I wrote an article about $NWBO: reddit.com/r/NWBO/comments/1… I encourage everyone to read it. What is happening with NWBO is astounding and our persistent retail investor has hung on through it all. I believe we will all be much better off when this story comes to its' ending.

💵The Yorkville Piggy Bank Late on Friday we saw an 8-K filed by $NWBO detailing the terms of another Yorkville financing. I'll compare this to the prior financings starting with the most recent. tldr; the most recent financing has 7% less in fees but throws in some warrants. ➡️July 29, 2026 Total Raised: $4,900,000 Total Cost: 5% OID $2,000,000 in warrants at price of $0.205* $50m credit line exact same terms as prior. *In talking with two separate funds that have done similar financings with $NWBO a lot of times these warrants are saved for potential upside whereas the principal balance is typically converted to shares and immediately sold at a profit. See: sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edg… ➡️June 30, 2025 Total Raised: $3,900,000 7.5% Gunnar Fee 5% OID See: sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/… ➡️December 19, 2024 Total Raised: $5,500,000 Costs as % of Total Raised: 22.1% See: sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/…

➡️The Battle for the Market Makers’ Trading Algorithms Continues The Case: Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc v. Canaccord Genuity LLC, 1:22-cv-10185, (S.D.N.Y.) The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/665… On July 10th we saw the Court state that the market makers’ algorithms are discoverable. "Defendants’ position that they need not produce algorithms related to their trading in $NWBO stock...is rejected." (See Image 1) On July 24th we saw a flurry of filings by the defendant market makers who have been accused of illegally manipulating the share price of $NWBO stock via spoofing. The Defendant Market Makers asked the Court for clarification and/or reconsideration of their decision that the trading algorithms are discoverable. “To the extent the Court’s Order compelled production of the code itself, Defendants respectfully request reconsideration.” (Docket #300) This all comes from a May 2025 $NWBO discovery request for said algorithms: “In May 2025, NWBO served sweeping document requests for “[a]ll trading algorithms and computer programs, including all underlying codes and compilations … and all versions [and] iterations … used to execute trades or place or cancel orders in NWBO shares”; “[a]ll of the Source Code and Executable Code underlying any trading algorithm used by You to execute trades or place or cancel orders in NWBO shares"; and all related documents and communications. E.g., Ex. 3 at 9, 12-13 (RFPs 6-7, 22-27)." (Docket #300) The Defendants argue that the source code is the kind of business interest the courts typically protect from disclosure: "There is no more sensitive proprietary information at a trading firm than its source code. Defendants' code is among their most valuable assets and used to process billions of dollars of order flow each day." (Docket #300) This ruling will have an enormous impact on the case. Stay tuned.

$NWBO Adam, Are you purposely being ignorant and misleading with your title and opening sentences? As I'm sure you're aware, the 150 day process takes no where close to 150 days in total. For a time the MHRA was publishing their timelines for the "150 day" review. I haven't checked the data recently, but for a reporter as unbiased as yourself, I'm sure you have. Last time I checked the "150 day" process for active new substances (not going through IRP) was taking anywhere from 208-459 days and that DOES NOT include clock off periods. [1] Not to mention the complexity of $NWBO's application. Unfortunately, your piece is behind a paywall and I'm not going to spend a penny on reading the work of a reporter that fails to do basic research. Is your work once again being used as an excuse behind a campaign to spoof $NWBO? [2] Still leaving creepy messages on the cell phones of people who call out your sloppy work? [3] Still waiting for that cease and desist letter your promised me. I know you enjoy it when I copy your co-workers so they can be made aware of the creepy guy working next to them. Hope you had a good 4th! [1]xitter.cf/hoffmann6383/status/18… [2]xitter.cf/hoffmann6383/status/17… [3]xitter.cf/hoffmann6383/status/18…

➡️NWBO Spoofing Lawsuit The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/665… Two quick updates on filings over the last 2 days in $NWBO's spoofing case. 1⃣Looks like we finally have an upcoming $NWBO Motion to Compel in their civil spoofing case against some of the largest market makers in the world. See attached image 1. This should be interesting as you often get some insight into parts of the case that haven't been public. 2⃣Another interesting tidbit in a separate filing, and I've pointed this out before, but this is a July 7th email from Citadel claiming they don't use algorithms to trade $NWBO stock (I'd guess it is their hedge fund clients likely using algos). See Image 2. "Algorithms: Citadel Securities explained, again, that it did not use algorithms to trade NWBO stock and that the source code Citadel Securities uses for all OTC Link trading is not specific to NWBO or otherwise relevant to the claims and defenses in this litigation. NWBO nevertheless asserted that it is entitled to that source code because it is “relevant,” but did not articulate how source code that is not specific to NWBO bears on any claim in this action."

All Market Makers in the Harrington Spoofing Case Have Settled The Case: Harrington Global Opportunity Fund, Limited v. BofA Securities, Inc., 1:21-cv-00761, (S.D.N.Y.) The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/469… The sole remaining Market Maker Defendant in the Harrington spoofing case has now settled. See attached image. It's interesting to note that all defendant market makers settled prior to summary judgment motions, when a lot of the previously sealed discovery might become available to view publicly. This bodes well for $NWBO's own spoofing case which is going through discovery.

✅Another Civil Spoofing Settlement This is at least the 3rd likely settlement I've seen. I'll go through each likely settlement from oldest to newest. 1⃣ This was likely a settlement in the Harrington spoofing case with defendants TD Securities, Inc. and TD Securities (USA) LLC. See: xitter.cf/hoffmann6383/status/18… 2⃣This was a likely settlement in $NWBO's spoofing case with defendant Canaccord Genuity LLC. See: xitter.cf/hoffmann6383/status/20… 3⃣ Most recently we see another Harrington settlement. This time the settlement is with Merrill Lynch Canada, Inc. and BofA Securities, Inc. While the prior settlements likely involved some sort of payment by the Defendant(s), this settlement makes it clear there will be a payment: "We expect that upon receiving the settlement payment Harrington will file a notice of dismissal with prejudice of all claims..." (emphasis added)

✅️Algorithms Discoverable? The federal magistrate judge in $NWBO's spoofing lawsuit against six of the largest market makers in the world, including Citadel and Vitru, believes that the Defendant market makers' trading algorithms are discoverable The Magistrate Judge stated, in relevant part: "I'm not sure how that gets limited, frankly." [1] See attached Image. [1] Docket #286, courtlistener.com/docket/665…

➡️NWBO Spoofing Lawsuit - May 29th Status Update The Case: Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc v. Canaccord Genuity LLC, 1:22-cv-10185, (S.D.N.Y.) The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/665… On May 29, 2026 the parties in the above case jointly filed a discovery status update with the Court. We have the usual back-and-forth finger pointing. Instead of wasting time analyzing the finger pointing I'll address some of the more interesting tidbits found in this letter. ✅ $NWBO is going after Defendant Market Makers' Algorithms "For example, Defendants have yet to produce algorithms underlying the relevant trading. No party has produced these algorithms despite the Court’s prior acknowledgment that they are discoverable,6 with Citadel asserting it did not use trading algorithms at all.7" ✅ Document Production NWBO: 4,508 Citadel: 257 G1X: 156 GTS: 229 Instinet: 69 Lime: 20 Virtu: 92 See Image 1. ✅ $NWBO is going for information related to short selling “Defendants suggest that by searching for terms related to shorting, NWBO is fishing. Not so. While the Court stated that short selling was not required among the mechanisms of the spoofing scheme, short selling is directly tied to profit motive incentives underlying the alleged activity.” ✅ $NWBO is seeking all trading data This includes ALL trading done from every Defendant from December '17 to the present. "Without access to Defendants’ complete trading data, Plaintiff is unduly restricted in evaluating Defendants’ bona fide market-making trading patterns versus their manipulative spoofing tactics and unduly limited in proving scienter or furthering its claim for injunctive relief for alleged, ongoing harm." We should expect to see a motion to compel filed by $NWBO if this matter is not resolved: "Discovery in connection with that claim should necessarily extend from December 5, 2017 to the present day. Defendants’ attempt to limit their searches is unsupported and contrary to their prior representations. As the parties are at an impasse, NWBO anticipates it will need to bring a motion to compel in the coming weeks." ✅ $NWBO seeks materials related to Defendants' regulatory investigations "NWBO has also raised the absence of materials regarding regulatory and internal investigations, including SEC investigations, into potential related misconduct, as well as data regarding short sales."

➡️Is Citadel attempting to use discovery in NWBO’s spoofing case to get a sneak peak at other market manipulation investigations into Citadel? The Case: Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc v. Canaccord Genuity LLC, 1:22-cv-10185, (S.D.N.Y.) The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/665… $NWBO has sued seven of the largest market makers in the world alleging that they have illegally manipulated $NWBO’s share price via spoofing. One of the seven defendants (Canaccord) has entered a confidential settlement agreement. The other six market makers are going through discovery. As part of their discovery, Citadel sent a subpoena to Joshua Mitts, $NWBO’s non-testifying expert and attorney. The Court entered a Protective Order limiting the documents Citadel and the other Defendants are able to obtain from Mr. Mitts via subpoena. In a letter dated June 2nd, 2026, Mr. Mitts’ attorney is asking the Court to further limit the subpoena to documents in his possession that are related to the $NWBO lawsuit instead of all documents in his possession. Why are the attorneys of Mr. Mitts asking the Court to further narrow the scope of Mr. Mitts' subpoena? In short, because Mr. Mitts is in possession of other documents concerning market manipulation by Citadel in unrelated matters. Recall, Mr. Mitts’ CV states that he “has extensive experience supporting the U.S. Department of Justice.” [1] The June 2nd letter from Mr. Mitts' attorneys to the Court states, in relevant part: “…Mr. Mitts possesses documents which concern market manipulation or spoofing activity by Citadel in a number of unrelated matters. While those documents are technically responsive to Request No. 4, which seeks all such documents related to Citadel, such documents are irrelevant and confidential, and many are subject to privileges owned by third parties and/or require Mr. Mitts to notify third parties prior to any disclosure regarding them. In some cases, the matters in which Mr. Mitts has been involved are sufficiently sensitive that even the limited information a categorical log would require could not be disclosed to Citadel without violating privilege or confidentiality obligations.” (emphasis added) Could Citadel be fishing for information on possible U.S. Department of Justice Investigations into themselves? It's certainly possible, but this this letter doesn't provide any definitive answers. [1]law.columbia.edu/sites/defau…

NWBO '26 Q1 10Q sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edg… At this point I’m skimming the filings for information regarding $NWBO's commercialization of their lead product and steps $NWBO might take to address their cash crunch. The information on additional trials and US manufacturing is great, but those trials and US manufacturing are many many years away from positively impacting the finances. Here is what stood out to me in $NWBO's recent '26 Q1 10Q. ➡️Significant Reduction in Net Loss The net loss for the 3 months ended March 31st from 2025 was $19.343m and for 2026 it was reduced to $3.069m. I’d imagine we are starting to feel the Advent merger synergies. ➡️Another Approval Timeline Hint First, lets look my at the prior speculation on timelines. Speculation #1: Per data posted by Tunnelvisionplenty, there is a big batch of approvals coming 6 months post the 2nd CHM meeting. $NWBO had their 2nd CHM meeting on November 27/28 of 2025. Six months past this date is late May 2026. Speculation #2: For the first time in the ’25 10k we saw that Advent started DCVax-L specific training which typically takes about six months. I assume they wanted this training to be complete prior to approval. This statement wasn’t in the ’25 Q3 10Q. So, this training likely started October-December ’25 timeframe. That means the training would be complete in the April-June ’26 timeframe. Speculation #3 (contained in recent 10Q): In this ’26 Q1 10Q we see that $NWBO started a leukapheresis buildout in the UK. I assume this is being timed to be done for the approval decision. The 10Q states that $NWBO expects the buildout “…to be completed by June…” So, we have three separate signals pointing to approval in May, April-June and finally June. There is an ongoing CHM meeting for May 21/22. Hopefully $NWBO is on the agenda at this CHM and we have an approval decision in mid ’26 as a few speculative timelines are starting to align. ➡️Potential UK Property Sale "The Company owns a 17-acre parcel of land on the edge of Sawston, UK...If zoned for residential development, the Company has been advised that its property would be extremely valuable." This is a positive step to possibly address $NWBO’s cash crunch and something to keep an eye on. I would also like to know what the company means by "extremely valuable". ➡️Spoofing Lawsuit Settlement Language “The funds are being held in escrow while the Company pursues discussions with other lesser defendants about resolution of the case against them. The Company anticipates that the funds will be released from escrow when the discussions with the lesser defendants have been completed.” That’s a positive sign that some of the smaller players are possibly talking settlement. I’m surprised $NWBO put this language in a public filing. Regarding the statement that the funds will remain in escrow until discussions with lesser defendants have been completed is puzzling. I’m not sure why those funds would be required to stay in escrow until discussions with other parties are complete. The only thing I can think of with my limited knowledge of the situation is that $NWBO sold interest in the lawsuit to certain investors and maybe their agreement stated that the first [insert dollar value] of the settlement goes to paying off the investors. Maybe $NWBO is required to hold the funds in escrow until the settlement has reached a certain amount to pay off the initial investment of the investors. Who knows. It's an unusual statement so I figure it has something to do with the possible unusual arrangement of selling lawsuit interests to investors. That's all that stood out to me on the commercialization/cash front. Fingers crossed for mid '26 approval decision!

🧑‍⚖️Two Rulings, Two (mostly) wins for $NWBO The Case: Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc v. Canaccord Genuity LLC, 1:22-cv-10185, (S.D.N.Y.) The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/665… Keep in mind these are discovery rulings. That being said, these were two important wins for $NWBO in their spoofing lawsuit against seven of the largest market makers in the world. ✅May 19, 2026 Ruling The 'I don't care to read the below quotes summary': This ruling stops the Defendants from getting a sneak peak at $NWBO's underlying analysis and protects Joshua Mitts from having to produce a burdensome document by document privilege log. "...the Court hereby GRANTS the motion for a protective order to the extent indicated below." "The Court is unpersuaded by Citadel’s argument that NWBO waived Rule 26(b)(4)(D) protections because statistical analyses prepared by Professor Mitts were incorporated into the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”)." "The Court also finds that a detailed privilege log is unwarranted to the extent the documents sought are protected by Rule 26(b)(4)(D)." "Although the Court thus finds that Rule 26(b)(4)(D) shields Mitts from providing documents concerning his work as a non-testifying consulting expert, it is not clear that this relieves him of any obligation to comply with the subpoena." "Citadel, however, states that it would be willing to accept a categorical privilege log, and the Court agrees that a categorical log, with information as to date range, general subject matter, and the privilege(s) asserted, would be appropriate." ✅May 20, 2026 Ruling The tldr summary: The Court is granting $NWBO's request for a discovery continuance but they're annoyed at the slow pace of discovery so the Court is taking steps to speed things up. "Having reviewed this letter, Defendants’ response (Dkt. No. 274), and the parties’ May 4, 2026 status report (Dkt. No. 270), the Court is not satisfied with the progress of discovery in this case. The original Scheduling Order, entered following the Initial Case Management Conference held on June 5, 2025, set a deadline for substantial completion of document production of August 29, 2025. (Dkt. No. 218 at 3). This date was mutually agreed to, and indeed proposed by, the parties. (Dkt. No. 205 at 7). Yet eleven months after the ICMC, and with the extended deadline for substantial completion of document discovery just two weeks away (Dkt. No. 254), Plaintiff writes that “the parties have yet to agree on search terms for either NWBO or Defendants.” (Dkt. No. 269 at 1 n.2; emphasis added). The Court does not understand how that could possibly be the case if the parties were working diligently, cooperatively, and in good faith to complete discovery in the allotted time. Nor does the Court understand how, after eleven months of discovery, so few documents have been produced in a case of this nature. To the extent there is any bona fide issue relating to search terms (the Court recognizes that Defendants say they understood that the search terms, at least for their own production, were already agreed to and that they produced documents based on that understanding, see Dkt. No. 274 at 2)), it must be resolved immediately. Similarly, any dispute as to Defendants’ production of trading data, described in the parties’ exchange of letters in November 2025 (see Dkt. No. 274 Exs. B and C), must be resolved immediately. The parties shall meet and confer and, by no later than next Friday, May 29, 2026, file a joint status letter that either (a) reports that these issues have been resolved (for both NWBO’s and Defendants’ productions) and provides a revised deadline for substantial completion of document production no later than July 31, 2026; or (b) states that the Court’s intervention is needed and provides each party’s position in no more than 3 pages for each side. To facilitate discussions regarding search terms, Plaintiff shall provide Defendants with string-by-string hit counts (and not just an aggregate hit count), or forfeit any ability to argue that Defendants’ proposed search terms are unduly burdensome. Pending receipt of the parties’ May 29 letter, the Court holds in abeyance NWBO’s request for an extension of discovery deadlines. SO ORDERED."

NWBO Spoofing Lawsuit - A Curious Defense Attorney Addition $NWBO The Case: Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc v. Canaccord Genuity LLC, 1:22-cv-10185, (S.D.N.Y.) In today's filing attorney Rushmi Bhaskaran entered her appearance for Defendant G1 Execution Services LLC in $NWBO's civil spoofing lawsuit. It's interesting that G1 would bring in someone with experience on the criminal side while $NWBO's case is in civil courts. It makes you wonder what has been uncovered in discovery where Defendants felt the need to bring in this attorney at this particular stage of litigation. "Former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Rushmi Bhaskaran—who has more than 15 years of experience handling sophisticated white collar fraud and cybercrime matters—has joined Ballard Spahr’s Litigation Department and White Collar Defense and Investigations Group as partner, firm Chair Peter Michaud announced today. Rushmi is resident in the firm’s New York office." ballardspahr.com/insights/ne… "Former Southern District of New York Assistant U.S. Attorney Rushmi Bhaskaran has joined Ballard Spahr’s Litigation Department, White Collar Defense and Investigations Group, and New York office. Rushmi has investigated and prosecuted white collar criminal cases involving bank fraud, mail and wire fraud, health care fraud, securities fraud, criminal tax violations, computer crimes, money laundering, false statements, sanctions violations, and violations of the Bank Secrecy Act." bizjournals.com/newyork/potm…

NWBO Spoofing Lawsuit - Joint Status Report $NWBO The Case: Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc v. Canaccord Genuity LLC, 1:22-cv-10185, (S.D.N.Y.) The Docket: courtlistener.com/docket/665… On May 4th the parties in the above action submitted a joint status report advising the Court as to the status of discovery. Both the Defendants and NWBO submitted their own updates within the same letter. The status report contains the typical back and forth bickering. ➡️Defendants state that they are nearly complete with discovery “Defendants’ productions are complete or substantially complete.” ➡️Defendants point the finger at $NWBO for failing to agree on search terms “As of the date of this filing, NWBO has still refused to provide string-by-string hit counts for the terms Defendants proposed in February (even though NWBO confirmed it has run them).” ➡️Defendants object to $NWBO’s 150-day extension request “NWBO had agreed to produce documents responsive to several categories of Defendants’ RFPs in September 2025. Ex. A at 23. Eight months later, it has not done so—and nothing in NWBO’s request for an additional 150 days explains how more time would cure what NWBO has made no effort to accomplish.” ➡️Third-Party Discovery "On May 1, 2026, NWBO filed a letter motion seeking a protective order regarding a subpoena that Citadel Securities served on Joshua Mitts in September 2025." ➡️$NWBO points the finger at Defendants for the discovery delays “The current discovery schedule has been strained by Defendants’ repeated, prolonged, and dilatory discovery disputes.” “The Parties have continued to negotiate and work through numerous discovery issues. But discovery has been mired in disputes largely occasioned or prolonged by Defendants’ conduct.” ➡️$NWBO points at the Defendants’ meager productions to date "Meanwhile, even though NWBO has produced 3,466 documents, no Defendant has produced more than 350 documents. Despite this, Defendants have harassed NWBO with frivolous discovery requests requiring unnecessary burden and expense to contest. NWBO addresses these requests in further detail its motion to extend the case management schedule, which will be filed today." “Moreover, Defendants have limited their data productions to specific days in the relevant period, with some producing only the minutes surrounding the events alleged in the complaint. Additionally, there are inconsistencies between Defendants’ trading data, suggesting curated and incomplete productions.” ➡️My takeaway Citadel, et. al, is attempting to produce minimal documents while running out the discovery clock. $NWBO needs to pick up the pace so they get the documents that are needed. The Court's ruling on $NWBO's 150-day discovery extension along with $NWBO's protective order for Joshua Mitts will be important decisions by the Court.