Company: MLTX
Filing Date: 2025-11-05
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001821586-25-000022
Chunk: 166

Company: MoonLake Immunotherapeutics
Filing Date: 2025-11-05
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 2
Chunk 166
---
 how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In addition, the design of disclosure controls and procedures must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and that management is required to apply judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to their costs. Lastly, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

48

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

s

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

On October 15, 2025, a lawsuit captioned Bridgewood v. MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-8500 (the “Bridgewood Action”) was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, naming the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, and its Chief Financial Officer as defendants. The Bridgewood Action was purportedly brought on behalf of a class of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s common stock between March 10, 2024, through September 29, 2025. The complaint alleged claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), based on allegedly false or misleading statements related to the clinical benefits and prospects of sonelokimab. The lawsuit sought unspecified damages and other relief. On October 22, 2025, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed without prejudice the Bridgewood Action.

On October 17, 2025, a second putative class action captioned Peters v. MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-8612 (the “Peters Action” and, together with the Bridgewood Action, the “Class Actions”) was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Peters Action names the same defendants, contains identical allegations of alleged violations of the Exchange Act, and seeks the same relief as the Bridgewood Action. 

The defendants deny the allegations of wrongdoing in the Class Actions and intend to vigorously defend against the claims.  The Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the Peters Action and therefore cannot estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, if any, that may result from the lawsuit.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Any of the risks described in our Annual Report