Leases

In August 2013, the Company entered into an agreement to lease office and laboratory space in Lexington, Massachusetts under an operating lease with a commencement date of January 1, 2014 and a termination date of January 31, 2019. In connection with this lease, the Company is required to maintain a $66,000 letter of credit as a security deposit. In addition, the Company recorded approximately $40,000 as prepaid rent as of September 30, 2017, with approximately $10,000 recorded as a non-current asset. The Company also incurred a liability of approximately $90,000 with respect to the Company’s contribution to the landlord’s leasehold improvements, of which approximately $25,000 is outstanding as of September 30, 2017, with approximately $5,000 recorded as a non-current liability, respectively. This liability is repayable as additional rent expense over the term of the lease and bears interest at 6%. In addition, in January 2017, the Company leased office space in Miami, Florida requiring a total of approximately $1,000 in payments through the lease termination date in December 2017.

Litigation

On August 27, 2015, Eurogentec S.A. (“EGT”), a former supplier of the Company, brought an action against the Company in the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich Switzerland (the “Court”) alleging nonpayment of invoices for services provided by EGT. The Company requested dismissal of the claim based on the argument that EGT knew, or should have known, that the services provided by EGT should not have been performed or had not been properly performed. On July 12, 2017, the Court rendered a decision in favor of EGT ordering the Company to pay approximately $0.7 million to EGT, representing all amounts that EGT alleged were owed by the Company, plus interest and court and legal fees.

The Company had previously recorded $0.6 million related to this contract when the relevant costs were incurred. As a result of this ruling, the Company has accrued an additional $0.1 million related to interest and fees associated with the ruling. The Company has appealed the decision.