License agreements and sponsored research – The Company has entered into various license, sponsored research, collaboration, and other agreements (the “Agreements”) with various counter parties in connection with the Company’s plant biotechnology business relating to tobacco and hemp/cannabis. The schedule below summarizes the Company’s commitments, both financial and other, associated with each Agreement. Costs incurred under the Agreements are generally recorded as research and development expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss.

The Company will exclusively own all results and all intellectual property relating to the results of the collaboration with KeyGene (the "Results”). The Company will pay royalties in varying amounts to KeyGene relating to the Company's commercialization in the Field of certain Results. The Company has granted KeyGene a license to commercialize the Results outside of the Field and KeyGene will pay royalties in varying amounts to the Company relating to KeyGene's commercialization outside of the Field of the Results.

(2)

The Company is also responsible for reimbursing NCSU for actual third-party patent costs incurred, including capitalized patent costs and patent maintenance costs. These costs vary from year to year and the Company has certain rights to direct the activities that result in these costs.

(3)

The Company is also responsible for the payment of certain costs, including, capitalized patent costs and patent maintenance costs, a running royalty on future net sales of products made from the sublicensed intellectual property, and a sharing of future sublicensing consideration received from sublicensing to third parties in all countries except for Canada. Anandia retains all patent rights, and is responsible for all patent maintenance, in Canada.

(4)

Various R&D growing agreements for hemp / cannabis and tobacco.

(5)

General corporate consulting agreements.

Litigation -

Crede Settlement

On June 19, 2019, the Company, Crede CG III, LTD. (“Crede”) and Terren Peizer (“Peizer”) participated in a settlement conference meeting as required by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “SDNY Court”) entitled Crede CG III, LTD. v. 22nd Century Group, Inc. Subsequently, the Company, Crede and Peizer entered into a settlement agreement that settled this case, with the effective date of the settlement agreement being on July 22, 2019. Under the terms of the settlement agreement: (i) the Company issued to Crede on July 25, 2019 an aggregate of Nine Hundred Ninety Thousand (990,000) shares of common stock of the Company in full satisfaction of the cashless exchange of the Tranche 1A warrant and in settlement of all disputes between Crede, Peizer and the Company; (ii) Crede granted a proxy to the Company for a period of five (5) years for the Company to vote all of the shares of common stock of the Company owned by Crede in favor of the recommendations by the Company’s Board of Directors (excluding any extraordinary transactions); (iii) Crede agreed to not purchase, borrow or short any securities of the Company; and (iv) the Company, Crede and Peizer agreed to mutual releases of all claims between the parties and the dismissal of all the litigation claims and counterclaims with prejudice.

The Company accrued an expense related to the settlement of this case during the second quarter of 2019 in the amount of $1,891, which is equal to the fair value of the 990,000 shares of Company common stock on July 22, 2019. The accrual was reclassified to capital upon the issuance of the common stock during the third quarter of 2019.

Class Action

On January 21, 2019, Matthew Jackson Bull, a resident of Denver, Colorado, filed a Complaint against the Company, the Company’s then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, and the Company’s then Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York entitled: Matthew Bull, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. 22nd Century Group, Inc., Henry Sicignano III, and John T. Brodfuehrer, Case No. 1:19-cv-00409.

On January 29, 2019, Ian M. Fitch, a resident of Essex County Massachusetts, filed a Complaint against the Company, the Company’s then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, and the Company’s then Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York entitled: Ian Fitch, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. 22nd Century Group, Inc., Henry Sicignano III, and John T. Brodfuehrer, Case No. 2:19-cv-00553.

On May 28, 2019, the plaintiff in the Fitch case voluntarily dismissed that action. On August 1, 2019, the Court in the Bull case issued an order designating Joseph Noto, Garden State Tire Corp, and Stephens Johnson as lead plaintiffs.

On September 16, 2019, pursuant to a joint motion by the parties, the Court in the Bull case transferred the class action to federal district court in the Western District of New York, where it remains pending as Case No. 1:19-cv-01285.

Plaintiffs in the Bull case filed an Amended Complaint on November 19, 2019 that alleges three counts: Count I sues the Company and Messrs. Sicignano and Brodfuehrer and alleges that the Company's quarterly and annual reports, SEC filings, press releases and other public statements and documents contained false statements in violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5; Count II sues Messrs. Sicignano and Brodfuehrer pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b5(a) and (c); and Count III sues Messrs. Sicignano and Brodfuehrer for the allegedly false statements pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. The Amended Complaint seeks to certify a class, and unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, and attorney's fees and costs.

On January 29, 2020, the Company and Messrs. Sicignano and Brodfuehrer filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. On July 31, 2020, the Court heard oral arguments on the motion to dismiss. On January 14, 2021, the Court granted motion, dismissing all claims with prejudice. The Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on February 12, 2021 to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The Second Circuit has granted an expedited briefing schedule and Plaintiff’s/Appellant’s was filed on April 12, 2021 and the Company’s was filed on May 17, 2021. The Second Circuit heard oral arguments on September 2, 2021 and the matter remains pending with the Second Circuit.

We believe that the claims are frivolous, meritless and that the Company and Messrs. Sicignano and Brodfuehrer have substantial legal and factual defenses to the claims. We intend to vigorously defend the Company and Messrs. Sicignano and Brodfuehrer against such claims.

Shareholder Derivative Cases

On February 6, 2019, Melvyn Klein, a resident of Nassau County New York, filed a shareholder derivative claim against the Company, the Company’s then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, and each member of the Company’s Board of Directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York entitled: Melvyn Klein, derivatively on behalf of 22nd Century Group v. Henry Sicignano, III, Richard M. Sanders, Joseph Alexander Dunn, Nora B. Sullivan, James W. Cornell, John T. Brodfuehrer and 22nd Century Group, Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-00748. Mr. Klein brings this action derivatively alleging that (i) the director defendants supposedly breached their fiduciary duties for allegedly allowing the Company to make false statements; (ii) the director defendants supposedly wasted corporate assets to defend this lawsuit and the other related lawsuits; (iii) the defendants allegedly violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder for allegedly approving or allowing false statements regarding the Company to be made; and (iv) the director defendants allegedly violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder for allegedly approving or allowing false statements regarding the Company to be made in the Company’s proxy statement.

On February 11, 2019, Stephen Mathew filed a shareholder derivative claim against the Company, the Company’s then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, and each member of the Company’s Board of Directors in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Erie, entitled: Stephen Mathew, derivatively on behalf of 22nd Century Group, Inc. v. Henry Sicignano, III, John T. Brodfuehrer, Richard M. Sanders, Joseph Alexander Dunn, James W. Cornell, Nora B. Sullivan and 22nd Century Group, Inc., Index No. 801786/2019. Mr. Mathew brings this action derivatively generally alleging the same allegations as in the Klein case. The Complaint seeks declaratory relief, unspecified monetary damages, corrective corporate governance actions, and attorney’s fees and costs. On August 15, 2019, the Court consolidated the Mathew and Klein actions pursuant to a stipulation by the parties (Western District of New York, Case No. 1-19-cv-0513). We believe that the claims are frivolous, meritless and that the Company and the individual defendants have substantial legal

and factual defenses to the claims. We intend to vigorously defend the Company and the individual defendants against such claims.

On June 10, 2019, Judy Rowley filed a shareholder derivative claim against the Company, the Company’s then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, and each member of the Company’s Board of Directors in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Erie, entitled: Judy Rowley, derivatively on behalf of 22nd Century Group, Inc. v. Henry Sicignano, III, Richard M. Sanders, Joseph Alexander Dunn, Nora B. Sullivan, James W. Cornell, John T. Brodfuehrer, and 22nd Century Group, Inc., Index No. 807214/2019. Ms. Rowley brings this action derivatively alleging that the director defendants supposedly breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly allowing the Company to make false statements. The Complaint seeks declaratory relief, unspecified monetary damages, corrective corporate governance actions, and attorney’s fees and costs. We believe that the claims are frivolous, meritless and that the Company and the individual defendants have substantial legal and factual defenses to the claims. We intend to vigorously defend the Company and the individual defendants against such claims. On September 13, 2019, the Court ordered the litigation stayed pursuant to a joint stipulation by the parties.

On January 15, 2020, Kevin Broccuto filed a shareholder derivative claim against the Company, the Company's then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, the Company's Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, and certain members of the Company's prior Board of Directors in the District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Clark, entitled: Kevin Broccuto, derivatively on behalf of 22nd Century Group, Inc. v. James W. Cornell, Richard M. Sanders, Nora B. Sullivan, Henry Sicignano, III, and John T. Brodfuehrer, Case No. A-20-808599. Mr. Broccuto brings this action derivatively alleging three counts: Count I alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties; Count II alleges they committed corporate waste; and Count III that they were unjustly enriched, by allegedly allowing the Company to make false statements.

On February 11, 2020, Jerry Wayne filed a shareholder derivative claim against the Company, the Company's then Chief Executive Officer, Henry Sicignano III, the Company's Chief Financial Officer, John T. Brodfuehrer, and certain members of the Company's prior Board of Directors in the District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Clark, entitled: Jerry Wayne, derivatively on behalf of 22nd Century Group, Inc. v. James W. Cornell, Richard M. Sanders, Nora B. Sullivan, Henry Sicignano, III, and John T. Brodfuehrer, Case No. A-20-808599. Mr. Wayne brings this action derivatively alleging generally the same allegations as the Brocutto case. The Complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, corrective corporate governance actions, disgorgement of alleged profits and imposition of constructive trusts, and attorney's fees and costs. The Complaint also seeks to declare as unenforceable the Company's Bylaw requiring derivative lawsuits to be filed in Erie County, New York, where the Company is headquartered.

On March 25, 2020, the Court ordered the Brocutto and Wayne cases consolidated and stayed pursuant to a joint stipulation from the parties. We believe that the claims are frivolous, meritless and that the Company and the individual defendants have substantial legal and factual defenses to the claims. We intend to vigorously defend the Company and the individual defendants against such claims.