XML 29 R12.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.19.1
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

NOTE 6 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Litigation settlement

 

In November 2016, an individual filed an action in Cook County, Illinois, against the Company; David J. Moss, its Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary ; and Raymond J. Tesi, its president and Chief Executive Officer (the Company, Mr. Moss and Mr. Tesi are referred to collectively as the “Company Parties”). The action alleged claims against the Company Parties concerning payment of monies and/or securities allegedly owed. In April 2017, the Company Parties and the Claimant entered into a Settlement Agreement and Mutual General Release agreement with that individual (the “Settlement Agreement”). Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Company agreed to issue 33,335 shares of the Company’s common stock valued at $50,000, based on the value of the stock of the last round of financing of $1.50 per share. The Company assessed the value of the common stock owed as of December 31, 2017, and determined that the $1.50 per share value form the most recent round of financing was still the most readily determinable value of the shares of the Company’s common stock issuable as a part of this settlement. These shares have not been issued and are subject to a restriction on transfer for a period of two years from the date the Company completes an initial public offering or otherwise becomes a public company after which the Company will deliver the shares to the Claimant. The agreement to issue the shares following the two-year restriction period was a full and complete settlement of all claims that the Claimant may have had against the Company Parties and the Cook County action was dismissed with prejudice. The obligation was recorded as common stock issuable of $50,000 as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, pending delivery of the shares to the Claimant after the restriction period expires.

 

Trademark settlement

 

During 2017, the Company received notice that another company had filed a trademark application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to register a certain trademark. The Company filed an opposition in the United States Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Subsequently, INmune and the other company entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which the Company agreed not to oppose the other company’s trademark and the other company paid INmune cash proceeds of $150,000 in full consideration for the settlement agreement, which the Company recorded as other income in the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2017.