[424B5] Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. Prospectus Supplement (Debt Securities)
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) filed an 8-K to disclose that on July 10, 2025 an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in U.S. ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1400 issued a Notice of Initial Determination finding a violation of Section 337 by Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. and affiliates). The ALJ also issued a Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond. GoPro attached the Notice as Exhibit 99.1 and a related press release as Exhibit 99.2.
The Item 7.01 disclosure states the Notice is now part of the public record and will be considered by the full International Trade Commission in a forthcoming Final Determination. GoPro cautions that outcomes remain subject to ITC review, potential presidential review, and additional litigation steps. No financial metrics or earnings data were provided.
- Immediate impact: Positive indication for GoPro’s patent-enforcement strategy but non-binding until affirmed by the full ITC.
- Next milestones: Final ITC decision, potential remedy (e.g., exclusion order), and 60-day presidential review period.
- Risk factors: Final decision could differ; timelines and remedies are uncertain, all noted in the forward-looking-statement disclaimer.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) ha presentato un modulo 8-K per comunicare che il 10 luglio 2025 un Giudice Amministrativo (ALJ) nell'ambito dell'Indagine ITC USA n. 337-TA-1400 ha emesso un Avviso di Determinazione Iniziale che rileva una violazione della Sezione 337 da parte di Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. e affiliati). L'ALJ ha anche emesso una Determinazione Raccomandata su Rimedi e Cauzione. GoPro ha allegato l'Avviso come Allegato 99.1 e un comunicato stampa correlato come Allegato 99.2.
La comunicazione all'Elemento 7.01 indica che l'Avviso è ora parte del registro pubblico e sarà esaminato dalla Commissione per il Commercio Internazionale completa in una prossima Determinazione Finale. GoPro avverte che i risultati sono ancora soggetti a revisione da parte dell'ITC, possibile revisione presidenziale e ulteriori azioni legali. Non sono stati forniti dati finanziari o di guadagni.
- Impatto immediato: Indicazione positiva per la strategia di tutela dei brevetti di GoPro, ma non vincolante finché non confermata dall'intera ITC.
- Prossime tappe: Decisione finale dell'ITC, possibile rimedio (ad esempio, ordine di esclusione) e periodo di revisione presidenziale di 60 giorni.
- Fattori di rischio: La decisione finale potrebbe essere diversa; tempi e rimedi sono incerti, come indicato nel disclaimer sulle dichiarazioni previsionali.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) presentó un formulario 8-K para informar que el 10 de julio de 2025 un Juez Administrativo (ALJ) en la Investigación de la ITC de EE. UU. No. 337-TA-1400 emitió un Aviso de Determinación Inicial que encuentra una violación de la Sección 337 por parte de Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. y afiliados). El ALJ también emitió una Determinación Recomendada sobre Remedios y Fianzas. GoPro adjuntó el Aviso como Anexo 99.1 y un comunicado de prensa relacionado como Anexo 99.2.
La divulgación del Ítem 7.01 indica que el Aviso ahora forma parte del registro público y será considerado por la Comisión Internacional de Comercio completa en una próxima Determinación Final. GoPro advierte que los resultados aún están sujetos a revisión por parte de la ITC, posible revisión presidencial y pasos adicionales de litigio. No se proporcionaron métricas financieras ni datos de ganancias.
- Impacto inmediato: Indicación positiva para la estrategia de protección de patentes de GoPro, pero no vinculante hasta que sea confirmada por la ITC completa.
- Próximos hitos: Decisión final de la ITC, posible remedio (por ejemplo, orden de exclusión) y período de revisión presidencial de 60 días.
- Factores de riesgo: La decisión final podría ser diferente; los plazos y remedios son inciertos, todo indicado en el descargo de responsabilidad sobre declaraciones prospectivas.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO)는 2025년 7월 10일 미국 ITC 조사 번호 337-TA-1400에서 행정법 판사(ALJ)가 Insta360(Arashi Vision Inc. 및 계열사)의 섹션 337 위반을 인정하는 초기 결정 통지를 발행했다고 8-K 보고서를 통해 공개했습니다. ALJ는 또한 구제책 및 보증금에 관한 권고 결정을 발표했습니다. GoPro는 이 통지를 부속서 99.1로, 관련 보도자료를 부속서 99.2로 첨부했습니다.
항목 7.01 공개 내용에 따르면 이 통지는 현재 공개 기록의 일부이며, 곧 있을 최종 결정에서 국제무역위원회 전체가 검토할 예정입니다. GoPro는 결과가 ITC 검토, 대통령 검토 가능성, 추가 소송 절차에 따라 달라질 수 있음을 경고했습니다. 재무 지표나 수익 데이터는 제공되지 않았습니다.
- 즉각적인 영향: GoPro의 특허 집행 전략에 긍정적 신호이나, 전체 ITC가 확정할 때까지는 구속력 없음.
- 다음 단계: ITC 최종 결정, 잠재적 구제 조치(예: 제외 명령) 및 60일간 대통령 검토 기간.
- 위험 요소: 최종 결정은 달라질 수 있으며, 일정과 구제 조치는 불확실함. 이는 미래 예측 진술 면책 조항에 명시되어 있음.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ : GPRO) a déposé un formulaire 8-K pour divulguer que le 10 juillet 2025, un juge administratif (ALJ) dans l'enquête ITC américaine n° 337-TA-1400 a émis un Avis de Décision Initiale constatant une violation de la Section 337 par Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. et affiliés). L'ALJ a également émis une décision recommandée concernant le recours et la caution. GoPro a joint l'Avis en tant qu'Exhibit 99.1 ainsi qu'un communiqué de presse associé en tant qu'Exhibit 99.2.
La divulgation à l'Item 7.01 indique que l'Avis fait désormais partie du dossier public et sera examiné par la Commission internationale du commerce dans une prochaine Décision Finale. GoPro avertit que les résultats restent soumis à l'examen de l'ITC, à un éventuel examen présidentiel et à des procédures judiciaires supplémentaires. Aucune donnée financière ou résultat n'a été communiqué.
- Impact immédiat : Indication positive pour la stratégie d'application des brevets de GoPro, mais non contraignante tant qu'elle n'est pas confirmée par l'ensemble de l'ITC.
- Prochaines étapes : Décision finale de l'ITC, recours potentiel (par exemple, ordre d'exclusion) et période d'examen présidentiel de 60 jours.
- Facteurs de risque : La décision finale pourrait différer ; les délais et recours sont incertains, comme indiqué dans la clause de non-responsabilité relative aux déclarations prospectives.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) reichte ein 8-K ein, um mitzuteilen, dass am 10. Juli 2025 ein Verwaltungsrichter (ALJ) in der US-ITC-Untersuchung Nr. 337-TA-1400 eine Mitteilung über eine vorläufige Feststellung einer Verletzung von Abschnitt 337 durch Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. und verbundene Unternehmen) erlassen hat. Der ALJ gab außerdem eine empfohlene Entscheidung zu Abhilfemaßnahmen und Kaution heraus. GoPro legte die Mitteilung als Anlage 99.1 und eine dazugehörige Pressemitteilung als Anlage 99.2 bei.
Die Offenlegung unter Punkt 7.01 besagt, dass die Mitteilung nun Teil des öffentlichen Registers ist und von der gesamten Internationalen Handelskommission in einer bevorstehenden Endgültigen Entscheidung berücksichtigt wird. GoPro weist darauf hin, dass die Ergebnisse noch der Überprüfung durch die ITC, einer möglichen Überprüfung durch den Präsidenten und weiteren Rechtsverfahren unterliegen. Es wurden keine finanziellen Kennzahlen oder Gewinnangaben gemacht.
- Unmittelbare Auswirkung: Positives Signal für GoPros Patentdurchsetzungsstrategie, jedoch nicht bindend, bis es von der gesamten ITC bestätigt wird.
- Nächste Meilensteine: Endgültige ITC-Entscheidung, mögliche Abhilfemaßnahmen (z.B. Ausschlussanordnung) und 60-tägige Überprüfungsfrist durch den Präsidenten.
- Risikofaktoren: Die endgültige Entscheidung könnte abweichen; Zeitpläne und Abhilfen sind ungewiss, wie im Hinweis zu zukunftsgerichteten Aussagen angegeben.
- None.
- None.
Insights
TL;DR: ALJ finds Section 337 violation; strong but preliminary win for GoPro’s patents.
The ALJ’s Notice confirms Insta360 infringed at least one asserted claim, triggering a recommended remedy. While the decision bolsters GoPro’s leverage, it is not yet enforceable; the full Commission will review the findings, typically within four to six months, and the remedy could range from an import ban to cease-and-desist orders. Historical data show that roughly 80% of ALJ infringement findings are affirmed, lending weight to GoPro’s position. Nevertheless, parties may petition for review and a presidential veto remains possible. From an IP perspective, today’s disclosure is a material positive step in protecting GoPro’s market share against Insta360’s competing 360-degree cameras.
TL;DR: Potentially favorable outcome, but financial impact awaits final ITC ruling.
The filing signals progress in GoPro’s litigation strategy, yet provides no quantitative data on revenue exposure, legal costs, or potential licensing gains. Investors should watch for the Final Determination date, because an exclusion order against Insta360 could meaningfully ease competitive pressure in the action-camera niche. Until then, no change is warranted to earnings models. The forward-looking statements section highlights litigation risk and timing uncertainty, indicating that today’s news, while encouraging, remains neutral to near-term fundamentals.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) ha presentato un modulo 8-K per comunicare che il 10 luglio 2025 un Giudice Amministrativo (ALJ) nell'ambito dell'Indagine ITC USA n. 337-TA-1400 ha emesso un Avviso di Determinazione Iniziale che rileva una violazione della Sezione 337 da parte di Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. e affiliati). L'ALJ ha anche emesso una Determinazione Raccomandata su Rimedi e Cauzione. GoPro ha allegato l'Avviso come Allegato 99.1 e un comunicato stampa correlato come Allegato 99.2.
La comunicazione all'Elemento 7.01 indica che l'Avviso è ora parte del registro pubblico e sarà esaminato dalla Commissione per il Commercio Internazionale completa in una prossima Determinazione Finale. GoPro avverte che i risultati sono ancora soggetti a revisione da parte dell'ITC, possibile revisione presidenziale e ulteriori azioni legali. Non sono stati forniti dati finanziari o di guadagni.
- Impatto immediato: Indicazione positiva per la strategia di tutela dei brevetti di GoPro, ma non vincolante finché non confermata dall'intera ITC.
- Prossime tappe: Decisione finale dell'ITC, possibile rimedio (ad esempio, ordine di esclusione) e periodo di revisione presidenziale di 60 giorni.
- Fattori di rischio: La decisione finale potrebbe essere diversa; tempi e rimedi sono incerti, come indicato nel disclaimer sulle dichiarazioni previsionali.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) presentó un formulario 8-K para informar que el 10 de julio de 2025 un Juez Administrativo (ALJ) en la Investigación de la ITC de EE. UU. No. 337-TA-1400 emitió un Aviso de Determinación Inicial que encuentra una violación de la Sección 337 por parte de Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. y afiliados). El ALJ también emitió una Determinación Recomendada sobre Remedios y Fianzas. GoPro adjuntó el Aviso como Anexo 99.1 y un comunicado de prensa relacionado como Anexo 99.2.
La divulgación del Ítem 7.01 indica que el Aviso ahora forma parte del registro público y será considerado por la Comisión Internacional de Comercio completa en una próxima Determinación Final. GoPro advierte que los resultados aún están sujetos a revisión por parte de la ITC, posible revisión presidencial y pasos adicionales de litigio. No se proporcionaron métricas financieras ni datos de ganancias.
- Impacto inmediato: Indicación positiva para la estrategia de protección de patentes de GoPro, pero no vinculante hasta que sea confirmada por la ITC completa.
- Próximos hitos: Decisión final de la ITC, posible remedio (por ejemplo, orden de exclusión) y período de revisión presidencial de 60 días.
- Factores de riesgo: La decisión final podría ser diferente; los plazos y remedios son inciertos, todo indicado en el descargo de responsabilidad sobre declaraciones prospectivas.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO)는 2025년 7월 10일 미국 ITC 조사 번호 337-TA-1400에서 행정법 판사(ALJ)가 Insta360(Arashi Vision Inc. 및 계열사)의 섹션 337 위반을 인정하는 초기 결정 통지를 발행했다고 8-K 보고서를 통해 공개했습니다. ALJ는 또한 구제책 및 보증금에 관한 권고 결정을 발표했습니다. GoPro는 이 통지를 부속서 99.1로, 관련 보도자료를 부속서 99.2로 첨부했습니다.
항목 7.01 공개 내용에 따르면 이 통지는 현재 공개 기록의 일부이며, 곧 있을 최종 결정에서 국제무역위원회 전체가 검토할 예정입니다. GoPro는 결과가 ITC 검토, 대통령 검토 가능성, 추가 소송 절차에 따라 달라질 수 있음을 경고했습니다. 재무 지표나 수익 데이터는 제공되지 않았습니다.
- 즉각적인 영향: GoPro의 특허 집행 전략에 긍정적 신호이나, 전체 ITC가 확정할 때까지는 구속력 없음.
- 다음 단계: ITC 최종 결정, 잠재적 구제 조치(예: 제외 명령) 및 60일간 대통령 검토 기간.
- 위험 요소: 최종 결정은 달라질 수 있으며, 일정과 구제 조치는 불확실함. 이는 미래 예측 진술 면책 조항에 명시되어 있음.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ : GPRO) a déposé un formulaire 8-K pour divulguer que le 10 juillet 2025, un juge administratif (ALJ) dans l'enquête ITC américaine n° 337-TA-1400 a émis un Avis de Décision Initiale constatant une violation de la Section 337 par Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. et affiliés). L'ALJ a également émis une décision recommandée concernant le recours et la caution. GoPro a joint l'Avis en tant qu'Exhibit 99.1 ainsi qu'un communiqué de presse associé en tant qu'Exhibit 99.2.
La divulgation à l'Item 7.01 indique que l'Avis fait désormais partie du dossier public et sera examiné par la Commission internationale du commerce dans une prochaine Décision Finale. GoPro avertit que les résultats restent soumis à l'examen de l'ITC, à un éventuel examen présidentiel et à des procédures judiciaires supplémentaires. Aucune donnée financière ou résultat n'a été communiqué.
- Impact immédiat : Indication positive pour la stratégie d'application des brevets de GoPro, mais non contraignante tant qu'elle n'est pas confirmée par l'ensemble de l'ITC.
- Prochaines étapes : Décision finale de l'ITC, recours potentiel (par exemple, ordre d'exclusion) et période d'examen présidentiel de 60 jours.
- Facteurs de risque : La décision finale pourrait différer ; les délais et recours sont incertains, comme indiqué dans la clause de non-responsabilité relative aux déclarations prospectives.
GoPro, Inc. (NASDAQ: GPRO) reichte ein 8-K ein, um mitzuteilen, dass am 10. Juli 2025 ein Verwaltungsrichter (ALJ) in der US-ITC-Untersuchung Nr. 337-TA-1400 eine Mitteilung über eine vorläufige Feststellung einer Verletzung von Abschnitt 337 durch Insta360 (Arashi Vision Inc. und verbundene Unternehmen) erlassen hat. Der ALJ gab außerdem eine empfohlene Entscheidung zu Abhilfemaßnahmen und Kaution heraus. GoPro legte die Mitteilung als Anlage 99.1 und eine dazugehörige Pressemitteilung als Anlage 99.2 bei.
Die Offenlegung unter Punkt 7.01 besagt, dass die Mitteilung nun Teil des öffentlichen Registers ist und von der gesamten Internationalen Handelskommission in einer bevorstehenden Endgültigen Entscheidung berücksichtigt wird. GoPro weist darauf hin, dass die Ergebnisse noch der Überprüfung durch die ITC, einer möglichen Überprüfung durch den Präsidenten und weiteren Rechtsverfahren unterliegen. Es wurden keine finanziellen Kennzahlen oder Gewinnangaben gemacht.
- Unmittelbare Auswirkung: Positives Signal für GoPros Patentdurchsetzungsstrategie, jedoch nicht bindend, bis es von der gesamten ITC bestätigt wird.
- Nächste Meilensteine: Endgültige ITC-Entscheidung, mögliche Abhilfemaßnahmen (z.B. Ausschlussanordnung) und 60-tägige Überprüfungsfrist durch den Präsidenten.
- Risikofaktoren: Die endgültige Entscheidung könnte abweichen; Zeitpläne und Abhilfen sind ungewiss, wie im Hinweis zu zukunftsgerichteten Aussagen angegeben.
![[MISSING IMAGE: lg_milestonepharma-4c.jpg]](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001408443/000110465925067130/lg_milestonepharma-4c.jpg)
| | |
Per common share
and accompanying Common Warrants |
| |
Per Pre-Funded
Warrant and accompanying Common Warrants |
| |
Total
|
| |||||||||
Public offering price | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||
Underwriting discounts and commissions(1) | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||
Proceeds, before expenses to us | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |
|
TD Cowen
|
| |
Piper Sandler
|
| |
Wells Fargo Securities
|
|
| | |
Page
|
| |||
ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS SUPPLEMENT
|
| | | | S-1 | | |
PROSPECTUS SUPPLEMENT SUMMARY
|
| | | | S-3 | | |
THE OFFERING
|
| | | | S-8 | | |
RISK FACTORS
|
| | | | S-10 | | |
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
|
| | | | S-14 | | |
USE OF PROCEEDS
|
| | | | S-16 | | |
DIVIDEND POLICY
|
| | | | S-17 | | |
DILUTION
|
| | | | S-18 | | |
DESCRIPTION OF WARRANTS
|
| | | | S-20 | | |
MATERIAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS
|
| | | | S-24 | | |
UNDERWRITING
|
| | | | S-34 | | |
LEGAL MATTERS
|
| | | | S-41 | | |
EXPERTS
|
| | | | S-41 | | |
SERVICE OF PROCESS AND ENFORCEMENT OF LIABILITIES
|
| | | | S-41 | | |
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
|
| | | | S-42 | | |
INCORPORATION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION BY REFERENCE
|
| | | | S-42 | | |
|
ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS
|
| | | | 1 | | |
|
SUMMARY
|
| | | | 2 | | |
|
RISK FACTORS
|
| | | | 7 | | |
|
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
|
| | | | 8 | | |
|
USE OF PROCEEDS
|
| | | | 10 | | |
|
DESCRIPTION OF SHARE CAPITAL
|
| | | | 11 | | |
|
DESCRIPTION OF DEBT SECURITIES
|
| | | | 14 | | |
|
DESCRIPTION OF WARRANTS
|
| | | | 21 | | |
|
MATERIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE QBCA AND THE DGCL
|
| | | | 24 | | |
|
LEGAL OWNERSHIP OF SECURITIES
|
| | | | 35 | | |
|
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION
|
| | | | 38 | | |
|
LEGAL MATTERS
|
| | | | 40 | | |
|
EXPERTS
|
| | | | 40 | | |
|
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
|
| | | | 41 | | |
|
INCORPORATION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION BY REFERENCE
|
| | | | 42 | | |
Us
Symbol
|
Combined offering price per common share and accompanying Common Warrants
|
| | | | | | | | | $ | | | |
|
Net tangible book value per share as of March 31, 2025
|
| | | $ | (0.16) | | | | | | | | |
|
Increase in adjusted net tangible book value per share attributable investors purchasing common shares and Warrants in this offering
|
| | | $ | | | | | | | | | |
|
As adjusted net tangible book value per share as of March 31, 2025, after giving effect
to this offering |
| | | | | | | | | $ | | | |
|
Dilution per share to investors purchasing our common shares in this offering
|
| | | | | | | | | $ | | | |
Underwriter
|
| |
Number of
Common Shares |
| |
Number
of Pre- Funded Warrants |
| |
Number of
Accompanying Series A Common Warrants |
| |
Number of
Accompanying Series B Common Warrants |
|
TD Securities (USA) LLC
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Piper Sandler & Co.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Wells Fargo Securities, LLC
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | |
Per Common Share
and Accompanying Common Warrants |
| |
Per Pre-Funded
Warrant and Accompanying Common Warrants |
| |
Totals
|
| |||||||||
Public offering price
|
| | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||
Underwriting discounts and commissions
|
| | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||
Proceeds, before expenses, to us
|
| | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |
![[MISSING IMAGE: lg_milestonepharma-4c.jpg]](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001408443/000110465925067130/lg_milestonepharma-4c.jpg)
Preferred Shares
Debt Securities
Warrants
|
ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS
|
| | | | 1 | | |
|
SUMMARY
|
| | | | 2 | | |
|
RISK FACTORS
|
| | | | 7 | | |
|
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
|
| | | | 8 | | |
|
USE OF PROCEEDS
|
| | | | 10 | | |
|
DESCRIPTION OF SHARE CAPITAL
|
| | | | 11 | | |
|
DESCRIPTION OF DEBT SECURITIES
|
| | | | 14 | | |
|
DESCRIPTION OF WARRANTS
|
| | | | 21 | | |
|
MATERIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE QBCA AND THE DGCL
|
| | | | 24 | | |
|
LEGAL OWNERSHIP OF SECURITIES
|
| | | | 35 | | |
|
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION
|
| | | | 38 | | |
|
LEGAL MATTERS
|
| | | | 40 | | |
|
EXPERTS
|
| | | | 40 | | |
|
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
|
| | | | 41 | | |
|
INCORPORATION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION BY REFERENCE
|
| | | | 42 | | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
|
Number and Election of Directors
|
| | Under the DGCL, the board of directors must consist of at least one director. The number of directors shall be fixed by the bylaws of the corporation, unless the certificate of incorporation fixes the number of directors, in which case a change in the number of directors shall only be made by an amendment of the certificate of incorporation. Under the DGCL, directors are elected at annual stockholder meetings by plurality vote of the stockholders, unless a shareholder — adopted bylaw prescribes a different required vote. | | | Under the QBCA, the board of directors of a corporation must consist of at least three members, at least two of whom must not be officers or employees of the corporation or an affiliate of the corporation, so long as the corporation remains a “reporting issuer” for purposes of the QBCA, which includes a corporation that has made a distribution of securities to the public. Under the QBCA, directors are elected by the shareholders, in the manner and for the term, not exceeding three years, set out in the corporation’s bylaws. Our bylaws provide that our directors are elected at each annual meeting of shareholders at which such an election is required. | |
|
Removal of Directors
|
| | Under the DGCL, any director or the entire board of directors may be removed, with or without cause, by the holders of a majority of the shares then entitled to vote at an election of directors, except (i) unless the certificate of incorporation provides otherwise, in the case of a corporation whose board of directors is classified, stockholders may effect such removal only for cause, or (ii) in the case of a corporation having cumulative voting, if less than the entire board of directors is to be removed, no director may be removed without cause if the votes cast against his removal would be sufficient to elect him if then cumulatively voted at an election of the entire board of directors, or, if there are classes of directors, at an election of the class of directors of which he is a part. | | | Under the QBCA, unless the articles of a corporation provide for cumulative voting (which is not the case for us), shareholders of the corporation may, by resolution passed by a majority of the vote cast thereon at a special meeting of shareholders, remove any or all directors from office and may elect any qualified person to fill the resulting vacancy. | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
|
Vacancies on the Board of Directors
|
| | Under the DGCL, vacancies and newly created directorships may be filled by a majority of the directors then in office (even though less than a quorum) or by a sole remaining director unless (i) otherwise provided in the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of the corporation or (ii) the certificate of incorporation directs that a particular class of stock is to elect such director, in which case a majority of the other directors elected by such class, or a sole remaining director elected by such class, will fill such vacancy. | | | Under the QBCA, vacancies that exist on the board of directors may generally be filled by the board if the remaining directors constitute a quorum. In the absence of a quorum, the remaining directors shall call a meeting of shareholders to fill the vacancy. If the directors refuse or fail to call a meeting or if there are no directors then in office, the meeting may be called by any shareholder. | |
|
Board of Director Quorum and Vote Requirements
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a majority of the total number of directors shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business unless the certificate of incorporation or bylaws require a greater number. The bylaws may lower the number required for a quorum to one-third the number of directors, but no less.
Under the DGCL, the board of directors may take action by the majority vote of the directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is present unless the certificate of incorporation or bylaws require a greater vote.
|
| |
Under the QBCA, subject to the corporation’s bylaws, a majority of the directors in office constitutes a quorum at any meeting of the board. Our bylaws also provide that a majority of the directors in office constitutes a quorum at any meeting of the board.
Under the QBCA, a quorum of directors may exercise all the powers of the directors despite any vacancy on the board.
|
|
|
Transactions with Directors and Officers
|
| | The DGCL generally provides that no transaction between a corporation and one or more of its directors or officers, or between a corporation and any other corporation or other organization in which one or more of its directors or officers, are directors or officers, or have a financial interest, shall be void or voidable solely for this reason, or solely because the director or officer is present at or participates in the meeting of the board or committee which authorizes the transaction, or solely because any such director’s or officer’s votes are counted for such purpose, if (i) the material facts as to the director’s or officer’s interest and as to the transaction are known to the board of directors or the committee, and the | | | transaction, including related negotiations, is considered a contract or transaction. In addition, a director or an officer must disclose any contract or transaction to which the corporation and any of the following are a party: (i) an associate of the director or officer; (ii) a group of which the director or officer is a director or officer; or (iii) a group in which the director or officer or an associate of the director or officer has an interest. Such disclosure is required even for a contract or transaction that does not require approval by the board of directors. If a director is required to disclose his or her interest in a contract or transaction, such director is not allowed to vote on any resolution to | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | board or committee in good faith authorizes the transaction by the affirmative votes of a majority of the disinterested directors, even though the disinterested directors be less than a quorum (ii) the material facts as to the director’s or officer’s interest and as to the transaction are disclosed or are known to the stockholders entitled to vote thereon, and the transaction is specifically approved in good faith by vote of the stockholders; or (iii) the transaction is fair as to the corporation as of the time it is authorized, approved or ratified, by the board of directors, a committee or the stockholders. | | |
approve, amend or terminate the contract or transaction or be present during deliberations concerning the approval, amendment or termination of such contract or transaction, unless the contract or transaction (i) relates primarily to the remuneration of the director or an associate of the director as a director, officer, employee or mandatory of the corporation or an affiliate of the corporation, (ii) is for indemnity or liability insurance under the QBCA, or (iii) is with an affiliate of the corporation, and the sole interest of the director is as a director or officer of the affiliate.
If a director or officer does not disclose his or her interest in accordance with the QBCA, or (in the case of a director) votes in respect of a resolution on a contract or transaction in which he or she is interested contrary to the QBCA, the corporation or a shareholder may ask the court to declare the contract or transaction null and to require the director or officer to account to the corporation for any profit or gain realized on it by the director or officer or the associates of the director or officer, and to remit the profit or gain to the corporation, according to the conditions the court considers appropriate. However, the contract or transaction may not be declared null if it was approved by the board of directors and the contract or transaction was in the interest of the corporation when it was approved, nor may the director or officer concerned, in such a case, be required to account for any profit or gain realized or to remit the profit or gain to the corporation. In addition, the contract or transaction may not be declared null if it was approved by ordinary resolution by the shareholders entitled to vote who do not have an interest in the contract or transaction, the required disclosure was made to the shareholders in a sufficiently clear manner and the
|
|
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | | | | contract or transaction was in the best interests of the corporation when it was approved, and if the director or officer acted honestly and in good faith, he or she may not be required to account for the profit or gain realized and to remit the profit or gain to the corporation. | |
|
Limitation on Liability of Directors
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a corporation’s certificate of incorporation may include a provision eliminating or limiting the personal liability of a director to the corporation and its stockholders for damages arising from a breach of fiduciary duty as a director. However, no provision can limit the liability of a director for:
•
breach of the director’s duty of loyalty to the corporation or its stockholders;
•
acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of the law;
•
intentional or negligent payment of unlawful dividends or stock purchases or redemptions; or
•
for any transaction from which the director derived an improper personal benefit.
|
| | The QBCA does not permit the limitation of a director’s liability as the DGCL does. | |
|
Indemnification of Directors and Officers
|
| | The DGCL permits indemnification for derivative suits only for expenses (including legal fees) and only if the person is not found liable, unless a court determines the person is fairly and reasonably entitled to the indemnification. | | | Under the QBCA, a corporation must indemnify a director or officer, a former director or officer or a person who acts or acted at the corporation’s request as a director or officer, or an individual acting in a similar capacity of another group (who is referred to in this document as an indemnifiable person) against all costs, charges and expenses, including an amount paid to settle an action or satisfy a judgment, reasonably incurred by the indemnifiable person on the exercise of the person’s functions or arising from any investigative or other proceeding in which the person is involved if: | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | | | |
•
the person acted honestly and loyally in the interest of the corporation or other group, and
|
|
| | | | | | |
•
in the case of a proceeding enforceable by a monetary penalty, the person had reasonable grounds for believing the person’s conduct was lawful.
In the case of a derivative action, indemnity may be made only with court approval.
|
|
|
Call and Notice of Shareholder Meetings
|
| | Under the DGCL, an annual or special stockholder meeting is held on such date, at such time and at such place as may be designated by the board of directors or any other person authorized to call such meeting under the corporation’s certificate of incorporation or bylaws. If an annual meeting for election of directors is not held on the date designated or an action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting has not been taken within 30 days after the date designated for the annual meeting, or if no date has been designated, for a period of 13 months after the later of the last annual meeting or the last action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting, the Delaware Court of Chancery may summarily order a meeting to be held upon the application of any stockholder or director. | | | Under the QBCA, an annual meeting of shareholders must be held no later than 15 months after holding the last preceding annual meeting. Under the QBCA, the directors of a corporation may call a special meeting at any time. In addition, holders of not less than 10% of the issued shares of a corporation that carry the right to vote at a meeting sought to be held may requisition the directors to call a meeting of shareholders for the purposes stated in the requisition. | |
|
Shareholder Action by Written Consent
|
| | Under the DGCL, a majority of the stockholders of a corporation may act by written consent without a meeting unless such action is prohibited by the corporation’s certificate of incorporation. | | | Under the QBCA, a written resolution signed by all the shareholders of a corporation who would have been entitled to vote on the resolution at a meeting is effective to approve the resolution. | |
|
Shareholder Nominations and Proposals
|
| | Not applicable. | | | Under the QBCA, a shareholder entitled to vote at a shareholders’ meeting may submit a shareholder proposal relating to matters which the shareholder wishes to propose and discuss at an annual shareholders’ meeting and, subject to such shareholder’s compliance with the prescribed time periods and other | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | | | |
requirements of the QBCA pertaining to shareholder proposals, the corporation is required to include such proposal in the information circular pertaining to any annual meeting at which it solicits proxies, subject to certain exceptions. Notice of such a proposal must be provided to the corporation at least 90 days before the anniversary date of the notice of meeting for the last annual shareholders’ meeting.
In addition, the QBCA requires that any shareholder proposal that includes nominations for the election of directors must be signed by one or more holders of shares representing in the aggregate not less than five per cent of the shares or five per cent of the shares of a class of shares of the corporation entitled to vote at the meeting to which the proposal is to be presented.
Our bylaws require shareholders wishing to nominate directors or propose business for a meeting of shareholders to give timely advance notice in writing, as described in our bylaws.
|
|
|
Shareholder Quorum and Vote Requirements
|
| | Under the DGCL, quorum for a stock corporation is a majority of the shares entitled to vote at the meeting unless the certificate of incorporation or bylaws specify a different quorum, but in no event may a quorum be less than one-third of the shares entitled to vote. Unless the DGCL, certificate of incorporation or bylaws provide for a greater vote, generally the required vote under the DGCL is a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy, except for the election of directors which requires a plurality of the votes cast. | | | Under the QBCA, unless the bylaws otherwise provide, the holders of a majority of the shares of a corporation entitled to vote at a meeting of shareholders, whether present in person or represented by proxy, constitute a quorum. | |
|
Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation
|
| | Generally, under the DGCL, the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding stock entitled to vote is required to approve a proposed amendment to the certificate of incorporation, following | | | Under the QBCA, amendments to the articles generally require the approval of not less than two-thirds of the votes cast by shareholders entitled to vote on the resolution. Specified amendments may also require the | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | the adoption of the amendment by the board of directors of the corporation, provided that the certificate of incorporation may provide for a greater vote. Under the DGCL, holders of outstanding shares of a class or series are entitled to vote separately on an amendment to the certificate of incorporation if the amendment would have certain consequences, including changes that adversely affect the rights and preferences of such class or series. | | | separate approval of other classes of shares. If the amendment is of a nature affecting a particular class or series in a manner requiring a separate class or series vote, that class or series is entitled to vote on the amendment whether or not it otherwise carries the right to vote. | |
|
Amendment of Bylaws
|
| | Under the DGCL, after a corporation has received any payment for any of its stock, the power to adopt, amend or repeal bylaws shall be vested in the stockholders entitled to vote; provided, however, that any corporation may, in its certificate of incorporation, provide that bylaws may be adopted, amended or repealed by the board of directors. The fact that such power has been conferred upon the board of directors shall not divest the stockholders of the power nor limit their power to adopt, amend or repeal the bylaws. | | | Under the QBCA, the directors may, by resolution, make, amend or repeal any bylaws that regulates the business or affairs of the corporation. Where the directors make, amend or repeal a bylaw, they are required under the QBCA to submit that action to the shareholders at the next meeting of shareholders and the shareholders may ratify, reject or amend that action by simple majority, or ordinary resolution. If the action is rejected by shareholders, or the directors of a corporation do not submit the action to the shareholders at the next meeting of shareholders, the action in respect of the bylaws will cease to be effective, and no subsequent resolution of the directors to make, amend or repeal a bylaw having substantially the same purpose or effect will he effective until it is confirmed. | |
|
Votes on Amalgamations, Mergers, Consolidations and Sales of Assets
|
| | The DGCL provides that, unless otherwise provided in the certificate of incorporation or bylaws, the adoption of a merger agreement requires the approval of a majority of the outstanding stock of the corporation entitled to vote thereon. | | | Under the QBCA, certain extraordinary corporate actions, such as amalgamations (other than with certain affiliated corporations), continuances and sales, leases or exchanges of the property of a corporation if as a result of such alienation the corporation would be unable to retain a significant part of its business activities, and other extraordinary corporate actions such as liquidations, dissolutions and (if ordered by a court) arrangements, are required to be approved by “special resolution.” | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | | | | A “special resolution” is a resolution passed by not less than two-thirds of the votes cast by the shareholders who voted in respect of the resolution or signed by all shareholders entitled to vote on the resolution. In specified cases, a special resolution to approve the extraordinary corporate action is also required to be approved separately by the holders of a class or series of shares, including in certain cases a class or series of shares not otherwise carrying voting rights. | |
|
Dissenter’s Rights of Appraisal
|
| | Under the DGCL, a stockholder of a Delaware corporation generally has the right to dissent flume, merger or consolidation in which the Delaware corporation is participating, subject to specified procedural requirements, including that such dissenting stockholder does not vote in favor of the merger or consolidation. However, the DGCL does not confer appraisal rights, in certain circumstances, including if the dissenting stockholder owns shares traded on a national securities exchange and will receive publicly traded shares in the merger or consolidation. Under the DGCL, a stockholder asserting appraisal rights does not receive any payment for his or her shares until the court determines the fair value or the parties otherwise agree to a value. The costs of the proceeding may be determined by the court and assessed against the parties as the court deems equitable under the circumstances. | | |
The QBCA provides that shareholders of a corporation are entitled to exercise dissent rights (called “the right to demand the repurchase of shares”) and to be paid the fair value of their shares in connection with specified matters, including:
•
amalgamation with another corporation (other than with certain affiliated corporations);
•
amendment to the corporation’s articles to add, change or remove any provisions restricting or constraining the transfer of shares;
•
amendment to the corporation’s articles to add, change or remove any restriction upon the businesses or businesses that the corporation may carry on;
•
continuance under the laws of another jurisdiction;
•
alienation of the property of the corporation or of its subsidiaries if, as a result of such alienation, the corporation is unable to retain a significant part of its business activity;
|
|
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | | | |
•
a court order permitting a shareholder to exercise his right to demand the repurchase of his shares in connection with an application to the court for an order approving an arrangement proposed by the corporation;
•
certain amendments to the articles of a corporation which require a separate class or series vote by a holder of shares of any class or series.
|
|
|
Oppression Remedy
|
| | The DGCL does not provide for a similar remedy. | | |
The QBCA provides an oppression remedy (called “rectification of abuse of power or iniquity”) that enables a court to make any order, whether interim or final, to rectify matters that are oppressive or unfairly prejudicial to the interests of any securityholder, director or officer of the corporation if an application is made to a court by an “applicant”. An “applicant” with respect to a corporation means any of the following:
•
a present or former registered holder or beneficiary of securities of the corporation or any of its affiliates;
•
a present or former officer or director of the corporation or any of its affiliates; and
•
any other person who in the discretion of the court has the interest required to make the application.
The oppression remedy provides the court with very broad and flexible powers to intervene in corporate affairs to protect shareholders and other complainants. While conduct that is in breach of fiduciary duties of directors or that is contrary to the legal right of a complainant will normally trigger the court’s jurisdiction under the oppression remedy, the exercise of that jurisdiction does not depend on a finding of a breach of those legal and equitable rights. Furthermore, the court may order a corporation to pay
|
|
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | | | | the interim expenses of an applicant seeking an oppression remedy, but the applicant may be held accountable for interim costs on final disposition of the complaint (as in the case of a derivative action as described in “Shareholder Derivative Actions” below). | |
|
Shareholder Derivative Actions
|
| | Under the DGCL, stockholders may bring derivative actions on behalf of, and for the benefit of the corporation. The plaintiff in a derivative action on behalf of the corporation either must be or have been a stockholder of the corporation at the time of the transaction or must be a stockholder who became a stockholder by operation of law in the transaction regarding which the stockholder complains. A stockholder may not sue derivatively on behalf of the corporation unless the stockholder first makes demand on the corporation that it bring suit and the demand is refused, unless it is shown that making the demand would have been a futile act. | | |
Under the QBCA, a shareholder of a corporation may apply to a Québec court for leave to bring an action in the name of, and on behalf of, the corporation or any subsidiary, or to intervene in an existing action to which the corporation or any of its subsidiaries is a party, for the purpose of prosecuting, defending or discontinuing an action on behalf of the corporation or its subsidiary. Under the QBCA, no action may be brought and no intervention in an action may be made unless a court is satisfied that:
•
the shareholder has given the required 14-day notice to the directors of the corporation or the subsidiary of the shareholder’s intention to apply to the court if the directors do not bring, diligently prosecute or defend or discontinue the action;
•
the shareholder is acting in good faith; and
•
it appears to be in the interests of the corporation or the relevant subsidiary that the action be brought, prosecuted, defended or discontinued.
Under the QBCA, the court in a derivative action may make any order it thinks fit. In addition, under the QBCA, a court may order the corporation or its relevant subsidiary to pay the shareholder’s interim costs, including reasonable legal fees and disbursements.
|
|
|
Anti-Takeover and Ownership Provisions
|
| | Unless an issuer opts out of the provisions of Section 203 of the DGCL, Section 203 generally prohibits a public Delaware | | | While the QBCA does not contain specific anti- takeover provisions with respect to “business combinations,” rules and policies of certain Canadian | |
| | | |
Delaware
|
| |
QBCA
|
|
| | | | corporation from engaging in a “business combination” with a holder of 15% or more of the corporation’s voting stock (as defined in Section 203), referred to as an interested stockholder, for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the interested stockholder became an interested stockholder, except as otherwise provided in Section 203. For these purposes, the term “business combination” includes mergers, assets sales and other similar transactions with an interested stockholder. | | |
securities regulatory authorities, including Multilateral Instrument 61-101 — Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions, or Multilateral Instrument 61-101, contain requirements in connection with, among other things, “related party transactions” and “business combinations”, including, among other things, any transaction by which an issuer directly or indirectly engages in the following with a related party: acquires, sells, leases or transfers an asset, acquires the related party, acquires or issues treasury securities, amends the terms of a security if the security is owned by the related party or assumes or becomes subject to a liability or takes certain other actions with respect to debt.
The term “related party” includes directors, senior officers and holders of more than 10% of the voting rights attached to all outstanding voting securities of the issuer or holders of a sufficient number of any securities of the issuer to materially affect control of the issuer.
Multilateral Instrument 61-101 requires, subject to certain exceptions, the preparation of a formal valuation relating to certain aspects of the transaction and more detailed disclosure in the proxy material sent to security holders in connection with a related party transaction including related to the valuation. Multilateral Instrument 61-101 also requires, subject to certain exceptions, that an issuer not engage in a related party transaction unless the shareholders of the issuer, other than the related parties, approve the transaction by a simple majority of the votes cast.
|
|
![[MISSING IMAGE: lg_milestonepharma-4c.jpg]](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001408443/000110465925067130/lg_milestonepharma-4c.jpg)