CONTINGENCIES AND UNCERTAINTIES	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES AND UNCERTAINTIES	CONTINGENCIES AND UNCERTAINTIES Legal Proceedings On March 13 and March 14, 2025, we and certain of our current and former officers were named as defendants in two putative securities class action lawsuits, each filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned Dabestani v. Geron Corporation, et al., No. 3:25-cv-02507-CRB and Potvin v. Geron Corporation, et al., No. 3:25-cv-02563-CRB, respectively. Both lawsuits allege violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder in connection with allegedly false and misleading statements concerning the commercial potential of RYTELO. The plaintiffs allege, among other things, that we overstated RYTELO's commercial potential by making materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning RYTELO's commercial potential, including the lack of awareness among healthcare providers for RYTELO, the burden of monitoring requirements in administering the drug, and the impacts of seasonality and existing competition on RYTELO's sales, and that our stock price dropped when we disclosed in our earnings call on February 26, 2025, that we had observed flat revenue trends over the prior few months. The plaintiffs seek damages and interest, and an award of reasonable costs, including attorneys' and experts' fees. On May 29, 2025, the Court consolidated the Dabestani and Potvin cases into one consolidated action captioned In re Geron Corporation Securities Litigation, or the Securities Class Action, and appointed lead plaintiffs and counsel for lead plaintiffs. On June 10, 2025, the Court ordered plaintiffs to file a consolidated amended complaint by August 8, 2025. On April 15, 2025 and April 16, 2025, three purported stockholders filed derivative complaints, each in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned Bishop v. Scarlett, et al., No. 3:25-cv-03356, Lerner v. Scarlett, et al., No. 3:25-cv-03401, and Willis v. Scarlett, et al., No: 3:25-cv-03396, respectively. The three derivative lawsuits name certain of our current and former directors and officers and allege that they breached their fiduciary duties and violated federal securities laws by issuing allegedly false and misleading statements concerning the commercial potential of RYTELO. The allegations in each of the three derivative complaints are substantially similar to the two aforementioned securities class action lawsuits, which these lawsuits are premised on. Each of the three plaintiffs seek damages and interest, and an award of reasonable costs, including attorneys' and experts' fees. The plaintiffs in Bishop v. Scarlett, et al. and Willis v. Scarlett, et al. also seek punitive damages. On May 16, 2025, the Court consolidated the three derivative complaints into one consolidated action captioned In re Geron Corporation Derivative Litigation, or the Consolidated Derivative Action. On June 17, 2025, the Court stayed the Consolidated Derivative Action pending a final ruling on the anticipated motion to dismiss in the Securities Class Action. It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed or allegations made by stockholders with respect to these same or other matters and also naming us and/or our officers and directors as defendants. We intend to vigorously defend against the claims brought by the plaintiffs in these matters. Such lawsuits are subject to inherent uncertainties, and the actual defense and disposition costs will depend upon many unknown factors. The outcome of the pending lawsuits and any other related lawsuits is necessarily uncertain. We could be forced to expend significant resources and may incur substantial legal fees and costs in defending against the pending lawsuits and any other related lawsuits, and we may not prevail. Monitoring, initiating and defending against legal actions is time-consuming for our management, is likely to be expensive, and may detract from our ability to fully focus our internal resources on our business activities. Additionally, we may not be successful in having any such lawsuits dismissed or settled within the limits of our insurance coverage. Given the early stage of these lawsuits and the inherent uncertainly of litigation, we cannot predict how long it may take to resolve the pending lawsuits or the potential outcome or possible amount of any damages. As such, we currently are unable to reasonably estimate the possible losses or a range of possible losses that may result from these matters, if any. Expenses associated with the pending lawsuits and any potential related lawsuits could be material to our consolidated financial statements if we do not prevail in the defense of such lawsuits, or even if we do prevail. Indemnifications to Officers and Directors Our corporate bylaws require that we indemnify our directors, as well as those who act as directors and officers of other entities at our request, against expenses, judgments, fines, settlements and other amounts actually and reasonably incurred in connection with any proceedings arising out of their services to Geron. In addition, we have entered into separate indemnification agreements with each of our directors and officers which provide for indemnification of these directors and officers under similar circumstances and under additional circumstances. The indemnification obligations are more fully described in our bylaws and the indemnification agreements. We purchase standard insurance to cover claims or a portion of the claims made against our directors and officers. Since a maximum obligation is not explicitly stated in our bylaws or in our indemnification agreements and will depend on the facts and circumstances that arise out of any future claims, the overall maximum amount of the obligations cannot be reasonably estimated. Purchase Commitments We have engaged third‑party contract manufacturers and have re-established our own manufacturing supply chain to manufacture and supply additional quantities of RYTELO that meet applicable regulatory standards for current and potential future clinical trials and commercial uses. Related to those contract manufacturing agreements, we have noncancelable commercial purchase commitments for approximately $124.7 million in the aggregate as of June 30, 2025. These purchase commitments can vary based on the commercial demand of RYTELO and are binding based on future manufacturing needs. In the normal course of business, we enter into agreements with CROs for clinical trials for clinical and commercial supply manufacturing and with other vendors for non-clinical research studies, investigator-led trials and other services and products for operating purposes. We have not considered these payments to be contractual obligations since the contracts are generally cancellable at any time by us upon less than 180 days’ prior written notice. We also have certain in-license agreements that require us to pay milestones to such third parties upon achievement of certain development, regulatory or commercial milestones. Amounts related to contingent milestone payments are not considered contractual obligations as they are contingent on the successful achievement of certain development, regulatory approval and commercial milestones, which may not be achieved.

District of California, captioned Dabestani v. Geron Corporation, et al., No. 3:25-cv-02507-CRB and Potvin v. Geron Corporation, et al., No. 3:25-cv-02563-CRB, respectively. Both lawsuits allege violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder in connection with allegedly false and misleading statements concerning the commercial potential of RYTELO. The plaintiffs allege, among other things, that we overstated RYTELO's commercial potential by making materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning RYTELO's commercial potential, including the lack of awareness among healthcare providers for RYTELO, the burden of monitoring requirements in administering the drug, and the impacts of seasonality and existing competition on RYTELO's sales, and that our stock price dropped when we disclosed in our earnings call on February 26, 2025, that we had observed flat revenue trends over the prior few months. The plaintiffs seek damages and interest, and an award of reasonable costs, including attorneys' and experts' fees. On May 29, 2025, the Court consolidated the Dabestani and Potvin cases into one consolidated action captioned In re Geron Corporation Securities Litigation, or the Securities Class Action, and appointed lead plaintiffs and counsel for lead plaintiffs. On June 10, 2025, the Court ordered plaintiffs to file a consolidated amended complaint by August 8, 2025.

On April 15, 2025 and April 16, 2025, three purported stockholders filed derivative complaints, each in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned Bishop v. Scarlett, et al., No. 3:25-cv-03356, Lerner v. Scarlett, et al., No. 3:25-cv-03401, and Willis v. Scarlett, et al., No: 3:25-cv-03396, respectively. The three derivative lawsuits name certain of our current and former directors and officers and allege that they breached their fiduciary duties and violated federal securities laws by issuing allegedly false and misleading statements concerning the commercial potential of RYTELO. The allegations in each of the three derivative complaints are substantially similar to the two aforementioned securities class action lawsuits, which these lawsuits are premised on. Each of the three plaintiffs seek damages and interest, and an award of reasonable costs, including attorneys' and experts' fees. The plaintiffs in Bishop v. Scarlett, et al. and Willis v. Scarlett, et al. also seek punitive damages. On May 16, 2025, the Court consolidated the three derivative complaints into one consolidated action captioned In re Geron Corporation Derivative Litigation, or the Consolidated Derivative Action. On June 17, 2025, the Court stayed the Consolidated Derivative Action pending a final ruling on the anticipated motion to dismiss in the Securities Class Action.

Such lawsuits are subject to inherent uncertainties, and the actual defense and disposition costs will depend upon many unknown factors. The outcome of the pending lawsuits and any other related lawsuits is necessarily uncertain. We could be forced to expend significant resources and may incur substantial legal fees and costs in defending against the pending lawsuits and any other related lawsuits, and we may not prevail. Monitoring, initiating and defending against legal actions is time-consuming for our management, is likely to be expensive, and may detract from our ability to fully focus our internal resources on our business activities. Additionally, we may not be successful in having any such lawsuits dismissed or settled within the limits of our insurance coverage. Given the early stage of these lawsuits and the inherent uncertainly of litigation, we cannot predict how long it may take to resolve the pending lawsuits or the potential outcome or possible amount of any damages. As such, we currently are unable to reasonably estimate the possible losses or a range of possible losses that may result from these matters, if any. Expenses associated with the pending lawsuits and any potential related lawsuits could be material to our consolidated financial statements if we do not prevail in the defense of such lawsuits, or even if we do prevail.

Our corporate bylaws require that we indemnify our directors, as well as those who act as directors and officers of other entities at our request, against expenses, judgments, fines, settlements and other amounts actually and reasonably incurred in connection with any proceedings arising out of their services to Geron. In addition, we have entered into separate indemnification agreements with each of our directors and officers which provide for indemnification of these directors and officers under similar circumstances and under additional circumstances. The indemnification obligations are more fully described in our bylaws and the indemnification agreements. We purchase standard insurance to cover claims or a portion of the claims made against our directors and officers. Since a maximum obligation is not explicitly stated in our bylaws or in our indemnification agreements and will depend on the facts and circumstances that arise out of any future claims, the overall maximum amount of the obligations cannot be reasonably estimated.

We have engaged third‑party contract manufacturers and have re-established our own manufacturing supply chain to manufacture and supply additional quantities of RYTELO that meet applicable regulatory standards for current and potential future clinical trials and commercial uses. Related to those contract manufacturing agreements, we have noncancelable commercial purchase commitments for approximately $124.7 million in the aggregate as of June 30, 2025. These purchase commitments can vary based on the commercial demand of RYTELO and are binding based on future manufacturing needs.

In the normal course of business, we enter into agreements with CROs for clinical trials for clinical and commercial supply manufacturing and with other vendors for non-clinical research studies, investigator-led trials and other services and products for operating purposes. We have not considered these payments to be contractual obligations since the contracts are generally cancellable at any time by us upon less than 180 days’ prior written notice. We also have certain in-license agreements that require us to pay milestones to such third parties upon achievement of certain development, regulatory or commercial milestones. Amounts related to contingent milestone payments are not considered contractual obligations as they are contingent on the successful achievement of certain development, regulatory approval and commercial milestones, which may not be achieved.