As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 14, 2022

Registration No. 333-266294

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Amendment No. 1

to

FORM F-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

ALVOTECH

(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

9, Rue de Bitbourg,

L-1273 Luxembourg,

Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

+354 422 4500

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of Registrant’s principal executive offices)

Joel Morales

Chief Executive Officer

Alvotech USA Inc.

1201 Wilson Blvd., Ste. 2130

Arlington, Virginia 22209

Tel: (703) 859-6815

(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

Copies to:

Michal Berkner, Esq.

Nicolas H.R. Dumont, Esq.

Divakar Gupta, Esq.

Cooley (UK) LLP

22 Bishopsgate

London EC2N 4BQ

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7583 4055

Fax: +44 (0) 20 7785 9355

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after this registration statement becomes effective.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933 (as amended, the “Securities Act”), check the following box.  ☒

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.  ☐

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.  ☐

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933.

Emerging growth company  ☒

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933.  ☐

The registrant hereby amends this registration statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this registration statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act, or until the registration statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and may be changed. The selling securityholder may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and we are not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

Subject to Completion, dated September 14, 2022

PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS

Up to 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares

This prospectus relates to the resale of up to 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares, $0.01 nominal value per share (the “Ordinary Shares”), by YA II PN, LTD., a Cayman Islands exempt limited partnership (“Yorkville”). The shares included in this prospectus consist of Ordinary Shares that we may, in our discretion, elect to issue and sell to Yorkville, from time to time after the date of this prospectus, pursuant to a standby equity purchase agreement we entered into with Yorkville on April 18, 2022 (the “SEPA”), in which Yorkville has committed to purchase from us, at our direction, up to $150,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares, subject to terms and conditions specified in the SEPA. As of the date of this prospectus, we have not issued any Ordinary Shares to Yorkville. See the section entitled “Committed Equity Financing” for a description of the SEPA and the section entitled “Selling Securityholder” for additional information regarding Yorkville.

Our registration of the securities covered by this prospectus does not mean that Yorkville will offer or sell any of the Ordinary Shares. Yorkville may offer, sell or distribute all or a portion of their Ordinary Shares publicly or through private transactions at prevailing market prices or at negotiated prices. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of Ordinary Shares by Yorkville pursuant to this prospectus. However, we may receive up to $150,000,000 in aggregate gross proceeds from sales of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville that we may, in our discretion, elect to make, from time to time after the date of this prospectus, pursuant to the SEPA. We provide more information about how Yorkville may sell or otherwise dispose of our Ordinary Shares in the section entitled “Plan of Distribution.” Yorkville is an “underwriter” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(11) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

We are a “foreign private issuer” under applicable Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) rules and an “emerging growth company” as that term is defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”) and are eligible for reduced public company disclosure requirements.

Our Ordinary Shares and warrants are listed on The Nasdaq Global Market (“Nasdaq”) under the symbols “ALVO” and “ALVOW,” respectively. On September 13, 2022, the closing price of our Ordinary Shares was $7.54. Our Ordinary Shares are also listed on the Nasdaq First North Growth Market (“Nasdaq First North”) under the ticker symbol “ALVO,” and to ensure compliance with applicable Icelandic and European securities rules and regulations, due to the listing of our Ordinary Shares on Nasdaq First North, this Registration Statement on Form F-1 will be published on Nasdaq First North’s website as well.

You should read this prospectus and any prospectus supplement or amendment carefully before you invest in our securities. Investing in our securities involves risks. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 11 of this prospectus.

Neither the SEC nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The date of this prospectus is                , 2022.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus, any amendment or supplement to this prospectus or any free writing prospectus prepared by us or on our behalf. Any amendment or supplement may also add, update or change information included in this prospectus. Any statement contained in this prospectus will be deemed to be modified or superseded for purposes of this prospectus to the extent that a statement contained in such amendment or supplement modifies or supersedes such statement. Any statement so modified will be deemed to constitute a part of this prospectus only as so modified, and any statement so superseded will be deemed not to constitute a part of this prospectus. See “Where You Can Find More Information.”

Neither we nor Yorkville have authorized any other person to provide you with different or additional information. Neither we nor Yorkville take responsibility for, nor can we provide assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may provide. The information contained in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus or such other date stated in this prospectus, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or prospects may have changed since those dates. This prospectus contains summaries of certain provisions contained in some of the documents described in this prospectus, but reference is made to the actual documents for complete information. All of the summaries are qualified in their entirety by the actual documents. Copies of some of the documents referred to in this prospectus have been filed, will be filed or will be incorporated by reference as exhibits to the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part, and you may obtain copies of those documents as described under “Where You Can Find More Information.”

Neither we nor Yorkville are making an offer to sell these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. Except as otherwise set forth in this prospectus, neither we nor Yorkville have taken any action to permit a public offering of these securities outside the United States or to permit the possession or distribution of this prospectus outside the United States. Persons outside the United States who come into possession of this prospectus must inform themselves about and observe any restrictions relating to the offering of these securities and the distribution of this prospectus outside the United States.

On June 15, 2022, Alvotech consummated the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement by and among OACB, Alvotech Holdings and Alvotech. For more information about the Business Combination, see the section “Explanatory Note” in the 20-F filed by Alvotech with the SEC on June 22, 2022.

This prospectus contains references to our trademarks and to trademarks belonging to other entities. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this prospectus, including logos, artwork and other visual displays may appear without the ^® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their rights thereto. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade name or trademarks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

Certain amounts that appear in this prospectus may not sum due to rounding.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT IFRS AND NON-IFRS FINANCIAL MEASURES

Alvotech’s historical consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with IFRS.

Certain of the measures included in this prospectus may be considered non-IFRS financial measures. Non-IFRS financial measures should not be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for, financial information presented in compliance with IFRS, and non-IFRS financial measures as used by Alvotech may not be comparable to similarly titled amounts used by other companies.

i

INDUSTRY AND MARKET DATA

This prospectus contains estimates, projections, and other information concerning Alvotech’s industry and business, as well as data regarding market research, estimates, and forecasts prepared by Alvotech’s management. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections, market research, or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties, and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances that are assumed in this information. The industry in which Alvotech operates is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk due to a variety of factors, including those described in the section titled “Risk Factors.” Unless otherwise expressly stated, Alvotech obtained this industry, business, market, and other data from reports, research surveys, studies, and similar data prepared by market research firms and other third parties, industry and general publications, government data, and similar sources. In some cases, Alvotech does not expressly refer to the sources from which this data is derived. In that regard, when Alvotech refers to one or more sources of this type of data in any paragraph, you should assume that other data of this type appearing in the same paragraph is derived from sources which Alvotech paid for, sponsored, or conducted, unless otherwise expressly stated or the context otherwise requires. While Alvotech has compiled, extracted, and reproduced industry data from these sources, Alvotech has not independently verified the data. Forecasts and other forward-looking information with respect to industry, business, market, and other data are subject to the same qualifications and additional uncertainties regarding the other forward-looking statements in this prospectus. See “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

ii

FREQUENTLY USED TERMS

In this prospectus:

“Alvogen” means Alvogen Lux Holdings S.à r.l., a limited liability company (Société à responsabilité limitée) incorporated and existing under the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg having its registered office at 5, Rue Heienhaff, L-1736 Senningerberg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and registered with the Luxembourg Trade and Company Register (Registre de Commerce et des Sociétés, Luxembourg) under number B 149045.

“Alvogen-Aztiq Loan Advance Conversion” means the private placement dated July 12, 2022, pursuant to which Alvogen and Aztiq subscribed to 2,500,000 Ordinary Shares each, for a subscription price of $10.00 per share.

“Alvotech” means as the context requires, (a) the registrant, a legal entity named Alvotech, previously known as Alvotech Lux Holdings S.A.S., a public limited liability company (société anonyme) incorporated and existing under the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg having its registered office at 9, Rue de Bitbourg, L-1273 Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, registered with the Luxembourg Trade and Company Register (Registre de Commerce et des Sociétés, Luxembourg) under number B258884, individually or together with its consolidated subsidiaries; or (b) Alvotech Holdings.

“Alvotech Holdings” means Alvotech Holdings S.A., a public limited liability company (société anonyme) incorporated under the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg having its registered office at 9, Rue de Bitbourg, L-1273 Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and registered with the Luxembourg Trade and Company Register (Registre de Commerce et des Sociétés, Luxembourg) under number B 229193, individually or together with its consolidated subsidiaries.

“Alvotech Holdings Class A Ordinary Shares” means the Class A Ordinary Shares, with a nominal value of $0.01 per share, of Alvotech Holdings, which converted into Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

“Alvotech Holdings Class B Shares” means the Class B Shares, with a nominal value of $0.01 per share, of Alvotech Holdings, which converted into Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

“Alvotech Holdings Ordinary Shares” means the Alvotech Holdings Class A Ordinary Shares and the Alvotech Holdings Class B Shares, collectively.

“Alvotech Holdings Shareholders” means the holders of Alvotech Holdings Ordinary Shares.

“Aztiq” means Aztiq Pharma Partners S.à r.l., a limited liability company (Société à responsabilité limitée) incorporated and existing under the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg having its registered office at 5, Rue Heienhaff, L-1736 Senningerberg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and registered with the Luxembourg Trade and Company Register (Registre de Commerce et des Sociétés, Luxembourg) under number B 147728.

“Business Combination” means the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement, including the Mergers.

“Business Combination Agreement” means the Business Combination Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2021 as may be amended, by and among OACB, Alvotech Holdings and Alvotech.

“Closing” means the consummation of the Business Combination, which occurred on June 15, 2022.

“Closing Date” means June 15, 2022, the date upon which the Closing occurred.

“Code” means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

iii

“Combined Company” means Alvotech and its consolidated subsidiaries after giving effect to the Business Combination.

“Conversion” means the change of Alvotech’s legal form from a simplified joint stock company (société par actions simplifiée) to a public limited liability company (société anonyme) under Luxembourg law immediately after the effectiveness of the First Merger and the Redemption.

“Election” means the election on Internal Revenue Service Form 8832 pursuant to Treasury Regulations Section 301.7701-3(c), effective as of the date of the First Merger Effective Time, for Alvotech to be classified as an association taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

“EMA” means the European Medicines Agency.

“Exchange Act” means the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

“FDA” means the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“First Merger” means when OACB merges with and into Alvotech, with Alvotech as the surviving company.

“First Merger Effective Time” means the date and time at which the notarial deed of the sole shareholder’s resolutions of Alvotech approving the First Merger becomes effective, upon its publication in the Recueil Electronique des Sociétés et Associations (the Luxembourg legal gazette), subject to the execution of a plan of merger between OACB and Alvotech and the filing and registration of such Plan of First Merger and such other documents as required under the Companies Act (as amended) of the Cayman Islands.

“GAAP” means United States generally accepted accounting principles.

“IFRS” means the International Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the International Accounting Standards Board.

“Initial Shareholders” means the holders of the OACB Class B Ordinary Shares.

“IPO” means OACB’s initial public offering of units, consummated on September 21, 2020.

“JOBS Act” means the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, as amended.

“Luxembourg Company Law” means the Luxembourg law of August 10, 1915 on commercial companies, as amended.

“Mergers” means the First Merger and the Second Merger collectively.

“Nasdaq” means The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC.

“Nasdaq First North” means the Nasdaq First North Growth Market.

“OACB” means Oaktree Acquisition Corp. II, a Cayman Islands exempted company.

“OACB Class A Ordinary Shares” means the Class A ordinary shares, par value 0.0001 per share, of OACB, which converted into Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

“OACB Class B Ordinary Shares” or “Founder Shares” means the 6,250,000 Class B ordinary shares, par value $0.0001 per share, of OACB, which were issued to the Sponsor in a private placement prior to OACB’s initial public offering and converted into Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

iv

“OACB Ordinary Shares” means the OACB Class A Ordinary Shares and the OACB Class B Ordinary Shares, collectively.

“OACB Private Placement Warrants” means the warrants to purchase OACB Class A Ordinary Shares purchased in a private placement in connection with the IPO, which automatically ceased to represent a right to acquire purchase OACB Class A Ordinary Shares and automatically represented a right to acquire Ordinary Shares at the Closing of the Business Combination.

“OACB Public Warrants” means each whole warrant of OACB entitling the holder to purchase one OACB Class A Ordinary Share at a price of $11.50 per share, which automatically ceased to represent a right to acquire purchase OACB Class A Ordinary Shares and automatically represented a right to acquire Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

“OACB Warrants” means the OACB Public Warrants and the OACB Private Placement Warrants.

“Ordinary Shares” means the ordinary shares, with a nominal value of $0.01 per share, of Alvotech.

“PIPE Financing” means the private placement pursuant to which the Subscribers subscribed to Ordinary Shares, for a subscription price of $10.00 per share.

“Public Shares” means the OACB Class A Ordinary Shares issued as part of the units sold in the IPO, which converted into Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

“Public Shareholders” means the holders of the OACB Class A Ordinary Shares, which converted into Ordinary Shares at the closing of the Business Combination.

“Public Warrants” means the former OACB Public Warrants converted at the First Merger Effective Time into a right to acquire one Ordinary Share on substantially the same terms as were in effect immediately prior to the First Merger Effective Time under the terms of the Warrant Agreement.

“Redemption” means Alvotech’s redemption and cancellation of the initial shares held by the initial sole shareholder of Alvotech pursuant to a share capital reduction of Alvotech immediately after the effectiveness of the First Merger but prior to the Conversion.

“SEC” means the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

“Second Merger” means when Alvotech Holdings merges with and into Alvotech, with Alvotech as the surviving company.

“Second Merger Effective Time” means the date and time at which the Second Merger becomes effective, on the Closing Date immediately after giving effect to the First Merger, the Redemption, the Conversion and the PIPE Financing.

“Securities Act” means the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

“Sponsor” means Oaktree Acquisition Holdings II, L.P., a Cayman Islands exempted limited partnership.

“Sponsor Letter Agreement” means the Sponsor Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2021, by and among OACB, Alvotech and Sponsor.

“Subscribers” means the institutional investors that have committed to subscribe to Ordinary Shares in the PIPE Financing.

v

“Trust Account” means the trust account that held a portion of the proceeds of the IPO and the concurrent sale of the Private Placement Warrants prior to the Closing.

“Warrants” means the former OACB Warrants converted at the First Merger Effective Time into a right to acquire one Ordinary Share on substantially the same terms as were in effect immediately prior to the First Merger Effective Time under the terms of the Warrant Agreement.

“Warrant Agreement” means the warrant agreement, dated September 21, 2020 by and between OACB and Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as warrant agent, governing OACB’s outstanding warrants, which was assigned to and assumed by Alvotech pursuant to that certain Assignment, Assumption and Amendment Agreement dated as of June 15, 2022.

“Yorkville” means YA II PN, LTD., a Cayman Islands exempt limited partnership.

CONVENTIONS WHICH APPLY TO THIS PROSPECTUS

In this prospectus, unless otherwise specified or the context otherwise requires:

“$,” “USD” and “U.S. dollar” each refers to the United States dollar; and

“€,” “EUR” and “euro” each refers to the lawful currency of certain participating member states of the European Union.

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the statements in this prospectus constitute forward-looking statements that do not directly or exclusively relate to historical facts. You should not place undue reliance on such statements because they are subject to numerous uncertainties and factors relating to our operations and business environment, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control. Forward-looking statements include information concerning our possible or assumed future results of operations, including descriptions of our business strategy. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “believe,” “anticipate,” “could,” “may,” “would,” “should,” “intend,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “will,” “expect,” “estimate,” “project,” “positioned,” “strategy,” “outlook,” “continue,” “possible,” “might” and similar expressions. All such forward-looking statements involve estimates and assumptions that are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results expressed in the statements. Among the key factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements are the following:

vi

These forward-looking statements are based on information available as of the date of this prospectus, and current expectations, forecasts and assumptions, and involve a number of judgments, risks and uncertainties. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date, and we do not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date they were made, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws.

You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements in deciding to invest in our securities. As a result of a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties, our actual results or performance may be materially different from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Some factors that could cause actual results to differ include:

vii

viii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

RISK FACTORS

An investment in our securities carries a significant degree of risk. In addition to the other information contained in this prospectus, including the matters addressed under the heading “Forward-Looking Statements,” you should carefully consider the following risk factors in deciding whether to invest in our securities. The occurrence of one or more of the events or circumstances described in these risk factors, alone or in combination with other events or circumstances, may have a material adverse effect on our business, reputation, revenue, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects, in which event the market price of our securities could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties of which we are not presently aware or that we currently deem immaterial could also affect our business operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Capital

Alvotech has a limited operating history in a highly regulated environment on which to assess its business, has incurred significant losses since its inception and anticipates that it may continue to incur significant losses for the immediate future.

Alvotech is a biotech company with a limited operating history. Alvotech has incurred a loss for the period in each year since its inception in 2013, including losses of $101.5 million, $170.0 million and $209.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively, and a loss for the period of $184.5 million and $273.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Alvotech had an accumulated deficit of $1,325.0 million as of June 30, 2022.

Alvotech has devoted substantially all of its financial resources to identify and develop its product candidates, including conducting, among other things, analytical characterization, process development and manufacture, formulation and clinical studies and providing general and administrative support for these operations. To date, Alvotech has financed its operations primarily through the sale of equity securities, debt financing by way of shareholder loans (convertible and non-convertible) and the issuance of bond instruments to third party investors, as well as through milestone payments under certain license and development agreements with its partners, for example Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH (“Teva”) and STADA. The amount of its future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of its future expenditures and its ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings or strategic collaborations. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk.

11

If Alvotech obtains regulatory approval to market a biosimilar product candidate, its future revenue will depend upon the therapeutic indications for which approval is granted, the size of any markets in which its product candidates may receive approval and its ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, pricing, reimbursement from third-party payors and adequate market share for its product candidates in those markets. However, even if one or more of Alvotech’s product candidates gains regulatory approval and is commercialized, Alvotech may never become profitable.

Alvotech expects to continue to incur significant expenses, which could lead to increasing operating losses for the immediate future. Alvotech anticipates that its expenses will increase substantially if and as Alvotech:

Further, the net losses Alvotech incurs may fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year such that a period-to-period comparison of its results of operations may not be a good indication of its future performance quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year due to factors including the timing of clinical trials, any litigation that Alvotech may file or that may be filed against Alvotech, the execution of collaboration, licensing or other agreements and the timing of any payments Alvotech makes or receives thereunder.

12

Alvotech has never generated any substantial revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

Although Alvotech has received upfront payments, milestone and other contingent payments and/or funding for development from some of its collaboration and license agreements, Alvotech never generated substantial revenue from product sales and only launched AVT02 in Canada and select European markets in 2022. Alvotech’s ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on its ability, alone or with strategic collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory and marketing approvals necessary to commercialize, as well as successfully commercialize, one or more of its product candidates. Alvotech cannot predict if and when it will begin generating revenue from product sales outside of Canada and select European markets, as this depends heavily on its success in many areas, including but not limited to:

Even if one or more of the product candidates that Alvotech develops is approved for commercial sale, Alvotech may incur significant costs in order to manufacture and commercialize any such product. Its expenses could increase beyond its expectations if Alvotech is required by the FDA, the European Commission, the EMA, other regulatory agencies, domestic or foreign, or by any unfavorable outcomes in intellectual property litigation filed against Alvotech, to change its manufacturing processes or assays or to perform clinical, nonclinical, analytical or other types of studies in addition to those that Alvotech currently anticipates. In cases where Alvotech is successful in obtaining regulatory approvals to market one or more of its product candidates, its revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which Alvotech gains regulatory approval, the timing of Alvotech’s entry into a particular market or territory, the number of biosimilar competitors in such markets and whether any have regulatory exclusivity, the national laws governing substitution, the accepted price for the product, the ability to get reimbursement at any price, the nature and degree of competition from the

13

reference product and other biosimilar companies (including competition from large pharmaceutical companies entering the biosimilar market that may be able to gain advantages in the sale of biosimilar products based on brand recognition and/or existing relationships with customers and payors), Alvotech’s ability to manufacture sufficient quantities of the product of sufficient quality and at a reasonable cost and whether Alvotech owns (or has partnered to own) the commercial rights for that territory. If the market for its product candidates (or its share of that market) is not as significant as Alvotech expects, the regulatory approval is narrower in scope than Alvotech expects (e.g., for a narrow indication or set of indications) or the reasonably accepted population for treatment is narrowed by competition, physician choice or treatment guidelines, Alvotech may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, even if approved. If Alvotech is unable to successfully complete development and obtain regulatory approval for its lead products, namely AVT02 (outside of the European Union, Canada and the UK, where it received approval), AVT03, AVT04, AVT05, AVT06 and AVT23, its business may suffer. Additionally, if Alvotech is not able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products or the costs necessary to generate revenues increase significantly, Alvotech may never become profitable.

Alvotech’s operating and financial results are subject to concentration risk.

Alvotech’s operational and financial results are subject to concentration risk. Alvotech’s success will depend significantly on the development of a limited number of product candidates, their regulatory approval in a limited number of jurisdictions and their commercialization by a limited number of commercial partners. Even if Alvotech is successful in developing and commercializing all of these products, its revenue will be dependent on a limited number of products that would account for a significant majority of its revenues. This concentration risk would increase to the extent Alvotech is successful in developing and commercializing fewer products as it would be dependent on a lower number of products for the significant majority of its revenues. Unfavorable changes or the non-occurrence of certain anticipated events with respect to any of these limited number of products, jurisdictions or commercial partners may disproportionally affect Alvotech’s global results. See also “—Alvotech is dependent on its partners, such as Teva and STADA, for the commercialization of its biosimilar products candidates in certain major markets, and their failure to commercialize in those markets could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s revenue, business and operating results.”

Alvotech may be unable to generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy its significant debt service obligations, which would adversely affect its financial condition and results of operations.

Alvotech’s ability to make principal and interest payments on and to refinance its indebtedness will depend on its ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that may be beyond Alvotech’s control. If Alvotech’s business does not generate sufficient cash flow, if currently anticipated costs and revenues are not realized on schedule, in the amounts projected or at all, or if future borrowings are not available to Alvotech in amounts sufficient to enable Alvotech to pay its indebtedness or to fund its other liquidity needs, Alvotech’s financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected. If Alvotech cannot generate sufficient cash flow to make scheduled principal and interest payments on its debt obligations in the future, Alvotech may need to refinance all or a portion of its indebtedness on or before maturity, sell assets, delay capital expenditures or seek additional equity. If Alvotech is unable to refinance any of its indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at all or to effect any other action relating to its indebtedness on satisfactory terms or at all, Alvotech may be forced to reduce or discontinue operations or seek protection of the bankruptcy laws, its business may be harmed and its securityholders may lose some or all of their investment.

14

Alvotech may need to raise substantial additional funding from shareholders or third parties. This additional funding may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. Failure to obtain such necessary capital when needed may force Alvotech to delay, limit or terminate its product development efforts or other operations.

Developing Alvotech’s product candidates is expensive, and Alvotech expects its research and development expenses to increase substantially in connection with its ongoing activities, particularly as Alvotech advances its product candidates through clinical studies.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech had cash and cash equivalents, excluding restricted cash, of $128.4 million.

On April 11, 2022, Alvotech executed a binding term sheet with Sculptor Capital Investments, LLC (“Sculptor”), for a debt facility in an expected amount of between $75.0 million to $125.0 million. The proceeds are expected to be used to pay off part of the shareholder loan and for general corporate purposes. Under the term sheet, Alvotech is expected to pay a 2% underwriting fee to Sculptor and the interest rate is to be determined on the date of the signing of the facility agreement but is expected to be no less than 10% and no more than 12.5%, and the maturity date of the facility is expected to be September 23, 2025. Alvotech’s entry into the facility agreement is, among other conditions precedent, subject to the negotiation and execution of final documentation in a form that is mutually agreeable to all parties involved and the receipt of necessary approvals. There can be no guarantee that the conditions precedent will be satisfied or that the parties will be able to agree on final documentation. Negotiations remain ongoing, which may impact the final terms of the facility.

On April 18, 2022, Alvotech entered into the SEPA with Yorkville pursuant to which Alvotech has the option, but not the obligation, to issue, and Yorkville shall subscribe for, an aggregate amount of up to $150.0 million of Ordinary Shares at the time of Alvotech’s choosing during the term of the agreement, subject to certain limitations. Each advance under the SEPA (an “Advance”) may be for an aggregate amount of Ordinary Shares purchased at 98.0% of the market price during a one- or three-day pricing period elected by Alvotech. The “Market Price” is defined in the SEPA as the average of the VWAPs (as defined below) during the one trading day, in the case of a one-day pricing period, or during each of the three consecutive trading days, in the case of a three-day pricing period, commencing on the trading day following the date Alvotech submits an Advance notice to Yorkville. “VWAP” means, for any trading day, the daily volume weighted average price of the Ordinary Shares for such date on NASDAQ as reported by Bloomberg L.P. during regular trading hours. The SEPA will continue for a term of three years commencing from the date of execution of the definitive agreement. For more information about the SEPA, see “Committed Equity Financing.”

To the extent that Sculptor and/or Yorkville are unable or unwilling to advance the funds committed under the debt facility and the SEPA, respectively, for any reason, or that Alvotech is unable to meet the conditions precedent to use these facilities, Alvotech’s liquidity may be materially adversely affected.

However, even with the aforementioned cash received during 2022 and expected to be received in the future, management has determined that there is a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt about Alvotech’s ability to continue as a going concern. The unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements and audited consolidated financial statements appearing at the end of this prospectus have been prepared on a going concern basis without adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty and the report of Alvotech’s independent registered public accounting firm thereon includes an explanatory paragraph to that effect.

Alvotech may therefore require additional capital to obtain regulatory approval for, and to successfully commercialize, its product candidates. In addition, its operating plans may change as a result of many factors that are currently unknown to Alvotech, and Alvotech may need to seek additional funding sooner than planned. Alvotech’s future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

15

Any additional fundraising efforts may divert Alvotech’s management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect its ability to develop and commercialize its product candidates. In addition, Alvotech cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to Alvotech, if at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of its shareholders, and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by Alvotech or the possibility of such issuance may cause the market price of its shares to decline. The sale of additional equity or convertible securities would dilute the share ownership of its existing shareholders. The incurrence of indebtedness could result in increased fixed payment obligations and Alvotech may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on its ability to incur additional debt, limitations on its ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact its ability to conduct its business. Alvotech could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and Alvotech may be required to relinquish rights to some of its technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to Alvotech, any of which may have a material adverse effect on its business, operating results and prospects. Even if Alvotech believes it has sufficient funds for its current or future operating plans, Alvotech may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or for specific strategic considerations. If Alvotech seeks additional financing to fund its business activities in the future and there remains substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern, investors or other financing sources may be unwilling to provide additional funding to Alvotech on commercially reasonable terms or at all. In addition, the perception that Alvotech may not be able to continue as a going concern may cause others to choose not to deal with it due to concerns about its ability to meet its contractual obligations.

If Alvotech is unable to obtain sufficient funding on a timely basis and on acceptable terms and continue as a going concern, Alvotech may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of its research or development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or to otherwise reduce or discontinue its operations. In general, Alvotech may be unable to expand its operations or otherwise capitalize on business opportunities, and defend against and prosecute litigation necessary to commercialize its product candidates as desired, which could materially affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. If Alvotech is ultimately unable to continue as a going concern, it may have to seek the protection of bankruptcy laws or liquidate its assets and may receive less than the value at which those assets are carried on its audited financial statements, and it is likely that its securityholders will lose all or a part of their investment.

16

Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

The regulatory review and approval processes of the FDA, European Commission and comparable national or regional authorities are lengthy, time consuming and have uncertain outcomes. If Alvotech and its collaboration partners are unable to obtain regulatory approval for its product candidates, its business will be substantially harmed. Alvotech cannot give any assurance that marketing authorization applications for any of its product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.

Alvotech’s future success is dependent on its ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then commercialize and obtain adequate third-party coverage and reimbursement for one or more product candidates. Alvotech currently does not have any approved products and generates no revenue from sales of any products, other than for AVT02 in Europe, Canada and the UK. Alvotech may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable product other than AVT02 in Europe, Canada and the UK.

The research, development, testing, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, approval, promotion, advertising, storage, marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting and export and import of biologic products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States, by the European Commission, the EMA and the Competent National Authorities in the European Economic Area (“EEA”), and by other regulatory authorities in other countries, which regulations differ from country to country. Neither Alvotech nor any collaboration partner is permitted to market its product candidates before receiving market authorization/approval from the appropriate regulatory authorities.

The time required to seek and obtain market authorization/approval by the FDA and comparable authorities is unpredictable, may take many years following the completion of clinical studies and depends upon numerous factors. In addition, approval requirements, regulations, or considerations with respect to the type and amount of clinical, nonclinical and analytical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the submission of an application for marketing authorization/approval, the authorization or approval, or the decision not to approve an application. Other than the regulatory approval received in the European Union, Canada and the UK for AVT02, neither Alvotech nor any collaboration partner has obtained regulatory approval for any of its product candidates in the United States, the EEA or in additional other countries where Alvotech or its partners have commercial rights, and it is possible that none of its current or future product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval.

These lengthy approval processes, as well as the unpredictability of the results of analytical, nonclinical, and clinical studies, may result in Alvotech’s failure to obtain regulatory approval to market any of its product candidates, which would significantly harm its business, prospects and financial condition. Moreover, any delays in the commencement or completion of product testing could significantly impact its product development costs and could result in the need for additional financing. For example, Alvotech’s clinical trials must use reference products as comparators, and such supplies may not be available on a timely basis to support such trials.

Most of Alvotech’s product candidates are in varying stages of development and will require additional clinical development, management of analytical, nonclinical, clinical and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval, adequate manufacturing supplies, commercial organization and significant marketing efforts before Alvotech may generate any revenue from product sales. Alvotech’s BLA for AVT02 supporting biosimilarity was filed with the FDA on September 4, 2020 and its BLA for AVT02 supporting interchangeability was accepted for review in February 2022 . In September 2022, Alvotech announced that it had received communication from the FDA detailing its assessment of the March 2022 inspection of Alvotech’s manufacturing facility in Reykjavik, Iceland and Alvotech’s subsequent written responses to the FDA. The FDA’s complete response letter to the initial biosimilar BLA for AVT02 noted certain deficiencies related to the Reykjavik facility and stated that satisfactory resolution of the deficiencies is required before FDA may approve this first-filed BLA. Alvotech is

17

working collaboratively with FDA to resolve these issues. Alvotech received regulatory approval in the European Union in November 2021, and in Canada and the UK in January 2022; in May 2022, Alvotech reported positive topline results from two clinical studies for its second product candidate, AVT04; in July 2022 Alvotech announced the initiation of its clinical trials for AVT06 and AVT03, while AVT05 and AVT23 are in pre-clinical development.

Although certain of its employees have prior experience with submitting marketing applications to the FDA and comparable national or regional regulatory authorities, Alvotech has not achieved approval for such applications for its product candidates other than in the European Union, Canada and the UK for AVT02. Alvotech cannot be certain that any of its product candidates will receive additional regulatory approval. If Alvotech and its collaboration partners do not receive regulatory approvals for enough of its product candidates in sufficiently large markets, Alvotech may not be able to continue its operations.

Applications for Alvotech’s product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:

In addition, if Alvotech changes the regulatory pathway through which it intends to seek approval of any of its product candidates, Alvotech may have to conduct additional clinical trials, which may delay its ability to submit a marketing application for the product. Even if Alvotech or its collaboration partners were to obtain approval for any of its product candidates, the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities may limit the scope of such approval, e.g., for fewer or more limited indications than Alvotech has sought licensure, may grant approval contingent on the completion of costly additional clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for Alvotech’s product candidates.

The UK’s withdrawal from the EEA on January 31, 2020, commonly referred to as Brexit, has created significant uncertainty and such uncertainty may make it more difficult for Alvotech to achieve regulatory approval in the UK. The impact of Brexit on the on-going validity in the UK of current EEA authorizations for medicinal products, whether granted through the centralized procedure, decentralized procedure, or mutual recognition, and on the future process for obtaining marketing authorization for pharmaceutical products manufactured or sold in the UK remains uncertain.

On December 24, 2020, the EEA and UK reached an agreement in principle on the framework for their future relationship, the EEA-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The Agreement primarily focuses on ensuring free

18

trade between the EEA and the UK in relation to goods, including medicinal products. Although the body of the Agreement includes general terms which apply to medicinal products, greater detail on sector-specific issues is provided in an Annex to the Agreement. The Annex provides a framework for the recognition of GMP inspections and for the exchange and acceptance of official GMP documents.

The regime does not, however, extend to procedures such as batch release certification. Among the changes that will now occur are that Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) will be treated as a third country. Northern Ireland will, with regard to EEA regulations, continue to follow the EEA regulatory rules. As part of the Agreement, the EEA and the UK will recognize Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) inspections carried out by the other Party and the acceptance of official GMP documents issued by the other Party. The Agreement also encourages, although it does not oblige, the parties to consult one another on proposals to introduce significant changes to technical regulations or inspection procedures. Among the areas of absence of mutual recognition are batch testing and batch release.

The UK has unilaterally agreed to accept EEA batch testing and batch release for a period of at least two years until January 1, 2023. However, the EEA continues to apply EEA laws that require batch testing and batch release to take place in the EEA territory. This means that medicinal products that are tested and released in the UK must be retested and re-released when entering the EEA market for commercial use. As regards marketing authorizations, Great Britain will have a separate regulatory submission process, approval process and a separate national MA. Northern Ireland will, however, continue to be covered by the marketing authorizations granted by the EC.

As a result of the foregoing, among other factors, there can be no assurance that Alvotech would be able to achieve its plan to commercialize its product candidates on its expected timeline, or at all.

If Alvotech is not able to demonstrate biosimilarity of its biosimilar product candidates to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable national or regional regulatory authorities, Alvotech will not obtain regulatory approval for commercialization of its biosimilar product candidates and its future results of operations and ability to generate revenue would be adversely affected.

Alvotech’s future results of operations depend, to a significant degree, on its ability to obtain regulatory approval for and to commercialize its proposed biosimilar products. Any inability to obtain regulatory approval could impact and delay the development timeline of Alvotech’s product candidates. To obtain regulatory approval for the commercialization of these product candidates, Alvotech will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable national regulatory authorities, among other things, that its proposed biosimilar products are highly similar to biological reference products already licensed by the regulatory authority pursuant to approved marketing applications/authorizations, notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components, and that they have no clinically meaningful differences as compared to the marketed biological products in terms of the safety, purity and potency of the products. Each individual jurisdiction may apply different criteria to assess biosimilarity, based on a preponderance of the data that can be interpreted subjectively in some cases.

It is uncertain if regulatory authorities will grant the reference biosimilar product candidates the same labeling approved for the reference product when they are approved. For example, an infliximab (Remicade) biosimilar molecule was approved in the EEA with the same label as the reference product, but it did not receive approval initially for the same labeling reference in Canada. A similar outcome could occur with respect to one or more of Alvotech’s product candidates.

In the event that the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities require Alvotech to generate additional data, including by conducting additional clinical trials or other lengthy processes or otherwise change their criteria and requirements for the approval of biosimilar products, the commercialization of its proposed biosimilar products could be delayed or prevented. Delays in the commercialization of or the inability to obtain regulatory approval for these products could adversely affect Alvotech’s operating results by restricting or significantly delaying its introduction of new biosimilars.

19

The structure of complex proteins used in protein-based therapeutics is inherently variable and highly dependent on the processes and conditions used to manufacture them. If Alvotech is unable to develop manufacturing processes that demonstrate that Alvotech’s product candidates are highly similar to their reference products, and within a range of variability considered acceptable by regulatory authorities, Alvotech may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for its products.

Protein-based therapeutics are inherently heterogeneous and their structures are highly dependent on the manufacturing process and conditions. Products from one manufacturing facility can differ from those produced in another facility. Similarly, physicochemical differences can also exist among different lots produced within a single facility. The physicochemical complexity and size of biologic therapeutics can create significant technical and scientific challenges in the context of their replication as biosimilar products.

The inherent variability in protein structure from one production lot to another is a fundamental consideration with respect to establishing biosimilarity to a reference product to support regulatory approval requirements. For example, the glycosylation of the protein, meaning the manner in which sugar molecules are attached to the protein backbone of a therapeutic protein when it is produced in a living cell, is critical to half-life (how long the drug stays in the body), efficacy and even safety of the therapeutic and is therefore a key consideration for biosimilarity. Defining and understanding the variability of a reference product in order to match its glycosylation profile requires significant skill in cell biology, protein purification and analytical protein chemistry. Variations in the glycosylation profile and other analytical characterizations important for determining biosimilarity to the reference product molecule are risks unique to biosimilar manufacturers.

There are extraordinary technical challenges in developing complex protein-based therapeutics that not only must achieve an acceptable degree of similarity to the reference product in terms of relevant quality attributes such as glycosylation patterns, but also the ability to develop manufacturing processes that can replicate the necessary structural characteristics within an acceptable range of variability sufficient to satisfy regulatory authorities.

For example, the manufacturing process of Alvotech’s products may be susceptible to non-ideal product variability without well-characterized and well-controlled master and working cell banks. A cell bank is a collection of ampoules of uniform composition stored under defined conditions, each containing an aliquot of a single pool of cells. The master cell bank is generally derived from the selected cell clone containing the expression construct that has been encoded to produce the protein of interest, such as a specific monoclonal antibody with a defined amino acid sequence. This unique aliquot of cells allows for a consistent high quality biologic medicine to be produced. The working cell bank is derived by expansion of one or more ampoules of the master cell bank and is used for routine manufacturing. Both the master cell bank and working cell bank are central to obtaining regulatory approval for manufacturing and marketing biologic medicine. The quality of the manufactured biologic product is dependent on the quality of the cells used for its manufacturing, and having a sufficient supply of master and working cell banks is important for a consistent manufacturing process. Should our cell banks be compromised, we would be unable to produce usable products for patients in any market.

Given the challenges caused by the inherent variability in protein production, Alvotech may not be successful in its application for approval of its products if regulators conclude that Alvotech has not demonstrated that its product candidates are highly similar to their reference products, or that the processes Alvotech uses to manufacture its products are unable to produce its products within an acceptable range of variability (including situations where the reference product sponsor changes its manufacturing process and such changes impact the characteristics of the product).

Additionally, the foregoing factors complicate scaling of Alvotech’s manufacturing capabilities. To the extent that Alvotech is unable to scale its manufacturing capabilities to produce sufficient quantities of its products at the required specifications and at an acceptable cost, it may be unable to meet demand for its approved product candidates and its business, financial condition, reputation and results of operations may suffer.

20

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process and Alvotech may encounter substantial delays in its clinical studies or may fail to demonstrate safety, purity and efficacy/potency to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities. Additionally, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, or the occurrence of unforeseen geopolitical events such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the resulting instability in the region, may delay the conduct and completion of clinical studies.

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of its product candidates, Alvotech (and/or its collaboration partners) must conduct clinical studies to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency (safety and efficacy) of the product candidates in humans.

Clinical studies are expensive and can take many years to complete, and their outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical study process. The results of preclinical studies, including comparative analytical assessments of Alvotech’s product candidates, may not be predictive of the results of clinical studies. The success of clinical studies cannot be predicted.

Alvotech cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic or the occurrence of unforeseen geopolitical events, such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the resulting instability in the region, timelines could be extended. A failure of one or more clinical studies can occur at any stage of testing. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include but are not limited to:

21

Any inability to successfully complete analytical, nonclinical, or clinical development could result in additional costs to Alvotech or impair its ability to achieve regulatory approval and generate revenue. Even if Alvotech is successful, the regulatory approval processes and action dates of the FDA, EMA and comparable authorities may be delayed due to impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, Alvotech may be delayed in obtaining regulatory approvals for its products. Further, the global economic slowdown, the overall disruption of global supply chains and distribution systems, effects of this on the work of appropriate regulatory authorities in different regions and the other risks and uncertainties associated with the COVID-19 pandemic could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

In addition, at the end of 2021 and into 2022, tensions between the United States and Russia escalated when Russia amassed large numbers of military ground forces and support personnel on the Ukraine-Russia border and, in February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine. In response, NATO has deployed additional military forces to Eastern Europe, including to Lithuania, and the Biden administration announced certain sanctions against Russia. The invasion of Ukraine and the retaliatory measures that have been taken, or could be taken in the future, by the United States, NATO, and other countries have created global security concerns that could result in a regional conflict and otherwise have a lasting impact on regional and global economies, any or all of which could adversely affect our ability to conduct ongoing and future clinical trials of our product candidates in Ukraine, Russia and Eastern European countries, including our ongoing clinical trial for AVT04, which currently includes trial sites located in Ukraine. Although we are past the primary endpoint collection with all subjects in Ukraine for the AVT04 clinical trial, we are still in the process of collecting safety data from such patients. In addition, we had planned to begin our AVT03 clinical trial, that included planned trial sites in Ukraine, and our AVT06 clinical trial, that included planned trial sites in Ukraine and Russia, in 2022. For the AVT03 and AVT06 trials, Alvotech replaced these Ukrainian trial sites with trial sites outside of Ukraine. For more information about the impact of this conflict on our AVT04, AVT03 and AVT06 trials, please see “Business—Our Pipeline—Our Programs.” The evolving situation of this conflict and the sanctions that may be imposed by the United States or other jurisdictions as a result are unpredictable and could negatively impact the anticipated timing and completion of our clinical trials and/or analyses of clinical results, including our clinical trials for AVT04, AVT03 or AVT06, which could limit our ability to obtain regulatory approval for these candidates on anticipated timelines or at all and materially harm our business.

In addition, if Alvotech makes manufacturing or formulation changes to its product candidates, it may need to conduct additional studies to bridge its modified product candidates to earlier versions. If Alvotech intends to alter the manufacturing process for a particular product candidate, it will need to provide data to the FDA and

22

regulatory authorities demonstrating the comparability of the pre- and post-change product candidate. If Alvotech is unable to make that demonstration to the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities, Alvotech could face significant delays or fail to obtain regulatory approval to market the product, which could significantly harm its business, prospects and financial condition.

Alvotech’s product candidates may cause unexpected side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if granted.

As with most pharmaceutical products, use of Alvotech’s product candidates could be associated with side effects or adverse events which can vary in severity (from minor reactions to death) and frequency (infrequent or prevalent). Side effects or adverse events associated with the use of Alvotech’s product candidates may be observed at any time, including in clinical trials or when a product is commercialized. Undesirable or unexpected side effects caused by Alvotech’s product candidates could cause Alvotech or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical studies and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other comparable authorities. Results of Alvotech’s studies could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or other safety issues and, if different from the severity and prevalence of side effects for the reference products, could preclude the demonstration of biosimilarity. Such adverse event findings also could require Alvotech or its collaboration partners to perform additional studies or halt development or sale of these product candidates or expose Alvotech to product liability lawsuits which will harm its business, prospects and financial condition. In such an event, Alvotech may be precluded from seeking licensure through the regulatory pathway for biosimilars, or could be required by the FDA or other comparable authorities to conduct additional animal or human studies regarding the safety and efficacy of its product candidates which Alvotech has not planned or anticipated or its studies could be suspended or terminated, and the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities could order Alvotech to cease further development of or deny, vary, or withdraw approval of its product candidates for any or all intended indications. There can be no assurance that Alvotech will resolve any issues related to any product-related adverse events to the satisfaction of the FDA or any comparable regulatory agency in a timely manner, if ever, which could harm its business, prospects and financial condition.

Drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment for clinical trials, the ability of enrolled patients to complete Alvotech’s studies or result in potential product liability claims against which Alvotech would need to mount a defense. Alvotech currently carries product liability insurance and Alvotech is required to maintain clinical trial insurance pursuant to certain of its license agreements. Alvotech believes its product liability insurance coverage is sufficient in light of its current clinical programs; however, Alvotech may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect Alvotech against losses due to liability. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against Alvotech could adversely affect its results of operations and business. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in impairment of its business reputation, withdrawal of clinical study participants, costs due to related litigation, distraction of management’s attention from its primary business, initiation of investigations by regulators, substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants, the inability to commercialize its product candidates and decreased demand for its product candidates, if approved for commercial sale.

Additionally, if one or more of Alvotech’s product candidates receives marketing approval, and Alvotech or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products (or caused by the reference products or other biosimilars based on the applicable reference products), a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

23

Any of these events could prevent Alvotech from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm its business, prospects and financial condition.

If any of Alvotech’s product candidates receives approval, regulatory agencies including the FDA, European Commission, EMA, Competent National Authorities in the EEA and other national regulatory agencies’ regulations will require that Alvotech regularly report certain information, including information about adverse events that may have caused or contributed by those products. The timing of adverse event reporting obligations would be triggered by the date Alvotech becomes aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. Alvotech may fail to report adverse events it becomes aware of within the prescribed timeframe especially if it is not reported to Alvotech as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of its products. If Alvotech fails to comply with its reporting obligations, the FDA, European Commission, the EMA, the Competent National Authorities in the EEA or other regulatory agencies could take action that may include criminal prosecution, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, seizure of its products, or suspension of market approval, and delay in approval or clearance of future products.

As a condition to granting marketing authorization or approval of a product, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may require additional clinical trials or other studies. The results generated in these trials could result in the loss of marketing approval, changes in labeling, and/or new or increased concerns about the side effects, efficacy or safety. Regulatory agencies in countries outside the United States often have similar regulations and may impose comparable requirements. Post-marketing studies, whether conducted by Alvotech or by others, whether mandated by regulatory agencies or conducted voluntarily, and other emerging data about products, such as adverse event reports, may also adversely affect the availability or commercial potential of Alvotech’s products. Any of the foregoing risks could render Alvotech unable to achieve its plan of commercializing five products by the end of 2025.

Alvotech’s reliance on certain participants for its clinical trials could cause delays in its ongoing studies or the development of its products if such participants prove to be too limited or a substantial portion of participants in the studies withdraw.

In order to be successful and pursue market authorization globally for its products, Alvotech must be able to gather health data on the basis of populations from around the world. To the extent participants in clinical trials are too limited to certain populations, Alvotech’s clinical research may be adversely affected. Additionally, Alvotech depends on the willingness of these volunteers to participate in studies and there is always the risk that they may no longer be willing to participate or revoke the consents necessary for Alvotech to process their medical data. For example, due to reasons beyond Alvotech’s control, including the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the resulting instability in the region, participants and Alvotech’s key employees and advisors may no longer be able to travel or cross country borders to participate in Alvotech’s studies. If, for any reason, a substantial portion of participants in the studies were to withdraw their consent or discontinue their participation, Alvotech may not be able to continue its clinical studies for some or all of its product candidates which may cause delays in the development or approval of its product candidates. If its ability to gather and use sufficient data is impaired, Alvotech also may not be able to fulfill some contractual obligations with its partners.

24

The development, manufacture and commercialization of biosimilar products under various global regulatory pathways pose unique risks related to regulatory approvals across various jurisdictions.

U.S. Regulatory Framework for Biosimilars

Alvotech and its collaboration partners intend to pursue market authorization globally. In the United States, an abbreviated pathway for approval of biosimilar products was established by the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), enacted on March 23, 2010, as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (together, the “PPACA”). The BPCIA established this abbreviated pathway under section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act (the “PHSA”) for biological products shown to be biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Subsequent to the enactment of the BPCIA, the FDA has issued numerous guidance documents explaining its current thinking regarding the demonstration of biosimilarity and interchangeability as well as the submission and review of such BLA. As of August 25, 2022, there have been at least 37 biosimilar product applications approved, including the first approval of an interchangeable biosimilar product in July 2021, the second approval of an interchangeable biosimilar product in October 2021 and the third approval of an interchangeable biosimilar product in August 2022. Market success of biosimilar products will depend on demonstrating to patients, physicians, payors and relevant authorities that such products are similar in quality, safety and efficacy as compared to the reference product. If biosimilar product applications do not continue to be approved and the markets in which Alvotech operates do not widely accept the commercialization of biosimilar products, Alvotech’s business will be harmed. How the BPCIA is applied and interpreted by the FDA may have a material impact on Alvotech’s chances of obtaining FDA approval for its biosimilar product candidates, and its business operations after obtaining approval.

Alvotech will continue to analyze and incorporate into its product development plans any additional final regulations issued by the FDA, pharmacy substitution policies enacted by state governments and other applicable requirements. The costs of development and approval, along with the probability of success for its biosimilar product candidates, will be dependent upon application of any laws and regulations issued by the relevant regulatory authorities. The costs of developing Alvotech’s products may increase due to uncertainties or changes in guidance provided by regulatory agencies like the FDA and Alvotech may not have adequate funding and resources to pursue market authorization for all of its biosimilar products.

Biosimilar products may also be subject to extensive patent clearances and patent infringement litigation, which may delay and could prevent the commercial launch of a product. Moreover, the PHSA prohibits the FDA from filing an application for a biosimilar candidate to a reference product for four years of the date of first licensure of the reference product by the FDA, and from approving an application for a biosimilar candidate for 12 years from the date of first licensure of the reference product. For example, the FDA would not be able to approve a BLA submitted for a biosimilar that references a specific drug until 12 years after the date of first licensure of the BLA, i.e., the date that reference product BLA was approved, which in the case of AVT02, a biosimilar to Humira (adalimumab), would be December 31, 2014, in the case of AVT04, a biosimilar candidate to Stelara (ustekinumab), would be September 25, 2021, in the case of AVT05, a biosimilar candidate to Simponi and Simponi Aria (golimumab), would be April 24, 2021, and in the case of AVT06, a biosimilar candidate to Eylea (aflibercept), would be November 18, 2023. Interchangeable biosimilar approvals may also be blocked by periods of first interchangeable exclusivity ranging from 12 to 42 months in duration.

Regulatory Framework for Biosimilars Outside the United States

In 2004, by variation of Directive 2001/83/EC rules were established permitting the approval of biosimilar therapeutics. Since then, the European Commission has granted marketing authorizations for more than 79 biosimilars of which 65 remain valid. Because of their extensive experience in the review and approval of biosimilars, the European Commission and EMA have developed more guidelines related to the authorization procedure for these products than the FDA, including data requirements needed to support approval.

25

Innovative products in the EEA benefit from eight years of data exclusivity and 10 years of marketing exclusivity following grant of marketing authorization. As a result, an application for regulatory approval of a biosimilar drug cannot be submitted to the EMA until expiration of the eight-year data exclusivity period for the reference product, measured from the date of grant of authorization for the reference product. Furthermore, even if the biosimilar is authorized in the subsequent two years it cannot be marketed in the EEA until expiration of the 10-year marketing exclusivity period. This 10-year period may be extendible to 11 years if approval is granted in relation to the reference product for an additional therapeutic indication, within the first eight years following its initial marketing authorization, representing a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. A new pharmaceutical form does not trigger a new data exclusivity. It could trigger orphan exclusivity, provided, however, that the targeted disease is a rare disease and that the new pharmaceutical form meets the high threshold for being considered as bringing a significant benefit to patients.

In the EEA, the approval of a biosimilar for marketing is based on a positive opinion issued by the EMA and a related decision issued by the European Commission. The marketing approval is valid throughout the entire EEA. However, rules governing substitution of a biosimilar for the innovator product are provided by the national law of individual EEA countries, and many of them do not permit the automatic substitution of biosimilars for the reference product. Therefore, even if Alvotech obtains marketing approval for the entire EEA, Alvotech may not receive substitution in one or more EEA nations, thereby restricting its ability to market its products in those jurisdictions.

Other regions, including Canada, China, Japan and Korea, also have their own legislation outlining a regulatory pathway for the approval of biosimilars. In some cases, other countries have either adopted European guidance (Singapore and Malaysia) or are following guidance issued by the World Health Organization (Cuba and Brazil). While there is overlap in the regulatory requirements across regions, there are also some areas of non-overlap. Additionally, Alvotech cannot predict whether countries that Alvotech may wish to market in, which do not yet have an established or tested regulatory framework could decide to issue regulations or guidance and/or adopt a more conservative viewpoint than other regions. Therefore, it is possible that even if Alvotech obtains agreement from one health authority to an accelerated or optimized development plan, Alvotech will need to defer to the most conservative view to ensure global harmonization of the development plan. Also, for regions where regulatory authorities do not yet have sufficient experience in the review and approval of a biosimilar product, these authorities may rely on the approval from another region (for example, the United States), which could delay its approval in that region. In addition, regulatory approval may be delayed as a result of laws in any applicable jurisdiction that provide for stay of regulatory approval related to patent coverage and subsequent litigation.

If other companies’ biosimilar candidates for certain reference products are determined to be interchangeable and Alvotech’s biosimilar candidates for these same reference products are not, its U.S. business could be negatively impacted.

The FDA may determine that a proposed biosimilar product is “interchangeable” with a reference product, meaning that the biosimilar product may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of the health care provider who prescribed the reference product, if the application includes sufficient information to show that the product is biosimilar to the reference product and that it can be expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient. In addition, if the biosimilar product may be administered more than once to a patient, the applicant must demonstrate that the risk in terms of safety or diminished efficacy of alternating or switching between the biosimilar product candidate and the reference product is not greater than the risk of using the reference product without such alternation or switch. To make a final determination of biosimilarity or interchangeability, the FDA may require additional confirmatory information beyond what Alvotech plans to initially submit in its applications for approval, such as more in-depth analytical characterization, animal testing or further clinical studies. Provision of sufficient information for approval may prove difficult and expensive.

26

Alvotech cannot predict whether any of its biosimilar product candidates will meet regulatory requirements for approval as a biosimilar product or as an interchangeable product.

The concept of “interchangeability” is important because, in the United States for example, the first biosimilar approved as interchangeable with a particular reference product for any condition of use is eligible for a period of market exclusivity during which time the FDA cannot approve a second or subsequent biosimilar product interchangeable with that reference product for any condition of use. The relevant period of exclusivity will end upon the earlier of: (1) one year after the first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable product; (2) 18 months after resolution of a patent infringement suit instituted under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6) against the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product, based on a final court decision regarding all of the patents in the litigation or dismissal of the litigation with or without prejudice; (3) 42 months after approval of the first interchangeable product, if a patent infringement suit instituted under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6) against the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product is still ongoing; or (4) 18 months after approval of the first interchangeable product if the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product has not been sued under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6). Thus, a determination that another company’s product is interchangeable with the reference biologic before Alvotech obtains approval of its corresponding biosimilar product candidates may delay the potential approval of its products as interchangeable with the reference product, which could materially adversely affect the results of operations and delay, prevent or limit its ability to generate revenue. Even if Alvotech is awarded interchangeable exclusivity for a product, that award may be challenged by third parties. Any successful challenge to Alvotech’s exclusivity will negatively impact Alvotech’s ability to market and sell the related product.

Even if Alvotech obtains regulatory approval for a product candidate, its products will remain subject to continuous subsequent regulatory obligations and scrutiny.

If Alvotech’s product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for pharmacovigilance, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies (if any) and submission of other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and equivalent requirements of comparable regulatory authorities.

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA, and comparable regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”), regulations. As such, Alvotech and its contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any marketing authorization application (“MAA”). Accordingly, Alvotech and others with whom Alvotech works must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control.

Any regulatory approvals that Alvotech or its collaboration partners receive for its product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved conditions of use for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval or may contain requirements for potentially costly additional data generation, including clinical trials. Alvotech will be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities, and to conduct surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. Any new legislation addressing drug safety or biologics or biosimilars issues could result in delays in product development or commercialization or increased costs to assure compliance.

Alvotech will have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for its products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions that vary throughout the world and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. As such, Alvotech may not promote its products in ways that are not consistent with FDA-approved labeling, e.g., for indications or uses for which they do not have approval.

27

If Alvotech’s product candidates are approved, the company must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain prior approval for certain changes to the licensed products, therapeutic indications, product labeling and manufacturing process. These changes may require submission of substantial data packages that may include clinical data.

If a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a biosimilar product (or with the reference product or related biosimilars) such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or if there are problems with the facility where the product is manufactured or the regulatory authority disagrees with the advertising, promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, such regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or Alvotech. If Alvotech fails to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory authority such as FDA may, among other things:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law or regulations could require Alvotech to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect Alvotech’s ability to commercialize and generate revenue from its products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of Alvotech and its operating results will be adversely affected.

Adverse events involving a reference product, or other biosimilars of such reference product, may result in negative publicity for Alvotech’s biosimilar product or ultimately result in the removal of Alvotech’s biosimilar product from the market.

In the event that use of a reference product, or another biosimilar for such reference product, results in unanticipated side effects or other adverse events, it is likely that Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidate will be viewed comparably and may become subject to the same scrutiny and regulatory actions as the reference product or other biosimilar, as applicable. Accordingly, Alvotech may become subject to, for example, safety labeling change orders, clinical holds, product recalls or other regulatory actions for matters outside of its control that affect the reference product, or other biosimilars, as applicable, potentially until Alvotech is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of its regulators that its biosimilar product candidate is not subject to the same issues leading to the regulatory action as the reference product or other biosimilar, as applicable. Any recall or safety alert or safety labeling change relating to Alvotech’s product (either voluntary or required by regulatory bodies) could ultimately result in the removal of Alvotech’s product from the market. Any recall could result in significant cost as well as negative publicity that could reduce overall demand for Alvotech’s products.

28

Alvotech is highly dependent on the services of its key executives and personnel and if Alvotech is not able to retain these members of its management or recruit additional management, clinical and scientific personnel, its operations and future performance will suffer.

Alvotech is highly dependent on the principal members of its management and scientific and technical staff. The loss of service of any of its management or key scientific and technical staff could harm its business, prospects and financial condition. In addition, Alvotech will need to expand and effectively manage its managerial, scientific, operational, financial and other resources in order to successfully pursue its clinical development and commercialization efforts. The pharmaceutical industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. If Alvotech is not able to retain its management and to attract, retain and motivate on acceptable terms, additional qualified personnel necessary for the continued development of its business, Alvotech may not be able to sustain its operations or grow.

Alvotech’s future performance will also depend, in part, on its ability to successfully integrate newly hired executive officers into its management team and its ability to develop an effective working relationship among senior management. Alvotech’s failure to integrate these individuals and create effective working relationships among them and other members of management could result in inefficiencies in the development and commercialization of its product candidates, harming future regulatory approvals, sales of its product candidates and its results of operations. Additionally, Alvotech does not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of its executives or any of its employees.

Alvotech has been and will need to continue to expand its organization and Alvotech may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt its operations.

As of July 28, 2022, Alvotech had 903 employees, including 25 contractors. Additionally, we rely on a number of temporary workers from time-to-time as needed. As its development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, Alvotech expects to need additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial, legal and other resources. Alvotech’s management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from its day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. Alvotech may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of its operations, which may result in weaknesses in its infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. In addition, Alvotech’s success depends on its ability to attract and retain a talented workforce with a specialized set of skills. A significant part of Alvotech’s employees are expatriates and may need to obtain work visas in the country of operations. Changes to immigration laws or other restrictions on the movement of persons might make it more difficult for Alvotech to attract and retain talented employees. Alvotech’s expected growth could also require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of its current and potential future product candidates. If Alvotech’s management is unable to effectively manage its growth, its expenses may increase more than expected, its ability to generate and/or grow revenue could be reduced and Alvotech may not be able to implement its business strategy. Alvotech’s future financial performance and its ability to commercialize product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on its ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Risks Related to Alvotech’s Reliance on Third Parties

Alvotech relies on third parties to conduct its nonclinical and clinical studies and perform other tasks for Alvotech. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or comply with regulatory requirements, Alvotech may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize its product candidates and its business could be substantially harmed.

Alvotech has relied upon and plans to continue to rely upon third-party CROs to monitor and manage data for its ongoing nonclinical and clinical programs. Alvotech relies on these parties for execution of its nonclinical and

29

clinical studies and controls only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, Alvotech is responsible for ensuring that each of its studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and its reliance on the CROs does not relieve Alvotech of its regulatory responsibilities. Alvotech and its CROs and other vendors are required to comply with relevant practices that may include cGMP, current good clinical practices (“cGCP”) and Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”), which are regulations and guidelines required by the FDA, the Competent National Authorities of the Member States of the EEA and comparable national regulatory authorities for all of its product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities monitor these regulations through periodic inspections of study sponsors, principal investigators, study sites and other contractors. If Alvotech, any of its CROs, service providers or investigators fail to comply with applicable regulations or cGCPs, the data generated in its nonclinical and clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, European Commission, EMA or comparable national regulatory authorities may require Alvotech to perform additional nonclinical and clinical studies before approving its marketing applications. Alvotech cannot provide assurance that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any clinical investigator for any of its clinical studies comply with cGCP regulations. In addition, its clinical studies must be conducted with product produced in compliance with cGMP regulations. Failure to comply by any of the participating parties or Alvotech with these regulations may require Alvotech to generate new data, repeat clinical studies, and potentially undergo re-inspection, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Further, if any accidents occur or there are process mistakes at the facilities of CROs or other vendors that handle reference products, there may be product loss which could further delay Alvotech’s nonclinical and clinical programs. Moreover, Alvotech’s business may be implicated if its CRO or any other participating parties violate federal or state fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws whether in the United States or equivalent foreign laws and obligations.

If any of Alvotech’s relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, Alvotech may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, Alvotech’s CROs are not its employees, and except for remedies available to Alvotech under its agreements with such CROs, Alvotech cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to its on-going nonclinical and clinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to protocols, regulatory requirements, delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, or for other reasons, Alvotech’s clinical studies may be extended, delayed or terminated and Alvotech may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize its product candidates. CROs may also generate higher costs than anticipated. As a result, Alvotech’s results of operations and the commercial prospects for its product candidates would be harmed, its costs could increase and its ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact Alvotech’s ability to meet its desired clinical development timelines. There can be no assurance that Alvotech will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on its business, financial condition and prospects.

Alvotech partly relies on third parties to manufacture clinical and commercial supplies of its product candidates and to store critical components of its product candidates for Alvotech (including procuring and providing reference product). Alvotech’s business could be harmed if those third parties fail to provide Alvotech with sufficient quantities of product candidates or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels, prices and agreed upon time frame.

Alvotech partly relies on third-party manufacturers (contract manufacturing organizations, or “CMOs”) to manufacture and supply Alvotech with its product candidates for its preclinical and clinical studies. Alvotech also relies on third parties to manufacture nonclinical and clinical supplies of its product candidates, to store critical components of its product candidates and perform for Alvotech various services related to the product candidates’ compliance with regulatory requirements. Successfully transferring complicated manufacturing

30

techniques to contract manufacturing organizations and scaling up these techniques for commercial quantities is time consuming and Alvotech may not be able to achieve such transfer or do so in a timely manner. Moreover, the availability of contract manufacturing services for protein-based therapeutics is highly variable and there are periods of relatively abundant capacity alternating with periods in which there is little available capacity. If Alvotech’s need for contract manufacturing services increases during a period of industry-wide production capacity shortage, Alvotech may not be able to produce its product candidates on a timely basis or on commercially viable terms. Moreover, Alvotech’s manufacturing processes utilize single-use processing technology to manufacture drug substance and drug product. Although Alvotech will plan accordingly and generally does not begin a clinical study unless it believes it has a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete such study, any significant delay, whether due to supply chain interruptions in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic or otherwise, or discontinuation in the supply of a product candidate for an ongoing clinical study due to the need to replace a third-party manufacturer could considerably delay completion of Alvotech’s clinical studies, product testing and potential regulatory approval of its product candidates, which could harm its business and results of operations.

Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance, the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party and the possible termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for Alvotech. In addition, commercial manufacturing must be produced in compliance with cGMP regulations. Failure to comply by any CMO may require Alvotech to generate new data, repeat clinical studies, and potentially undergo re-inspection, which would delay the regulatory approval process. In addition, if a CMO does not comply with cGMP, Alvotech’s failure or the failure of its third-party manufacturers to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on Alvotech, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, license suspension or revocation, seizures or recalls of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of Alvotech’s product candidates or any other product candidates or products that it may develop. Any failure or refusal to supply the components for Alvotech’s product candidates that it may develop could delay, prevent or impair its clinical development or commercialization efforts. If Alvotech’s contract manufacturers were to breach or terminate their manufacturing arrangements with Alvotech, the development or commercialization of the affected products or product candidates could be delayed, which could have an adverse effect on Alvotech’s business. Any change in Alvotech’s manufacturers could be costly because the commercial terms of any new arrangement could be less favorable and because the expenses relating to the transfer of necessary technology and processes could be significant. In addition, any changes in Alvotech’s manufacturers could necessitate generation of new data and pre-license facility inspections. Changes made during the pendency of a BLA before FDA could result in delay in approval of the BLA.

If any of Alvotech’s product candidates are approved, in order to produce the quantities necessary to meet anticipated market demand, any contract manufacturer that Alvotech engages may need to increase manufacturing capacity. If Alvotech is unable to produce its product candidates in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the launch of these products or to meet future demand, its revenue and gross margins could be adversely affected. Although Alvotech believes that it will not have any material supply issues, Alvotech cannot be certain that it will be able to obtain long-term supply arrangements for its product candidates or materials used to produce them on acceptable terms, if at all. If Alvotech is unable to arrange for third-party manufacturing, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, Alvotech may not be able to complete development or commercialization of its products.

In addition, Alvotech engages external transport companies to ship its products between the different supply points used to manufacture the finished product. Delays in shipment, damage of materials during shipment or any other events leading to late delivery or not full amount of ordered quantities could have a significant impact on project timelines, stock on markets and sales.

31

Alvotech has entered into collaborations with third parties in connection with the development of certain of its product candidates. Even if Alvotech believes that the development of its technology and product candidates is promising, its partners may choose not to proceed with such development if Alvotech materially deviates from the original program timelines, the contractual terms, or breaches the contractual terms.

Alvotech has or may have future collaborations with various partners for the development and commercialization of certain of its biosimilar candidates. Alvotech’s existing and future agreements with its collaboration partners are generally subject to termination by the counterparty under certain circumstances. Accordingly, even if Alvotech believes that the development of certain product candidates is worth pursuing, its partners may choose not to continue with such development, if Alvotech materially deviates from the original program timelines, the contractual terms, or breaches the contractual terms. If any of Alvotech’s collaborations are terminated, Alvotech may be required to devote additional resources to the development of its product candidates or seek a new collaboration partner, and the terms of any additional collaborations or other arrangements that Alvotech establishes may not be favorable to Alvotech, available under commercially reasonable terms or available at all.

Alvotech is also at risk that its collaborations or other arrangements may not be successful. Factors that may affect the success of its collaborations include the following:

If Alvotech cannot maintain successful collaborations, its business, financial condition and operating results may be adversely affected.

Alvotech is dependent on its partners, such as Teva and STADA, for the commercialization of its biosimilar products candidates in certain major markets, and their failure to commercialize in those markets could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s revenue, business and operating results.

Alvotech does not currently have direct sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities. Instead, Alvotech has chosen to market and commercialize its products through partnerships with multiple regional partners. For more information about Alvotech’s sales and marketing strategy and its commercial partnerships, please see the section entitled “Business—Our Platform—Sales and Marketing” and “—Commercial Partnerships”. For example, Teva, is responsible for commercialization of, among other product candidates, AVT02, AVT04 and AVT06 in the United States, and STADA is responsible for commercialization of, among other product candidates, AVT02, AVT04 and AVT06 in the EEA. If Alvotech’s commercial partners fail to exercise commercially reasonable efforts to market and sell Alvotech’s products in their respective licensed jurisdictions (timely or at all) or are otherwise ineffective in doing so, Alvotech’s business will be harmed and Alvotech may not be able to adequately remedy the harm through negotiation, litigation, arbitration or termination of the license agreements. Moreover, any disputes with Alvotech’s collaboration partners concerning the adequacy of their commercialization efforts will substantially divert the attention of Alvotech’s senior management from other business activities and will require Alvotech to incur substantial legal costs to fund litigation or arbitration proceedings and perhaps lead to delayed license-related payments to Alvotech.

32

Alvotech is subject to a multitude of risks related to manufacturing. Any adverse developments affecting the manufacturing operations of Alvotech’s biosimilar products could substantially increase its costs and limit supply for its products.

The process of manufacturing Alvotech’s products is complex, highly regulated and subject to several risks, including but not limited to:

Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes for any of its products could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. Additionally, if microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in its products or in the manufacturing facilities in which Alvotech’s products are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. Further, any defects or contaminations, or inadequate disclosure relating to the risk of using Alvotech’s products could lead to recalls or safety alerts, or other enforcement action by regulatory authorities.

Any adverse developments affecting manufacturing operations for Alvotech’s products may result in shipment delays, inventory shortages, lot failures, withdrawals or recalls or other interruptions in the supply of its products. Alvotech may also have to take inventory write-offs and incur other charges and expenses for products that fail to meet specifications, undertake costly remediation efforts or seek more costly manufacturing alternatives.

Alvotech currently engages single suppliers for some manufacture, clinical trial services, formulation development and product testing of its product candidates. The loss of any of these suppliers or vendors could materially and adversely affect its business.

The biologic drug substance used in all Alvotech programs is currently manufactured at the facility of Alvotech hf. in Reykjavik, as is the pre-filled syringe (bulk drug product) for AVT02. In addition, Alvotech relies on certain single third-party suppliers for the safety device assembly and associated finished packaging of the AVT02 pre-filled syringe for all clinical supplies and future commercial supplies and for the combination product assembly and finished packaging of the AVT02 pre-filled syringe for all clinical supplies and future commercial supplies. In addition, Alvotech has engaged a future second contract manufacturer of the combination product and packaging for AVT02. Alvotech has engaged a single contract manufacturer for clinical supplies of AVT06, to conduct the fill and finish manufacturing step for vial presentations. Prior to engaging any contract manufacturer for services, Alvotech performs a qualification of the site, including a verification of its status with regard to the relevant regulations. In addition, Alvotech performs regular audits as per its contractor management procedures once the contractor is qualified. Prior to any approval inspection, Alvotech engages external partners to help prepare for a successful inspection. Alvotech does not currently have any other suppliers or vendors for the above-mentioned requirements for its product candidates and, although Alvotech believes that there are alternate sources that could satisfy these requirements, Alvotech cannot assure you that identifying and establishing relationships with such would not result in significant delay in the development of its product candidates. Additionally, Alvotech may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative vendors on commercially reasonable terms or at all. A delay in the development of its product candidates or having to enter into a new agreement with a different third-party on less favorable terms than Alvotech has with its current suppliers could have a material adverse impact upon on its business.

33

Alvotech’s failure to obtain or renew certain approvals, licenses, permits and certificates required may result in its inability to continue its operations or may result in enforcement actions with the respective regulatory authorities which would materially and adversely affect Alvotech’s business.

Alvotech is required to obtain and maintain various approvals, licenses, permits and certificates from relevant authorities to operate its business. Any failure to obtain any approvals, licenses, permits and certificates necessary for Alvotech’s operations may result in enforcement actions thereunder, including the relevant regulatory authorities ordering Alvotech to cease operations, implement potentially costly corrective measures or any other action which could materially disrupt Alvotech’s business operations.

In addition, some of these approvals, permits, licenses and certificates are subject to periodic renewal and/or reassessment by the relevant authorities, and the standards of such renewal and/or reassessment may change from time to time. Alvotech cannot give reassurance that it will be able to successfully procure such renewals and/or reassessment when due, and any failure to do so could severely disrupt its business.

Furthermore, if the interpretation or implementation of existing laws and regulations changes or new regulations come into effect requiring Alvotech to obtain any additional approvals, permits, licenses or certificates that were previously not required to operate its existing businesses, Alvotech cannot provide assurance that it will successfully obtain them, which in turn could restrict its scope of permitted business activities and constrain its drug development and revenue generation capability.

Any of the above developments could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Alvotech and its collaboration partners and contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing its product candidates. The manufacturing facilities on which Alvotech relies may not continue to meet regulatory requirements or may not be able to meet supply demands.

All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical studies or commercial sale, including its existing contract manufacturers for Alvotech’s product candidates, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of its product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. Alvotech, its collaboration partners or its contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a market application on a timely basis and must adhere to GLP and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA and other regulatory agencies through their facilities inspection program. Not all contractors supporting Alvotech product candidates may be registered or approved for commercial pharmaceutical production. The facilities and quality systems of some or all of Alvotech’s collaboration partners and third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of Alvotech’s product candidates. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of Alvotech’s product candidates or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. Although Alvotech oversees the contract manufacturers, Alvotech cannot control the implementation of the manufacturing process used by its contract manufacturing partners. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, regulatory approval of the products may not be granted or may be substantially delayed until any violations are corrected to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority, if ever.

The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit the manufacturing facilities of Alvotech’s collaboration partners and third-party contractors. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of Alvotech’s product specifications or

34

applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, Alvotech or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time consuming for Alvotech or a third party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical study or commercial sales or import or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility and that may require re-inspection thereby causing delays. Any such remedial measures imposed upon Alvotech or third parties with whom Alvotech contracts could materially harm its business, prospects and financial condition.

If Alvotech, its collaboration partners or any of its third-party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or other applicable regulatory authority can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a new biologic product, or suspension or revocation of a license. As a result, Alvotech’s business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed.

Additionally, if supply from one approved manufacturer is interrupted, registration of an alternative manufacturer would require submissions to the market application (e.g., variation to the MAA), which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and prior regulatory approval and is likely to result in a delay in Alvotech’s desired clinical and commercial timelines.

These factors could cause Alvotech to incur higher costs and could cause the delay or termination of clinical studies, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of its product candidates. Furthermore, if Alvotech’s suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements and Alvotech is unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, its clinical studies may be delayed or Alvotech could lose potential revenue from sales of an approved product.

Alvotech may not realize the benefits expected through the Joint Venture and the Joint Venture could have adverse effects on Alvotech’s business.

In September 2018, Alvotech entered into a joint venture agreement with Changchun High & New Technology Industries (Group) Inc., a Chinese corporation (the “Joint Venture Partner”). Under the joint venture agreement, Alvotech created Alvotech & CCHN Biopharmaceutical Limited Liability Company in 2019 (the “Joint Venture”), of which it owns a 50% ownership interest. The purpose of the Joint Venture is to research, develop, manufacture and sell high quality biosimilar products, to be a Chinese market leader in the biosimilar space and to deliver high quality competitive cost products to patients in China through the introduction of appropriate technology and adoption of scientific management systems and marketing methods, meanwhile, to realize the biopharmaceutical internationalization through providing international OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) service and innovate biosimilar development. For that purpose, the Joint Venture Partner is assisting the Joint Venture to build manufacturing facilities in the City of Changchun, Jilin Province, completing all registration and filing procedures as well as obtaining and maintaining all necessary permits and certifications, and assisting in hiring personnel with appropriate expertise and experience. In 2019, the Joint Venture broke ground on its manufacturing facility, expected to be operational in 2022. The Joint Venture expects to complete certifications and quality controls in the third quarter of 2022 and aims to start producing commercial batches before the end of 2023.

Because Alvotech’s continued business operations in China are part of its current and future growth plans, further adverse changes in the economic and political policies relating to China, as well as any legal disputes with the Joint Venture Partner, could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business. An escalation of recent trade tensions between the United States and China has resulted in trade restrictions that could harm Alvotech’s ability to participate in Chinese markets and numerous additional such restrictions have been threatened by both countries. Alvotech may find it impossible to comply with these or other conflicting regulations in the United States and China, which could make it difficult or impossible to achieve its business objectives in China or realize a return on its investment in this market. Sustained uncertainty about, or worsening of, current global economic conditions and further escalation of trade tensions between the United States and its trading partners,

35

especially China, could result in a global economic slowdown and long-term changes to global trade, including retaliatory trade restrictions that could further restrict Alvotech’s ability to operate in China.

The Chinese economic, legal, and political landscape differs from other countries in many respects, including the level of government involvement and regulation, control of foreign exchange and allocation of resources, and uncertainty regarding the enforceability and scope of protection for intellectual property rights among others. The Chinese government has exercised and continues to exercise substantial control over virtually every sector of the Chinese economy through regulation and state ownership. The laws, regulations and legal requirements in China are also subject to frequent changes and the exact obligations under and enforcement of laws and regulations are often subject to unpublished internal government interpretations and policies which makes it challenging to ascertain compliance with such laws. This uncertainty includes investigations and inquiries into graft, corruption and other crimes, the nature of which are difficult to predict. If one or more of the senior executives of the Joint Venture Partner or the Joint Venture or related entities are questioned or come under investigation under such an inquiry, for example, the Joint Venture’s performance could be materially adversely impacted and in turn Alvotech’s realization of its investment in such joint ventures and facilities, even if the claims underlying such questions or inquiry are proven false or challenging to verify.

Furthermore, Alvotech’s ability to operate in China may be harmed by changes in its laws and regulations, including those relating to taxation, import and export tariffs, environmental regulations, land use rights, property and other matters. Alvotech believes that its operations in China are in material compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements. However, the central Chinese government or the local government of the jurisdiction in which Alvotech operates may impose new, stricter regulations or interpretations of existing regulations that would require additional expenditures and efforts on Alvotech’s part to ensure its compliance with such regulations or interpretations. For example, certain Joint Venture permits and certifications could be withdrawn, which could significantly impair or eliminate the Joint Venture’s ability to operate in China. Any actions and policies adopted by the Chinese government, or any prolonged slowdown in China’s economy, could have an adverse effect on Alvotech’s business, results of operations and financial condition.

The relationship between China and the United States is subject to periodic tension. Relations may also be compromised if the United States pressures the Chinese government regarding its monetary, economic, or social policies. Changes in political conditions in China and changes in the state of China-U.S. relations are difficult to predict and could adversely affect the operations or financial condition of the Joint Venture.

Alvotech relies on third parties to construct the Joint Venture’s manufacturing facility in China and, to the extent such third parties do not perform as expected, Alvotech may be unable to complete the Joint Venture’s facility on time or at all.

Alvotech has no construction capabilities and has partnered with the Joint Venture Partner to develop the Joint Venture’s manufacturing facilities. Alvotech expects substantially all of the Joint Venture’s construction work to be outsourced to the Joint Venture Partner. Alvotech is exposed to risks that the performance of the Joint Venture Partner and third parties supporting the facility construction may not meet its standards or specifications or on its timeline. Negligence or poor work quality by any contractors may result in defects in the Joint Venture’s building, which could in turn cause Alvotech to suffer financial losses, harm its reputation or expose Alvotech to third-party claims. Although Alvotech’s construction and other contracts contain provisions designed to protect it, Alvotech may be unable to successfully enforce these rights and, even if Alvotech is able to successfully enforce these rights, the Joint Venture Partner may not have sufficient financial resources to compensate Alvotech. Moreover, the Joint Venture Partner may undertake projects from other property developers, engage in risky undertakings or encounter financial or other difficulties, such as supply shortages, labor disputes or work accidents, which may cause delays in the completion of the Joint Venture’s property projects or increases in Alvotech’s costs. Alvotech may be unable to complete the Joint Ventures manufacturing facilities development on time, with sufficient workmanship or at all, which may cause it to be unable to scale up its manufacturing capabilities sufficiently or at all, rendering it unable to meet demand for, and successfully commercialize, any products, which may materially adversely affect its business, financial condition, reputation and results of operations.

36

Alvotech’s reliance on third parties requires Alvotech to share its trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that Alvotech’s trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Because Alvotech relies on third parties to develop and manufacture its product candidates, Alvotech must, at times, share trade secrets with them. Alvotech seeks to protect its proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with its collaboration partners, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information, such as trade secrets. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose Alvotech’s confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by Alvotech’s competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that Alvotech’s proprietary position is based, in part, on its know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of Alvotech’s trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair Alvotech’s competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business.

Alvotech may not be successful in its efforts to identify, develop or commercialize additional product candidates.

Although a substantial amount of Alvotech’s effort will focus on the continued testing, potential approval and commercialization of its existing product candidates, the success of Alvotech’s business also depends upon its ability to identify, develop and commercialize additional product candidates (in addition to the lead candidates). Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. Alvotech may focus its efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. Alvotech’s development efforts may fail to yield additional product candidates suitable for development and/or commercialization for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the following:

If any of these events occur, Alvotech may be forced to abandon its development efforts for a program or programs or Alvotech may not be able to identify, develop or commercialize additional product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business and could potentially cause Alvotech to cease operations.

37

Risks Related to Our Competition and Industry

Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates, if approved, will face significant competition from the reference products, other biosimilars, and from other medicinal products approved for the same indication(s) as the reference products. Alvotech’s failure to effectively compete may prevent Alvotech from achieving significant market penetration and expansion.

Alvotech expects to enter highly competitive markets. Alvotech expects other companies to seek approval to manufacture and market biosimilars to Humira, Prolia/Xgeva, Stelara, Simponi/Simponi Aria, Eylea or Xolair. If other biosimilars to Humira, Prolia/Xgeva, Stelara, Simponi/Simponi Aria, Eylea or Xolair, or other non-reference products in the same therapeutic spaces are approved and successfully commercialized before AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05, AVT06 or AVT23, respectively, Alvotech may never achieve significant market share for these products, its revenue would be reduced and, as a result, its business, prospects and financial condition could suffer.

Successful competitors in the market have demonstrated the ability to effectively discover, obtain patents, develop, test and obtain regulatory approvals for products, as well as an ability to effectively commercialize, market and promote approved products. Numerous companies, universities and other research institutions are engaged in developing, patenting, manufacturing and marketing of products competitive with those that Alvotech is developing. Many of these potential competitors are large, experienced pharmaceutical companies that enjoy significant competitive advantages, such as substantially greater financial, research and development, manufacturing, personnel and marketing resources. These companies also have greater brand recognition and more experience in conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials of product candidates and obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of products.

If an improved version of a reference product, such as Humira, Prolia or Xgeva, Stelara, Simponi/Simponi Aria, Eylea or Xolair is developed or if the market for the reference product significantly declines, sales or potential sales of Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates may suffer.

Companies may develop improved versions, treatment regimens, combinations and/or doses of a reference product as part of a life cycle extension strategy and may obtain regulatory approval of the improved version under a new or supplemental BLA, or equivalent foreign procedure, filed with the applicable regulatory authority. Should the company manufacturing the reference product for any of Alvotech’s candidate products succeed in obtaining an approval of an improved biologic product, it may capture a significant share of the market for the reference product in the applicable jurisdiction and significantly reduce the market for the reference product and thereby the potential size of the market for Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates. In addition, the improved product may be protected by additional regulatory exclusivity or patent rights that may subject Alvotech’s follow-on biosimilar to claims of infringement.

Biologic reference products may also face competition as technological advances are made that may offer patients a more convenient form of administration or increased efficacy or as new products are introduced. As new products are approved that compete with the reference product for Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates, sales of the reference products may be adversely impacted or rendered obsolete. If the market for the reference product is impacted, Alvotech may lose significant market share or experience limited market potential for its approved biosimilar products or product candidates, and the value of Alvotech’s product pipeline could be negatively impacted. As a result of the above factors, Alvotech’s business, prospects and financial condition could suffer.

38

If efforts by manufacturers of reference products to prevent, delay or limit the use of biosimilars are successful, Alvotech’s business may be negatively affected, including but not limited to the sales of its biosimilar products.

Many manufacturers of reference products have increasingly used legislative, regulatory and other means to prevent or delay regulatory approval and to seek to restrict competition from manufacturers of biosimilars. These efforts may include or have included:

In 2012, Abbott Laboratories filed a Citizen Petition with the FDA asking the agency to refrain from accepting biosimilar applications under the BPCIA arguing that to approve such applications, without compensation to the reference product sponsor, would constitute an unconstitutional taking of a reference company’s valuable trade secrets under the fifth amendment of the U.S. constitution. The FDA denied this citizen petition in 2016. Other reference companies may file Citizen Petitions in an effort to restrict or prevent the introduction of biosimilars. If the FDA or a federal court determines that biosimilar applications under the BPCIA should be limited, Alvotech’s business may be negatively impacted.

39

Alvotech faces intense competition and rapid technological changes and the possibility that Alvotech’s competitors and originators such as AbbVie and Janssen may develop therapies that are similar, more advanced or more effective than Alvotech’s, which may adversely affect Alvotech’s financial condition and its ability to successfully commercialize its product candidates.

Alvotech has competitors both in the United States and internationally, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. Some of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies developing biosimilars Alvotech expects to compete with include, for example, Celltrion Healthcare Co., Ltd. (“Celltrion”), Coherus, Amgen, Pfizer Inc. (“Pfizer”), Samsung Bioepis, Ltd. (“Samsung Bioepis”), and Sandoz International GmbH (“Sandoz”), as well as other companies. These companies may develop biosimilars or other products in the same therapeutic space as Alvotech’s products. For example, based on publicly available information, Alvotech expects AbbVie (the originator), Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Biocon/Fujifilm/Viatris, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Coherus, and Sandoz to be its main competitors for AVT02, a biosimilar product candidate to Humira (adalimumab); Janssen (the originator), Amgen, Celltrion, BioFactura, Bio-Thera, Formycon, Dong-A/Meiji Seika, Neuclone, Samsung Bioepis, and Biocon to be its main competitors for AVT04, a biosimilar candidate to Stelara (ustekinumab); Amgen (the originator), Celltrion, Eden Biologics, Fresenius Kabi, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Gedeon Richter, mAbxience, Biocon, Henlius and Teva to be its main competitors for AVT03, a biosimilar candidate to Prolia / Xgeva (denosumab); Janssen (the originator), and Bio-thera to be its main competitors for AVT05, a biosimilar candidate of Simponi and Simponi Aria (golimumab); and Regeneron/Bayer Health Care (the originator), Amgen, Celltrion, Formycon, Altos, Sam Chun Dang, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, and Viatris, to be its main competitors for AVT06, a biosimilar candidate to Eylea (aflibercept); and Genentech (the originator), Celltrion and Teva, to be its main competitors for AVT23, a biosimilar candidate to Xolair (omalizumab).

Some of Alvotech’s competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Additional mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical industry may result in even more resources being concentrated in Alvotech’s competitors. As a result, these companies may obtain regulatory approval more rapidly than Alvotech is able to and may be more effective in selling and marketing their products. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Alvotech’s competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidate that Alvotech may develop; they may also obtain patent protection that could block Alvotech’s products; and they may obtain regulatory approval, product commercialization and market penetration earlier than Alvotech do. Additionally, Alvotech’s competitors may have more resources in order to effectively pursue, defend against or settle with regard to potential or ongoing litigation. Biosimilar product candidates developed by Alvotech’s competitors may render its potential product candidates uneconomical, less desirable or obsolete, and Alvotech may not be successful in marketing its product candidates against competitors. Competitors may also assert in their marketing or medical education programs that their biosimilar products demonstrate a higher degree of biosimilarity to the reference products than do Alvotech or other competitor’s biosimilar products, thereby seeking to influence health care practitioners to select their biosimilar products, versus Alvotech or other competitors.

If Alvotech is unable to establish effective sales and marketing capabilities in jurisdictions for which Alvotech chooses to retain commercialization rights or if Alvotech is unable to enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell its product candidates, and Alvotech is unable to establish and maintain a marketing and sales organization, Alvotech may be unable to generate substantial or any revenue.

Alvotech currently has no marketing or sales organization. Alvotech as a company has no experience selling and marketing its product candidates. To successfully commercialize any products that may result from Alvotech’s development programs, Alvotech will need to develop these capabilities, either on its own or with others. If Alvotech’s product candidates receive regulatory approval, Alvotech might establish a sales and marketing

40

organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize its product candidates in major markets where Alvotech may choose to retain commercialization rights. Doing so will be expensive, difficult and time consuming. Any failure or delay in the development of Alvotech’s internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of its products.

Further, given Alvotech’s lack of prior experience in marketing and selling biopharmaceutical products, Alvotech’s initial estimate of the size of the required sales force may be materially more or less than the size of the sales force actually required to effectively commercialize its product candidates. As such, Alvotech may be required to hire substantially more sales representatives to adequately support the commercialization of its product candidates or Alvotech may incur excess costs as a result of hiring more sales representatives than necessary. With respect to certain geographical markets, Alvotech may enter into collaborations with other entities to utilize their local marketing and distribution capabilities, but Alvotech may be unable to enter into such agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If Alvotech’s future collaboration partners do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize its future products, if any, and Alvotech is unable to develop the necessary marketing capabilities on its own, Alvotech will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain its business. Alvotech expects competition from companies such as Celltrion, Sandoz, Amgen, Pfizer, Fresenius Kabi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Samsung Bioepis, Coherus and Viatris that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third-party to perform marketing and sales functions, Alvotech may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

Alvotech may need to enter into alliances with other companies that can provide capabilities and funds for the development and commercialization of its product candidates. If Alvotech is unsuccessful in forming or maintaining these alliances on sufficiently favorable terms, its business could be adversely affected.

Alvotech expects its manufacturing facility in Reykjavik to be able to scale up its capabilities for commercial production. Nevertheless, Alvotech is expected to retain contract manufacturing organization services as a second source of supply, including for business continuity risk mitigation. In addition, because Alvotech has limited capabilities for late-stage product development, manufacturing, sales, marketing and distribution, Alvotech has found it necessary to enter into alliances with other companies. Alvotech entered into a collaboration agreement with Teva for the development and commercialization of AVT02 in the United States. Similarly, Alvotech entered into a collaboration agreement with STADA for the development and commercialization of AVT02 in the European Union. In the future, Alvotech may also find it necessary to form alliances or joint ventures with major pharmaceutical companies to jointly develop and/or commercialize specific biosimilar product candidates. In such alliances, Alvotech would expect its collaboration partners to provide substantial capabilities in clinical development, manufacturing, regulatory affairs, sales and marketing. Alvotech may not be successful in entering into any such alliances. Even if Alvotech does succeed in securing such alliances, Alvotech may not be able to maintain them if, for example, development or approval of a product candidate is delayed or sales of an approved product are disappointing. If Alvotech is unable to secure or maintain such alliances Alvotech may not have the capabilities necessary to continue or complete development of its product candidates and bring them to market, which may have an adverse effect on its business.

In addition to product development and commercialization capabilities, Alvotech may depend on its alliances with other companies to provide substantial additional funding for development and potential commercialization of its product candidates. Alvotech may not be able to obtain funding on favorable terms from these alliances, and if Alvotech is not successful in doing so, Alvotech may not have sufficient funds to develop a particular product candidate internally or to bring product candidates to market. Failure to bring Alvotech’s product candidates to market will prevent Alvotech from generating sales revenue, and this may substantially harm its business, prospects and financial condition. Furthermore, any delay in entering into these alliances could delay the development and commercialization of Alvotech’s product candidates and reduce their competitiveness even if they reach the market. As a result, Alvotech’s business and operating results may be adversely affected.

41

The commercial success of any current or future product candidate will depend upon the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community.

Even with the requisite approvals from the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities, the commercial success of Alvotech’s product candidates will depend in part on the medical community, patients and third-party payors accepting Alvotech’s product candidates as medically useful, cost-effective and safe. Any product that Alvotech brings to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. The degree of market acceptance of any of Alvotech’s product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

Even if a potential biosimilar product is expected to have a highly similar efficacy and safety profile to the reference product, as demonstrated through analytical, nonclinical, and clinical studies, market acceptance of the product will not be fully known until after it is launched and may be negatively affected by a potential poor safety experience and the track record of other biosimilar product candidates. Alvotech’s efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the product candidates may require significant resources, may be under-resourced compared to large well-funded pharmaceutical entities and may never be successful. If Alvotech’s product candidates are approved but fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community, Alvotech will not be able to generate sufficient revenue to become or remain profitable.

42

The third-party coverage and reimbursement status of newly-approved products is uncertain. Failure of Alvotech’s third-party commercial partners to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for new or current products could limit Alvotech’s ability to market those products and decrease its ability to generate revenue.

Pricing, coverage and reimbursement of Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates, if approved, may not be adequate to support its commercial infrastructure. Alvotech’s per-patient prices may not be sufficient to recover its development and manufacturing costs and potentially achieve profitability. Accordingly, the availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement by governmental and private payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments such as Alvotech’s products, if approved. Sales of Alvotech’s product candidates will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of Alvotech’s product candidates will be paid for by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations or reimbursed by government authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payors. If coverage and reimbursement are not available, or are available only to limited levels, Alvotech may not be able to successfully commercialize its product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be adequate to allow Alvotech to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a return on its investment.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered and reimbursed. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates, if approved. In addition, in the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for biologics exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for biologics can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the process for obtaining favorable coverage determinations often is time-consuming and costly and may require Alvotech to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of its products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. Further, coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Therefore, even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Outside the United States, pharmaceutical companies, products and distributors are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations. Alvotech believes the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in EEA, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of its product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that Alvotech is able to charge for its product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for Alvotech’s products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to control healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for Alvotech’s product candidates. Certain cost containment practices may adversely affect Alvotech’s product sales. Alvotech expects to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of its product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes.

43

If Alvotech’s third-party commercial partners are unable to establish or sustain coverage and adequate reimbursement for any of Alvotech’s product candidates from third-party payors, the adoption of those products and sales revenue will be adversely affected, which, in turn, could adversely affect Alvotech’s ability to market or sell those product candidates, if approved.

Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates, if approved, could face price competition from other biosimilars of the same reference products for the same indication. This price competition could exceed Alvotech’s capacity to respond, detrimentally affecting its market share and revenue as well as adversely affecting the overall financial health and attractiveness of the market for the biosimilar.

Alvotech expects to enter highly competitive biosimilar markets. Successful competitors in the biosimilar market have the ability to effectively compete on price through payors and their third-party administrators who exert downward pricing pressure. It is possible Alvotech’s biosimilar competitors’ compliance with price discounting demands in exchange for market share could exceed Alvotech’s capacity to respond in kind and reduce market prices beyond its expectations. Such practices may limit Alvotech’s and its collaboration partners’ ability to increase market share and will also impact profitability.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If Alvotech infringes or is alleged to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, its business could be harmed. Avoiding and defending against infringement claims could be expensive and time consuming, which may in turn prevent or delay Alvotech’s development and commercialization efforts.

Alvotech’s commercial success depends in large part on avoiding infringement of the valid and enforceable patents and proprietary rights of third parties and invalidating or rendering unenforceable other patent and proprietary rights of third parties. There have been many lawsuits and other proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical industry, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions and reexamination proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), and corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which Alvotech is developing product candidates. As the pharmaceutical industry expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that Alvotech’s product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights, or other intellectual property rights, of third parties.

Alvotech’s research, development and commercialization activities may be claimed or held to infringe or otherwise violate patents owned or controlled by other parties. The companies that originated the products for which Alvotech intends to introduce biosimilar versions, such as AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Genentech and Regeneron as well as other competitors (including other companies developing biosimilars) often have developed worldwide patent portfolios of varying sizes and breadth, many of which are in fields relating to Alvotech’s business, and it may not always be clear to industry participants, including Alvotech, which patents cover various types of products, methods of use, methods of manufacturing, etc.

Third parties may assert that Alvotech is employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of Alvotech’s product candidates. While Alvotech has conducted freedom to operate analyses with respect to its lead product candidates, Alvotech cannot guarantee that any of its analyses will ensure that claims will not be brought or won against Alvotech, nor can Alvotech be sure that it has identified each and every patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant or necessary to the commercialization of its product candidates. Moreover, because patent applications can take up to 18 months after initial priority filing date to publish and issue, there may be currently pending patent applications with claims not yet filed that may later result in issued patents covering Alvotech’s product candidates. Alvotech has not yet completed freedom to operate analysis on products it is evaluating for

44

inclusion in its future biosimilar product pipeline and therefore Alvotech does not know whether or to what extent that development of these products may be influenced by unexpired patents and pending applications.

There may also be patent applications that have been filed but not published and if such applications issue as patents, they could be asserted against Alvotech. For example, in most cases, a patent filed today would not become known to industry participants for at least 18 months given patent rules applicable in most jurisdictions which typically do not publish patent applications until 18 months from the application’s prior date. Moreover, Alvotech may face claims from non-practicing entities that have no relevant product revenue and against whom its own patent portfolio may have no deterrent effect. In addition, coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. If Alvotech is sued for patent infringement, Alvotech would need to convince a judicial authority that its product candidates, products or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid and/or unenforceable, and Alvotech may not be able to do this. Proving to a judicial authority that a patent claim is invalid or unenforceable can be difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Also in proceedings before courts in Europe, the burden of proving invalidity of the patent usually rests on the party alleging invalidity. Further, proving the invalidity or unenforceability of a patent claim in the jurisdictions in which Alvotech operates may also depend on changes in the relevant law. Attempts to resolve intellectual property disputes may require substantial efforts including, but not limited to, validity challenges in patent offices, court litigation and arbitration. Even if Alvotech is successful in these proceedings, Alvotech may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of its management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech. In addition, Alvotech may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a desired conclusion.

Third parties could bring claims against Alvotech that would cause Alvotech to incur substantial expenses to defend against and, if successful against Alvotech, could cause Alvotech to pay substantial monetary damages if Alvotech’s product candidate is on the market. Further, if a patent infringement suit were brought against Alvotech, Alvotech could be forced to stop or delay research, development, manufacturing or sales of the product or product candidate that is the subject of the suit. Ultimately, Alvotech could be prevented from commercializing a product or be forced to cease some aspect of its business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened patent infringement claims, Alvotech is unable to enter into licenses on commercially acceptable terms or at all. If, as a result of patent infringement claims or to avoid potential claims, Alvotech chooses or is required to seek licenses from third parties, these licenses may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. Even if Alvotech is able to obtain a license, the license may obligate Alvotech to pay substantial license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to Alvotech might be nonexclusive, which could result in Alvotech’s competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Parties making claims against Alvotech may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively delay or block Alvotech’s ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of its product candidates. For example, companies that originated the products for which Alvotech intends to introduce biosimilar versions may seek damages for their loss of profits and/or market share. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would likely involve substantial litigation expense and would likely be a substantial diversion of employee resources from Alvotech’s business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against Alvotech, Alvotech may, in addition to being blocked from the market, have to pay substantial monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign its infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

In addition to infringement claims against Alvotech, Alvotech may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including interference, derivation or post-grant proceedings declared or granted by the USPTO and similar proceedings in foreign countries, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to its current or future products. An unfavorable outcome in any such proceedings could require Alvotech to delay or cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party or could cause Alvotech to lose valuable intellectual property rights. Alvotech’s business could be harmed if the prevailing party

45

does not offer Alvotech a license on commercially reasonable terms, if any license is offered at all. Litigation or other proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract Alvotech’s management and other employees. Alvotech may also become involved in disputes with others regarding the ownership of intellectual property rights. For example, Alvotech may jointly develop intellectual property with certain parties, and disagreements may therefore arise as to the ownership of the intellectual property developed pursuant to these relationships. If Alvotech is unable to resolve these disputes, Alvotech could lose valuable intellectual property rights.

BLA holders may submit applications for patent term extensions in the United States or other jurisdictions where similar extensions are available and/or Supplementary Protection Certificates in the EEA countries, and an equivalent process in Switzerland, seeking to extend certain patent protection which, if approved, may interfere with or delay the launch of one or more of Alvotech’s biosimilar products. Further, patent laws in the various jurisdictions in which Alvotech does business are subject to change and any future changes in patent laws may be less favorable for Alvotech.

The cost to Alvotech of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in its favor, could be substantial. Patent litigation and other proceedings may fail, and even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract Alvotech’s management and other employees. The companies that originated the products for which Alvotech intends to introduce biosimilar versions, as well as other competitors (including other biosimilar companies) may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than Alvotech can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could impair Alvotech’s ability to compete in the marketplace. For example, Alvotech is in legal proceedings adverse to AbbVie. See “—Alvotech has been and continues to be involved, directly or through its partners, in various legal proceedings adverse to AbbVie that may have an impact on its AVT02 product.”

So called “submarine” patents may be granted to Alvotech’s competitors that may significantly alter Alvotech’s launch timing expectations, reduce Alvotech’s projected market size, cause Alvotech to modify its product or process or block Alvotech from the market altogether.

The term “submarine” patent has been used in the pharmaceutical industry and in other industries to denote a patent issuing from an application that was not published, publicly known or available (including unfiled continuation. continuation-in-part, and divisional applications, and the like) at a critical time during which development and/or commercial decisions are made. Submarine patents add uncertainty to Alvotech’s business, e.g., because key decisions may be made during a period of time during which a pending applications has not yet published and such applications may only become known after those key decisions have already been made and perhaps even acted on. Submarine patents may issue to Alvotech’s competitors covering key aspects of Alvotech’s biosimilar product candidates or Alvotech’s pipeline candidates and thereby cause significant market entry delay, lead to unexpected licensing fees, defeat Alvotech’s ability to market its products or cause Alvotech to abandon development and/or commercialization of a molecule.

The issuance of one or more submarine patents may harm Alvotech’s business by causing substantial delays in its ability to introduce a biosimilar candidate into the U.S. market.

Alvotech may not timely identify, or identify at all, relevant patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a patent which might adversely affect Alvotech’s ability to develop and market its products.

Alvotech cannot guarantee that any of its patent searches or analyses, including but not limited to the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are 100% accurate and/or exhaustive, nor can Alvotech be certain that it has identified each and every patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of Alvotech’s product candidates in any jurisdiction (timely or at all).

46

The scope of a patent claim is determined by a judicial authority’s interpretation under controlling law. Alvotech’s interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect and/or different from that of a judicial authority, which may negatively impact Alvotech’s ability to market its products or pipeline molecules. Alvotech may determine that its products are not covered by a third-party patent, but a judicial authority may hold otherwise.

Many patents may cover a marketed product, including but not limited to the composition of the product, methods of use, formulations, cell line constructs, vectors, growth media, production processes and purification processes. The identification of all patents and their expiration dates relevant to the production and sale of a reference product is extraordinarily complex and requires sophisticated legal knowledge in the relevant jurisdiction and interactive monitoring and analyzing of the patent landscape. It may be impossible to identify all patents in all jurisdictions relevant to a marketed product. Alvotech’s determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that Alvotech considers (timely or at all) relevant may be incorrect which may negatively impact Alvotech’s ability to develop and market its products. Alvotech’s failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact its ability to develop and market its products.

Legal proceedings that carry risk may occur from time to time, and their outcome may be uncertain.

Alvotech may be involved in various legal proceedings, including patent litigation and challenges, other intellectual property disputes, product liability and other product-related litigation, including personal injury, consumer, off-label promotion, securities, antitrust and breach of contract claims, commercial, environmental, government investigations, employment, tax litigation and other legal proceedings that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of our business. See, for example, “—Alvotech may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce its patents or other intellectual property rights, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful” and “—Alvotech has been and continues to be involved, directly or through its partners, in various legal proceedings adverse to AbbVie that may have an impact on its AVT02 product.” Litigation is inherently unpredictable and excessive verdicts do occur. Alvotech could in the future incur judgments and/or enter into settlements, which could require Alvotech to make payments to the proceedings’ counterparties or limit or discontinue certain of its activities, or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on its business operations. In addition, even if such legal proceedings are ultimately resolved in Alvotech’s favor, they may be costly and time-consuming to conduct, which may materially adversely affect Alvotech’s business, financial condition and results of operations. The cost and resource requirements, including management attention, associated with conducting such legal proceedings may lead Alvotech to settle certain actions on terms that are materially adverse to it, even if it believes that the ultimate resolution of the proceedings is likely to be favorable.

Alvotech may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce its patents or other intellectual property rights, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Alvotech may discover that competitors are infringing one or more of its patents after they issue. Expensive and time-consuming litigation may be required to abate such infringement. Although Alvotech is not currently involved in any litigation to enforce patents, if Alvotech or one of its collaboration partners, such as Teva or STADA, were to initiate legal proceedings against a third-party to enforce a patent covering one of Alvotech’s product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering its product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including but not limited to lack of novelty, obviousness, written description or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone involved in the prosecution of the patent withheld relevant or material information related to the patentability of the invention from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable.

An unfavorable outcome could require Alvotech to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Alvotech’s business could be harmed if it cannot obtain a license from the

47

prevailing party on commercially reasonable terms. Alvotech’s defense of litigation proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract its management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on its ability to raise the funds necessary to continue Alvotech’s clinical trials, continue its research programs, license necessary technology from third parties or enter into development partnerships that would help Alvotech bring its product candidates to market.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, and although there are protections in place, there is a risk that some of Alvotech’s confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during any litigation Alvotech initiates to enforce its patents. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of the Ordinary Shares.

Alvotech may be subject to claims that its employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that its employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers or third parties.

Alvotech employs individuals, retains independent contractors and consultants and members on its board of directors or scientific advisory board who were previously employed at universities or other pharmaceutical companies, including its competitors or potential competitors. For example, Alvotech’s Chief Executive Officer, Mark Levick is a former employee of Sandoz Biopharmaceuticals, a business unit of Novartis, where he worked as the global head of development and oversaw the successful approval of biosimilar medicines. Joe McClellan, Alvotech’s Chief Scientific Officer, is a former employee of Pfizer where he held the position of Global Head of Biosimilars Development and Medicine/Asset Team Leader of IXIFI (biosimilar infliximab). Alvotech’s Chief Technical Officer, Sean Gaskell, is a former employee of Novartis where he held a leading role in the development of a number of commercial medicines and drug products, including innovators and biosimilars. Although Alvotech has several mechanisms in place to ensure that its employees, consultants and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for Alvotech, Alvotech may in the future be subject to such claims. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. For example, in March 2021, AbbVie brought a suit, which is now dismissed, against Alvotech hf. alleging that Alvotech hf. misappropriated trade secrets through the hiring of a former AbbVie employee. If Alvotech fails in defending against any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, Alvotech may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact its business. Even if Alvotech is successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs or delay and be a distraction to management and other employees.

If Alvotech is unable to obtain and maintain effective intellectual property rights, including patent rights, for its product candidates or any future product candidates, Alvotech may not be able to prevent competitors from using technologies Alvotech considers important in its successful development and commercialization of its product candidates, resulting in loss of any potential competitive advantage its intellectual property rights may have otherwise afforded Alvotech.

While Alvotech’s principal focus in matters relating to intellectual property is to avoid infringing the valid and enforceable rights of third parties, Alvotech also relies upon a combination of intellectual property protection and confidentiality agreements to protect Alvotech’s own intellectual property related to its product candidates and development programs. Alvotech’s ability to enjoy any competitive advantages afforded by Alvotech’s own intellectual property depends in large part on its ability to obtain and maintain patents and other intellectual property protection in the United States and in other countries with respect to various proprietary elements of its product candidates, such as, for example, Alvotech’s product formulations and processes for manufacturing its products and its ability to maintain and control the confidentiality of its trade secrets and confidential information critical to its business.

48

Alvotech has sought to protect its proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to its products that are important to its business. This process is expensive and time consuming, and Alvotech may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that Alvotech will fail to identify patentable aspects of its research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. There is no guarantee that any patent application Alvotech files will result in an issued patent having claims that protect its products. Additionally, while the basic requirements for patentability are similar across jurisdictions, each jurisdiction has its own specific requirements for patentability. Alvotech cannot guarantee that it will obtain identical or similar, or any, patent protection covering its products in all jurisdictions where Alvotech files patent applications.

The patent positions of biopharmaceutical companies generally are highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which legal principles remain unresolved. As a result, the patent applications that Alvotech owns or licenses may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover Alvotech’s product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries for many reasons. There is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to Alvotech’s patents and patent applications has been found, considered or cited during patent prosecution, which can be used to invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue, and even if such patents cover Alvotech’s product candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patent claims being narrowed, found unenforceable or invalidated. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, Alvotech’s patents and patent applications may not adequately protect its intellectual property, provide exclusivity for its product candidates or prevent others from designing around its claims. Any of these outcomes could impair Alvotech’s ability to prevent competitors from using the technologies claimed in any patents issued to Alvotech, which may have an adverse impact on Alvotech’s business.

Patents granted by the European Patent Office may be opposed by any person within nine months from the publication of their grant and, in addition, may be challenged before national courts at any time. From time to time, Alvotech may be involved in these anonymous or “straw man” oppositions. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, Alvotech’s patents and patent applications may not adequately protect its intellectual property or prevent others from designing around its claims. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patents and patent applications Alvotech holds, licenses or pursues with respect to its product candidates is threatened, it could threaten Alvotech’s ability to prevent third parties from using the same technologies that Alvotech uses in its product candidates. In addition, changes to the patent laws of the United States provide additional procedures for third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents based on patent applications filed after March 15, 2013. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patents and patent applications Alvotech holds or pursues with respect to its current or future product candidates is challenged, then it could threaten Alvotech’s ability to prevent competitive products using its proprietary technology. Further, because patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time, typically for 18 months after filing, Alvotech cannot be certain that it was the first to either (i) file any patent application related to Alvotech’s product candidates or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in Alvotech’s patents or patent applications. Furthermore, for applications filed before March 16, 2013 or patents issuing from such applications, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third-party or instituted by the USPTO to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of Alvotech’s applications and patents. As of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first-inventor-to-file” system for deciding which party should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications claiming the same invention are filed by different parties. A third-party that files a patent application in the USPTO before Alvotech could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of Alvotech’s.

The change to “first-inventor-to-file” from “first-to-invent” is one of the changes to the patent laws of the United States resulting from the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), signed into law on September 16, 2011. Among some of the other significant changes to the patent laws are changes that limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and provide opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO.

49

Alvotech has filed patent applications, which are in various stages of prosecution/issuance, and plans to pursue additional applications, covering various aspects of its product candidates (e.g., formulations and bioprocesses). Alvotech cannot offer any assurances about which or where, if any, patents will issue, the breadth of any such patent or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened or infringed by third parties. Any successful actions by third parties to challenge the validity or enforceability of any patents which may issue to Alvotech could deprive Alvotech the ability to prevent others from using the technologies claimed in such issued patents. Further, if Alvotech encounters delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which Alvotech could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced.

While Alvotech’s business is based primarily on the timing of its biosimilar product launches to occur after the expiration of relevant patents and/or regulatory exclusivity. Alvotech files patent applications directed to its proprietary formulations for its product candidates when Alvotech believes securing such patents may afford a competitive advantage. For example, the company that originated Humira (AbbVie) owns patents directed to formulations for these products. Alvotech has developed its own proprietary formulations for this product and has filed patent applications covering its formulations. Alvotech cannot guarantee that its proprietary formulations will avoid infringement of third-party patents, or that the patent applications filed on its proprietary formulations will be found patentable and/or upheld as valid. Moreover, because competitors may be able to develop their own proprietary product formulations, it is uncertain whether issuance of any of its pending patent applications directed to formulations of ATV02, a biosimilar candidate to Humira (adalimumab), would cover the formulations of any competitors.

Alvotech does not consider it necessary for Alvotech or its competitors to obtain or maintain a proprietary patent position in order to engage in the business of biosimilar development and commercialization. Hence, while Alvotech’s ability to secure patent coverage on its own proprietary developments may improve its competitive position with respect to the product candidates Alvotech intends to commercialize, Alvotech does not view its own patent filings as a necessary or essential requirement for conducting its business nor does Alvotech rely on its own patent filings or the potential for any commercial advantage they may provide Alvotech as a basis for its success.

Obtaining and maintaining Alvotech’s patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural requirements, document submissions, actions within prescribed deadlines, overcoming substantial and procedural examination requirements, fee payments and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies. Alvotech’s patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent process. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, competitors might be able to enter the market earlier than would otherwise have been the case.

Alvotech may not be able to adequately protect its intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and Alvotech’s intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Further, licensing partners may choose not to file patent applications in certain jurisdictions in which Alvotech may obtain commercial rights (to the extent those partners have a contractual right to do so), thereby precluding the possibility of later obtaining patent protection in these countries. Consequently, Alvotech may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing its inventions in all countries outside the United States or importing products

50

made using its inventions into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use Alvotech’s technologies in jurisdictions where Alvotech has not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and may also export infringing products to territories where Alvotech has patent protection, but the ability to enforce its patents is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with Alvotech’s products and its patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in obtaining, protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain non-U.S. jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for Alvotech to stop the infringement of its patents or marketing of competing products in violation of its proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce Alvotech’s patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert Alvotech’s efforts and attention from other aspects of its business, could put Alvotech’s patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and Alvotech’s patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against Alvotech. Alvotech may not prevail in any lawsuits that it initiates and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Governments of some foreign countries may force Alvotech to license its patents to third parties on terms that are not commercially reasonable or acceptable to Alvotech (not timely or not at all). Accordingly, Alvotech’s efforts to enforce its intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that Alvotech develops or licenses in certain jurisdictions.

Changes in the patent laws of the United States and other jurisdictions in which Alvotech does business could diminish the value of patents obtainable in such jurisdictions, thereby impairing Alvotech’s ability to protect its products.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, Alvotech’s success for any given product could be heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity. Therefore, obtaining and enforcing biopharmaceutical patents is costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain.

Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken Alvotech’s ability to obtain new patents or to enforce its existing patents and patents that Alvotech might obtain in the future.

If Alvotech is unable to maintain effective (non-patent) proprietary rights for its product candidates or any future product candidates, Alvotech may not be able to compete effectively in its markets.

While Alvotech has filed patent applications to protect certain aspects of its own proprietary formulation and process developments, Alvotech also relies on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary scientific, business and technical information and know-how that is not or may not be patentable or that Alvotech elects not to patent. However, confidential information and trade secrets can be difficult to protect. Moreover, the information embodied in Alvotech’s trade secrets and confidential information may be independently and legitimately developed or discovered by third parties without any improper use of or reference to information or trade secrets. Alvotech seeks to protect the scientific, technical and business information supporting its operations, as well as the confidential information relating specifically to its product candidates by entering into confidentiality agreements with parties to whom Alvotech needs to disclose its confidential information, for example, its employees, consultants, scientific advisors, board members, contractors, potential collaborators and financial investors. However, Alvotech cannot be certain that such agreements have been entered into with all relevant parties, or that any such agreements would not be violated. Alvotech also seeks to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of its data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of its premises and physical and electronic security of its information technology systems, but it is possible that these

51

security measures could be breached. While Alvotech has confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and Alvotech may not have adequate remedies for any breach. Further, from time-to-time Alvotech may be subject to anonymous Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), requests. To the extent the company needs to respond to such requests, Alvotech’s management’s attention and the company’s resources may be diverted from normal business operations. As a result of either security breaches or FOIA requests, Alvotech’s confidential information and trade secrets thus may become known by its competitors in ways Alvotech cannot prevent or remedy.

Although Alvotech requires all of its employees and consultants to assign their inventions to Alvotech, and all of its employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to its proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, Alvotech cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed. Alvotech cannot guarantee that its trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to its trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. For example, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose its proprietary information, including its trade secrets, and Alvotech may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of Alvotech’s trade secrets could impair Alvotech’s competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain Alvotech’s trade secrets are deemed inadequate, Alvotech may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. Alvotech cannot guarantee that its employees, former employees or consultants will not file patent applications claiming Alvotech’s inventions. Because of the “first-to-file” laws in the United States, such unauthorized patent application filings may defeat Alvotech’s attempts to obtain patents on its own inventions.

Alvotech may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of its patent filings and other intellectual property.

Although Alvotech is not currently aware of any claims challenging the inventorship of its patent applications or ownership of its intellectual property, Alvotech may in the future be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in Alvotech’s patent applications or patents Alvotech may be granted or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, Alvotech may have inventorship or ownership disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing Alvotech’s product candidates, or which result from an improper assignment of ownership. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If Alvotech fails in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, Alvotech may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of or right to use valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business. Even if Alvotech is successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Alvotech may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary intellectual property rights to its product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses.

Alvotech currently has or is pursuing rights to certain intellectual property, through licenses from third parties for various technologies relevant to the manufacture and commercialization of biologics. Because Alvotech may find that its programs require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of Alvotech’s business may depend in part on its ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights. Alvotech may be unable to acquire or in-license compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that Alvotech identifies as necessary for its product candidates. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that Alvotech may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over Alvotech due to their size, financial resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies

52

that perceive Alvotech to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to Alvotech. Alvotech also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow Alvotech to make an appropriate return on its investment.

If Alvotech is unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights Alvotech has, Alvotech’s business and financial condition could suffer.

Alvotech’s ability to market its products in the United States may be significantly delayed or prevented by the BPCIA patent information exchange mechanism.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, Title VII, Subtitle A of the PPACA, Pub.L.No.111-148, 124 Stat.119, Sections 7001-02 signed into law March 23, 2010 (the “BPCIA”), created an elaborate and complex, private, pre-litigation patent information exchange mechanism for biosimilars to focus issues for patent litigation and/or facilitate dispute resolution with the reference product sponsor before litigation commences/ends.

The BPCIA provides for a detailed and complex mechanism for exchange of confidential and business-sensitive information between a reference product sponsor and a biosimilar candidate (pre-approval) that is demanding, time-sensitive and, to date, not fully tested and therefore unpredictable. This pre-litigation private information exchange is colloquially known as the “patent dance.”

The patent dance requires the biosimilar applicant to disclose not only the regulatory application but also the applicant’s manufacturing process before litigation (and therefore significantly earlier than would normally be required in patent litigation), has the potential to afford the reference product sponsor an easier path than traditional infringement litigation for developing any factual grounds they may require to support allegations of infringement. The rules established in the BPCIA’s patent dance procedures could place biosimilar firms at a significant disadvantage by affording the reference product sponsor a much easier mechanism for factual discovery, thereby increasing the risk that a biosimilar product could be blocked from the market more quickly than under traditional patent infringement litigation processes and in certain cases could outweigh advantages provided to biosimilar firms by the patent dance.

Preparing for and conducting the patent information exchange, briefing and negotiation process under the BPCIA will require sophisticated legal counseling and extensive planning, all under extremely tight deadlines. Alvotech cannot guarantee the outcome of the patent dance will be a successful path to commercialization of its biosimilar products.

It is possible for a biosimilar firm to skip the patent dance before any corresponding patent litigation. But this too could place a biosimilar firm at a significant disadvantage by ceding all control of the number of patents and the timing for the start of litigation to the reference product sponsor, thereby increasing the uncertainty before approval and launch and increasing the chances for possible delays. In certain circumstances, the advantages of participating in the patent dance could outweigh the advantages of skipping the patent dance.

Regardless of whether a biosimilar firm chooses to participate in the patent dance, the BPCIA’s information disclosure procedure adds significantly to expense, complexity, uncertainty, and risk. For example, a biosimilar firm may be subject to an allegation of violating the BPCIA independent of the patent issues, given that what could be a violation still has not been fully vetted. Moreover, the complexity of the patent dance and subsequent biosimilar litigation requires highly qualified law firms and the conflict space for such firms is very crowded, with biosimilar firms competing not only with other biosimilar firms but also with reference product sponsors for the engagement of suitable law firms. It may be difficult for Alvotech to secure such legal support if large, well-funded references have already entered into engagements with highly qualified law firms or if the most highly qualified law firms choose not to represent biosimilar applicants due to their long-standing relationships with references.

53

Alvotech has been and continues to be involved, directly or through its partners, in various legal proceedings adverse to AbbVie that may have an impact on its AVT02 product.

Alvotech has been and continues to be involved in legal proceedings adverse to AbbVie, directly or through its partners, that may have an impact on Alvotech’s biosimilar adalimumab product, AVT02, as further discussed below and in “Business—Legal Proceedings”. While the proceedings in the United States, the Netherlands, and Japan, and before the European Patent Office, have been settled or otherwise resolved as further described in “Business—Legal Proceedings”, proceedings are pending in Canada as further described below.

Canadian Litigations

On March 31, 2021, AbbVie filed four actions in the Federal Court of Canada (T-557-21, T-559-21, T-560-21 and T-561-21, collectively, the “NOC Actions”) against JAMP Pharma Corporation (“JAMP Pharma”), which is Alvotech’s exclusive Canadian partner for AVT02 (adalimumab solution for injection). No Alvotech entity is a named party in the NOC Actions. AbbVie is seeking declarations pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations and the Patent Act that JAMP Pharma’s adalimumab solution for subcutaneous injection (the “JAMP Pharma Products”) would directly or indirectly infringe the asserted claims of Canadian Patent Nos. 2,898,009; 2,904,458; 2,504,868; 2,847,142; 2,801,917 and 2,385,745. JAMP Pharma counterclaimed, in each of the four actions, alleging that the asserted claims of each of the six patents are invalid.

On April 6, 2021, JAMP Pharma commenced four actions in the Federal Court of Canada (T-572-21, T-573-21, T-577-21 and T-581-21, collectively, the “Impeachment Actions”) seeking declarations that all claims of Canadian Patent Nos. 2,898,009; 2,904,458; 2,504,868; 2,847,142; 2,801,917 and 2,385,745 are invalid, void and of no force or effect, and declarations that the making, using or selling of the JAMP Pharma Products by JAMP Pharma in Canada will not infringe any valid claim of Canadian Patent Nos. 2,898,009; 2,904,458; 2,504,868; 2,847,142; 2,801,917 and 2,385,745. No Alvotech entity is a named party in the Impeachment Actions.

On June 4, 2021, JAMP Pharma amended its Statements of Claim in the Impeachment Actions to only seek declarations that the specific claims asserted in the NOC Actions are invalid, void and of no force or effect, and declarations that the making, using or selling of the JAMP Pharma Products by JAMP Pharma in Canada will not infringe the asserted claims. AbbVie has counterclaimed for declarations that the asserted claims of the patents are valid and that they will be infringed by JAMP Pharma.

The pleadings are closed and the parties exchanged documentary productions as part of the discovery process on September 3, 2021. The trial of the Impeachment Actions and the NOC Actions is scheduled to commence on November 14, 2022.

In the event of a successful claim of patent infringement against JAMP Pharma, JAMP Pharma may be blocked from the market, and Alvotech may have to redesign its infringing products or obtain a license from AbbVie, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Even if JAMP Pharma is successful in defending against AbbVie’s patent infringement claims, litigation could result in substantial cost and distraction to management and other employees.

In December 2021, Health Canada informed JAMP Pharma that the 40 mg/0.4 mL and 80 mg/0.8 mL presentations of SIMLANDI are not subject to the 24-month statutory stay pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations because AbbVie elected to not market the equivalent high-concentration versions to Canadian patients. In January 2022, JAMP Pharma received notices of compliance for the 40 mg/0.4 mL and 80 mg/0.8 mL presentations of SIMLANDI. AbbVie has commenced applications to judicially review Health Canada’s decision in the Federal Court of Canada, and a hearing took place on May 16-17, 2022. On August 17, 2022, the court issued a decision, finding that Health Canada’s interpretation of the regulations was reasonable and dismissing AbbVie’s applications for judicial review.

In the event that AbbVie appeals the court’s decision, and an appellate court finds in AbbVie’s favor, then JAMP Pharma’s notices of compliance may be quashed, resulting in JAMP Pharma not being able to market the 40 mg/

54

0.4 mL and 80 mg/0.8 mL presentations of SIMLANDI until a favorable trial decision is released in the ongoing patent infringement claims brought by AbbVie against JAMP Pharma.

Risks Related to Legal and Regulatory Compliance Matters

Healthcare legislative reform measures may have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business and results of operations.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system, including initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the PPACA, was passed, which substantially changed the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The PPACA, among other things, created a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, added a provision to increase the Medicaid rebate for line extensions or reformulated drugs, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs and promotes a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program. The PPACA also includes the BPCIA, which created, among other things, a regulatory framework for the approval of biosimilars and interchangeables.

There have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to repeal or replace certain aspects of the PPACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, it has enacted laws that modify certain provisions of the PPACA such as removing penalties, starting January 1, 2019, for not complying with the PPACA’s individual mandate to carry health insurance and eliminating the implementation of certain PPACA-mandated fees. Additionally, on June 17, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the PPACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Thus, the PPACA will remain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the PPACA marketplace, which began February 15, 2021 and remained open through August 15, 2021. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the PPACA. On August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”) into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in PPACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the PPACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges, and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration, will impact the PPACA, including the BPCIA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the PPACA was enacted. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect until 2031, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022 due to COVID-19 relief legislation, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 4% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the American

55

Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to certain providers, including physicians, hospitals and cancer treatment centers. Alvotech expects that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for its product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products. At the federal level, the Trump administration used several means to propose or implement pharmaceutical pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. For example, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the prior administration announced several executive orders related to pharmaceutical pricing that attempted to implement several of the administration’s proposals. As a result, the FDA released a final rule and concurrent guidance in September 2020, providing pathways for states to build and submit importation plans for non-biological pharmaceutical products from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. The implementation of the rule has been delayed until 2023. Based on a recent executive order, the Biden administration expressed its intent to pursue certain policy initiatives to reduce pharmaceutical prices. For example, the executive order expressed the Biden administration’s support of legislative reforms to lower prescription drug prices, including by allowing Medicare’s negotiation of drug prices. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA directs the HHS Secretary to establish a Drug Price Negotiation Program (the “Program”) to lower prices for certain high-expenditure, single-source prescription drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B and Part D that have been approved by the FDA for at least 7 years for prescription drugs and at least 11 years for biologics. Under the Program, the HHS Secretary will publish a list of “selected drugs,” and will then negotiate maximum fair prices (“MFP”) with their manufacturers. The Program will be implemented in stages. Beginning in 2026, 10 Medicare Part D “selected drugs” will be subject to price negotiations. By 2029, and in subsequent years thereafter, the number will increase to 20 drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B and Part D. Agreements between HHS and manufacturers will remain in place until a drug or biologic is no longer considered a “selected drug” for negotiation purposes. Manufacturers who do not comply with the negotiated prices set under the Program will be subject to an excise tax based on a percentage of total sales of a “selected drug” up to 95% and potential civil monetary penalties. Further, beginning in October 2023, the IRA will require manufacturers that increase prices of certain Medicare Part B and Part D drugs or biologics at a rate greater than inflation to pay rebates to CMS or be subject to civil monetary penalties. The IRA also provides certain incentives for the development and manufacture of biosimilars. For example, the Secretary can grant a one-year delay from price negotiations for biosimilars that have a “high likelihood” of a competing biosimilar product entering the market within the requested delay period. In addition, certain Part B biosimilars qualify for an increase in Medicare payments, to 8% of the 5-year Average Sales Price, from 6% under current law. The HHS Secretary has been directed to promulgate regulations to implement the Program and other IRA health reform measures.

At the state level, individual states have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in

56

some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Further, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In various EEA countries, Alvotech expects to be subject to continuous cost-cutting measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper products as an alternative. Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”), of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EEA countries, including countries representing major markets. The HTA process, which is currently governed by the national laws of these countries, is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medicinal products will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EEA Member States. On January 31, 2018, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation on health technologies assessment. The proposed regulation is intended to boost cooperation among EEA Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and providing the basis for cooperation at the EEA level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. In June 2021, the European Parliament and Council reached a provisional agreement on the draft regulation. Entry into application of the Regulation could impose stricter and more detailed procedures to be followed by MAHs concerning conduct of HTA in relation to their products which may influence related pricing and reimbursement decisions.

Alvotech may be subject to federal and state healthcare laws, including those governing fraud and abuse, false claims, physician payment transparency and health information privacy and security laws. If Alvotech is unable to comply or has not fully complied with such laws, Alvotech could face substantial penalties including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, and exclusion from participation in government health care programs.

Alvotech’s operations may be subject to various civil and criminal fraud and abuse laws. In the United States, federal fraud and abuse laws include, without limitation, the False Claims Act (“FCA”), the Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”), the Exclusions Law, and the Civil Monetary Penalties Law (“CMPL”). Many states have similar state laws. These laws may impact, among other things, Alvotech’s research activities as well as its proposed sales, marketing and education programs. In addition, Alvotech may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which Alvotech conducts its business. The laws that may affect its ability to operate include:

57

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of its business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, in the United States the PPACA, among other things, amended the intent requirement of the federal anti-kickback and criminal healthcare fraud statutes, such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it. Moreover, the PPACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal anti-kickback statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act.

If Alvotech’s operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to Alvotech, Alvotech may be subject to significant penalties, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, and the curtailment or restructuring of Alvotech’s operations, any of which could adversely affect Alvotech’s ability to operate its business and its results of operations. Moreover, one or more of Alvotech’s commercial partners may be subject to the above law and may be investigated or sued for any one or more of the previous concerns which may in turn materially impact Alvotech by virtue of its association with such commercial partner(s).

The international aspects of Alvotech’s business expose Alvotech to business, regulatory, political, operational, financial and economic risks associated with doing business outside of the United States.

Alvotech currently has international operations of its own and has a number of international collaborations. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including but not limited to:

58

Alvotech is subject to U.S. anti-corruption laws and regulations, export and import controls, and sanctions laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal standards could impair Alvotech’s ability to compete in United States and international markets. Alvotech could face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which could harm its business, prospects and financial condition.

Alvotech is subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, and other state and national anti-bribery laws in jurisdictions in which Alvotech may conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, CROs, contractors and other collaborators and partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting or receiving, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value improperly to or from recipients in the public or private sector. Alvotech has engaged third parties for clinical trials outside of the United States, to sell its products abroad once Alvotech enters a commercialization phase, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other regulatory approvals. Alvotech has direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. Alvotech can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of its employees, agents, CROs, contractors and other collaborators and partners, even if Alvotech does not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. In addition, the FCPA imposes accounting standards and requirements on publicly traded U.S. corporations and their foreign affiliates, which requires such companies to maintain complete and accurate books and records and maintain a system of internal accounting controls.

Alvotech is also subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, and various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls, as well as by comparable import and export laws and regulations in other jurisdictions. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, or applications for custom seizures filed by third parties relating to intellectual property rights,

59

regarding the import and export of Alvotech’s products may create delays in the introduction of its products in international markets or, in some cases, prevent the export its products to some countries altogether.

Furthermore, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the shipment of certain products and services to countries, governments, and persons targeted by U.S. sanctions.

Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences.

A breakdown, cyberattack or information security breach could compromise the confidentiality, integrity and availability of Alvotech’s confidential information in internal systems or those used by third party collaborator partners or other contractors or consultants, could compromise the confidentiality, integrity and availability of Alvotech’s confidential information in information technology systems, network-connected control systems and/or Alvotech’s data, interrupt the operation of Alvotech’s business and/or affect Alvotech’s reputation.

To achieve its business objectives, Alvotech relies on sophisticated information technology systems, including software, mobile applications, cloud services and network-connected control systems, some of which are managed, hosted, provided or serviced by third parties. Internal or external events that compromise the confidentiality, integrity and availability of Alvotech’s systems and data may significantly interrupt the operation of its business, result in significant costs and/or adversely affect Alvotech’s reputation and/or place Alvotech at a competitive disadvantage resulting from the improper disclosure/theft of confidential information or intellectual property.

Alvotech’s information technology systems are highly integrated into its business, including its research and development (“R&D”) efforts, its clinical and commercial manufacturing processes and its product sales and distribution processes. Further, as certain of Alvotech’s employees are working remotely, Alvotech’s reliance on its and third-party information technology systems has increased substantially and is expected to continue to increase. The complexity and interconnected nature of Alvotech’s systems makes them potentially vulnerable to breakdown or other service interruptions. Alvotech’s systems are also subject to frequent cyberattacks. As the cyber-threat landscape evolves, these attacks are growing in frequency, sophistication and intensity and are becoming increasingly difficult to detect. Such attacks could include the use of harmful and virulent malware, including ransomware or other denials of service, that can be deployed through various means, including the software supply chain, e-mail, malicious websites and/or the use of social engineering. Attacks such as those experienced by governmental entities (including those that approve and/or regulate Alvotech’s products, such as the FDA, the European Commission or EMA) and other multi-national companies, including some of Alvotech’s peers, could leave Alvotech unable to utilize key business systems or access or protect important data, and could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s ability to operate its business, including developing, gaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing, selling and/or distributing Alvotech’s products.

Alvotech’s systems and possibly those of permissible third parties also contain and utilize a high volume of sensitive data, including intellectual property, trade secrets, financial information, regulatory information, strategic plans, sales trends and forecasts, litigation materials and/or personal information belonging to Alvotech, its staff, customers and/or other parties. In some cases, Alvotech and/or permissible third parties may use third-party service providers to process, store, manage or transmit such data, which may increase its risk. Intentional or inadvertent data privacy or security breaches (including cyberattacks) or lapses by employees, service providers (including providers of information technology-specific services), nation states (including groups associated with or supported by foreign intelligence agencies), organized crime organizations, “hacktivists” or others, create risks that Alvotech’s sensitive data may be exposed to unauthorized persons, its competitors, or the public.

Domestic and global government regulators, Alvotech’s business partners, suppliers with whom it does business, vendors and law firms that host Alvotech’s documents and information in connection with transactions or

60

proceedings, companies that provide Alvotech or its partners with business services and companies that Alvotech may acquire may face similar risks, and security breaches of their systems could adversely affect Alvotech’s security, leave Alvotech without access to important systems, products, raw materials, components, services or information or expose Alvotech’s confidential data. As a part of Alvotech’s business, it shares confidential information to third parties, such as commercial partners, consultants, advisors, vendors, etc. Alvotech is at risk of its confidential data being disclosed without its consent or lost if these third parties’ servers or databases experience security breaches of their systems.

Although Alvotech has experienced system breakdowns, attacks and information security breaches, Alvotech does not believe such breakdowns, attacks and breaches have had a material adverse effect on its business or results of operations. Alvotech continues to invest in the monitoring, protection and resilience of its critical and/or sensitive data and systems. However, there can be no assurances that Alvotech’s efforts will detect, prevent or fully recover systems or data from all breakdowns, service interruptions, attacks, and/or breaches of its systems that could adversely affect Alvotech’s business and operations and/or result in the loss or exposure of critical, proprietary, private, confidential or otherwise sensitive data, which could result in material financial, legal, business or reputational harm to Alvotech or negatively affect its share price. While Alvotech maintains cyber-liability insurance, its insurance is not sufficient to cover it against all losses that could potentially result from a service interruption, breach of Alvotech’s systems or loss of its critical or sensitive data.

Alvotech is also subject to various laws and regulations globally regarding privacy and data protection, including laws and regulations relating to the collection, storage, handling, use, disclosure, transfer and security of personal data. The legislative and regulatory environment regarding privacy and data protection is continuously evolving and developing and the subject of significant attention globally. For example, in the EEA Alvotech is subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), which became effective in May 2018, imposes strict obligations and restrictions on the ability to collect, analyze and transfer personal data, including health data from clinical trials and adverse event reporting and which provides for substantial penalties for non-compliance. Other jurisdictions where Alvotech operates have enacted or proposed similar legislation and/or regulations. Failure to comply with these current and future laws could result in significant penalties, liability for damages incurred by individuals whose privacy is violated, and could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business and results of operations.

Alvotech currently relies on Alvogen’s IT infrastructure and may not successfully migrate to its own IT environment in the foreseeable future.

Alvotech currently relies on some critical IT infrastructure and software owned and operated by Alvogen.

A service agreement is in place between the two companies covering confidentiality, service and fees etc., and Alvotech and Alvogen are negotiating an agreement regarding the ownership, access rights and retention of shared data. Alvotech expects the agreement to state that most data (other than data on litigation hold, historic backups and data held in SAP) will be under the control of Alvotech.

Alvotech has signed a separate license agreement for an ERP platform and is in the process of implementing and migrating to a new platform in an environment separate from Alvogen’s. This environment is expected to go live at the end of 2022. However, in the meantime, Alvotech is relying on Alvogen’s platform and licenses. In addition, Alvotech a small number of applications, generally for less than ten users per application, that are licensed through Alvogen. Alvotech plans to stop using these applications before the end of 2022.

Alvotech is also currently relying on Alvogen’s Azure (cloud) environment and is in the process of migrating into a dedicated separate environment. While Alvotech’s components of the environment have been logically separated from Alvogen’s components and are operated entirely by Alvotech, a limited number of Alvogen system administrators have access to Alvotech’s infrastructure. Alvotech and Alvotech are in the process of logically separating their resources so that Alvogen users cannot access resources from Alvotech. Once the

61

migration of the Azure environment and SAP moves have been completed, Alvotech plans to physically separate the resources. This is expected to happen in the first quarter of 2023.

The separation of the IT infrastructure of Alvogen and Alvotech is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2023. However, the implementation might not be successfully completed on the expected timeline, or at all, due to lack of capabilities, resources or funding, prioritization, or other reasons.

There is a risk that other issues due to the shared infrastructure between the companies have not yet been identified, posing risk to Alvotech’s business operations which are currently relying on the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical information systems and data of Alvogen. For more information on the service agreements between Alvotech and Alvogen, please see the section entitled “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions.”

Alvotech’s IT Governance (ITG) and Information Security Management System (ISMS) may not be sufficient to ensure the effective and efficient use of IT in enabling the organization to achieve business objectives and secure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical information technology systems and data.

Alvotech currently does not have a fully implemented ITG and ISMS in place. Alvotech is currently revising and updating its ITG and ISMS, including policies, procedures, and internal controls, which will be based on the ISO 27001 and ITIL standards. These standards cover the areas of access management, change management, incident management, business continuity plans, disaster recovery, and data retention policy.

Alvotech’s business continuity is not fully secured as its business continuity plan has not yet been fully implemented and tested. Some of Alvotech’s critical systems and data are hosted on premise in one data center, without a secondary data center for redundancy. Force majeure events impacting the data center such as fire, flood, earthquake, or power outage can therefore pose a risk to Alvotech’s operation and may compromise the confidentiality, integrity and availability of those systems and data.

If Alvotech fails to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, Alvotech could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of its business.

Alvotech’s research and development activities and its third-party manufacturers’ and suppliers’ activities involve the controlled storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials, including the components of Alvotech’s product candidates and other hazardous compounds. Alvotech and its manufacturers and suppliers are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at Alvotech’s and its manufacturers’ facilities pending their use and disposal. Alvotech cannot eliminate the risk of contamination, which could cause an interruption of its commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. Although Alvotech believes that the safety procedures utilized by Alvotech and its third-party manufacturers for handling and disposing of these materials generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, Alvotech cannot guarantee that this is the case or eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In such an event, Alvotech may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed its resources and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail Alvotech’s use of certain materials and/or interrupt its business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent. Alvotech cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of its future compliance. Alvotech does not currently carry biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage.

62

Alvotech or the third parties upon whom Alvotech depends may be adversely affected by earthquakes or other natural disasters and Alvotech’s business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect from a serious disaster. Until the Joint Venture becomes fully operational, Alvotech’s manufacturing facility and Alvotech’s inventories are located at a single site in Reykjavik, Iceland and any severe natural or other disaster or disruption at this site could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s financial condition and results of operations.

Alvotech’s corporate headquarters, manufacturing site and a large part of its R&D division are located in Reykjavik, Iceland. Iceland is geographically isolated and has in the past experienced severe earthquakes and other natural disasters, such as volcanic eruptions. Earthquakes or other natural disasters could severely disrupt Alvotech’s operations or those of its collaboration partners and have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented Alvotech from using all or a significant portion of its headquarters, that damaged critical infrastructure (such as the manufacturing facilities of Alvotech’s third-party providers of power or water supplies) or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for Alvotech to continue its business for a substantial period of time. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans Alvotech has in place currently are limited and are unlikely to prove adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. Alvotech may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of its disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with Alvotech’s current lack of business continuity insurance, could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech’s business.

Iceland’s implementation of EEA rules may not be comprehensive or may be delayed, resulting in uncertainty for Alvotech and its business.

Alvotech has significant assets, including its subsidiary Alvotech hf., in Iceland. Many of Alvotech’s assets and material agreements are therefore governed by Icelandic law and subject to the jurisdiction of the Icelandic courts. As a member state of the European Economic Area (the EEA), Iceland is obligated to implement important parts of European Union law concerning the “four freedoms” within the EU single market. Certain aspects of Alvotech’s operations are subject to laws originating from such implementation. If the Icelandic state fails to draft national legislation which conforms with such EEA rules, Icelandic individuals and legal persons may not be able to rely on the relevant EEA rules and the Icelandic courts could be restricted from applying them unless the Icelandic legislation can be interpreted in a way which conforms with EEA rules. Errors or undue delay may occur in the implementation of EEA rules and in those cases, Icelandic law will be deemed by the Icelandic courts to prevail. This could negatively affect Alvotech or other individuals or legal persons who conduct business with Alvotech in Iceland.

Alvotech has identified material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting. If Alvotech is unable to remediate these material weaknesses, or if Alvotech experiences additional material weaknesses in the future or otherwise is unable to develop and maintain an effective system of internal controls in the future, Alvotech may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements or comply with applicable laws and regulations, which may adversely affect investor confidence in Alvotech and, as a result, the value of the Ordinary Shares.

Alvotech has identified material weaknesses in the design and operating effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In connection with the preparation of this prospectus and its financial statements, Alvotech has identified material weaknesses as follows: (i) control environment driven by the lack of a sufficient number of trained professionals with an appropriate level of internal control knowledge, training and experience; (ii) risk assessment, as Alvotech did not design and implement an effective risk assessment to identify and communicate appropriate objectives and fraud, and to identify and assess changes in the business that could affect Alvotech’s system of internal controls; (iii) control activities, as Alvotech did not have adequate formal documentation of certain policies and procedures,

63

implementation of all required business process controls, including effective review process of key financial information, and documentation to evidence the design and operating effectiveness of the control activities; (iv) information and communication as Alvotech did not implement effective controls over the segregation of duties and certain information technology general controls for information systems that are relevant to the preparation of its financial statements; and (v) monitoring activities, as Alvotech did not have the evidence to support evaluation of the effectiveness of monitoring controls to ascertain whether the components of internal control are present and functioning. As a consequence of these material weaknesses, material accounting errors were identified in Alvotech’s annual consolidated financial statements primarily related to the accounting for joint ventures and convertible debt instruments. These material weaknesses could result in a misstatement of Alvotech’s accounts or disclosures that would result in a material misstatement to the annual or interim consolidated financial statements that would not be prevented or detected.

Upon identifying the material weaknesses, Alvotech began taking steps intended to address the underlying causes of the control deficiencies in order to remediate the material weaknesses, which included the implementation of new tools and controls, engagement of outside consultants to develop remediation plans, provide training to control owners and plans to implement a new enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system and automated controls. Alvotech is in the process of making the following enhancements to its control environment: (i) implementing a compliance tool to provide workflow and electronic approval capabilities as well as to maintain control evidence; (ii) engaging outside consultants to assist in evaluating the internal controls and developing a remediation plan to address the control deficiencies; (iii) implementing entity level and business process-level controls to mitigate the key risks identified; (iv) implementing a new ERP system; and (v) hiring more accounting resources. Alvotech’s remediation activities have continued through 2021 and into 2022. In addition to the above actions, Alvotech expects to engage in additional activities, including, but not limited to: (i) continue to implement entity level controls, business process-level controls across all significant accounts and information technology general controls across all relevant domains; (ii) provide training to control owners to establish clear expectations as it relates to the control design, execution and monitoring of such controls, including enhancements to the documentation to evidence the execution of the controls; (iii) engage outside consultants to help design and implement automated controls and enhance Alvotech’s information technology general controls environment as part of the ERP system implementation; (iv) implement a Governance, Risk and Control tool to monitor the segregation of duties in the new ERP system.

Alvotech cannot assure that the measures it has taken to date, and is continuing to implement, will be sufficient to remediate the material weaknesses identified and avoid potential future material weaknesses. If the steps Alvotech takes do not remediate the material weaknesses in a timely manner, Alvotech will be unable to conclude that it maintains effective internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, there could continue to be a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of Alvotech’s financial statements would not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

If Alvotech fails to remediate Alvotech’s existing material weaknesses, identifies new material weaknesses in its internal controls over financial reporting, is unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, is unable to conclude that its internal controls over financial reporting are effective, or if Alvotech’s independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of Alvotech’s internal controls over financial reporting when Alvotech is no longer an emerging growth company, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of Alvotech’s financial reports and the market price of the Ordinary Shares could be negatively affected. As a result of such failures, Alvotech could also become subject to investigations by the stock exchanges on which Alvotech’s securities are listed, the SEC, or other regulatory authorities, and become subject to litigation from investors and shareholders, which could harm Alvotech’s reputation and financial condition or divert financial and management resources from Alvotech’s regular business activities.

64

Risks Related to Ownership of our Ordinary Shares and Warrants and our Status as a Public Company

Alvotech will incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and its management will devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

Alvotech will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that it did not incur as a private company, and these expenses may increase even more if and when Alvotech is no longer an emerging growth company, as defined in Section 2(a) of the Securities Act. As a public company, Alvotech is subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as well as rules adopted, and to be adopted, by the SEC and Nasdaq. Alvotech’s management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, Alvotech expects these rules and regulations to substantially increase its legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time consuming and costly. The increased costs will increase Alvotech’s net loss. For example, Alvotech expects these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for it to obtain director and officer liability insurance and it may be forced to accept reduced policy limits or incur substantially higher costs to maintain the same or similar coverage. Alvotech cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs it may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for Alvotech to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on its board of directors, its board advisors or as executive officers.

Alvotech’s management has limited experience in operating a public company.

Alvotech’s executive officers have limited experience in the management of a publicly traded company. Alvotech’s management team may not successfully or effectively manage its transition to a public company that will be subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under federal securities laws. Their limited experience in dealing with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies could be a disadvantage in that it is likely that an increasing amount of their time may be devoted to these activities. This in turn may result in less time being devoted to the management and growth of Alvotech. Alvotech may not have adequate personnel with the appropriate level of knowledge, experience, and training in the accounting policies, practices or internal controls over financial reporting required of public companies in the United States. The development and implementation of the standards and controls necessary for Alvotech to achieve the level of accounting standards required of a public company in the United States may require costs greater than expected. It is possible that Alvotech will be required to expand its employee base and hire additional employees to support its operations as a public company, which will increase its operating costs in future periods.

The market price and trading volume of our Ordinary Shares and Warrants may be volatile and could decline significantly.

The stock markets, including Nasdaq and Nasdaq First North on which Ordinary Shares and Warrants are listed under the symbols ALVO and ALVOW, respectively, have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. The market price of Ordinary Shares and Warrants may be volatile and could decline significantly. In addition, the trading volume in Ordinary Shares and Warrants may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. Additionally, any substantial amount of trading or sales in Ordinary Shares could make it difficult for Alvotech to raise capital through the issuance of debt or equity securities in the future. Generally, securities of biopharmaceutical companies tend to be volatile and experience significant price and volume fluctuations. Alvotech cannot assure you that the market price of the Ordinary Shares and Warrants will not fluctuate widely or decline significantly in the future in response to a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

65

In the past, securities class-action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in the market price of their shares. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and divert Alvotech’s management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on Alvotech.

The dual listing of Ordinary Shares may adversely affect the liquidity and value of those ordinary shares.

Our Ordinary Shares are listed on both the Nasdaq and Nasdaq First North. The trading of the Ordinary Shares in these markets takes place in different currencies (U.S. dollars on Nasdaq and Icelandic Krona on Nasdaq First North), at different times (resulting from different time zones, different trading days and different public holidays in the United States and Iceland) and with different settlement mechanics. The trading prices of Ordinary Shares on these two markets may differ due to these and other factors. Any decrease in the price of Ordinary Shares on Nasdaq First North could cause a decrease in the trading price of the ordinary shares on Nasdaq and vice versa. Investors could seek to sell or buy Ordinary Shares to take advantage of any price differences between the markets through a practice referred to as arbitrage. Any arbitrage activity could create unexpected volatility in both the trading prices on one exchange and the ordinary shares available for trading on the other exchange. Further, the dual listing of Ordinary Shares may reduce the liquidity of these securities in one or both markets and may adversely affect the development of an active trading market for Ordinary Shares in the United States.

The listing of Ordinary Shares on Nasdaq First North may result in increased uncertainty for investors as well as additional compliance risk for Alvotech’s management, all of which could have a material effect on Alvotech’s business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our ordinary shares are listed on both the Nasdaq and Nasdaq First North. Nasdaq First North is an alternative marketplace operated by Nasdaq First North, the Icelandic stock exchange. It does not have the same legal status as a regulated market such as Nasdaq in the United States. Issuers on Nasdaq First North are subject to the rules of Nasdaq First North, but not the same legal requirements which otherwise apply to issuers of securities listed on a regulated market. For example, certain restrictions on take-over bids and changes in the ownership of major holdings do not apply to Alvotech’s shares listed on Nasdaq First North. Any investment in a company trading on Nasdaq First North involves more risk than an investment in a company trading on a regulated market.

As a dual-listed Luxembourg company listed on Nasdaq First North and Nasdaq, Alvotech is subject to reporting requirements and certain other applicable requirements under Luxembourg law, U.S. law and Icelandic law, including, but not limited to, the Market Abuse Regulation. Adherence to the requirements of these rules and regulations may increase Alvotech’s legal, accounting and financial compliance costs, make certain activities more difficult, time consuming and costly, place additional strain on resources and divert management’s attention away from other business matters.

66

In addition, the applicable legal requirements or the interpretation of such requirements by regulators and courts in each of these jurisdictions may differ or conflict which could expose Alvotech to additional costs, sanctions and/or fines. Any of these factors could have a material effect on Alvotech’s business, results of operations and financial condition.

We expect to issue additional Ordinary Shares, including under our management incentive plan. Any such issuances would dilute the interest of our shareholders and likely present other risks.

We expect to issue a substantial number of Ordinary Shares, including under the 2022 management incentive plan.

Ordinary Shares reserved for future issuance under our management incentive plan will become eligible for sale in the public market once those shares are issued, subject to provisions relating to various vesting agreements, lock-up agreements and, in some cases, limitations on volume and manner of sale applicable to affiliates under Rule 144, as applicable. The aggregate number of Ordinary Shares initially reserved for future issuance under 2022 equity incentive plan (the “2022 Plan”) is 16,802,386 shares. In August 2022, we filed a registration statement on Form S-8 under the Securities Act to register Ordinary Shares or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for Ordinary Shares pursuant to the 2022 equity incentive plan, and we may file additional registration statements on Form S-8 in the future.

Accordingly, shares registered under such registration statements may be immediately available for sale in the open market.

Any such issuances of additional Ordinary Shares or securities convertible into Ordinary Shares:

Our Warrants are exercisable for Ordinary Shares, the exercise of which would increase the number of shares eligible for future resale in the public market and result in dilution to our shareholders.

As a result of the Business Combination being consummated, outstanding warrants to purchase an aggregate of 10,916,647 Ordinary Shares became exercisable in accordance with the terms of the Warrant Agreement. These warrants became exercisable on July 15, 2022. The exercise price of these warrants is $11.50 per share, or approximately $125.5 million, assuming none of the warrants are exercised through “cashless” exercise. To the extent such warrants are exercised, additional ordinary shares will be issued, which will result in dilution to the holders of Ordinary Shares and increase the number of shares eligible for resale in the public market. We believe the likelihood that warrant holders will exercise their warrants, and therefore the amount of cash proceeds that we would receive, is dependent upon the trading price of our ordinary shares. If the trading price for our ordinary shares is less than $11.50 per share, we believe holders of our Public Warrants and Private Placement Warrants will be unlikely to exercise their warrants. On September 1, 2022, the last reported sales price of our ordinary shares was $7.71 per share and the last reported sales price of our Public Warrants was $0.75 per warrant. Sales of substantial numbers of such shares in the public market or the fact that such warrants may be exercised could adversely affect the market price of ordinary shares. However, there is no guarantee that the Public Warrants will ever be in the money prior to their expiration, and as such, the warrants may expire worthless. See “—The warrants may never be in the money, and they may expire worthless and the terms of the Public Warrants may be amended in a manner adverse to a holder if holders of at least 50% of the then outstanding Public Warrants approve of such amendment.”

67

The Warrants may never be in the money, and they may expire worthless and the terms of the Public Warrants may be amended in a manner adverse to a holder if holders of at least 50% of the then outstanding Public Warrants approve of such amendment.

The exercise price for our Warrants is $11.50 per Ordinary Share. We believe the likelihood that warrant holders will exercise their Public Warrants and Private Placement Warrants, and therefore the amount of cash proceeds that we would receive, is dependent upon the trading price of our Ordinary Shares. If the trading price for our Ordinary Shares is less than $11.50 per share, we believe warrant holders will be unlikely to exercise their Warrants. There is no guarantee that the Warrants will be in the money following the time they become exercisable and prior to their expiration, and as such, the Warrants may expire worthless.

The Warrants were issued in registered form under a warrant agreement between Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as warrant agent, and OACB. The warrant agreement provides that the terms of the warrants may be amended without the consent of any holder to cure any ambiguity, correct any defective provision or correct any mistake, amend the definition of “Ordinary Cash Dividend” or add or change any provisions with respect to matters or questions arising under the warrant as the parties may deem necessary or desirable and that the parties deem shall not adversely affect the rights of the warrant holders, but requires the approval by the holders of at least 50% of the then-outstanding Public Warrants to make any change that adversely affects the interests of the registered holders of Public Warrants. Accordingly, we may amend the terms of the Public Warrants in a manner adverse to a holder if holders of at least 50% of the then-outstanding Public Warrants approve of such amendment and, solely with respect to any amendment to the terms of the Private Placement Warrants or any provision of the warrant agreement with respect to the private placement warrants, 50% of the number of the then outstanding Private Placement Warrants. Although our ability to amend the terms of the Public Warrants with the consent of at least 50% of the then-outstanding Public Warrants is unlimited, examples of such amendments could be amendments to, among other things, increase the exercise price of the warrants, convert the warrants into cash, shorten the exercise period or decrease the number of Ordinary Shares purchasable upon exercise of a warrant.

Alvotech may redeem the Public Warrants prior to their exercise at a time that is disadvantageous to the holder, thereby making such warrants worthless.

Alvotech may redeem the Public Warrants prior to their exercise at a time that is disadvantageous to the holder, thereby making such warrants worthless. Alvotech will have the ability to redeem outstanding Public Warrants at any time after they become exercisable and prior to their expiration, at a price of $0.01 per warrant, provided that the closing price of the Ordinary Shares equals or exceeds $18.00 per share (as adjusted for share subdivisions, share capitalizations, reorganizations, recapitalizations and the like) for any 20 trading days within a 30 trading day period ending on the third trading day prior to the date on which a notice of redemption is sent to the warrantholders. Alvotech will not redeem the warrants as described above unless a registration statement under the Securities Act covering the Ordinary Shares issuable upon exercise of such warrants is effective and a current prospectus relating to those Ordinary Shares is available throughout the 30-day redemption period. If and when the Public Warrants become redeemable by Alvotech, it may exercise its redemption right even if it is unable to register or qualify the underlying securities for sale under all applicable state securities laws. Redemption of the outstanding Public Warrants could force holders (i) to exercise the Public Warrants and pay the exercise price therefor at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so, (ii) to sell the Public Warrants at the then-current market price when holders might otherwise wish to hold the Public Warrants, or (iii) to accept the nominal redemption price which, at the time the outstanding Public Warrants are called for redemption, is likely to be substantially less than the market value of the Public Warrants.

In addition, Alvotech will have the ability to redeem the outstanding Public Warrants at any time after they become exercisable and prior to their expiration, at a price of $0.10 per warrant if, among other things, the closing price of the Ordinary Shares equals or exceeds $10.00 per share (as adjusted for share sub-divisions, share dividends, rights issuances, subdivisions, reorganizations, recapitalizations and the like) on the trading day prior to the date on which a notice of redemption is sent to the warrant holders. Recent trading prices for the

68

Ordinary Shares have not exceeded the $10.00 per share threshold at which the Public Warrants would become redeemable. In such a case, the holders will be able to exercise their Public Warrants prior to redemption for a number of Ordinary Shares determined based on the redemption date and the fair market value of the Ordinary Shares.

The value received upon exercise of the Public Warrants (1) may be less than the value the holders would have received if they had exercised their Public Warrants at a later time when the underlying share price is higher and (2) may not compensate the holders for the value of the Public Warrants.

Risks Related to this Offering

It is not possible to predict the actual number of shares we will sell under the SEPA to Yorkville or the actual gross proceeds resulting from those sales. Further, we may not have access to the full amount available under the SEPA with Yorkville.

On April 18, 2022, we entered into the SEPA with Yorkville, pursuant to which Yorkville has committed to purchase up to $150,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares, subject to certain limitations and conditions set forth in the SEPA. The Ordinary Shares that may be issued under the SPEA may be sold by us to Yorkville at our discretion from time to time.

We generally have the right to control the timing and amount of any sales of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville under the SEPA. Sales of our Ordinary Shares, if any, to Yorkville under the SEPA will depend upon market conditions and other factors to be determined by us. We may ultimately decide to sell to Yorkville all, some or none of the Ordinary Shares that may be available for us to sell to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA.

Because the purchase price per share to be paid by Yorkville for the Ordinary Shares that we may elect to sell to Yorkville under the SEPA, if any, will fluctuate based on the market prices of our Ordinary Shares prior to each Advance made pursuant to the SEPA, if any, it is not possible for us to predict, as of the date of this prospectus and prior to any such sales, the number of Ordinary Shares that we will sell to Yorkville under the SEPA, the purchase price per share that Yorkville will pay for shares purchased from us under the SEPA, or the aggregate gross proceeds that we will receive from those purchases by Yorkville under the SEPA, if any.

Moreover, although the SEPA provides that we may sell up to an aggregate of $150,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville, only 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares are being registered for resale under the registration statement that includes this prospectus. If we elect to sell to Yorkville all of the 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares being registered for resale under this prospectus, depending on the market price of our Ordinary Shares prior to each advance made pursuant to SEPA, the actual gross proceeds from the sale of all such shares may be substantially less than the $150,000,000 available to us under the SEPA, which could materially adversely affect our liquidity.

If it becomes necessary for us to issue and sell to Yorkville under the SEPA more than the 15,306,122 shares being registered for resale under this prospectus in order to receive aggregate gross proceeds equal to $150,000,000 under the SEPA, we must file with the SEC one or more additional registration statements to register under the Securities Act the resale by Yorkville of any such additional Ordinary Shares we wish to sell from time to time under the SEPA, which the SEC must declare effective. Any issuance and sale by us under the SEPA of Ordinary Shares in addition to the 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares being registered for resale by Yorkville under the registration statement that includes this prospectus could cause additional dilution to our shareholders.

We are not required or permitted to issue any Ordinary Shares under the SEPA if such issuance would breach our obligations under the rules or regulations of Nasdaq. In addition, Yorkville will not be required to purchase any Ordinary Shares if such sale would result in Yorkville’s beneficial ownership exceeding 9.99% of the then issued and outstanding Ordinary Shares. Our inability to access a part or all of the amount available under the SEPA, in the absence of any other financing sources, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

69

The sale and issuance of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville will cause dilution to our existing shareholders, and the sale of the Ordinary Shares acquired by Yorkville, or the perception that such sales may occur, could cause the price of our Ordinary Shares to fall.

The purchase price for the shares that we may sell to Yorkville under the SEPA will fluctuate based on the price of our Ordinary Shares. Depending on a number of factors, including market liquidity, sales of such shares may cause the trading price of our Ordinary Shares to fall. If and when we do sell shares to Yorkville, Yorkville may resell all, some, or none of those shares at its discretion, subject to the terms of the SEPA. Therefore, sales to Yorkville by us could result in substantial dilution to the interests of other holders of our Ordinary Shares. Additionally, the sale of a substantial number of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville, or the anticipation of such sales, could make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a desirable time and price. The resale of shares Ordinary Shares by Yorkville in the public market or otherwise, including sales pursuant to this prospectus, or the perception that such sales could occur, could also harm the prevailing market price of our Ordinary Shares.

In addition, we agreed to issue up to 3,660,582 Ordinary Shares to certain current and former employees as a result of the settlement of their existing share appreciation rights agreements. Pursuant to these settlement agreements, 3,510,582 Ordinary Shares will be issued June 16, 2023 and 150,000 Ordinary Shares may be issued on this date if the individual elects to receive shares in lieu of cash.

Following these issuances described above and following the expiration of lock-ups of certain other restricted shareholders and as restrictions on resale end and registration statements are available for use, the market price of our Ordinary Shares could decline if the holders of restricted or locked up shares sell them or are perceived by the market as intending to sell them. As such, sales of a substantial number of Ordinary Shares in the public market could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of Ordinary Shares.

Investors who buy Ordinary Shares at different times will likely pay different prices

Pursuant to the SEPA, we control the timing and amount of any sales of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville. If and when we elect to sell Ordinary Shares to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA, Yorkville may resell all, some or none of such shares at its discretion and at different prices, subject to the terms of the SEPA. As a result, investors who purchase shares from Yorkville in this offering at different times will likely pay different prices for those shares, and so may experience different levels of dilution and in some cases substantial dilution and different outcomes in their investment results. Investors may experience a decline in the value of the shares they purchase from Yorkville in this offering as a result of future sales made by us to Yorkville at prices lower than the prices such investors paid for their shares in this offering. In addition, if we sell a substantial number of shares to Yorkville under the SEPA, or if investors expect that we will do so, the actual sales of shares or the mere existence of our arrangement with Yorkville may make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a desirable time and price.

Our management team will have broad discretion over the use of the net proceeds from our sale of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville, if any, and you may not agree with how we use the proceeds and the proceeds may not be invested successfully.

Our management team will have broad discretion as to the use of the net proceeds from our sale of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville, if any, and we could use such proceeds for purposes other than those contemplated at the time of commencement of this offering.

Accordingly, you will be relying on the judgment of our management team with regard to the use of those net proceeds, and you will not have the opportunity, as part of your investment decision, to assess whether the proceeds are being used appropriately. It is possible that, pending their use, we may invest those net proceeds in a way that does not yield a favorable, or any, return for us. The failure of our management team to use such funds effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows.

70

Risks Related to Investment in a Luxembourg Company and Our Status as a Foreign Private Issuer

As a foreign private issuer, Alvotech is exempt from a number of U.S. securities laws and rules promulgated thereunder and is permitted to publicly disclose less information than U.S. public companies must. This may limit the information available to holders of the Ordinary Shares.

Alvotech qualifies as a “foreign private issuer,” as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations, and, consequently, Alvotech is not subject to all of the disclosure requirements applicable to public companies organized within the United States. For example, Alvotech is exempt from certain rules under the Exchange Act that regulate disclosure obligations and procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations applicable to a security registered under the Exchange Act. In addition, Alvotech’s officers and directors are exempt from the reporting and “short-swing” profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act and related rules with respect to their purchases and sales of Alvotech’s securities. For example, some of Alvotech’s key executives may sell a significant amount of Ordinary Shares and such sales are not required to be disclosed as promptly as public companies organized within the United States would have to disclose. Accordingly, once such sales are eventually disclosed, the price of Ordinary Shares may decline significantly.

Moreover, Alvotech is not required to file periodic reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. public companies. Alvotech is also not subject to Regulation FD under the Exchange Act, which prohibits Alvotech from selectively disclosing material nonpublic information to certain persons without concurrently making a widespread public disclosure of such information. Accordingly, there may be less publicly available information concerning Alvotech than there is for U.S. public companies.

As a foreign private issuer, Alvotech will file an annual report on Form 20-F within four months of the close of each fiscal year ended December 31 and furnish reports on Form 6-K relating to certain material events promptly after Alvotech publicly announces these events. However, because of the above exemptions for foreign private issuers, which Alvotech relies on, Alvotech shareholders are not afforded the same information generally available to investors holding shares in public companies that are not foreign private issuers.

As a foreign private issuer, Alvotech will also be permitted to follow home country practice in lieu of certain corporate governance rules of the Nasdaq, including those that require listed companies to have a majority of independent directors and independent director oversight of executive compensation, nomination of directors and corporate governance matters. As long as Alvotech relies on the foreign private issuer exemption, a majority of its board of directors will not be required to be independent directors and Alvotech’s compensation committee will not be required to be composed entirely of independent directors. Accordingly, holders of our securities may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of listed companies that are subject to all of the applicable corporate governance requirements.

Alvotech may lose its foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional costs and expenses. This would subject Alvotech to U.S. GAAP reporting requirements which may be difficult for it to comply with.

As a “foreign private issuer,” Alvotech is not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and related rules and regulations. Under those rules, the determination of foreign private issuer status is made annually on the last business day of an issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, and, accordingly, the next determination will be made with respect to Alvotech on June 30, 2023.

In the future, Alvotech could lose its foreign private issuer status if a majority of its ordinary shares are held by residents in the United States and it fails to meet any one of the additional “business contacts” requirements. Although Alvotech intends to follow certain practices that are consistent with U.S. regulatory provisions applicable to U.S. companies, Alvotech’s loss of foreign private issuer status would make such provisions

71

mandatory. The regulatory and compliance costs to Alvotech under U.S. securities laws if it is deemed a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher. If Alvotech is not a foreign private issuer, Alvotech will be required to file periodic reports and prospectuses on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed and extensive than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. For example, Alvotech would become subject to the Regulation FD, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information.

Alvotech also may be required to modify certain of its policies to comply with good governance practices associated with U.S. domestic issuers. Such conversion and modifications will involve additional costs. In addition, Alvotech may lose its ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq that are available to foreign private issuers. For example, Nasdaq’s corporate governance rules require listed companies to have, among other things, a majority of independent board members and independent director oversight of executive compensation, nomination of directors, and corporate governance matters. As a foreign private issuer, Alvotech is permitted to follow home country practice in lieu of the above requirements. Alvotech intends to follow Luxembourg practice with respect to quorum requirements for shareholder meetings in lieu of the requirement under Nasdaq Listing Rules that the quorum be not less than 33 1/3% of the outstanding voting shares. Under Alvotech’s articles of association, at an ordinary general meeting, there is no quorum requirement and resolutions are adopted by a simple majority of validly cast votes. In addition, under Alvotech’s articles of association, for any resolutions to be considered at an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders, the quorum shall be at least one half of our issued share capital unless otherwise mandatorily required by law. As long as Alvotech relies on the foreign private issuer exemption to certain of Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards, a majority of the directors on its board of directors are not required to be independent directors, its remuneration committee is not required to be comprised entirely of independent directors, and it will not be required to have a nominating and corporate governance committee. Also, Alvotech would be required to change its basis of accounting from IFRS to U.S. GAAP, which may be difficult and costly for it to comply with. If Alvotech loses its foreign private issuer status and fails to comply with U.S. securities laws applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, Alvotech may have to de-list from Nasdaq and could be subject to investigation by the SEC, Nasdaq and other regulators, among other materially adverse consequences.

Alvotech is organized under the laws of Luxembourg and a substantial amount of its assets are not located in the United States. It may be difficult to obtain or enforce judgments or bring original actions against Alvotech or the members of its board of directors in the United States.

Alvotech is organized under the laws of Luxembourg. In addition, a substantial amount of its assets are located in Iceland and elsewhere outside the United States.

Furthermore, some of the members of Alvotech’s board of directors and officers reside outside the United States and a substantial portion of Alvotech’s assets are located in Iceland and elsewhere outside the U.S. Investors may not be able to effect service of process within the United States upon Alvotech or these persons or enforce judgments obtained against Alvotech or these persons in U.S. courts, including judgments in actions predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws. Likewise, it also may be difficult for an investor to enforce in U.S. courts judgments obtained against Alvotech or these persons in courts located in jurisdictions outside the United States, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws. Awards of punitive damages in actions brought in the United States or elsewhere are generally not enforceable in Luxembourg.

As there is no treaty in force on the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters between the United States and Luxembourg other than arbitral awards rendered in civil and commercial matters, courts in Luxembourg will not automatically recognize and enforce a final judgment rendered by a U.S. court. A valid judgment obtained from a court of competent jurisdiction in the United States may be entered and enforced through a court of competent jurisdiction in Luxembourg, subject to the applicable enforcement

72

procedures (exequatur) as set out in the relevant provisions of the Luxembourg New Civil Procedure Code and in Luxembourg case law. Pursuant to Luxembourg case law, the granting of exequatur is subject to the following requirements:

Similarly, as Alvotech hf., a subsidiary of Alvotech, has significant assets in Iceland, investors may seek to enforce judgments obtained in the United States against Alvotech in Iceland. As there is no treaty in force on the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters between the United States and Iceland other than arbitral awards entered in civil and commercial matters, courts in Iceland will not automatically recognize and enforce a final judgment rendered by a U.S. court. Based on recent Icelandic case law, a valid judgment obtained from a court of competent jurisdiction in the United States will not be directly recognized and enforceable in Iceland. Instead, the judgment creditor would need to issue fresh legal proceedings against the judgment debtor in Iceland in which the U.S. judgment would serve as evidence, in addition to other evidence and legal arguments regarding the merits of the case, which will be adjudicated by the Icelandic courts.

If an original action is brought in Luxembourg or Iceland, without prejudice to specific conflict of law rules, Luxembourg courts or Icelandic courts may refuse to apply the designated law (i) if the choice of such foreign law was not made bona fide or (ii) if the foreign law was not pleaded and proved or (iii) if pleaded and proved, such foreign law is contrary to mandatory Luxembourg or Icelandic laws or incompatible with Luxembourg or Icelandic public policy rules. In an action brought in Luxembourg or Iceland on the basis of U.S. federal or state securities laws, Luxembourg courts or Icelandic courts may not have the requisite power to grant the remedies sought. Also, an exequatur may be refused by a Luxembourg court in respect of punitive damages.

In practice, Luxembourg courts tend not to review the merits of a foreign judgment, although there is no clear statutory prohibition of such review.

73

A contractual provision allowing the service of process against a party to a service agent could be overridden by Luxembourg or Icelandic statutory provisions allowing the valid serving of process against a party in accordance with applicable laws at the domicile of the party. Further, in the event any proceedings are brought in a Luxembourg court in respect of a monetary obligation payable in a currency other than the Euro, a Luxembourg court would have the power to give judgment as an order to pay the obligation in a currency other than the Euro. However, enforcement of the judgment against any party in Luxembourg would be available only in Euros and, for such purposes, all claims or debts would be converted into Euros. Similarly, in the event any proceedings are brought in an Icelandic court in respect of a monetary obligation payable in a currency other than the Icelandic Krona, an Icelandic court would have the power to give judgment as an order to pay the obligation in a currency other than the Icelandic Krona.

In addition, actions brought in a Luxembourg court against Alvotech, the members of its board of directors, its officers, or the experts named herein to enforce liabilities based on U.S. federal securities laws may be subject to certain restrictions. In particular, Luxembourg courts generally do not award punitive damages. Litigation in Luxembourg also is subject to rules of procedure that differ from the U.S. rules, including, with respect to the taking and admissibility of evidence, the conduct of the proceedings and the allocation of costs. Proceedings in Luxembourg would have to be conducted in the French or German language, and all documents submitted to the court would, in principle, have to be translated into French or German. For these reasons, it may be difficult for a U.S. investor to bring an original action in a Luxembourg court predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws against Alvotech, the members of its board of directors, its officers, or the experts named herein. In addition, even if a judgment against Alvotech, the non-U.S. members of its board of directors, its officers, or the experts named in this prospectus based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws is obtained, a U.S. investor may not be able to enforce it in United States or Luxembourg courts.

The directors and officers of Alvotech have entered into, or will enter into, indemnification agreements with Alvotech. Under such agreements, the directors and officers will be entitled to indemnification from Alvotech to the fullest extent permitted by Luxemburg law against liability and expenses reasonably incurred or paid by him or her in connection with any claim, action, suit, or proceeding in which he or she would be involved by virtue of his or her being or having been a director or officer and against amounts paid or incurred by him or her in the settlement thereof. Luxembourg law permits Alvotech to keep directors indemnified against any expenses, judgments, fines and amounts paid in connection with liability of a director towards Alvotech or a third-party for management errors i.e., for wrongful acts committed during the execution of the mandate (mandat) granted to the director by Alvotech, except in connection with criminal offenses, gross negligence or fraud. The rights to and obligations of indemnification among or between Alvotech and any of its current or former directors and officers are generally governed by the laws of Luxembourg and subject to the jurisdiction of the Luxembourg courts, unless such rights or obligations do not relate to or arise out of such persons’ capacities listed above. Although there is doubt as to whether U.S. courts would enforce this indemnification provision in an action brought in the United States under U.S. federal or state securities laws, this provision could make it more difficult to obtain judgments outside Luxembourg or from non-Luxembourg jurisdictions that would apply Luxembourg law against Alvotech’s assets in Luxembourg.

Luxembourg, Icelandic and European insolvency and bankruptcy laws are substantially different from U.S. insolvency and bankruptcy laws and may offer Alvotech’s shareholders less protection than they would have under U.S. insolvency and bankruptcy laws.

As a company organized under the laws of Luxembourg and with its registered office in Luxembourg, Alvotech is subject to Luxembourg insolvency and bankruptcy laws in the event any insolvency proceedings are initiated against it including, among other things, Council and European Parliament Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of May 20, 2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast). Should courts in another European country determine that the insolvency and bankruptcy laws of that country apply to Alvotech in accordance with and subject to such EEA regulations, the courts in such European country could have jurisdiction over the insolvency proceedings initiated against Alvotech.

74

Alvotech is the parent company of Alvotech hf., the main operating subsidiary of Alvotech. As a company organized under the laws of Iceland and with its registered office in Iceland, Alvotech hf. is subject to Icelandic insolvency and bankruptcy laws in the event any insolvency proceedings are initiated against it.

Insolvency and bankruptcy laws in Luxembourg, Iceland or the relevant other European country, if any, may offer Alvotech’s shareholders less protection than they would have under U.S. insolvency and bankruptcy laws and make it more difficult for them to recover the amount they could expect to recover in a liquidation under U.S. insolvency and bankruptcy laws.

The rights of its shareholders and responsibilities of its directors and officers are governed by Luxembourg or Icelandic law and differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders under other jurisdictions, including jurisdictions in the United States.

Its corporate affairs are governed by its articles of association, and by the laws governing companies incorporated in Luxembourg, including the Luxembourg Company Law. The rights of its shareholders and the responsibilities of its directors and officers under Luxembourg law differ in some respects from those of a company incorporated under other jurisdictions, including jurisdictions in the U.S. corporate laws governing Luxembourg companies may not be as extensive as those in effect in U.S. jurisdictions and the Luxembourg Company Law in respect of corporate governance matters might not be as protective of shareholders as the corporate law and court decisions interpreting the corporate law in Delaware, where the majority of U.S. public companies are incorporated. Further, under Luxembourg law there may be less publicly available information about Alvotech than would otherwise be published by or about U.S. issuers. In addition, Alvotech anticipates that all of its shareholder meetings will take place in Luxembourg. Its shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in connection with actions taken by its directors and officers or its principal shareholders than they would as shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction in the United States.

Risks Related to Taxation

If we are treated as a “passive foreign investment company” for any taxable year, U.S. investors could be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

A non-U.S. corporation generally will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company” (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes if either (i) at least 75% of its gross income in a taxable year, including its pro rata share of the gross income of any corporation in which it is considered to own at least 25% of the shares by value, is passive income or (ii) at least 50% of its assets in a taxable year (ordinarily determined based on fair market value and averaged quarterly over the year), including its pro rata share of the assets of any corporation in which it is considered to own at least 25% of the shares by value, are held for the production of, or produce, passive income. Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, rents and royalties (other than rents or royalties derived from the active conduct of a trade or business), and gains from the disposition of passive assets.

Based on the expected operations, and the composition of income and assets, of us and our subsidiaries, we do not expect to be treated as a PFIC for our current taxable year. However, the determination of whether a non-U.S. corporation is a PFIC is a fact-intensive determination made on an annual basis and the applicable law is subject to varying interpretation. As a result, our actual PFIC status for any taxable year will not be determinable until after the end of such year. Therefore, there can be no assurance with respect to our status as a PFIC for the current or any future taxable year, and our U.S. counsel expresses no opinion with respect to our PFIC status for the current or any future taxable year.

If we are treated as a PFIC, U.S. investors may be subject to certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences, including additional reporting requirements. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules” for a more detailed discussion of the PFIC rules. U.S. investors should consult their tax advisors regarding the application of the PFIC rules in their particular circumstances.

75

If we or any of our subsidiaries is treated as a “controlled foreign corporation,” certain U.S. investors could be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

Generally, under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), if a U.S. investor owns or is treated as owning, directly, indirectly, or constructively, 10% or more of the total value or total combing voting power of our stock, the U.S. investor may be treated as a “United States shareholder” with respect to each controlled foreign corporation (“CFC”) in our corporate structure, if any. A non-U.S. corporation generally will be a CFC if United States shareholders own, directly, indirectly, or constructively, 10% or more of the total value or total combined voting power of the stock of such corporation. Because our corporate structure includes a U.S. corporate subsidiary, our non-U.S. corporate subsidiaries, including any non-U.S. corporate subsidiaries that may be formed or acquired in the future, will be treated as CFCs, regardless of whether we are treated as a CFC. A United States shareholder of a CFC may be required to annually report and include in its U.S. taxable income its pro rata share of the CFC’s “Subpart F income”, “global intangible low-taxed income,” and investments of earnings in U.S. property, regardless of whether the CFC makes any distributions to its shareholders. Furthermore, an individual United States shareholder with respect to a CFC generally will not be allowed certain tax deductions and foreign tax credits that are allowed to a corporate United States shareholder. Failure to comply with CFC reporting obligations may also subject a United States shareholder to significant penalties. There can be no assurance that the Company will provide to any United States shareholder information that may be necessary for the United States shareholder to comply with its CFC reporting and tax paying obligations. U.S. investors should consult their tax advisors regarding the application of the CFC rules in their particular circumstances.

Changes in tax laws and unanticipated tax liabilities could adversely affect Alvotech.

Alvotech is subject to taxes in Luxembourg and numerous foreign jurisdictions. Alvotech hf., Alvotech’s operating subsidiary, is subject to taxes in Iceland and other foreign jurisdictions. Alvotech’s tax liabilities could be adversely affected in the future by a number of factors, including changes in the mix of earnings in countries with differing statutory tax rates, changes in the valuation of deferred tax assets and liabilities, changes in tax laws and the outcome of tax audits in various jurisdictions around the world. Many of the countries in which Alvotech and its subsidiaries do business have or are expected to adopt changes to tax laws as a result of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting final proposals from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and specific country anti-avoidance initiatives. Such tax law changes increase uncertainty and may adversely affect Alvotech’s tax provision. Alvotech regularly assesses all of these matters to determine the adequacy of its tax provision, which is subject to significant judgment.

Alvotech may not be able to utilize a significant portion of its Iceland NOL carryforwards.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech had Iceland net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards. There can be no certainty that Alvotech will generate revenue from sales of products outside Canada or select European countries in the foreseeable future, if ever, and Alvotech may never achieve profitability. These NOL carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. In the absence of profitability, any increased liabilities could adversely affect its business, results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

General Risk Factors

Future issuances of debt securities and equity securities may adversely affect us, including the market price of our Ordinary Shares and may be dilutive to existing shareholders.

We expect that significant additional capital will be needed in the future to continue our planned research, development and business operations. In the future, we may incur debt or issue equity ranking senior to our ordinary shares. Those securities will generally have priority upon liquidation. Such securities also may be governed by an indenture or other instrument containing covenants restricting our operating flexibility.

76

Additionally, any convertible or exchangeable securities that we issue in the future may have rights, preferences and privileges more favorable than those of Ordinary Shares. Because our decision to issue debt or equity in the future will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing, nature or success of our future capital raising efforts. As a result, future capital raising efforts may reduce the market price of Ordinary Shares and be dilutive to existing shareholders. In addition, our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities could be significantly impacted by the resale of Ordinary Shares by Yorkville pursuant to this prospectus or by selling shareholders pursuant to one or more other prospectuses, which could result in a significant decline in the trading price of Ordinary Shares and potentially hinder our ability to raise capital at terms that are acceptable to us or at all.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about Alvotech, its business, or its market, or if they change their recommendations regarding Ordinary Shares adversely, then the price and trading volume of Ordinary Shares could decline.

The trading market for Ordinary Shares is influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about Alvotech, its business, its market, or its competitors. If any of the analysts who may cover Alvotech change their recommendation regarding Ordinary Shares adversely, cease to provide coverage or provide more favorable relative recommendations about Alvotech’s competitors, the price of Ordinary Shares would likely decline. If any analyst who may cover OACB were to cease coverage of Alvotech or fail to regularly publish reports on it, Alvotech could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause Ordinary Share price or trading volume to decline.

The JOBS Act permits “emerging growth companies” like Alvotech to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, which may make our Ordinary Shares less attractive to investors.

Alvotech currently qualifies as an “emerging growth company” as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the Securities Act, as modified by the Jumpstart Its Business Startups Act of 2012, which is referred to as the “JOBS Act.” As such, Alvotech takes advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies for as long as it continues to be an emerging growth company, including the exemption from the auditor attestation requirements with respect to internal control over financial reporting under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. As a result, Alvotech shareholders may not have access to certain information they deem important.

Alvotech cannot predict if investors will find Ordinary Shares less attractive because it relies on these exemptions. If some investors find Ordinary Shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market and share price for Ordinary Shares may be more volatile. Alvotech may incur increased legal, accounting and compliance costs associated with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

77

COMMITTED EQUITY FINANCING

On April 18, 2022, we entered into the Standby Equity Purchase Agreement (“SEPA”) with Yorkville pursuant to which we have the right to sell to Yorkville up to $150,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares, subject to certain limitations and conditions set forth in the SEPA, from time to time during the term of the SEPA. Sales of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville under the SEPA, and the timing of any such sales, are at our option, and we are under no obligation to sell any securities to Yorkville under the SEPA. In accordance with our obligations under the SEPA, we have filed the registration statement that includes this prospectus with the SEC to register under the Securities Act the resale by Yorkville of up to 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares that we may elect, in our sole discretion, to issue and sell to Yorkville, under the SEPA.

We do not have the right to commence any sales of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville under the SEPA until the date on which all of the conditions to Yorkville’s purchase obligation set forth in the SEPA have been satisfied, including that the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part be declared effective by the SEC and the final form of this prospectus is filed with the SEC. Upon the satisfaction of the conditions to Yorkville’s purchase obligation set forth in the SEPA, including that the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part be declared effective by the SEC and the final form of this prospectus is filed with the SEC, we will have the right, but not the obligation, from time to time at our discretion until the first day of the month following the 36-month period after the date of the SEPA, to direct Yorkville to purchase a specified amount of Ordinary Shares (each such sale, an “Advance”) by delivering written notice to Yorkville (each, an “Advance Notice”). While there is no mandatory minimum amount for any Advance, it may not exceed the lesser of (i) $20,000,000 in respect of an Advance Notice in which the Company elects a one-day pricing period or (ii) $60 million in respect of an Advance Notice in which the Company elects a three-day pricing period.

The per share subscription price Yorkville will pay for the Ordinary Shares will be 98.0% of the market price during a one- or three-day pricing period elected by Alvotech. The “Market Price” is defined in the SEPA as the lowest daily VWAP (as defined below) during the one trading day, in the case of a one-day pricing period, or of the three consecutive trading days, in the case of a three-day pricing period, commencing on the trading day on which Alvotech delivers an Advance Notice to Yorkville. “VWAP” means, for any trading day, the daily volume weighted average price of the Ordinary Shares for such date on NASDAQ as reported by Bloomberg L.P. during regular trading hours. There is no upper limit on the subscription price per share that Yorkville could be obligated to pay for the Ordinary Shares.

We will control the timing and amount of any sales of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville. Actual sales of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville under the SEPA will depend on a variety of factors to be determined by us from time to time, which may include, among other things, market conditions, the trading price of our Ordinary Shares and determinations by us as to the appropriate sources of funding for our business and its operations.

Yorkville will not be obligated to subscribe to any Ordinary Shares under the SEPA which, when aggregated with all other Ordinary Shares then beneficially owned by Yorkville and its affiliates (as calculated pursuant to Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 13d-3 promulgated thereunder), would result in the beneficial ownership by Yorkville and its affiliates to exceed 9.99% of the outstanding voting power or number of Ordinary Shares (the “Beneficial Ownership Limitation”).

The net proceeds under the SEPA to us will depend on the frequency and prices at which we sell our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville. We expect that any proceeds received by us from such sales to Yorkville will be used for working capital and general corporate purposes.

Yorkville has agreed that it and its affiliates will not engage in any short sales of the Ordinary Shares nor enter into any transaction that establishes a net short position in the Ordinary Shares during the term of the SEPA.

78

The SEPA will automatically terminate on the earliest to occur of (i) the first day of the month next following the 36-month anniversary of the date of the SEPA or (ii) the date on which Yorkville shall have made payment of Advances pursuant to the SEPA for Ordinary Shares equal to $150,000,000. We have the right to terminate the SEPA at no cost or penalty upon five (5) trading days’ prior written notice to Yorkville, provided that there are no outstanding Advance Notices for which Ordinary Shares need to be issued and Alvotech has paid all amounts owed to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA. We and Yorkville may also agree to terminate the SEPA by mutual written consent. Neither we nor Yorkville may assign or transfer our respective rights and obligations under the SEPA, and no provision of the SEPA may be modified or waived by us or Yorkville other than by an instrument in writing signed by both parties.

As consideration for Yorkville’s commitment to purchase Ordinary Shares at our direction upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the SEPA, we paid YA Global II SPV, LLC, a subsidiary of Yorkville, (i) a structuring fee in the amount of $10,000 and (ii) a commitment fee in the amount of $750,000.

The SEPA contains customary representations, warranties, conditions and indemnification obligations of the parties. The representations, warranties and covenants contained in such agreements were made only for purposes of such agreements and as of specific dates, were solely for the benefit of the parties to such agreements and may be subject to limitations agreed upon by the contracting parties.

We do not know what the subscription price for our Ordinary Shares will be and therefore cannot be certain as to the number of shares we might issue to Yorkville under the SEPA. As of July 14, 2022, there were 248,649,505 Ordinary Shares outstanding (excluding the 27,072,167 Ordinary Shares issued on July 4, 2022 and held in treasury by Alvotech’s subsidiary, Alvotech Manco ehf.). Although the SEPA provides that we may sell up to $150,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville, only 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares are being registered for resale under the registration statement that includes this prospectus.

If and when we elect to issue and sell shares to Yorkville, we may need to register for resale under the Securities Act additional Ordinary Shares in order to receive aggregate gross proceeds equal to the $150,000,000 available to us under the SEPA, depending on market prices for our Ordinary Shares. If all of the 15,306,122 shares offered by Yorkville for resale under the registration statement that includes this prospectus were issued and outstanding as of the date hereof, such shares would represent approximately 5.8% of the total number of Ordinary Shares outstanding as of July 14, 2022. If we elect to issue and sell more than the 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares offered under this prospectus to Yorkville, we must first register for resale under the Securities Act any such additional shares, which could cause additional dilution to our shareholders. The number of shares ultimately offered for resale by Yorkville is dependent upon the number of Ordinary Shares we may elect to sell to Yorkville under the SEPA.

There are substantial risks to our shareholders as a result of the sale and issuance of Ordinary Shares to Yorkville under the SEPA. These risks include the potential for substantial dilution and significant declines in our share price. See the section entitled “Risk Factors.” Issuances of our Ordinary Shares in this offering will not affect the rights or privileges of our existing shareholders, except that the economic and voting interests of each of our existing shareholders will be diluted as a result of any such issuance. Although the number of Ordinary Shares that our existing shareholders own will not decrease as a result of sales, if any, under the SEPA, the shares owned by our existing shareholders will represent a smaller percentage of our total outstanding shares after any such issuance to Yorkville.

The below summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the SEPA, a copy of which is filed as exhibit 10.34.

79

Advances of Ordinary Shares Under the SEPA

Advances

We have the right, but not the obligation, from time to time at our discretion, until the first day of the month following the 36-month period after the date of the SEPA, and up to an aggregate subscription amount of $150,000,000, to direct Yorkville to purchase up to a specified maximum amount of Ordinary Shares as set forth in the SEPA (each, an “Advance”) by delivering written notice to Yorkville (each, an “Advance Notice”) on any trading day (each, an “Advance Notice Date”), so long as the amount under any single Advance does not exceed (i) $20 million in respect of an Advance Notice in which we elect a one-day pricing period, and (ii) $60 million in respect of an Advance Notice in which we elect a three-day pricing period. There are no mandatory minimum Advances and no non-usage fees for not utilizing the SEPA facility.

Conditions to Each Advance

Yorkville’s obligation to accept Advance Notices that are timely delivered by us under the SEPA and to purchase Ordinary Shares in Advances under the SEPA, is subject to the satisfaction, at the applicable Advance Notice Date, of certain conditions, including:

80

Termination of the SEPA

Unless earlier terminated as provided in the SEPA, the SEPA will terminate automatically on the earliest to occur of:

We also have the right to terminate the SEPA at any time, at no cost or penalty, upon five (5) trading days’ prior written notice to Yorkville, provided that there are no outstanding Advance Notices under which we are yet to issue Ordinary Shares.

No Short-Selling by Yorkville

Yorkville has agreed that it and its affiliates will not engage in any short sales during the term of the SEPA and will not enter into any transaction that establishes a net short position with respect to the Ordinary Shares. The SEPA stipulates that Yorkville may sell our Ordinary Shares to be issued pursuant to an Advance Notice, following receipt of the Advance Notice, but prior to receiving such shares and may sell other Ordinary Shares acquired pursuant to the SEPA that Yorkville has continuously held from a prior date of acquisition.

Effect of Sales of our Ordinary Shares under the SEPA on our Shareholders

All Ordinary Shares that may be issued or sold by us to Yorkville under the SEPA that are being registered under the Securities Act for resale by Yorkville in this offering are expected to be freely tradable. The Ordinary Shares being registered for resale in this offering may be issued and sold by us to Yorkville from time to time at our discretion over the term of the SEPA. The resale by Yorkville of a significant amount of shares registered for resale in this offering at any given time, or the perception that these sales may occur, could cause the market price of our Ordinary Shares to decline and to be highly volatile. Sales of our Ordinary Shares, if any, to Yorkville under the SEPA will depend upon market conditions and other factors to be determined by us. We may ultimately decide to sell to Yorkville all, some or none of the Ordinary Shares that may be available for us to sell to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA.

If and when we do elect to sell Ordinary Shares to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA, Yorkville may resell all, some or none of such shares in its discretion and at different prices subject to the terms of the SEPA. As a result, investors who purchase shares from Yorkville in this offering at different times will likely pay different prices for those shares, and so may experience different levels of dilution and in some cases substantial dilution and different outcomes in their investment results. Investors may experience a decline in the value of the shares they purchase from Yorkville in this offering as a result of future sales made by us to Yorkville at prices lower than the prices such investors paid for their shares in this offering. In addition, if we sell a substantial number of shares to Yorkville under the SEPA, or if investors expect that we will do so, the actual sales of shares or the mere existence of our arrangement with Yorkville may make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a desirable time and price.

Because the purchase price per share to be paid by Yorkville for the Ordinary Shares that we may elect to sell to Yorkville under the SEPA, if any, will fluctuate based on the market prices of our Ordinary Shares during the applicable Pricing Period (as defined in the SEPA), as of the date of this prospectus we cannot reliably predict the number of Ordinary Shares that we will sell to Yorkville under the SEPA, the actual purchase price

81

per share to be paid by Yorkville for those shares, or the actual gross proceeds to be raised by us from those sales, if any. As of July 14, 2022, there were 248,649,505 Ordinary Shares outstanding (excluding the 27,072,167 Ordinary Shares issued on July 4, 2022 and held in treasury by Alvotech’s subsidiary, Alvotech Manco ehf.). If all of the 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares offered for resale by Yorkville under the registration statement that includes this prospectus were issued and outstanding as of July 14, 2022, such shares would represent approximately 5.8% of the total number of Ordinary Shares outstanding.

Although the SEPA provides that we may, in our discretion, from time to time after the date of this prospectus and during the term of the SEPA, direct Yorkville to purchase Ordinary Shares from us in one or more Advances under the SEPA, for a maximum aggregate purchase price of up to $150,000,000, only 15,306,122 Ordinary Shares are being registered for resale under the registration statement that includes this prospectus. Assuming all of such 15,306,122 shares were sold to Yorkville at the 2% discount to the per share price of $7.16 (which represents the volume weighted average price of the Ordinary Shares on Nasdaq on July 20, 2022), such number of shares would be insufficient to enable us to receive aggregate gross proceeds from the sale of such shares to Yorkville equal to Yorkville’s $150,000,000 total aggregate purchase commitment under the SEPA. While the market price of our Ordinary Shares may fluctuate from time to time after the date of this prospectus and, as a result, the actual purchase price to be paid by Yorkville under the SEPA for Ordinary Shares, if any, may also fluctuate, in order for us to receive the full amount of Yorkville’s commitment under the SEPA, it is possible that we may need to issue and sell more than the number of shares being registered for resale under the registration statement that includes this prospectus.

The issuance, if any, of our Ordinary Shares to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA will not affect the rights or privileges of our existing shareholders, except that the economic and voting interests of each of our existing shareholders would be diluted. Although the number of Ordinary Shares that our existing shareholders own would not decrease as a result of sales, if any, under the SEPA, the Ordinary Shares owned by our existing shareholders would represent a smaller percentage of our total outstanding Ordinary Shares after any such issuance.

82

USE OF PROCEEDS

All of the Ordinary Shares offered by Yorkville pursuant to this prospectus will be sold by Yorkville for its own account. We will not receive any of the direct proceeds from these sales. However, we may receive up to $150,000,000 aggregate gross proceeds from any sales we make to Yorkville pursuant to the SEPA. The net proceeds from sales, if any, under the SEPA, will depend on the frequency and prices at which we sell Ordinary Shares to Yorkville after the date of this prospectus. See the section titled “Plan of Distribution” elsewhere in this prospectus for more information.

We expect to use any proceeds that we receive under the SEPA for working capital and general corporate purposes. As of the date of this prospectus, we cannot specify with certainty all of the particular uses, and the respective amounts we may allocate to those uses, for any net proceeds we receive. Accordingly, we will retain broad discretion over the use of these proceeds. Pending our use of the net proceeds as described above, we intend to invest the net proceeds pursuant to the SEPA in interest-bearing, investment-grade instruments.

DIVIDEND POLICY

From the annual net profits of Alvotech, at least 5% shall each year be allocated to the reserve required by applicable laws (the “Legal Reserve”). That allocation to the Legal Reserve will cease to be required as soon and as long as the Legal Reserve amounts to 10% of the amount of the share capital of Alvotech. The legal reserve is not available for distribution.

We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to fund the development and expansion of our business and product candidates.

In accordance with the Luxembourg law of August 10, 1915, on commercial companies, as amended (“Luxembourg Company Law”), the general meeting of shareholders, by a simple majority vote and based on the recommendation of our board of directors, shall resolve how the remainder of the annual net profits, after allocation to the Legal Reserve, will be disposed of by allocating the whole or part of the remainder to a reserve or to a provision, by carrying it forward to the next following financial year or by distributing it, together with carried forward profits, distributable reserves or share premium to the shareholders, each Ordinary Share entitling to the same proportion in such distributions.

The board of directors may resolve that Alvotech pays out an interim dividend to the shareholders, subject to the conditions of article 461-3 of the Luxembourg Company Law and Alvotech’s articles of association. The board of directors shall set the amount and the date of payment of the interim dividend.

Any share premium, assimilated premium or other distributable reserve may be freely distributed to the shareholders subject to the provisions of the Luxembourg Company Law and Alvotech’s articles of association.

Distributions may be lawfully declared and paid only if our net profits and/or distributable reserves are sufficient under Luxembourg Company Law.

Thus, in case of a dividend payment, each shareholder is entitled to receive a dividend right pro rata according to his or her respective shareholding. The dividend entitlement lapses upon the expiration of a five-year prescription period from the date of the dividend distribution. The unclaimed dividends return to Alvotech’s accounts. However, Alvotech does not anticipate paying cash dividends on our Ordinary shares in the foreseeable future.

A Luxembourg withholding tax of 15% is generally due on dividends and similar distributions made by us to our shareholders, unless a reduced treaty rate or the participation exemption applies. No withholding tax is levied on capital gains and liquidation proceeds.

83

There is no law, governmental decree or regulation in Luxembourg that would affect the remittance of dividends or other distributions by us to non-resident holders of our Ordinary Shares, other than withholding tax requirements. In certain limited circumstances, the implementation and administration of international financial sanctions may affect the remittance of dividends or other distributions. There are no specified procedures for non-resident holders to claim dividends or other distributions.

We are a holding company and have no material assets other than our ownership of shares in our subsidiaries. To the extent we pay a dividend or other distribution on our Ordinary Shares in the future, we will generally cause our operating subsidiaries to make distributions to us in an amount sufficient to cover any such dividends or distributions. Our subsidiaries’ ability to make distributions to us is subject to their capacity to generate sufficient earnings and cash flow, and may also be affected by statutory accounting and tax rules.

84

CAPITALIZATION

The following table sets out our consolidated capitalization and indebtedness as of June 30, 2022. The information below should be read together with the information under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Prior to the Closing, 24,023,495 of OACB Class A Ordinary Shares were redeemed by the holders for an aggregate redemption payment of approximately $240,234,950.

85

BUSINESS

Our Mission

Our mission and vision is to enhance sustainability of the global healthcare system and improve patient access by providing lower cost alternatives (biosimilars) to high priced biologic medicines. To realize this vision, we intend to become a world leader in the biosimilars market.

Biologic medicines produced from living cells have revolutionized and continue to transform the treatment of conditions from autoimmune diseases to cancer. The high cost of many brand-name reference products put them beyond the reach of millions of patients and threaten the sustainability of healthcare systems globally. We believe that one solution is high-quality biosimilars—which much like generic drugs provide a medically equivalent but more cost-effective alternative to reference biologic medicines—and their efficient and systematic development as the patent exclusivity of reference products expires.

Over the past nine years, we have built a distinctive integrated, scalable platform focused exclusively on developing and manufacturing biosimilars that we believe positions us to serve as a central engine for advancing this vision globally. By executing on our strategy, we aim to ensure that life-saving and life-changing treatments will be available to as many of those who need them as possible, not just to those who can afford the original branded versions. In addition to our current pipeline of eight product candidates, we believe that our platform approach, experienced team, network of global partners, and vast potential product targets will allow us to serve a social purpose that is directly aligned with creating value for shareholders.

As an enterprise, we have worked to put Alvotech into a distinctive position, ahead of what is an increasingly compelling set of industry tailwinds. We anticipated the platform opportunity in biosimilars and founded our Company nine years ago to capture that opportunity. Since then, the biologics market, the market we intend to target for the foreseeable future, has continued to expand and mature. The biosimilars market has matured rapidly in tandem, as physicians, payors, and patients become more accepting of and increasingly demand lower cost, therapeutically equivalent treatments to well-known biologics medicines. Similarly, the biosimilars regulatory framework in which we intend to navigate globally has also matured. This has created more certainty in approval pathways and opened new avenues for differentiation, including that of interchangeability for biosimilars in the U.S. market. Since our founding in 2013, we have invested nearly $1 billion and today have an advancing and expanding product portfolio built on a fully integrated infrastructure, one that is distinctive and exclusively dedicated to realizing the commercial and medical potential of biosimilars.

Company Overview

Alvotech is a highly integrated biotech company focused solely on the development and manufacture of biosimilar medicines for patients worldwide. Our purpose is to improve the health and quality of life of patients around the world by improving access to proven treatments for various diseases. Since our inception, we have built our company with key characteristics we believe will help us capture the substantial global market opportunity in biosimilars: a leadership team that has brought numerous successful biologics and biosimilars to market around the world; a purpose-built biosimilars R&D and manufacturing platform; top commercial partnerships in global markets; and a diverse, expanding pipeline addressing many of the biggest disease areas and health challenges globally. Alvotech is a company committed to constant innovation: we focus our platform, people and partnerships on finding new ways to drive access to more affordable biologic medicines.

Much as generics do for off-patent small-molecule drugs, biosimilars provide a cost-effective alternative with no clinically meaningful difference to biologic medicines whose patent exclusivity has expired. Many patient, policy, industry and regulatory organizations share Alvotech’s view that the availability of quality, affordable biosimilars is critical to the long-term sustainability of health systems and medical innovation globally. Cost savings generated by biosimilars can be used to treat more people and to sustain the cost of investment in the next generations of innovative therapies. Alvotech sees both the discovery of novel therapies, which is the focus

86

of many biopharmaceutical companies, and innovating access to medicines, which is Alvotech’s core focus, as critical to the purpose of the pharmaceutical industry as a whole—to deliver breakthrough, life-changing medicines to as many patients as possible, whoever and wherever they are.

The market for biologic medicines has grown rapidly in the past fifteen years. In the five years from 2006 to 2010, 23 novel biologic products were approved by the FDA; in the five years from 2016 to 2020, there were 60 novel biologic approvals in the U.S. market alone and from 2020 to 2026, the global biologics market is forecasted to more than double in size, from approximately $288 billion to approximately $582 billion. Alvotech believes it is well-positioned to succeed in this rapidly growing market. It intends to apply the infrastructure it has systemically developed to navigate the inherent complexity of developing biosimilars to select target originator biologics that will lose patent protection in the years ahead. In so doing, Alvotech aims to enable more patients to afford the medicines they need and to reduce the cost of biologic medicines to healthcare system globally.

Alvotech aims to achieve its mission by becoming a leading supplier of biosimilars globally. To do this, Alvotech has built a distinctive and comprehensive platform for developing and manufacturing biosimilars at scale. Alvotech’s platform is designed to enable it to execute the product development and scale-up process in-house: from identifying therapeutic areas and target product candidates with significant unmet patient and market need through R&D, leveraging gold-standard host cell lines, cell-culture processes and Good Manufacturing Practice (“GMP”) manufacturing, clinical testing, and regulatory approvals. In order to give its products global reach with local expertise, Alvotech has formed strategic commercialization partnerships with leading pharmaceutical companies covering global markets. Alvotech licenses its intellectual property to partners in exchange for milestone payments and royalties. Thus far, Alvotech has executed agreements with the potential for milestone payments of up to $1,075 million under these partnerships.

Developing and manufacturing biosimilars is a time-consuming, capital intensive, complex and historically uncertain undertaking. The high barrier-to-entry has given rise to a competitive landscape comprised principally of large pharmaceutical companies with biosimilar divisions and independent regional firms. Since Alvotech’s founding in 2013, it has invested approximately $1 billion in developing its highly integrated capabilities and advancing its candidates through development and towards market launch. Alvotech believes its singular focus on biosimilars, investment in its platform, and global market reach endow it with a differentiated set of strategic advantages in a dynamic and competitive marketplace. These advantages include substantial control over quality and capacity allocation; the ability to find and exploit operational and process efficiencies across R&D and manufacturing; and the agility to rapidly, flexibly and efficiently pursue new product opportunities to advance a broad portfolio of product candidates. Alvotech believes these advantages expand its opportunity set and support its goals of accelerating the development of cost-effective biosimilars that are highly similar to and with no clinically meaningful differences from its target reference products, and then getting them to the patients around the world who need them.

Alvotech currently has eight product candidates in its pipeline for serious diseases with unmet patient and market need. Product candidates in our pipeline address reference products treating autoimmune, eye, and bone disorders, as well as cancer, with combined estimated peak global sales of originator products of more than $85 billion.

In September 2020, Alvotech submitted its biologics license application for AVT02 to the FDA and in September 2021, the FDA notified Alvotech it had elected to defer the application. The FDA can defer action when no deficiencies have been identified and the application otherwise satisfies the requirements for approval, but a pre-approval inspection(s) is necessary yet cannot be completed due to

87

factors including travel restrictions. In February 2022, the FDA communicated that it had accepted Alvotech’s BLA supporting interchangeability for review. In September 2022, Alvotech announced that it had received communication from the FDA detailing its assessment of the March 2022 inspection of Alvotech’s manufacturing facility in Reykjavik, Iceland and Alvotech’s subsequent written responses to the FDA. The FDA’s complete response letter to the initial biosimilar BLA for AVT02 noted certain deficiencies related to the Reykjavik facility and stated that satisfactory resolution of the deficiencies is required before FDA may approve this first-filed BLA. Alvotech is working collaboratively with FDA to resolve these issues. Pursuant to the U.S. AbbVie Agreement, Alvotech and AbbVie settled all U.S. litigation arising out of the development of Alvotech’s adalimumab biosimilar, and the filing of the corresponding BLA with the FDA. Subject to regulatory approval from the FDA, Alvotech expects to launch AVT02 in the United States on July 1, 2023.

Alvotech has built an end-to-end platform that enables a comprehensive approach to biosimilars. In addition to products developed in-house, Alvotech’s pure-play focus allows it to identify and partner with third-parties to in-license or acquire attractive products into its R&D pipeline. By then leveraging the Alvotech platform R&D, manufacturing and global commercial network, Alvotech can be highly strategic in its approach to growth.

Our History

Alvotech hf. was founded in 2013 in Reykjavik, Iceland with the aim of creating a highly integrated platform company focused exclusively on developing and manufacturing biosimilars for the global market. Alvotech has a world class management team of proven and highly experienced pharma executives with deep expertise in biologics and biosimilars, led by a visionary founder in Robert Wessman, who serves as Alvotech’s chairman. Alvotech represents Robert’s third platform in the pharmaceutical sector. Across these three platforms, Robert has led more than 50 strategic acquisitions and partnerships, and established operations in over 60 countries around the globe.

Over the past nine years, Alvotech has invested steadily and methodically in building a fully integrated platform, enabling the company to control quality, cost and speed to market of its developed products, representing a key competitive advantage in the biosimilar business. Alvotech’s growth and development can be divided roughly into three periods:

88

To support the execution of our strategy, we have continued to bring onboard world-class investors from across the global life sciences, among others CVC Capital Partners, Temasek, Baxter Healthcare SA, YAS Holdings and Athos (the Strüngmann Family Office).

Our Market Opportunity

Background on Biologics

Biologic medicines (biologics) are complex pharmaceutical products that typically contain one or more active substances made by or derived from a biological source. Conventional medicines are typically chemically synthesized small molecules that are easily identified and characterized; in contrast, biologics are large, complex molecules that require unique characterization techniques and generally tend to be sensitive to heat and microbial contamination. The creation innovation and advancement of biologics are the result of cutting-edge research and these medicines have provided novel treatments for a variety of illnesses such as rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, psoriasis, multiple sclerosis, age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema and numerous types of cancer. Biologics are designed to have very specific effects and to interact with specific targets in the patient’s body, mainly on the outside of cells. A more targeted mechanism of action leads to a greater chance of the medicine having the desired effect against the disease and results in fewer side effects compared to traditional medicines. The effectiveness of biologics has led to an increase of investment in R&D within the pharmaceutical sector for biologic medicines. In 2020, 40% of U.S. pharmaceutical R&D spend was focused on biologics with eight out of the top 10 pharmaceutical products being biologics (as measured by global sales). Also in 2020, 10 out of the top 15 pharmaceutical products in terms of global sales were biologics.

Source: Biosimilars council “The Era of Biological Medicines”, EvaluatePharma

1. IQVIA institute report, “Biosimilars in the United States 2020 – 2024”

2. Size based on illustrative antibody size

3. Per EvaluatePharma

89

Background on Biosimilars

A biosimilar is a biological medicine that is highly similar to and has no clinically meaningful differences from an existing approved biological, or reference product. Biosimilars are approved according to the same standards of pharmaceutical quality, safety and efficacy that apply to all biological medicines and typically have the same amino acid sequence.

Biosimilars offer a lower cost alternative to their name-brand reference products, and have no clinically meaningful difference in terms of safety, purity or potency when compared to reference products. Because they are designed to be highly similar to already approved biologics, the success rate for developing biosimilars is considerably higher, and the R&D cost proportionally much lower. While the average originator biologic takes an average of 12 years to develop at a cost of more than $2.5 billion, the average biosimilar can usually be developed six to nine years and at a cost of between $100 to 200 million. Further, this is significantly different to generics, which are simpler to manufacture, can typically developed in two years or less at a cost of less than $10 million, and without needing clinical trials.

The availability of biologics and their rapidly increasing prices have forced healthcare systems and payors around the world, public and private alike, into difficult tradeoffs in the effort to balance the best quality of care, accessibility, sustainability and cost. As biosimilars provide a more affordable alternative to payors and patients, they offer the potential to improve the accessibility of many life-altering treatments to many more patients. More broadly, lower costs for existing treatments can make healthcare systems more sustainable and free up resources to pay for the next generation of innovative brand-name therapies, and the R&D infrastructure that sustains future drug discovery. In this way, we believe that biosimilars can also help to sustain the global biomedical innovation ecosystem as a whole.

While biosimilars share similarities with generics, there are significant differences, including the complexity of development and manufacturing. For traditional medications, generic products can generally be considered identical to the branded product in form and function. In the case of biologics and biosimilars, the complexity of a biologic molecule means that the biosimilar product is not identical in form to the branded product, and some variability

90

from the branded reference product is considered inherent to the process. However, there is no clinically meaningful functional difference between a biosimilar and the reference product in safety, purity or potency.

Market Growth

The global biosimilars market is large and has experienced rapid growth, which we believe represents one of the most significant growth opportunities in biotechnology. We believe the rapid growth in the biologics market is a leading indicator for the biosimilar opportunity, of which the critical facets include:

Represents patent expiry events in the U.S. and the EU markets for products with more than $1 billion in annual sales, with the exception of Blincyto.

91

The global biologics market is expected to grow at a rapid pace, nearly doubling between 2020 and 2026, from $288 billion to $582 billion.

Source: Evaluate Pharma, Frost & Sullivan

While biologics are being studied for a range of diseases that have limited effective alternative treatment options, their cost can limit access to patients. By offering a therapeutic with no clinically meaningful differences to brand-name reference biologics products at much lower cost, biosimilars offer a direct response to these dynamics and the significant cost pressures they are putting on healthcare providers, insurers and governments. At the same time, they could not only lower the cost of treating current patients but also expand access to people who previously could not afford these therapies. As a result, the biosimilars market is estimated to grow at a 17% CAGR between 2020 and 2026, from $30 billion to $79 billion, outstripping growth in the biologics market, and set to generate $100 billion in drug cost savings between 2020 and 2024 in the U.S. alone.

In addition, the concept of biosimilar interchangeability, under which pharmacists can substitute a biosimilar for a reference product without intervention by the prescribing physician, may further accelerate the growth of the biosimilars market. In the second half of 2021, the FDA approved the first two interchangeable biosimilar products. In August 2022, the FDA approved the third interchangeable biosimilar product. Alvotech intends to selectively pursue interchangeability when appropriate, including for our AVT02 and AVT05 products.

Our Strategy

Alvotech believes its differentiated strategy enables it to leverage its highly integrated platform to develop and manufacture high quality biosimilars. Alvotech is advancing multiple product candidates towards regulatory approval and has established a global network of partnerships, with the goal of expeditiously delivering its cost-effective biosimilar medicines to patients worldwide. We believe this positions Alvotech to positively impact public health and create significant commercial value streams for the company and its shareholders.

Since Alvotech was founded in 2013, approximately $1 billion has been invested to create a platform singularly focused on biosimilars and optimized for quality, speed, and flexibility. Alvotech’s business strategy is underpinned by six key pillars:

92

93

Our Platform

We believe that the nature and quality of our platform enable us to innovate and systematically develop and manufacture biosimilar medicines. We consider this ability, and that our platform can generate and capture efficiencies all along the research and development, manufacturing and sales and marketing chain, to be fundamental advantages when competing with both originator and other biosimilar companies in quality, cost and speed to market.

The challenges of biosimilars development

Making biosimilars—biologic medicines that are highly similar to and without clinically meaningful differences from their reference products in terms of safety, purity and potency—is a fundamentally complex task. It requires, among other things, highly specialized expertise and infrastructure, time, and significant capital. Success in the biosimilar space is largely determined by the ability to make biosimilars efficiently and consistently.

We believe that these same barriers to entry also create opportunities for differentiation. The capital investment, sophisticated infrastructure and scientific/ technical expertise required are principal reasons that the biosimilar divisions of large originator biopharmaceutical companies, who have access to all of these, have dominated the sector’s early years. But these biosimilars divisions within larger organizations have competing internal demands for resources, including people, R&D and manufacturing facilities. As a result, biosimilars are often viewed as a secondary business. Such internal competition makes consistent and replicable operational control and efficiencies more difficult and costly to achieve, and biosimilars also tend to receive less focus in marketing and

94

distribution. Conversely, smaller companies may not have all of the internal capabilities needed for development or the capital resources to invest in such capabilities. These constraints may require these smaller companies to outsource key parts of the R&D and manufacturing process, thereby potentially losing control over quality or the ability to innovate and control costs.

Our differentiated approach

Alvotech’s goal is to become a leading global supplier of biosimilar medicines and it intends to realize this ambition through its distinctive approach. Built around its exclusive focus on biosimilars; a comprehensive and fully-integrated platform; an agile and rapidly expanding portfolio and pipeline; and a network of leading commercial partners who can deliver its products to payors and patients with expert local knowledge in every major market.

Research & Development

Alvotech’s research and development is solely focused on the development of biosimilar medicines, which require considerable time and substantial financial investment. We intend to continue to commit significant resources in financial and human capital to development activities going forward, with the aim of offering more affordable biologic medicines, globally. We also strive to identify opportunities where a level of differentiation can be applied to the development program to enable improved commercial success.

Biosimilar medicines are highly similar to their reference products and typically have identical primary amino acid structure. They are held to the same high-quality standards as innovative biopharmaceuticals. The ultimate goal in the development of biosimilar medications is to develop therapeutics that are highly similar to and have no clinically meaningful difference from their reference products. In order to demonstrate this, we apply rigorous processes in the development of our product candidates.

A biosimilarity claim must demonstrate totality of evidence with respect to physiochemical characteristics, biologic activity, pharmacokinetics, clinical safety and efficacy, and therapeutic indication. Extensive analytical comparisons to the reference products are conducted, followed by nonclinical and clinical pharmacokinetic (“PK”) and pharmacodynamic (“PD”) studies, as required. Finally, a clinical efficacy and safety study is conducted to resolve any remaining uncertainty that the product is biosimilar. This process is described in more detail below.

Early phase development

In this phase of development it is vital to establish a manufacturing process that delivers highly similar product to the reference product. This starts with cell line development activities, where clones having characteristics similar to the reference product with acceptable productivity are selected. Following this a competitive commercial manufacturing process for drug substance and drug product is developed to deliver a product that is highly similar to the reference product, enabling future investment in GMP manufacturing. Numerous characterization methods are also applied to ensure our biosimilar candidate is highly similar to the reference product in structure and function. Significant time and effort is spent on this similarity evaluation to enable a streamlined clinical program in subsequent development phases with a higher probability of success.

Pre-clinical development and GMP manufacturing

In this phase, the manufacturing process is scaled-up up from small pilot scale batches to commercial scale in a commercial site. The goal is to manufacture product with a high degree of analytical similarity to the reference product while also confirming the highest quality product is produced.

In parallel, regulatory authorities in the United States, EU and other geographies are engaged to discuss the overall development strategy, in order to ensure the ultimate submission package is approvable in all major

95

regions. Non-clinical studies may also be conducted as required, based on the individual biosimilar program and alignments with regulatory authorities.

Clinical studies

Clinical studies are conducted in this phase to support product registration. Typically, a PK study is performed to demonstrate PK equivalence of the proposed biosimilar to the approved reference products such as those available in both the U.S. and EU. A global, confirmatory clinical efficacy and safety study is typically also performed to demonstrate that there are no clinically meaningful differences between the proposed biosimilar and the reference product. Depending on the specific program, these two studies may be conducted within one larger study or, conversely, additional small studies may need to be performed to support registration. When both a PK and confirmatory efficacy and safety study is required, we take the calculated risk to execute these studies in parallel (where feasible), which enables the fast track to licensing application submission for the program.

In parallel to the clinical studies being conducted, manufacturing process characterization and validation is completed, in addition to completion of the analytical similarity assessment supporting registration.

Interchangeability

When practical and commercially relevant in the U.S. market and other countries and regions, we seek interchangeability designation such as is the case with our lead product, AVT02, our biosimilar candidate to Humira. Interchangeability is a U.S. regulatory construct and according to the FDA, an interchangeable product will have met additional data requirements and so may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of a prescriber. The substitution may occur at the pharmacy, much as generic drugs are substituted for brand name drugs, subject to varying U.S. state pharmacy laws. Biosimilars, including those designated as interchangeable products, have the potential to reduce health care costs. The concept of interchangeability for biosimilars was signed into law through the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act in 2010. In order to be considered interchangeable, a biosimilar must meet additional requirements, including the execution of a “switching study,” utilizing the reference product and biosimilar product in patients. The vast majority of states have passed laws regarding substitution for interchangeable products.

Submission and approval

The ultimate goal is to submit a globally vetted, high-quality dossier that enables first-pass approval based on the totality of evidence for the comparative analytical, Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls, (“CMC”), and clinical data. Extrapolation principles also allow for attaining a full label matching the reference product other than indications specifically protected by regulatory exclusivity. We work closely with health authorities through the review process to enable approval at the earliest possible time after dossier submission, ensuring we can remain competitive with market entry.

Manufacturing & Supply

Manufacturing Facilities

Alvotech’s manufacturing facility is located in Reykjavik, Iceland. It provides us with purpose-built GMP, and highly integrated capabilities for producing biosimilars at scale. Our facility is currently approximately 140,000 square feet and utilizes single-use technology to manufacture drug substance and drug product. The platform enables us to use both CHO and SP2/0 cell culture processes; produce active drug substance using both perfusion and fed batch processes; and to carry out sterile fill-and-finish for pre-filled syringes. Having all of these capabilities in-house and in one place, alongside both R&D, quality control and quality assurance teams, allows us to streamline tech transfer and implement efficiencies across the entire production process, while continuously optimizing quality and controlling costs.

96

In December 2020, Alvotech broke ground on an expansion of its Reykjavik facility that will double its total footprint, adding another 140,000 square feet. The expansion is expected to be completed in early 2023 and will give us additional redundancy in our drug product capacity, assembly of combination products and devices, and secondary packaging. Additionally, the expansion will support increased warehousing and other supportive functions. Alvotech’s manufacturing facility and the extension are owned and leased for the company’s use by a related party, life sciences/pharmaceutical investment company Aztiq, which is a founding investor in Alvotech. These facilities are leased under extendable agreements that currently run through 2038.

The Reykjavik facility has an active and valid GMP certificate issued by the Icelandic Medicines Authority authorizing Investigational Medicinal Product and commercial manufacturing. This certificate enables our products to be manufactured for the market overseen by the European Medicines Agency.

Third Party Suppliers and Manufacturers

Raw Materials

Alvotech’s manufacturing processes utilize single-use processing technology for both drug substance and drug product. Our manufacturing is therefore reliant on the availability of single-use components to complete production. Alvotech sources these components from various reputable third-party suppliers. However, the price of these materials and components is subject to market forces and competing demands. Increases in the cost of components would have an adverse effect on the company’s forecasted cost of goods. In certain cases, Alvotech may rely on only one approved source for a particular component and shortages may significantly impact our ability to manufacture drug substance and drug product. Finding alternative suppliers may not be possible or cause material delay to development plans or commercial production. Alvotech has the ability and is currently evaluating opportunities for redundancies in our manufacturing processes in order to mitigate risk and control costs.

Alvotech also requires the use of certain reagents and materials in order to develop and produce biologic medicines. We acquire these reagents and materials through reputable third parties that specialize in the production and sourcing of these reagents and materials. These materials are widely available commodities. However, unforeseen shortages in these materials may have an adverse effect on either the price of these materials or could cause delays in Alvotech’s development or commercialization timelines.

AVT02 and certain other products within our pipeline require the use of auto-injector devices. We work closely with our vendor in order to assure availability and manage risk through inventory management and relationship management. Our current arrangement with our supplier utilizes a proprietary design.

Master cell banks and working cell banks are critical components in biologic medicine manufacturing. A cell bank is a collection of ampoules of uniform composition stored under defined conditions, each containing an aliquot of a single pool of cells. The master cell bank is generally derived from the selected cell clone containing the expression construct that has been encoded to produce the protein of interest, such as a specific monoclonal antibody with a defined amino acid sequence. This unique aliquot of cells allows for a consistent high quality biologic medicine to be produced. The working cell bank is derived by expansion of one or more ampoules of the master cell bank and is used for routine manufacturing. Both the master cell bank and working cell bank are central to obtaining regulatory approval for manufacturing and marketing biologic medicine. Without well-characterized and well-controlled master and working cell banks, the manufacturing process could be susceptible to non-ideal product variability. The quality of the manufactured biologic product is dependent on the quality of the cells used for its manufacturing, and having a sufficient supply of master and working cell banks is important for a consistent manufacturing process. The master cell banks and working cell banks for our lead product candidates are produced at either an EU or U.S.-based contract manufacturing organization and then transferred internally to both the Reykjavik site in Iceland and Jülich site in Germany for supply continuity and redundancy. The availability of master cell banks is critical to our ability to manufacture products for the commercial market. Should our cell banks (despite any redundancies) be compromised, we would be unable to produce usable products for patients in any market.

97

Sales and Marketing

To date, we have chosen to market and commercialize our products through numerous strategic partnerships rather than sell a single global license to an individual commercial partner. By partnering with multiple leading regional partners who would likely be able place a higher value on licenses due to their core market(s) focus, we believe we can achieve higher return for the rights of our products. This also better ensures focus from partners on Alvotech’s portfolio. Additionally, by partnering with multiple partners, we are able to enhance local market knowledge and expand our geographic reach by mitigating our risk of being dependent on one single partner.

Our broad commercial footprint is highlighted by the orange countries in the graphic above.

By outsourcing sales and marketing, we believe we are able to realize and leverage the following benefits:

98

As a result of our strategic decision to form commercial partnerships, we do not currently have direct sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities. In order for us to commercialize any product on our own, we would need to either develop an infrastructure to facilitate sales, marketing and distribution or contract with third parties that have the requisite capabilities. Our in-house strategic sales and marketing expertise is currently focused on relationships with our existing partners and finding new partner relationships. As of June 30, 2022, we have contracted with 17 partners to sell, market, and distribute our products in certain agreed upon territories.

Commercial partnerships

Alvotech has formed strategic commercialization partnerships with leading pharmaceutical companies covering global markets. A commercialization partnership generally consists of two components. First, under the licensing component, Alvotech and the partner agree that Alvotech will develop the product candidate and that the partner will have the exclusive right to market, distribute and sell Alvotech’s product in a certain territory once the product has been approved by the relevant regulator. In return, the partner agrees to make certain upfront or milestone payments to Alvotech, which can be any or a combination of the following:

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received $190.7 million in execution and milestone payments, including $75.0 million from Teva, $61.5 million from STADA (amounts payable in Euro and converted at the December 31, 2020 exchange rate of EUR/USD 1.23015), $15.0 million from JAMP Pharma, $10.0 million from YAS Holdings, $9.6 million from Fuji Pharma and $19.6 million in the aggregate from its other partners combined. As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has estimated the potential to receive up to $884.4 million in the future, including $455.0 million from Teva, $267.5 million from STADA, $41.7 million from JAMP Pharma, $30.4 million from Fuji Pharma and $89.8 million in the aggregate from its other partners combined.

Under the supply component of the partnership agreements, Alvotech will generally manufacture, supply and deliver the product to each partner, and the partner will exclusively buy the product from Alvotech. The purchase price for each commercial partner, unless specifically noted otherwise in the description of the partnership

99

agreements below, is a royalty of approximately 40% (between 35% and 45%) of the estimated net selling price or an agreed-upon applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreements. The floor price is a minimum price per unit specific to each presentation to be paid by the commercial partner for the product, and is determined per each presentation and product taking into consideration Cost of Goods of manufacturing, supply and commercial market environment. Under certain partnership agreements, Alvotech may be eligible to receive additional royalty payments in periods where sales exceed certain targets. As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has not received any product-based revenue from any of its partners. As is customary, the partnerships are concluded for durations of ten to twenty years.

The amounts in upfront and milestone payments and the royalty rates are negotiated between parties and depend in part on the estimated addressable market for the product and the size of the territory.

As a principal matter, Alvotech grants its partners access to the dossier, which includes Alvotech’s dossier of data, information and know-how relating to the relevant products that enable our partners to apply for and obtain marketing authorization in the various territories. Marketing authorizations obtained with the help of the dossier remain with the partners after the expiry of the partnership. Partners only return the marketing authorization to Alvotech when Alvotech terminates the agreement for cause. Certain partners may also get access to Alvotech trademarks.

Alvotech’s principal partners and partnerships include:

United States

Teva. In August 2020, Alvotech and Teva formed a commercial partnership under which Teva will have exclusive marketing and distribution rights to a portfolio of five Alvotech biosimilars in the U.S. Teva has a leading commercial footprint in the U.S., one of every nine prescriptions in the U.S. is filled with a Teva product. Teva is a global leader in generic and specialty medicines with a portfolio consisting of over 3,500 products in nearly every therapeutic area. Around 200 million people around the world take a Teva medicine every day and are served by one of the largest and most complex supply chains in the pharmaceutical industry. For more information about our agreements with Teva, see “—License and Development Agreement with Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH.”

Europe

STADA. In November 2019, Alvotech announced a strategic commercial partnership with STADA under which STADA will serve as the exclusive marketer and distributor of seven Alvotech biosimilars in all key European markets and selected markets outside Europe. The initial partnership spans biosimilars for autoimmune, inflammatory and ophthalmological diseases, as well as oncology. STADA sells its products in approximately 120 countries and in 2020 achieved approximately $3.7 billion in sales across its generics, specialty pharma and non-prescription consumer healthcare product platform. For more information about our agreements with STADA, see “—STADA Out-License Contracts in the European Union and Certain Other Countries.”

Japan

Fuji Pharma. On April 2, 2019, Alvotech and Fuji Pharma entered into a license agreement, as amended on June 23, 2020 to reflect a delay in the development process and therefore, among others, amended and restated the milestone payments, (the “Fuji Pharma AVT04 License Agreement”) and a supply agreement (the “Fuji Pharma AVT04 Supply Agreement”). Under the Fuji Pharma AVT04 License Agreement, Alvotech will develop AVT04 and compile and provide a dossier of data, information and know-how relating to AVT04 to Fuji Pharma. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in AVT04 and the AVT04 dossier. Fuji Pharma has the exclusive right to use the dossier to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for AVT04 and to import, finish, market, promote, sell and distribute AVT04 in Japan. Fuji Pharma made a one-time payment on the

100

signature date of $4.6 million and will make an additional milestone payment to Alvotech upon the launch of the product, subject to certain conditions. If Fuji Pharma achieves annual sales in excess of certain target volumes, it will pay Alvotech an additional royalty on the net sales above the target. Under the Fuji Pharma AVT04 Supply Agreement, Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the AVT04 product. Fuji Pharma will pay Alvotech a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within thirty business days, in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreements terminate 20 years after the first commercial sale of AVT04 in Japan. They can be terminated by either party if the other party: (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than two months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; or (iv) goes into liquidation. The agreements can be terminated by Fuji Pharma if (i) a competing product obtains reimbursement approval (Fuji Pharma AVT04 License Agreement) before AVT04 obtains reimbursement approval; (ii) AVT04 does not obtain reimbursement approval by November 30, 2023; or (iii) AVT04 obtains reimbursement approval at the same time two competing products obtain reimbursement approval.

On November 18, 2020, Alvotech and Fuji Pharma entered into four binding term sheets with respect to AVT06, two proposed AVT03 biosimilar products and AVT05. On February 10, 2022, Alvotech and Fuji Pharma expanded their strategic partnership and entered into an additional binding term sheet with respect to a new undisclosed biosimilar candidate currently in early phase development. Under the binding term sheets, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide a dossier of data, information and know-how relating to the relevant product to Fuji Pharma. Fuji Pharma has the exclusive right to use the dossier to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals and to import, finish, market, promote, sell and distribute the relevant product in Japan. As of December 31, 2021, Fuji Pharma made one-time payments on the signing dates of the binding term sheets of $3.0 million and agreed to make additional payments upon the achievement of certain regulatory and development milestones. Alvotech and Fuji Pharma will enter into license and supply agreements for each product at a later date, subject to fulfilling of certain conditions related to the development of that product and the absence of the commercial launch of competing products in Japan at that time. Fuji Pharma will exclusively buy the relevant biosimilar candidate from Alvotech at a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. The license and supply agreements will terminate 20 years after the first commercial sale of the relevant product in Japan. They can be terminated by either party in case a party (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than two months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; or (iv) goes into liquidation.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $9.6 million under the abovementioned agreements with Fuji Pharma and is eligible to receive up to an additional $30.4 million in milestone payments under the abovementioned agreements with Fuji Pharma.

Canada

JAMP Pharma. JAMP Pharma has a portfolio with more than 290 molecules and is a leader in the pharmaceutical industry in Canada. In December 2019, Alvotech entered into five license and supply agreements with JAMP Pharma with respect to AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05 and AVT06. Under the terms of the agreements, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to the relevant product candidate to JAMP Pharma. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. JAMP Pharma has the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to try to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the relevant product and to market, sell, and distribute the products in Canada. JAMP Pharma made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $15.0 million and agreed to make additional payments for an aggregate amount of up to CAD53.2 million upon the achievement of certain sales milestones. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the product to JAMP Pharma and JAMP Pharma will exclusively buy the relevant biosimilar candidate from Alvotech at a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. If

101

the agreed remittance is less than the floor price, JAMP Pharma has the option to turn the supply price for that product into a profit share arrangement. All invoices are payable within sixty days, in euros and by wire transfer. The agreements terminate 20 year after the first commercial sale of the relevant product and are subject to certain customary early termination rights. They can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term or provision of the agreement; (ii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets, or enter into any arrangement or composition with its creditors; or (iii) goes into liquidation. The agreements can be terminated by JAMP Pharma (i) in case of Phase III study failure; (ii) in case the dossier is delayed by more than 12 months from the target date; (iii) if, following the agreed launch date, Alvotech’s formulation of the product or the process used in the manufacture of the product violates any third-party patent in Iceland or Canada; (iv) in case of GMP or quality failures hindering registration or launch in the Canada; (v) if Health Canada rejects or does not provide regulatory approval within 18 months of filing; (vi) if the results of due diligence performed by JAMP Pharma are not satisfactory; (viii) if 50% of the market for the product is not converted to certain product specifications at the time of launch by JAMP Pharma; or (ix) if Alvotech fails to deliver the launch order for the product within 12 months from the placing of the launch and, due to Alvotech’s non- or late delivery of products, JAMP Pharma is out of stock for more than 12 consecutive months.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $15.0 million in upfront and milestone payments and is eligible to receive up to an additional CAD53.2 million upon achievement of certain milestones under the abovementioned agreements with JAMP Pharma.

Additional Markets

Cipla Gulf. In July 2019, Alvotech entered into a license and supply agreement with Cipla Gulf FZ – LLC (“Cipla Gulf”) with respect to AVT02 for Algeria, Australia, Colombia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand and Sri Lanka. In January 2021, Alvotech and Cipla Gulf entered into an additional license and supply agreement with respect to AVT06, AVT03, AVT04 and AVT05 for Australia and New Zealand. Under the terms of the 2019 and 2021 agreements, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to relevant product candidate to Cipla Gulf. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. Cipla Gulf has the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for that product and to market, sell and distribute the products in the abovementioned countries. Under the 2019 and 2021 agreements, Cipla Gulf made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $2.6 million upon signing the agreements and agreed to make additional payments upon achieving certain regulatory and sales milestones. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the product and Cipla Gulf will exclusively buy the relevant biosimilar candidate from Alvotech at a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within 60 days (for payments under the 2019 agreement) or 75 business days (for payments under the 2021 agreement), in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreements terminate ten years after the launch of each respective product in the relevant country, as applicable. The agreements can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term or provision of the agreements; (ii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets, or enters into any arrangement or composition with its creditors; or (iii) goes into liquidation. The agreements can be terminated by Cipla Gulf (i) in case of a supply failure; (ii) if the manufacturing facility is no longer authorized by a regulatory authority to manufacture the products and the authorization is not reinstated within 60 days; (iii) in the event the parties are unable to agree on a revised floor price; or (iv) if Cipla Gulf serves an audit concern notice on Alvotech and does not wish to proceed any further.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $4.0 million under the abovementioned agreements with Cipla Gulf.

Cipla Medpro. In October 2020, Alvotech entered into a license and supply agreement with Medpro Pharmaceutica (Pty) Ltd (“Cipla Medpro”) with respect to AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05 and an undisclosed

102

biosimilar candidate currently in early phase development. Under the terms of the agreement, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to relevant product candidate to Cipla Medpro. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. Cipla Medpro has the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the products and to market, promote, sell and distribute the products in South Africa. Cipla Medpro made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $1.05 million upon signing the agreements and agreed to make additional payments upon achieving certain regulatory and sales milestones. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the product and Cipla Medpro will exclusively buy the relevant biosimilar candidate from Alvotech at a royalty (Supply Price) or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within 70 days, in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreement terminates ten years after the launch of each respective product in the relevant country, as applicable. The agreement can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term or provision of the agreement; (ii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enter into any arrangement or composition with its creditors; or (iii) goes into liquidation. The agreement can be terminated by Cipla MedPro (i) in case of a supply failure; (ii) if the manufacturing facility is no longer authorized by a regulatory authority to manufacture the product and the authorization is not reinstated within 60 days; (iii) in the event the parties are unable to agree on a revised floor price; or (iv) if the originator has not registered the reference product in the respective country by the time Alvotech’s dossier is available for submission.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $1.25 million in upfront and milestone payments under the abovementioned agreement with Cipla Medpro.

DKSH. In November 2019, Alvotech entered into a license and supply agreement with Favorex Pte Ltd. (“DKSH”) with respect to AVT02 in the Asia Pacific region. In August 2020, Alvotech and DKSH entered into another license and supply agreement with respect to six more Alvotech products in more than 20 markets, including, Thailand, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Under the terms of the agreements, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to relevant product candidate to DKSH. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. DKSH has the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to try to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the products and to market, sell and distribute the products in the abovementioned countries. DKSH made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $7.15 million upon signing the agreements and agreed to make additional payments upon achieving certain regulatory and sales milestones. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the products and DKSH will exclusively buy the relevant product from Alvotech at a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within 90 days, in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreements terminate ten years after the launch of the AVT02 and 15 years after the launch of each respective product in the relevant country, as applicable. The agreements can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than 2 months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreements; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; or (iv) goes into liquidation. The agreements can be terminated by DKSH (i) if the dossier is delayed by more than 60 days from the target date; (ii) if DKSH serves an audit concern notice on Alvotech and does not wish to proceed any further; or (ii) if regulatory approval is not obtained by a certain date.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $7.15 million in upfront and milestone payments under the abovementioned agreements with DKSH.

YAS Holding. In October 2019, Alvotech entered into license agreements with Abu Dhabi-based YAS Holding LLC, acting through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Bioventure FZ-LLC (“YAS”), with respect to AVT02, AVT04 and AVT06. The parties agreed to enter into a supply agreement with respect to the products at a later date and, in February 2022, entered into a supply agreement with respect to AVT02. Under the terms of the agreements,

103

Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to relevant product candidate to YAS. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. YAS has the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to try to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the products and to market, sell, and distribute the products in the Middle East and Africa region. YAS made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $10 million. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the products and YAS will exclusively buy the relevant product from Alvotech at an agreed royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within 90 days, in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreements terminate ten years after the launch date of each respective product, as applicable. They can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than 2 months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; or (iv) goes into liquidation.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $10.0 million in upfront payments under the abovementioned agreements with YAS.

Abdi Ibrahim. In October 2019, Alvotech entered into a commercial and joint manufacturing partnership agreement with Abdi Ibrahim Ilac Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S (“Abdi Ibrahim”) for the commercialization and joint production of AVT02, AVT03 and AVT05 in the Turkish market. Under the terms of the agreement, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to relevant product candidate to Abdi Ibrahim. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. Abdi Ibrahim has the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to try to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the products and to fill, finish, market promote, sell and distribute the products in Turkey. Alvotech will transfer the technology needed by Abdi Ibrahim to fill and finish the product at Abdi Ibrahim’s manufacturing site. Any know-how that is transferred to Abdi Ibrahim remains Alvotech’s property and Abdi Ibrahim does not gain any right other than the right to use such know-how itself and solely for the purpose of filling and finishing the products for the Turkish market. Abdi Ibrahim made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $1.19 million and agreed to make additional payments upon achieving certain development, regulatory and sales milestones. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the raw products and Abdi Ibrahim will exclusively buy the relevant raw product from Alvotech at a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within 60 days, in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreement terminates 20 years after the launch date of each respective product, as applicable. It can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than 2 months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; or (iv) goes into liquidation. The agreement can be terminated by Alvotech if regulatory approval is not granted within 24 months after submission and parties fail to agree on a new timeline and by Adbi Ibrahim if (i) product presentation is delayed beyond the agreed timeline; (ii) a final technical failure of the product occurs; (iii) Abdi Ibrahim serves an audit concern notice on Alvotech and does not wish to proceed any further; or (iv) regulatory approval is not granted within 24 months after submission due to reasons that are attributable to failure of the dossier.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $1.72 million in upfront and milestone payments under the abovementioned agreement with Abdi Ibrahim.

Kamada. In November 2019, Alvotech entered into license, supply and distribution agreements with Kamada Ltd. (“Kamada”) with respect to AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05 and AVT06. On January 28, 2022, Alvotech and Kamada expanded their strategic partnership and entered into two additional license, supply and distribution agreements with Kamada with respect to two new undisclosed biosimilar candidates currently in early phase development. Under the terms of the agreements, Alvotech will develop the product candidates and provide the dossier of data, information and know-how relating to the relevant product candidate to Kamada. Alvotech retains full ownership of all intellectual property rights in the product candidates and the dossiers. Kamada has

104

the exclusive right and obligation to use the dossier to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the products and to market, promote, sell and distribute the products in Israel, including the Palestinian Authorities (West Banks and Gaza Streep). Kamada made upfront payments in the aggregate amount of $0.5 million and agreed to make additional payments upon the achievement of certain development and sales milestones. Alvotech will manufacture, supply and deliver the product and Kamada will exclusively buy the relevant biosimilar candidate from Alvotech at a royalty or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for the duration of the agreement. All invoices are payable within 60 days, in euros and by wire transfer. The agreements terminate ten years after the launch of each respective product in the relevant country, as applicable. They can be terminated by either party if the other party (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than two months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; or (iv) goes into liquidation. The agreement can be terminated by Alvotech if: (i) Kamada fails to launch the product within three months after the grant of the regulatory approval; or (ii) Kamada fails to purchase from Alvotech the applicable minimum quantity per year. Each of the agreements can be terminated by Kamada if (i) the phase III study with respect to the relevant product fails; (ii) filing of the dossier with respect to the relevant product is delayed more than 12 months due to reasons attributable to Alvotech; (iii) if the respective product cannot be launched due to a third-party process or formulation patent; or (iv) in case of GMP or quality failure(s) with respect to the relevant product occurring prior to launch and such failure cannot be remedied within reasonable time prior to launch.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has received an aggregate of $0.7 million in upfront and milestone payments under the abovementioned agreements with Kamada.

Yangtze. In March 2020, the Joint Venture entered into a distribution, marketing services and agency agreement with Yangtze and Alvotech with respect to AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05, AVT06 and three undisclosed products in China. Under the terms of the agreements, the Joint Venture and Alvotech will develop the product candidates and the Joint Venture will obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for the products in China. In case any product can be launched before the Joint Venture is ready to provide commercial supplies of such product, Alvotech will take over the Joint Venture’s obligations with respect to the regulatory approvals. Yangtze will have the exclusive right and obligation to market, promote, offer and sell the products in China, under trademarks registered in the name of the Joint Venture. There is no transfer of intellectual property. The agreement does not provide for upfront payments. However, Yangtze will make additional payments to the Joint Venture for an aggregate amount of up to CNY469 million upon achieving certain sales milestones. The Joint Venture will manufacture, supply and deliver the products and Yangtze will exclusively buy the relevant product from the Joint Venture at a royalty of approximately 50% of the estimated net selling price or the applicable floor price, whichever is higher, for AVT02 for the duration of the agreement. The sales price for the other products is to be agreed upon at a later date. All invoices are payable within 60 days in CNY. The agreements terminate ten years after the launch of the first product in China. It can be terminated by the Joint Venture and Yangtze if the other party (i) withholds any monies due to the other party for more than two months; (ii) commits or permits any substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; (iii) has a receiver or administrator appointed in respect of any of its assets or enters into any agreement with its creditors; (iv) goes into liquidation; or (v) with respect to any product if no agreement on the purchase price of that product can be reached. Yangtze may terminate the agreement entirely or with respect to AVT02 if the regulatory approval is not obtained by a target date.

As of June 30, 2022, no payments have been made under this agreement and the Joint Venture is eligible to receive up to CNY469 million upon achieving certain sales milestones under the abovementioned agreement with Yangtze. Alvotech has not received and will not receive payments under this agreement.

Biosana. In December 2021, Alvotech entered into an exclusive global licensing agreement with Biosana Pharma (“Biosana”) for the co-development of AVT23, which will be produced using Biosana’s proprietary 3C manufacturing process technology. Under the terms of the agreement, Biosana will develop AVT23, compile part of the dossier of data, information and know-how related to AVT23 and provide the dossier to Alvotech. Alvotech will conduct the comparative study and update the dossier, and, when completed, has the exclusive

105

right (and, for the U.S., the U.K., France, Germany, Italy and Spain, the obligation) to use the dossier to obtain regulatory approvals and to market, promote, distribute and sell AVT23. In each case limited to the extent necessary and solely for the purpose of (i) developing, registering, marketing, offering for sale, importing, storage, distributing, selling and using the property; and (ii) manufacturing the product, Biosana grants Alvotech (i) exclusive, perpetual and irrevocable, assignable and sub-licensable rights to its intellectual property rights related to AVT23, including in the dossier, that existed prior to or are created during the collaboration; and (ii) the non-exclusive, perpetual and irrevocable, assignable and sub-licensable right with respect to the 3C manufacturing process. Alvotech made a one-time payment of $7.5 million upon the signing of the agreement with an additional $7.5 million due at the earlier of the closing of the Business Combination or April 30, 2022, and agreed to make additional payments upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones. Biosana will manufacture, supply and deliver AVT23 and Alvotech will exclusively buy AVT23 from Biosana (i) for five years, on a country-by-country basis, from the launch for supply for the EEA market; and (ii) for the term of the agreement for all other markets. In addition to the supply price, Alvotech will make tiered royalty payments to Biosana of 0% of product revenue in the first three years after the launch, 5% for the next three years, and 10% for as long as Alvotech continues to commercialize AVT23, unless the agreement is terminated for cause. All invoices are payable within 60 days in U.S. dollar and by wire transfer. The agreement terminates 15 years after the launch of AVT23 in a given country on a country-by-country basis, unless the parties agree to a renewal term. Either party may terminate the agreement for cause at any time if the other party (i) is two or more months overdue on a payment; (ii) commits or permits a substantial breach of any material term of the agreement; or (iii) is subject to certain bankruptcy proceedings. Alvotech may terminate the agreement in its entirety in a certain territory if (i) the intellectual property rights of a third party may be infringed; (ii) there is an unacceptable product liability risk; (iii) a regulatory authority prohibits, prevents, or restricts the products developed under the agreement for more than 90 days; (iv) the product fails to achieve real time stability; or (v) its gross margin is below a certain threshold in that country. Alvotech may further terminate the agreement if (i) Biosana fails to ship clinical trial material by the target date; (ii) the regulatory approval for the U.S. has not been submitted or granted by certain target dates for reasons attributable to Biosana; or (iii) a supply failure occurs. Biosana may terminate the agreement if Alvotech, its affiliates, or customers institutes or actively participates with a third party in challenging any of the patents under the agreement.

As of June 30, 2022, Alvotech has paid an aggregate of $15.0 million in upfront and milestone payments under the abovementioned agreement with Biosana.

Our Pipeline

Product selection

Alvotech believes that the nature and quality of its platform enable it to innovate and systematically produce high quality biosimilars for treating a broad range of serious diseases. It believes that its ability to generate and capture efficiencies across research and development, manufacturing and commercialization gives it fundamental advantages in quality, cost and speed to market when competing with both originator and other biosimilar companies.

Alvotech’s fully integrated capabilities provide it wide breadth and flexibility in deciding which biosimilar opportunities to pursue, optimizing the commercial, scientific and medical impact of each program as part of its portfolio. It evaluates a rigorous set of six criteria to select its candidates:

106

In addition to the above, Alvotech’s platform is built for flexibility that may allow Alvotech to expand into other healthcare products areas such as respiratory and primary care products.

Our Pipeline

Through our rigorous product selection and development platform, we have been able to build a pipeline comprising five disclosed biosimilar products covering a variety of therapeutic areas, including autoimmune, eye, and bone disorders, as well as cancer. Our lead program, AVT02, a high concentration formulation biosimilar to Humira, was approved by the European Commission in the fourth quarter of 2021 and in Canada and the UK in January 2022. Subject to regulatory approval from the FDA, Alvotech expects to launch AVT02 in the United States on July 1, 2023. We also have a second clinical program, AVT04, which uses the same SP2/0 host cell line as Stelara. AVT04 has an expected clinical readout in the second half of 2022. In July 2022, Alvotech announced the initiation of its clinical trials for AVT06 and AVT03. Beyond our registrational and clinical programs, we have AVT05, with clinical trials expected to be initiated in the second half of 2022, and AVT23, that is in late-stage development. Lastly, we also have two undisclosed programs in pre-clinical development.

We intend to continuously invest in our development program with the goal of establishing a program that can add one to two additional product candidates to our pipeline every 12 to 18 months. As of March 2022, market opportunities for our current product candidates include:

In addition to the above programs, we are currently in early phase development for two additional products that have not yet been publicly disclosed, AVT16, a proposed biosimilar to an immunology product, and AVT33, a proposed biosimilar to an oncology product, for which the estimated combined originator market opportunity is approximately $30 billion. In all, we believe our pipeline has the potential to address an originator market of over $85 billion.

These estimated market opportunities are based on peak sales results from 2021 to 2026 for each product candidate’s respective originator product, according to reports from Evaluate Pharma. In the biosimilar industry, the target market for any given product is described by reference to the corresponding originator medicine’s peak global revenues. The ultimate revenue realized by a biosimilar medicine relative to those peak revenues depends on the pricing of the biosimilar medicine, often at a discount relative to the originator medicine, and the market share achieved by the biosimilar medicine. The estimated originator market opportunity for each candidate does not reflect impact of expected price erosion caused by biosimilar competition. In the event that Alvotech is

107

required to set the price of its biosimilar candidates at greater discounts than are currently estimated, Alvotech may realize lower than expected revenues; conversely, smaller discounts than are currently expected may result in higher revenues for Alvotech.

Our Programs

AVT02, our high-concentration biosimilar to Humira

Humira (adalimumab) inhibits tumor necrosis factor (“TNF”), which is a protein in the body that can cause inflammation. Developed and predominantly marketed by AbbVie, adalimumab is prescribed to treat a variety of inflammatory conditions including, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, plaque psoriasis among other indications. Humira is approved and marketed in a high concentration formation (100 mg/mL) across four doses (10 mg, 20 mg, 40 mg, 80 mg) which account for roughly 80% of the U.S. Humira market. A lower concentration formulation (50 mg/mL) is also approved and marketed across three strengths (10 mg, 20mg, 40mg). In 2021, Humira worldwide net revenues were approximately $20.7 billion. Adalimumab has many of the core characteristics Alvotech looks for in selecting a candidate for development. We are aiming to be in the first wave of launches, as there are currently only two other companies developing high concentration formulation biosimilars to Humira. Additionally, adalimumab fits well within our immunology portfolio and manufacturing capabilities. The competitive landscape and broad market opportunity for adalimumab is attractive to us and our commercial partners as we are aware of only one other company that is pursuing an interchangeability designation referencing the high concentration form of the product, and others that are doing low concentration.

108

We have conducted five clinical studies to date for AVT02, comprising of over 1,500 subjects. In September of 2021, we announced that topline results from a randomized study in patients demonstrate no increased risk in terms of safety or decreased efficacy from repeated switches between the administration of Humira (adalimumab) and Alvotech’s high-concentration interchangeable biosimilar candidate AVT02, compared to the administration of Humira without switching (AVT02-GL-302). The study has been conducted in 568 patients with Chronic Plaque Psoriasis across five countries and 25 sites in Central and Eastern Europe. Further, no significant differences were observed in clinical pharmacokinetics (which was the primary endpoint), or the clinical efficacy, safety or immunogenicity between the switching cohort and the reference product cohort. During the lead-in period (Week 1 to Week 12), only one patient reported a serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (“TEAE”). During the switching module phase (Week 12 to Week 28), six patients (1.1%) reported serious TEAEs, of which five patients (1.8%) were in the AVT02/EU-Humira/AVT02 group, and one patient was in the EU-Humira group. During the extension phase, three patients reported TEAEs. All ten of the TEAEs were assessed by the investigator as non-drug related. Two of the TEAEs were assessed by the sponsor as drug related: one event was COVID-19 pneumonia, which was resolved in the patient with sequelae, and the other event was extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Only one TEAE was fatal and the cause was determined to be unexpected and non-drug related (accidental carbon monoxide poisoning). None of the drug related serious TEAEs were unexpected. The most commonly reported serious TEAE was COVID-19 (30%). Statistical analysis for this study was conducted in line with the scientific standards and in agreement with relevant regulatory guidelines and the specific advice received from major agencies during the course of development. An overview of this study is outlined below:

AVT04, our proposed biosimilar to Stelara

Stelara (ustekinumab) is a human IgG1k monoclonal antibody against the human interleukin-12 and -23 cytokines. Marketed by Janssen, Stelara is prescribed to treat a variety of inflammatory conditions including psoriatic arthritis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, plaque psoriasis among other indications. In 2020, Stelara’s worldwide net revenues were nearly $8 billion.

We are using an SP2/0 host cell line, which is the same manufacturing host cell line as Stelara. The infrequent dosing for Stelara is enabled by an extended half-life that is partially achieved due to the high levels of sialic acid on the monoclonal antibody. The SP2/0 host cell line allows for more efficient sialyation of the molecule as compared to CHO. Therefore, matching of the post-translational modifications and structure in a biosimilar development program for Stelara also, in our view, requires matching of the host cell line. Developing our biosimilar in the same host cell line as the originator for a product that requires such a long half-life, de-risks the approval process and creates potential differentiation relative to other biosimilar developers. In July 2021, we

109

announced the initiation of clinical studies for AVT04. A pharmacokinetic (PK) comparability study (AVT04-GL-101) is being conducted in healthy volunteers and is being conducted simultaneously in New Zealand and Australia. This is a single dose, 3-arm, parallel design to compare pharmacokinetic, safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of a single 45mg/0.5mL subcutaneous dose of AVT04, European sourced Stelara (EU-Stelara) and U.S. sourced Stelara (US-Stelara). The study is being conducted in Australia and New-Zealand and the enrollment of all 294 participants was completed in the fourth quarter of 2021. The primary endpoints for this PK study are peak concentration (Cmax) and the total area under the curve (AUC0-inf). The secondary endpoints for the study include (but are not limited to) additional PK parameters, adverse events and clinical laboratory assessments, tolerability and immunogenicity parameters. This study is still ongoing, therefore allocation to either one of the treatment arms is not possible until the database lock, when the study will be unblinded. Statistical analysis for this study is being conducted in line with the scientific standards and in agreement with relevant regulatory guidelines and the specific advice received from major agencies during the course of development. In May 2022, Alvotech reported positive topline results for the PK study for AVT04.

Simultaneously, Alvotech is conducting a comparative, confirmatory efficacy and safety clinical study (AVT04-GL-301) in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis. The clinical study is conducted at approximately 30 investigational sites in five countries across Central and Eastern Europe. The enrollment (581 patients) was completed in September 2021. The primary efficacy endpoint for AVT04-GL-301 study is Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) percent improvement from Baseline at Week 12. The key secondary endpoints include additional efficacy parameters, adverse events and clinical laboratory assessments, tolerability, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic parameters as well as quality of life scores. This study is still ongoing, therefore allocation to either one of the treatment arms is not possible until the database lock, when the study will be unblinded. Statistical analysis for this study is being conducted in line with the scientific standards and in agreement with relevant regulatory guidelines and the specific advice received from major agencies during the course of development. In May 2022, Alvotech reported positive topline results for AVT04-GL-301.

The ongoing AVT04 clinical trial currently includes seven trial sites and 188 patients located in Ukraine. As a result of the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, one Ukrainian site is inactive and Alvotech does not expect that any of the 29 patients enrolled through that site will make it to Week 52. The other six trial sites in Ukraine are not reporting major operational issues and, as of July 10, 2022, 162 of the 188 Ukrainian patients had completed the Week 40 visit. Alvotech expects that all Week 52 visits will be completed in the third quarter of 2022. Due to the size of patient group enrolled in this study worldwide (581 patients) and the overall patient retention rate of approximately 92% through Week 40, Alvotech expects that the study has a sufficient number of patients outside Ukraine to ensure a robust long-term safety assessment, even if none of the Ukrainian patients are able to complete the trial through Week 52. As of today, Alvotech does not expect the conflict in Ukraine to have a material impact on Alvotech as a whole or on the development or clinical trial of AVT04. Alvotech expects to file for regulatory approvals for AVT04 in the second half of 2022.

AVT06, our proposed biosimilar to Eylea

Eylea (aflibercept) is a recombinant fusion protein formulated for intravitreal administration consisting of portions of human VEGF receptors 1 and 2 extracellular domains fused to the Fc portion of human IgG1. Developed and marketed by Bayer and Regeneron, Eylea is prescribed to treat conditions including age-related macular degeneration, macular edema, and diabetic retinopathy. In 2020, Eylea worldwide net revenues were nearly $8 billion.

Both the reference product as well as our proposed biosimilar AVT06 are produced in recombinant Chinese hamster ovary cells.

In July 2022, we initiated the confirmatory clinical study for AVT06. The objective of the study is to compare AVT06 and Eylea in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in adult patients with neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The study (ALVOEYE) is a randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, multicenter, therapeutic equivalence study, and is expected to enroll approximately 444 participants in

110

approximately 16 different countries in Europe, South America, Asia (India and Japan) and South Africa. The study’s primary endpoint is change from baseline to week 8 in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Statistical analysis for this study will be conducted in line with the scientific standards and in agreement with relevant regulatory guidelines and the specific advice received from major agencies during the course of development. We have engaged with global regulatory authorities on our development strategy in order to align our program with expectations from regulatory authorities and further limit development risk.

Alvotech originally planned to conduct the AVT06 trial, in part, in ten sites (for 44 patients) located in Ukraine and eight sites (for 19 patients) in Russia. Due to the Russian invasion in Ukraine, Alvotech replaced these sites with sites in new countries with similar patient enrollment projections. As of today, Alvotech does not expect the conflict in Ukraine to have a material impact on Alvotech as a whole or on the development or clinical trial of AVT06.

AVT03, our proposed biosimilar to both Xgeva and Prolia

Xgeva and Prolia have the same active ingredient, denosumab, but the products are approved for different indications, patient populations, doses and frequencies of administration. Denosumab is a human IgG2 monoclonal antibody with affinity and specificity for human RANKL, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand. Developed and predominately marketed by Amgen, Xgeva is prescribed to prevent bone fracture, spinal cord compression or the need for radiation or bone surgery in patients with certain types of cancer, and Prolia is prescribed to prevent bone loss and increase bone mass. In 2020, Xgeva and Prolia worldwide net revenues were over $4 billion.

Both the reference product as well as our proposed biosimilar AVT03 are produced in recombinant Chinese hamster ovary cells.

AVT03 has been developed to have a high degree of analytical similarity to the originator. Further we have engaged with global regulatory authorities on our development strategy in order to align our program with expectations from regulatory authorities and further limit development risk.

Alvotech clinical program consists of a pharmacokinetic (PK) study in healthy volunteers and a confirmatory efficacy and safety study in patients with post-menopausal osteoporosis.

In July 2022, Alvotech announced the initiation of the pharmacokinetic (PK) study (AVT03-GL-P01) in healthy volunteers aimed to compare the pharmacokinetic, safety, tolerability and immunogenicity between AVT03 and the reference product Prolia after administration of 60mg single subcutaneous dose. The study is expected to have a 2-arm, double-blind, parallel design and to be conducted at selected pharmacology units in Australia and New Zealand. Alvotech aims to recruit approximately 206 participants for this study. The primary endpoints for this PK study are peak concentration (Cmax) and the total area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC0-inf). The secondary endpoints for this study include (but are not limited to) additional PK parameters, adverse events and clinical laboratory assessments, tolerability and immunogenicity parameters. Statistical analysis for this study will be conducted in line with the scientific standards and in agreement with relevant regulatory guidelines and the specific advice received from major agencies during the course of development.

Alvotech originally planned to conduct the AVT03 trial, in part, in five sites (for a projected 40 patients) in Ukraine. Due to the Russian invasion in Ukraine, Alvotech replaced these Ukrainian trial sites with sites elsewhere. As of today, Alvotech does not expect the conflict in Ukraine to have a material impact on Alvotech as a whole or on the development or clinical trial of AVT03.

AVT05, our proposed biosimilar to Simponi and Simponi Aria

Simponi / Simponi Aria (golimumab), inhibits TNF, which is a protein in the body that can cause inflammation. Simponi / Simponi Aria are prescribed to treat a variety of inflammatory conditions including, RA, psoriatic arthritis, ulcerative colitis among others. Simponi is a sterile solution of golimumab antibody supplied for subcutaneous use. Simponi Aria injection is a sterile solution supplied for intravenous use. We are developing both forms of the product. In 2020, Simponi and Simponi Aria generated over $3 billion in sales.

111

AVT05 is expressed in an SP2/0 host cell line, which matches the cell used by the developer of the originator. AVT05 is in early phase development. We have developed AVT05 to match the host cell line type used by the originator and we intend to pursue interchangeability designation.

AVT23 (also called BP001), our proposed biosimilar to Xolair

Xolair (omalizumab) is an antibody that targets free IgE and is used to improve the control of severe persistent allergic asthma, for chronic (long-term) spontaneous urticaria (itchy rash) in patients with elevated IgE who do not respond to treatment with antihistamines, and to treat nasal polyps in people 18 years of age and older when medicines to treat nasal polyps called nasal corticosteroids have not worked well enough. Xolair, the only currently approved product containing omalizumab, was first approved in 2003. In 2020, global sales of Xolair reached $3.3 billion.

AVT23 is in late-stage development. AVT23 will be produced using Biosana’s proprietary 3C process technology, a fully continuous operation to allow for highly productive, low-cost manufacturing. A pharmacokinetic (PK) comparability study has been completed showing that AVT23’s bioavailability, safety, tolerability and immunogenicity are comparable to those of Xolair.

Undisclosed programs, AVT16 and AVT33

We are currently in early phase development for two additional products that have not yet been publicly disclosed, AVT16, a proposed biosimilar to an immunology product, and AVT33, a proposed biosimilar to an oncology product. We expect the estimated combined originator market opportunity for these two products to be approximately $30 billion.

Material Agreements, Partnerships and Suppliers

STADA Out-License Contracts in the European Union and Certain Other Countries

AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05, AVT06, and AVT16 Out-License Contracts

From August to November of 2019, we entered into similar license and supply agreements (“out-license contracts”) with STADA which were amended in March 2020, pursuant to which we granted STADA exclusive licenses (even as to us and our affiliates) to import, commercialize and market certain products containing AVT02, AVT03, AVT04, AVT05, AVT06 and AVT16 in the European Union and certain other countries. Under the amended agreements, STADA also received joint ownership of certain of our intellectual property covering such products in the EU and certain other countries under certain conditions. Pursuant to the amended agreements, we are required to provide, and STADA is required to obtain, all of STADA’s requirements of the licensed products for a defined period of time. We are also obligated to develop the licensed products, including performing all pre-clinical and clinical activities required to submit grants to obtain marketing authorizations for the licensed products in the EU and certain other countries, whereas STADA is required to use all commercially reasonable efforts to sell, market, import and store the licensed products and Alvotech has the right to terminate if STADA does not launch after fulfillment of certain conditions. STADA will remit approximately 40% of its in-market sales to us in the form of sales-based royalties.

As of June 30, 2022, we have received $6.5 million in upfront payments and $55.0 million in milestone payments, and we are eligible to receive aggregate payments of up to an additional $267.8 million upon achievement of certain financial, regulatory, commercial, manufacturing and sales milestones. Subject to certain conditions, the consideration paid to us is subject to a partial or full refund to STADA on a product-by-product basis if (i) the net sales of a product fall below certain specified thresholds, (ii) the manufacture, marketing or sale of such product would result in patent infringement, or (iii) we materially breach the agreement and fail to cure within 60 days of receiving notice from STADA.

112

The licenses granted to STADA will remain exclusive until the fifth anniversary of STADA’s first sale of a product in a country, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis. STADA may extend the exclusivity period up to three times for an additional five years by providing written notice one year prior to the expiration of the exclusivity period. Upon expiration of the exclusivity period for a product in a country, STADA will retain a non-exclusive license to import, commercialize and market such product in the country, and will be granted a worldwide, non-exclusive license to manufacture such product for sale in such country.

Expansion of the AVT02 Agreement

In May 2021, we entered into a second amendment of the AVT02 agreement to, among other things, expand the agreement to include an additional product and provide certain additional terms for the development, licensing and commercialization of such product. Under the amended agreement, we granted STADA a perpetual, exclusive license to import, commercialize and market the additional product in the EU and certain other countries. Under the terms of the amended agreement, we are eligible to receive aggregate payments of up to an additional $3.6 million upon certain development milestones as payment for the development costs of the additional product, of which Alvotech has received $1.1 million as of June 30, 2022. If STADA grants us a non-exclusive license to import, commercialize and market the additional product, we will be required to reimburse a portion of the milestone payments received for the development of the additional product. Upon expiration of the exclusive license of any AVT02 product in a country, STADA will be granted a worldwide, non-exclusive license to manufacture the additional product for sale in such country. Prior to the completion of development of the additional product, STADA may terminate its rights to the additional product upon 10 days written notice. Upon such termination, we would no longer be eligible for payments for the subsequent completion of milestones for the additional product.

License and Development Agreement with Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH

In August 2020, we entered into a license and development agreement with Teva which was amended in June 2021, for the commercialization of certain biosimilar products in certain territories (the “LDA”). Under the LDA, we granted Teva an exclusive license (even as to us and our affiliates), with the right to sublicense through multiple tiers, to use, import, commercialize, and market products containing AVT02, AVT04, AVT05, AVT06 and AVT16 in the United States and each of its territories, districts and possessions, including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Under the LDA, Teva has the exclusive right to reference (i) the registration dossiers of certain biosimilar products for its BLA approval, (ii) its BLA approval, (iii) all clinical studies conducted by or on our behalf with respect to the development of certain biosimilar products for purposes of obtaining its applicable BLA approval. Under the LDA, we granted Teva the right of first negotiation for commercialization and marketing rights in certain territories for certain future biosimilar products for five (5) years from the effective date of the agreement, excluding AVT03.

As consideration for the rights granted to Teva under the LDA, Teva will pay us license and milestone fees. As of June 30, 2022, we received $40 million in upfront payments and $35 million in milestone payments, and we are eligible to receive aggregate payments of up to an additional $455 million upon achievement of certain financial, regulatory, commercial, manufacturing and sales milestones.

The LDA expires on a product-by-product basis ten (10) years from the first commercial sale of a product, subject to possible one-year extensions. Either party may terminate the LDA on a product-by-product basis for any material breach by the other party that is not remedied within a specified time period, or if either party reasonably believes that there is a material safety issue with respect to such product. Teva may terminate the LDA on a product-by-product basis within certain time periods, only if Teva reasonably demonstrates a lack of commercial viability for such product and Alvotech retains already paid milestone payments and allowed to partner with someone else. Either party may also terminate the LDA upon insolvency of the other party. The LDA will automatically terminate as a whole upon the termination of the Teva Product Supply Agreement, or in part with respect to any product if the Teva Product Supply Agreement is terminated with respect to such product.

113

Product Supply Agreement with Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH

In connection with the LDA, we entered into a product supply agreement with Teva in August 2020 for the exclusive manufacture and supply of each product during such product’s respective product supply term (the “PSA”). Under the PSA, we will manufacture and supply each product exclusively in the territory for and to Teva for the marketing of such product in the territory and fully meet purchase orders for the product that have been accepted or deemed accepted by us. We will also provide, at our cost, all packaging materials for each product. However, Teva will reimburse our costs for any packaging or labeling materials as specified in the first six months of a forecast which can no longer be used due to a change in artwork requested by Teva. Teva has agreed to a minimum order quantity for each product for the determined supply price. Pursuant to the PSA, Teva will remit approximately 40% of its in-market sales to us in the form of sales-based royalties.

The PSA expires on a product-by-product basis until the expiration or earlier termination of the LDA in respect of that product or termination of the LDA as a whole. Either party may terminate the PSA on a product-by-product basis for any material breach by the other party that is not remedied within a specified time period. Either party may terminate the agreement with respect to a product if the BLA approval for a product in the territory is revoked by a regulatory authority due to a health, safety or efficacy concern. Under the PSA, Teva may require us to purchase any and all unsold quantities of products ordered by Teva prior to termination. We may terminate the PSA if Teva fails to fulfill the minimum quantity of each product. Additionally, either party may terminate the PSA with respect to a product if a margin split event occurred which results in a negative margin for a period of four (4) consecutive calendar quarters.

China Joint Venture

In September 2018, Alvotech created a 50-50 joint venture with the Joint Venture Partner to develop, manufacture and commercialize Alvotech’s biosimilar medicines in China and for the China market. Pursuant to a joint venture agreement, as amended on February 17, 2019, the Joint Venture Partner is investing $100 million in cash to build a state-of-the-art biologic medicine manufacturing facility in Changchun, and Alvotech is contributing the same value via a combination of additional capital and the granting of market licenses for six of its biosimilar medicines in the China market under a separate technology license contract. These capital contributions are made in installments pursuant to the contribution schedule in the joint venture agreement. There are no other anticipated payments under the joint venture agreement aside from the aforementioned capital contributions.

The Joint Venture Partner’s responsibilities include building the manufacturing facility, hiring employees, and obtaining the requisite approvals, permits and licenses for the operation of the facility. Alvotech’s responsibilities include providing the Joint Venture with technical support for the construction of the facility, procuring equipment, and providing technical experts and training. Profit distributions from the Joint Venture shall be made to Alvotech and the Joint Venture Partner in proportion to their respective paid-up capital contributions. The duration of the Joint Venture is infinite, but the joint venture agreement is subject to certain customary termination rights. Upon termination of the joint venture agreement, the Joint Venture shall be dissolved, or if terminated pursuant to a breach, the non-breaching party may opt to buy out the other party pursuant to the terms of the joint venture agreement.

This joint venture provides Alvotech with the ability to expeditiously enter its products into the Chinese market, leveraging the Joint Venture Partner’s experience and reputation in the China market as well as expertise in local registration, certification, and approval processes. In 2019, the Joint Venture broke ground on its manufacturing. The Joint Venture expects to complete certifications and quality controls in the third quarter of 2022 and aims to start producing commercial batches before the end of 2023.

U.S. AbbVie Agreement

On March 8, 2022 Alvotech entered into the AbbVie U.S. Agreement with AbbVie Inc. and AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd with respect to AVT02 for the U.S. market. Pursuant to the settlement component of the

114

AbbVie U.S. Agreement, the parties agreed to stipulate to the dismissal of all claims, counterclaims and potential claims in the pending litigation, with each party to bear its own fees and costs, in the U.S. For more information about the U.S. litigation that was terminated, please refer to “ —Legal Proceedings —U.S. Litigations.” The parties further agreed to release each other from certain claims and demands. Under the licensing component of the AbbVie U.S. Agreement, AbbVie granted Alvotech a license effective July 1, 2023 to make, import, use, distribute, sell and offer for sale AVT02 in the U.S. and a license to manufacture, import and store a reasonable amount of AVT02 in anticipation of the commercial launch of AVT02 in the U.S. Under the agreement, Alvotech may sublicense certain rights to Teva, as a commercialization partner, and may also sublicense to other parties subject to certain conditions. In return, Alvotech is obligated to pay a royalty to AbbVie in the single-digits of the net sales of AVT02 in the U.S. The agreement does not provide for upfront or milestone payments. The obligation of Alvotech to pay royalties shall terminate on the earlier of (i) February 11, 2025; or (ii) a determination that licensed patents are invalid or unenforceable, at which time the license granted will be deemed fully paid up and irrevocable. Each party has the right to terminate the agreement upon breach of certain terms of the agreement that remains uncured for a certain period of time. Additionally, AbbVie may terminate the agreement if Alvotech takes certain actions concerning the patentability, validity, or enforceability of AbbVie’s patents in the U.S. with respect to AVT02.

European AbbVie Agreement

On April 4, 2022, Alvotech entered into the European AbbVie Agreement with AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd with respect to the sale of AVT02 in Europe and selected markets outside of Europe (the “European AbbVie Agreement”). Pursuant to the settlement component, the parties resolved all intellectual property disputes between Alvotech and AbbVie relating to AVT02 in those territories. For more information about those legal disputes, please refer to “—Legal Proceedings.” The parties further agreed to release each other from certain claims and demands. Under the licensing component of the European AbbVie Agreement, AbbVie granted Alvotech a license effective immediately to make, import, use, distribute, sell and offer for sale AVT02 in Europe and selected markets outside of Europe. Under the agreement, Alvotech may sublicense certain rights to STADA, as a commercialization partner, and may also sublicense to other parties subject to certain conditions. In return, Alvotech is obligated to pay royalties to AbbVie with respect to certain indications that are covered by AbbVie patents, on an indication-by-indication and territory-by-territory basis. For purposes of calculating royalties due under the agreement, the parties agreed that in any territory, a certain percentage of AVT02 sold in such territory is covered by the indication, bringing the effective royalty rate in the single-digit to low-teens percentage range of net sales of AVT02 in the territories. The agreement does not provide for upfront or milestone payments. The royalty payments will terminate, on an indication-by-indication basis, on June 5, 2022, April 11, 2025 and June 3, 2031, respectively, at which time the license granted for that indication will be deemed fully paid up and irrevocable. Alvotech’s royalty obligation will terminate earlier if, on a territory-by-territory and indication-by-indication basis, no valid AbbVie patent rights remain. Each party has the right to terminate the agreement upon breach of certain terms of the agreement that remains uncured for a certain period of time. Additionally, AbbVie may terminate the agreement if Alvotech takes certain actions concerning the patentability, validity, or enforceability of AbbVie’s patents in Europe with respect to AVT02.

In June 2022, Alvotech’s commercial partner, STADA, launched AVT02 under the name Hukyndra in selected European countries, including France, Germany, Austria, Finland, and Sweden under this license. Commercial launches in further European countries are scheduled over the coming months.

Competition

Alvotech believes its focus on biosimilars, investment in its platform, and global market reach endow it with a differentiated set of strategic advantages in the dynamic and competitive biosimilars marketplace. These features include substantial control over quality and capacity allocation; the ability to find and exploit operational and process efficiencies across R&D and manufacturing; and the agility to rapidly, flexibly and efficiently pivot to new opportunities to advance a broad portfolio of product candidates. Alvotech believes these advantages expand

115

its opportunity and support its commercial and medical goals of accelerating the development of cost-effective biosimilars that are as close to the reference products as possible, and then getting them to the patients around the world who need them.

The specific characteristics of the competitive landscape for each of Alvotech’s publicly announced product development programs include but are not limited to:

AVT02. Alvotech expects AbbVie (the originator) as well as Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Biocon/FujiFilm/Viatris, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Coherus, and Sandoz to be its main competitors for AVT02, a biosimilar product candidate to Humira (adalimumab). Most of these companies have either launched or disclosed development plans for a 50 mg/mL Humira biosimilar in the U.S., EU, or both, as well as in some other global markets. Celltrion and Alvotech are the only two companies with regulatory approval in the EU for a 100 mg/mL biosimilar version of adalimumab. In August 2022, Samsung Bioepis received approval in the US for a 100 mg/mL biosimilar version of adalimumab. In June-July 2022, Sandoz announced it filed its 100 mg/mL biosimilar version of adalimumab in Europe and the US. Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH has a PK study ongoing to compare its 100 mg/mL biosimilar version of adalimumab with its 50 mg/mL biosimilar version of adalimumab. In November of 2021, Amgen announced that the company is enrolling patients in a Phase 3 study to support interchangeability designation in the U.S. The study indicates Amgen is utilizing a 100 mg/mL version of the product with their study. In August 2022, Celltrion announced it filed an IND with FDA for an interchangeability study for its 100 mg/mL biosimilar version of adalimumab.

AVT04. Alvotech expects Janssen (the originator) as well as Amgen, Celltrion, Bio-Thera, Formycon, Dong-A/Meiji Seika, Samsung Bioepis and Biocon to be its main competitors for AVT04, a biosimilar candidate to Stelara (ustekinumab), all of which have disclosed development plans for a Stelara biosimilar. As the originator, Janssen is expanding the label for Stelara and launching follow-on drugs that could compete with ustekinumab biosimilars.

AVT06. Alvotech expects Regeneron (the originator) Amgen, Celltrion, Formycon, Altos, Sam Chun Dang, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz and Viatris to be its main competitors for AVT06, a biosimilar candidate to Regeneron’s Eylea (aflibercept). As the originator, Regeneron is currently working to expand the label for Eylea and developing higher-concentration formulations.

AVT03. Alvotech expects Amgen (the originator), Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Gedeon Richter, mAbxience, Biocon, Henlius and Teva to be its main competitors for AVT03, a biosimilar candidate to Prolia/Xgeva (denosumab), as they have all disclosed development plans for a Prolia/Xgeva biosimilar. Sandoz is additionally pursuing development for a biosimilar to Prolia/Xgeva in Japan, as are multiple companies in China. Alvotech believes that Evenity, a follow-on drug launched by Amgen with similar characteristics as Prolia/Xgeva, is likely most indicated for a subpopulation with very severe disease and is priced at a significant premium to Prolia/Xgeva.

AVT05. Alvotech expects Janssen (the originator), and Bio-thera to be its main competitors for AVT05, a biosimilar candidate to Janssen’s Simponi (golimumab). The originator, Janssen, is solidifying the reference product’s market position by actively expanding the label and by winning approvals in Japan and China. Alvotech believes that the originator’s success in expanding the market for the reference product will prove to be a benefit to AVT05’s commercial positioning.

AVT23. Alvotech expects Genentech (the originator), Celltrion and Teva to be its main competitors for AVT23, a biosimilar candidate to Genentech’s Xolair (omalizumab), as they have all disclosed development plans for a Xolair biosimilar. As the originator, Genentech is currently working to expand the label for Xolair.

Intellectual Property

The branded pharmaceutical industry relies on patent protection as one of several means to maintain exclusivity on the market. As a biosimilar-focused company, our success will depend in part on our ability to avoid

116

infringement of, to invalidate, and/or to license any relevant and material intellectual property rights of third parties. We expect all branded companies that market products in which we are developing a biosimilar to vigorously protect what they view as their proprietary rights. We fully understand that efforts to market our products may result in patent litigation, which may determine whether a particular patent at issue is valid and whether Alvotech has infringed such a patent. Timelines for resolution to patent disputes are difficult to estimate and are very specific to a particular situation (including, for example, the jurisdiction).

While our principal focus in matters relating to intellectual property is to avoid infringing the valid and enforceable rights of third parties, we also use a combination of intellectual property protection and confidentiality agreements and trade secrets to protect our own intellectual property related to our product candidates and development programs. We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technologies, inventions and improvements that we believe are important to our business, including by seeking, maintaining, enforcing and defending trademarks, trade secrets, patent rights, and other intellectual property rights for our products and processes, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties.

We are actively building our own intellectual property portfolio around our product candidates and platform technologies, including our manufacturing processes, and intend to identify and obtain, directly or through a license, as appropriate, patents that provide protection to our intellectual property and technology base. As of June 30, 2022, our patent portfolio consists of several pending patent applications for composition of matter (formulations) related to our AVT02 product:

With respect to these pending and any future applications, we cannot be sure that patents will be granted in any or all jurisdictions, nor can we be sure that any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our products. In addition to patents, Alvotech also relies on trademarks, trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation, confidentiality agreements, and IP assignment agreements in place with our employees to develop and maintain our proprietary position and ensure the future commercial success of our products.

Regulatory Landscape

Government Regulation and Product Approval

Government authorities at the federal, state and local level in the United States and in other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, clinical trials manufacture, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, import and export of pharmaceutical products such as those we are developing. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in other countries, along with subsequent obligation of compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, can vary widely and can require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

FDA Approval Process

All of our current product candidates are subject to extensive pre- and post-market regulation in the United States by the FDA as biological products, or biologics. The Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FFDCA, and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, post-approval changes, and import and

117

export of biologics. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending Biologics License Applications, or BLAs, withdrawal of approvals or revocation or suspension of licenses, clinical holds, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal penalties. The PHSA and its implementing regulations provides FDA authority to immediately suspend licenses in certain situations where FDA determines that there exists a danger to health, and to promulgate and enforce regulations to prevent the introduction or spread of communicable diseases in the United States and between states.

The process required by the FDA before a new biologic may be marketed in the United States is long, expensive and inherently uncertain. In order to establish the safety, purity and potency (effectiveness) of the biologic, biologics development in the United States typically involves, among other things, pre-clinical laboratory and animal tests, the submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, which must become effective before U.S. clinical investigations in humans may commence, and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety, purity and potency of the biologic for the conditions of use for which FDA approval is sought. Developing the data to satisfy FDA approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease.

Pre-clinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicology, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the pre-clinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including good laboratory practices. An IND must be submitted to the FDA to administer an investigational new drug to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for human studies, although the IND must also include safety data, e.g., the results of pre-clinical testing and animal testing assessing the toxicology and pharmacology of the product along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long term pre-clinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted.

An IND must become effective before United States clinical trials may begin. There is generally a 30-day waiting period after the IND submission, after which clinical investigations can begin, unless the FDA notifies the sponsor of concerns or questions related to a clinical hold. If that happens, the sponsor and the FDA must resolve the hold issue(s) before the clinical investigation can begin. Otherwise, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin at the conclusion of this 30-day period.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to volunteers or patients all under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted in compliance with federal regulations on good clinical practice, or GCP, including, for example, regulations regarding the protection of human subjects, defining, the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors, and governing protocols detailing the objectives of the trial and, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP.

The FDA may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients, among other reasons. The study protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an institutional review board, or IRB, for approval. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements or may impose other conditions. The study sponsor may also suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a determination that the subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk.

Clinical trials to support BLAs for marketing approval of a reference biologic product under the 351(a) pathway are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap or be combined. In Phase 1, the

118

biologics are initially introduced into patients or healthy human subjects and the biologic is tested to assess the safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence of effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the biologic for a particular indication, dosage tolerance and optimum dosage and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks. If a product candidate demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 clinical trials are undertaken to obtain additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These Phase 3 clinical trials are intended to establish data sufficient to demonstrate substantial evidence of the efficacy and safety of the product to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the biologic and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the biologic. Trials conducted outside of the United States under similar, GCP-compliant conditions in accordance with local applicable laws may also be acceptable to the FDA in support of product licensing.

Sponsors of clinical trials for investigational drugs generally must publicly disclose certain clinical trial information, including detailed trial design and trial results in a public database administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. These requirements are subject to specific timelines and apply to most clinical trials of FDA-regulated products.

After completion of the required clinical testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, detailed information regarding the investigational product is prepared and submitted to the FDA in the form of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications or conditions of use. FDA review and approval of the BLA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The BLA will include the results of pre-clinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture and controls and must demonstrate the continued safety, purity, and potency (efficacy) of the product based on these data.

Manufacturing controls and conformance to current good manufacturing practices (“cGMPs”) are considered very important for biological products. The BLA must also contain extensive manufacturing information. The FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the biologic is manufactured to ensure conformance to cGMPs. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the FDA’s ability to complete timely inspections of manufacturing sites. FDA is using alternative tools, where available, to determine or mitigate the need for an inspection and to support the application assessment. This can include reviewing a firm’s previous compliance history, using information sharing from trusted foreign regulatory partners through mutual recognition agreements and other confidentiality agreements, requesting records “in advance of or in lieu of” facility inspections or voluntarily from facilities and sites, and conducting remote interactive evaluations where appropriate.

The cost of preparing and submitting a BLA is substantial. Under federal law, the submission of most original BLAs is subject to a multi-million dollar application user fee, as well as annual fees, both of which are typically increased annually.

The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of BLAs. First, the FDA has agreed to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to enable substantive review within 60 days from its receipt of a BLA. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA’s stated goal is to review most original BLA applications for standard review biologics within ten months from the date the application is accepted for filing. Although the FDA often meets its user fee performance goals, the review goal date can be extended in the event of a “major amendment,” or can be extended by requests for additional information or clarification, and FDA review may not occur on a timely basis at all. Additionally, as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, review timelines may be delayed even further.

The FDA often refers applications for novel biologics or biologics which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee — typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts — for review,

119

evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and/or specific use and approvability questions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.

The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. After the FDA evaluates the BLA, including the facilities listed in the BLA, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter outlines the deficiencies in the submission. Remedying those deficiencies may require substantial additional testing or information in order for the FDA to consider the resubmitted application for approval. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction such that a resubmitted BLA is approvable, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to user fee goals of reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included. The FDA approval is never guaranteed, and the FDA may refuse to approve a BLA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied. Additionally, while the agency may utilize alternative approaches such as records requests in lieu of inspections for certain facilities, the agency is also deferring actions (i.e., missing the goal dates) on BLAs for which they have been unable to conduct site inspections due to the COVID-19 pandemic as FDA regulations generally require a pre-approval inspection for biologics in addition to the BLA’s demonstration the biologic is safe, pure and potent (effective) under the conditions of use sought. For BLAs where FDA defers action, there is no submission or communication needed by the applicant to ensure that an inspection will be scheduled to support approval.

Under the PHSA, the FDA will approve a BLA if it determines, among other things, that the product is safe, pure and potent and the facility where the product will be manufactured meets standards designed to ensure that it continues to be safe, pure and potent. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the biologic with specific prescribing information for specific indications. The approval for a biologic may be significantly more limited than requested in the application, including limitations on the specific conditions of use, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. The FDA may also require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. In addition, under certain circumstances, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, as a condition of approval, if necessary to ensure that the benefits of the biologic outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals and elements to assure safe use, or ETASU. ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the biologic. Moreover, product approval may include post-marketing commitments and/or post-marketing-requirements, including, for example, pediatric studies, safety monitoring, and Phase 4 trials.

Certain types of biologics may also be subject to official lot release. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official lot release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA may also perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products, such as viral vaccines, before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA conducts laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency and effectiveness of biological products. After approval of biologics, manufacturers must address any safety issues that arise, may be subject to recalls or a halt in manufacturing under certain circumstances, and are subject to periodic inspection after approval.

Because biologically-sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks, their use may be restricted in some countries.

120

Abbreviated Licensure Pathway of Biological Products as Biosimilars under 351(k)

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, amended the PHSA and created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be highly similar to an FDA-licensed reference biological products. This pathway was established as a way to provide more treatment options, increase access to lifesaving medications, and potentially lower health care costs through competition. Under the 351(k) (biosimilar) approval pathway, an application for licensure of a biosimilar product must include information demonstrating biosimilarity based upon the following (unless a specific element is waived by FDA):

In addition, an application submitted under the 351(k) pathway must include information demonstrating that:

Biosimilarity, as defined in PHSA §351(i), means that the biological product is highly similar to the reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components and that there are no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of the safety, purity and potency of the product. In addition, section 351(k)(4) of the PHSA provides for a designation of “interchangeability” between the reference and biosimilar products if certain additional criteria are met, whereby the biosimilar may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of the health care provider who prescribed the reference product. An application seeking licensure as an interchangeable must include information sufficient to demonstrate that:

As with other biological products, FDA approval of a BLA is required before a biosimilar may be marketed in the United States. Biosimilar BLAs (or “351(k) BLAs”) are not required to duplicate the entirety of the data package used to establish the safety and effectiveness of the reference product. Rather, a 351(k) BLA will be approved based on a demonstration of biosimilarity to the reference product, including the information outlined above, and does not require an independent showing of safety and effectiveness. Because a biosimilar can rely in

121

part on FDA’s previous determination of safety and effectiveness for the reference product for approval, biosimilar applicants generally do not need to conduct as many clinical trials. Biosimilar products also may be approved for an indication without direct studies of the biosimilar in that indication, with sufficient scientific justification for extrapolation. However, the FDA may not approve a 351(k) BLA if there is insufficient information to show that the biosimilar is “highly similar” to the reference product or that there are no clinically meaningful differences between the biosimilar product and the reference product. In addition, as with innovator BLAs, biosimilar BLAs will not be approved unless the product is manufactured in facilities designed to assure and preserve the biological product’s safety, purity and potency.

The process for filing and review of a BLA submitted through the 351(k) pathway is very similar to that of a BLA submitted through the 351(a) pathway, although there is a period of statutory exclusivity during which time the FDA is precluded from filing a 351(k) BLA that references a protected reference product. Subsequently, the FDA will accept the application for filing if it meets the regulatory criteria. The FDA may refuse to file applications that it finds are incomplete. The FDA will treat a biosimilar application or supplement as incomplete if, among other reasons, any applicable user fees assessed under the Biosimilar User Fee Act of 2012 have not been paid. In addition, the FDA may accept an application for filing but deny approval on the basis that the sponsor has not demonstrated biosimilarity, in which case the sponsor may choose to conduct further analytical, preclinical or clinical studies and resubmit the BLA to demonstrate biosimilarity under section 351(k).

The timing of final FDA approval of a biosimilar for commercial distribution depends on a variety of factors, including whether the manufacturer of the branded product is entitled to one or more statutory exclusivity periods, during which time the FDA is prohibited from approving any products that are biosimilar to the branded product. The FDA cannot approve a biosimilar application for 12 years from the date of first licensure of the reference product. A reference product may also be entitled to exclusivity under other statutory provisions. For example, a reference product with orphan drug exclusivity for a particular orphan “disease or condition” may be entitled to seven years of exclusivity, in which case no product that is biosimilar to the reference product may be approved until either the end of the 12-year period provided under §351(k)(7), and no biosimilar may be approved for the orphan disease or condition until the end of the seven-year orphan drug exclusivity period. In certain circumstances, a regulatory exclusivity period can extend beyond the life of a patent and thus block §351(k) applications from being approved on or after the patent expiration date.

The first biological product determined to be interchangeable with a branded reference product for any condition of use is also eligible for a period of exclusivity, during which time the FDA may not determine that another product is interchangeable with the same reference product for any condition of use. This exclusivity period lasts until the earlier of: (1) one year after the first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable product; (2) 18 months after resolution of a patent infringement suit instituted under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6) against the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product, based on a final court decision regarding all of the patents in the litigation or dismissal of the litigation with or without prejudice; (3) 42 months after approval of the first interchangeable product, if a patent infringement suit instituted under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6) against the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product is still ongoing; or (4) 18 months after approval of the first interchangeable product if the applicant that submitted the application for the first interchangeable product has not been sued under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(6).

Advertising and Promotion

The FFDCA prohibits the marketing, promotion, or advertising of an investigational drug as if it has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for the uses for which it is being studied. Once a BLA is approved, a product will be subject to continuing post-approval regulatory requirements, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion and reporting of adverse events. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval advertising, marketing and promotion of drugs, including biologics, including, for example, direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, and industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. Violations of the FDA’s

122

requirements around advertising, marketing, and promotion of drugs can result in significant enforcement activities, including the issuance of warning letters or untitled letters, which may direct a company to correct deviations from FDA, and federal and state investigations, which can lead to civil and criminal penalties, lawsuits, and prosecutions.

As with all drugs, biologics may be marketed only as consistent with FDA-approved labeling. After approval, most changes require submission and FDA approval supplemental BLA before the change can be implemented. This includes changes to labeling or manufacturing processes (including changes to facilities), which typically require prior approval of a supplement. A supplement for a 351(a) BLA seeking to add a new indication typically requires new clinical data, and the FDA generally uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing BLA supplements with clinical data as it does in reviewing BLAs. There are also continuing reporting requirements for marketed drug products.

Adverse Event Reporting and GMP Compliance

In addition to regular periodic reports following FDA approval of a BLA and compliance with any post-marketing commitments or post-marketing requirements, license-holders also must comply with adverse event reporting requirements and must continue to conform to cGMPs, as described above. Manufacture, packaging, labeling, storage, and distribution procedures must continue to conform to cGMP after approval, and FDA conducts periodic surveillance inspections intended to ensure such ongoing compliance. Biologics manufacturers and their manufacturing subcontractors are generally required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP.

Post-approval discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency or issues with manufacturing processes or cGMP compliance, or other failures to comply with regulatory requirements, may lead the FDA to, for example:

Under certain circumstances, FDA may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke a license or recall the product from the market.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

Although we currently do not have any products on the market or engage with any licensed health care providers in the United States, our current and future business operations are subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we conduct our business. These laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, privacy and security and physician sunshine laws and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) prohibits any individual or entity from knowingly and willfully offering or paying “remuneration,” directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind to induce another

123

individual or entity to: (a) refer an individual to a person for the furnishing (or arranging for the furnishing) of any item or service for which payment may be made under a federal health care program; (b) purchase or order any covered item or service; (c) arrange for the purchase or order of any covered item or service; or (d) recommend the purchase or order of any covered item or service. It also is illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute to solicit or receive remuneration for such purposes. “Remuneration” is generally defined to include any transfer of value, in cash or in kind, including gifts or free product, meals, discounts, rebates, and other price concessions. Courts have broadly construed the AKS to include virtually anything of value given to an individual or entity if one purpose of the remuneration is to influence the recipient’s reason or judgment relating to referrals.

There are statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors specifying certain payment practices that will not be considered to violate the AKS. Such exceptions and safe harbors include, among others, protection for payments for personal services and management contracts, and for certain discounts. If a payment practice falls squarely within one of the exceptions or safe harbors, it will be immune from criminal prosecution and civil exclusion under the AKS. Importantly, the failure of an arrangement to fall within a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not mean that it necessarily violates the AKS; however, the legality of such arrangements may be closely scrutinized by federal authorities on a facts and circumstances basis and are not protected.

Additionally, states have enacted similar kickback statutes that may apply to healthcare services reimbursed by private insurance, not just those reimbursed by a federal or state health care program. The specific scope of these laws vary. However, in many instances, activities that are protected from scrutiny under the federal statute would not violate the state statutes.

Further, pursuant to changes made under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “ACA”) any claims submitted to Medicare or Medicaid as a result of an illegal kickback constitutes a false or fraudulent claims under the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”). Additionally, the ACA amended the intent requirement of the AKS so that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the AKS, or the specific intent to violate it, to have violated the statute.

The civil false claims laws, including the FCA, prohibits, among other things, knowingly presenting or causing the presentation of a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to the U.S. government. Actions under the FCA may be brought by the government or as a qui tam action by a private individual in the name of the government. Government enforcement agencies and private whistleblowers have investigated pharmaceutical companies for or asserted liability under the FCA for a variety of alleged promotional and marketing activities, such as providing free products to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the products; providing consulting fees and other benefits to physicians to induce them to prescribe products; and engaging in promotion for unapproved uses. Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws.

The federal Health insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of whether the payor is public or private, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a health care benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a health care offense and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by any trick, scheme or device a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters. Additionally, the ACA amended the intent requirement of some of these criminal statutes under HIPAA so that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute, or the specific intent to violate it, to have committed a violation.

124

In addition, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments made to physicians and other healthcare providers. For instance, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act (“Sunshine Act”) requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with specified exceptions) to report annually information related to specified payments or other transfers of value provided to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals and to report annually specified ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Beginning in 2022, applicable manufacturers also will be required to report such information regarding its payments and other transfers of value to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwives during the previous year.

In addition, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”) and their implementing regulations, impose requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information held by covered entities and their business associates. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security standards directly applicable to business associates, defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions.

Many states have also adopted laws similar to each of the above federal laws, which may be broader in scope and apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers. We may also be subject to state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, and/or state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information, state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

The shifting commercial compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust systems to comply with different compliance and/or reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions increase the possibility that a healthcare company may violate one or more of the requirements. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including, without limitation, administrative, civil, and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and imprisonment.

International Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, a variety of foreign regulations govern clinical trials, marketing authorization procedures and commercial sales and distribution of pharmaceutical products. The approval process varies from country to country and the time to approval may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. In the European Union, the approval of a biosimilar for marketing is based on an opinion issued by the European Medicines Agency and a related decision issued by the European Commission. However, the subsequent substitutability of a biosimilar for the innovator product is a decision that is made at the national level on a country-by-country basis in individual EU Member States. Other regions, including Canada, Japan and Korea, also have their own regulatory pathways governing the approval and marketing of biosimilars. Some third

125

countries (such as Singapore and Malaysia) have adopted EU guidance. Other countries (such as (Cuba and Brazil) follow guidance issued by the World Health Organization. While there are some similarities between the regulatory requirements across regions, some areas of substantial difference remain.

Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

In the United States and other countries, sales of our products will depend on the availability and extent of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors, including government healthcare programs and private insurance plans. Patients who are provided medical treatment for their conditions generally rely on third party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their treatment. Coverage and adequate reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and commercial payors are critical to new product acceptance. Governments and private payors continue to pursue initiatives to manage drug utilization and contain costs. These payors are increasingly focused on the effectiveness, benefits, and costs of similar treatments, which could result in lower reimbursement rates for our products or narrower populations for whom payors will reimburse. Continued intense public scrutiny of the price of drugs and other healthcare costs, together with payor dynamics, have limited, and are likely to continue to limit, our ability to set or adjust the price of our products based on their value, which could adversely affect on our business.

In the United States, no uniform product coverage and reimbursement policy exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor can be a time-consuming and costly process that can require provision of supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data, with no assurance that coverage or specific levels of reimbursement will be obtained. Third-party payors are increasingly examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of products and services in addition to their safety and efficacy. Accordingly, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved products.

Both private and government payors use formularies to manage access and utilization of drugs. A drug’s inclusion and favorable positioning on a formulary are essential to ensure patients have access to a particular drug. Even when access is available, some patients abandon their prescriptions for economic reasons. Third-party payors continue to institute cost reduction and containment measures that lower drug utilization and/or spending altogether and/or shift a greater portion of the costs to patients. Such measures include, but are not limited to, more-limited benefit plan designs, higher patient co-pays or coinsurance obligations, limitations on patients’ use of commercial manufacturer co-pay payment assistance programs (including through co-pay accumulator adjustment or maximization programs), stricter utilization management criteria before a patient may get access to a drug, higher-tier formulary placement that increases the level of patient out-of-pocket costs and formulary exclusion, which effectively encourages patients and providers to seek alternative treatments or pay 100% of the cost of a drug. The use of such measures by pharmacy benefit managers (“PBMs”) and insurers has continued to intensify and could limit use and sales of our products.

Over the past few years, many PBMs and insurers have consolidated, resulting in a smaller number of PBMs and insurers overseeing a large portion of total covered lives in the United States. As a result, PBMs and insurers have greater market power and negotiating leverage to mandate stricter utilization criteria and/or exclude drugs from their formularies in favor of competitor drugs or alternative treatments. In highly competitive treatment markets, PBMs are also able to exert negotiating leverage by requiring incremental rebates from manufacturers in order for them to gain and/or maintain their formulary position. Moreover, third-party coverage policies and reimbursement rates are dynamic, meaning that our products could be subject to less favorable coverage policies and/or reimbursement rates over time, making prospective reimbursement and coverage status of our products difficult to predict.

126

Healthcare Reform

Like third-party payors, the U.S. federal government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continually implemented cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for generic substitution. For example, the IRA, among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in PPACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost through a newly established manufacturer discount program. State laws may permit or require substitution of interchangeable products, too, when approved interchangeable products are available in the future. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could further limit our net revenue and results. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for our products or decisions by certain third-party payors to not cover specific products, or implement coverage restrictions (e.g. prior authorization, step-edit requirements) could reduce provider utilization and have a material adverse effect on sales, results of operations and financial condition.

In the United States and some other countries, particularly over the past few years, a number of legislative and regulatory proposals have been introduced in an attempt to lower drug prices and restrict or regulate post-approval activities.

In the United States, in addition to market actions taken by private and government payors, there has been heightened government, media, and public scrutiny over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, resulting in several presidential executive orders, Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products. For example, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA directs the HHS Secretary to establish a Drug Price Negotiation Program to lower prices for certain high-expenditure, single-source prescription drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B and Part D that have been approved by the FDA for at least 7 years for prescription drugs and at least 11 years for biologics. Under the Program, the HHS Secretary will publish a list of “selected drugs,” and will then negotiate maximum fair prices with their manufacturers. The Program will be implemented in stages. Beginning in 2026, 10 Medicare Part D “selected drugs” will be subject to price negotiations. By 2029, and in subsequent years thereafter, the number will increase to 20 drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B and Part D. Agreements between HHS and manufacturers will remain in place until a drug or biologic is no longer considered a “selected drug” for negotiation purposes. Manufacturers who do not comply with the negotiated prices set under the Program will be subject to an excise tax based on a percentage of total sales of a “selected drug” up to 95% and potential civil monetary penalties. Further, beginning in October 2023, the IRA will require manufacturers that increase prices of certain Medicare Part B and Part D drugs or biologics at a rate greater than inflation to pay rebates to CMS or be subject to civil monetary penalties. The IRA also provides certain incentives for the development and manufacture of biosimilars. For example, the Secretary can grant a one-year delay from price negotiations for biosimilars that have a “high likelihood” of a competing biosimilar product entering the market within the requested delay period. In addition, certain Part B biosimilars qualify for an increase in Medicare payments, to 8% of the 5-year Average Sales Price, from 6% under current law. The HHS Secretary has been directed to promulgate regulations to implement the Program and other IRA health reform measures. In this dynamic environment, we are unable to predict which or how many government policy, legislative, regulatory, executive or administrative changes may ultimately be, or effectively estimate the consequences to our business if, enacted and implemented. However, to the extent that these or other federal government initiatives further decrease or modify the coverage or reimbursement available for our products,

127

require that we pay increased rebates or shift other costs to us, limit or affect our decisions regarding the pricing of or otherwise reduce the use of our products, or limit our ability to offer co-pay payment assistance to commercial patients, such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Individual states have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In many countries outside the United States, government-sponsored healthcare systems are the primary payors for drugs. With increasing budgetary constraints and/or difficulty in understanding the value of medicines, governments and payors in many countries are applying a variety of measures to exert downward price pressure. These measures can include mandatory price controls; price referencing; therapeutic-reference pricing; increases in mandates; incentives for generic substitution and biosimilar usage and government-mandated price cuts. In this regard, many countries have health technology assessment agencies that use formal economic metrics such as cost-effectiveness to determine prices, coverage and reimbursement of new therapies; and these agencies are expanding in both established and emerging markets. Many countries also limit coverage to populations narrower than those specified on our product labels or impose volume caps to limit utilization. We expect that countries will continue taking aggressive actions to seek to reduce expenditures on drugs. Similarly, fiscal constraints may also affect the extent to which countries are willing to approve new and innovative therapies and/or allow access to new technologies.

Facilities

As of July 28, 2022, Alvotech has six locations.

Alvotech’s registered office is at 9, Rue de Bitbourg, L-1273 Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, where it has approximately 500 square feet of office space. This location is used for administrative functions only.

Our corporate headquarters, main manufacturing site and a large part of our R&D division are located in Reykjavik, Iceland. This facility provides us with purpose-built GMP, and has highly integrated capabilities for producing biosimilars at scale. Our facility is currently approximately 140,000 square feet and utilizes single-use technology to manufacture drug substance and drug product. The Reykjavik facility houses Alvotech’s R&D, quality control and quality assurance teams and has an active and valid GMP certificate issued by the Icelandic Medicines Authority authorizing Investigational Medicinal Product and commercial manufacturing. In December 2020, Alvotech broke ground on an expansion of its Reykjavik facility that will double its total footprint, adding another 140,000 square feet. The expansion is expected to be completed in early 2023 and will give us additional redundancy in our drug product capacity, assembly of combination products and devices, and secondary packaging. Additionally, the expansion will support increased warehousing and other supportive functions. With the expansion of the Reykjavik facility’s manufacturing capabilities, we expect our capabilities to be able to meet the demand for our products, after obtaining regulatory approval and commercial launch, in the near future. See “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions—Lease Agreements—Leases of Operational Facilities.”

During this expansion, our R&D functions have temporarily moved to another facility in Reykjavik. Permits from the Icelandic EPA (Umhverfisstofnun) and the city of Reykjavik have been granted for the operations in Klettagardar. These facilities have no known additional environmental risks that might impact our operations or utilization of facilities.

Additionally, in Reykjavik we also have two office spaces, each approximately 4,700 square feet, and a new warehouse of approximately 36,000 square feet that opened in the fourth quarter of 2021 and will increase our warehousing capabilities and allow for laboratories to sample incoming materials. We expect these laboratories to be operational later in 2022.

128

We also have a facility in Jülich, Germany that focuses on cell line, media, process and analytical development, including tailored clone creation and selection. The Jülich site also serves as a warehouse for supply continuity of master cell banks and working cell banks for our lead product candidates that are produced at contract manufacturing organizations. This facility is approximately 15,000 square feet and is not used for manufacturing.

We have a facility in Hannover, Germany that houses our capabilities in analytical glycoprotein characterization. This facility is approximately 14,000 square feet and is not used for manufacturing.

Our Virginia, USA office provides our U.S. regulatory, government policy and legal affairs functions. This office is approximately 3,200 square feet and is not used for manufacturing.

Our office in Zurich, Switzerland features our strategic clinical and Medical Affairs R&D center that focuses on late-stage development and regulatory filings. This facility is approximately 3,800 square feet and is not used for manufacturing.

We believe that our office, research, laboratory and manufacturing facilities, including the ongoing expansion of the Reykjavik facility, are sufficient to meet our current needs. However, as a high-growth company we are constantly evaluating our needs for expanding and or adding to our facilities.

Alvotech holds operational permits from the city of Reykjavik for our facilities in Iceland. The permits address potential environmental impact from our operations. They also address factors that could impact our neighboring communities, such as noise pollution, handling of hazardous substances, air emissions, handling of solid waste and wastewater. We are also required to hold permits from the Icelandic EPA (Umhverfisstofnun) for the use of GMOs in our facilities. We are subject to Icelandic law and regulations, many of whom are set by the Icelandic EPA (Umhverfisstofnun) and the Icelandic Administration of Occupational Safety and Health (Vinnueftirlitið).

We are not aware of, and do not anticipate, environmental issues that may affect our utilization of the facilities described above.

Employees

As of July 28, 2022, Alvotech had 903 employees, including 25 contractors, 87% of whom were devoted to R&D, quality and technical operations, and 13% to administration and support roles. Approximately 58% of our employees hold a PhD, MD or master’s degree.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, Alvotech may become involved in additional legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of its business.

U.S. Litigations

On March 19, 2021, AbbVie filed an action against Alvotech hf. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging trade secret misappropriation under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and under the Illinois Trade Secrets Act. The complaint pleaded, among other things, that Alvotech hf. hired a certain former AbbVie employee in order to acquire and access trade secrets belonging to AbbVie. Pursuant to the U.S. AbbVie Agreement, Alvotech and AbbVie settled all U.S. litigation arising out of the development of Alvotech’s adalimumab biosimilar, and the filing of the corresponding BLA with the FDA. The case is now dismissed.

On December 17, 2021, AbbVie Inc., AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd, and AbbVie Operations Singapore Pte. Ltd. filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission against Alvotech hf., Alvotech Germany GmbH, Alvotech Swiss AG, Alvotech USA Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., and Ivers-Lee AG (Certain Adalimumab, Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same, and Products

129

Containing Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-1296). The complaint raised trade secret misappropriation allegations similar to those raised in the trade secret litigation that AbbVie previously filed in the Northern District of Illinois. Pursuant to the U.S. AbbVie Agreement, Alvotech and AbbVie jointly sought dismissal of this action for all respondents, with each respondent to bear its own fees and costs. The action is now terminated.

On April 27, 2021, AbbVie filed an action against Alvotech hf. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleging infringement of four patents, under the patent laws of the United States. On May 28, 2021, AbbVie filed another action against Alvotech hf. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging infringement of 58 patents, under the patent laws of the United States, the BPCIA, and the Declaratory Judgment Act, and later added three more patents. Pursuant to the U.S. AbbVie Agreement, Alvotech and AbbVie agreed to jointly seek dismissal of all claims, counterclaims, potential claims and counterclaims in these cases without prejudice, with each respondent to bear its own fees and costs. The cases are now dismissed.

Canadian Litigations

On March 31, 2021, AbbVie filed four actions in the Federal Court of Canada (T-557-21, T-559-21, T-560-21 and T-561-21, collectively, the “NOC Actions”) against JAMP Pharma, which is Alvotech’s exclusive Canadian partner for AVT02 (adalimumab solution for injection). No Alvotech entity is a named party in the NOC Actions. AbbVie is seeking declarations pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations and the Patent Act that JAMP Pharma’s adalimumab solution for subcutaneous injection (the “JAMP Pharma Products”) would directly or indirectly infringe the asserted claims of Canadian Patent Nos. 2,898,009; 2,904,458; 2,504,868; 2,847,142; 2,801,917 and 2,385,745. JAMP Pharma counterclaimed, in each of the four actions, alleging that the asserted claims of each of the six patents are invalid.

On April 6, 2021, JAMP Pharma commenced four actions in the Federal Court of Canada (T-572-21, T-573-21, T-577-21 and T-581-21, collectively, the “Impeachment Actions”) seeking declarations that all claims of Canadian Patent Nos. 2,898,009; 2,904,458; 2,504,868; 2,847,142; 2,801,917 and 2,385,745 are invalid, void and of no force or effect, and declarations that the making, using or selling of the JAMP Pharma Products by JAMP Pharma in Canada will not infringe any valid claim of Canadian Patent Nos. 2,898,009; 2,904,458; 2,504,868; 2,847,142; 2,801,917 and 2,385,745. No Alvotech entity is a named party in the Impeachment Actions.

On June 4, 2021, JAMP Pharma amended its Statements of Claim in the Impeachment Actions to only seek declarations that the specific claims asserted in the NOC Actions are invalid, void and of no force or effect, and declarations that the making, using or selling of the JAMP Pharma Products by JAMP Pharma in Canada will not infringe the asserted claims. AbbVie has counterclaimed for declarations that the asserted claims of the patents are valid and that they will be infringed by JAMP Pharma.

The pleadings are closed and the parties exchanged documentary productions as part of the discovery process on September 3, 2021. The trial of the Impeachment Actions and the NOC Actions is scheduled to commence on November 14, 2022.

In the event of a successful claim of patent infringement against JAMP Pharma, JAMP Pharma may be blocked from the market and Alvotech may have to redesign its infringing products or obtain a license from AbbVie, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Even if JAMP Pharma is successful in defending against AbbVie’s patent infringement claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

In December 2021, Health Canada informed JAMP Pharma that the 40 mg/0.4 mL and 80 mg/0.8 mL presentations of SIMLANDI are not subject to the 24-month statutory stay pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations because AbbVie elected to not market the equivalent high-concentration versions to Canadian patients. In January 2022, JAMP Pharma received notices of compliance for the 40 mg/0.4 mL and 80 mg/0.8 mL presentations of SIMLANDI. AbbVie has commenced applications to judicially review Health Canada’s decision in the Federal Court of Canada, and a hearing took place on May 16-17, 2022. On

130

August 17, 2022, the court issued a decision, finding that Health Canada’s interpretation of the regulations was reasonable and dismissing AbbVie’s applications for judicial review.

In the event that AbbVie appeals the court’s decision, and an appellate court finds in AbbVie’s favor, then JAMP Pharma’s notices of compliance may be quashed, resulting in JAMP Pharma not being able to market the 40 mg/0.4 mL and 80 mg/0.8 mL presentations of SIMLANDI until a favorable trial decision is released in the ongoing patent infringement claims brought by AbbVie against JAMP Pharma.

Preliminary Injunction Proceedings in Netherlands

On April 15, 2021, AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd. (“AbbVie Biotech”) filed a writ of summons, bringing preliminary injunction proceedings (Case number: C/09/610604 KG ZA 21-366) against Alvotech hf., Alvotech Swiss AG, and STADA Arzneimittel AG (collectively, “Defendants”) in the District Court of Amsterdam, relating to the European Marketing Authorization Application for AVT02, and asserting European Patent Nos. EP 1 737 491 and EP 2 940 044. AbbVie Biotech sought, after amendment of its claims, an order for the defendants to obtain a Marketing Authorization for AVT02 with a carve-out pursuant to Article 11, second paragraph, of Directive 2001/83/EC, whereby the indications allegedly protected by EP 1 737 491 and/or EP 2 940 044 and the corresponding dosage regimens are removed from certain portions of the SmPC of the Marketing Authorization, before AVT02 is marketed in Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and the EU countries where the asserted patents are valid. AbbVie Biotech also sought periodic penalty payments and an order to pay the costs of the proceedings. The Court heard oral argument on June 18, 2021. On July 16, 2021, the Court issued a decision, denying AbbVie Biotech’s request for relief and ordering AbbVie Biotech to pay the defendants’ costs. AbbVie Biotech did not appeal the Court’s ruling.

Proceedings Before the European Patent Office

On July 15, 2021, Alvotech hf. filed an intervention with the European Patent Office in the appeal opposition proceedings (T1837/19-3.304) relating to EP2940044, assigned to AbbVie Biotech. In 2017, a number of oppositions were filed with the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office (“Opposition Division”) against EP2940044. On July 15, 2021, Alvotech hf. also filed an intervention with the European Patent Office in the appeal opposition proceedings (T