrant has since been cancelled (see the description below). The aggregate purchase price for the full exercise of the option was $10,000,000.

The Company recorded $16,514,000 for the acquisition of intangible assets for the in-process research and development as the fair value of the cash,
stock and warrants on the date of the License Agreement acquisition in accordance with Accounting Standards Codiﬁcation 730 – Research and
Development. The Company has the license rights to pursue alternative applications of the technology as part of its future development plans.

The Company also agreed to pay Xencor a royalty on Net Sales of all Licensed Products in a given calendar year, which are payable on a country-by-
country and licensed product by licensed product basis until the date that is the later of (a) the expiration of the last to expire valid claim covering such
Licensed Product in such country or (b) ten years following the first sale to a third party of the licensed product in such country.

F-10

Under the Xencor License Agreement, the Company also agreed to pay Xencor a percentage of any sublicensing revenue that it receives.

On June 10, 2021, the Company and Xencor entered into an Option Cancellation Agreement whereby Xencor terminated its warrant to purchase 10% of
the fully diluted shares of the Company in exchange for a cash payment of $15,000,000 and 192,533 shares of the Company’s common stock with a fair
value of $3,300,000 based on the market price of the common stock as of June 10, 2021, which the Company issued in June 2021. The Company ﬁled a
registration statement covering the resale of these shares during September 2021 and agreed to keep the registration statement continuously eﬀective
until all such shares cease to be outstanding or otherwise cease to be registrable securities as deﬁned in the Option Cancellation Agreement. The
Company charged the cash consideration paid to Xencor to enter into the Option Cancellation Agreement to equity as the fair value of the warrant
immediately prior to the Option Cancellation Agreement was greater than the consideration paid to Xencor.

INKmune License Agreement

On October 29, 2015, the Company entered into an exclusive license agreement (the “INKmune License Agreement”) with Immune Ventures, LLC
(“Immune Ventures”). Pursuant to the INKmune License Agreement, the Company was granted exclusive worldwide rights to the patents, including rights
to incorporate any improvements or additions to the patents that may be developed in the future. In consideration for the patent rights, the Company
agreed to the following milestone payments:

(in thousands)
Each Phase I initiation
Each Phase II initiation
Each Phase III initiation
Each NDA/EMA filing
Each NDA/EMA awarded

$
$
$
$
$

25
250
350
1,000
9,000

During July 2021, the Company initiated a Phase I clinical trial using INKmune and the Company paid Immune Ventures a $ 25,000 milestone payment.

In addition, the Company agreed to pay the licensor a royalty of 1% of net sales during the life of each patent granted to the Company. The License is
owned by Immune Ventures. RJ Tesi, the Company’s President and a member of our Board of Directors, David Moss, its Chief Financial Oﬃcer and
Treasurer and Mark Lowdell, its Chief Scientific Officer, are the owners of Immune Ventures. As of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, no sales
had occurred under this license.

The term of the agreement began on October 29, 2015 and, if not terminated sooner pursuant to the agreement, ends on a country-by-country basis on
the date of the expiration of the last to expire patent rights where patent rights exists. Upon the termination of the agreement we shall have a fully paid
up, perpetual, royalty-free license without further obligation to Immune Ventures. The agreement can be terminated by Immune Ventures if, after 60 days
from the Company’s receipt of notice that the Company has not made a payment under the agreement, and the Company still does not make this
payment. On July 20, 2018, the parties amended the agreement under which the Company was required achieve milestones pursuant to the agreement.
On October 30, 2020, the parties executed an additional amendment to the agreement under which the Company is required to achieve the following
milestones:

Initiation of Phase II clinical trials or equivalent by October 29, 2023

Initiation of Phase III clinical trials or equivalent by October 29, 2025

Filing of NDA or equivalent by October 29, 2026 or equivalent

If the Company doesn’t achieve the above milestones, it is required to negotiate in good faith with Immune Ventures to determine how it can either
remedy the failure or achieve an alternate development. If the Company fails to make any required eﬀorts, or if the eﬀorts do not remedy the situation
within 60 days of written notice by Immune Ventures, then Immune Ventures may provide notice to terminate the license or convert it to a non-exclusive
license.

University of Pittsburg License Agreement

On October 3, 2017, the Company entered into an Assignment and Assumption Agreement with Immune Ventures related to intellectual property
licensed from the University of Pittsburgh. Pursuant to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement (“Assignment Agreement”), Immune Ventures
assigned all of its rights, obligations and liabilities under an Exclusive License Agreement between the University of Pittsburgh – Of the Commonwealth
System of Higher Education (“Licensor”) and Immune Ventures to INmune Bio (“Licensee”), (the “PITT Agreement”).

F-11

Consideration under the PITT Agreement includes: (i) annual maintenance fees, (ii) royalty payments based on the sale of products making use of the
licensed technology, and (iii) milestone payments.

Annual maintenance fees under the PITT Agreement include: $5,000 due June 26 of each year 2020-2022; $10,000 due on June 26 of each year 2023-
2024; and $25,000 due on June 26 of each year 2025 and annually thereafter until ﬁrst commercial sale. The Company had no amounts owed pursuant
to the PITT Agreement as of December 31, 2021.

(in thousands)
June 26 of each year 2020-2022
June 26 of each year 2023-2024
June 26 of each year 2025 until first commercial sale

$
$
$

5
10
25

Upon ﬁrst commercial sale of a product making use of the licensed technology under the PITT Agreement, the Licensee is required to pay royalties equal
t o 2.5% of Net Sales each calendar quarter. There were no commercial sales of product making use of the licensed technology under the PITT
Agreement in 2021.

Moreover, under the PITT Agreement the Licensee is required to make milestone payments as follows:

(in thousands)
Each Phase I initiation

Each Phase III initiation
First commercial sale of product making use of licensed technology

$
$

500
1,250

The Company made a $50,000 milestone payment in March 2019 pursuant to the PITT Agreement as a result of a Phase I initiation. The PITT
Agreement expires upon the earlier of: (i) expiration of the last claim of the Patent Rights forming the subject matter of the PITT Agreement; or (ii) the
date that is 20 years from the effective date of the agreement (June 26, 2037).

The Licensee may terminate the PITT Agreement upon 3 months prior written notice provided all payments under the license are current. The Licensor
may terminate the PITT Agreement upon written notice if: (i) Licensee defaults as to performance of material obligations which have not been cured
within 60 days after receiving written notice; or (ii) Licensee ceases to carry out its business, becomes bankrupt or insolvent, applies for or consents to
the appointment of a trustee, receiver or liquidator of its assets or seeks relief under any law for the aid of debtors.

NOTE 5 – LEASE

In May 2019, the Company signed a sublease agreement with a related party for oﬃce space in La Jolla, California, which served as the former
headquarters of the Company. The lease has a 61-month term, which corresponds to the lease term of the lessor. The lessor is CTI Clinical Trial &
Consulting Services (“CTI”). CTI is majority-owned by a member of the Company’s Board of Directors. During 2021, the Company moved its corporate
headquarters to Boca Raton, Florida. The Company intends to sublease its office space in La Jolla.

In September 2021, the Company signed a lease with a third party for oﬃce space in Boca Raton, Florida. The lease agreement has a 64-month term
and commenced during the fourth quarter of 2021.

F-12

Below is a summary of the Company’s right-of-use assets and liabilities:

(in thousands, except years and rate)
Right-of-use asset (La Jolla lease)
Right-of-use asset (Boca Raton lease)
Total

Operating lease, current liability (La Jolla lease)
Operating lease, current liability (Boca Raton lease)
Total

Long-term operating lease liability (La Jolla lease)
Long-term operating lease liability (Boca Raton lease)

Total lease liability

Weighted-average remaining lease term

Weighted-average discount rate

NOTE 6 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

UCL

December 31,
2021

December 31,
2020

118
608
726

52
20
72

84
620
704
776

156
-
156

8
-
8

160
-
160
168

4.6 years

4.5 years

11.70%

10.00%

At December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company owed UCL Consultants Limited (“UCL”) $ 10,000 and $34,000, respectively, in connection with medical
research performed on behalf of the Company. During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company paid UCL $218,000 and $335,000,
respectively, for medical research performed on behalf of the Company. UCL is a wholly owned subsidiary of the University of London. The Company’s
Chief Scientific and Manufacturing Officer is a professor at the University of London.

CTI

During the year ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company paid CTI $ 0 and $127,000, respectively, for medical research performed on behalf of
the Company. During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company recorded a capital contribution of $216,000 for the forgiveness of certain
accounts payable due to CTI. During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company paid CTI $38,000 and $25,000, respectively,
pursuant to its sublease agreement with CTI. See Note 5.

AmplifyBio

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company engaged AmplifyBio to perform certain medical research on behalf of the Company. The CEO
of AmplifyBio is on the Board of Directors of the Company. At December 31, 2021, the Company owed AmplifyBio $70,000. No amounts were paid to
AmplifyBio during 2021. The Company had no transactions with AmplifyBio during 2020.

NOTE 7 – DEBT

On June 10, 2021, the Company entered into a Loan and Security Agreement (the “Term Loan”) with Silicon Valley Bank and SVB Innovation Credit
Fund VIII, L.P., together (the “Lenders”). The Term Loan provides for a $ 15.0 million term loan, of which the Company borrowed the entire amount on
June 10, 2021, and is secured by the Company’s assets. The Term Loan also provides for the Company to request an additional $5.0 million term loan
from the Lenders, which may be granted or denied at the sole discretion of the Lenders.

F-13

The Company paid the Lenders $ 47,000 to access the term loan, which has been included as a component of the debt discount and is amortized to
interest expense over the term of the loan. The term loan and debt discount are as follows as of December 31, 2021:

(in thousands)
Term Loan
Less: debt discount and financing costs, net
Less: current portion
Long-term debt

15,000
(542)
-
14,458

For the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company recognized interest expense of $ 985,000 related to the Term Loan.

The term loan repayment schedule provided for interest only payments beginning on July 1, 2021, and continuing for 12 months, followed by monthly
principal and interest payments, starting on July 1, 2022 and continuing through the maturity date of January 1, 2025. During August 2021, the Lenders
extended the interest-only period for one year due to the Company achieving an equity milestone as fully deﬁned in the Term Loan. As a result of
achieving the equity milestone, monthly principal and interest payments begin on July 1, 2023. All outstanding principal and accrued and unpaid interest
will be due and payable on the maturity date. The Term Loan provides for an annual interest rate equal to the greater of (i) the prime rate then in eﬀect
as reported in The Wall Street Journal plus 4.50% and (ii) 7.75%. At December 31, 2021, the interest rate was 7.75%.

The Term Loan includes a ﬁnal payment fee equal to 6.5% of the original principal amount borrowed payable on the earlier of the repayment of the loan
in full and the maturity date. The Company has the option to prepay the outstanding balance of the term loans in full, subject to a prepayment premium
of (i) 3% of the original principal amount borrowed for any prepayment on or prior to the ﬁrst anniversary of the loan, (ii) 2% of the original principal
amount borrowed for any prepayment after the ﬁrst anniversary and on or before the second anniversary of the loan or (iii) 1% of the original principal
amount borrowed for any prepayment after the second anniversary of the loan but before the maturity date.

The expected repayment of the $ 15.0 million Term loan principal is as follows as of December 31, 2021:

(in thousands, except years)
2022
2023
2024
Total debt

-
5,833
9,167
15,000

Upon the occurrence of certain events, including but not limited to the Company’s failure to satisfy its payment obligations under the Term Loan, the
breach of certain of its other covenants under the Term Loan, or the occurrence of a material adverse change, the Lenders will have the right, among
other remedies, to declare all principal and interest immediately due and payable, and will have the right to receive the ﬁnal payment fee and, if the
payment of principal and interest is due prior to maturity, the applicable prepayment fee. The Company was in compliance with its debt covenants at
December 31, 2021.

F-14

NOTE 8 – STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Common Stock – At the Market Offerings

During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company issued and sold 178,600 shares of common stock at an average price of $ 5.45 per share under
the 2020 ATM agreement. The aggregate net proceeds were approximately $0.8 million after BTIG’s commission and other offering expenses.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company sold 1,439,480 shares of its common stock at an average price of $ 20.17 per share under the
2020 ATM agreement. The aggregate net proceeds were approximately $28.4 million after BTIG’s commission and other offering expenses.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company sold 713,192 shares of its common stock at an average price of $ 21.73 per share under the
2021 ATM agreement. The aggregate net proceeds were approximately $14.9 million after BTIG’s commission and other offering expenses.

Registered Direct Offering

During July 2021, the Company completed a registered direct oﬀering whereby the Company sold 1,818,182 shares of its common stock to investors for
gross proceeds of $38.0 million (net proceeds of $36.9 million).

Underwritten Stock Offering

During July 2020, the Company completed an underwritten public oﬀering in which it sold 2,500,000 shares of common stock at a public oﬀering price of
$10.00 per share. The 2,500,000 shares sold included the full exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase 326,086 shares at a price of $ 10.00 per
share. Aggregate net proceeds from the underwritten public oﬀering were $23.1 million, net of approximately $ 1.9 million in underwriting discounts and
commissions and offering expenses.

Issuance of shares to Xencor

On June 10, 2021, the Company and Xencor entered into an Option Cancellation Agreement whereby the Company issued 192,533 shares of its
common stock to Xencor (See Note 4).

Lincoln Park

On May 15, 2019, the Company entered into both a securities purchase agreement and registration rights agreement with Lincoln Park Capital Fund,

LLC (“Lincoln Park”). Under the terms and subject to the conditions of the securities purchase agreement, the Company had the right to sell to Lincoln
Park, and Lincoln Park was obligated to purchase, up to $20.0 million in shares of the Company’s common stock, subject to certain limitations, over the
24-month period that commenced on May 15, 2019. During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company issued 196,000 shares of its common
stock to Lincoln Park for approximately $1.0 million of cash.

During April 2021, the Company terminated the securities purchase agreement with Lincoln Park.

Purchase and retirement of common stock

During January 2020, the Company purchased and cancelled 220,000 shares of its common stock from a shareholder in exchange for $ 1,012,000 of
cash. Immediately following the purchase, the investor owned less than 10% of the outstanding common stock of the Company.

F-15

Common Stock Issued for Services

During July 2020, the Company granted a consultant 50,000 fully vested warrants with a 5-year term, of which 25,000 warrants had an exercise price of
$5.50 per share and 25,000 warrants had an exercise price of $ 10.00 per share. The fair value of these warrants was $ 356,874 based on the Black-
Scholes Option Pricing Model and was recorded within general and administrative expense. The assumptions used for these warrants consist of the
exercise prices, expected dividends of 0%, expected volatility of 111.67% based on the trading history of similar companies, risk-free rate of 0.30% based
on the applicable US Treasury bill rate and an expected life of 5.0 years. During July 2020, the Company issued the consultant 20,000 shares of common
stock and cancelled the 50,000 warrants. The 20,000 shares were issued from the Company’s 2019 Incentive Stock Plan and had a fair value of
approximately $230,000 based on the market value of the Company’s common stock on the grant date. The Company accounted for the exchange of the
warrants for shares of common stock as a modiﬁcation and recorded no additional expense in connection with the exchange as the fair value of warrants
exceeded the fair value of the shares issued.

Settlement

In 2016, the Company entered into a settlement agreement whereby the Company agreed to issue 33,335 shares of the Company’s common stock to an
individual to settle a claim in full. During 2020, the Company issued the 33,335 shares.

Stock options

During September 2020, the Company granted an employee an option to purchase 40,000 shares of its common stock pursuant to the 2019 Incentive
Stock Plan. The stock options vest over four years and had a fair value of $339,731 that was calculated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
Variables used in the Black-Scholes option-pricing model include: (1) discount rate of 0.46% based on the applicable US Treasury bill rate (2) expected
life of 6.25 years, (3) expected volatility of approximately 106% based on the trading history of similar companies, and (4) zero expected dividends.

During 2021, the Company granted various employees, consultants and directors options to purchase 823,000 shares of common stock pursuant to the
2021, 2019 and 2017 Incentive Stock Plans. The stock options vest over zero to four years and had a fair value of $14,027,000 that was calculated using
the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Variables used in the Black-Scholes option-pricing model include: (1) discount rate of 0.78-1.49%% based on the
applicable US Treasury bill rate (2) expected life of 6.00-10.00 years, (3) expected volatility of approximately 105%-114% based on the trading history of
similar companies, and (4) zero expected dividends.

F-16

The following table summarizes stock option activity:

(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Outstanding at January 1, 2020
Options granted
Options exercised
Options cancelled
Outstanding at January 1, 2021
Options granted
Options exercised
Options cancelled
Outstanding at December 31, 2021

Exercisable at December 31, 2021

Number
of
Shares

Weighted-
average
Exercise
Price

Weighted-
average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(years)

Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value

3,417,000 $
40,000 $
- $
- $
3,457,000 $
823,000 $
(183,000) $
- $
4,097,000 $
2,743,760 $

5.77
10.38
-
-
5.82
20.63
6.21
-
8.67

6.45

9.03
-
-
-
8.05
10.0
-
-
7.21 $

6.91 $

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14,414

10,890

The Company received $1,135,000 in cash proceeds from exercises of stock options during the year ended December 31, 2021.

During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company recognized stock-based compensation expense of $ 4,796,000 and $2,755,000,
respectively, related to stock options. As of December 31, 2021, there was $13,308,000 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested
stock options which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.52 years.

Warrants

The Company issued 45,386 warrants to the Company’s lenders upon obtaining its loan in June 2021. The warrants have a 10-year term and an exercise
price of $14.05. The warrants have a fair value of approximately $ 0.6 million that was calculated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Variables
used in the Black-Scholes option-pricing model include: (1) discount rate of 1.45% based on the applicable US Treasury bill rate (2) expected life
of 10.0 years, (3) expected volatility of approximately 103% based on the trading history of similar companies, and (4) zero expected dividends. At
December 31, 2021, the intrinsic value of these warrants is $0.

In connection with the Company’s initial public oﬀering in February 2019, the Company issued warrants to the placement agents to purchase the
Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $9.60 per common share, which warrants are exercisable until December 19, 2023. During the year
ended December 31, 2021, 6,147 of these warrants were exercised on a cashless basis in exchange for 3,758 shares of common stock. At December
31, 2021, 28,688 of these warrants are outstanding and the intrinsic value is $ 17,000.

On June 30, 2017, the Company issued fully vested warrants to purchase 31,667 shares of the Company’s common stock to a third party in conjunction
with the common stock sold for cash. The warrants have a $1.50 exercise price and expire on June 30, 2022. During the year ended December 31,
2021, 11,875 of these warrants were exercised for cash proceeds of $ 18,000. At December 31, 2021, 19,792 of these warrants are outstanding, with an
intrinsic value of $172,000.

Stock-based Compensation by Class of Expense

The following summarizes the components of stock-based compensation expense in the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended
December 31, 2021 and 2020 respectively:

Research and development
General and administrative
Total

Shareholder Rights Agreement

F-17

Year Ended
December 31,
2021
1,651,000 $
3,145,000
4,796,000 $

Year Ended
December 31,
2020

583,000
2,529,000
3,112,000

On December 30, 2020, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Company approved and adopted a Rights Agreement, dated as of December 30,
2020, by and between the Company and VStock Transfer, LLC, as rights agent, pursuant to which the Board declared a dividend of one preferred share
purchase right (each, a “Right”) for each outstanding share of the Company’s common stock held by stockholders as of the close of business on January
11, 2021. When exercisable, each right initially would represent the right to purchase from the Company one one-thousandth of a share of a newly
designated series of preferred stock, Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share, of the Company, at an exercise price of
$300.00 per one one-thousandth of a Series A Junior Participating Preferred Share, subject to adjustment. Subject to various exceptions, the Rights
become exercisable in the event any person (excluding certain exempted or grandfathered persons) becomes the beneﬁcial owner of twenty percent or
more of the Company’s common stock without the approval of the Board. The Rights Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 30, 2021 but
was extended until December 30, 2022 by the Board.

Preferred Stock

In 2020, the Company designated 45,000 shares of its preferred stock with par value of $ 0.001 per share as Series A Junior Participating Preferred
Stock. The remaining 9,955,000 shares of preferred stock with par value of $ 0.001 remain undesignated. None of the preferred shares were issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2021 and 2020.

NOTE 9– INCOME TAXES

The provision for income taxes consists of the following components:

Current expense (benefit)
Federal
Foreign
Current income tax expense

Deferred expense (benefit)
Federal
Foreign
Deferred income tax
Net deferred taxes

December 31,
2021

December 31,
2020

- $
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
- $

-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-

A reconciliation of income tax benefit computed using the federal statutory income tax rate to the Company’s tax expense is as follows:

(in thousands, except percentage)
Federal tax benefit at statutory rate (21%)

Stock-based compensation
State income tax benefit, net of federal tax effect
Foreign tax differential
Research credits

December 31,
2021

December 31,
2020

(6,381) $
1,156

(519)
(41)
2,372

(2,541)
599

(411)
(61)
742

Other
Return to provision adjustment
Change in valuation allowance
Income tax benefit

2
166
3,245
- $

1
33
1,638
-

F-18

The principal components of deferred tax assets and liabilities consist of the following at December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively:

(in thousands)
Deferred tax assets
Stock-based compensation
Federal NOL carryforwards
Foreign NOL carryforwards
Total deferred tax assets
Less valuation allowance
Net deferred tax assets

December 31,
2021

December 31,
2020

934 $
3,702
2,156
6,792
(6,792)
- $

563
2,202
782
3,547
(3,547)
-

At December 31, 2021, the Company had a federal net operating loss carryforward of approximately $ 15.7 million. The net operating loss carryforwards
for 2017 will begin to expire in the year ending December 31, 2037. The net operating loss carryforwards starting in 2018 have no expiration.

The Company’s gross deferred tax assets of $ 6.8 million and $ 3.5 million at December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, primarily consist of net operating
loss carryforwards for income tax purposes. A valuation allowance is required to be recorded when it is not more likely than not that some portion or all of
the net deferred tax assets will be realized. Since the Company cannot be assured of generating taxable income and thereby realizing the net deferred
tax assets, a full valuation allowance has been recorded. The change in the valuation allowance was $3,245,000 during the year ended December 31,
2021.

The Company recognizes uncertain tax positions in accordance with ASC 740 on the basis of evaluating whether it is more likely than not that the tax
positions will be sustained upon examination by tax authorities. For those tax positions that meet the more-likely-than not recognition threshold, we
recognize the largest amount of tax beneﬁt that is more than 50 percent likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement. As of December 31, 2021, and
2020, the Company has no signiﬁcant uncertain tax positions. There are no unrecognized tax beneﬁts included on the balance sheet that would, if
recognized, impact the eﬀective tax rate. The Company does not anticipate there will be a signiﬁcant change in unrecognized tax beneﬁts within the next
12 months.

NOTE 10 – COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENTS

During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company was awarded a $500,000 grant from the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (“ALS”) Association to
fund a study of the eﬃcacy of XPro to reverse ALS in vitro and to fund a study of the eﬃcacy of XPro to protect against ALS model phenotypes in vivo.
During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company received $200,000, and $ 300,000, respectively of cash proceeds pursuant to this
grant which the Company recorded as deferred liabilities. The Company records costs incurred related to the ALS study as a reduction of the deferred
liabilities. As of December 31, 2021, the Company has $257,000 recorded as deferred liabilities related to the ALS grant.

During September 2020, the Company was awarded a grant of up to $2.9 million from the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”). The grant will support a
Phase 2 study of XPro in patients with treatment resistant depression. As of December 31, 2021, the Company has not received any proceeds pursuant
to this grant.

NOTE 11 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Lease

In May 2019, the Company signed a sublease agreement with a related party for oﬃce space in La Jolla, California. The lease has a 61-month term,
which corresponds to the lease term of the lessor. The lessor is CTI.

During September 2021, the Company signed a lease agreement with a third party for oﬃce space in Boca Raton, Florida. The lease agreement has
a 64-month term and commenced during the fourth quarter of 2021.

Future minimum payments pursuant to the leases are as follows:

(in thousands, except years)

2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
Thereafter
Total lease payments
Less: imputed interest
Present value of future lease payments
Less: operating lease, current liabilities
Long-term operating lease liabilities

170
237
220
193
199
17
1,036
(260)
776
(72)
704

During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company recognized $ 102,000 and $52,000, respectively, in operating lease expense, which
is included in general and administrative expenses in the Company’s consolidated statement of operations.

F-19

Litigation

The Company is subject to claims and suits that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of our business. Although management currently believes
that resolving claims against the Company, individually or in aggregate, will not have a material adverse impact in the Company’s consolidated ﬁnancial
statements, these matters are subject to inherent uncertainties and management’s view of these matters may change in the future.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

None.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Oﬃcer and Chief Financial Oﬃcer, evaluated the eﬀectiveness of our disclosure controls
and procedures as of December 31, 2021. The term “disclosure controls and procedures,” as deﬁned in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), means controls and other procedures of a company that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it ﬁles or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported, within the time periods speciﬁed in the SEC’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and
procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it ﬁles or submits under the Exchange Act is
accumulated and communicated to the company’s management, including its principal executive and principal ﬁnancial oﬃcers, as appropriate to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated,
can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives and management necessarily applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-beneﬁt
relationship of possible controls and procedures. Based on the evaluation, our Chief Executive Oﬃcer and Chief Financial Oﬃcer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2021.

Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm

Our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to formally attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting
for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” pursuant to the provisions of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our CEO and our CFO are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over ﬁnancial reporting, as such term is deﬁned in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f). Management conducted an assessment of the eﬀectiveness of our internal control over ﬁnancial reporting as of
December 31, 2021. In making this assessment, management used the criteria described in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Our management concluded that our internal controls over ﬁnancial
reporting were effective based on those criteria, as of December 31, 2021.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

None.

Item 9B. Other Information

None.

Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections

Not applicable.

PART III

Certain information required by Part III is omitted from this report because the Company will ﬁle a deﬁnitive proxy statement within 120 days after the end
of its ﬁscal year pursuant to Regulation 14A (the Proxy Statement) for its annual meeting of stockholders, and certain information included in the Proxy
Statement is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

The information required by this Item 10 will be set forth in the Proxy Statement and is incorporated in this report by reference.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

The information required by this item will be set forth in the Proxy Statement and is incorporated in this report by reference.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table provides certain information with respect to all of our compensation plans in effect as of December 31, 2021:

(C)
Number of
Securities
Remaining
Available for
Future
Issuance
Under Equity
Compensation
Plans
(excluding
securities
reflected in
column(A))

8.67
—
8.67

1,391,525(2)

—
1,391,525

(A)
Number of
Securities to
be Issued
Upon
Exercise of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants and
Rights
4,097,000(1) $

—
4,097,000

(B)
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
of Outstanding
Options,
Warrants and
Rights

Plan Category
Equity Compensation Plans approved by stockholders
Equity Compensation Plans not approved by stockholders
Total

(1) Consists of shares subject to outstanding stock options, under the INmune Bio, Inc. 2021 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2021 Plan”), the 2019 Stock
Incentive Plan (the “2019 Plan”) and INmune Bio, Inc. 2017 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2017 Plan) some of which are vested and some of which
remain subject to the vesting of the respective equity award.

(2) Consists of shares available for future issuance under the 2021 Plan, 2019 Plan and the 2017 Plan. As of December 31, 2021, an aggregate of
1,375,549 shares of common stock were available for issuance under the 2021 Plan, 7,313 shares of common stock were available for issuance
under the 2019 Plan and 8,663 shares of common stock were available for issuance under the 2017 Plan.

Other

The other information required by this item will be set forth in the Proxy Statement and is incorporated in this report by reference.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

The information required by this item will be set forth in the Proxy Statement and is incorporated in this report by reference.

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services

The information required by this item will be set forth in the Proxy Statement and is incorporated in this report by reference.

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits.

Exhibit No. Description of Exhibit
1.1

Form of Placement Agent Agreement (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1/A ﬁled with the
SEC on November 20, 2018).

1.2

3.1

3.2

3.3

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

Underwriting Agreement dated July 16, 2020 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC
on July 16, 2020).

Certiﬁcate of Incorporation (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 ﬁled with the SEC on
August 30, 2018).

Bylaws (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Certiﬁcate of Designations of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of INmune Bio Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to
the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K Filed with the SEC on December 30, 2020).

Description of Securities of INmune Bio, Inc.

Form of Registrant’s common stock certiﬁcate (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1/A ﬁled
with the SEC on September 26, 2018).

Form of Placement Agent Common Stock Warrant (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1/A
filed with the SEC on September 26, 2018).

Rights Agreement, dated as of December 30, 2020 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on December 30, 2020).

Amendment No. 1 to the Rights Agreement between INmune Bio, Inc. and VStock Transfer, LLC (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1
to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 21, 2021).

10.1

Form of Subscription Agreement (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on
August 30, 2018).

10.2

10.3

10.4

10.5

10.6

10.7

10.8

10.9

10.10

10.11

10.12

10.13

10.14

10.15

10.16

10.17

10.18

10.19

10.20

10.21

10.22

10.23

10.24

10.25

10.26

License Agreement between INmune Bio, Inc. and Immune Ventures LLC (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Assignment and Assumption Agreement with Immune Ventures LLC (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Exclusive License Agreement by the University of Pittsburgh of the Common Wealth system of Higher Education and Immune Ventures
LLC (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

First Amendment to Exclusive License Agreement by and between the University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth system of Higher
Education and Immune Ventures, LLC (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 ﬁled with the
SEC on August 30, 2018).

Material Transfer and License Agreement between Anthony Nolan Cord Blood Bank and Immune Bio International LTD. (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Employment Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and Raymond Tesi (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Employment Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and David Moss (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Registration Statement
on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Consulting Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and Mark Lowdell (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

INmune Bio, Inc. 2017 Stock Incentive Plan (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 ﬁled
with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Form of Incentive Option Agreement with employees (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1
filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Form of Incentive Option Agreement with non-employee directors (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the Registration Statement
on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

License Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and Xencor, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Amendment to the Consultancy Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and Mark Lowdell (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to the
Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

First Amendment to Stock Issuance Agreement (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1 ﬁled
with the SEC on August 30, 2018).

Form of Waiver of Registration Rights. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Registration Statement on Form S-1/A ﬁled with
the SEC on September 26, 2018).

Form of Subscription Agreement to be used in connection with the Best Eﬀorts Oﬀering (Incorporated by reference to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the SEC on September 26, 2018).

Purchase Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC, dated May 15, 2019 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 16, 2019).

Registration Rights Agreement between INmune Bio Inc. and Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC, dated May 15, 2019 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 16, 2019).

Amendment to Securities Purchase Agreement between INmune Bio, Inc. and Raymond J. Tesi (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 17, 2019).

Amendment to Securities Purchase Agreement between INmune Bio, Inc. and David J. Moss (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 17, 2019).

Sublease between INmune Bio Inc. and CTI-Clinical Trial Services, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 24, 2019).

Amendment No. 2 to Securities Purchase Agreement between INmune Bio, Inc. and Raymond J. Tesi (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 24, 2019).

INmune Bio, Inc. 2019 Stock Incentive Plan (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 to the Form 10-K ﬁled with the SEC on March 11,
2020).

At-the-Market Sales Agreement, dated April 16, 2020 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with
the SEC on April 17, 2020).

Amendment NO. 1 to At-the-Market Sales Agreement 2020 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on August 19, 2020).

10.27

10.28

Employment Agreement eﬀective as of January 1, 2021 between INmune Bio Inc. and Raymond J. Tesi (incorporated by reference to our
Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 4, 2021).

Employment Agreement effective as of January 1, 2021 between INmune Bio Inc. and David Moss (incorporated by reference to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 4, 2021).

10.29

Form of Securities Purchase Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on 8-K filed with the SEC on July 15, 2021).

10.30

Form of Placement Agency Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 15, 2021).

10.31

10.32

10.33

10.34

10.35

10.36

Lease Agreement dated September 13, 2021 (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with the SEC on
September 15, 2021).

At-the-Market Sales Agreement, dated March 10, 2021 between the Company and BTIG, LLC (incorporated by reference to the Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 11, 2021).

Financial Advisory Agreement dated March 29, 2021 between the Company and National Securities Corp. (incorporated by reference to the
Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 29, 2021).

INmune Bio, Inc. 2021 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with the SEC on June 3,
2021).

Option Cancellation Agreement between the Company and Xencor, Inc. (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled
with the SEC on June 15, 2021).

First Amendment to License Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with the SEC on June 15,
2021).

10.37

Loan and Security Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 15, 2021).

10.38

10.39

10.40

10.41

Warrant to purchase common stock issued to SVB Innovation Credit Fund VIII, L.P. (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 15, 2021).

Warrant to purchase common stock issued to Silicon Valley Bank (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with
the SEC on June 15, 2021).

Form of nonqualiﬁed stock option agreement option agreement between the Company and non-employee directors (incorporated by
reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 24, 2021).

Form of incentive stock option agreement between the Company and employees (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form
8-K filed with the SEC on June 24, 2021).

10.42

Securities Purchase Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 15, 2021).

10.43

Placement Agency Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 15, 2021).

10.44

10.45

21.1

23.1

31.1

31.2

32.1

32.2

Lease Agreement dated September 13, 2021 (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with the SEC on
September 15, 2021).

Amendment No. 1 to Rights Agreement (incorporated by reference to the Current Report on Form 8-K ﬁled with the SEC on December 20,
2021).

Subsidiaries (incorporated by reference to our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 4, 2021).

Consent of Marcum LLP, independent registered public accounting firm.

Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to Section 3.02 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Certification of principal financial officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Certification of principal financial officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101.INS

Inline XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

101.CAL

Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

101.DEF

Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document

101.LAB

Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

101.PRE

Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

104

Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted as Inline XBRL and contained in Exhibit 101)

Item 16. Form 10-K Summary

None.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Dated: March 3, 2022

INMUNE BIO INC.

/s/ Raymond J. Tesi, M.D.
Raymond J. Tesi, M.D.
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

/s/ David J. Moss
David J. Moss
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Signature

Title

Date

/s/ Raymond J. Tesi, M.D.
Raymond J. Tesi, M.D.

/s/ David J. Moss
David J. Moss

/s/ Timothy Schroeder
Timothy Schroeder

/s/ J. Kelly Ganjei
J. Kelly Ganjei

/s/ Scott Juda, JD
Scott Juda, JD

/s/ Edgardo Baracchini
Edgardo Baracchini

/s/ Marcia Allen
Marcia Allen

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)

March 3, 2022

Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, Secretary
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

March 3, 2022

Director

March 3, 2022