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. With the execution of this lease, the Company is required to maintain a $66,000 letter of credit as a security deposit, which is classified as a current asset within the consolidated balance sheets. In connection with the Lexington lease, the Company has approximately $32,000 recorded as prepaid rent as of December 31, 2017, with approximately $2,000 recorded as a non-current asset. The Company also incurred a liability of $89,074 with respect to the Company’s contribution to the landlord’s leasehold improvements, of which approximately $20,000 is outstanding and reflected as a current liability as of December 31, 2017. This liability is repayable as additional rent expense over the term of the lease and bears interest at 6%.

In December 2016, the Company entered into a one-year lease of office space in Miami, Florida, under an operating lease with a commencement date of December 1, 2016, and a termination date of November 30, 2017. The Company renewed this lease in November 2017 for an additional two years with a revised termination date of November 30, 2019.

The Company’s contractual commitments under all non-cancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2017, are as follows:

Rent expense is calculated on a straight-line basis over the term of the leases. Rent expense under the Company’s operating leases was approximately $0.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

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 services were provided and accrued an additional $0.1 million related to interest and fees in 2017 as a result of the ruling. In December 2017, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement and paid approximately $0.6 million to settle all claims associated with this matter.