Talis Biomedical Corp [TLIS] Filings

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023

OR

Commission File Number: 001-40047

Talis Biomedical Corporation

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

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

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 15(d) of the Act. YES ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark 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.

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 ☒

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the Registrant’s common stock on The Nasdaq Stock Market on June 30, 2023 (the last business day of its most recently completed second quarter), was $8,151,667, restated for the 1-for-15 Reverse Stock Split effective July 5, 2023. The calculation of the aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity excludes shares held by executive officers, directors and stockholders that the Registrant concluded were affiliates of the Registrant on such date. Exclusion of such shares should not be construed to indicate that any such person possesses the power, direct or indirect, to direct or cause the direction of the management or policies of the Registrant or that such person is controlled by or under common control with the Registrant.

As of March 19, 2024, there were 31,685,660 shares of the Registrant’s common stock and preferred stock outstanding, consisting of 1,821,986 shares of common stock and 29,863,674 shares of Series 1 convertible preferred stock which is convertible into 1,990,914 shares of common stock, as adjusted for the 1-for-15 Reverse Stock Split effective July 5, 2023. The conversion ratio of the outstanding Series 1 convertible preferred stock increased and the number of shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of such Series 1 convertible preferred stock decreased in proportion to the 1-for-15 ratio of the Reverse Stock Split. Our Series 1 convertible preferred stock is a voting common stock equivalent, subject to certain limitations.

Table of Contents

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this Annual Report) contains forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are contained principally in the sections entitled “Risk Factors,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Business.” These statements relate to future events or to our future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

In some cases, you can identify these statements by terms such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expects,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would” or the negative of those terms, and similar expressions that convey uncertainty of future events or outcomes. These forward-looking statements reflect our management’s beliefs and views with respect to future events and are based on estimates and assumptions as of the date of this Annual Report and are subject to risks and uncertainties. In addition, statements that “we believe” and similar statements reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based upon information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report, and while we believe such information forms a reasonable basis for such statements, such information may be limited or incomplete, and our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all potentially available relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain and investors are cautioned not to unduly rely upon these statements. We discuss many of the risks associated with the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report in greater detail under the heading “Risk Factors.” Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment. New risks emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. You should carefully read this Annual Report and the documents that we reference in this Annual Report and have filed as exhibits to this Annual Report completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report by these cautionary statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements publicly, or to update the reasons actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Summary of Risk Factors

Below is a summary of material factors that make an investment in our common stock speculative or risky. Importantly, this summary does not address all of the risks and uncertainties that we face. Additional discussion of the risks and uncertainties summarized in this risk factor summary, as well as other risks and uncertainties that we face, can be found under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report. The below summary is qualified in its entirety by that more complete discussion of such risks and uncertainties. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report as part of your evaluation of an investment in our common stock.

Part I

Item 1. Business.

All references to “Talis Biomedical,” “Talis,” “the Company,” “we,” “our,” and “us” in this Annual Report refer to Talis Biomedical Corporation.

Overview

Talis aimed to transform diagnostic testing by developing and commercializing innovative products that were designed to enable accurate, reliable, low cost and rapid molecular testing for infectious diseases and other conditions at the point of care. While timely diagnosis of infectious diseases is critically important to enable effective treatment, testing is primarily performed in centralized laboratories, which require samples to be shipped for processing, delaying the return of results by days. Point-of-care testing solves this problem by delivering the timely information necessary for clinical care. We developed the Talis One system, a sample-to-answer, cloud-enabled molecular diagnostic system to be deployed to a variety of testing settings in the United States and around the world to diagnose infectious disease in the moment of need, at the point of care. The Talis One system comprises a compact instrument, single-use test cartridges and software supporting a central cloud database which work together. The system was designed to provide central laboratory levels of accuracy and to be operated by an untrained user.

In November 2023, due to unforeseen operational challenges, setbacks in product development timelines and volatile market conditions, the Company decided to cease operations in its Redwood City, CA laboratory and office facility and consolidate operations to its Chicago facility and to consider strategic alternatives. In addition, on November 14, 2023, we announced that we retained TD Cowen, an investment bank, to lead a comprehensive review of strategic alternatives focusing on maximizing stockholder value, including but not limited to, an acquisition, merger, reverse merger, divestiture of assets, licensing or other strategic transactions and a voluntary dissolution or liquidation of the Company. However, there is no set timetable for the overall process given the anticipated timelines for different strategic alternatives may vary, and there can be no assurance that this process will result in us pursuing a transaction or that any transaction, if pursued, will be completed on attractive terms or at all. We have ceased substantially all of our research and development and manufacturing activities while our Board of Directors considers strategic alternatives. If we are unable to complete a strategic transaction within a reasonable timeframe or at all, then we may cease all operations and seek stockholder approval to voluntarily dissolve and liquidate the Company.

Corporate Information

We were formed as a limited liability company under the Illinois Limited Liability Company Act in March 23, 2010 under the name SlipChip LLC. In June 2013, SlipChip LLC merged with and into SlipChip Corporation, a Delaware corporation, with each member of SlipChip LLC exchanging their respective membership interest for shares of common stock of SlipChip Corporation. In February 2018, we changed our corporate name to Talis Biomedical Corporation. Our principal executive offices are located at 1375 West Fulton Market, Suite 700, Chicago, IL 60607, and our telephone number is (650) 433-3000. Our corporate website address is http://talisbio.com.

This Annual Report contains references to our trademarks, including Talis, Talis One®, and Sia DxTM and to trademarks belonging to other entities. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this Annual Report, including logos, artwork and other visual displays, may appear without the ® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their rights thereto. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names or trademarks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

General

Previous surveys of women's and sexual health providers that we conducted confirmed the continued and strong interest in adoption of point-of-care systems, such as the Talis One system. We believe the Talis One system was well positioned to meet this growing demand in both traditional and non-traditional care settings. Although there are

several commercially available point-of-care systems, we believe that few, if any, sufficiently meet the needs of healthcare providers to drive broad adoption of, and transition to, point-of-care testing from central lab testing for a broad range of infectious diseases. We believe that the ideal point-of-care technology for diagnosing infectious diseases would not only be highly accurate and rapid, but would also be easy to use, low cost, cloud-compatible and enable multiplexing to detect multiple pathogens at the same time.

We developed Talis One tests to address some of the most critical infectious diseases in women's and sexual health, initially with a panel for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis (CT/NG/TV), as well as a respiratory panel consisting of tests for influenza A, influenza B and COVID-19 (Respiratory Panel). In order to bring the Talis One system to market as soon as possible, we leveraged progress made to-date and directed our efforts on the pursuit of 510(k) clearances under the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) for our highly differentiated platform and development of multiple test panels. We planned to conduct clinical trials to support clearance of the Respiratory Panel and CT/NG/TV test, as well as other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), such as herpes simplex virus (HSV), vaginal infections including bacterial vaginosis (Vaginal Infections Panel), and urinary tract infections (UTI).

We designed the Talis One system to address limitations of existing point-of-care diagnostic testing technologies for infectious diseases. Our system combines robust sample preparation with highly optimized and rapid isothermal nucleic acid amplification technology to enable rapid detection of infectious pathogens in a variety of unpurified patient sample types. We designed the Talis One system to have the following capabilities which we believed would create a competitive advantage over other commercially available point-of-care technologies:

Our Business Strategy

Prior to the announcement in November 2023 to consider strategic alternatives, our strategy was to transform diagnostic testing by developing and commercializing innovative products that were designed to enable accurate, reliable, low cost and rapid molecular testing for infectious diseases and other conditions at the point of care.

Since November 2023, while we have maintained limited manufacturing capabilities to have the ability to support minimal research and development functions, our primary business strategy consists of:

Industry background

Infectious disease remains among the top health problems facing populations around the world. Mortality rate for all infectious disease in the United States ranged between 42 and 63 deaths per 100,000 population, accounting for 5.4% of overall mortality for the period of 1980-2014.

The drawbacks of centralized laboratory testing

The need to send samples to a central location for testing introduces delays in treatment or incentivizes prescribing treatment in the absence of a definitive diagnosis. The turnaround time for centralized lab tests is typically one to five days and can often be longer. Therefore, physicians are faced with one of two choices: either wait days for test results before initiating treatment and risk that an infected patient may continue to spread the infection and suffer increasingly negative health effects from delayed treatment or treat empirically while the patient is in front of them. Smaller hospital and clinic laboratories, many in rural settings, may not have the testing volume to justify investing in high throughput molecular diagnostic instruments, requiring smaller hospitals to send out molecular testing to reference laboratories and wait for the results.

We believe that immediate access to high-quality diagnostic test results will improve medical treatment of disease and avoid inappropriate prescription of antibiotics, which can amplify the growing problem of antibiotic resistant bacteria. In a 2016 study of 1,103 emergency room patients at St. John Hospital & Medical Center in Detroit, 440 patients who had a suspected chlamydia or gonorrhea infection were treated with antibiotics even though the vast majority, 323 patients (74%), ultimately tested negative for the infection. Similarly, in some cases, test result delays lead to patients who do not return after the initial visit, resulting in the health care provider losing these patients to

follow-up and unnecessarily exposing additional individuals to detectable and treatable infections. This is particularly problematic in pediatric care and for urgent care and community care clinics.

Limitations of current point-of-care diagnostic technologies

There are a broad range of point-of-care technologies available for use in physician offices for a variety of applications, ranging from glucose strips for diabetes to lateral flow immunoassays for detecting high pathogen load infections, such as Strep A or influenza. Molecular testing is less common in point-of-care settings, despite being highly accurate. We believe that this is due to a lack of available point-of-care molecular technologies that sufficiently balance speed, accuracy and cost to meet customer needs and drive broad adoption.

We believe that most molecular diagnostic solutions currently being marketed for use at the point-of-care each have one or more of the following limitations:

The Talis One system

We developed the Talis One system to address the limitations of existing point-of-care diagnostic testing technologies for infectious diseases. Our system combines robust sample preparation with highly-optimized and rapid isothermal nucleic acid amplification technology to enable rapid detection of infectious pathogens in a variety of unpurified patient sample types. The Talis One system is an integrated system that includes a compact instrument, single-use test cartridges and software, including a central cloud database.

Talis One cartridge

At the core of our system is the Talis One cartridge, a versatile shelf-stable and single-use test cartridge designed to fully integrate proprietary highly-optimized nucleic acid isothermal amplification tests with sample preparation. The cartridge was designed to handle a wide range of sample types, including nasal swab, vaginal swab, saliva, urine, whole blood, plasma, serum and sputum. It was also designed to be compatible with chemical, enzymatic, and mechanical lysis, e.g., by bead-beating in order to process a wide range of pathogens, including viral, bacterial and

hard-to-lyse fungal pathogens. The cartridge design incorporates a patented rotary valve that integrates sample purification and is easily adaptable to alternate fluidic layouts to accommodate alternate testing methods that may require pre-treatment of specimens, pre-amplification and/or multiple purification steps to facilitate expansion of the testing menu. The cartridge also incorporates reagent plug technology, which is designed to enable implementation of new tests on the same cartridge backbone simply by inserting plugs with different target test reagents. The reagent plugs in our cartridges are optically clear, permitting the instrument to visualize and detect fluorescent signals from the amplification test. Patented test wells employ a fluidic design and include a mechanism to heat-seal the cartridge for amplicon containment designed to prevent contamination of the work surfaces.

The cartridge, with modifications, is designed to support up to 14-well multiplexing, which we believe will enable development of expanded panels and syndromic applications. The specific cartridge that we developed for the CT/NG/TV test provides 5-fold multiplexing, which we believe was sufficient to meet our product plans.

Talis One instrument

The Talis One instrument is designed to enable sample-to-answer capabilities without user intervention. We designed the instrument to be low cost, portable and easy to use. We believe the modular design, which is divided into major subsystems for performing cartridge handling, sample preparation, amplification and detection, would facilitate automated assembly and low-cost manufacturing. The compact size, approximately 7 x 10 x 14 inches, is designed to enable portability and use in various front-line locations. The instrument incorporates a touchpad interface for easily communicating instructions, information and results to the user. An integrated camera that reads and enables registration of a label on the cartridge facilitates sample custody by linking an image of the cartridge label with test results. The instruments are designed for multi-instrument deployments to satisfy different testing volume requirements and can be stacked three-by-three without disturbing the cellular connection to the cloud.

Talis One software and IT

The Talis One system incorporates the Sia Dx software which enables the communication of test results to a central cloud database that can be remotely and securely accessed to obtain key data required to collect, screen, collate, report, and monitor disease infection and pandemic spread on a micro and macro level. The cellular and ethernet connectivity built into each Talis One instrument is also designed to enable Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)-compliant transmission, storage, and review. Such centralized storage could permit (i) creation of a public health interface granting access to select information to governmental entities and/or (ii) automatic transmission of notifiable diseases to public health authorities. The cloud-based data could serve to help institutions better manage clinical practice and also to improve infection control. With substantially increased adoption over time, the data may offer a mapping of infection patterns that public health and research institutions can use to address care on a larger scale. Additionally, for organizations that may desire several instrument placements in multiple exam rooms, departments or distributed testing sites, authorized administrators may be able to monitor, in real-time, the status of any instrument in the organization, as well as manage users, passwords, and certain security features. The continuous connectivity of the Talis One instruments is also designed to enable automated updates including security patches, instrument configurations, and firmware and software updates, the latter of which could be deployed to enable the instrument to recognize and run newly released tests.

Talis One workflow

The Talis One system is capable of being integrated into the clinical workflow as follows: (1) label cartridge with patient information, (2) dispense sample into loading port and close lid, (3) insert cartridge into instrument, and (4) follow on-instrument instructions to initiate testing, results will automatically display after less than 30 minutes. The workflow may vary for alternate sample types.

The Talis One workflow follows a few simple steps from sample preparation to results. The system is designed to return results in less than 30 minutes and requires two minutes or less of hands-on time for the operator. After the sample is collected and the cartridge is introduced into the instrument, the instrument confirms the operability of the cartridge, runs the test and communicates the test result to the instrument display. We believe the ease of use, compact size and speed could enable near-patient diagnosis in a broad range of settings.

Infectious Diseases

We developed our Talis One system to be used for infections related to women’s health, STIs and respiratory infections. We intended to complete clinical development of our Talis One system for CT/NG/TV and submit a 510(k) pre-market notification to the FDA after the successful completion of our clinical trials. We further intended to explore authorization to affix a CE Mark from the EMA soon after 510(k) clearance, if obtained. If cleared or otherwise authorized for marketing, this would be our first commercial offering in our women’s health menu. We planned to develop additional tests for infections related to women’s health, including a panel for STIs and other infections, such as the Vaginal Infection Panel, UTI and HSV.

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends annual CT/NG screening of all sexually active women age 25 and younger and for women over age 25 with risk factors. In addition to promoting our test menu to our existing customers, we planned to engage in a focused commercialization effort directed towards obstetricians and gynecologists, where we estimate that a substantial majority of CT/NG testing occurs. Traditionally, testing is carried out by centralized laboratories, and we believed that there is a significant opportunity to move these tests to the point-of-care at the office of the obstetrician and gynecologist or in urgent care clinics or primary care facilities. We believe testing at the point-of-care could (i) improve decision making and enable the provider to use this information to treat the patient in the same visit and (ii) improve the patient experience and empower providers and patients to adhere to screening guidelines and improve outcomes. We also believe that care providers may be able to create profit opportunities by bringing testing in-house to the point-of-care. We believe the tests that we were developing for our Talis One system would have had established reimbursement codes, enabling healthcare providers to submit for reimbursement.

The Talis One COVID-19 test was the first product that we developed for respiratory infections. Although we did not plan a broad commercial launch for the stand-alone COVID-19 test, we intended to seek marketing authorization for the Respiratory Panel through a 510(k) clearance process.

Commercialization and Manufacturing

We developed relevant in-vitro diagnostic tests for a variety of respiratory infections and infections related to women’s health and STIs. We estimated that the total potential annualized addressable global market opportunity for molecular testing of infectious diseases to be over $5.4 billion for 2022 and expected to grow to over $7.1 billion by 2026.

In 2022, we discontinued further investment in commercializing our stand-alone COVID test. In conjunction with this decision, we eliminated our sales force and reduced the commercial team supporting our product development and marketing needs. Leveraging progress made at that time with our stand-alone COVID test, we conducted investigational field studies with the Talis One system to gain user experience and feedback on the platform’s physical components, workflow, and software. Results from these studies were intended to help inform the development of our planned product roadmap.

To support future commercialization of the Talis One system, we invested in automated manufacturing to provide the advantages of quality, speed and cost at full scale. In 2022, we demonstrated our ability to manufacture cartridges and instruments at the quality and pace needed with a clear path to what we believed would be attractive gross margins in the future. In order to drive further efficiency and cost reduction in the manufacturing process, we restructured relationships with our contract manufacturing partners in 2023. Our commercialization and manufacturing strategies are uncertain at this time pending completion of a review of strategic alternatives by our Board of Directors.

Competition

The in vitro diagnostics industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary intellectual property. Due to the significant interest and growth in diagnostics, we expect ongoing intense competition primarily from centralized laboratories and diagnostic companies offering both point-of-care and at-home solutions. We believe key competitive factors include the accuracy, utility, turnaround time and economics of our products, and commercial execution. We also believe our ability to succeed in the future

depended on the timing of obtaining regulatory clearances and approvals, as well as the timing of our ability to deliver instruments and consumables into the marketplace in significant volumes.

Our competitors include those offering molecular, antibody and antigen tests. Competitors in the reference lab category include Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (commonly referred to as LabCorp) and Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, along with many hospital laboratories. Our competitors in the point-of-care and/or at-home category, for molecular and/or antigen tests include Abbott Laboratories, bioMérieux SA, Cepheid (a subsidiary of Danaher Corporation), Thermo Fischer Scientific Inc., Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., and QuidelOrtho.

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, regulatory clearance approval and compliance, and sales and distribution than we do. Smaller or early-stage companies developing tests may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies or customer networks. If our competitors (i) develop and commercialize diagnostic products or services that are more accurate, more convenient to use or more cost-effective than our products or services and/or
(ii) obtain FDA or other regulatory clearance or approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain clearance or approval or other marketing authorizations for ours, our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated, especially if our competitors establish a strong market position before we are able to enter a particular market.

Government Contract

National Institutes of Health - Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx)

In July 2020, we were awarded a $25.4 million contract from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for Phase 2 of its RADx initiative (NIH Contract), of which $9.6 million had been received as of December 31, 2022, for the validation, approval, and scale-up of capacity for manufacturing of the Talis One instrument and test cartridges. Due to delays in meeting certain milestones, we received several extensions to the NIH Contract that concomitantly extended the time to perform the remaining milestones and reduced the potential milestone payments. The NIH Contract expired on January 30, 2022, and we did not achieve the final two milestones.

Operations

Our products have been manufactured by several third parties. The instrument assembly is largely manual with some automation in testing. We had various suppliers that provide molded parts and reagents that are assembled by two contract manufacturers for the cartridge. We have made significant investments to scale up cartridge manufacturing including high cavity count molding capability and automation of significant portions of the cartridge assembly process. In addition to restructuring and streamlining our contract manufacturing relationships, we focused on developing more internal expertise in manufacturing and have developed internal pilot manufacturing lines.

Supply chain management

We utilized multiple vendors for our supply chain. Currently, many of the materials, enzymes and reagents used in our systems and cartridges are from single source suppliers.

Supply Agreement with thinXXS Microtechnology AG (thinXXS)

In May 2020, we entered into a supply agreement with thinXXS (thinXXS Agreement), a wholly-owned subsidiary of IDEX Corporation (NYSE:IEX), for the purchase of certain materials, including single-use cartridges for use with the Talis One system and components and subassemblies of such single-use cartridges. In March 2023, we entered into a termination agreement with thinXXS, pursuant to which we (i) terminated the thinXXS Agreement, (ii) received possession and title to automated manufacturing lines and certain related materials, and (iii) entered into a license agreement under which we received a patent license to thinXXS intellectual property that may be incorporated into the Talis One system.

Intellectual property

Our intellectual property strategy is focused on protecting our core technologies, including target-specific amplification reagents, integrated cartridges and components thereof, and related instrumentation and software applications through patents and other intellectual property rights. In addition, we protect our ongoing research and development into the detection of infectious diseases through patents and other intellectual property rights in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, such as Japan, China, the United Kingdom and the European Union (through shared registration or examination agencies such as the European Patent Office or European Intellectual Property Office).

Patents

As of March 1, 2024, we solely own 17 issued U.S. patents, 22 pending U.S. patent applications, 41 issued foreign patents, and 124 pending foreign patent applications. Our patent portfolio generally includes patents and patent applications relating to microfluidic systems, our rapid isothermal amplification method, integrated cartridges and instrument for the Talis One system, as well as components thereof and methods of operating the same. In addition to patents and applications related generally to the Talis One system, our portfolio includes patents and applications drawn to test reagents for specific targets, including CT and NG. Issued U.S. patents in our portfolio of company-owned and in-licensed patents and patent applications (if issued) are expected to expire between 2035 and 2045.

Trademarks

Our trademark portfolio is designed to protect the brands of our current and future products and includes U.S. trademark applications for registration for our company name, Talis, and the product names, Talis One and Sia Dx.

Trade secrets

We also rely on trade secrets, including know-how, unpatented technology and other proprietary information, to strengthen our competitive position. We have determined that certain technologies, such as aspects of our amplification chemistry, some bioinformatics, data processing and analysis techniques, and manufacturing processes are better kept as trade secrets, rather than pursuing patent protection. To prevent disclosure of trade secrets to others, it is our policy to enter into nondisclosure, invention assignment and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to trade secrets, such as our employees, collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, consultants, advisors and other third parties. These agreements also provide that all inventions resulting from work performed for us or relating to our business and conceived or completed during the period of employment or assignment, as applicable, are our exclusive property. In addition, we take other appropriate precautions, such as physical and technological security measures, to guard against misappropriation of our proprietary information by third parties.

In addition to Talis-owned intellectual property, we may also in-license third party intellectual property for use in our products through both exclusive and non-exclusive licensing agreements. Although we have been able to obtain licenses on commercially reasonable terms, there is no guarantee that we may obtain such licenses in the future on reasonable terms or at all.

Government regulation and product approval

Our products under development and our operations are subject to significant government regulation.

Regulation in the United States

In the United States, our products are regulated as medical devices by the FDA and other federal, state, and local regulatory authorities. Numerous laws and regulations govern the processes by which medical devices are brought to market and marketed, including the FDCA and the FDA’s implementing regulations, among others. The FDA regulates the preclinical and clinical testing, approval, manufacture, labeling, distribution, and promotion of medical devices. The FDA enforces these requirements by inspection and market surveillance. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements may result in enforcement action by the FDA, which may include fines, injunctions, civil penalties, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, refusing our request for 510(k) clearance or pre-market authorization (PMA) of new product versions, revocation of 510(k) clearance or PMAs previously granted, and criminal prosecution and penalties.

The FDA classifies all medical devices into one of three classes—Class I, Class II or Class III—depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of manufacturer and regulatory control needed to

ensure its safety and effectiveness. Class I and Class II devices are subject to the FDA’s General Controls, and special controls as deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of Class II devices, including performance standards, post-market surveillance, clinical investigations, patient registries and additional conditions set forth in FDA guidance documents. While most Class I devices are exempt from the 510(k) pre-market notification requirement, manufacturers of most Class II devices are required to submit to the FDA a pre-market notification under Section 510(k) of the FDCA requesting permission to commercially distribute the device. The FDA’s permission to commercially distribute a device subject to a 510(k) pre-market notification is generally known as a 510(k) clearance. Devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risks are placed in Class III, requiring approval of a PMA application. At this time, we have no Class III devices in the pipeline nor plans to add Class III's.

In addition, EUAs and other forms of approval or clearance may be limited for use with tests by authorized laboratories certified under CLIA to perform moderate and high-complexity tests. In order for a test to be used at the point-of-care, the FDA must grant the test waived status under CLIA, which would permit any laboratory with a Certificate of Waiver to perform the test.

The U.S. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) may declare public health emergencies that have a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens. On February 4, 2020, the novel coronavirus was declared a public health emergency, and it was declared that circumstances existed justifying the authorization of emergency use of in vitro diagnostics for detection and/or diagnosis of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19. These EUAs will terminate upon declaration that the public health emergency circumstances have ceased, or the product provided pursuant to EUA has otherwise achieved commercial authorization for the emergency indication for use, such as through 510(k) clearance, de novo process, or PMA approval.

In order to be the subject of an EUA, the FDA Commissioner (under authority delegated by the Secretary of the HHS) must conclude that, based on the totality of scientific evidence available, it is reasonable to believe that the product may be effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing a disease attributable to the agents described above, that its known and potential benefits outweigh its known and potential risks, and that there is no adequate, approved and available alternative. The FDA may revise or revoke an EUA to protect the public health.

510(k) clearance process

To obtain 510(k) clearance, we must submit a pre-market notification to the FDA demonstrating that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to a previously-cleared 510(k) device, a pre-amendment device that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 for which the FDA has not yet called for the submission of a 510(k) or PMA applications, or is a device that has been reclassified from Class III to either Class II or I. In rare cases, Class III devices may be cleared through the 510(k) process. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to twelve months from the date the application is submitted and filed with the FDA but may take significantly longer. Although many 510(k) pre-market notifications are cleared without clinical data, in some cases, the FDA requires significant clinical data to support substantial equivalence. In reviewing a pre-market notification submission, the FDA may request additional information, including clinical data, which may significantly prolong the review process. If the FDA agrees that the device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device currently on the market, it will grant 510(k) clearance to commercially market the device. If the FDA determines that the device is not "substantially equivalent" to a previously cleared device, the device is automatically designated as a Class III device. The device sponsor must then fulfill more rigorous PMA requirements, or can request a risk-based classification determination for the device in accordance with the de novo classification process, which is a route to market for novel medical devices that are low to moderate risk and are not substantially equivalent to a predicate device. Once a de novo application is reviewed and approved, it results in the device having a Class II status and future devices from the company or a competitor may use the company’s de novo-classified device as a 510(k) predicate.

After a device receives 510(k) clearance, any subsequent modification of the device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or could require a PMA. The FDA requires each manufacturer to make this determination initially, but the FDA may review any such decision and may disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination, the FDA may require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA is obtained. Under these circumstances, the FDA may also subject a manufacturer to significant regulatory fines or other penalties.

Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, FDA officials announced forthcoming steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the pre-market notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. The FDA also announced that it intends to finalize guidance to establish a pre-market review pathway for “manufacturers of certain well-understood device types” as an alternative to the 510(k) clearance pathway and that such pre-market review pathway would allow manufacturers to rely on objective safety and performance criteria recognized by the FDA to demonstrate substantial equivalence, obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process.

In May 2019, the FDA solicited public feedback on its plans to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates, including whether the FDA should publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation. More recently, in September 2019, the FDA finalized the aforementioned guidance to describe an optional “safety and performance based” pre-market review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway, by demonstrating that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process.

Pervasive and continuing FDA regulation

After a medical device is placed on the market, numerous FDA regulatory requirements apply, including, but not limited to the following:

The FDA enforces these requirements by inspection and market surveillance. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements may result in enforcement action by the FDA, which may include one or more of the following sanctions:

International Regulation

Sales of medical devices outside the United States are subject to foreign government regulations and international standards compliance, which vary substantially from country to country. In order to market our products in other countries, we must obtain regulatory approvals and comply with extensive safety and quality regulations in other countries. The time required to obtain approval by a foreign country may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA clearance or approval, and the requirements may differ significantly.

Other healthcare laws

Our current and future business activities are subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we conduct our business. These laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, physician sunshine transparency, and healthy information privacy and security laws and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce either the referral of an individual, for an item or service or the purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under federal healthcare programs such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. 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 AKS. 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 AKS has been violated. In addition, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

The federal civil and criminal false claims laws, such as the civil False Claims Act (FCA), prohibit individuals or entities from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, false, fictitious or fraudulent claims for payment or approval by the federal government, and knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. Additionally, the FCA authorizes actions to be brought on behalf of the federal government by a private party having knowledge of the alleged fraud. Because the complaint is initially filed under seal, the action may be pending for some time before the defendant is even aware of the action. If the government intervenes and is ultimately successful in obtaining redress in the matter, or if the plaintiff succeeds in obtaining redress without the government’s involvement, then the plaintiff will receive a percentage of the recovery. The federal government is using the FCA, and the accompanying threat of significant liability, in its investigation and prosecution of life sciences companies throughout the country, for example, in connection with the promotion of products for unapproved uses and other sales and marketing practices. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil FCA. The government has obtained multi-million and multi-billion dollar settlements under the FCA in addition to individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is

expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws.

The civil monetary penalties statute imposes penalties against any person or entity that, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal health program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

The majority of states also have anti-kickback laws which establish similar prohibitions and, in some cases, may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers. HIPAA created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other actions, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, and 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. Like the AKS, 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.

Moreover, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires 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, to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, and applicable manufacturers and applicable group purchasing organizations to report annually to CMS ownership and investment interests held by such physicians and their immediate family members. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act includes in its reporting requirements a broad range of transfers of value including, but not limited to, consulting fees, speaker honoraria, charitable contributions, research payments and grants. Failure to report could subject companies to significant financial penalties. Tracking and reporting the required payments and transfers of value may result in considerable expense and additional resources. Several states currently have similar laws and more states may enact similar legislation, some of which may be broader in scope. For example, certain states require the implementation of compliance programs, compliance with industry ethics codes, implementation of gift bans and spending limits, and/or reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to healthcare professionals.

The shifting commercial compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with different compliance and/or reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions increase the possibility that a healthcare company may violate one or more of the requirements. If our future operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including, without limitation, administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, additional reporting and oversight requirements, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and imprisonment.

Coverage and reimbursement

Sales of our products will depend in large part on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors, including government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, private insurance plans and managed care programs. These third-party payors are increasingly limiting coverage and reducing reimbursement for medical products and services. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls and restrictions on coverage and reimbursement. 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.

Hospitals, clinical laboratories and other healthcare provider customers that may purchase our product candidates, if approved, generally bill various third-party payors to cover all or a portion of the costs and fees associated with diagnostic tests, including the cost of the purchase of our product candidates. If our product candidates are cleared or approved by the FDA as point-of-care tests and deemed CLIA-waived following market authorization, we expect that the majority of our diagnostic tests will be performed in physician offices and other point-of-care settings and billed using existing Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Our healthcare provider customers may not purchase our tests unless third-party payors cover and provide adequate reimbursement for a substantial portion of the price of the tests. If we are not able to obtain coverage and an acceptable level of reimbursement for our tests from third-party payors, there would typically be a greater co-insurance or co-payment requirement from the patient for whom the test is ordered or the patient may be forced to pay the entire cost of the test out-of-pocket, which could dissuade practitioners from ordering our tests and, if ordered, could result in a delay in or decreased likelihood of collecting payment, whether from patients or from third-party payors. Our customers’ access to adequate coverage and reimbursement for our products and/or product candidates by government and private insurance plans is central to the acceptance of our products. We may be unable to sell our products on a profitable basis if third-party payors deny coverage or reduce their current levels of payment, or if our costs of production increase faster than increases in reimbursement levels.

The potential end-users of our Talis One system and diagnostic tests include large elder care chains where vulnerable residents have unmet needs for millions of high sensitivity tests per year; urgent care chains that serve on the front lines of COVID-19 diagnosis, needing millions of rapid tests to triage symptomatic patients; and traditional medical establishments including hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers, cancer treatment and dialysis centers, independent practice associations, accountable care organizations, and public health clinics that need rapid and high-quality testing to best serve their patients.

Hospitals, physicians and other healthcare providers who purchase diagnostic products in the United States generally rely on third-party payors, such as private health insurance plans, Medicare and Medicaid, to reimburse all or part of the cost of the product. Therefore, our market success is highly dependent upon government and commercial third-party payors providing coverage and adequate reimbursement for our test. While we believe our COVID-19 test will qualify for coverage that is currently available for other COVID-19 tests on the market, coverage criteria and reimbursement rates for diagnostic tests are subject to adjustment by payors, and current reimbursement rates could be reduced, or coverage criteria restricted in the future, which could adversely affect the market for our tests.

There has been federal and state legislation and other reform initiatives regarding the coverage and reimbursement for COVID-19 diagnostic testing in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. For example, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) generally requires group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance to cover FDA approved COVID-19 tests and associated diagnostic costs with no cost-sharing, as long as the test is deemed medically appropriate and furnished on or after March 18, 2020 and during the applicable public health emergency period. The FFCRA also permits states to cover testing for the uninsured through Medicaid with federal financing. Additionally, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act expanded the FFCRA to include a broader range of diagnostic tests and services as well as requiring plans and issuers to cover out-of-network COVID-19 test claims at up to the cash price that the provider has posted on a public website.

CMS announced plans in March 2020 to cover the cost of COVID-19 diagnostic testing under the Medicare program and identified the amount at which it would reimburse for such tests, which has been adjusted numerous times. For example, Medicare adjusted its payment methodology effective January 1, 2021, such that it will pay $100 per test only to those laboratories that complete high throughput COVID-19 diagnostic tests within two calendar days of the specimen being collected and will only pay $75 per test to laboratories that take longer than two days to complete such test. This change is indicative of the evolving nature of the coverage and reimbursement of COVID-19 tests. In

addition, there has been federal and state legislation and other reform initiatives regarding the coverage and reimbursement for COVID-19 diagnostic testing in response to the COVID-19 outbreak which continue to evolve. For example, effective January 15, 2022, private health insurance companies and group health plans are required to cover eight free over-the-counter at-home COVID-19 diagnostic tests authorized, cleared, or approved by the FDA per covered individual per month.

Data Privacy

In the ordinary course of our business, we may process personal data and, accordingly, we are, or may become, subject to numerous data privacy and security obligations, including federal, state, local, and foreign laws, regulations, guidance, and industry standards related to data privacy, security, and protection. Such obligations may include, without limitation, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the California Privacy Rights Act of California (CRPA), the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (EU GDPR), the EU GDPR as it forms part of United Kingdom (UK) law by virtue of section 3 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (UK GDPR), and the ePrivacy Directive. In addition, several states within the United States have enacted or proposed data privacy laws, including Virginia, Colorado, Utah and Connecticut.

The CRPA, EU GDPR, and UK GDPR are examples of the increasingly stringent and evolving regulatory frameworks related to personal data processing may increase our compliance obligations and exposure for any noncompliance. For example, the CPRA, effective January 1, 2023, gives, among other things, California residents the ability to limit use of certain sensitive personal data, establishes restrictions on personal data retention, expands the types of data breaches that are subject to a consumer private right of action, and establishes a new California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the new law. In addition, U.S. federal and state consumer protection laws may require us to publish statements that accurately and fairly describe how we handle personal data and choices individuals may have about the way we handle their personal data.

European data privacy and security laws (including the EU GDPR and UK GDPR) impose significant and complex compliance obligations on entities that are subject to those laws. For example, the EU GDPR applies to any company established in the European Economic Area (EEA) and to companies established outside the EEA that process personal data in connection with the offering of goods or services to data subjects in the EEA or the monitoring of the behavior of data subjects in the EEA. These obligations may include limiting personal data processing to only what is necessary for specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes; requiring a legal basis for personal data processing; requiring the appointment of a data protection officer in certain circumstances; increasing transparency obligations to data subjects; requiring data protection impact assessments in certain circumstances; limiting the collection and retention of personal data; increasing rights for data subjects; formalizing a heightened and codified standard of data subject consents; requiring the implementation and maintenance of technical and organizational safeguards for personal data; mandating notice of certain personal data breaches to the relevant supervisory authority(ies) and affected individuals; and mandating the appointment of representatives in the UK and/or the EU in certain circumstances.

See the section titled “Risk Factors – Risks related to regulatory matters” for additional information about the laws and regulations to which we are or may become subject and about the risks to our business associated with such laws and regulations.

Human capital resources

As of December 31, 2023, we had a total of 99 full-time employees. Our employees are located in Chicago, Illinois and other locations within the United States. None of our employees are represented by any collective bargaining agreements. We believe that we maintain good relations with our employees. Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, maintaining adequate staffing to support the completion of a strategic transaction or the voluntary dissolution and liquidation of the Company.

Available Information

Our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to reports filed pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act), are filed with the SEC. Such reports and other information filed by us with the SEC are

available free of charge on our website at http://investors.talisbio.com when such reports are available on the SEC’s website. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov. The information contained on the websites referenced in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is not incorporated by reference into this filing. Further, our references to website URLs are intended to be inactive textual references only.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Careful consideration should be given to the following risk factors, together with the other information contained in this Annual Report, including our financial statements and the related notes. If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. This Annual Report also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including the risks described below. See “Special note regarding forward-looking statements.”

Risks related to our business and strategy

We may not be successful in completing a strategic transaction within a reasonable timeframe, on attractive terms or at all. If we are unable to complete a strategic transaction, then we may cease all operations and seek stockholder approval to voluntarily dissolve and liquidate the Company.

Since November 2023, we have ceased substantially all of our research and development and manufacturing activities while our Board of Directors considers strategic alternatives. We may be unable to complete a strategic transaction within a reasonable timeframe, on attractive terms or at all, and market conditions, including the historical volatility in our common stock will likely limit our ability to raise capital on favorable terms, or at all, and the terms of any public or private offerings of debt or equity securities likely would be significantly dilutive to existing stockholders. There is no set timetable for the overall process given the anticipated timelines for different strategic alternatives may vary, and there can be no assurance that this process will result in us pursuing a transaction or that any transaction, if pursued, will be completed on attractive terms or at all. Given these challenges, if we are unable to complete a strategic transaction, then we may cease all operations and seek stockholder approval to voluntarily dissolve and liquidate the Company. The completion of a strategic transaction or the voluntary dissolution and liquidation of the Company each would have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy and our results of operations and financial condition.

Commercialization of the Talis One system will require pursuing marketing authorization through the FDA’s standard 510(k) clearance process. We may not be able to obtain marketing authorization for these tests, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our historical research and development efforts focused on the development of the Talis One system for FDA clearance or other marketing authorization as a point-of-care testing system for infectious diseases pursuant to 510(k) submissions to the FDA.

Development of the data necessary to obtain marketing authorization of a diagnostic test is time-consuming and carries with it the risk of not yielding the desired results. The performance achieved in initial studies may not be repeated in later studies that may be required to obtain marketing authorizations. In addition, limited results from earlier-stage verification studies may not predict results from studies conducted to obtain marketing authorization. Unfavorable results from ongoing preclinical and clinical studies could result in delays, modifications or abandonment of ongoing analytical or future clinical studies, or abandonment of a product development program, or may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approvals or clearances or commercialization of our products, any of which may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, results that would be sufficient for regulatory approval or clearance may not demonstrate strong performance characteristics, limiting the market demand for the system, which would adversely affect our business. See “—Risks related to regulatory matters.

We have no experience with the entire commercialization process for the Talis One system. We have gained some experience with the initial stages of the process, including demand generation, evaluations, and quoting, and we have recent commercialization experience selling and distributing the Antigen Tests as an authorized distributor. As a result, we have limited experience forecasting future financial performance for our products and our actual results may fall below our financial guidance or other projections, or the expectations of analysts or investors, which could cause the price of our common stock to decline.

Future commercialization of the Talis One system in the United States will require pursuing 510(k) clearance or another available approval path. The launch of new products is inherently uncertain and requires the completion of commercialization activities that are complex, costly, time-intensive and uncertain, and require us to accurately anticipate patients’, providers’ and, if applicable, payors’ attitudes and needs, the future competitive landscape, and emerging technology and industry trends. This process is conducted in various stages, and each stage presents the risk that we will not achieve our goals on a timely basis, or at all.

Commercial success of the Talis One system depends, in part, on the acceptance of our diagnostic tests and services as being safe, accurate, and relatively simple for medical personnel to learn and use, clinically flexible, operationally versatile and, with respect to providers and payors, cost effective. We cannot predict how quickly, if at all, payors, providers, clinics and patients will accept future diagnostic tests and services or, if accepted, how frequently they will be used. These constituents must believe that our diagnostic tests offer benefits over other available alternatives. The degree of market acceptance of the Talis One system depends on a number of factors, including:

Additionally, even if our diagnostic tests achieve widespread market acceptance, they may not maintain that market acceptance over time if competing diagnostic tests or technologies, which are more cost effective or are received more favorably, are introduced. Failure to achieve or maintain market acceptance and/or market share would limit our ability to generate revenue and would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Also, there may be research and development, regulatory, marketing and other difficulties that could delay or prevent the introduction of enhanced or new products and result in increased costs and the diversion of management’s attention and resources from other business matters. For example, any molecular diagnostic tests that we may develop or further enhance may not prove to be clinically effective, or may not meet our desired target product profile or be offered at acceptable cost and with the sensitivity, specificity and other test performance metrics necessary to address the relevant clinical need or commercial opportunity; our molecular diagnostic test performance in commercial settings may be inconsistent with our validation or other clinical data; we may not be successful in achieving market awareness and demand, whether through our own sales and marketing operations or entering into collaborative arrangements; the collaborative arrangements we enter into may not be successful or we may not be able to maintain those that are successful; healthcare providers may not use any tests that we may enhance or develop; or we may otherwise have to abandon a product, service ore development program in which we have invested substantial resources.

An important factor in our ability to commercialize our products is collecting data that supports the value proposition of our products, and in particular that our tests are just as accurate and reliable as central lab testing. The

data collected from any studies we complete may not be favorable or consistent with our existing data or may not be statistically significant or compelling to the medical community or to third-party payors seeking such data for purposes of determining coverage for our products. Any of the foregoing could have a negative impact on our ability to commercialize our future products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

It may not be possible to validate manufacturing for the Talis One instrument and cartridges at scale, which may have a material adverse effect on any efforts to commercialize our products.

In order to commercialize our products, if approved, it is necessary to manufacture the Talis One instrument and test cartridges in large quantities. We, or our manufacturing partners, may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our products in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. If we, or our manufacturing partners, are unable to successfully scale-up the manufacture of our products in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of our women's health and STI products may be delayed or become infeasible, and marketing approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business.

If our products do not perform as expected, including due to errors, defects or reliability issues, our reputation and market acceptance of our products could be harmed, and our operating results, reputation and business will suffer.

Our success depends on physician and customer confidence that we can provide reliable and highly accurate diagnostic tests and enable better patient care. We believe that physicians and other healthcare providers are likely to be particularly sensitive to defects, errors or reliability issues in our products, including if our products fail to accurately diagnose infections with high accuracy from patient samples, and there can be no guarantee that our products will meet their expectations. There is no guarantee that the accuracy and reproducibility we have demonstrated to date will continue as our product deliveries increase and our product portfolio expands.

Our products use a number of complex and sophisticated biochemical and bioinformatics processes, many of which are highly sensitive to external factors. For example, the Talis One system, comprised of a compact instrument, universal single-use test cartridges and software, including a central cloud database, may contain undetected errors or defects when first introduced or as new versions are released. Our diagnostic tests may contain errors or defects or be subject to reliability issues, and while we have made efforts to test them extensively, we cannot assure that our current diagnostic tests, or those developed in the future, will not have performance problems. An operational, technological or other failure in one of these complex processes or fluctuations in external variables may result in sensitivity or specificity rates that are lower than we anticipate, thus affecting the accuracy of a diagnostic result, or result in longer than expected turnaround times or they may cause our products to malfunction. Due to the complexity of our instrument and cartridge, it may be difficult or impossible to identify the reason for such performance. Performance issues would increase our costs in the near-term and accordingly adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, failure to maintain high-quality customer support, or a market perception that we do not maintain high-quality customer support, could adversely affect our reputation and our ability to sell our Talis One system. We may also be subject to warranty claims or breach of contract for damages related to errors, defects or reliability issues in our products.

Further, our products are designed to be used at the customer’s location by untrained personnel. We cannot provide assurance that our products will be approved for use by untrained personnel or that our customers will always use our products in the manner in which we intend. Any intentional or unintentional misuse of our products by our customers could lead to substantial civil and criminal monetary and non-monetary penalties and could cause us to incur significant legal and investigatory fees.

If our products do not perform, or are perceived to not have performed, as expected or favorably in comparison to competitive products, our operating results, reputation, and business will suffer, and we may also be subject to legal claims arising from product limitations, errors, or inaccuracies.

Additionally, many of the pathogens for which we are developing tests may mutate over time. Such mutations may negatively affect the accuracy of our tests or even make our tests obsolete if our tests are unable to detect future variants. The failure of our products to perform as expected could significantly impair our operating results and our reputation, including if we become subject to legal claims arising from any defects or errors in our products or test results.

Operational, technical and other difficulties adversely affecting test performance may harm our reputation, impact the commercial attractiveness of our products, increase our costs or divert our resources, including management’s

time and attention, from other projects and priorities. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our products may be subject to recalls in the future. A recall of products, either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA or another governmental authority, or the discovery of serious safety issues with our products, could have a significant adverse impact on us.

The FDA has the authority to require the recall of commercialized products that are subject to FDA regulation. Manufacturers may, also, under their own initiative, recall a product or service if any deficiency is found. For reportable corrections and removals, companies are required to make additional periodic submissions to the FDA after initiating the recall, and often engage with the FDA on their recall strategy prior to initiating the recall. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us or a distributor could occur as a result of an unacceptable health risk, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects, or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any of our commercialized products would divert managerial and financial resources and adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and reputation. A recall of Talis One instruments could be required for any number of problems. Given the number of components, determining the cause of the malfunction may be particularly challenging and costly. In addition, any recall of Talis One instruments would decrease the market for our authorized tests given the decreased availability of such instruments. We may also be subject to liability claims, be required to bear other costs or take other actions that may negatively impact our future sales and our ability to generate profits. Companies are also required to maintain certain records of corrections and removals, even if these do not require reporting to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary recalls involving our commercialized products. The FDA or other agency could take enforcement action for failing to report the recalls when they were conducted. In addition, if we are required to make changes to our products to redress the deficiencies leading to the recall, we may be required to seek marketing authorization for the modified device prior to commercializing it. Any recall announcement by us or a governmental authority, or any changes that we make to our products as a result of such recall, could harm our reputation with customers and negatively affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

If we initiate a recall, including a correction or removal, for one of our commercialized products, if and when approved, issue a safety alert, or undertake a field action or recall to reduce a health risk, this could lead to increased scrutiny by the FDA, other governmental and regulatory enforcement bodies, and our customers regarding the quality and safety of our products, and to negative publicity, including FDA alerts, press releases, or administrative or judicial actions. Furthermore, the submission of these reports could be used against us by competitors and cause customers to delay purchase decisions or cancel orders, which would harm our reputation.

The diagnostic testing industry is subject to rapid change, which could make our current or future products obsolete.

Our industry is characterized by rapid changes, including technological and scientific breakthroughs, frequent new product introductions and enhancements and evolving industry standards, all of which could make our current products and the other products we are developing obsolete. Concerns about obsolescence could make it particularly difficult to successfully deploy our Talis One system to a sufficiently broad customer base to enable us to profitably sell our authorized tests in the future. Our future success will depend on our ability to keep pace with the evolving needs of customers on a timely and cost-effective basis and to pursue new market opportunities that develop as a result of scientific and technological advances. We must continuously enhance our Talis One system and develop new tests to keep pace with evolving standards of care. If we do not update our products to reflect new scientific knowledge our products could become obsolete and sales of our current products and any new products we develop could decline or fail to grow as expected.

We have eliminated our sales and customer support capabilities which could impact our ability to commercialize our future products, if and when they are approved, and we may not be able to generate any revenue.

In 2022, we implemented two reductions in force of approximately 40% of our employees which has impacted our sales, service and support personnel, and thus our ability to market, sell and support future products, if any. We may not be successful in re-establishing our commercial organization, if and when we have approved products in the future, and we may not be able to generate any revenue.

Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our future products on our own include:

If our future products are not competitive in their intended markets, we may be unable to generate revenues or achieve profitability.

Our industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. Due to the significant interest and growth in diagnostics, we expect ongoing intense competition.

We anticipate facing competition primarily from centralized laboratories and diagnostic companies offering both point-of-care and at-home solutions. Competitors include those offering molecular, antibody and antigen tests. Competitors in the reference lab category include Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (commonly referred to as LabCorp) and Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, along with many hospital laboratories. Our competitors in the point-of-care and/or at-home category, for molecular and/or antigen tests include Abbott Laboratories, bioMérieux SA, Cepheid (a subsidiary of Danaher Corporation), Thermo Fischer Scientific Inc., Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., and QuidelOrtho. There are also smaller or earlier-stage companies developing tests that may also prove to be significant competitors in the women’s health and/or sexual health markets. Many of our potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, regulatory clearance approval and compliance, and sales and distribution than we do. Mergers and acquisitions involving diagnostics companies may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies or customer networks. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize diagnostic products or services that are more accurate, more convenient to use or more cost-effective than our products or services. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory clearance or approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain clearance or approval or other marketing authorizations for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter a particular market.

Further, some of our competitors’ products are sold at prices that are lower than our anticipated pricing, which could cause sales of our products to decline or force us to reduce our prices, which would harm our revenues, operating income or market share. If we are unable to compete successfully, we may be unable to increase or sustain our revenue or achieve profitability.

To remain competitive, we must continually research and develop improvements to our products. However, we may not be able to develop and commercialize improvements to our products in a timely manner. Our competitors may develop and commercialize competing or alternative products and improvements faster than we are able to do so, which would negatively affect our ability to increase or sustain our revenue or achieve profitability.

We have estimated the sizes of the markets for our current and future products, and these markets may be smaller than we estimate.

Our estimates of the annual addressable markets for our women's health and STI tests under development are based on a number of internal and third-party estimates as well as the assumed rates at which such products will be reimbursed, or the assumed prices at which we can sell our products for markets that have not been established. While we believe our assumptions and the data underlying our estimates are reasonable, these assumptions and estimates may not be correct and the conditions supporting our assumptions or estimates may change at any time, including as a result of factors outside our control, thereby reducing the predictive accuracy of these underlying factors. The market and competitive landscape are continuously changing. Any number of factors that are outside of our control could make our estimates invalid.

There can be no assurance that demand for our women's health and STI tests will continue to exist in the future after we commercialize. If the actual number of patients who would benefit from our products under development, the

price at which we can sell future products or the annual addressable market for our products is smaller than we have estimated, it may impair our sales growth and have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Unfavorable local and global economic conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in both the local and global economy and financial markets, particularly as the United States and other countries balance concerns around debt, inflation, growth and budget allocations in their policy initiatives. There can be no assurance that global economic conditions and financial markets will not worsen and that we will not experience any adverse effects that may be material to our cash flows, results of operations, financial position or our ability to access capital, such as the adverse effects resulting from a prolonged shutdown in government operations both in the United States and internationally. Our business is also affected by local economic environments, including inflation, recession, financial liquidity and currency volatility or devaluation. Political changes, including war or other conflicts, some of which may be disruptive, could interfere with our supply chain, our customers and all of our activities in a particular location. A severe or prolonged global economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our manufacturers and suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption. In addition, geopolitical, economic and military conditions around the world may directly affect our business. Any hostilities involving any of the countries in which we or our third-party suppliers operate, including terrorist activities, political instability or violence in the region or the interruption or curtailment of trade or transport between such country and its trading partners could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

We are highly dependent on our senior management team and key personnel, and we may encounter difficulties in managing our operations, completing a strategic transaction or keeping current and timely with our Exchange Act reporting obligations with our reduced staffing and limited resources.

Due to our limited resources, we may not be able to effectively manage our operations, complete any possible strategic transaction or remain current and timely with our Exchange Act reporting obligations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, errors in disclosure, loss of additional business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. The loss of members of our senior management, research and development, science and engineering, manufacturing and marketing teams could delay our completion of any possible strategic transaction or the achievement of our research, product development and commercialization objectives and harm our business.

We also do not maintain fixed-term employment contracts or key man life insurance with any of our employees.

If we were sued for product liability or professional liability, we could face substantial liabilities that exceed our resources.

The marketing, sale, and use of our products could lead to the filing of product liability claims were someone to allege that our products identified inaccurate or incomplete information regarding their infections, or otherwise failed to perform as designed. We may also be subject to liability for errors in, a misunderstanding of, or inappropriate reliance upon the information we provide in the ordinary course of our business activities. A product liability or professional liability claim could result in substantial damages and be costly and time-consuming for us to defend.

We maintain product liability and professional liability insurance, but this insurance may not fully protect us from the financial impact of defending against product liability or professional liability claims. Any product liability or professional liability claim brought against us, with or without merit, could increase our insurance rates or prevent us from securing insurance coverage in the future. Additionally, any product liability lawsuit could damage our reputation, which could impact our results of operations.

We depend on our information technology and telecommunications systems, and those of our third-party service providers, contractors and consultants, and any failure of these systems could harm our business.

We depend on our information technology and telecommunications systems and those of our third-party service providers, contractors and consultants for significant elements of our operations. We have installed and are expanding a number of enterprise software systems that affect a broad range of business processes and functional areas, including, for example, systems handling human resources, financial controls and reporting, contract management, and other infrastructure operations. These information technology and telecommunications systems support a variety of functions. In addition, our third-party service providers depend upon technology and telecommunications systems provided by outside vendors.

Despite the implementation of preventative and detective security controls, such information technology and telecommunications systems are vulnerable to damage or interruption from a variety of sources, including telecommunications or network failures or interruptions, system malfunction, natural disasters, malicious human acts, terrorism and war. Failures or significant downtime of our information technology or telecommunications systems, or those used by our third-party service providers, contractors or consultants could prevent us from conducting our comprehensive genomic analyses, preparing and providing reports and data to clinicians, handling customer inquiries, conducting research and development activities, and managing the administrative aspects of our business.

If the information technology systems of our third-party service providers and other contractors and consultants become subject to disruptions, we may have insufficient recourse against such third parties and we may have to expend significant resources to mitigate the impact of such an event, and to develop and implement protections to help prevent future events of this nature from occurring. Any disruption or loss of information technology or telecommunications systems on which critical aspects of our operations depend could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If our information technology systems or data, or those of third parties upon which we rely, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences resulting from such compromise, including but not limited to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse consequences.

In the ordinary course of our business, we and our third-party service providers will collect, store, use, transmit, disclose, or otherwise process proprietary, confidential, and sensitive data, including personal data (which includes intellectual property and trade secrets). In addition, upon commercialization, we will offer online customer-facing portals accessible through public web portals, through which our customers may process protected health information (PHI). It is critical that we process PHI and other sensitive data in a secure manner to maintain the confidentiality, availability and integrity of such confidential information. We manage and maintain our applications and data utilizing a combination of on-site systems, managed data center systems, and cloud-based data center systems. These applications and related data encompass a wide variety of business-critical information including research and development information, commercial information, and business and financial information. We rely upon third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to process confidential information and personal data in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, third-party providers of cloud-based infrastructure, encryption and authentication technology, employee email and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ cybersecurity practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. We may share or receive sensitive data with or from third parties.

Cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, and online and offline fraud and other similar activities that threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our sensitive information and information technology systems, and those of the third parties upon which we rely. These threats are prevalent and continue to increase, are becoming increasingly difficult to detect and come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, "hacktivists," organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties upon which we rely, may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations and the supply chain.

We and the third parties upon which we rely may be subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks (such as credential stuffing), personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. Ransomware attacks, including those perpetrated by organized criminal threat actors, nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors, are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. Similarly, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties and infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised or that they do not contain exploitable defects or bugs that could result in a breach of or disruption to our information technology systems or the third-party information technology systems that support us and our services. Remote work has become more common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees utilize network connections, computers and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit and in public locations. Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies.

Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption that could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to data or could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to provide our services. If such an event were to occur, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs and our business operations. These threats pose a risk to the security of our systems, the confidentiality and the availability and integrity of our data, and these risks apply both to us, and to third parties on whose systems we rely for the conduct of our business.

We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities (including our clinical trial activities) in an effort to protect against security incidents. Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures, industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and data. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We have previously been, and may in the future become, the target of cyber-attacks by third parties seeking unauthorized access to our or our customers’ data or to disrupt our operations or ability to provide our services. For example, we have been subject to phishing incidents, and we may experience additional incidents in the future.

We may be unable to detect vulnerabilities in our information technology systems because such threats and techniques change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. Despite our efforts to identify and remediate vulnerabilities, if any, in our information technology systems, our efforts may not be successful. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities.

Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosures or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences. These consequences may include: government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing data (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary expenditures; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may cause delays in the development of our product candidates, cause customers to stop using our products or services, deter new customers from using our products or services, and negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.

Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our

data privacy and security obligations. We cannot be sure that our insurance coverage will be adequate or sufficient of protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices, that such coverage will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or that such coverage will pay future claims. Our risks are likely to increase as we continue to expand our business, grow our customer base, and process, store, and transmit increasingly large amounts of proprietary and sensitive data.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by power outages, earthquakes, fires, health pandemics or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our facilities are located in areas which have experienced severe earthquakes and fires and are at risk for rolling or prolonged power outages. If these earthquakes, fires, other natural disasters, power outages, health pandemics or epidemics, terrorism and similar unforeseen events beyond our control, including for example the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our facilities, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time and/or could result in the loss of commercial inventory or inventory and supplies required for our clinical trials. We do not have a disaster recovery or business continuity plan in place and may incur substantial expenses as a result of the absence or limited nature of our internal or third-party service provider disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are operating from single sites, increasing their vulnerability to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our clinical trials, our development plans and business.

International expansion of our business exposes us to business, regulatory, political, operational, financial and economic risks associated with doing business outside the United States.

Because we intend to market our products outside the United States, if cleared, authorized or approved, our business will be subject to risks associated with doing business outside the United States, including an increase in our expenses and diversion of our management’s attention from the development of future products. Accordingly, our business and financial results in the future could be adversely affected due to a variety of factors, including:

Any of these factors could significantly harm our future international expansion and operations and, consequently, our revenue and results of operations.

We may not have adequate insurance coverage.

We may not have adequate insurance coverage. The successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceeds our available insurance coverage, or results in changes to our insurance policies (including premium increases or the imposition of large deductible or co-insurance requirements), could have an adverse effect on our business. In addition, we cannot be sure that our existing insurance coverage and coverage for errors and omissions will continue to be available on acceptable terms or that our insurers will not deny coverage as to any future claim.

Performance issues, service interruptions or price increases by our shipping carriers and warehousing providers could adversely affect our business and harm our reputation and ability to provide our services on a timely basis.

Expedited, reliable shipping and delivery services and secure warehousing are essential to our operations. When we commercialize our products, we intend to rely heavily on providers of transport services for reliable and secure point-to-point transport of our diagnostic tests to our customers and for tracking of these shipments and require warehousing for our diagnostic tests, sample collection kits and supplies. Should a carrier encounter delivery performance issues such as loss, damage or destruction of any systems, it would be costly to replace such systems in a timely manner and such occurrences may damage our reputation and lead to decreased demand for our diagnostic tests and increased cost and expense to our business. In addition, we have and may continue to experience higher costs for transportation and warehousing and significant inflation that could adversely affect our operating margins and results of operations, if these costs continue to rise after we commercialize our products. Similarly, strikes, severe weather, natural disasters, civil unrest and disturbances or other service interruptions affecting delivery or warehousing services we use would adversely affect our ability to process orders for our diagnostic tests on a timely basis.

We have entered into licenses, collaborations and strategic alliances, and may enter into additional arrangements like these in the future, and we may not realize the anticipated benefits of such arrangements.

The development and potential commercialization of products will require substantial additional capital to fund expenses. We may form or seek further strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations, or enter into additional licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to any products that we may develop and commercialize, including in territories outside the United States. These transactions can entail numerous operational and financial risks, including exposure to unknown liabilities, disruption of our business and diversion of our management’s time and attention in order to manage a collaboration or develop acquired technologies, incurrence of substantial debt or dilutive issuances of equity securities to pay transaction consideration or costs, higher than expected collaboration, acquisition or integration costs, write-downs of assets or goodwill or impairment charges, increased amortization expenses, difficulty and cost in facilitating the collaboration or combining the operations and personnel of any acquired business, impairment of relationships with key suppliers, manufacturers or customers of any acquired business due to changes in management and ownership and the inability to retain key employees of any acquired business. As a result, if we enter into acquisition or in-license agreements or strategic partnerships, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture, or if there are materially adverse impacts on our or the counterparty’s operations which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business. We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction or such other benefits that led us to enter into the arrangement.

Additionally, we sometimes collaborate with academic institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property or to maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of such program and our business and financial condition could suffer. Even if we are successful in attaining a license, we may abandon development of a program utilizing licensed technology which may adversely affect our business relationships with our licensors or disrupt our business and financial position.

Further, rights to certain of the components and technology incorporated into our products are, and in the future, may be held by others and we may be unable to in-license any rights to components, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, which would harm our business. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, or if we lose access to components or technologies controlled by others, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. Any such redevelopment or any delays in entering into new collaborations or strategic partnership agreements related to our technologies could delay the development and commercialization of our products in certain geographies, which could harm our business prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

See the risk factor titled “We depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties and we are currently party to several in-license agreements under which we acquired rights to use, develop, manufacture and/or commercialize certain of our system components. If we breach our obligations under these agreements or if any of these agreements is terminated, or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we may be required to pay damages, lose our rights to such intellectual property and technology, or both, which would harm our business.” for additional risks related to these licenses, collaborations and strategic alliances.

We may acquire other businesses or engage in other strategic transaction discussions with third parties, each of which could require significant management attention, disrupt our business, dilute stockholder value and adversely affect our results of operations.

We may in the future make additional acquisitions or investments in companies, diagnostic tests or technologies that we believe either fit within our business model and can address the needs of our customers and potential customers or will otherwise provide strategic benefits to us. In the future, we may not be able to acquire and integrate other companies, diagnostic tests or technologies in a successful manner. We may not be able to find suitable acquisition candidates, and we may not be able to complete such acquisitions on favorable terms, if at all. In addition, the pursuit of potential acquisitions may divert the attention of management and cause us to incur additional expenses in identifying, investigating and pursuing suitable acquisitions, whether or not they are consummated. If we do complete acquisitions, we may not ultimately strengthen our competitive position or achieve our goals, including increases in revenue, and any acquisitions we complete could be viewed negatively by our customers, investors and industry analysts. Additionally, we may engage with third parties, including potential acquirers, in discussions regarding strategic transactions. The time required to engage with any such third parties could require significant attention from management, disrupt the ordinary functioning of our business and adversely affect our operating results.

Future acquisitions may reduce our cash available for operations and other uses and could result in amortization expense related to identifiable assets acquired. We may have to pay cash, incur debt or issue equity securities to pay for any such acquisition, each of which could adversely affect our financial condition or the value of our common stock. The sale or issuance of equity to finance any such acquisitions would result in dilution to our stockholders. The incurrence of indebtedness to finance any such acquisition would result in fixed obligations and could also include covenants or other restrictions that could impede our ability to manage our operations. In addition, our future results of operations may be adversely affected by the dilutive effect of an acquisition, performance earn-outs or contingent bonuses associated with an acquisition. Furthermore, acquisitions may require large, onetime charges and can result in increased debt or contingent liabilities, adverse tax consequences, additional stock-based compensation expenses and the recording and subsequent amortization of amounts related to certain purchased intangible assets, any of which items could negatively affect our future results of operations. We may also incur goodwill impairment charges in the future if we do not realize the expected value of any such acquisitions.

Also, the anticipated benefit of any strategic alliance, joint venture or acquisition may not materialize. Additionally, future acquisitions or dispositions could result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities or amortization expenses or write-offs of goodwill, any of which could harm our financial condition. We cannot predict the number, timing or size of future joint ventures or acquisitions, or the effect that any such transactions might have on our operating results.

Risks related to regulatory matters

We must obtain marketing authorizations for our products for point-of-care clinical diagnostic use before they can be marketed. Any such regulatory process would be expensive, time-consuming and uncertain both in timing and in outcome. If we fail to obtain or maintain necessary marketing authorizations, or if such authorizations for future products are delayed or not issued, it will negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our products will be subject to regulation by the FDA as medical devices, including requirements for regulatory clearance or approval of such products before they can be marketed. Accordingly, marketing authorization is required in order to sell our future products in a manner consistent with FDA laws and regulations. Such processes are expensive, time-consuming and uncertain; our efforts may never result in any marketing authorization; and failure to obtain or comply with such marketing authorizations could have a material adverse effect on the ability to commercialize our products.

The FDA or other regulators can delay, limit, or deny clearance, approval, or other form of marketing authorization of a device for many reasons, including:

The regulations to which we are subject are complex and have tended to become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to carry on or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales. The FDA enforces these regulatory requirements through, among other means, periodic unannounced inspections. We do not know whether we will be found compliant in connection with any future regulatory inspections. Moreover, the FDA and state authorities have broad enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by any such agency, which may include any of the following sanctions:

If any of these events were to occur, it would negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, a CLIA-waived designation by the FDA is required for our products to be used at the point-of-care, and outside of the clinical laboratory setting. Laboratory tests regulated under CLIA are categorized by the FDA as waived, moderate complexity or high complexity based on set criteria. Tests that are waived by regulation, or cleared, approved, or otherwise authorized by the FDA for home use or a point-of-care test, are deemed waived following marketing authorization. Otherwise, a manufacturer of a test categorized as moderate complexity may request categorization of the test as waived through a CLIA Waiver by Application submission to the FDA. The manufacturer must provide evidence to the FDA that a test meets the CLIA statutory criteria for waiver, including, among other things, that the test employs methodologies that are so simple and accurate as to render the likelihood of erroneous results by the user negligible. When a test is categorized as waived, it may be performed by laboratories with a Certificate of Waiver, which is issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal agency responsible for the oversight of clinical laboratories, which includes issuing waiver certificates. If we fail to obtain, or experience significant delays in obtaining, a waiver approval by the FDA for our tests, our tests will only be able to be performed by CLIA certified and state licensed laboratories, which may limit our commercial success and have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or operations.

We may never obtain authorization to market our tests in any foreign country for any of our products and, even if we do, we may never be able to commercialize them in any other jurisdiction, which would limit our ability to realize their full market potential.

In order to eventually market any of our products in any particular foreign jurisdiction, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis regarding quality, safety, performance and efficacy. In addition, clinical trials or clinical investigations conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory clearance, authorization or approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory clearance, authorization or approval in any other country. For example, the performance characteristics of our products may need to be validated separately in specific ethnic and genetic populations. Marketing authorization processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods.

Seeking foreign regulatory clearance, authorization or approval could result in difficulties and costs for us and our collaborators and require additional preclinical studies, clinical trials or clinical investigations which could be costly and time-consuming. Regulatory requirements and ethical approval obligations can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. The foreign regulatory clearance, authorization or approval process involves all of the risks and uncertainties associated with FDA clearance, authorization or approval. We have no experience in obtaining regulatory clearance, authorization or approval in international markets. If we or our collaborators fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required regulatory clearances, authorizations or approvals in international markets, or if those approvals are delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be unrealized.

The commercial success of the Talis One system could be compromised if our customers do not receive coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products, if and when approved.

The potential end-users of our women's health and STI tests include hospitals, physician practices, urgent care centers, public health and retail clinics that need rapid and high-quality testing to best serve their patients. If these end-users do not receive adequate reimbursement for the cost of our products from their patients’ healthcare insurers or payors, the use of our products could be negatively impacted. Furthermore, the net sales of our products could also be adversely affected by changes in reimbursement policies of government or private healthcare payors.

Due to the overall escalating cost of medical products and services, especially in light of the COVID-19 outbreak and its straining of healthcare systems across the globe, there is increased pressure on the healthcare industry, both foreign and domestic, to reduce the cost of products and services. Given the efforts to control and reduce healthcare costs in the United States, available levels of reimbursement may change for our products. Third-party reimbursement and coverage may not be available or adequate in either the United States or international markets, current reimbursement amounts may be decreased in the future and future legislation, and regulation or

reimbursement policies of third-party payors, may reduce the demand for our products or our ability to sell our products on a profitable basis.

In the United States, we expect that our customers will use standard industry billing codes, known as CPT codes, to bill for our tests. If these codes were to change, there is a risk of an error being made in the claim adjudication process. Such errors can occur with claims submission, third-party transmission or in the processing of the claim by the payor. Claim adjudication errors may result in a delay in payment processing or a reduction in the amount of the payment received, either of which may materially impact the demand for our testing products. If we introduce new testing products, we may need to apply for new codes to describe our tests, which may not be approved or if approved, may not have adequate reimbursement rates, any of which could result in reduced demand for our tests or additional pricing pressures.

Hospitals, physicians and other healthcare providers who purchase diagnostic products in the United States generally rely on third-party payors, such as private health insurance plans, Medicare and Medicaid, to reimburse all or part of the cost of the product. Therefore, our market success is highly dependent upon government and commercial third-party payors providing coverage and adequate reimbursement for our test. While we believe our women's health and STI tests will qualify for coverage that is currently available for other women's health and STI tests on the market, coverage criteria and reimbursement rates for diagnostic tests are subject to adjustment by payors, and current reimbursement rates could be reduced, or coverage criteria restricted in the future, which could adversely affect the market for our tests. In addition, the availability of other forms of testing in the future, such as at-home tests, could impact the reimbursement rate and market acceptance for our women's health and STI tests.

We also cannot predict whether future healthcare initiatives will be implemented at the federal or state level or in countries outside of the United States in which we may do business in the future, or the effect any future legislation or regulation will have on us. Although we cannot predict the full effect of recent legislative changes, such changes individually or in the aggregate may result in decreased profits to us and/or lower reimbursement by payors for our tests, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the coverage and reimbursement market is ever changing and we are not in control of how our competitors’ coverage and pricing strategies are established. Some of our competitors have widespread brand recognition and substantially greater financial and technical resources and development, production and marketing capabilities than we do. Others may develop lower-priced, less complex tests that payors and physicians could view as functionally equivalent to our products, which could force us to lower the list price of our tests and impact our operating margins and our ability to achieve and maintain profitability. In addition, technological innovations that result in the creation of enhanced diagnostic tools that are more effective than ours may enable other hospitals, physicians or medical providers to provide specialized diagnostic tests similar to ours in a more patient-friendly, efficient or cost-effective manner than is currently possible. If we cannot compete successfully against current or future competitors, we may be unable to increase or create market acceptance and sales of our products, which could prevent us from increasing or sustaining our revenue or achieving or sustaining profitability.

Clinical trials will be required to support future product submissions to the FDA. The clinical trials that may be required for our products are expensive and time-consuming, their outcome is uncertain, and if our clinical trials do not meet the stated endpoints in their evaluations, or if we experience significant delays in any of these tests or trials, our ability to commercialize our products and our financial position will be impaired.

Clinical development is a long, expensive and uncertain process with several clinical trials involved, any of which is subject to significant delays. Due to known or unknown circumstances beyond our control, it may take us several years to complete our testing, and failure can occur at any stage of testing. Delays associated with products for which we are directly conducting preclinical or clinical trials may cause us to incur additional operating expenses.

Moreover, the results of early clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results, and any product we advance into clinical trials may not have favorable results in later clinical trials. The results of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our products conducted to date and ongoing or future studies and trials of our current, planned or future products may not be predictive of the results of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Our interpretation of data and results from our clinical trials do not ensure that we will achieve similar results in future clinical trials. In addition, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to various interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their products performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and earlier clinical trials have nonetheless failed to replicate results in later clinical trials. Products in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy despite having progressed through nonclinical studies and earlier clinical trials. Failure can occur at any stage of clinical testing. Our clinical

studies may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical and non-clinical testing in addition to those we have planned.

The commencement and rate of completion of clinical trials may be delayed by many factors, including, for example:

In addition, disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic may increase the likelihood that we encounter such difficulties or delays in initiating, enrolling, conducting or completing our planned and ongoing clinical trials. Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the laws and regulations of the FDA and other applicable regulatory authorities’ legal requirements, regulations or guidelines, and are subject to oversight by these governmental agencies and IRBs at the medical institutions where the clinical trials are conducted. Conducting successful clinical studies will require the enrollment of large numbers of patients, and suitable patients may be difficult to identify and recruit. Patient enrollment in clinical trials and completion of patient participation and follow-up depends on many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the trial protocol, the attractiveness of, or the discomforts and risks associated with, the treatments received by enrolled subjects, the availability of appropriate clinical trial investigators, support staff, and proximity of patients to clinical sites and ability to comply with the eligibility and exclusion criteria for participation in the clinical trial and patient compliance. For example, patients may be discouraged from enrolling in our clinical trials if the trial protocol requires them to undergo extensive post-treatment procedures or follow-up to assess the safety and effectiveness of our products or if they determine that the treatments received under the trial protocols are not attractive or involve unacceptable risks or discomforts.

We depend on our collaborators and on medical institutions and CROs to conduct our clinical trials in compliance with good clinical practice (GCP) requirements. To the extent our collaborators or the CROs fail to enroll participants for our clinical trials, fail to conduct the study to GCP standards or are delayed for a significant time in the execution of trials, including achieving full enrollment, we may be affected by increased costs, program delays or both. In addition, clinical trials that are conducted in countries outside the United States may subject us to further delays and expenses as a result of increased shipment costs, additional regulatory requirements and the engagement of non-U.S. CROs, as well as expose us to risks associated with clinical investigators who are unknown to the FDA, and different standards of diagnosis, screening and medical care.

Development of sufficient and appropriate clinical protocols to demonstrate safety and efficacy are required, and we may not adequately develop such protocols to support clearance and approval. Further, the FDA may require us to submit data on a greater number of patients than we originally anticipated and/or for a longer follow-up period or change the data collection requirements or data analysis applicable to our clinical trials. Delays in patient enrollment or failure of patients to continue to participate in a clinical trial may cause an increase in costs and delays in the approval and attempted commercialization of our products or result in the failure of the clinical trial. In addition, despite considerable time and expense invested in our clinical trials, the FDA may not consider our data adequate to demonstrate safety and efficacy. Such increased costs and delays or failures could adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

Even if we receive marketing authorization for a planned product, we and our suppliers will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and subject us to penalties if we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements.

Any product for which we obtain clearance, approval, or other marketing authorization, and the manufacturing processes, post-market surveillance, post-approval clinical data and promotional activities for such product, will be subject to continued regulatory review, oversight, requirements, and periodic inspections by the FDA and other domestic and foreign regulatory bodies. In particular, unless exempt, we and our suppliers are required to comply with the FDA’s QSR and other regulations enforced outside the United States which cover the manufacture of our products and the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, control, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping of medical devices. Regulatory bodies, such as the FDA, enforce the QSR and other regulations through periodic inspections. The failure by us or one of our suppliers to comply with applicable statutes and regulations administered by the FDA and other regulatory bodies, or the failure to timely and adequately respond to any adverse inspectional observations or product safety issues, could result in, among other things, any of the following enforcement actions:

If any of these actions were to occur, it would harm our reputation and cause our product sales and profitability to suffer and may prevent us from generating revenue. Furthermore, our key component suppliers may not currently be or may not continue to be in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements which could result in our failure to produce our products on a timely basis and in the required quantities, if at all.

In addition, we are required to conduct costly post-market testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or effectiveness of our products, and we must comply with medical device reporting requirements, including the reporting of adverse events and malfunctions related to our products. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products, including unanticipated adverse events or adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, manufacturing problems, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements such as the QSR, may result in changes to labeling, restrictions on such products or manufacturing processes, withdrawal of the products from the market, voluntary or mandatory recalls, a requirement to repair, replace or refund the cost of any medical device we manufacture or distribute, fines, suspension of regulatory approvals, product seizures, injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties which would adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response, and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory clearance or approval is withdrawn, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our products may cause or contribute to adverse medical events or be subject to failures or malfunctions that we are required to report to the FDA, and if we fail to do so, we would be subject to sanctions that could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations. The discovery of serious safety issues with our products, or a recall of our products either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA or another governmental authority, could have a negative impact on us.

We are subject to the FDA’s medical device reporting regulations and similar foreign regulations, which require us to report to the FDA when we receive or become aware of information that reasonably suggests that one or more of our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that, if the malfunction were to recur, it could cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. The timing of our obligation to report is triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report adverse events of which we become aware within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to recognize that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of the product. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA could take action, including warning letters, untitled letters, administrative actions, criminal prosecution, imposition of civil monetary penalties, revocation of our device clearance or approval, seizure of our products or delay in clearance or approval of future products.

The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture of a product or in the event that a product poses an unacceptable risk to health. The FDA’s authority to require a recall must be based on a finding that there is reasonable probability that the device could cause serious injury or death. We may also choose to voluntarily recall a product if any material deficiency is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing defects, labeling or design deficiencies, packaging defects or other deficiencies or failures to comply with applicable regulations. Product defects or other errors may occur in the future.

Depending on the corrective action we take to redress a product’s deficiencies or defects, the FDA may require, or we may decide, that we will need to obtain new clearances or approvals for the device before we may market or distribute the corrected device. Seeking such clearances or approvals may delay our ability to replace the recalled

devices in a timely manner. Moreover, if we do not adequately address problems associated with our devices, we may face additional regulatory enforcement action, including FDA warning letters, product seizure, injunctions, administrative penalties or civil or criminal fines.

Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls and corrections, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary withdrawals or corrections for our products in the future that we determine do not require notification of the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, it could require us to report those actions as recalls and we may be subject to enforcement action. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers, potentially lead to product liability claims against us and negatively affect our sales. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending ourselves in a lawsuit, will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business and may harm our reputation and financial results.

Changes in funding or disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner, or at all, or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new product applications to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, including the FDA, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in March 2020, the FDA announced its intention to postpone most inspections of foreign and domestic manufacturing facilities. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA intends to use this risk-based assessment system to identify the categories of regulatory activity that can occur within a given geographic area, ranging from mission critical inspections to remote interactive evaluations to resumption of all regulatory activities. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We expect to rely on third parties in conducting future clinical studies of diagnostic products that may be required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily.

We do not have the ability to independently conduct clinical trials that may be required to obtain FDA and other regulatory clearance or approval for future diagnostic products. Accordingly, we expect that we would rely on third parties, such as, laboratories, clinical investigators, CROs, consultants, and collaborators to conduct such studies if needed. Our reliance on these third parties for clinical and other development activities would reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. We will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical studies is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the study. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical studies to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity, and confidentiality of patients in clinical studies are protected. Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. To the extent our collaborators or the CROs fail to enroll participants for our clinical trials, fail to conduct the study to current GCP standards or are delayed for a significant time in the execution of trials, including achieving full enrollment, including on account of the outbreak of infectious disease, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or otherwise, we may be affected by increased costs, program delays or both, any resulting data may be unreliable or unusable for regulatory purposes, and we may be subject to enforcement action.

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or regulatory obligations or meet expected deadlines, if the third parties need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised, our preclinical development activities or clinical trials may be extended, delayed, suspended or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize, our products on a timely basis, if at all, and our business, operating results and prospects may be adversely affected.

We are subject to stringent and changing obligations related to data privacy and security. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse business consequences.

We process personal data and other sensitive data (including health data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials); proprietary and confidential business data; trade secrets; intellectual property; and sensitive third-party data. Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contracts, and other obligations that govern the processing of personal data by us and on our behalf.

Data privacy and information security have become significant issues in the United States, countries in Europe, and in other countries in which we operate. The legal and regulatory framework for privacy and security issues is rapidly evolving, and is expected to increase our compliance costs and exposure to liability. In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws, and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). These privacy laws include, without limitation, the following laws and regulations: Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA). HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH), imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. The CPRA imposes obligations on businesses to which it applies that include, but are not limited to, providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording California residents certain rights related to their personal data. The CPRA allows for statutory fines for noncompliance (up to $7,500 per violation) and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Although the CPRA exempts some data processed in the context of clinical trials, the CPRA may increase compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we may maintain about California residents. In addition, the CPRA extends to personal information of business representatives and employees and established a new regulatory agency to implement and enforce the law. Other states, like Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, and Virginia, have passed comprehensive data privacy laws which differ from the CPRA and all of which went into effect in 2023. In addition, data privacy and security laws have been proposed at the federal, state, and local levels in recent years, which could further complicate compliance efforts and may increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties upon whom we rely. Additionally, under various privacy laws and other obligations, we may be required to obtain certain consents to process personal data. Our inability or failure to do so could result in adverse consequences. If we are or become subject to these laws and/or new or amended data privacy laws, the risk of enforcement actions against us could increase because we may be subject to obligations under applicable regulatory frameworks and the number of individuals or entities that could initiate actions against us may increase (including individuals via a private right of action), in addition to further complicating our compliance efforts. In addition, privacy advocates and industry groups have proposed, and may propose in the future, standards with which we are legally or contractually bound to comply.

Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards apply to data privacy and security. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) and the equivalent law in the United Kingdom (UK GDPR) impose strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals, including sensitive data that we may process such as health data. For example, under the EU GDPR, government regulators may impose temporary or definitive bans on data processing, as well as fines of up to 20 million euros or 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater. Similar processing penalties and fines exist under the UK GDPR and the uncertainty of data protection laws in the UK following Brexit has increased the complexity of our compliance efforts. Further, individuals may initiate litigation related to our processing of their personal data.

In the ordinary course of business, we may transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area (EEA) and the United Kingdom (UK) have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it believes are inadequate. Most jurisdictions have adopted similarly stringent data protection laws which include data localization and cross-border data transfer limitations. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA and UK’s standard contractual clauses, these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Some European regulators have prevented companies from transferring personal data out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. Other jurisdictions require all processing of sensitive personal information be done inside the borders of that jurisdiction.

We may also be bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. For example, certain privacy laws, such as the GDPR and the CPRA, require our customers to impose specific contractual restrictions on their service providers. We may publish privacy policies, marketing materials and other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators or other adverse consequences.

Our obligations related to data privacy and security are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent and creating some uncertainty as to the effective future legal framework. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or in direct conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources (including, without limitation, financial and time-related resources). These obligations may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. In addition, these obligations may require us to change our business model. Our business model materially depends on our ability to process personal data, so we are particularly exposed to the risks associated with the rapidly changing legal landscape. For example, we may be at heightened risk of regulatory scrutiny, and any changes in the regulatory framework could require us to fundamentally change our business model.

Although we endeavor to comply with all applicable data privacy and security obligations, we may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) to do so. Despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties upon whom we rely may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations and compliance posture. For example, any failure by a third-party processor to comply with applicable law, regulations, or contractual obligations could result in adverse effects, including inability to operate our business and proceedings against us by governmental entities or others. Moreover, clinical trial subjects about whom we or our potential collaborators obtain information, as well as the third-party providers (such as contract research organizations) who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information.

If we or the third parties on which we rely fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with data privacy and security obligations, we could face significant consequences. These consequences may include, but are not limited to, government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-related claims); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; and orders to destroy or not use personal data. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including our clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or revision or restructuring of our operations.

All of our employees, principal investigators, consultants, and commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, principal investigators, consultants, and commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with the regulations of the FDA and non-United States regulatory authorities, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately, or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing, and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing, and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs, and other business arrangements. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical studies, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and our code of conduct and the other precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses, or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could result in the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions, which could have a significant impact on our business. Whether or not we are successful in defending against such actions or investigations, we could incur substantial costs, including legal fees, and divert the attention of management in defending ourselves against any of these actions or investigations.

We may be subject to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations and could face substantial penalties if we are unable to fully comply with such laws.

We and our collaborators and strategic partners may be subject to broadly applicable healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we develop, market, sell, and distribute our products. These health care laws and regulations include, for example:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities, including our planned reagent rental program or other sales and marketing practices, could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. Any action brought against us for violation of these laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws and regulations, we may be subject to any applicable penalty associated with the violation, including, among others, significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, and exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Additionally, we could be required to refund payments received by us, and we could be required to curtail or cease our operations. Any of the foregoing consequences could significantly harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In addition, if any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative sanctions, including exclusion from government funded healthcare programs.

Legislative or regulatory reforms may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain marketing authorization for any future products and to manufacture, market and distribute our products after marketing authorization is obtained.

From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the marketing authorization, manufacture and marketing of regulated products or the reimbursement thereof. In addition, the FDA may change its policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay marketing authorization of our future products under development or impact our ability to modify any then-marketed products on a timely basis. Any new regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing laws and regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of planned or future products. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted or FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations changed, and what the impact of such changes, if any, may be.

For example, over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, FDA officials announced forthcoming steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the pre-market notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. The FDA also announced that it intended to finalize guidance to establish a pre-market review pathway for “manufacturers of certain well-understood device types” as an alternative to the 510(k) clearance pathway and that such pre-market review pathway would allow manufacturers to rely on objective safety and performance criteria recognized by the FDA to demonstrate substantial equivalence, obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process.

In May 2019, the FDA solicited public feedback on its plans to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates, including whether the FDA should publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. The FDA requested public feedback on whether it should consider certain actions that might require new authority, such as whether to sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation. Accordingly, it is unclear the extent to which any proposals, if adopted, could impose additional regulatory requirements on us that could delay our ability to obtain new 510(k)

clearances, increase the costs of compliance, or restrict our ability to maintain our current clearances, or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

More recently, in September 2019, the FDA finalized the aforementioned guidance to describe an optional “safety and performance based” pre-market review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway, by demonstrating that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA intends to maintain a list device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based pathway” and develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the testing methods recommended in the guidance, where feasible. The FDA may establish performance criteria for classes of devices for which we or our competitors seek or currently have received clearance, and it is unclear the extent to which such performance standards, if established, could impact our ability to obtain new 510(k) clearances or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new statutes, regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of any future products or make it more difficult to obtain clearance or approval for, manufacture, market or distribute our products. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: additional testing prior to obtaining clearance or approval; changes to manufacturing methods; recall, replacement or discontinuance of our products; or additional record keeping.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory clearance or approval of our products. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad.

Any change in the laws or regulations that govern the clearance and approval, or other marketing authorization, relating to our current, planned and future products could make it more difficult and costly to obtain marketing authorization for new products or to produce, market and distribute existing products. Significant delays in or the failure to receive marketing authorization for any new products would have an adverse effect on our ability to expand our business. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing authorization that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

The misuse or off-label use of our products may harm our reputation in the marketplace, result in false test results that lead to product liability suits or result in costly investigations, fines or sanctions by regulatory bodies if we are deemed to have engaged in the promotion of these uses, any of which could be costly to our business.

We are not permitted to market our products for off-label uses. For example, the EUA for our Talis One COVID-19 Test System, prior to its revocation, was for the in vitro qualitative detection of RNA from the SARS-CoV-2 virus in nasal swab specimens from individuals suspected of COVID-19 by a healthcare provider. We were not permitted to market our Talis One COVID-19 Test System for use in screening of asymptomatic populations, for use in pooling samples for testing, or for use with different specimen samples (other than nasal swab specimens). Such uses would have been considered “off-label.” We have trained and will train our marketing and direct sales force to not promote our products for uses outside of any FDA-authorized indications for use. We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using our products off-label, when in the physician’s independent professional medical judgment, he or she deems it appropriate. There may be increased risk of inaccurate results if physicians attempt to use our tests off-label. Furthermore, such off-label uses could harm our reputation in the marketplace among physicians and patients.

If the FDA or any foreign regulatory body determines that our promotional materials or training constitute promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance or imposition of an untitled letter, which is used for violators that do not necessitate a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties, or withdrawal of any EUA or other marketing authorization we obtain. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action under other regulatory authority if they consider our business activities to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including, but not limited to,

criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment of our operations.

A significant portion of the funding for the development of our Talis One system came from U.S. federal government grants, and if the cognizant federal agencies were to eliminate, reduce or delay funding from our agreements, this could have a significant, negative impact on our revenues and cash flows, and we may be forced to suspend or terminate our development programs or obtain alternative sources of funding.

We have received grant funding from the U.S. federal government, including through a grant from the NIH, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a sub-award from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Biopharmaceutical Accelerator (CARB-X) program, a sub-award from the NIH RADx program, and an NIH RADx grant. We anticipate that a portion of the funding for the development of our technologies will come from these agreements, which provide for grant funds ultimately from the government. In addition, activities covered under the awards may ultimately cost more than is covered by the grants and sub-awards or require a longer performance periods to complete than are remaining on our agreements; if we are unable to secure additional funding or allow for additional time for completion, we would have to incur additional costs to complete the activities or terminate the activities before completion. Moreover, the continuation of our agreements depends in large part on our ability to meet development milestones previously agreed to and on our compliance with certain operating procedures and protocols. These agreements may be suspended or terminated should we fail to achieve key milestones or fail to comply with the operating procedures and processes approved by the government and its audit agencies. There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve these milestones or continue to comply with these procedures and protocols. For example, although we extended the time to perform certain milestones under the NIH Contract, we also had to reduce the potential milestone payments, and we were unable to satisfy all of the remaining milestones before the NIH Contract expired. In addition, changes in government budgets and agendas may result in a decreased and deprioritized emphasis on supporting the development of our programs. While the NIH has provided funding for many activities associated with combating COVID-19, the availability and focus for any NIH funding will likely be finite and may require us to compete with other technologies, both similar and disparate. If our agreements are terminated or suspended, if there is any reduction or delay in funding under our agreements, or if the government or higher-tier grantees determine not to exercise some or all of the options provided for under the agreements, our revenues and cash flows would be significantly and negatively impacted and we may be forced to seek alternative sources of funding, which may not be available on non-dilutive terms, terms favorable to us or at all. If alternative sources of funding are not available, we may be forced to suspend or terminate certain of our related development activities. Furthermore, should we be unable to deploy personnel or derive a benefit from fixed study costs or generate data from clinical sites and studies reimbursed through the agreements, our cash flows would be negatively impacted or we may have to initiate furloughs and layoffs which would likely prove disruptive to our management and operations. This in turn would impair our ability to recommence and complete studies if and when the COVID-19 crisis subsides and we are able to restart many suspended or delayed activities.

Unfavorable provisions in government contracts, including in our grant and sub-award agreements, may harm our business, financial condition and operating results.

U.S. government contracts and grants typically contain unfavorable provisions and are subject to audit and modification by the government at its sole discretion, which will subject us to additional risks. For example, under our grant and sub-award agreements, the U.S. government and higher-tier grantees, in certain circumstances, have the power to unilaterally:

Generally, government contracts and grants, including our grant and sub-award agreements, contain provisions permitting unilateral termination or modification, in whole or in part. Termination-for-convenience provisions generally enable us to recover only our costs incurred or committed, plus a portion of the agreed fee (if a fee has been negotiated) and settlement expenses on the work completed prior to termination. Except for the amount of services received by the government, termination-for-default provisions do not permit recovery of fees and may subject us to damages, including reprocurement expenses. In addition, in the event of termination or upon expiration of our agreements, the U.S. government or higher-tier grantees may dispute wind-down and termination costs and may question prior expenses under the agreements and deny payment of those expenses. Should we choose to challenge those denials, such a challenge could subject us to substantial additional expenses that we may or may not recover. Further, if our agreements are terminated for convenience, or if we default by failing to perform in accordance with the schedule and terms, a significant negative impact on our cash flows and operations could result.

In addition, government contracts and grants normally contain additional requirements that may increase our costs of doing business and expose us to liability for failure to comply with these terms and conditions. These requirements include, for example:

If we fail to maintain compliance with these requirements, we may be subject to potential liability and to the termination of our agreements.

Furthermore, we have entered into and will continue to enter into agreements and subcontracts with third parties, including suppliers, consultants and other third-party contractors, in order to satisfy our contractual obligations under our agreements. Negotiating and entering into such arrangements can be time-consuming and we may not be able to reach agreement with such third parties. Any such agreement must also be compliant with the terms of our grant and sub-award agreements. Any delay or inability to enter into such arrangements or entering into such arrangements in a manner that is non-compliant with the terms, may result in violations of our agreements.

In addition, under the agreements, the government and higher-tier grantees will regularly review our development efforts and clinical activities. Under certain circumstances, they may advise us to delay certain activities and invest additional time and resources before proceeding. If we follow such advice, overall program delays and costs associated with additional resources for which we had not planned may result. Also, the costs associated with following such advice may or may not be reimbursed under our agreement. Finally, we may decide not to follow the advice provided and instead pursue activities that we believe are in the best interests of our programs and our business, even if those would not be reimbursed under our agreement.

As a result of the unfavorable provisions in our agreements, we must undertake significant compliance activities. The diversion of resources from our development and commercial programs to these compliance activities, as well as the exercise by the U.S. government or higher-tier grantees of any rights under these provisions, could materially harm our business.

Laws and regulations affecting government contracts and grants, including our grants and sub-award agreements, make it more costly and difficult for us to successfully conduct our business. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in significant civil and criminal penalties and adversely affect our business.

We must comply with numerous laws, regulations, and agency-specific policies and procedures relating to the administration and performance of our grant and sub-award agreements. Among the most significant are:

In addition, as a U.S. government contractor, we are required to comply with applicable laws, regulations and standards relating to our accounting practices, including unique accounting requirements regarding allowable and unallowable costs, and are subject to periodic audits and reviews. As part of any such audit or review, the U.S. government may review the adequacy of, and our compliance with, our internal control systems and policies, including those relating to our purchasing, property, estimating, compensation and management information systems. Based on the results of its audits, the U.S. government may adjust our agreement-related costs and fees, including allocated indirect costs. This adjustment could impact the amount of revenues reported on a historic basis and could impact our cash flows under the contract prospectively. In addition, in the event the U.S. government determines that certain costs and fees were unallowable or determines that the allocated indirect cost rate was higher than the actual indirect cost rate, it would be entitled to recoup any overpayment from us as a result. In addition, if an audit or review uncovers any improper or illegal activity, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of our agreements, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and suspension or prohibition from doing business with the U.S. government. We could also suffer serious harm to our reputation if allegations of impropriety were made against us, which could cause our stock price to decline. Further, as a U.S. government contractor, we are subject to an increased risk of investigations, criminal prosecution, civil fraud, whistleblower lawsuits and other legal actions and liabilities as compared to private sector commercial companies. In addition, the qui tam provisions of the civil FCA authorize a private person to file civil actions on behalf of the federal and state governments and retain a share of any recovery, which can include treble damages and civil penalties.

If we or our third-party manufacturing partners fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

We and our suppliers and manufacturers are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations, and the manufacturer of our products, involve the production and use of hazardous and flammable materials and waste, including chemicals and biological and radioactive materials. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials.

Our manufacturers are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations in the U.S. governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of medical and hazardous materials. Although we believe that our manufacturers’ procedures for using, handling, 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.

Healthcare policy changes may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The ACA, enacted in March 2010, made a number of substantial changes in the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among other ways in which the ACA may significantly impact our business, the ACA includes: provisions regarding coordination and promotion of research on comparative clinical effectiveness of different technologies and procedures; initiatives to revise Medicare payment methodologies; and initiatives to promote quality indicators in payment methodologies.

There have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, the legislation enacted on December 22, 2017, informally known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) repealed the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA, on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year, which is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” Additionally, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace, which began on February 15, 2021 and remained open through August 15, 2021. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA. In addition, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the "donut hole" under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any additional healthcare reform measure of the Biden administration will impact the ACA or our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers and suppliers of 2% per fiscal year, starting in 2013, and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2031, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, unless additional congressional action is taken. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 4% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. Furthermore, on January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

In addition, there has been numerous governmental reform activity in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is possible that additional governmental action is taken to address the COVID-19 pandemic, which may impact our business.

We cannot predict whether future healthcare initiatives will be implemented at the federal or state level, or how any future legislation or regulation may affect us. The expansion of government’s role in the U.S. healthcare industry as a result of the ACA’s implementation, and changes to the reimbursement amounts paid by Medicare and other payors for our tests and our planned future tests, may reduce our profits, if any, and have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We cannot predict the impact changes to these laws or the implementation of, or changes to, any other laws applicable to us in the future may have on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

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

We have incurred substantial losses during our history and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may never achieve profitability. Unused U.S. federal net operating losses (NOLs) for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2018, may be carried forward to offset future taxable income, if any, until such unused NOLs expire. Under the TCJA, as modified by the CARES Act, U.S. federal NOLs incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, can be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such U.S. federal NOLs in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020, is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the TCJA or the CARES Act.

As of December 31, 2023, we had $30.9 million of U.S. federal NOLs that were generated in 2017 and prior periods that will expire at various dates through 2037, and $258.2 million of U.S. federal NOLs that can be carried forward indefinitely under current law. As of December 31, 2023, we also had aggregate U.S. federal research and development (R&D) credits of approximately $11.4 million and U.S. state research and development (R&D) credits of approximately $8.7 million. Our NOL carryforwards and R&D credits are subject to review and possible adjustment by the U.S. and state tax authorities.

In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Code), and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards, R&D credits and certain other tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. This could limit the amount of NOLs, R&D credit carryforwards or other applicable tax attributes that we can utilize annually to offset future taxable income or tax liabilities. Subsequent ownership changes and changes to the U.S. tax rules in respect of the utilization of NOLs, R&D credits and other applicable tax attributes carried forward may further affect the limitation in future years. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOLs is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. For example, California recently imposed limits on the usability of California state NOL carryforwards to offset taxable income in tax years beginning after 2019 and before 2023. As a result, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our NOL carryforwards and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.

Changes in tax laws or regulations that are applied adversely to us or our customers may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, the TCJA enacted many significant changes to the U.S. tax laws, and the CARES Act modified certain provisions of the TCJA. Future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to the TCJA may affect us, and certain aspects of the TCJA could be repealed or modified in future legislation. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the TCJA or any other federal tax legislation. Changes in corporate tax rates, the realization of net deferred tax assets relating to our operations, the taxation of foreign earnings, and the deductibility of expenses could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense.

Risks related to our intellectual property

We may be, in the future, subject to claims against us alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of third parties, the outcome of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our commercial success depends in part upon our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our products and use our technology without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the patents, trademarks or other intellectual property or proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot assure you that technologies we may develop will not infringe existing or future patents owned by third parties. Litigation relating to infringement, misappropriation or other violations of intellectual property rights in biotechnology industry is common, unpredictable and generally expensive and time consuming, including patent infringement lawsuits, trade secret

lawsuits, interferences, oppositions, and inter-partes review, post-grant review and ex parte reexamination proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and corresponding post-grant proceedings in international patent offices. The various markets in which we plan to operate are subject to frequent and extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. In addition, many companies in intellectual property-dependent industries, including the biotechnology industry, have employed intellectual property litigation as a means to gain an advantage over their competitors. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

We recently settled a trademark suit as described under the heading "Legal Proceedings" above. In the future, we may also be subject to other third-party claims and adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding infringement, misappropriation or other violation by us of patent, trademark or other intellectual property rights of third parties. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our products, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties. If any such claim or proceeding is brought against us, our collaborators or our third-party service providers, our development, manufacturing, marketing, sales and other commercialization activities could be similarly adversely affected. Even if we believe third-party intellectual property claims are without merit, there is no assurance that a court would find in our favor on questions of infringement, validity, enforceability, or priority. A court of competent jurisdiction could hold that third-party patents asserted against us are valid, enforceable, and infringed, which could materially and adversely affect our ability to develop, manufacture, market, sell and commercialize any of our products. To successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. If we are found to infringe any third-party’s patents or other intellectual property rights, and we are unsuccessful in demonstrating that such patents or other intellectual property are invalid or unenforceable, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing, manufacturing, marketing, selling and commercializing our products. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all, and if we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, our ability to commercialize our products may be impaired or delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, which would give our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing, royalty and other payments. We also could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing, marketing, selling and commercializing the infringing product or technology. In addition, we could be found liable for significant monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent or other intellectual property right. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

There may be third-party patents of which we are currently unaware with claims to machines, manufactures, compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture, or methods of use or treatment that cover our products. It is also possible that patents owned by third parties of which we are aware, but which we do not believe are relevant to the technologies we may develop, could be found to be infringed by our technology. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our products may infringe. In addition, third parties, our competitors in both the United States and abroad, many of which have substantially greater resources and have made substantial investments in patent portfolios and competing technologies, may obtain patents in the future that may prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use and sell our products, and may claim that use of our technologies or the manufacture, use, or sale of our products infringes upon these patents.

Some claimants may have substantially greater resources than we do and may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property litigation to a greater degree and for longer periods of time than we could. In addition, patent holding companies that focus solely on extracting royalties and settlements by enforcing patent rights may target us. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patents and patent applications we own or in-license is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future technology. In addition, intellectual property litigation, regardless of its outcome, may cause negative publicity, adversely impact prospective customers or business collaborators, cause product shipment delays

or prohibit us from manufacturing, marketing, selling or otherwise commercializing our products and technology. We may receive, and expect to receive, communications from various industry participants alleging our infringement of their patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property rights and/or offering licenses to such intellectual property.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing, or commercialization activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Uncertainties resulting from patent and other intellectual property litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace, our ability to raise additional funds, and could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may be, in the future, involved in lawsuits to defend or enforce our patents and proprietary rights. Such disputes could result in substantial costs or loss of productivity, delay or prevent the development and commercialization of our technology, products, prohibit our use of proprietary technology or sale of products, or put our patents and other proprietary rights at risk.

Competitors and other third parties may infringe, misappropriate, mischaracterize or otherwise violate our patents and intellectual property rights or the patents and intellectual property rights of our licensors. The enforcement of such claims can be expensive and time-consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Further, there can be no assurance that the pending patent application in question will result in an issued patent for enforcement. In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent owned or in-licensed by us is invalid or unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our owned and in-licensed patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our owned or in-licensed patents at risk of being invalidated, interpreted narrowly or amended to no longer cover our technology or products.

If we were to initiate legal proceedings against any other third party to enforce a patent covering our technology, the defendant could assert that our patent is invalid or unenforceable. If we or one of our licensing partners initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering our technologies, the defendant could counterclaim we infringe their patents or that the patent covering our technology is invalid or unenforceable, or both. In patent litigation in the United States and Europe, defendants alleging invalidity or unenforceability are common. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness, lack of written description or non-enablement. Third parties might allege unenforceability of our patents because during prosecution of the patent an individual connected with such prosecution withheld relevant information, or made a misleading statement affecting the interpretation of the relevant scope of the claims. There is a risk that a court will decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. Third parties may also raise challenges to the validity of our patent claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post-grant review, inter-partes review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of, or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our technology or products and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. The outcome of proceedings involving assertions of invalidity and unenforceability, including during patent litigation, is unpredictable. With respect to the validity of patents, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution, but that an adverse third party may identify and submit in support of such assertions of invalidity. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our technology. There is also a risk that, even if the validity of such

patents is upheld, the court will construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover the invention, or decide that the other party’s use of our patented technology falls under the safe harbor to patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(e)(1). Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse effect on our business. Our patents and other intellectual property rights also will not protect our technology if competitors design around our protected technology without infringing our patents or other intellectual property rights. Interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to, or the correct inventorship of, our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur negative publicity, reputational harm, significant expenses and could distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities, and the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. In addition, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing, or commercialization activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Uncertainties resulting from patent and other intellectual property litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace, our ability to raise additional funds, and could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks.

If we are not able to obtain, maintain, defend or enforce patent and other intellectual property protection for products, or if the scope of the patent and other intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to ours, which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain, maintain, defend and enforce patents and other forms of intellectual property rights, including in-licenses of intellectual property rights of others, for our products, as well as our ability to preserve our trade secrets, to prevent third parties from infringing, misappropriating, mischaracterizing or otherwise violating our intellectual property and proprietary rights. Our ability to protect our products from unauthorized use by third parties depends on the extent to which valid and enforceable patents cover them or they are effectively protected as trade secrets. While we have a number of issued patents in the United States and foreign countries, several aspects of our patent portfolio are in much earlier stages of prosecution in the United States and foreign countries. Moreover, we do not own or license any issued patents related to certain aspects of our products and technology, including certain structures and components used in our instruments and established molecular biology techniques. The patent position of biotechnology companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. There can be no assurance that our patent rights will not be invalidated or held to be unenforceable, will adequately protect our technology, products or provide any competitive advantage, or that any of our pending or future patent applications will issue as valid and enforceable patents. Our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our products is uncertain due to a number of factors, including that:

Even if we have or obtain patents covering our products or methods, we may still be barred from making, using and selling such products or methods because of the patent rights of others. Others may have filed, and in the future may file, patent applications covering compositions, products or methods that are similar or identical to ours, which could materially affect our ability to successfully develop our technology or to successfully commercialize any approved products alone or with collaborators. Patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere are generally published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering our methods and products could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Additionally, pending claims in patent applications which have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our system technologies or related products. These patent applications may have priority over patent applications filed by us.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our owned and licensed patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to third-party pre-issuance submissions of prior art to the USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant and inter-partes review, or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our products and technology and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, we, or our licensors, may have to participate in interference

proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical products and technology, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our products and technology. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our employees and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

Furthermore, we cannot guarantee that any patents will be issued from any of our pending or future patent applications. Criteria determining patentable subject matter and enforcement thereof may be impacted from future judicial and legislative changes or developments in the United States and abroad. Additionally, the standards applied by the USPTO and foreign patent offices in granting patents are not always applied uniformly or predictably. For example, there is no uniform worldwide policy regarding patentable subject matter or the scope of claims allowable in diagnostic patents. As such, we do not know the degree of future protection that we will have on our proprietary products and technology. Thus, even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. While we will endeavor to protect our technology with intellectual property rights such as patents, as appropriate, the process of obtaining patents is time-consuming, expensive and sometimes unpredictable.

In addition, third parties may be able to develop technology that is similar to, or better than, ours in a way that is not covered by the claims of our patents, or may have blocking patents that could prevent us from marketing our products or practicing our own patented technology. Moreover, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are paid timely, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from the filing date of the earliest U.S. or international (PCT) application, to which priority is claimed (excluding provisional applications), thus the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. In addition, although upon issuance in the United States a patent’s life can be increased based on certain delays caused by the USPTO, this increase can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. Without patent protection for current or future methods and related products, we may face competing technology. Given the amount of time required for the development and testing, and regulatory review where necessary, patents protecting such technology might expire before or shortly after such technology is commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing technology similar or identical to that we or our collaborators may develop.

Moreover, certain of our patents and patent applications are, and others may in the future be, co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to use or license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

We depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties and we are currently party to several in-license agreements under which we acquired rights to use, develop, manufacture and/or commercialize certain of our system components. If we breach our obligations under these agreements or if any of these agreements is terminated, or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we may be required to pay damages, lose our rights to such intellectual property and technology, or both, which would harm our business.

We are dependent on patents, know-how, and proprietary technology, both our own and licensed from others. We are a party to a number of intellectual property license agreements that are important to our business and expect to enter into additional license agreements in the future. For example, we have licensed technology related to frangible seals and reagent plugs in our Talis One cartridges, under an agreement with thinXXS. Our existing license agreements impose (under certain circumstances), and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, including due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business operations or our use of the intellectual property licensed to us in an unauthorized manner, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, we may be required to pay damages and the licensor may have the right to terminate the license. Any termination of these

licenses could result in the loss of significant rights and could harm our ability to develop, manufacture and/or commercialize our system or product candidates.

In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology to or from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates. Our business also would suffer if any current or future licensors fail to abide by the terms of the license, if the licensors fail to enforce licensed patents against infringing third parties, if the licensed patents or other rights are found to be invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter into necessary licenses on acceptable terms. Moreover, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us and, as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing or otherwise violating the licensor’s rights.

In addition, while we cannot currently determine the amount of the royalty obligations we would be required to pay on sales of future products, if any, the amounts may be significant. The amount of our future royalty obligations will depend on the technology and intellectual property we use in products that we successfully develop and commercialize, if any. Therefore, even if we successfully develop and commercialize products, we may be unable to achieve or maintain profitability.

The growth of our business may depend, in part, on our ability to acquire or in-license additional proprietary rights, including to advance the development or commercialization of our products. In that event, we may be required to expend considerable time and resources to license such technology. From time to time, in order to avoid infringing third-party patents, we may be required to license technology from additional third parties to further develop or commercialize our products. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any relevant third-party intellectual property rights, including any such intellectual property rights required to manufacture, use or sell our products, that we identify as necessary or important to our business operations. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all, and as a result we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, and we may have to abandon development of the relevant products, which would harm our business. We may need to cease use of the compositions or methods covered by such third-party intellectual property rights, and may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if we were able to develop such alternatives, which may not be feasible. Even if we are able to obtain a license under such intellectual property rights, any such license may be non-exclusive, which may allow our competitors’ access to the same technologies licensed to us.

The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive practice, and companies that may be more established, or have greater resources than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our products. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their larger size and cash resources or greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete such negotiations and ultimately acquire the rights to the intellectual property surrounding the additional products that we may seek to acquire.

Disputes may also arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement. If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product. We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license as we are for intellectual property that we own, which are described below. If we or our licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize our products could suffer.

We depend, in part, on our licensors to file, prosecute, maintain, defend, and enforce patents and patent applications that are material to our business.

Patents relating to certain components of our Talis One cartridge are controlled by a third party. Such third party has rights to file, prosecute, maintain, and defend the patents we have licensed from such licensor. If our licensors or any

future licensees having rights to file, prosecute, maintain, and defend patent rights that are critical to our products fail to conduct these activities, including due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our licensors’ business operations, our ability to develop and commercialize our products may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, or selling competing products. We cannot be certain that such activities by our licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents or other intellectual property rights. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreements with some of our licensors, the licensors may have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents and, even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we cannot ensure the cooperation of our licensors. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license intellectual property that we may need in our business. In addition, even when we have the right to control patent prosecution of licensed patents and patent applications, enforcement of licensed patents, or defense of claims asserting the invalidity of those patents, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to or after our assuming control. In the event we breach any of our obligations related to such prosecution, we may incur significant liability to our licensing partners.

We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent, which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our products. We may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our product candidates. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

One aspect of the determination of patentability of our inventions depends on the scope and content of the “prior art,” information that was or is deemed available to a person of skill in the relevant art prior to the priority date of the claimed invention. For example, we have identified certain third-party patents that may be asserted against us with respect to our technology. These patents may expire prior to commercial launch of our products. We believe that the relevant claims of these third-party patents are likely invalid or unenforceable, and we may choose to challenge those patents, though the outcome of any challenge that we may initiate in the future is uncertain. We may also decide in the future to seek a license to those third-party patents, but we might not be able to do so on reasonable terms. There may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the patentability of our patent claims or, if issued, affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim. Further, we may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our product candidates or their intended uses, and as a result the impact of such third-party intellectual property rights upon the patentability of our own patents and patent applications, as well as the impact of such third-party intellectual property upon our freedom to operate, is highly uncertain. Because patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for typically a period of 18 months after filing, or may not be published at all, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to our product candidates. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Furthermore, for U.S. applications in which all claims are entitled to a priority date before March 16, 2013, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third party or instituted by the USPTO to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. For U.S. applications containing a claim not entitled to priority before March 16, 2013, there is a greater level of uncertainty in the patent law in view of the passage of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), which brought into effect significant changes to the U.S. patent laws, including new procedures for challenging pending patent applications and issued patents.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment, and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Obtaining and maintaining a patent portfolio entails significant expense, including periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and patent applications. These expenditures can be at numerous stages of prosecuting patent applications and over the lifetime of maintaining and enforcing issued patents. We may or may not choose to pursue or maintain protection for particular intellectual property in our portfolio. If we choose to forgo patent protection or to allow a patent application or patent to lapse purposefully or inadvertently, our competitive position could suffer. Furthermore, we employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply with the various procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions we are subject to and, in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with a jurisdiction's applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which failure to make certain payments or noncompliance with certain requirements in the patent process can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Legal action that may be required to enforce our patent rights can be expensive and may involve the diversion of significant management time. There can be no assurance that we will have sufficient financial or other resources to file and pursue infringement claims, which typically last for years before they are concluded. In addition, these legal actions could be unsuccessful and result in the limitation of scope or invalidation of our patents, a finding that they are unenforceable or a requirement that we enter into a licensing agreement with or pay monies to a third party for use of technology covered by our patents. We may or may not choose to pursue litigation or other actions against those that have infringed on our patents, or have used them without authorization, due to the associated expense and time commitment of monitoring these activities. If we fail to successfully protect or enforce our intellectual property rights, our competitive position could suffer, which could harm our results of operations.

Some of our intellectual property has been discovered through government funded programs and thus may be subject to federal regulations such as “march-in” rights, certain reporting requirements and a preference for U.S.-based companies, and compliance with such regulations may limit our exclusive rights and our ability to contract with non-U.S. manufacturers.

Our intellectual property rights may be subject to a reservation of rights by one or more third parties. For example, certain intellectual property rights related to structures, such as the rotor or test chambers, within Talis One test cartridges were generated, at least in part, through the use of U.S. government funding and are therefore subject to certain federal regulations. As a result, the U.S. government may have certain rights to intellectual property embodied in the cartridges of our current or future products pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 (Bayh-Dole Act). These U.S. government rights include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has what are referred to as “march-in” rights to, under certain limited circumstances, require the licensor to grant exclusive, partially exclusive or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that (1) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention and achieve practical application of the government-funded technology, (2) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs, (3) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations or (4) we fail to meet requirements of federal regulations. The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if we or our licensors fail to disclose the invention to the government or fail to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. These rights may permit the government to disclose our confidential information to third parties. In addition, our rights in such inventions may be subject to certain requirements to manufacture products embodying such inventions in the United States. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us to expend substantial resources. To the extent any of our future owned or licensed intellectual property is also generated through the use of U.S. government funding, the provisions of the Bayh-Dole Act may similarly apply. Any exercise by the government of such rights could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Changes to US and international patent laws on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis is highly uncertain and could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and international jurisdictions could increase the uncertainties and costs, and may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain, and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our owned and licensed patents. There are numerous recent changes to the patent laws and proposed changes to the rules of the USPTO which may have a significant impact on our ability to protect our technology and enforce our intellectual property rights. For example, the AIA, enacted on September 16, 2011, resulted in significant changes to the U.S. patent system. An important change introduced by the AIA is that, as of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned from a “first-to-invent” 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. Under a “first-to-file” system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to a patent on the invention regardless of whether another inventor had made the invention earlier. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 16, 2013, but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we made the invention before it was made by the third party. Circumstances could prevent us from promptly filing patent applications on our inventions.

Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time (typically 18 months), after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to either (1) file any patent application related to our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (2) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license.

The AIA provided opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. Those provisions apply to all of our U.S. patents, regardless of when issued. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts 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. These provisions could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our or our licensors’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or our licensors’ issued patents.

Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing U.S. patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. For example, in the 2013 case Assoc. for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain claims to naturally-occurring substances are not patentable. Although we do not believe that any of the patents owned or licensed by us will be found invalid based on this decision, we cannot predict how future decisions by Congress, the federal courts or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents. In addition, the European patent system is relatively stringent in the type of amendments that are allowed during prosecution, but the complexity and uncertainty of European patent laws has also increased in recent years. Complying with these laws and regulations could limit our ability to obtain new patents in the future that may be important for our business.

In addition, changes in, or different interpretations of, patent laws in the United States and other countries may permit others to use our discoveries or to develop and commercialize our technology without providing any compensation to us, or may limit the scope of patent protection that we are able to obtain. The laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as U.S. laws, and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for defending our intellectual property rights.

If the patent applications we hold or have in-licensed with respect to our current and future technology fail to issue, if the validity, breadth or strength of protection of our patent rights is threatened, or if such patent rights fail to provide meaningful exclusivity for our methods and related products that we or our collaborators may develop, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us, encourage competitors to develop competing technology and threaten our or our collaborators’ ability to commercialize future products or services. Any such outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We will not seek to protect our intellectual property rights in all jurisdictions throughout the world, and we may not be able to adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the jurisdictions where we seek protection.

Filing, prosecuting, enforcing and defending patents in all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States could be less extensive than those in the United States, assuming that rights are obtained in the United States. In-licensing patents covering our technology in all countries throughout the world may similarly be prohibitively expensive, if such opportunities are available at all. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States, even in jurisdictions where we do pursue patent protection. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, even in jurisdictions where we do pursue patent protection, or from selling or importing our technology in and into the United States or other jurisdictions.

We generally apply for patents in those countries where we intend to make, have made, use, offer for sale or sell products and where we assess the risk of infringement to justify the cost of seeking patent protection. However, we may not seek protection in all countries where we will commercialize our products and we may not accurately predict all the countries where patent protection would ultimately be desirable. If we fail to timely file a patent application in any such country or major market, we may be precluded from doing so at a later date. Competitors may use our technology in jurisdictions where we do not pursue and obtain patent protection to develop their own tests and products and may export otherwise infringing tests and products to territories where we have patent protection, but where our ability to enforce our patent rights is not as strong as in the United States. These tests and products may compete with technologies that we or our collaborators may develop, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent such competition.

The laws of some other countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. For example, European patent law restricts the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than U.S. law does. Patent protection must ultimately be sought on a country-by-country basis, which is an expensive and time-consuming process with uncertain outcomes. Accordingly, we may choose not to seek patent protection in certain countries, and we will not have the benefit of patent protection in such countries. In addition, the legal systems of some countries, particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, especially those relating to biopharmaceuticals or biotechnologies. As a result, many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain jurisdictions outside the United States. Such issues may make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents, if obtained, or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. For example, many other countries, including countries in the EU, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no benefit. In those countries, we and our licensors may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we or our licensors are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents and could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our and our licensors’ efforts to enforce intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we own or license. Similarly, if our trade secrets are disclosed in a foreign jurisdiction, competitors worldwide could have access to our proprietary information and we may be without satisfactory recourse. Such disclosure could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Furthermore, proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, subject our patents to the risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, subject our patent applications to the risk of not issuing or provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded to us, if any, may not be commercially meaningful, while the damages and other remedies we may be ordered to pay such third parties may be significant. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

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

In addition to seeking patent protection for certain aspects of our technology, we also consider trade secrets, including technical and commercial information, including but not limited to confidential and unpatented formulas, processes, know-how, customer and supplier lists, methods of distribution, and advertising strategies, important to the maintenance of our competitive position. We protect trade secrets and confidential and unpatented information, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to such knowledge, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract research

organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants that obligate them to maintain confidentiality and assign their invention rights to us. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes or that the assignment agreements that have been entered into are self-executing. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements, intentionally or inadvertently, and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, or claim ownership in intellectual property that we believe is owned by us. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures of our intellectual property is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property will be effective. In addition, we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets.

Moreover, our competitors or other third parties may independently develop knowledge, methods and know-how equivalent to our trade secrets or seek to reverse engineer our technology for which we do not have patent protection. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third parties, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

We are also subject both in the U.S. and outside the U.S. to various regulatory schemes regarding requests for the information we provide to regulatory authorities, which may include, in whole or in part, trade secrets or confidential commercial information. While we are likely to be notified in advance of any disclosure of such information and would likely object to such disclosure, there can be no assurance that our challenge to the request would be successful. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or advisors have wrongfully used or disclosed trade secrets or other confidential information of their current or former employers or claims asserting inventorship or ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

Many of our employees, consultants, and advisors are currently or were previously employed at universities or other healthcare, biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants, and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s current or former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our product candidates or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual

property that we regard as our own. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Such claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, opposed, infringed, circumvented, invalidated, cancelled, declared generic, determined to be not entitled to registration, or determined to be infringing on other marks. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections of our applications by the USPTO or in other foreign jurisdictions. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. For example, our application to register the trademark TALIS in the United States was the subject of an opposition before the USPTO and related litigation which was resolved with a settlement agreement imposing certain restrictions on our use and registration of our trademarks. Any trademark litigation could be expensive. In addition, we could be found liable for significant monetary damages, including treble damages, disgorgement of profits and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a trademark. We may not be able to protect our exclusive right to these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential collaborators or customers in our markets of interest. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. We may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and trade names by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names.

Our use of “open source” software could subject our proprietary software to general release, adversely affect our ability to sell our products, and subject us to possible litigation.

A portion of our products incorporate so-called “open source” software and we may incorporate open source software into other products or technologies in the future. Such open source software is generally licensed by its authors or other third parties under open source licenses. Some open source licenses contain requirements that we disclose source code for modifications we make to the open source software and that we license such modifications to third parties at no cost. In some circumstances, distribution of our software in connection with open source software could require that we disclose and license some or all of our proprietary code in that software as well as distribute our products that use particular open source software at no cost to the user. We monitor our use of open source software in an effort to avoid uses in a manner that would require us to disclose or grant licenses under our proprietary source code, however, there can be no assurance that such efforts will be successful. Open source license terms are often ambiguous and such use could inadvertently occur. There is little legal precedent governing the interpretation of many of the terms of certain of these licenses, and the potential impact of these terms on our business may result in unanticipated obligations regarding our products and technologies. Companies that incorporate open source software into their products have, in the past, faced claims seeking enforcement of open source license provisions and claims asserting ownership of open source software incorporated into their product. If an author or other third party that distributes such open source software were to allege that we had not complied with the conditions of an open source license, we could incur significant legal costs defending ourselves against such allegations. In the event such claims were successful, we could be subject to significant damages or be enjoined from the distribution of our products. In addition, if we combine our proprietary software with open source software in certain ways, under some open source licenses we could be required to release the source code of our proprietary software, which could substantially help our competitors develop products that are similar to or better than ours and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:

Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Risks related to our financial condition and capital requirements

We have incurred significant losses since our inception, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, which could harm our future business prospects.

We have historically incurred substantial net losses, including net losses of $62.0 million and $113.0 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $540.0 million. We expect our losses to continue as we continue to devote a substantial portion of our resources to efforts to develop women's health and STI test tests, for the commercial launch of the Talis One system, and thereafter to increase the adoption of our products, improve these products, scale our manufacturing capabilities and research, develop and commercialize new products.

We have devoted a substantial portion of our resources to the development and commercialization of the Talis One system, a molecular diagnostic system, including clinical and regulatory initiatives to obtain regulatory clearance. These losses have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our working capital, total assets, and stockholders’ equity. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with our research, development and commercialization efforts, we are unable to predict when we will become profitable, and we may never become profitable. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly

or annual basis. Our inability to achieve and then maintain profitability would negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

We will likely need to raise additional capital to fund our existing operations, further develop our diagnostic system, commercialize products, if and when approved, and expand our operations.

We may seek to sell common or preferred equity or convertible debt securities, enter into a credit facility or another form of third-party funding, or seek other debt financing. We may also need to raise capital sooner or in larger amounts than currently anticipated for numerous reasons, including as a result of failure to obtain regulatory approvals for our tests, or other risks described in this Annual Report. In addition, we intend to pursue a reagent rental model where the customer does not purchase our Talis One instrument, which will require substantial additional working capital.

We may also consider raising additional capital in the future to expand our business, to pursue strategic investments, to take advantage of financing opportunities, or for other reasons, including to:

Our present and future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:

The various ways we could raise additional capital carry potential risks. If we raise funds by issuing equity securities, our stockholders’ ownership interests will be diluted. Any equity securities we issue could also provide for rights, preferences, or privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. If we raise funds by issuing debt securities, those debt securities would have rights, preferences, and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. If we raise funds through borrowings pursuant to a credit agreement, the incurrence of such indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and could involve restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt and acquire or license intellectual property rights, and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we raise funds through collaborations and alliances and licensing arrangements, we might be required to relinquish significant rights to our system or technologies or to grant licenses on terms that are unfavorable to us.

Additional equity or debt financing might not be available on reasonable terms, if at all. If we cannot secure additional funding when needed, we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more research and development programs or sales and marketing initiatives. In addition, we may have to work with a partner on one or more of our development programs, which could lower the economic value of those programs to us.

Lastly, if we are unable to obtain the requisite amount of financing needed to fund our planned operations, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and ability to continue operating as a going concern.

Risks related to ownership of our common stock

The market price of our common stock has been and may continue to be volatile or may decline regardless of our operating performance and you could lose all or part of your investment.

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile and may fluctuate or decline substantially as a result of a variety of factors, some of which are beyond our control, including, but not limited to:

These and other factors may cause the market price and demand for our common stock to fluctuate substantially, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their shares of common stock and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our common stock. In recent years, stock markets in general, and the market for life science technology companies in particular (including companies in the genomics, biotechnology, diagnostics and related sectors), have experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to changes in the operating performance of the companies whose stock is experiencing those price and volume fluctuations. Broad market and industry factors may seriously affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.

Following periods of such volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been brought against that company. Because of the potential volatility of our stock price, we may become the target of securities litigation in the future. Securities litigation could result in substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources from our business.

We are involved in securities class action litigation and are at risk of additional similar litigation in the future that could divert management’s attention, may be expensive and adversely affect our business and could subject us to significant liabilities.

Our share price is volatile, and in the past companies that have experienced volatility in the market price of their stock have been subject to securities class action litigation. We are a party to securities class action litigation described under the heading “Legal Proceedings” below. The defense of these claims may be expensive and divert our management’s attention and resources and any unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Any adverse determination in these claims, or any amounts paid to settle these claims could require that we make significant payments. In addition, we may in the future be the target of other securities class actions or similar litigation.

Future sales of our common stock in the public market could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities.

There were 718,230 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options outstanding and 14,484 shares of common stock issuable upon vesting of restricted stock units as of December 31, 2023. We registered all of the shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of such outstanding options or other equity incentives we may grant in the future, for public resale under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act). The shares of common stock will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent such options are exercised, subject to compliance with applicable securities laws.

Further, based on shares outstanding as of December 31, 2023, holders of approximately 2,499,285 shares (adjusted for the 1-for-15 reverse stock split and activity during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023), or 66% of our capital stock have certain registration rights with respect to the resale of such shares. In March 2024, we terminated a previously filed registration statement on Form S-3 as the Company was no longer eligible to register securities on Form S-3 and obtained a waiver of the registration rights relating to these 2,499,285 shares. This waiver of the registration rights is effective for a period of thirty (30) days from the filing of this Form 10-K.

The issuance of shares in connection with any subsequent issuance could depress the market price of our common stock. We are unable to predict the effect that such issuances and/or sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock.

We are an emerging growth company and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, as amended (JOBS Act). For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted by Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules and plan to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other SEC-registered public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

These exemptions include not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, as amended (Sarbanes-Oxley Act), not being required to comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. As a result, the information we provide stockholders will be different from the information that is available with respect to other public companies. We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive if we rely on these exemptions.

In addition, as an emerging growth company the JOBS Act allows us to delay adoption of new or revised accounting pronouncements applicable to public companies until such pronouncements are made applicable to private companies, unless we later irrevocably elect not to avail ourselves of this exemption. We have elected to use this extended transition period under the JOBS Act; however, we may choose to early adopt new or revised accounting pronouncements, if permitted under such pronouncements.

Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may still qualify as a “smaller reporting company” which may allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

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.

We do not expect to pay any dividends for the foreseeable future. Investors may never obtain a return on their investment.

You should not rely on an investment in our common stock to provide dividend income. We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock, and we do not anticipate that we will pay any dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future. Instead, we plan to retain all available funds and future earnings to fund the development and expansion of our business. In addition, any future credit facility or financing we obtain may contain, terms prohibiting or limiting the amount of dividends that may be declared or paid on our common stock. Accordingly, investors must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any return on their investment. As a result, investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock.

If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative evaluations of our common stock, the price of our common stock could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will rely in part on the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage by industry or securities analysts. If no or few analysts commence coverage of us, the trading price of our common stock could decrease. Even if we do obtain analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts covering our business downgrade their evaluations of our common stock, the price of our common stock could decline. If one or more of these analysts cease to cover our common stock, we could lose visibility in the market for our common stock, which in turn could cause the price of our common stock to decline.

We will incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to compliance with our public company responsibilities and corporate governance practices.

As a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting, and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company, which we expect to further increase after we are no longer an emerging growth company. The Sarbanes–Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Stock Market (Nasdaq), and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on public companies. Our management and other personnel devote a substantial amount of time to compliance with these requirements. Moreover, these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. We cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we will incur as a public company or the specific timing of such costs.

We have broad discretion in the use of our cash and cash equivalents and may not use them effectively.

We have broad discretion in the application and use of our cash and cash equivalents, including the net proceeds from our initial public offering, and you will not have the opportunity as part of your investment decision to assess whether our cash and cash equivalents were used or are being used effectively. Because of the number and variability of factors that determine the application and use of our cash and cash equivalents, our ultimate use may vary or has varied substantially from our original intended uses. For example, due to significant delays in obtaining an EUA for the Talis One COVID-19 Test System and to produce the Talis One system at scale, which in turn delayed the commercialization of the Talis One system, we have used a larger proportion of the net proceeds from our initial public offering for research and development expenses and a smaller proportion for commercial activities than our original estimates in our prospectus filed with the SEC on February 12, 2021. Investors will need to rely upon the judgment of our management with respect to the use of our cash and cash equivalents. Our failure to apply our cash and cash equivalents effectively could compromise our ability to pursue our business strategy and we might not be able to yield a significant return, if any, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be harmed, and the market price of our common stock could decline.

Our principal stockholder owns a very significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.

As of March 19, 2024, our executive officers, directors and five percent or greater stockholders and their respective affiliates, beneficially own, in the aggregate, approximately 74% of our outstanding voting stock. Further, 66% of our outstanding voting stock is owned by entities affiliated with Baker Bros. Advisors LP (Baker Bros.). In addition, the holders of our Series 1 convertible preferred stock, which, subject to certain limitations, is a voting common

stock equivalent, may elect to convert shares of Series 1 convertible preferred stock into shares of Series 2 convertible preferred stock, which is a non-voting common stock equivalent. These shares of Series 2 convertible preferred stock are then convertible into shares of our common stock, subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations.

We also have a nominating agreement with Baker Bros. that provides that, for so long as it continues to own a certain number of shares of our common stock, we have the obligation to support the nomination of, and to cause our Board of Directors to include in the slate of nominees recommended to our stockholders for election, one or two individuals designated by Baker Bros. As a result, Baker Bros. is able to exercise considerable influence over matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors, amendments of our organizational documents and approval of any merger, sale of substantially all our assets or other significant corporate transactions for the foreseeable future. This concentration of ownership may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you or other stockholders may feel are in your or their best interest as one of our stockholders.

As a result of being a public company, we are obligated to develop and maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting, and any failure to maintain the adequacy of these internal controls may adversely affect investor confidence in our company and, as a result, the value of our common stock.

We are required, pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act to furnish a report by management on, among other things, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. These assessments must include disclosure of any material weaknesses identified by our management in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency or combination of deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual and interim financial statements will not be detected or prevented on a timely basis. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our first annual report required to be filed with the SEC following the date we are no longer an emerging growth company if we are not a non-accelerated filer at such time. We continue the costly and challenging process of compiling the information systems, processes and internal controls documentation necessary to perform the evaluation needed to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, but we may not be able to complete our evaluation, testing and any required remediation in a timely fashion once initiated. Our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act requires that we incur substantial accounting expenses and expend significant management efforts. We currently do not have an internal audit group, and we will need to outsource or hire the accounting and financial staff with appropriate public company experience and technical accounting knowledge to compile the system and process documentation necessary to perform the evaluation needed to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act.

If we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm determines we have a material weakness or significant deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Failure to remedy any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to implement or maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation designates the state courts in the State of Delaware or, if no state court located within the State of Delaware has jurisdiction, the federal court for the District of Delaware, as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could discourage lawsuits against us or our directors, officers, or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if the Court of Chancery does not have jurisdiction, any state court located within the State of Delaware, or if all such state courts lack jurisdiction, the federal district court for the District of Delaware) will be the sole and exclusive forum for the following types of actions or proceedings under Delaware statutory or common law: (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (2) any action asserting a breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any current or former director, officer or other employee, to us or our stockholders; (3) any action or proceeding asserting a claim against us or any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees, arising out of or pursuant to any

provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, or our amended and restated bylaws; (4) any action or proceeding to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws; (5) any action or proceeding as to which the Delaware General Corporation Law confers jurisdiction to the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware; and (6) any action asserting a claim against us, or any of our directors, officers or other employees, that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in all cases to the fullest extent permitted by law and subject to the court’s having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants. The amended and restated certificate of incorporation states that these choice of forum provisions will not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Securities Act, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. This amended and restated certificate of incorporation will further provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act.

These choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees and may discourage these types of lawsuits. Furthermore, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions.

Delaware law and provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest difficult, thereby depressing the trading price of our common stock.

Provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may delay or discourage transactions involving an actual or potential change in our control or change in our management, including transactions in which stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares or transactions that our stockholders might otherwise deem to be in their best interests. Therefore, these provisions could adversely affect the price of our common stock. Among other things, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws:

The amendment of any of these provisions, with the exception of the ability of our Board of Directors to issue shares of preferred stock and designate any rights, preferences and privileges thereto, would require approval by the holders of at least 66 2/3% of our then-outstanding voting capital stock.

In addition, as a Delaware corporation, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. These provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us for a certain period of time. A Delaware corporation may opt out of this provision by express provision in its original certificate of incorporation or by amendment to its certificate of incorporation or bylaws approved by its stockholders. However, we have not opted out of this provision.

These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law could make it more difficult for stockholders or potential acquirers to obtain control of our Board of Directors or initiate actions that are opposed by our then-current Board of Directors, including delay or impede a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving our company. The existence of these provisions could negatively affect the price of our common stock and limit opportunities for you to realize value in a corporate transaction.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 1C. Cybersecurity.

Cybersecurity Risk Management and Strategy

The Company maintains a cybersecurity program designed to detect, identify, classify and mitigate cyber security and other data security threats, as part of its efforts to protect and maintain the confidentiality and security of customer, employee and vendor information, and non-public information about the Company. Our cyber security program is led by the Company's SVP, Head of Legal and Compliance.

The Company and its third-party service providers conduct periodic risk assessments to identify significant cybersecurity threats that may affect information systems that are vulnerable to such cyber security threats and regularly review these risk assessments for changes in our business practices and the external cybersecurity landscape as well as the impact of our security processes. These risk assessments include physical, administrative and technical safeguards and involves identification of reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks and evaluation of the likelihood and potential damage that could result from the realization of such risks.

Following our risk assessments, we evaluate when and how to design, implement, and maintain reasonable safeguards to minimize the identified risks and address any identified gaps in existing safeguards, and proceed with such design, implementation, and maintenance as deemed appropriate. We also engage third-party service providers in connection with our risk assessment process and certain risk management processes. Our collaboration with these third-party service providers includes threat assessments and consultation on security enhancements, 24/7 monitoring and incident response support.

Based on the information we have as of the date of this Form 10-K, we do not believe any risks from cybersecurity threats, including as a result of any previous cybersecurity incidents, have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect us, including our business strategy, results of operations or financial condition. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors” for further information about these risks.

Cybersecurity Governance

Our Board of Directors is focused on cyber security. Specific responsibility for cybersecurity oversight is managed by the Audit Committee. The SVP, Head of Legal and Compliance is responsible for the management and mitigation of identified risks and the presentation of any changes in risk factors, identified risks, overall cybersecurity efforts and upcoming improvements to the Audit Committee. The SVP, Head of Legal and Compliance is also responsible for the response to and the remediation and resolution of a security incident involving a potential or actual compromise of our proprietary information and/or personal information. The SVP,

Head of Legal and Compliance reports to the Audit Committee quarterly with respect to the Company’s cybersecurity infrastructure and risk assessment and reports any security incidents to the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee will report the Company’s cybersecurity infrastructure and risk assessment and any findings and recommendations to the full Board of Directors for consideration if and when the Audit Committee deems it necessary or appropriate.

In the event of a cybersecurity incident, the Company's SVP, Head of Legal and Compliance is equipped with a well-defined Incident Response and Reporting Policy (IRRP) to guide response, reporting, and recovery actions. This IRRP includes immediate actions to mitigate the impact of the incident, long-term strategies for remediation and prevention of future incidents, and provides for internal notification of the incident to functional areas as well as senior leadership and the Board of Directors, as appropriate.

Item 2. Properties.

Our corporate headquarters are currently located in Chicago, IL (Chicago office), where we occupy approximately 26,400 square feet of office and laboratory space under a lease that ends in July 2032.

The Company also has 13,165 square feet of office and laboratory space in Redwood City, California under a sublease that ends on May 31, 2030. While the sublease is still in effect, in November 2023, we decided to cease operations in our Redwood City laboratory and office facility and have consolidated all of our operations to our Chicago office during 2024.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

From time to time, we have been and may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us due to defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, negative publicity, reputational harm and other factors, and there can be no assurances that favorable outcomes will be obtained.

On or about January 7, 2022, John Modrak filed a class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, BofA Securities, Inc., Piper Sandler & Co., and BTIG, LLC, underwriters of the Company’s February 2021 initial public offering (“IPO”), captioned as Modrak v. Talis Biomedical Corp., et al., No. 3:22-cv-00105, purportedly on behalf of shareholders who purchased shares of the Company’s stock that were registered in the Company’s IPO. On February 18, 2022, Karen Mitcham filed a substantively identical lawsuit in the same court captioned as Mitcham v. Talis Biomedical Corp., et al., No. 3:22-cv-01039-JD, against the Company, and the same officers and directors as the Modrak lawsuit. These two cases were consolidated and co-lead plaintiffs were appointed as mandated by the applicable federal securities laws. On December 9, 2022, the Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss and gave plaintiffs leave to amend their consolidated complaint. On January 13, 2023, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, asserting claims for violation of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) against all defendants and Section 15 of the Securities Act against the individual defendants. The amended complaint alleges that the Company’s registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s IPO was false and misleading, and omitted to state material adverse facts, related to (1) instrument manufacturing, (2) the reliability and accuracy of the Company’s Talis One COVID-19 test, and (3) the comparator test used in the Company’s primary study in support of its EUA application for the Talis One COVID-19 Test System. The amended complaint seeks unspecified damages under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act, reasonable attorneys’ fees, and other costs. The amended complaint does not assert claims against the above referenced underwriters. On April 28, 2023, the Court denied our motion to dismiss. On February 9, 2024, the Court certified the class and appointed plaintiff Martin Dugan as class representative. Discovery is ongoing. Trial is currently set for February 24, 2025.

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.

Market information

Our common stock has been publicly traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC under the symbol “TLIS” since our initial public offering on February 12, 2021. Prior to that time, there was no public market for our common stock.

On July 27, 2022, the Company received a notice (the “Notice”) from the Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) that the Company was not in compliance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5450(a)(1), as the minimum bid price of the Company’s common stock had been below $1.00 per share for thirty-one (31) consecutive business days as of the date of the Notice.

On January 24, 2023, the Company transferred the listing of its securities to the Nasdaq Capital Market (the “Capital Market”) and received notice from Nasdaq on the same date indicating that, while the Company had not regained compliance with the Bid Price Requirement, Nasdaq determined that the Company was eligible for an additional 180-day period, and extended the Company until July 24, 2023 to regain compliance. We committed to effectuate a reverse stock split by the end of the second compliance period, if necessary, to regain compliance with the Bid Price Requirement. The Notice had no other immediate effect on the listing of the Company’s common stock, which trades on the Capital Market under the symbol “TLIS.”

On July 5, 2023, we effected our 1-for-15 Reverse Stock Split. The common stock began trading on a post-split as-adjusted basis on July 6, 2023. On July 20, 2023, we received notice from Nasdaq that we had regained compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to maintain compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement, even after the implementation of the Reverse Stock Split.

Holders

As of March 19, 2024, we had approximately 69 holders of record of our common stock and one holder of record of our Series 1 convertible preferred stock.

Dividend policy

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings for use in the operation of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future determination to declare dividends will be made at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on our financial condition, operating results, capital requirements, general business conditions and other factors that our Board of Directors may deem relevant.

Recent sales of unregistered securities

None.

Use of Proceeds from our Initial Public Offering of Common Stock

In February 2021, our Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No: 333-252360) was declared effective by the SEC. We received approximately $233 million in net proceeds from our initial public offering. Through December 31, 2023, we have used all of the net proceeds from the offering primarily to fund our ongoing research and development activities, manufacturing scale-up project and pre-launch inventory.

Due to significant delays in obtaining the EUA for the Talis One COVID-19 Test System and to produce the Talis One system at scale, which in turn delayed the commercialization of the Talis One system, we have used a larger proportion of the net proceeds from our initial public offering for research and development expenses and a smaller proportion for commercial activities than our original estimates in our prospectus filed with the SEC on February 12, 2021 pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4). Other than the foregoing, there have been no other no material changes in the planned use of proceeds from our initial public offering from that described in the related prospectus filed February 12, 2021 with the SEC pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4) under the Securities Act.

Item 6. [Reserved]

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read together with our audited financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report. Some of the information contained in this discussion and analysis or set forth elsewhere in this Annual Report, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business and related financing, includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors, including those factors set forth in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report, our actual results could differ materially from the results described in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion and analysis. You should carefully read the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report to gain an understanding of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our forward-looking statements. Please also see the section entitled “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) is designed to provide material information relevant to an assessment of our financial condition and results of operations, including an evaluation of the amounts and certainty of cash flows from operations and from outside sources. This section is designed to focus on material events and uncertainties known to management that are reasonably likely to cause reported financial information not to be necessarily indicative of future operating results or of future financial condition. This includes descriptions and amounts of matters that have had a material impact on reported operations, as well as matters that are reasonably likely based on management’s assessment to have a material impact on future operations.

Recent Developments

In November 2023, due to unforeseen operational challenges, setbacks in product development timelines and volatile market conditions, the Company decided to cease operations in its Redwood City, CA laboratory and office facility and consolidate operations to its Chicago facility and to consider strategic alternatives. In addition, on November 14, 2023, we announced that we have retained TD Cowen, an investment bank, to lead a comprehensive review of strategic alternatives focusing on maximizing stockholder value, including but not limited to, an acquisition, merger, reverse merger, divestiture of assets, licensing or other strategic transactions and a voluntary dissolution or liquidation of the Company. However, there is no set timetable for the overall process given the anticipated timelines for different strategic alternatives may vary, and there can be no assurance that this process will result in us pursuing a transaction or that any transaction, if pursued, will be completed on attractive terms or at all. If we are unable to complete a strategic transaction within a reasonable timeframe or at all, then we may cease all operations and seek stockholder approval to voluntarily dissolve and liquidate the Company. We do not expect to disclose developments with respect to this process unless and until the evaluation of strategic alternatives has been completed or we have concluded that disclosure is appropriate or legally required.

In connection with the evaluation of strategic alternatives and in order to extend our cash, we implemented a cost-savings plan that includes a reduction in force of approximately 90% of our positions, with the remaining employees focusing primarily on supporting the exploration and potential completion of strategic alternatives as well as preserving limited manufacturing capabilities to have the ability to support minimal research and development functions throughout this process.

Overview

Prior to the November 2023 announcement to consider strategic alternatives, Talis aimed to transform diagnostic testing by developing and commercializing innovative products that are designed to enable accurate, reliable, low cost and rapid molecular testing for infectious diseases and other conditions at the point of care. While timely diagnosis of infectious diseases is critically important to enable effective treatment, currently, testing is primarily performed in centralized laboratories, which requires samples to be shipped for processing, delaying the return of results by days. Point-of-care testing solves this problem by delivering the timely information necessary for clinical care. We were developing the Talis One system, a sample-to-answer, cloud-enabled molecular diagnostic system that could be deployed to a variety of testing settings in the United States and around the world to diagnose infectious disease in the moment of need, at the point of care. The Talis One system comprises a compact instrument, single use test cartridges and software, supporting a central cloud database, which work together. The

system is designed to provide central laboratory levels of accuracy and be operated by an untrained user in less than 30 minutes.

Previous surveys of women’s and sexual health providers that we conducted confirmed continued and strong interest in adoption of point-of-care systems. We believe that the Talis One system was well positioned to meet this growing demand in both traditional and non-traditional care settings. Although there are several commercially available point-of-care systems, we believe that few, if any, sufficiently meet the needs of healthcare providers to drive broad adoption of, and transition to, point-of-care testing from central lab testing for a broad range of infectious diseases. We believe that the ideal point-of-care technology for diagnosing infectious diseases would not only be highly accurate and rapid, but would also be easy to use, low cost, cloud-compatible and enable multiplexing to detect multiple pathogens at the same time.

On July 19, 2023, we paused our COVID-19 clinical trials due to an increase in invalid rates and decided to terminate these clinical trials. We have also suspended all other planned clinical trials intended to support regulatory clearance and commercialization of our other tests.

We had been developing Talis One tests to address some of the most critical infectious diseases in women’s and sexual health with a targeted product menu and disciplined regulatory strategy to minimize risk and accelerate time to first commercial launch. However, on November 10, 2023, our Board of Directors decided to pursue strategic alternatives and cease continued development of our test menu, consisting of a respiratory panel for influenza A, influenza B and COVID-19; Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis (CT/NG/TV); herpes simplex virus (HSV); and vaginal infections including bacterial vaginosis (Vaginal Infections Panel) and are focused primarily on pursuing strategic alternatives.

We invested in and increased the flexibility of our manufacturing capabilities to support the development and commercialization of the Talis One system. We automated cartridge manufacturing lines, currently located and operated by our contract manufacturing partners, to enable production advantages with quality, speed, and cost at full scale. We also established internal manufacturing lines to enable flexibility and stability in our ability to support our strategic efforts around research and development, clinical trials and commercialization. These internal lines allow us to (i) make process improvements and cost reductions in-house before transferring production back to our contract manufacturing partners, (ii) innovate more quickly to support internal test development and (iii) support cartridge inventory levels pre-commercialization. We intended to perform a cartridge stability study of cartridges from our internal manufacturing line to confirm the performance of our COVID-19 test on this manufacturing line. In order to drive further efficiency and cost reduction in the manufacturing process, we restructured our relationships with our contract manufacturing partners and streamlined our supply chain. Additionally, we have built several hundred instruments to date and invested in, and received, the raw materials to build thousands more to help ensure that we were positioned to support completion of any possible strategic transactions.

We outsourced a substantial portion of our manufacturing. Design work, prototyping and pilot manufacturing were performed in-house before outsourcing to third-party contract manufacturers. Our outsourced production strategy was intended to drive rapid scalability. Certain of our suppliers of components and materials were single source suppliers. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 we had one supplier that individually provided more than 10% of our materials and equipment purchases. To support a commercial launch, we have invested in automated cartridge manufacturing production lines for our Talis One cartridges. Those assets deemed to have an alternative future use have been capitalized as property and equipment while those assets determined to not have an alternative future use have been expensed.

Since our inception in 2013, we have devoted substantially all our efforts to research and development activities, manufacturing capabilities, raising capital, building our intellectual property portfolio, providing general and administrative support for these operations, and providing selling support as the need has arisen. We have principally financed our operations through the issuance and sale of shares of our convertible preferred stock to outside investors in private equity financings as well as the issuance of convertible promissory notes and receipts from government grants. Prior to our initial public offering, we received $351.5 million from investors in our preferred stock financings and the sale of convertible promissory notes that converted in such financings.

Additionally, on February 17, 2021, we raised $232.5 million (after deducting underwriting discounts, commissions and offering expenses) through an initial public offering.

We have incurred recurring losses since our inception, including net losses of $62.0 million and $113.0 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $540.0 million. We expect to continue to generate operating losses and negative operating cash flows for the foreseeable future if and as we:

As of December 31, 2023, we had unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $76.7 million. Based on our planned operations, we expect that our unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $76.7 million as of December 31, 2023 will be sufficient to fund our operations through at least the next 12 months from the date our financial statements are issued. We expect to finance our future operations with our existing cash and cash equivalents and through one or more possible strategic alternatives. However, there is no guarantee that any of these strategic opportunities will be executed or realized on favorable terms, if at all, and some could be dilutive to existing stockholders.

In March 2023, in order to support our long-term financial objectives, we terminated our former lease for laboratory and office space in Redwood City, CA and entered into a sublease for new laboratory and office space in Redwood City, CA. This move reduced our facilities footprint by two-thirds, and we expected approximately $9.0 million of cash savings on a discounted basis over the life of the lease. While the sublease is still in effect, in November 2023, we have decided to cease operations in our Redwood City laboratory and office facility and have consolidated all of our operations to our Chicago facility in 2024.

In November 2023, due to unforeseen operational challenges, setbacks in product development timelines and volatile market conditions, we decided to cease operations in our Redwood City, CA laboratory and office facility and consolidate operations to our Chicago facility in 2024 and to consider strategic alternatives. In order to further reduce costs and extend our remaining cash, we announced a reduction in force of approximately 90% of our work force on November 14, 2023 ("November 2023 RIF"). As part of these actions, we provided notices to the impacted employees under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act ("WARN Act") for job eliminations to occur through March 2024.

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023, we incurred $3.4 million of expenses related to the November 2023 RIF which included payroll costs for salaries, wages and benefits paid or to be paid to employees during the minimum WARN act retention period and other costs. Expenses related to the November 2023 RIF are included in Selling, general and administrative and Research and development expenses in the statement of operations and comprehensive loss.

Depending on the outcome of our plans to consider strategic alternatives, we expect to incur approximately $0.5 million of additional expenses related to the November 2023 RIF, substantially all of which will consist of charges related to the staff reduction.

In 2022, in connection with our refocus on the women's health and STI markets, we implemented two separate reductions in force, designed to align our remaining resources to focus on (i) developing women's health and STI tests on the Talis One system, (ii) our internal manufacturing expertise to support our strategic plans and (iii) reducing costs and preserving cash to extend our runway to commercialize our women's health and STI tests. The 2022 reductions in force amounted to approximately 40% of our headcount.

Reverse Stock Split

On June 30, 2023, we filed a certificate of amendment to the our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation (the “Certificate of Amendment”), with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware to effect a 1-for-15 reverse stock split of the shares of the our common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, effective as of 5:00 p.m., Eastern

Time, on July 5, 2023 (the “Reverse Stock Split”). On this date, every 15 issued and outstanding shares of common stock were converted into one share of common stock, with any fractional shares resulting from the Reverse Stock Split rounded up to the nearest whole share. The number of outstanding shares of common stock was reduced from approximately 26.9 million shares to approximately 1.8 million shares.

The Reverse Stock Split did not change our authorized shares of common stock or Series 1 convertible preferred stock, which remained at 200,000,000 and 60,000,000 shares, respectively. The Reverse Stock Split did not change the par value of the common stock. Proportionate adjustments were made to the per share exercise price and/or the number of shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options and the settlement of restricted stock units and the number of shares authorized and reserved for issuance pursuant to the our equity incentive plans. Additionally, the Reverse Stock Split had no impact on the number of shares of our Series 1 convertible preferred stock issued and outstanding. However, the conversion ratio of the outstanding Series 1 convertible preferred stock increased and the number of shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of such preferred stock decreased in proportion to the 1-for-15 split ratio.

All share and per share amounts for common stock in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 have been retroactively adjusted for all periods presented to give effect to the Reverse Stock Split, including reclassifying an amount equal to the reduction in the number of shares of common stock at par value to additional paid-in capital.

Components of our results of operations

Revenue

To date, we have not generated any revenue from sales of our Talis One system. As a result of the announcement in November 2023 to consider strategic alternatives, we no longer plan to commercialize the Talis One system.

Product revenue, net

In January 2022, we began distributing third party antigen tests (the "Antigen Tests"). We currently derive all of our product revenue from the sales of the Antigen Tests in accordance with the provisions of Accounting Standards Codifications (ASC), Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Our product revenue is recognized upon the transfer of control of the test kits to the customer. This program concluded as of December 31, 2022, as the majority of sales of Antigen Tests occurred during 2022. However, during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023, we earned $0.4 million of revenue from the remaining sales of Antigen Tests from existing inventory.

Grant revenue

For the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, our revenue from government grants includes a May 2018 grant from the NIH to support our advancement of a Diagnostics via Rapid Enrichment, Identification, and Phenotypic Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing of Pathogens from Blood project (NIH grant), a July 2020 sub-award grant from the University of Massachusetts Medical School for Phase 1 of the NIH’s Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics - Advanced Technology Platforms (RADx) initiative and a contract from the NIH directly for Phase 2 of the RADx initiative (NIH Contract).

Under the NIH grant, we recognized $1.7 million and $0.5 million during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022. In April 2023, the Company exercised a one-year option under the grant, extending the term through April 2024. As of December 31, 2023 there is $0.4 million in additional funding available under the grant, which we do not expect to fully utilize.

The NIH Contract for the RADx initiative expired on January 30, 2022. The Company successfully met milestone requirements and recognized $0.7 million of grant revenue during the twelve months ended December 31, 2022. There is no additional funding available under the NIH Contract for the RADx initiative.

These grants are not in the scope of ASC 606 as the government entities and/or government-sponsored entities are not customers under the agreements.

Operating expenses

Cost of product sold

We began to recognize costs of product sold in January 2022 when we began selling the Antigen Tests. Costs of product sold include material costs, direct labor, provisions for inventory write-downs and shipping and handling costs incurred.

Research and development expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of internal and external costs incurred for our research activities, the development of our system, investment in manufacturing capabilities as well as costs incurred pursuant to our government grants and include:

Until future commercialization is considered probable and the future economic benefit is expected to be realized, we do not capitalize pre-launch inventory costs and costs of property and equipment prior to completion of marketing authorization unless the regulatory review process has progressed to a point that objective and persuasive evidence of regulatory approval is sufficiently probable, and future economic benefit can be asserted. We record pre-launch inventory costs to research and development expenses, or if used in marketing evaluations, record such cost to selling, general and administrative expense. We record property and equipment costs to research and development expenses when the asset does not have an alternative future use. A number of factors are taken into consideration, based on management’s judgment, including the current status in the regulatory approval process, potential impediments to the approval process, anticipated research and development initiatives and risk of technical feasibility, viability of commercialization and marketplace trends.

Research and development activities were central to our historical operations. We previously focused our research and development efforts on the stand-alone Talis One COVID-19 test and developing tests for women’s and sexual health infections, including a respiratory panel consisting of tests for influenza A, influenza B and COVID-19; Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis (CT/NG/TV); herpes simplex virus (HSV); and the Vaginal Infections Panel.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and other related costs, including stock-based compensation and bonus, for personnel in our executive, finance, sales and product management, commercial operations, human resources and legal functions. Selling, general and administrative expenses also include professional fees for legal, auditing, tax and consulting services, insurance fees, information technology, and facility-related expenses, which include direct depreciation expenses and allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities and other operating expenses.

Other income, net

Other income, net consists primarily of interest income on cash deposits held at financial institutions, gains and losses on holdings invested in money market funds, and unrealized and realized foreign exchange gains and losses.

Results of operations

Comparison for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022

The following table summarizes our results of operations (in thousands):

Grant revenue and product revenue, net

Grant revenue for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023, primarily relates to the NIH grant. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, $1.7 million and $0.5 million of revenue was recognized related to NIH grant, respectively.

The NIH Contract for the RADx initiative expired on January 30, 2022. The Company successfully met milestone requirements and recognized $0.7 million of grant revenue during the twelve months ended December 31, 2022. There is no additional funding available under the NIH Contract.

We began to generate product sales during January 2022 after we entered into a distribution agreement to sell the Antigen Tests. The change in product revenue, net is driven by the conclusion of the program at the end of 2022.

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 we earned $0.4 million of revenue from the remaining sales of Antigen Tests from existing inventory.

Cost of products sold

The decrease in cost of product sold during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 is due to higher volume in units sold during the twelve months ended December 31, 2022 whereas we did not conduct significant product revenue generating activities during the same period in 2023.

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2022, the Company also established a reserve against $4.4 million of inventory in excess of forecasted demand recorded within cost of product sold.

Research and development expenses

Research and development expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 were $40.7 million and $70.8 million, respectively, a decrease of $30.1 million. Substantially all of our research and development expenses incurred were related to the development of and manufacturing scale-up for the Talis One system including tests to detect COVID-19 as well as other respiratory, women's health and sexual health tests. The decline of $30.1 million was driven by a reduction of $13.0 million in pre-launch inventory costs, a decrease of $8.0 million in depreciation expense as certain manufacturing equipment was fully depreciated by December 31, 2022, and a decrease of $5.0 million related to lower manufacturing costs and the costs related to the automation of consumables manufacturing as we completed our scale-up investments in 2022. Payroll and related expenses decreased by $5.0 million during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 as a result of our March 2022 and August 2022 reductions in force which was partially offset by expenses of $2.4 million incurred during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2023 related to the November 2023 RIF. Partially offsetting these declines was $2.0 million of expense

incurred in 2023 to purchase a license for patents, cartridge raw materials and components in connection with the termination of our supply agreement with a contract manufacturer.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses were $28.2 million for twelve months ended December 31, 2023, compared to $40.7 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2022, a decrease of $12.5 million. The decline was primarily due to decreases in personnel-related expenses including salaries and benefits and stock-based compensation expenses as a result of our March 2022 and August 2022 reductions in force, which was partially offset by expenses of $1.0 million incurred during the fourth quarter of 2023 related to the November 2023 RIF. Lower insurance costs also contributed to the decrease in selling, general and administrative expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023. Selling, general and administrative expenses also include an impairment expense related to our right-of-use assets of $2.8 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 compared to $3.6 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2022.

Liquidity and capital resources

Sources of liquidity

As of December 31, 2023, we had unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $76.7 million. We have funded our operations primarily through public equity offerings, private placements of equity securities and through government grants. We believe our unrestricted cash and cash equivalents balance as of December 31, 2023 is sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months from the date our financial statements are issued. We expect to finance our future operations with our existing unrestricted cash and cash equivalents and through one or more possible strategic alternatives. However, there is no guarantee that any of these strategic opportunities will be executed or realized on favorable terms, if at all, and some could be dilutive to existing stockholders.

On February 17, 2021, we completed our initial public offering (IPO), pursuant to which we issued and sold 1,058,000 shares (15,870,000 shares pre-Reverse Stock Split) of our common stock, at a public offering price of $240 per share ($16.00 per share pre-Reverse Stock Split). The net proceeds from the IPO were $232.5 million after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering expenses.

In 2022, in connection with our refocus on the women's health and STI markets, we implemented two separate reductions in force, designed to align our remaining resources to focus on (i) developing women's health and STI tests on the Talis One system, (ii) our internal manufacturing expertise to support our strategic plans and (iii) reducing costs and preserving cash to extend our runway to commercialize our women's health and STI tests. The 2022 reductions in force amounted to approximately 40% of our headcount. We incurred $2.5 million of expenses related to these reductions in force during the twelve months ended December 31, 2022, substantially all of which consisted of one-time charges related to the staff reduction, including cash expenditures and other costs.

On November 14, 2023, in connection with our plans to consider strategic alternatives, reduce costs and preserve cash, we terminated approximately 90% of our work force. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023, the Company incurred $3.4 million of expenses related to the November 2023 RIF which included payroll costs for salaries, wages and benefits paid or to be paid to employees during the minimum WARN act retention period and other costs. Expenses related to the November 2023 RIF are included in Selling, general and administrative and Research and development expenses in the statement of operations and comprehensive loss. Depending on the outcome of our plans to consider strategic alternatives, the Company expects to incur approximately $0.5 million of additional expenses related to the November 2023 RIF, substantially all of which will consist of charges related to the staff reduction.

Cash flows

The following table summarizes our cash flows for each of the periods presented (in thousands):

Operating activities

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023, net cash used in operating activities was $53.2 million, resulting from our net loss of $62.0 million, a $2.4 million decrease in accounts payable and a decrease of $3.1 million in accrued expenses and other liabilities. These outflows were partially offset by a decrease of $1.9 million in prepaid expenses and other current assets, as well as non-cash items including $4.4 million of stock-based compensation, a $2.8 million impairment of long-lived assets and $4.3 million of non-cash lease expense. The reduction in net cash used in operating activities from 2022 to 2023 was driven by the completion of our manufacturing scale-up investments in 2022 and the impact of lower employee compensation costs from the 2022 RIFs.

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2022, net cash used in operating activities was $100.1 million, resulting from our net loss of $113.0 million and a $8.9 million decrease in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities driven by the completion of our manufacturing scale-up project. These outflows were offset by non-cash items of $20.6 million, including $8.8 million of depreciation expense primarily driven by the acceleration of the useful life of certain lab equipment as a result of manufacturing changes brought about by the decision to changes in business strategy, $5.4 million of stock based compensation expense, $3.6 million impairment of long-lived assets and $2.8 million of non-cash lease expense.

Investing activities

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, we used $0.5 million and $1.6 million of cash for investing activities related to purchases of property and equipment.

Financing activities

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2023, net cash provided by financing activities related to proceeds from stock purchases pursuant to the Company's employee stock purchase plan.

During the twelve months ended December 31, 2022, net cash provided by financing activities was $0.4 million, consisting of $0.3 million in proceeds from common stock issued pursuant to the Company’s employee stock purchase plan and $0.1 million in proceeds from stock option exercises.

Contractual obligations

Leases

See Note 6. Commitments and contingencies, to our audited financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for a summary of our operating lease commitments as of December 31, 2023.

In March 2023, the Company entered into a lease termination agreement with the landlord of our former Redwood City, CA facility. The Company incurred immaterial customary termination and broker fees during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023. The lease of our former Redwood City, CA facility was terminated on May 12, 2023.

In March 2023, the Company entered into a sublease for laboratory and office space in our current Redwood City, CA facility. The sublease will continue for a term of 7 years, with no option to extend. The minimum annual commitment under the new sublease is approximately $1.0 million with fixed escalations of 3.5% per annum. The sublease commenced for accounting purposes on May 1, 2023 and the Company recorded a lease liability and corresponding right-of-use asset and liability of $7.3 million.

Purchase commitments

Currently, we have no material long-term purchase commitments.

Critical accounting policies and estimates

This MD&A is based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The preparation of our financial statements and related disclosures requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, costs and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in our financial statements. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events and various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. We evaluate our estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis. Our actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

While our significant accounting policies are described in greater detail in Note 2 to our financial statements appearing within Item 8 of this Annual Report, we believe that the following accounting policies are those most critical to the judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements.

Research and development expenses

Capitalizing pre-launch inventory costs will not occur prior to obtaining an EUA or other FDA marketing authorization unless the regulatory review process has progressed to a point that objective and persuasive evidence of regulatory approval is sufficiently probable, commercialization is considered probable and future economic benefit can be asserted. We have incurred significant costs related to the scale-up of manufacturing activities for commercialization. We record such costs as research and development expenses, or if used in marketing evaluations costs are recorded as selling, general and administrative expenses. A number of factors are taken into consideration, based on our management’s judgment, including the current status in the regulatory approval process, potential impediments to the approval process, anticipated research and development initiatives and risk of technical feasibility, viability of commercialization and marketplace trends.

All materials, equipment, and external consulting costs associated with developing aspects of the production line that do not have an alternative future use are expensed as research and development costs until regulatory approval or clearance is obtained, and commercialization is probable. Materials, equipment, and external consulting costs associated with developing aspects of the production line that are deemed to have an alternative future use are capitalized as property and equipment, assessed for impairment and depreciated over their related useful lives. These research and development costs, including expenditures for property and equipment with no alternative future use, are classified as operating cash outflows within our statements of cash flows.

Stock-based compensation

We measure stock-based compensation expense for stock options and restricted stock units (RSUs) granted to our employees and directors on the date of grant and recognize the corresponding compensation expense of those awards over the requisite service period, which is generally the vesting period of the respective award, on a straight-line basis. We also recognize stock-based compensation expense associated with our employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) based on the grant date fair value required under authoritative guidance. Forfeitures are recorded as they occur.

From time to time, we may grant stock options to employees, including executive officers, that vest upon the satisfaction of service-based or performance-based vesting conditions. We recognize stock-based compensation over the requisite service period using the accelerated attribution method for awards with a performance condition if the performance condition is deemed probable of being met.

We estimate the fair value of stock options granted to our employees and directors on the grant date, and the resulting stock-based compensation expense, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the use of subjective assumptions which determine the fair value of stock option awards. These assumptions include:

We determine the fair market value of our common stock based on its closing price as reported on the date of grant on the primary stock exchange on which our common stock is traded.

Leases

Lease liabilities and their corresponding right-of-use assets are recorded based on the present value of lease payments over the remaining lease term. The present value of future lease payments are discounted using the interest rate implicit in lease contracts if that rate is readily determinable; otherwise we utilize our incremental borrowing rate (IBR), which reflects the fixed rate at which we could borrow on a collateralized basis over a similar term, the amount of the lease payments in a similar economic environment. After lease commencement and the establishment of a right-to-use asset and operating lease liability, lease expense is recorded on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

Recoverability of long-lived assets

We review the carrying amount of our long-lived assets, including property and equipment, for impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset or an asset group may not be fully recoverable. If indicators of impairment exist, an impairment loss would be recognized when the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset or asset group and its eventual disposition are less than its carrying amount. The impairment charge is determined based upon the excess of the carrying value of the asset over its estimated fair value, reducing the carrying value of the related asset to no less than its fair value. Estimated fair value is determined based upon an estimate of discounted future cash flows or other appropriate measures of estimated fair value. Estimates in our fair value calculation may include estimates made for discount rate, rental rate and escalations or downtime periods associated with our right-of-use assets as well as others. A 5% change in the estimated rental rate, escalations or downtime periods would not materially impact the fair value of the right-of-use assets. In addition, a 200 basis point change in the selected discount rate would not materially impact the fair value of the right-of-use assets. For purposes of recognition of impairment for long-lived assets, we group assets and liabilities at the lowest level for which cash flows are separately identifiable.

Recently issued accounting pronouncements

There are no accounting pronouncements pending at December 31, 2023 that we expect to have a material impact on our financial statements and disclosures.

Recently adopted accounting standards

We did not adopt any new accounting standards during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023.

Emerging growth company status

In April 2012, the JOBS Act was enacted. Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company may take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act for complying with new or revised accounting standards. Therefore, an emerging growth company can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected to avail ourselves of this extended transition period and, as a result, we may adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required for non-public companies instead of the dates required for other public companies. However, we may early adopt these standards.

In addition, 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:

We may take advantage of these exemptions for up to the last day of the fiscal year ending after the fifth anniversary of our initial public offering, which is December 31, 2026, or such earlier time that we are no longer an emerging growth company. We would cease to be an emerging growth company on the date that is the earliest of (1) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of $1.24 billion or more; (2) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of our initial public offering; (3) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (4) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the SEC. We may choose to take advantage of some but not all of these exemptions.

We are also a “smaller reporting company” meaning that the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million and our annual revenue was less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million or (ii) our annual revenue was less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million. If we are a smaller reporting company at the time we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. Specifically, as a smaller reporting company we may choose to present only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements in our Annual Report and, similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Not applicable.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Index to Financial Statements and Notes

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of Talis Biomedical Corporation

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Talis Biomedical Corporation (the Company) as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the related statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2023, 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 at December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2023, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

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 audit 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/ Ernst & Young LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2016.

Chicago, Illinois

March 28, 2024

Talis Biomedical Corporation

Balance sheets

(in thousands, except for share and par value)

See accompanying notes to the financial statements

Talis Biomedical Corporation

Statements of operations and comprehensive loss

(in thousands, except for share and per share amounts)

See accompanying notes to the financial statements

Talis Biomedical Corporation

Statements of stockholders’ equity

(in thousands, except for share amounts)