{"url_path":"/sec/ino/10-q/2026/item-1","section_key":"item-1","section_title":"Item 1 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS","topic":"sec","document":{"doc_type":"10-Q","doc_date":"2026-05-13","source_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1055726/0001055726-26-000018-index.html","accession_number":"0001055726-26-000018","cik":"0001055726","ticker":"INO","issuer_name":"INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.","edgar_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1055726/0001055726-26-000018-index.html","primary_entity_key":"0001055726","primary_entity_name":"INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC."},"word_count":508,"has_tables":true,"body_markdown":"ITEM 1.    LEGAL PROCEEDINGS\n\nVGXI Litigation\n\nOn June 3, 2020, the Company filed a complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania against VGXI, Inc. and GeneOne Life Science, Inc., or GeneOne, collectively referred to as “VGXI”, alleging that VGXI materially breached the Company’s supply agreement. The complaint seeks declaratory judgments, specific performance of the agreement, injunctive relief, an accounting, damages, attorneys’ fees, interest, costs and other relief from VGXI. On July 7, 2020, VGXI filed an answer, new matter and counterclaims against the Company, alleging that the Company breached the supply agreement, as well as misappropriation of trade secrets and unjust enrichment. The counterclaims seek injunctive relief, damages, attorneys’ fees, interest, costs and other relief from the Company. On July 27, 2020, the Company filed an answer to VGXI’s counterclaims, disputing the allegations and the claims raised in VGXI’s filing. All discovery is closed and the parties are waiting for a trial date. The Company intends to aggressively prosecute the claims in the complaint and defend the counterclaims.\n\nSecurities Litigation\n\nOn February 6, 2026, a purported shareholder class action complaint, Carlson v. Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Jacqueline Shea, and Peter Kies, was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, naming the Company, Jacqueline Shea, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, and Peter Kies, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the Company made materially false and misleading statements regarding its submission to the FDA and the FDA’s review timeline for the Biologics License Application for INO-3107 in its public disclosures in violation of certain federal securities laws. The plaintiff seeks unspecified monetary damages on behalf of the putative class and an award of costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.\n\nOn March 5, 2026, a purported shareholder derivative complaint, Shin v. Shea, et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, naming Jacqueline Shea, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Peter Kies, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, and seven current directors as defendants. The lawsuit asserts state and federal claims and is based on the same alleged misstatements as the shareholder class action complaint. The lawsuit accuses our board of directors of failing to exercise reasonable and prudent supervision over our management, policies, internal controls and operations. The plaintiff seeks unspecified monetary damages on behalf of us as well as governance reforms.\n\nOn March 16, 2026, a second shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, captioned Pepito v. Shea, et al.; and on May 1, 2026, a third shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Corut for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, captioned Panes v. Shea, et al. Both complaints assert substantially similar claims as the Shin action and names the same defendants. On March 23, 2026, the plaintiffs in the first two derivative actions stipulated to consolidating the cases under the caption In re Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Derivative Litigation.\n\nWe intend to defend both actions vigorously."}