- within Corporate/Commercial Law and Insurance topic(s)
Emerging companies & venture capital partner Brad Flint moderated a panel at Fierce Biotech Week on October 8, 2025, that examined the legal issues that newly-formed biotech companies must navigate. Brad was joined on the panel by Nell Meosky Luo, founder and CEO of Folia Health; Annie Mitsak, partner at Cure Ventures; and Tom Neyarapally, CEO and co-founder of Archetype Therapeutics.
The path from founding to exit in biotech is a study in disciplined strategy under constraints—capital, time, data access, and regulatory uncertainty. Biotech companies succeed when legal strategy moves in lockstep with science, capital, and commercial reality. Insights from leaders at Folia Health, Archetype Therapeutics, and Cure VC converge on a simple blueprint: make values explicit, manage IP dynamically, and time partnerships strategically. The throughline is disciplined optionality—protect flexibility while building credible proof. What follows are the key takeaways for founders and investors navigating the full biotech arc.
Start with Durable First Principles, an IP Strategy, and Project Impact
At formation, clarity of purpose is not branding; it is a legal and commercial operating system. These principles become the company's operating system across product, contracts, and trust. Treat IP as a continuous strategy rather than a single event. Costs matter and so does sequencing. The early questions should be surgical: where do the economics justify immediate prosecution to preserve optionality, what can be held as a trade secret, and where can you defer spend without eroding long-term defensibility?
Develop an IP roadmap that distinguishes among these categories, aligning your IP posture with key scientific milestones to support a compelling, data-driven narrative—particularly when capital is scarce, and attention is fragmented. For instance, consider whether a strategic pivot could allow for the use of more robust comparative datasets, enabling high-impact scientific validation before commercial proof—stacking the deck for credibility.
Diligence: The Investor's Lens and Why IP Maturity Matters
Standard diligence will always probe team quality, unmet need, technology, market size, and exit paths. The source of IP matters: academic spin-out, founder-generated innovation, or pharma asset carve-out each demands a different negotiation posture and future-proofing plan.
For investors who "invest in an idea," the threshold is not simply a compelling concept, but a sound thesis paired with a credible path to protection. Correctable gaps are more tractable with academic institutions than with some private counterparties. Founders should enter early conversations with a realistic plan to harden IP around the idea and be explicit about milestones that convert theoretical defensibility into enforceable rights.
Choosing Capital Partners: Fit Is a Risk Control
Early-stage founders do not always get to choose their investors. But when they can, the best filter is alignment on the company's core principles and operating tempo. Founders should watch for how investors engage with the company's values and the thoughtfulness of their questions. If investors tune out when you articulate your red lines, expect friction later in governance, hiring, and commercial strategy.
On the investor side, "value-add" should be demonstrated before term sheets, not promised after. The goal is clarity on what happens post-close, not just agreement in principle.
Equity among Founders and Early Teams: Price the Journey, Not Just the Starting Point
Founders often wrestle with asymmetric contributions that change over time. Practical options include attempting to price precise contributions—often illusory—or a clean 50/50 split acknowledging different roles across the timeline. The meta-lesson is to treat founder equity as a living instrument. Expect to revisit it, especially when roles evolve, new expertise is added, or capital structure changes.
For early executives, compensation should anchor to meaningful outcomes and market comparables, not just titles. Aim for simplicity where possible, but preserve flexibility to adjust as the company matures.
Hiring and Resourcing: Hire for the Next Milestone, Not the Imagined Future
A common early-stage hiring error is aspirational recruiting—hiring the person you'll need post-Series B when you are pre-seed. When approaching recruiting, consider less how a potential hire will contribute when your company reaches a future stage and more how that potential hire will help you get there.
You can also extend capacity through consultants who operate as embedded teammates, flexing up and down with milestone needs. Investors often prefer this lean model in the seed stage, reserving full-time hires for technical leadership that unlocks data generation and development progress. A charismatic "fundraising CEO" is rarely the gating item early; a CSO who can hit a tranche-defining milestone often is.
Partnerships and Data Access: Preserve Flexibility, Police the Lanes
Partnerships can accelerate validation, but they also carry strategic drag if mis-sequenced. Over-partnering can pull a young company into someone else's roadmap, especially if the partner is less innovative and more risk adverse. The default should be optionality: keep lanes clear, define the "water's edge," and partner later when the company has leverage to preserve independence.
For certain categories of companies, such as AI-enabled discovery platforms, some partnerships are essential—particularly for training data and validation. The legal boundary-setting must be exacting: discovery stays with the company; validation belongs with the partner; and IP allocations reflect that line. The clause you draft today determines the defensibility of your platform tomorrow.
Strategics on the Cap Table: Useful Signal, Real Signaling Risk
Strategic investors can provide credibility, access, and product-market validation, but they also introduce signaling dynamics. Treat strategics like any investor: diligence board behavior, governance, and capital participation patterns. If a strategic investor does not follow on, later-stage investors may infer negative information. Consider them when the company's story is mature enough to convert their involvement into durable advantage.
Execution Rhythm: Tranche Capital to Data, Not to Time
Seed rounds increasingly tranche to technical milestones. This is healthy discipline when paired with crisp definitions of what "de-risked" really means. Founders should negotiate tranche criteria that are objective and within their control, favoring data readouts and validation over subjective thresholds. Investors should resist calendar-based burn planning and instead wire capital against the next proof-point that moves valuation and partnership leverage.
Putting It Together: A Lifecycle Operating System
A resilient biotech company scales the same instincts from day zero through exit. Codify values in your contracts, manage IP as a living strategy, and align dollars to data – select investors for alignment and transparency, not just price. Right-size your team and use flexible resourcing to protect runway. Partner when it accelerates validation without ceding control. Bring strategics in when your story is strong enough to handle the signaling. And always map capital to the next empirical milestone. Do these consistently, and the legal architecture will enable the science to scale from formation to exit.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
