LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2024
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	NOTE 12 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS On January 18, 2022, a complaint (the “Complaint”) was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (the “Court”) against the Company, Orgenesis Ltd (“the Israeli Subsidiary”), Prof. Sarah Ferber, Vered Caplan and Dr. Efrat Asa Kunik (collectively, the “defendants”) by plaintiffs the State of Israel, as the owner of Chaim Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer (“Sheba”), and Tel Hashomer Medical Research, Infrastructure and Services Ltd. (collectively, the “plaintiffs”). In the Complaint, the plaintiffs are seeking that the Court issue a declaratory remedy whereby the defendants are required to pay royalties to the plaintiffs at the rate of 7% of the sales and 24% of any and all revenues in consideration for sublicenses related to any product, service or process that contain know-how and technology of Sheba and any and all know-how and technology either developed or supervised by Prof. Ferber in the field of cell therapy, including in the category of the point-of-care platform and any and all services and products in relation to the defendants’ CDMO activity. In addition, the plaintiffs seek that the defendants provide financial statements and pay NIS 10,000 to the plaintiffs due to the royalty provisions of the license agreement, dated February 2, 2012, between the Israeli subsidiary and Tel Hashomer Medical Research, Infrastructure and Services Ltd. (the “License Agreement”). The Complaint alleges that the Company and the Israeli subsidiary used know-how and technology of Sheba and know-how and technology either developed or supervised by Prof. Ferber while employed by Sheba in the field of cell therapy, including in the category of the point-of-care platform and the services and products in relation to the defendants’ CDMO activity and are entitled to the payment of certain royalties pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement. The defendants have filed their statements of defense responding to this Complaint, the Plaintiffs filed their response and the parties are now conducting disclosure proceedings in accordance with Israel’s civil regulations. In accordance with Israel’s civil regulations, the parties considered alternative means to resolve at least some of the disputes and have consented to engage the services of a mutually agreeable mediator. The mediation is currently taking place. According to management’s estimation, since a loss is not considered probable, no provision was made in the financial statements. On September 6, 2023, a claim (the “Claim”) was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (the “Court”) against the Company, the Israeli Subsidiary, Octomera LLC, Orgenesis Biotech Israel Ltd, Theracell Laboratories Private Company and Vered Caplan (collectively, the “defendants”) by Ehud Almon (Plaintiff) for certain finders’ fees and / or royalties related to sales made by an Octomera subsidiary to a Greek entity in the amount of $896 and also for other means of compensation. The Israeli Subsidiary and Vered Caplan filed their statement of defense on January 28, 2024 claiming, inter alia, that the Plaintiff did not serve as a broker, but rather served as the Greek entity’s representative and as such he is not entitled to compensation of any kind from the defendants. It was also clarified that the defendants did not enter into a finder’s agreement with the Plaintiff. Additionally, the Israeli subsidiary and Vered Caplan claimed that the Plaintiff concealed material information from the court, including the signed partnership agreement between the Greek entity’s owner and the Plaintiff, as well as certain criminal charges brought against him in Greece. On February 22, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a request for service of process to deliver the Claim to the Company and the other defendants incorporated outside of Israel. This request was denied on the same day. An appeal filed by the Plaintiff on the aforementioned decision was denied. On May 27, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a new request for service of process to deliver the Claim to the Company and the other defendants incorporated outside of Israel. On May 28, 2024 the request was accepted. The court ruled that the Claim be delivered via courier to the Company and Octomera LLC, and delivered in accordance with the Hague Convention to Theracell Laboratories. After requesting a continuance, the court has ruled that the Plaintiff must file proof of the execution of the aforementioned deliveries until August 15, 2024. According to management’s estimation, since the likelihood of the Plaintiff winning the case is less than fifty percent, no provision was made in the financial statements. On October 26, 2023, a complaint was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York by plaintiffs Southern Israel Bridging Fund Two LP and Mr. Amir Hasidim, against the Company, seeking the payment of $1,150 together with interest in the amount of 6%. In the Complaint plaintiffs alleged the amount provided to the Company was based on a Convertible Loan Agreement dated May 17, 2022, which provided for a loan amount of $5,000. Notwithstanding the Convertible Loan Agreement, on August 21, 2023, Company sent the plaintiffs an offset notice in light of the plaintiffs’ breach of obligations under the Convertible Loan Agreement and the damages caused to the Company as a result of said breach. The Company counter sued as well, seeking damages for Plaintiff’s breach of contract, fraud and harassment. Accordingly, the Company disputes whether it owes plaintiffs the amount sought in the Complaint. On November 1, 2023, a claim (the “Claim”) was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (the “Court”) against the Company, the Israeli Subsidiary, and Vered Caplan (collectively, the “Defendants”) by Fidelity Venture Capital Ltd. and Dror Atzmon (together – the “Plaintiffs”). The claim is based on two agreements the Company entered into with the Plaintiffs on November 2, 2016: (a) an unsecured convertible note agreements for an aggregate amount of NIS 1 million ($280). The loan bears a monthly interest rate of 2% and will mature on May 1, 2017, unless converted earlier and (b) a consultation agreement which awarded the Plaintiffs 800 thousand warrants. The exercise price of the warrants and conversion price were fixed at $0.52 per share (pre-reverse stock split implemented by the Company in November 2017). On April 27, 2017, and November 2, 2017, the Company entered into extension agreements through November 2, 2017 and May 2, 2018, respectively, in connection with the convertible note agreements. In March 2018, the Plaintiffs submitted a notice of their intention to convert into shares the Company’s common stock, the principal amount of the loan, and accrued interest of approximately $383 outstanding. In addition, the Plaintiffs exercised all the warrants awarded in the consultation agreement. In light of the reverse stock split which took place in November 2017, the Company disagreed with the plaintiffs’ calculations regarding the number of issuable shares of Common Stock. The Company responded to the notice and rejected these contentions in their entirety. In April 2018, the Company terminated the agreements based on several claims, including mistake, intentional misrepresentation and bad faith. Therefore, the Company deposited the shares in total amount of 107,985 issued under those agreements and the principal amount and accrued interest of the loan in an escrow account. The deposit of the principal amount and accrued interest presented as restricted cash in the balance sheet as of December 31, 2023. Based on the calculation difference, in their Claim, the Plaintiffs request damages in the amount of NIS 40,140, and the issuance of 11,869,600 shares of the Company. The Defendants filed their statement of defense on April 15, 2024, in which they raised, among others, the aforementioned claims and additional procedural and substantial claims, including laches. The Claim is scheduled for pretrial which will take place on November 5, 2024. Meanwhile, the parties have agreed to start mediation proceeding in connection with the Claim. According to management’s estimation, since the likelihood of the Plaintiffs winning the case is less than fifty percent, no provision was made in the financial statements. On July 11, 2024 the Israeli subsidiary reached a settlement agreement sanctioned by the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s court pursuant to which the subsidiary will pay the amount of NIS 427,000 (approximately $114) including VAT to the lessor of leased premises no later than September 30, 2024, which includes a grace period for late payments. As of the date of this quarterly report on Form 10Q, the Company had paid NIS 140,000 (approximately $37), leaving an amount of NIS 286,000 (approximately $76) still due under the settlement agreement. In the event that the Company fails to meet all of its obligations under the settlement agreement, the Company may be liable to pay an additional NIS 211,000 (approximately $12) over and above the amount still due, in respect of claims for unpaid rentals made by the lessor. Except as described above, the Company is not involved in any pending material legal proceedings.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2024

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

NOTE 12 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

On January 18, 2022, a complaint (the “Complaint”) was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (the “Court”) against the Company, Orgenesis Ltd (“the Israeli Subsidiary”), Prof. Sarah Ferber, Vered Caplan and Dr. Efrat Asa Kunik (collectively, the “defendants”) by plaintiffs the State of Israel, as the owner of Chaim Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer (“Sheba”), and Tel Hashomer Medical Research, Infrastructure and Services Ltd. (collectively, the “plaintiffs”). In the Complaint, the plaintiffs are seeking that the Court issue a declaratory remedy whereby the defendants are required to pay royalties to the plaintiffs at the rate of 7% of the sales and 24% of any and all revenues in consideration for sublicenses related to any product, service or process that contain know-how and technology of Sheba and any and all know-how and technology either developed or supervised by Prof. Ferber in the field of cell therapy, including in the category of the point-of-care platform and any and all services and products in relation to the defendants’ CDMO activity. In addition, the plaintiffs seek that the defendants provide financial statements and pay NIS 10,000 to the plaintiffs due to the royalty provisions of the license agreement, dated February 2, 2012, between the Israeli subsidiary and Tel Hashomer Medical Research, Infrastructure and Services Ltd. (the “License Agreement”). The Complaint alleges that the Company and the Israeli subsidiary used know-how and technology of Sheba and know-how and technology either developed or supervised by Prof. Ferber while employed by Sheba in the field of cell therapy, including in the category of the point-of-care platform and the services and products in relation to the defendants’ CDMO activity and are entitled to the payment of certain royalties pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement. The defendants have filed their statements of defense responding to this Complaint, the Plaintiffs filed their response and the parties are now conducting disclosure proceedings in accordance with Israel’s civil regulations. In accordance with Israel’s civil regulations, the parties considered alternative means to resolve at least some of the disputes and have consented to engage the services of a mutually agreeable mediator. The mediation is currently taking place. According to management’s estimation, since a loss is not considered probable, no provision was made in the financial statements.

On September 6, 2023, a claim (the “Claim”) was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (the “Court”) against the Company, the Israeli Subsidiary, Octomera LLC, Orgenesis Biotech Israel Ltd, Theracell Laboratories Private Company and Vered Caplan (collectively, the “defendants”) by Ehud Almon (Plaintiff) for certain finders’ fees and / or royalties related to sales made by an Octomera subsidiary to a Greek entity in the amount of $896 and also for other means of compensation. The Israeli Subsidiary and Vered Caplan filed their statement of defense on January 28, 2024 claiming, inter alia, that the Plaintiff did not serve as a broker, but rather served as the Greek entity’s representative and as such he is not entitled to compensation of any kind from the defendants. It was also clarified that the defendants did not enter into a finder’s agreement with the Plaintiff. Additionally, the Israeli subsidiary and Vered Caplan claimed that the Plaintiff concealed material information from the court, including the signed partnership agreement between the Greek entity’s owner and the Plaintiff, as well as certain criminal charges brought against him in Greece. On February 22, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a request for service of process to deliver the Claim to the Company and the other defendants incorporated outside of Israel. This request was denied on the same day. An appeal filed by the Plaintiff on the aforementioned decision was denied. On May 27, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a new request for service of process to deliver the Claim to the Company and the other defendants incorporated outside of Israel. On May 28, 2024 the request was accepted. The court ruled that the Claim be delivered via courier to the Company and Octomera LLC, and delivered in accordance with the Hague Convention to Theracell Laboratories. After requesting a continuance, the court has ruled that the Plaintiff must file proof of the execution of the aforementioned deliveries until August 15, 2024. According to management’s estimation, since the likelihood of the Plaintiff winning the case is less than fifty percent, no provision was made in the financial statements.

On October 26, 2023, a complaint was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York by plaintiffs Southern Israel Bridging Fund Two LP and Mr. Amir Hasidim, against the Company, seeking the payment of $1,150 together with interest in the amount of 6%. In the Complaint plaintiffs alleged the amount provided to the Company was based on a Convertible Loan Agreement dated May 17, 2022, which provided for a loan amount of $5,000. Notwithstanding the Convertible Loan Agreement, on August 21, 2023, Company sent the plaintiffs an offset notice in light of the plaintiffs’ breach of obligations under the Convertible Loan Agreement and the damages caused to the Company as a result of said breach. The Company counter sued as well, seeking damages for Plaintiff’s breach of contract, fraud and harassment. Accordingly, the Company disputes whether it owes plaintiffs the amount sought in the Complaint.

On November 1, 2023, a claim (the “Claim”) was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (the “Court”) against the Company, the Israeli Subsidiary, and Vered Caplan (collectively, the “Defendants”) by Fidelity Venture Capital Ltd. and Dror Atzmon (together – the “Plaintiffs”). The claim is based on two agreements the Company entered into with the Plaintiffs on November 2, 2016: (a) an unsecured convertible note agreements for an aggregate amount of NIS 1 million ($280). The loan bears a monthly interest rate of 2% and will mature on May 1, 2017, unless converted earlier and (b) a consultation agreement which awarded the Plaintiffs 800 thousand warrants. The exercise price of the warrants and conversion price were fixed at $0.52 per share (pre-reverse stock split implemented by the Company in November 2017). On April 27, 2017, and November 2, 2017, the Company entered into extension agreements through November 2, 2017 and May 2, 2018, respectively, in connection with the convertible note agreements. In March 2018, the Plaintiffs submitted a notice of their intention to convert into shares the Company’s common stock, the principal amount of the loan, and accrued interest of approximately $383 outstanding. In addition, the Plaintiffs exercised all the warrants awarded in the consultation agreement. In light of the reverse stock split which took place in November 2017, the Company disagreed with the plaintiffs’ calculations regarding the number of issuable shares of Common Stock. The Company responded to the notice and rejected these contentions in their entirety. In April 2018, the Company terminated the agreements based on several claims, including mistake, intentional misrepresentation and bad faith. Therefore, the Company deposited the shares in total amount of 107,985 issued under those agreements and the principal amount and accrued interest of the loan in an escrow account. The deposit of the principal amount and accrued interest presented as restricted cash in the balance sheet as of December 31, 2023. Based on the calculation difference, in their Claim, the Plaintiffs request damages in the amount of NIS 40,140, and the issuance of 11,869,600 shares of the Company. The Defendants filed their statement of defense on April 15, 2024, in which they raised, among others, the aforementioned claims and additional procedural and substantial claims, including laches. The Claim is scheduled for pretrial which will take place on November 5, 2024. Meanwhile, the parties have agreed to start mediation proceeding in connection with the Claim. According to management’s estimation, since the likelihood of the Plaintiffs winning the case is less than fifty percent, no provision was made in the financial statements.

On July 11, 2024 the Israeli subsidiary reached a settlement agreement sanctioned by the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s court pursuant to which the subsidiary will pay the amount of NIS 427,000 (approximately $114) including VAT to the lessor of leased premises no later than September 30, 2024, which includes a grace period for late payments. As of the date of this quarterly report on Form 10Q, the Company had paid NIS 140,000 (approximately $37), leaving an amount of NIS 286,000 (approximately $76) still due under the settlement agreement. In the event that the Company fails to meet all of its obligations under the settlement agreement, the Company may be liable to pay an additional NIS 211,000 (approximately $12) over and above the amount still due, in respect of claims for unpaid rentals made by the lessor.

Except as described above, the Company is not involved in any pending material legal proceedings.