Company: VRCA
Filing Date: 2025-03-11
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0000950170-25-037172
Chunk: 98

Company: Verrica Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-03-11
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1A
Chunk 98
---
 (VP-102) and our cantharidin-based product candidates.

Patent applications covering products containing the same active ingredient as YCANTH (VP-102) and our cantharidin-based product candidates indicates that competitors have sought to develop and may seek to commercialize competing formulations that may not be covered by our patents and patent applications. The commercial opportunity for YCANTH (VP-102) and our cantharidin-based product candidates could be significantly harmed if competitors are able to develop and commercialize alternative formulations of YCANTH (VP-102) and our cantharidin-based product candidates that are different from ours and do not infringe our issued patents covering YCANTH (VP-102) and our cantharidin-based product candidates, our device, our manufacturing processes, or uses of YCANTH (VP-102) and our cantharidin-based product candidates.

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

Competitors may infringe the patents we have been granted. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. If we initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering YCANTH (VP-102) or one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product or product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are common, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. Third parties may also raise similar 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 (IPR), and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product or product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example