HCCC Healthcare Capital Corporation

Notice of Special Meeting of Stockholders

of Healthcare Capital Corp.

To Be Held on February 15, 2022

TO THE STOCKHOLDERS OF HEALTHCARE CAPITAL CORP.:

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of stockholders of Healthcare Capital Corp., a Delaware corporation (“HCCC”), will be held at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time, on February 15, 2022 (the “special meeting”). Due to health concerns stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, and to support the health and well-being of our stockholders, the special meeting will be a virtual meeting. You are cordially invited to attend and participate in the special meeting online by visiting https://www.cstproxy.com/healthcarecapitalcorp/2022. The special meeting will be held for the following purposes:

i. the name of the new public entity will be “Alpha Tau Medical Ltd.” as opposed to “Healthcare Capital Corp.”;

ii. the Alpha Tau Articles will provide for one class of ordinary shares as opposed to the two classes of common stock provided for in the HCCC Charter;

iii. Alpha Tau’s corporate existence is perpetual as opposed to HCCC’s corporate existence terminating if a business combination is not consummated within a specified period of time; and

iv. the Alpha Tau Articles will not include the various provisions applicable only to special purpose acquisition corporations that the HCCC Charter contains (collectively, the “Charter Proposals”);

We also will transact any other business as may properly come before the special meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

The items of business listed above are more fully described elsewhere in the proxy statement/prospectus. Whether or not you intend to attend the special meeting, we urge you to read the attached proxy statement/prospectus in its entirety, including the annexes and accompanying financial statements, before voting. IN PARTICULAR, WE URGE YOU TO CAREFULLY READ THE SECTION IN THE PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS ENTITLED “RISK FACTORS.”

Only holders of record of shares of Class A common stock of HCCC, par value $0.0001 per share (“Class A common stock”), or shares of Class B Common Stock of HCCC, par value $0.0001 per share (“Class B common stock” and, together with the Class A common stock, the, “HCCC Common Stock”), at the close of business on January 13, 2022 (the “record date”) are entitled to notice of the special meeting and to vote and have their votes counted at the special meeting and any adjournments or postponements of the special meeting.

After careful consideration, HCCC’s board of directors has determined that each of the proposals listed is fair to and in the best interests of HCCC and its stockholders and recommends that you vote or give instruction to

vote “FOR” each of the proposals set forth above. When you consider the recommendations of HCCC’s board of directors, you should keep in mind that HCCC’s directors and officers may have interests in the Business Combination that conflict with, or are different from, your interests as a stockholder of HCCC. See the section entitled “Proposal One — The Business Combination Proposal — Interests of Certain Persons in the Business Combination.”

The closing of the Business Combination is conditioned on approval of the Business Combination Proposal and the Charter Proposals. If either of these proposals is not approved and the applicable closing condition in the Merger Agreement is not waived, the remaining proposals will not be presented to stockholders for a vote. The Adjournment Proposal is not conditioned on the approval of any other proposal set forth in this proxy statement/prospectus.

All HCCC stockholders are cordially invited to attend the special meeting, which will be held virtually over the Internet at https://www.cstproxy.com/healthcarecapitalcorp/2022. To ensure your representation at the special meeting, however, you are urged to complete, sign, date and return the enclosed proxy card as soon as possible. If you are a holder of record of HCCC Common Stock on the record date, you may also cast your vote at the special meeting. If your HCCC Common Stock is held in an account at a brokerage firm or bank, you must instruct your broker or bank on how to vote your shares or, if you wish to attend the special meeting, obtain a proxy from your broker or bank.

A complete list of HCCC stockholders of record entitled to vote at the special meeting will be available for ten days before the special meeting at the principal executive offices of HCCC for inspection by stockholders during business hours for any purpose germane to the special meeting.

Your vote is important regardless of the number of shares you own. Whether you plan to attend the special meeting virtually or not, please complete, sign, date and return the enclosed proxy card as soon as possible in the envelope provided. If your shares are held in “street name” or are in a margin or similar account, you should contact your broker to ensure that votes related to the shares you beneficially own are properly voted and counted.

If you have any questions or need assistance voting your HCCC Common Stock, please contact Morrow Sodali. Questions can also be sent by email to HCCC.info@investor.morrowsodali.com. This notice of special meeting is and the proxy statement/prospectus relating to the Business Combination will be available at https://www.cstproxy.com/healthcarecapitalcorp/2022.

Thank you for your participation. We look forward to your continued support.

By Order of the Board of Directors

William Johns

Chief Executive Officer

January 13, 2022

TO EXERCISE REDEMPTION RIGHTS, HOLDERS MUST TENDER THEIR STOCK TO CONTINENTAL STOCK TRANSFER & TRUST COMPANY, HCCC’S TRANSFER AGENT, NO LATER THAN TWO (2) BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE SPECIAL MEETING. YOU MAY TENDER YOUR STOCK BY EITHER DELIVERING YOUR STOCK CERTIFICATE TO THE TRANSFER AGENT OR BY DELIVERING YOUR SHARES ELECTRONICALLY USING THE DEPOSITORY TRUST COMPANY’S DEPOSIT WITHDRAWAL AT CUSTODIAN SYSTEM. IF THE BUSINESS COMBINATION IS NOT COMPLETED, THEN THESE SHARES WILL NOT BE REDEEMED FOR CASH. IF YOU HOLD THE SHARES IN STREET NAME, YOU WILL NEED TO INSTRUCT THE ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE AT YOUR BANK OR BROKER TO WITHDRAW THE SHARES FROM YOUR ACCOUNT IN ORDER TO EXERCISE YOUR REDEMPTION RIGHTS. SEE “SPECIAL MEETING OF HCCC STOCKHOLDERS — REDEMPTION RIGHTS” FOR MORE SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS.

ABOUT THIS PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS

This proxy statement/prospectus, which forms a part of a registration statement on Form F-4 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, by Alpha Tau, constitutes a prospectus of Alpha Tau under Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), with respect to the Alpha Tau ordinary shares to be issued to HCCC stockholders in connection with the Business Combination, as well as the warrants to acquire Alpha Tau ordinary shares to be issued to HCCC warrant holders and the Alpha Tau ordinary shares underlying such warrants. This document also constitutes a proxy statement of HCCC under Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, and the rules thereunder, and a notice of meeting with respect to the special meeting of HCCC stockholders to consider and vote upon the proposals to adopt the Merger Agreement, to adopt the Charter Proposals (as defined herein) and to adjourn the meeting, if necessary, to permit further solicitation of proxies because there are not sufficient votes to adopt the Merger Agreement.

Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this proxy statement/prospectus to the terms “Alpha Tau” and the “Company” refer to Alpha Tau Medical Ltd., together with its subsidiaries. All references in this proxy statement/prospectus to “HCCC” refer to Healthcare Capital Corp.

ii

INDUSTRY AND MARKET DATA

Unless otherwise indicated, information contained in this proxy statement/prospectus concerning Alpha Tau’s industry and the regions in which it operates, including Alpha Tau’s general expectations and market position, market opportunity, market share and other management estimates, is based on information obtained from various independent publicly available sources and other industry publications, surveys and forecasts, which Alpha Tau believes to be reliable based upon its management’s knowledge of the industry Alpha Tau assumes liability for the accuracy and completeness of such information to the extent included in this proxy statement/prospectus. Such assumptions and estimates of Alpha Tau’s future performance and growth objectives and the future performance of its industry and the markets in which it operates are necessarily subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk due to a variety of factors, including those discussed under the headings “Risk Factors,” “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements; Market, Ranking and Other Industry Data” and “Alpha Tau’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this proxy statement/prospectus.

iii

TRADEMARKS, TRADE NAMES AND SERVICE MARKS

This document contains references to trademarks, trade names and service marks belonging to other entities. Solely for convenience, trademarks, trade names and service marks referred to in this proxy statement/prospectus may appear without the ^® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that the applicable licensor will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, its rights to these trademarks and trade names. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

iv

SELECTED DEFINITIONS

v

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE BUSINESS COMBINATION AND THE SPECIAL MEETING

The questions and answers below highlight only selected information set forth elsewhere in this proxy statement/prospectus and only briefly address some commonly asked questions about the special meeting and the proposals to be presented at the special meeting, including with respect to the proposed Business Combination. The following questions and answers do not include all the information that may be important to HCCC stockholders. HCCC stockholders are urged to carefully read this entire proxy statement/prospectus, including the annexes and the other documents referred to herein, to fully understand the proposed Business Combination and the voting procedures for the special meeting.

Q: Why am I receiving this proxy statement/prospectus?

A: HCCC and Alpha Tau have agreed to a business combination under the terms of the Merger Agreement that is described in this proxy statement/prospectus. A copy of the Merger Agreement is attached to this proxy statement/prospectus as Annex A, and HCCC encourages its stockholders to read it in its entirety. HCCC’s stockholders are being asked to consider and vote upon a proposal to approve the Merger Agreement, which, among other things, provides for Merger Sub to be merged with and into HCCC with HCCC being the surviving corporation in the Business Combination and becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of Alpha Tau, and the other Transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement. See the section entitled “Proposal One — The Business Combination Proposal.”

Q: Are there any other matters being presented to stockholders at the meeting?

A: In addition to voting on the Business Combination Proposal, the stockholders of HCCC will vote on the following proposals:

HCCC will hold the special meeting of its stockholders to consider and vote upon these proposals. This proxy statement/prospectus contains important information about the proposed Business Combination and the other matters to be acted upon at the special meeting. HCCC stockholders should read it carefully.

The vote of stockholders is important. Regardless of how many shares you own, you are encouraged to vote as soon as possible after carefully reviewing this proxy statement/prospectus.

Q: Why is HCCC providing stockholders with the opportunity to vote on the Business Combination?

A: Pursuant to the HCCC Charter, HCCC is required to provide stockholders with an opportunity to have their shares of HCCC Common Stock redeemed for cash, either through a stockholder meeting or tender offer. Due to the structure of the Transactions, HCCC is providing this opportunity through a stockholder vote.

vi

Q: Why am I receiving this proxy statement/prospectus if I only own HCCC warrants?

A: The HCCC warrants will become exercisable following the Business Combination and will entitle holders to purchase Alpha Tau ordinary shares, as described in more detail herein. This proxy statement/prospectus includes important information about Alpha Tau, the Alpha Tau Articles to be in effect following the closing of the Business Combination and the business of Alpha Tau and its subsidiaries following the closing of the Business Combination. Because holders of HCCC warrants will be entitled to purchase Alpha Tau ordinary shares after the closing of the Business Combination, we urge you to read the information contained in this proxy statement/prospectus carefully.

Q: What will happen to HCCC’s securities upon consummation of the Business Combination?

A: HCCC’s units, Class A common stock and the HCCC warrants are currently listed on Nasdaq under the symbols HCCCU, HCCC and HCCCW, respectively. HCCC’s securities will cease trading upon consummation of the Business Combination. If you own HCCC units, immediately prior to the consummation of the Business Combination, your HCCC units will split into the underlying shares of Class A common stock and warrants, and you will receive Alpha Tau ordinary shares in exchange for your Class A common stock and Alpha Tau warrants in exchange for your HCCC warrants as described herein. Alpha Tau intends to apply for listing of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants on Nasdaq under the proposed symbols “DRTS” and “DRTSW,” respectively, to be effective upon the consummation of the Business Combination. It is a condition of the consummation of the Transactions that the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants are approved for listing on Nasdaq (subject only to official notice of issuance thereof and round lot holder requirements). While trading on Nasdaq is expected to begin on the first business day following the consummation of the Business Combination, there can be no assurance that Alpha Tau’s securities will be listed on Nasdaq or that a viable and active trading market will develop. If such listing condition is not met or if such confirmation is not obtained, the Business Combination will not be consummated unless the Nasdaq condition set forth in the Merger Agreement is waived by the applicable parties. See “Risk Factors — Risks Related to the Combined Company Following the Business Combination” for more information.

Q: Why is HCCC proposing the Business Combination?

A: HCCC was organized to effect a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization or other similar business combination with one or more businesses or entities.

On January 20, 2021, HCCC consummated the HCCC IPO of units, with each unit consisting of one share of its Class A common stock and one-half of one HCCC warrant, raising total gross proceeds of approximately $268,200,000, including $35,000,000 pursuant to the underwriters’ overallotment option. Simultaneously with the closing of the HCCC IPO, HCCC consummated the sale of 6,800,000 private placement warrants at a price of $1.00 per warrant in a private placement to Sponsor, generating gross proceeds of $6,800,000. The aggregate proceeds held in the trust account (the “Trust Account”) resulting from the HCCC IPO and the private placement warrants was $275,000,000. Since the HCCC IPO, HCCC’s activity has been limited to the evaluation of business combination candidates.

HCCC believes Alpha Tau is a company with an appealing market opportunity and growth profile, a strong position in its industry and a compelling valuation. As a result, HCCC believes that the Business Combination will provide HCCC stockholders with an opportunity to participate in the ownership of a company with significant growth potential. See the section entitled “Proposal One — The Business Combination Proposal — HCCC’s Board of Directors’ Reasons for the Business Combination and Recommendation of the Board of Directors.”

Q: What is the “PIPE” transaction?

A: Concurrently with and following the execution of the Merger Agreement, Alpha Tau entered into subscription agreements with certain parties subscribing for Alpha Tau ordinary shares pursuant to which such investors have agreed to purchase, and Alpha Tau has agreed to sell to them, an aggregate of 9,263,006 Alpha Tau ordinary shares, for a purchase price of $10.00 per share and at an aggregate purchase price of $92,630,060. The $10.00 per share purchase price is a 1% premium to the closing price of HCCC’s Class A common stock on on January 11, 2022.

vii

Q: Did HCCC’s board of directors obtain a third-party valuation or fairness opinion in determining whether or not to proceed with the Business Combination?

A: No. HCCC’s board of directors did not obtain a third-party valuation or fairness opinion in connection with its determination to approve the Business Combination. We note that the prospectus for the HCCC IPO provides that if HCCC seeks to complete a business combination with an entity affiliated with the Sponsor or HCCC’s officers or directors, HCCC would be required to obtain an opinion from an independent investment banking firm or another independent entity that commonly renders valuation opinions that such an initial business combination is fair from a financial point of view. While a family member of Dr. Milch is a minority shareholder of Alpha Tau, such family member holds less than 1% of Alpha Tau’s outstanding securities, and therefore Alpha Tau is not an entity affiliated with the Sponsor or HCCC’s officers or directors. In light of the foregoing and the fact that a majority of HCCC’s board of directors did not have an interest in the proposed transaction, HCCC’s board of directors determined that hiring an independent valuation firm or appointing a committee of independent directors was not necessary to evaluate the proposed transaction. Further, out of an abundance of caution, Dr. Milch did not participate in votes related to the Business Combination and did not engage in significant contact with representatives of Alpha Tau on his own and instead contacted Alpha Tau management only with other members of HCCC management team present.

Additionally, in analyzing the Business Combination, HCCC’s board of directors conducted significant due diligence on Alpha Tau and again concluded that its members’ collective experience and backgrounds, together with the experience and sector expertise of HCCC’s advisors, enabled it to make the necessary analyses and determinations regarding the Business Combination, including that the Business Combination was fair from a financial perspective to its stockholders and that Alpha Tau’s fair market value was at least 80% of the assets held in the Trust Account (excluding the deferred underwriting commissions and taxes payable on interest earned on the Trust Account) at the time of the agreement to enter into the Business Combination.

Q: Do I have redemption rights?

A: If you are a holder of public shares, you have the right to demand that HCCC redeem such shares for a pro rata portion of the cash held in HCCC’s Trust Account, calculated as of two business days prior to the consummation of the Business Combination. We sometimes refer to these rights to demand redemption of the public shares as “redemption rights.”

Notwithstanding the foregoing, a holder of public shares, together with any affiliate of his or any other person with whom such holder is acting in concert or as a “group” (as defined in Section 13(d)(3) of the Exchange Act), will be restricted from seeking redemption rights with respect to 15% or more of the public shares. Accordingly, all public shares in excess of 15% held by a public stockholder, together with any affiliate of such holder or any other person with whom such holder is acting in concert or as a “group,” will not be converted.

Under the HCCC Charter, the Business Combination may not be consummated if HCCC has net tangible assets of less than $5,000,001 either immediately prior to or upon consummation of the Business Combination after taking into account the redemption for cash of all public shares properly demanded to be redeemed by holders of public shares.

viii

Q: How do I exercise my redemption rights?

A: A holder of public shares may exercise redemption rights regardless of whether it votes for or against the Business Combination Proposal or does not vote on such proposal at all, or if it is a holder of public shares on the record date. If you are a holder of public shares and wish to exercise your redemption rights, you must demand that HCCC convert your public shares into cash and deliver your public shares to HCCC’s transfer agent electronically using The Depository Trust Company’s Deposit/Withdrawal at Custodian (“DWAC”) System no later than two (2) business days prior to the special meeting. Any holder of public shares seeking redemption will be entitled to their pro rata portion of the amount then in the Trust Account (which, for illustrative purposes, was approximately $275 million, or $10.00 per share, as of the record date), less any owed but unpaid taxes on the funds in the Trust Account. Such amount will be paid promptly upon consummation of the Business Combination. There are currently no owed but unpaid income taxes on the funds in the Trust Account.

Any request for redemption, once made by a holder of public shares, may be withdrawn at any time prior to the time the vote is taken with respect to the Business Combination Proposal at the special meeting. If you deliver your shares for redemption to HCCC’s transfer agent and later decide prior to the special meeting not to elect redemption, you may request that HCCC’s transfer agent return the shares (physically or electronically). You may make such request by contacting HCCC’s transfer agent at the address listed at the end of this section.

Any written demand of redemption rights must be received by HCCC’s transfer agent at least two (2) business days prior to the vote taken on the Business Combination Proposal at the special meeting. No demand for redemption will be honored unless the holder’s stock has been delivered (either physically or electronically) to the transfer agent.

If you are a holder of public shares (including through the ownership of HCCC units) and you exercise your redemption rights, it will not result in the loss of any HCCC warrants that you may hold (including those contained in any units you hold). Your whole warrants will become exercisable to purchase one Alpha Tau ordinary share following consummation of the Business Combination.

Q: What equity stake will the current Alpha Tau shareholders and HCCC stockholders hold in the public company immediately after the consummation of the Business Combination?

A: It is anticipated that, upon completion of the Business Combination, the ownership interests in Alpha Tau as the public company will be as set forth in the table below:

The share numbers set forth above do not take into account (a) HCCC’s public warrants and private placement warrants that will remain outstanding immediately following the Business Combination and may be exercised thereafter (commencing the later of 30 days after the Closing of the Business Combination and 12 months from the closing of the Initial Public Offering, which occurred on January 20, 2021), or (b) the issuance of any shares upon completion of the Business Combination under Alpha Tau 2021 Share Incentive Plan. If the actual facts are different than the assumptions set forth above, the share numbers set forth above will be different.

Based on HCCC’s public trading price at market close on January 11, 2021 ($9.90), the estimated implied dollar value of the Sponsor post-Business Combination ordinary shares is approximately $57.85 million if none of the Redemption Equity is forfeited, or approximately $40.83 million if the full amount of the Redemption Equity is forfeited.

x

The table below reflects the ownership percentages immediately after the consummation of the Business Combination if all HCCC warrants are exercised assuming no redemptions, 50% redemptions and maximum redemptions.

For more information, please see the section entitled “Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Combined Financial Information.”

It should be noted that when the HCCC warrants become exercisable, we may require the public warrants to be exercised on a cashless basis and the private placement warrants may be exercised on a cashless basis at the option of each holder thereof.

Q: What happens to the funds deposited in the Trust Account after consummation of the Business Combination?

A: The net proceeds of the HCCC IPO, together with the partial exercise of the over-allotment option by the underwriter and a portion of the amount raised from the simultaneous private placement of HCCC warrants for a total of $275,000,000, was placed in the Trust Account immediately following the HCCC IPO. After consummation of the Business Combination, the funds in the Trust Account will be used to pay, on a pro rata basis, holders of the public shares who exercise redemption rights, to pay fees and expenses incurred in connection with the Business Combination (including aggregate fees of approximately $10.3 million to the underwriter of the HCCC IPO) and for working capital and general corporate purposes.

Q: What happens if a substantial number of public stockholders vote in favor of the Business Combination Proposal and exercise their redemption rights?

A: HCCC’s public stockholders may vote in favor of the Business Combination and still exercise their redemption rights, although they are not required to vote in any way to exercise such redemption rights. Accordingly, the Business Combination may be consummated even though the funds available from the Trust

xi

Account and the number of public stockholders are substantially reduced as a result of redemptions by public stockholders. Nonetheless, the consummation of the Business Combination is conditioned upon, among other things, HCCC having an aggregate cash amount of at least $225 million available at Closing from the Trust Account and the PIPE Investors, after payment of deferred underwriting fees (though this condition may be waived by Alpha Tau). If the Business Combination is consummated, but we experience a significant level of redemptions, this may result in fewer public shares and public shareholders, which may result in the trading market for Alpha Tau ordinary shares being less liquid than the market for HCCC’s Class A common stock was prior to consummation of the Business Combination. In addition, Alpha Tau may not be able to meet the listing standards for the Nasdaq or another national securities exchange. Furthermore, with less funds available from the Trust Account, the capital infusion from the Trust Account into Alpha Tau’s business will be reduced. As such, Alpha Tau’s ability to perform against its business plan may be negatively impaired if redemptions by HCCC’s public stockholders are significant. See a discussion of risks related to redemption rights in “Risk Factors Relating to HCCC and the Business Combination”.

Public stockholders who purchased units as part of HCCC’s IPO for $10.00 may experience dilution if they elect not to redeem in connection with the Business Combination. The expense of the deferred underwriting commission would be borne by those stockholders who elect not to redeem.

The Business Combination also involves the $92,630,060 PIPE Investment for ordinary shares of Alpha Tau. These securities are dilutive to HCCC’s IPO investors only to the extent that HCCC’s stock price exceeds $10.00. HCCC also has public and private warrants outstanding. While these securities may be dilutive to HCCC’s IPO investors in the future, they have an exercise price of $11.50, meaning that they are not dilutive to HCCC’s IPO investors until the stock price exceeds $11.50.

HCCC’s IPO investors will also face dilution from the Founder Shares, which will automatically convert into Alpha Tau ordinary shares at the closing on a one-for-one basis, resulting in the issuance of 5,843,750 ordinary shares in the event the Aggregate Transaction Proceeds exceed $250.0 million, with relevant reductions for Redemption Equity in the event the Aggregate Transaction Proceeds are below $250.0 million, reaching 4,125,000 ordinary shares in the event the Aggregate Transaction Proceeds equal $225.0 million. Of such Founder Shares, 1,375,000 are Conditional Equity and subject to vesting over a three year period following the consummation of the Business Combination. The table below illustrates how the conversion of the Founder Shares and other sources of possible dilution affect the public stockholder ownership percentage in the combined entity.

The tables above in Q&A discussing the ownership of Alpha Tau shareholders and HCCC stockholders post-Business Combination show possible sources of dilution and the extent of such dilution that non-redeeming HCCC public stockholders could experience in connection with the closing of the Business Combination. In an effort to illustrate the extent of such dilution, the table above shows the effect of the exercise of all public and private placement warrants, which are exercisable for one whole share at a price of $11.50 per share at any time commencing on the later of 12 months from the closing of HCCC’s IPO and 30 days after the completion of the Business Combination. The table is presented assuming (i) no redemptions, (ii) 50% of the maximum redemptions and (iii) maximum redemptions that may occur but which would still provide for the satisfaction of the Minimum Cash Condition.

xii

The deferred underwriting commissions in connection with the Initial Public Offering will be released to the underwriters only on completion of the Business Combination, in an amount equal to approximately 3.75% of the gross proceeds of the Initial Public Offering. Below is a summary of the total deferred underwriting commission to be paid upon closing of the Business Combination, assuming (i) no redemptions, (ii) 50% of the maximum redemptions and (iii) maximum redemptions that may occur but which would still provide for the satisfaction of the Minimum Cash Condition of a trust account balance greater than $225.0 million, after payment of deferred underwriting fees.

Q: What happens if the Business Combination is not consummated?

A: If HCCC does not complete the Business Combination with Alpha Tau for whatever reason, HCCC would search for another target business with which to complete a business combination. If HCCC does not complete the Business Combination with Alpha Tau or another business combination by January 20, 2023 (or such later date as may be approved by HCCC’s stockholders in an amendment to the HCCC Charter), HCCC must redeem 100% of the outstanding public shares, at a per-share price, payable in cash, equal to an amount then held in the Trust Account (net of taxes payable and less up to $100,000 of interest to pay dissolution expenses) divided by the number of outstanding public shares. The Sponsor and HCCC’s officers and directors have waived their redemption rights with respect to their Founder Shares in the event a business combination is not effected in the required time period, and, accordingly, their Founder Shares will be worthless. Additionally, in the event of such liquidation, there will be no distribution with respect to HCCC’s outstanding warrants. Accordingly, the warrants will expire worthless.

Q: How do the Sponsor and the officers and directors of HCCC intend to vote on the proposals?

A: The Sponsor, as well as HCCC’s officers and directors, beneficially own and are entitled to vote an aggregate of approximately 20.0% of the outstanding HCCC Common Stock. These holders have agreed to vote their shares in favor of the Business Combination Proposal. These holders have also indicated that they intend to vote their shares in favor of all other proposals being presented at the meeting. In addition to the shares of HCCC Common Stock held by the Sponsor and HCCC’s officers and directors, HCCC would need 10,312,501 shares, or approximately 37.5%, of the 27,500,000 public shares to be voted in favor of the Business Combination Proposal and other proposals in order for them to be approved.

Q: What interests do the Sponsor and the current officers and directors of HCCC have in the Business Combination?

A: In considering the recommendation of HCCC’s board of directors to vote in favor of the Business Combination, stockholders should be aware that, aside from their interests as stockholders, the Sponsor and certain of HCCC’s directors and officers have interests in the Business Combination that are different from, or in addition to, those of other stockholders generally. HCCC’s directors were aware of and considered these

xiii

interests, among other matters, in evaluating the Business Combination, in recommending to stockholders that they approve the Business Combination and in agreeing to vote their shares in favor of the Business Combination. Stockholders should take these interests into account in deciding whether to approve the Business Combination. These interests include, among other things, the fact that:

xiv

Q: When do you expect the Business Combination to be completed?

A: It is currently anticipated that the Business Combination will be consummated promptly following the HCCC special meeting, which is set for February 15, 2022; however, such meeting could be adjourned or postponed to a

xv

later date, as described above. The Closing (as defined below) is also subject to the approval of the holders of Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau preferred shares, as well as other customary closing conditions. For a description of the conditions for the completion of the Business Combination, see the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Conditions to Closing of the Transactions.”

Q: What do I need to do now?

A: HCCC urges you to carefully read and consider the information contained in this proxy statement/prospectus, including the annexes, and to consider how the Business Combination will affect you as a stockholder and/or a warrant holder of HCCC. Stockholders should then vote as soon as possible in accordance with the instructions provided in this proxy statement/prospectus and on the enclosed proxy card.

Q: When and where will the special meeting take place?

A: The special meeting will be held on February 15, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., Eastern Time, solely over the Internet by means of a live audio webcast. You may attend the special meeting webcast by accessing the web portal located at https://www.cstproxy.com/healthcarecapitalcorp/2022 and following the instructions set forth below. Stockholders participating in the special meeting will be able to listen only and will not be able to speak during the webcast. However, in order to maintain the interactive nature of the special meeting, virtual attendees will be able to:

Stockholders may submit questions or comments during the meeting through the special meeting webcast by typing in the “Submit a question” box.

Q: How do I attend the special meeting?

A: Due to health concerns stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic and to support the health and well-being of HCCC’s stockholders, the special meeting will be held virtually. To register for and attend the special meeting, please follow these instructions as applicable to the nature of your ownership of HCCC Common Stock:

Stockholders will also have the option to listen to the special meeting by telephone by calling:

xvi

The passcode for telephone access: 8264641#. You will not be able to vote or submit questions unless you register for and log in to the special meeting webcast as described above.

Q: How do I vote?

A: If you are a holder of record of HCCC Common Stock on the record date, you may vote by virtually attending the special meeting and submitting a ballot via the special meeting webcast or by submitting a proxy for the special meeting. You may submit your proxy by completing, signing, dating and returning the enclosed proxy card in the accompanying pre-addressed postage paid envelope. If you hold your shares in “street name,” you should contact your broker, bank or nominee to ensure that votes related to the shares you beneficially own are properly voted and counted. In this regard, you must provide the broker, bank or nominee with instructions on how to vote your shares or, if you wish to attend the virtual special meeting and vote through the web portal, obtain a legal proxy from your broker, bank or nominee.

Q: If my shares are held in “street name,” will my broker, bank or nominee automatically vote my shares for me?

A: Your broker, bank or nominee can vote your shares without receiving your instructions on “routine” proposals only. Your broker, bank or nominee cannot vote your shares with respect to “non-routine” proposals unless you provide instructions on how to vote in accordance with the information and procedures provided to you by your broker, bank or nominee.

The Charter Proposal to approve the name of the public company being “Alpha Tau Medical Ltd.” is considered a routine proposal. Accordingly, your broker, bank or nominee may vote your shares with respect to such proposal without receiving voting instructions.

The Business Combination Proposal, each other Charter Proposal, and the Adjournment Proposal are non-routine proposals. Accordingly, your broker, bank or nominee may not vote your shares with respect to these proposals unless you provide voting instructions.

Q: May I change my vote after I have mailed my signed proxy card?

A: Yes. Stockholders of record may send a later-dated, signed proxy card to HCCC’s transfer agent at the address set forth below so that it is received prior to the vote at the special meeting or virtually attend the special meeting and submit a ballot through the web portal during the special meeting webcast. Stockholders of record also may revoke their proxy by sending a notice of revocation to HCCC’s transfer agent, which must be received prior to the vote at the special meeting. If you hold your shares in “street name,” you should contact your broker, bank or nominee to change your instructions on how to vote. If you hold your shares in “street name” and wish to virtually attend the special meeting and vote through the web portal, you must obtain a legal proxy from your broker, bank or nominee.

Q: What constitutes a quorum for the special meeting?

A: A quorum is the minimum number of shares of HCCC Common Stock that must be present to hold a valid meeting. A quorum will be present at the HCCC special meeting if a majority of the voting power of the issued and outstanding shares of HCCC Common Stock entitled to vote at the meeting are represented at the virtual special meeting or by proxy. Abstentions and broker non-votes will count as present for the purposes of establishing a quorum. The Class A common stock and Class B common stock are entitled vote together as a single class on all matters to be considered at the special meeting.

xvii

Q: What stockholder vote thresholds are required for the approval of each proposal brought before the special meeting?

Q: What happens if I fail to take any action with respect to the special meeting?

A: If you fail to take any action with respect to the meeting and the Business Combination is approved by the HCCC stockholders and consummated, you will become a shareholder and/or warrant holder of Alpha Tau.

If you fail to take any action with respect to the special meeting and the Business Combination is not approved, you will continue to be a stockholder and/or warrant holder of HCCC, as applicable, and HCCC will continue to search for another target business with which to complete an initial business combination. If HCCC does not complete an initial business combination by January 20, 2023 (or such later date as may be approved by HCCC’s stockholders in an amendment to the HCCC Charter), HCCC must cease all operations except for the purpose of winding up, redeem 100% of the outstanding public shares, at a per-share price, payable in cash, equal to an amount then held in the Trust Account (net of taxes payable and less up to $100,000 of interest to pay dissolution expenses), and as promptly as reasonably possible following such redemption, subject to the approval of HCCC’s remaining stockholders and its board of directors, dissolve and liquidate.

Q: What should I do with my share and/or warrant certificates?

A: Warrant holders and those stockholders who do not elect to have their shares of HCCC Common Stock redeemed for a pro rata share of the Trust Account should wait for instructions from HCCC’s transfer agent regarding what to do with their certificates. HCCC stockholders who exercise their redemption rights must deliver their share certificates to HCCC’s transfer agent (either physically or electronically) no later than two (2) business days prior to the special meeting as described above.

Upon consummation of the Transactions, the HCCC warrants, by their terms, will entitle holders to purchase shares of Alpha Tau. Therefore, warrant holders need not deliver their warrants to HCCC or Alpha Tau at that time.

xviii

Q: What should I do if I receive more than one set of voting materials?

A: Stockholders may receive more than one set of voting materials, including multiple copies of this proxy statement/prospectus and multiple proxy cards or voting instruction cards. For example, if you hold your shares in more than one brokerage account, you will receive a separate voting instruction card for each brokerage account in which you hold shares. If you are a holder of record and your shares are registered in more than one name, you will receive more than one proxy card. Please complete, sign, date and return each proxy card and voting instruction card that you receive in order to cast a vote with respect to all of your shares of HCCC Common Stock.

Q: Who can help answer my questions?

A: If you have questions about the Business Combination or if you need additional copies of this proxy statement/prospectus or the enclosed proxy card, you should contact the proxy solicitor at:

Morrow Sodali LLC

333 Ludlow Street, 5th Floor, South Tower

Stamford CT 06902

Tel: Toll-Free (800) 662-5200 or (203) 658-9400

Email: HCCC.Info@investor.morrowsodali.com

You may also obtain additional information about HCCC from documents filed with the SEC by following the instructions in the section entitled “Where You Can Find More Information.” If you are a holder of public shares and you intend to seek redemption of your shares, you will need to deliver your shares (either physically or electronically) to HCCC’s transfer agent at the address below at least two (2) business days prior to the vote at the special meeting. If you have questions regarding the certification of your position or delivery of your stock, please contact:

Mr. Mark Zimkind

Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company

1 State Street, 30th Floor

New York, New York 10004

E-mail: mzimkind@continentalstock.com

xix

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

RISK FACTORS

If the Business Combination is completed, the combined company will operate in a market environment that is difficult to predict and that involves significant risks, many of which will be beyond its control. You should carefully consider the risks described below before voting your shares. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to Alpha Tau and HCCC or that they do not currently believe are important to an investor, if they materialize, also may adversely affect the Business Combination. If any of the events, contingencies, circumstances or conditions described in the following risks actually occur, the combined company’s business, financial condition or results of operations could be seriously harmed. If that happens, the trading price of Alpha Tau’s ordinary shares or, if the Business Combination is not consummated, HCCC Common Stock could decline, and you may lose part or all of the value of any Alpha Tau ordinary shares or, if the Business Combination is not consummated, shares of HCCC Common Stock that you hold.

Risks Related to the Combined Company Following the Business Combination

Any of the following risk factors could cause the combined company’s actual results to differ materially from anticipated results. These risks and uncertainties are not the only ones that the combined company faces.

Risks Related to Alpha Tau’s Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

We have incurred significant losses since inception and have not generated any revenue to date. We expect to incur losses over the next several years and may not be able to achieve or sustain revenues or profitability in the future.

Investment in the medical device industry and product development is a highly speculative undertaking and entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that our Alpha DaRT technology will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain marketing authorization in the United States and similar authorization or certification in various other jurisdictions worldwide and become commercially viable. We currently have no products authorized for commercial sale in the United States and have not generated any revenue to date, and we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through private placements of our ordinary and preferred shares as well as through grants received from government authorities, primarily in Israel.

We have incurred significant net losses in each period since we commenced activity in 2016. For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2020, we reported net losses of $8.4 million and $8.9 million, respectively and for the six months ended June 30, 2020 and June 30, 2021, we reported net losses of $4.0 million and $18.7 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $44.3 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase substantially if and as we:

21

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the medical device industry, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses we will incur or when, if ever, we will be able to achieve profitability. Even if we succeed in commercializing our Alpha DaRT technology in one indication, we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenditures to develop, seek marketing authorizations or certifications for, and potentially market our Alpha DaRT technology in other indications. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our shareholders’ equity and working capital.

We have not generated any revenue to date and may never be profitable.

Our ability to become profitable depends upon our ability to generate revenue. To date, we have not generated any revenue. We do not expect to generate significant product revenue unless or until we successfully complete clinical development and obtain marketing authorization in the United States and similar authorization or certification in other target jurisdictions of, and then successfully commercialize, our Alpha DaRT technology for at least one indication. Our Alpha-DaRT technology is currently in clinical trials for a number of forms of cancer, including skin, oral, pancreatic and breast cancers, and preclinical studies for hepatic cell carcinoma, lung and prostate cancers, which will all require additional preclinical or clinical studies, clinical development and regulatory review and authorization or certification, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and significant commercialization and marketing efforts before we can generate any revenue from product sales.

We are conducting clinical trials in a number of forms of cancer and, as such, face significant development risks as our Alpha DaRT technology advances further through clinical development. Our ability to generate revenue depends on a number of factors, including, but not limited to:

22

Many of the factors listed above are beyond our control, and could cause us to experience significant delays or prevent us from obtaining marketing authorizations or certifications or commercializing our Alpha DaRT technology. Even if we are able to commercialize our Alpha DaRT technology, we may not achieve profitability soon after generating product sales, if ever. If we are unable to generate sufficient revenue through the sale of our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates, we may be unable to continue operations without continued funding.

Even if we consummate the Transactions, we will need substantial additional funding, and if we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or terminate the development of our Alpha DaRT technology or other product discovery and development programs or commercialization efforts.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to continue the clinical and preclinical development of our Alpha DaRT technology. We will need to raise additional capital to complete our currently ongoing planned clinical trials and any future clinical trials. Other unanticipated costs may arise in the course of our development efforts. If we are able to gain marketing authorization or certification for our Alpha DaRT technology or other future products or product candidates that we develop, we may require significant additional amounts of funding in order to launch and commercialize such our Alpha DaRT technology or products or product candidates. We cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development of and commercialize our Alpha DaRT technology and we may need substantial additional funding after consummation of this transaction to complete the development and commercialization of our Alpha DaRT technology.

Our future need for additional funding depends on many factors, including:

23

We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, reduce or terminate the development of our Alpha DaRT technology or plans for commercialization.

We believe that the net proceeds from the Transactions, together with our existing cash and cash equivalents, will enable us to fund its operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into 2024. Our estimates may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Further, changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned.

Our limited operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

We are a clinical-stage medical device oncology therapy company with a limited operating history. We commenced operations in 2016, and our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, conducting research activities, filing patent applications, developing our Alpha DaRT technology, identifying target indications, initiating and conducting our clinical trials, undertaking preclinical studies and establishing manufacturing infrastructure and capacity to produce our Alpha DaRT technology. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully initiate a pivotal trial in the United States, obtain marketing authorizations (other than in Israel) or similar authorizations or certifications in other foreign jurisdictions, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales, marketing and distribution activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history.

24

In addition, as a young business, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors. We will need to transition at some point from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

We may be exposed to financial risk related to the fluctuation of foreign exchange rates and the degrees of volatility of those rates.

We may be adversely affected by foreign currency fluctuations. Our reporting currency and the functional currency of our operating companies is the US Dollar. To date, we have been primarily funded through issuances of equity that have been denominated in U.S. Dollar. However, a meaningful portion of our expenditures are paid in New Israeli Shekel, particularly with respect to our employees, and we are therefore subject to foreign currency fluctuations that may, from time to time, impact our financial position and results of operations.

Risks Related to Alpha Tau’s Business and the Alpha DaRT Technology

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

Our approach to the development of our proprietary Alpha DaRT technology represents a novel approach to radiation therapy, which creates significant and potentially unpredictable challenges for us.

Our future success depends on the successful development of our Alpha DaRT technology, which is designed to treat solid tumors through alpha-irradiation by intratumoral insertion of radium-224 impregnated sources, representing what we believe to be a novel approach to local radiotherapy. Alpha-emitting isotope oncology therapy is relatively new, and only one alpha-emitting isotope therapy has been approved in the United States or the European Union and only a limited number of clinical trials of products based on alpha-emitting isotope therapies have commenced. In addition, the majority of the clinical trials evaluating alpha-emitting isotope oncology therapy have focused on systemic delivery of drugs like radiopharmaceuticals (including Xofigo or certain antibody-radionuclide conjugates), while our Alpha DaRT technology is designed to be a local therapy. As such, it is difficult to accurately predict the developmental challenges we may incur for our Alpha DaRT technology as it proceeds through preclinical studies and clinical trials. In addition, beyond the limited universe of patients treated with Xofigo, the sole alpha-emitting isotope therapy approved in the United States or the European Union, as well as other uses of alpha-emitting isotope therapy outside of oncology, such as in the use in treating ankylosing spondylitis, assessments of the long-term safety of targeted alpha-emitting isotope therapies in humans have been limited, and there may be long-term effects from treatment with our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates we develop that we cannot predict at this time. It is difficult for us to predict the time and cost of the regulatory development of our Alpha DaRT technology, and we cannot predict whether the application of our technology, or any similar or competitive technologies, will result in the identification, development, and marketing authorization or certification of any products. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future related to our technology or any of our research programs will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be solved at all. Any of these factors may prevent us from completing our preclinical studies and clinical trials that we may initiate or commercializing any product candidates we may develop on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. In addition, the success of our Alpha DaRT technology will depend on several factors, including the following:

25

The commercial success of our Alpha DaRT technology, if authorized for commercial sale or certified, will depend in part upon public perception of radiation therapies, and to a lesser extent, radiopharmaceuticals, and the degree of their market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community.

Adverse events in clinical trials of our Alpha DaRT technology or in clinical trials of others developing similar products and the resulting negative publicity, as well as any other adverse events in the field of radiation therapies or radiopharmaceuticals that may occur in the future, could result in a decrease in demand for our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or any product candidates that we may develop that rely on radiation therapy. If public perception is influenced by claims that radiation therapies or radiopharmaceuticals or specific therapies within radiation therapies or radiopharmaceuticals are unsafe or if alternative therapies for cancer treatment are developed and proven to be more successful or provide an actual or perceived, preferred course of treatment for cancer(s), our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or any product candidates we may develop may not be accepted by the general public or the medical community.

In particular, the future commercial success of our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or any product candidates we may develop, as applicable, depends and will depend upon, among other things, these products and product candidates gaining and maintaining acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and other members of the medical community as efficacious and cost-effective alternatives to competing products and treatments. If any of our products or product candidates do not achieve and maintain an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate material sales of that product or product candidate or be able to successfully commercialize it. The degree of market acceptance of our products and product candidates, if authorized for sale or certified, will depend on a number of factors, including:

26

If our Alpha DaRT technology or any of our other future products or product candidates, if authorized or certified, do not become widely accepted by potential customers, physicians, patients, third-party payors and other members of the medical community, such a lack of acceptance could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are exploring development of our Alpha DaRT technology in combination with other therapies, which exposes us to additional risks.

We are planning to conduct a combination trial evaluating our Alpha DaRT technology in combination with pembrolizumab for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, and in the future we may explore conduct additional combination trials with one or more currently approved or experimental cancer therapies for this or other indications. Even if our Alpha DaRT technology receives marketing authorization or obtains certification for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities could revoke marketing authorization of the therapy used in combination with our Alpha DaRT technology or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these other therapies. Combination therapies are commonly used for the treatment of cancer, and we would be subject to similar risks if we develop any of our products or product candidates for use in combination with other drugs or for indications other than cancer. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

We may also evaluate our Alpha DaRT technology in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell our product candidate we develop in combination with any such unapproved cancer therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing authorization.

If the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities do not approve these other drugs or revoke their marketing authorization, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing, or supply issues arise with, the drugs we choose to evaluate in combination with our product candidate, we may be unable to obtain marketing authorization or certification of or market our product candidate.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic could continue to adversely impact our business, including our clinical trials, supply chain and business development activities.

In connection with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, governments have implemented significant measures, including closures of businesses, quarantines, travel restrictions and other social distancing directives, intended to control the spread of the virus. Companies have also taken precautions, such as requiring employees to work remotely, imposing travel restrictions and temporarily closing businesses. In response to these public health directives and orders, we have implemented certain travel restrictions and work-from-home policies for our employees, and as a result we have experienced limitations on employee resources. The effects of government actions and our own policies and those of third parties to reduce the spread of COVID-19 may negatively impact productivity and slow down or delay our ongoing and future clinical trials, preclinical studies and research and development activities, may cause disruptions to our supply chain, to the administrative functions of clinical trial sites and/or to the operations of our other partners, and as a result may impair our ability to execute our programs and/or business development strategy. In the event that government authorities were to enhance current restrictions, our employees who currently are not telecommuting may no longer be able to access our facilities, including our laboratories and our operations may be further limited or curtailed.

Our clinical trials have been, and may in the future be, affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, certain of our clinical trial sites, most notably Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, and Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal in Montreal, have both seen significantly decreased clinical trial recruitment in general due to the devastating local impact of COVID-19, and therefore have not yet recruited

27

any patients in to our clinical trials in these cities. However, in July 2021, the first participant in our U.S. pilot trial for skin cancer was treated with Alpha DaRT at University Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. We may experience other disruptions due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic that could severely impact our business, preclinical studies and clinical trials, including:

These and other disruptions in our operations and the global economy could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition.

The spread of COVID-19 and actions taken to reduce its spread may also materially affect us economically. While the potential economic impact brought by, and the duration of, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic may be difficult to assess or predict, there have recently been, and could in the future be, significant disruptions of global financial markets, reducing our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity

28

and financial position. In addition, the trading prices for other medical device and other biopharmaceutical companies have been highly volatile as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, we may face difficulties raising capital or such capital raises may be on unfavorable terms.

COVID-19 and actions taken to reduce its spread continue to rapidly evolve. The extent to which COVID-19 may impede the development of our product Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates, reduce the productivity of our employees, disrupt our supply chains, delay our clinical trials, reduce our access to capital or limit our business development activities, will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence. To the extent the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section, such as those relating to the timing and results of our clinical trials and our financing needs.

The market opportunities for our Alpha DaRT technology may be smaller than we anticipated or may be limited to those patients who are ineligible for or have failed prior treatments. If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

Our current and future target patient populations are based on our beliefs and estimates regarding the incidence or prevalence of certain types of cancers that may be addressable by our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates we develop, which is derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, publications by medical societies and non-profit organizations, and surveys of clinics. Our projections may prove to be incorrect and the number of potential patients may turn out to be lower than expected. Even if we obtain significant market share for our Alpha DaRT technology, because the potential target populations could be small, we may never achieve profitability without obtaining marketing authorizations for additional indications in the United States or similar authorizations or certifications in other target jurisdictions, including use of our Alpha DaRT technology for front-line and second-line therapy.

We currently have no commercial marketing and sales organization and have no experience in marketing products. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our Alpha DaRT technology, if approved for commercial sale, we may not be able to generate product revenue.

We currently have no in-house sales or distribution capabilities and have no experience in marketing products. We intend to develop an in-house marketing organization and sales force, which will require significant capital expenditures, management resources and time. We will have to compete with other pharmaceutical, medical device and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel.

If we are unable or decide not to establish internal sales and marketing capabilities, we will pursue collaborative arrangements regarding the sales and marketing of our products, if licensed, as we have done in Canada and Israel. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to establish or maintain such collaborative arrangements, or if we are able to do so, that they will have effective sales forces. Any revenue we receive will depend upon the efforts of such third parties, which may not be successful. We may have little or no control over the marketing and sales efforts of such third parties and our revenue from product sales may be lower than if we had commercialized our Alpha DaRT technology ourselves. We also face competition in our search for third parties to assist us with the sales and marketing efforts of our Alpha DaRT technology.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to develop in-house sales and distribution capabilities or establish or maintain relationships with third-party collaborators to commercialize any product in the United States or overseas for which we are able to obtain marketing authorization or certification.

29

We may expend our resources to pursue a particular indication and forgo the opportunity to capitalize on Alpha DaRT technology in indications that may ultimately be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

We have limited financial and personnel resources and are placing significant focus on the development of our Alpha DaRT technology in certain indications, and as such, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other future products or product candidates or other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and other future products or product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable future products or product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular future product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to those future products or product candidates through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such future products or product candidates.

We currently conduct and in the future intend to continue conducting pre-clinical studies, clinical trials for our Alpha DaRT technology outside the United States, and the FDA and similar foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.

We are currently conducting clinical trials in Israel, Canada, the United States, Japan and Europe and may in the future choose to conduct additional clinical trials, including in Asia, Australia, elsewhere in Europe or other foreign jurisdictions. The acceptance of trial data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States by the FDA may be subject to certain conditions. For example, in cases where data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing authorization in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless such clinical trials were conducted in accordance with good clinical practices, or GCP, and (i) the data are applicable to the United States population and United States medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Many foreign regulatory bodies have similar requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any similar foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any similar foreign regulatory authority or other bodies does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our Alpha DaRT not receiving approval, clearance or certification for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

Our Alpha DaRT technology and operations are subject to extensive government regulation and oversight both in the United States and abroad, and our failure to comply with applicable requirements could harm our business.

Any products or product candidates which ultimately integrate our Alpha DaRT technology are expected to be regulated as medical devices in the United States. Medical devices and their manufacturers and product developers are subject to extensive regulation in the United States and elsewhere, including by the FDA and its foreign counterparts. The FDA and foreign regulatory agencies regulate, among other things, with respect to medical devices: design, development and manufacturing; testing, labeling, content and language of instructions

30

for use and storage; clinical trials; product safety; establishment registration and device listing; marketing, sales and distribution; premarket clearance, classification and approval; recordkeeping procedures; advertising and promotion; recalls and field safety corrective actions; postmarket surveillance, including reporting of deaths or serious injuries and malfunctions that, if they were to recur, could lead to death or serious injury; post-market studies; and product import and export.

The regulations to which we are subject are complex, burdensome to understand and apply and have tended to become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to carry on or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales, if our product candidate receives marketing authorization or certification. The FDA enforces its regulatory requirements through, among other means, periodic unannounced inspections. We do not know whether we or any contract manufacturers we may utilize will be found compliant in connection with any future FDA or foreign inspections. Failure to comply with applicable regulations could jeopardize our ability to sell our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates, if they obtain marketing authorization or certification, and result in enforcement actions such as: warning letters; fines; injunctions; civil penalties; termination of distribution; recalls or seizures of products; delays in the introduction of products into the market; total or partial suspension of production; refusal to grant future clearances, approvals or certifications; withdrawals or suspensions of clearances, approvals or certifications, resulting in prohibitions on sales of our products; and in the most serious cases, criminal penalties.

We may not receive, or may be delayed in receiving, the necessary marketing authorizations or certifications for our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates, and failure to timely obtain necessary marketing authorizations or certifications for our product candidates would have a material adverse effect on our business.

In the United States, before we can market a new medical device, or a new use of, or other significant modification to an existing, marketed medical device, we must first receive either clearance under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA, approval of a premarket approval application, or PMA, or grant of a de novo classification request from the FDA, unless an exemption applies. In the 510(k) clearance process, before a device may be marketed, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a legally-marketed “predicate” device, which includes a device that has been previously cleared through the 510(k) process, a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device), a device that was originally on the U.S. market pursuant to an approved PMA and later down-classified, or a 510(k)-exempt device. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data are sometimes required to support substantial equivalence. In the process of obtaining PMA approval, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, pre-clinical, clinical trial, manufacturing and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices that are deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting or implantable devices. In the de novo classification process, a manufacturer whose novel device under the FDCA would otherwise be automatically classified as Class III and require the submission and approval of a PMA prior to marketing is able to request down-classification of the device to Class I or Class II on the basis that the device presents a low or moderate risk. If the FDA grants the de novo classification request, the applicant will receive authorization to market the device. This device type may be used subsequently as a predicate device for future 510(k) submissions.

The PMA approval, 510(k) clearance and de novo classification processes can be expensive, lengthy and uncertain. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to 12 months, but can take longer. The process of obtaining a PMA is much more costly and uncertain than the 510(k) clearance process and generally takes from one to three years, or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA. In addition, a PMA generally requires the performance of one or more clinical trials. Clinical data may also be required in

31

connection with an application for 510(k) clearance or a de novo request. Despite the time, effort and cost, a device may not obtain marketing authorization by the FDA. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory marketing authorizations could harm our business. Furthermore, even if we are granted such marketing authorizations, they may include significant limitations on the indicated uses for the device, which may limit the potential commercial market for the device.

To date, we have not obtained authorization from the FDA to market any product candidate in the United States, and we expect to pursue the de novo classification process for our Alpha DaRT technology. If the FDA requires us to go through a lengthier, more rigorous examination for our products than we had expected, our product introductions or modifications could be delayed or prevented, which would have a material impact on our business and prospects. For example, if the FDA disagrees with our determination that the de novo classification pathway is the appropriate path to obtain marketing authorization for Alpha DaRT, the FDA may require us to submit a PMA application, which is generally more costly, time-consuming, and uncertain.

In the United States, any modification to a product candidate for which we receive marketing authorization may require us to submit a new 510(k) premarket notification and obtain clearance, to submit a PMA and obtain FDA approval, or to submit a de novo request prior to implementing the change. For example, any modification to a 510(k)-cleared device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, design or manufacture, generally requires a new 510(k) clearance or other marketing authorization. The FDA requires every manufacturer to make such determinations in the first instance, but the FDA may review any manufacturer’s decision. The FDA may not agree with a manufacturer’s decisions regarding whether new clearances or approvals are necessary. If we obtain marketing authorizations from the FDA, we may make modifications or add additional features in the future that we believe do not require a new 510(k) clearance, de novo request or approval of a PMA. If the FDA disagrees with our determination and requires us to seek new marketing authorizations for the modifications for which we have concluded that new marketing authorizations are unnecessary, we may be required to cease marketing or to recall the modified product until we obtain such marketing authorization, and we may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties. If the FDA requires us to go through a lengthier, more rigorous examination for future products or modifications to existing products than we had expected, product introductions or modifications could be delayed or canceled, which could adversely affect our business.

The FDA, applicable foreign regulatory entity or notified body can delay, limit or deny marketing authorization or certification of a device for many reasons, including:

In order to sell our products in member states of the European Union, or the EU, our products must comply with the general safety and performance requirements of the EU Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation (EU)

32

No 2017/745), which repeals and replaces the EU Medical Devices Directive (Council Directive 93/42/EEC) and the Active Implantable Medical Devices Directive (Council Directive 90/385/EEC). Compliance with these requirements is a prerequisite to be able to affix the European Conformity, or CE, mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in the EU. All medical devices placed on the market in the EU must meet the general safety and performance requirements laid down in Annex I to the EU Medical Devices Regulation including the requirement that a medical device must be designed and manufactured in such a way that, during normal conditions of use, it is suitable for its intended purpose. Medical devices must be safe and effective and must not compromise the clinical condition or safety of patients, or the safety and health of users and – where applicable – other persons, provided that any risks which may be associated with their use constitute acceptable risks when weighed against the benefits to the patient and are compatible with a high level of protection of health and safety, taking into account the generally acknowledged state of the art. The European Commission has adopted various standards applicable to medical devices. These include standards governing common requirements, such as sterilization and safety of medical electrical equipment and product standards for certain types of medical devices. There are also harmonized standards relating to design and manufacture. While not mandatory, compliance with these standards is viewed as the easiest way to satisfy the general safety and performance requirements as a practical matter, as it creates a rebuttable presumption that the device satisfies the general safety and performance requirements.

To demonstrate compliance with the general safety and performance requirements we must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its (risk) classification. As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of medical devices and their manufacturers with the general safety and performance requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence. Except for low-risk medical devices (Class I), where the manufacturer can issue an EC Declaration of Conformity based on a self-assessment of the conformity of its products with the general safety and performance requirements (except for any parts which relate to sterility, metrology or reuse aspects), a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of an organization accredited or designated by a member state of the EU to conduct conformity assessments, or a notified body. Depending on the relevant conformity assessment procedure, the notified body would typically audit and examine the technical file and the quality system for the manufacture, design and final inspection of our devices. If satisfied that the relevant product conforms to the relevant essential requirements, the notified body issues a certificate of conformity, which the manufacturer uses as a basis for its own declaration of conformity. The manufacturer may then apply the CE Mark to the device, which allows the device to be placed on the market throughout the EU. If we fail to comply with applicable EU laws and regulations, and corresponding EU member state laws, we would be unable to affix the CE mark to our products, which would prevent us from selling them within the EU.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the European Economic Area, or EEA, which consists of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland. Non-compliance with the above requirements would also prevent us from selling our products in these three countries.

From January 1, 2021 onwards, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA becomes the sovereign regulatory authority responsible for Great Britain (i.e. England, Wales and Scotland) medical device market according to the requirements provided in the Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (SI 2002 No 618, as amended) that sought to give effect to the three pre-existing EU directives governing active implantable medical devices, general medical devices and in vitro diagnostic medical devices whereas Northern Ireland continues to be governed by EU rules according to the Northern Ireland Protocol. Following the end of the Brexit transitional period on January 1, 2021, new regulations require medical devices to be registered with the MHRA (but manufacturers will be given a grace period of four to 12 months to comply with the new

33

registration process) before being placed on Great Britain market. The MHRA will only register devices where the manufacturer or their United Kingdom Responsible Person has a registered place of business in the United Kingdom. Manufacturers based outside the United Kingdom will need to appoint a U.K. Responsible Person that has a registered place of business in the United Kingdom to register devices with the MHRA in line with the grace periods. By July 1, 2023, in Great Britain, all medical devices will require a UKCA (UK Conformity Assessed) mark but CE marks issued by EU notified bodies will remain valid until this time. Manufacturers may choose to use the UKCA mark on a voluntary basis until June 30, 2023. However, UKCA marking will not be recognized in the EU. The rules for placing medical devices on the market in Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, differ from those in the rest of the United Kingdom. Compliance with this legislation is a prerequisite to be able to affix the UKCA mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in Great Britain. Under the terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol, Northern Ireland will follow EU rules on medical devices and devices marketed in Northern Ireland will require assessment according to the EU regulatory regime. Such assessment may be conducted by an EU notified body, in which case a CE mark will be required before placing the device on the market in the EU or Northern Ireland. Alternatively, if a UK notified body conducts such assessment, a ‘UKNI’ mark will be applied and the device may only be placed on the market in Northern Ireland and not the EU.

The clinical trial process is lengthy and expensive with uncertain outcomes. Results of earlier studies may not be predictive of future clinical trial results.

Clinical testing is difficult to design and implement, can take many years, can be expensive and carries uncertain outcomes. The results of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our products conducted to date and ongoing or future studies and trials of our current, planned or future products may not be predictive of the results of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. The data and results from our clinical trials do not ensure that we will achieve similar results in future clinical trials. In addition, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to various interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their products performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and earlier clinical trials have nonetheless failed to replicate results in later clinical trials, or have viewed such data in different ways than regulators do. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy despite having progressed through nonclinical studies and earlier clinical trials. Failure can occur at any stage of clinical testing. Our clinical studies or investigations may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical and nonclinical testing in addition to those we have planned.

The initiation and completion of clinical studies may be prevented, delayed, or halted for numerous reasons. We may experience delays in our clinical trials for a number of reasons, which could adversely affect the costs, timing or successful completion of our clinical trials, including related to the following:

34

Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of marketing authorization or similar certification of any product candidate.

Patient enrollment in clinical trials and completion of patient follow-up depend on many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the trial protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial, patient compliance, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new treatments that may be approved for the indications we are investigating. For example, patients may be discouraged from enrolling in our clinical trials if the trial protocol requires them to undergo extensive post-treatment procedures or follow-up to assess the safety and efficacy of a product candidate, or they may be persuaded to participate in contemporaneous clinical trials of a competitor’s product candidate. In addition, patients participating in our clinical trials may drop out before completion of the trial or experience adverse medical events unrelated to our product candidate. Delays in patient enrollment or failure of patients to continue to participate in a clinical trial may delay commencement or completion of the clinical trial, cause an increase in the costs of the clinical trial and delays, or result in the failure of the clinical trial.

35

Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the laws and regulations of the FDA and other applicable regulatory authorities’ legal requirements, regulations or guidelines, and are subject to oversight by these governmental agencies and IRBs, or other bodies at the medical institutions where the clinical trials are conducted. In addition, clinical trials must be conducted with supplies of our devices produced under current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, and other regulations. Furthermore, we rely on CROs, and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance. We depend on our collaborators and on medical institutions and CROs to conduct our clinical trials in compliance with good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements. To the extent our collaborators or the CROs fail to enroll participants for our clinical trials, fail to conduct the study to GCP standards or are delayed for a significant time in the execution of trials, including achieving full enrollment, we may be affected by increased costs, program delays or both. In addition, conducting clinical trials in various countries may subject us to further delays and expenses as a result of increased shipment costs, additional regulatory requirements and the engagement of non-U.S. CROs and other third party contractors, as well as expose us to risks associated with clinical investigators who are unknown to the FDA, and different standards of diagnosis, screening and medical care.

Even if our Alpha DaRT technology obtains marketing authorization in the United States, commercialization of our products in foreign countries would require similar authorization or certification by regulatory authorities in those countries. Marketing authorization and certification practices vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies, clinical trials. Any of these occurrences could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Interim, “top-line” and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, top-line or preliminary data from our clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the interim, top-line or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same trial, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Interim, top-line or preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the interim, top-line or preliminary data we previously announced. As a result, interim, top-line and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.

In particular, we may disclose interim data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, disclosure of interim data by us or by our competitors could result in volatility in our share price.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies or other bodies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, or the approvability or potential for commercialization of the particular product candidate. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study, clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. If the interim, top-line or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others,

36

including regulatory authorities and other bodies, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain marketing authorization or certification for, and commercialize, our Alpha DaRT technology may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

Even if we obtain marketing authorization or certification, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory review and scrutiny. Failure to comply with post-marketing regulatory requirements could subject us to enforcement actions, including substantial penalties, and might require us to recall or withdraw a product from the market.

If we obtain marketing authorization or certification for a product candidate, we will remain subject to ongoing and pervasive regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the manufacture, marketing, advertising, medical device reporting, sale, promotion, import, export, registration, and listing of devices. For example, medical device manufacturers must submit periodic reports to the FDA as a condition of obtaining marketing authorization. These reports include information about failures and certain adverse events associated with the device after its marketing authorization. Failure to submit such reports, or failure to submit the reports in a timely manner, could result in enforcement action by the FDA. Following its review of the periodic reports, the FDA might ask for additional information or initiate further investigation.

Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to continue or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs, or lower than anticipated sales. Even after we have obtained marketing authorization or certification, we have ongoing responsibilities under FDA regulations and applicable foreign laws and regulations. The FDA, state and foreign regulatory authorities have broad enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, state or foreign regulatory authorities, which may include any of the following sanctions:

Any of these sanctions could result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the FDA may change its marketing authorization policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay marketing authorization of any product candidate under development or impact our ability to modify any products authorized for market on a timely basis. Such changes may also occur in foreign jurisdictions where we intend to market our products. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain marketing authorizations, increase the costs of compliance or restrict our ability to maintain any marketing authorizations we have obtained. For example, in recent years, the FDA has announced plans to modernize the

37

premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. For more information, see “Legislative or regulatory reforms in the United States or the EU may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain marketing authorizations or certifications for any product candidate or to manufacture, market or distribute any product candidates after such marketing authorizations or certifications have been obtained.”

Any product candidates we develop must be manufactured in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and we could be forced to recall our devices or terminate production if we fail to comply with these regulations.

In the United States, the methods used in, and the facilities used for, the manufacture of medical devices must comply with the FDA’s cGMPs for medical devices, known as the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which is a complex regulatory scheme that covers the procedures and documentation of the design, testing, production, process controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, handling, storage, distribution, installation, servicing and shipping of medical devices. Furthermore, we will be required to verify that our suppliers maintain facilities, procedures and operations that comply with our quality standards and applicable regulatory requirements. The FDA enforces the QSR through periodic announced or unannounced inspections of medical device manufacturing facilities, which may include the facilities of subcontractors. Our product candidates are also subject to similar state regulations and various laws and regulations of foreign countries governing manufacturing.

Our third-party manufacturers may not take the necessary steps to comply with applicable regulations, which could cause delays in the delivery of product candidate. In addition, failure to comply with applicable FDA requirements or later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products or manufacturing processes could result in, among other things: warning letters or untitled letters; fines, injunctions or civil penalties; suspension or withdrawal of marketing authorizations; seizures or recalls of our products; total or partial suspension of production or distribution; administrative or judicially imposed sanctions; the FDA’s refusal to grant pending or future clearances or approvals for our products; clinical holds; refusal to permit the import or export of our products; and criminal prosecution of us, our suppliers, or our employees. Similar requirements may apply in foreign jurisdictions.

Any of these actions could significantly and negatively affect supply of our product candidates, if authorized for sale by the FDA. If any of these events occurs, our reputation could be harmed, we could be exposed to product liability claims and we could lose customers and experience reduced sales and increased costs.

Any product candidate we develop may cause or contribute to adverse medical events, which could interrupt, delay, or prevent their continued development. If certain events occur after marketing authorization or certification, we may be required to report them to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, and if we fail to do so, we would be subject to sanctions that could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the discovery of serious safety issues with our products, or a recall of our products either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA, another governmental authority or foreign regulatory authorities, could have a negative impact on us.

As is the case with cancer therapies generally, it is likely that there may be side effects and adverse events associated with our Alpha DaRT technology or any future product or product candidate’s use. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities or other bodies to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials or, may cause us to abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Undesirable side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

38

Patients treated with our product candidates may also be undergoing surgical, chemotherapy, immunotherapy or alternative radiation treatments, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidate, but may still impact the success of our clinical trials. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using or due to the gravity of such patients’ illnesses. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining marketing authorization or certification, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance due to its tolerability versus other therapies. Any of these developments could materially harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

Additionally, if our Alpha DaRT technology or any future product candidate receives marketing authorization from the FDA, the side effects observed in clinical studies could result in a more restrictive label and we will subject to the FDA’s medical device reporting regulations and similar foreign regulations, which require us to report to the FDA or to foreign regulatory authorities when we receive or become aware of information that reasonably suggests that one or more of our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that, if the malfunction were to recur, it could cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. The timing of our obligation to report is triggered by the date we become aware of the event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report events of which we become aware within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to recognize that we have become aware of a reportable event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of the product. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities could take action, including warning letters, untitled letters, administrative actions, criminal prosecution, imposition of civil monetary penalties, revocation of our marketing authorizations or certification, seizure of our products or delay in obtaining marketing authorizations or certification for our product candidates.

The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture of a product or in the event that a product poses an unacceptable risk to health. The FDA’s authority to require a recall must be based on a finding that there is reasonable probability that the device could cause serious injury or death. We may also choose to voluntarily recall a product if any material deficiency is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing defects, labeling or design deficiencies, packaging defects or other deficiencies or failures to comply with applicable regulations. Product defects or other errors may occur in the future.

Depending on the corrective action we take to redress a product’s deficiencies or defects, the FDA or foreign regulatory bodies may require, or we may decide, that we will need to obtain new marketing authorizations or certifications for the device before we may market or distribute the corrected device. Seeking such clearances, certifications or approvals may delay our ability to replace the recalled devices in a timely manner. Moreover, if we do not adequately address problems associated with our devices, we may face additional regulatory enforcement action, including FDA warning letters, product seizure, injunctions, administrative penalties or civil or criminal fines or similar actions by the foreign regulatory bodies.

Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls and corrections, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary withdrawals or corrections for our products in the future that we determine do not require notification of the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, it could require us to report those actions as recalls and we may be subject to enforcement action. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers, potentially lead to product liability claims against us and negatively affect our sales. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending ourselves in a lawsuit, will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business and may harm our reputation and financial results.

39

The misuse or off-label use of our product candidates, if authorized or certified for marketing, may harm our reputation in the marketplace, result in injuries that lead to product liability suits or result in costly investigations, fines or sanctions by regulatory bodies if we are deemed to have engaged in the promotion of these uses, any of which could be costly to our business.

Any marketing authorization or certification we may receive for a product candidate will be limited to specified indications for use. We plan to train our sales and marketing personnel, as well as any direct sales force which may be hired in the future, to not promote our devices for uses outside of the FDA (or foreign regulatory authorities)- authorized indications for use, known as “off-label uses.” We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using our devices off-label, when in the physician’s independent professional medical judgment he or she deems it appropriate. There may be increased risk of injury to patients if physicians attempt to use our devices off-label, which could harm our reputation in the marketplace among physicians and patients.

If the FDA or any foreign regulatory body determines that our promotional materials or training constitute promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance or imposition of an untitled letter, which is used for violators that do not necessitate a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action under other regulatory authority, such as false claims laws, if they consider our business activities to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including, but not limited to, criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment of our operations.

In addition, physicians may misuse our products or use improper techniques if they are not adequately trained, potentially leading to injury and an increased risk of product liability. If our devices are misused or used with improper technique, we may become subject to costly litigation by our customers or their patients. As described above, product liability claims could divert management’s attention from our core business, be expensive to defend and result in sizeable damage awards against us that may not be covered by insurance.

If we do not obtain and maintain international regulatory registrations, marketing authorizations or certifications for any product candidates we develop, we will be unable to market and sell such product candidates outside of the United States.

Sales of our product candidates outside of the United States will remain subject to foreign regulatory requirements that vary widely from country to country. In addition, the FDA regulates exports of medical devices from the United States. While the regulations of some countries may not impose significant barriers to marketing and selling our products or only require notification to regulators or third parties, others require that we obtain affirmative marketing authorization or certification from a specified regulatory body. Complying with foreign regulatory requirements, including obtaining registrations, certifications, clearances or approvals, can be expensive and time-consuming, and we may not receive necessary marketing authorizations or certifications in each country in which we plan to market our products or we may be unable to do so on a timely basis. The time required to obtain registrations, certifications and marketing authorizations, if required by other countries, may be longer than that required for FDA marketing authorizations, and requirements for such certifications, registrations or authorizations may significantly differ from FDA requirements. If we modify our products, we may need to apply for additional marketing authorizations or certifications before we are permitted to sell the modified product. In addition, we may not continue to meet the quality and safety standards required to maintain the authorizations or certifications that we have received. If we are unable to maintain our marketing authorizations or certifications in a particular country, we will no longer be able to sell the applicable product in that country.

Obtaining marketing authorization from the FDA does not ensure similar marketing authorization or certifications by regulatory authorities in other countries, and registration, marketing authorization or

40

certification by one or more foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure registration, marketing authorization or certification by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. However, a failure or delay in obtaining registration, marketing authorization or certification in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others.

Legislative or regulatory reforms in the United States or the EU may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain marketing authorizations or certifications for any product candidate or to manufacture, market or distribute any product candidates after such authorizations or certifications have been obtained.

From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the regulation of medical devices. In addition, the FDA may change its policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay marketing authorization of our future products under development or impact our ability to modify any products for which we have already obtained marketing authorizations on a timely basis. Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, FDA officials announced steps that the FDA intended to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, although the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation. Accordingly, it is unclear the extent to which any proposals, if adopted, could impose additional regulatory requirements on us that could delay our ability to obtain 510(k) clearances in the future, increase the costs of compliance, or restrict our ability to maintain any marketing authorizations that we may obtain, or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

More recently, in September 2019, the FDA issued revised final guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA maintains a list device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and continues to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as recommended testing methods, where feasible. The FDA may establish performance criteria for classes of devices similar to ours, and it is unclear the extent to which such performance standards, if established, could impact our ability to obtain marketing authorization or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new statutes, regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of any product candidates or make it more difficult to obtain marketing authorizations for, manufacture, market or distribute any product candidate we are developing. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: additional testing prior to obtaining clearance or approval; changes to manufacturing methods; recall, replacement or discontinuance of our products; or additional record keeping.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay marketing authorization of any product candidates we

41

develop. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

The EU landscape concerning medical devices in the EU recently evolved. On May 25, 2017, the EU Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation 2017/745) entered into force, which repeals and replaces the EU Medical Devices Directive and the Active Implantable Medical Devices Directive. Unlike directives, which must be implemented into the national laws of the EU member states, regulations are directly applicable (i.e., without the need for adoption of EU member state laws implementing them) in all EU member states and are intended to eliminate current differences in the regulation of medical devices among EU member States. The Medical Devices Regulation, among other things, is intended to establish a uniform, transparent, predictable and sustainable regulatory framework across the EU for medical devices and ensure a high level of safety and health while supporting innovation. Devices lawfully placed on the market pursuant to the Medical Devices Directive prior to May 26, 2021 may generally continue to be made available on the market or put into service until May 26, 2025, provided that the requirements of the transitional provisions are fulfilled. In particular, the certificate in question must still be valid. However, even in this case, manufacturers must comply with a number of new or reinforced requirements set forth in the EU Medical Devices Regulation with regard to registration of economic operators and of devices, post-market surveillance, market surveillance and vigilance requirements.

The EU Medical Devices Regulation became effective on May 26, 2021. The new regulation among other things:

These modifications may have an effect on the way we design and manufacture our products candidates and we conduct our business in the EU and EEA (also including Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland). For example, as a result of the transition towards the new regime, Notified Body review times have lengthened, and product introductions or modifications could be delayed or canceled, which could adversely affect our ability to grow our business.

The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, or TCA, came into effect on January 1, 2021. The TCA does not specifically refer to medical devices. However, as a result of Brexit, the EU Medical Devices Regulation will not be implemented in the UK, and previous legislation that mirrored the EU Medical Devices Regulation in the UK law has been revoked. The regulatory regime for medical devices in Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) will continue to be based on the requirements derived from current EU legislation, and the UK may

42

choose to retain regulatory flexibility or align with the EU Medical Devices Regulation going forward. CE markings will continue to be recognized in the UK, and certificates issued by EU-recognized notified bodies will be valid in the UK, until June 30, 2023. For medical devices placed on the market in Great Britain after this period, the UK Conformity Assessment, or UKCA, marking will be mandatory. In contrast, UKCA marking and certificates issued by UK notified bodies will not be recognized on the EU market. The TCA does provide for cooperation and exchange of information in the area of product safety and compliance, including market surveillance, enforcement activities and measures, standardization related activities, exchanges of officials, and coordinated product recalls (or other similar actions). For medical devices that are locally manufactured but use components from other countries, the “rules of origin” criteria will need to be reviewed. Depending on which countries products will be ultimately sold in, manufacturers may start seeking alternative sources for components if this would allow them to benefit from no tariffs. The rules for placing medical devices on the Northern Ireland market will differ from those in Great Britain. These modifications may have an effect on the way we intend to conduct our business in these countries.

Changes in funding for, or disruptions caused by global health concerns impacting, the FDA and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new medical device products from being developed, authorized, certified or commercialized in a timely manner, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review and authorize the sale of new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels; its ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees; statutory, regulatory, and policy changes; and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA, other agencies and foreign bodies may also slow the time necessary for new devices to be reviewed and/or authorized or certified for marketing by necessary government agencies or foreign bodies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to postpone inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities and products, and on March 18, 2020, the FDA temporarily postponed routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA intends to use this risk-based assessment system to identify the categories of regulatory activity that can occur within a given geographic area, ranging from mission critical inspections to resumption of all regulatory activities. Other regulatory authorities may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting business as usual or conducting inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

In the EU, notified bodies must be officially designated to certify products and services in accordance with the EU Medical Devices Regulation. Several notified bodies have been designated so far but the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly slowed down their designation process. Without the EU Medical Devices Regulation designation, notified bodies may not yet start certifying devices in accordance with the new Regulation. This situation could impact our ability to build our business in the EU and the EEA.

43

Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, and customers, may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute our product candidates, if approved. Such laws include:

44

Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices, including our relationships with physicians and other healthcare providers, some of whom are compensated in the form of stock options for consulting services provided, may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment, which could affect our ability to operate our business. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business and our ability to sell our products may be materially harmed.

If in the future Alpha DaRT is approved for commercial sale or certified, but we are unable to obtain adequate reimbursement or insurance coverage from third-party payors, we may not be able to generate significant revenue.

Because the Alpha DaRT is still in the development stage, it is not yet approved for third-party payor coverage or reimbursement. Coding and coverage determinations as well as reimbursement levels and conditions are important to the commercial success of any product or offering. The future availability of insurance coverage and reimbursement for newly approved medical devices is highly uncertain, and our future business will be greatly impacted by the level of reimbursement provided by third-party payors.

In the United States, third-party payors decide which cancer treatment products and services they will cover, how much they will pay and whether they will continue reimbursement. Third-party payors may not cover or provide adequate reimbursement for the Alpha DaRT device, the Alpha DaRT sources or the procedures using the system, assuming we are able to fully develop and obtain all marketing authorizations to market it in the United States or similar certifications in other geographies. To date, we have not had any discussions with any third-party payors, including any regulatory agencies administering any government funded healthcare programs, regarding the coding, coverage or reimbursement for imaging services using the Alpha DaRT, which may vary depending on the specific application or indication of our technology. Accordingly, unless government and other

45

third-party payors provide coverage and reimbursement for our products, patients and healthcare providers may choose not to use them, which would adversely impact our future revenues.

No uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement among payors in the United States exists and coverage and reimbursement for procedures can differ significantly from payor to payor. Some third-party payors must approve coverage for new or innovative devices or procedures before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use the products or therapies. Even though a new product may have been cleared for commercial distribution by the FDA, we may find limited demand for the product unless and until reimbursement approval has been obtained from governmental and private third-party payors. We can provide no assurances that we would be successful in obtaining coverage from Medicare or any other governmental or commercial third-party payor. In addition, while we believe that we may be able to rely on certain existing procedure codes for certain elements of the physician’s treatment efforts, we are not certain of this and as such may be required to seek new billing codes for our products, and regulatory authorities may not approve the creation of separate codes. Additionally, even if we are successful, these billing codes or the payment amounts associated with such codes may change in the future.

In addition to uncertainties surrounding coverage policies, there are periodic changes to reimbursement levels. Third-party payors regularly update reimbursement amounts and also from time to time revise the methodologies used to determine reimbursement amounts. This includes routine updates to payments to physicians, hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers for procedures during which our products are used. These updates could directly impact the demand for our products. By way of example, in the United States, payment rates under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule are regularly subject to updates to effectuate various policy goals. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 repealed the formula by which Medicare made annual payment adjustments to physicians and replaced the former formula with fixed annual updates and a new system of incentive payments that began in 2019 that are based on various performance measures and physicians’ participation in alternative payment models, such as accountable care organizations. The ongoing and future impact of these changes cannot be determined at this time.

A primary trend in the United States healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular products and services. Reimbursement may not be available, or continue to be available, for the Alpha DaRT or the treatment services using the Alpha DaRT or any other products we may develop in the future, or even if reimbursement is available, such reimbursement may not be adequate. We also will be subject to foreign reimbursement policies in the international markets we expect to enter. Decisions by health insurers or other third-party payors in these markets not to cover, or to discontinue reimbursing, our products could materially and adversely affect our business. If such decisions are made, they could also have a negative impact on our ability to generate revenues.

On September 18, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, the federal agency responsible for administering the Medicare program, issued a final rule implementing a new mandatory payment model for radiation oncology services: the Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model, or the RO Model. The RO Model is scheduled to commence January 1, 2022 and will be in effect for a five (5) year period. The RO Model significantly alters CMS’ payment methodology from a fee for service, or FFS, paradigm to a prospective payment for all radiotherapy services furnished during a 90-day episode of care for fifteen (15) different cancer types, regardless of the modality used or site of service. Under the RO Model, all providers of radiotherapy services, including physician group practices, hospital outpatient departments and free-standing radiation therapy centers located within a randomly selected Core Based Statistical Area, or CBSA are required to participate. The CBSAs selected for the RO Model will contain approximately 30% of all eligible Medicare FFS radiotherapy episodes in the U.S. Any provider outside of the CBSAs will continue to receive Medicare reimbursement based on a FFS methodology. It is uncertain the impact, if any, of the RO Model on the Medicare reimbursement to our customers when using our Alpha DaRT technology, if authorized for marketing or our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

46

Outside of the United States, reimbursement levels vary significantly by country. For example, in the EU, member states impose controls on whether products are reimbursable by national or regional health service providers and on the prices at which medical devices are reimbursed under state-run healthcare schemes.

Healthcare policy changes, including recently enacted legislation reforming the U.S. healthcare system, could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. Federal and state lawmakers regularly propose and, at times, enact legislation that would result in significant changes to the healthcare system, some of which are intended to contain or reduce the costs of medical products and services. Current and future legislative proposals to further reform healthcare or reduce healthcare costs may limit coverage of or lower reimbursement for our product candidates and the treatment associated with the use of our products. The cost containment measures that payors and providers are instituting and the effect of any healthcare reform initiative implemented in the future could impact our revenue from the sale of our product candidates, if approved or cleared.

By way of example, in the United States, the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, made a number of substantial changes in the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among other ways in which it may affect our business, the ACA

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. 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 ACA. It is unclear how other healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration or how other efforts, if any, to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA will impact the ACA or our business. Any expansion in the government’s role in the U.S. healthcare industry may result in decreased profits to us and/or lower reimbursement by payors for our product candidates, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to providers by 2% per fiscal year, effective on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Additionally, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, or MACRA, enacted on April 16, 2015, repealed the formula by which Medicare made annual payment adjustments to physicians and replaced the former formula with fixed annual updates and a new system of incentive payments that are based on various performance

47

measures and physicians’ participation in alternative payment models such as accountable care organizations. It is unclear what effect new quality and payment programs, such as MACRA, may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

We expect additional state, federal and foreign healthcare policies and reform measures to be adopted in the future, any of which could limit reimbursement for healthcare products and services or otherwise result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressure and have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our customers. We cannot predict what other healthcare programs and regulations will ultimately be implemented at the federal or state level or the effect of any future legislation or regulation in the United States may negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our product candidates, our ability to generate revenue and achieve or maintain profitability or the availability of capital.

Any changes of, or uncertainty with respect to, future coverage or reimbursement rates could affect demand for our product candidates, which in turn could impact our ability to successfully commercialize these devices and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Actual or perceived failures to comply with applicable data protection, privacy and security laws, regulations, standards and other requirements could adversely affect our business, financial condition and prospects.

The global data protection landscape is rapidly evolving, and we are or may become subject to numerous state, federal and foreign laws, requirements and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure, retention, and security of personal data, such as information that we may collect in connection with clinical trials in the U.S. and abroad. Implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or perception of their requirements may have on our business. This evolution may create uncertainty in our business, affect our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to collect, store, transfer use and share personal information, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in liability or impose additional costs on us. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and standards is high and is likely to increase in the future. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulation, our internal policies and procedures or our contracts governing our processing of personal information could result in negative publicity, government investigations and enforcement actions, claims by third parties and damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and prospects.

As our operations and business grow, we may become subject to or affected by new or additional data protection laws and regulations and face increased scrutiny or attention from regulatory authorities. For example, the State of Israel has implemented data protection laws and regulations, including the Israeli Protection of Privacy Law of 1981. Further, in the U.S., HIPAA imposes, among other things, certain standards relating to the privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting of individually identifiable health information. Certain states have also adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, some of which may be more stringent than HIPAA. Such laws and regulations will be subject to interpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our future customers and strategic partners. In addition, the CCPA went into effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA creates individual privacy rights for California consumers and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. The CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability, and many similar laws have been proposed at the federal level and in other states. Further, the CPRA recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new

48

California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In the event that we are subject to or affected by Israeli data protection laws, HIPAA, the CCPA, the CPRA or other domestic or foreign privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

In Europe, the GDPR went into effect in May 2018 and imposes strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals within the European Economic Area, or EEA. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater. Among other requirements, the GDPR regulates transfers of personal data subject to the GDPR to third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, including the United States, and the efficacy and longevity of current transfer mechanisms between the EU and the United States remains uncertain. For example, in 2016, the EU and United States agreed to a transfer framework for data transferred from the EU to the United States, called the Privacy Shield, but the Privacy Shield was invalidated in July 2020 by the Court of Justice of the European Union, or CJUE. While the CJEU upheld the adequacy of the standard contractual clauses (a standard form of contract approved by the European Commission as an adequate personal data transfer mechanism, and potential alternative to the Privacy Shield), it made clear that reliance on them alone may not necessarily be sufficient in all circumstances. Use of the standard contractual clauses must now be assessed on a case-by-case basis taking into account the legal regime applicable in the destination country, in particular applicable surveillance laws and rights of individuals and additional measures and/or contractual provisions may need to be put in place, however, the nature of these additional measures is currently uncertain. The CJEU went on to state that if a competent supervisory authority believes that the standard contractual clauses cannot be complied with in the destination country and the required level of protection cannot be secured by other means, such supervisory authority is under an obligation to suspend or prohibit that transfer. The European Commission has published revised standard contractual clauses for data transfers from the EEA: the revised clauses must be used for relevant new data transfers from September 27, 2021; existing standard contractual clauses arrangements must be migrated to the revised clauses by December 27, 2022. We will be required to implement the revised standard contractual clauses, in relation to relevant existing contracts and certain additional contracts and arrangements, within the relevant time frames. There is some uncertainty around whether the revised clauses can be used for all types of data transfers, particularly whether they can be relied on for data transfers to non-EEA entities subject to the GDPR. These recent developments are likely to require us to review and amend the legal mechanisms by which we make and/or receive personal data transfers to/in the United States. As supervisory authorities issue further guidance on personal data export mechanisms, including circumstances where the standard contractual clauses cannot be used, and/or start taking enforcement action, we could suffer additional costs, complaints and/or regulatory investigations or fines, and/or if we are otherwise unable to transfer personal data between and among countries and regions in which we operate, it could affect the manner in which we provide our services, the geographical location or segregation of our relevant systems and operations, and could adversely affect our financial results.

Further, from January 1, 2021, companies have to comply with the GDPR and also the United Kingdom GDPR, or UK GDPR, which, together with the amended UK Data Protection Act 2018, retains the GDPR in UK national law. The UK GDPR mirrors the fines under the GDPR, i.e., fines up to the greater of €20 million (£17.5 million) or 4% of global turnover. The European Commission has adopted an adequacy decision in favor of the United Kingdom, enabling data transfers from EU member states to the United Kingdom without additional safeguards. However, the United Kingdom adequacy decision will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the European Commission re-assesses and renews/extends that decision, and remains under review by the Commission during this period. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear, and it is unclear how UK data protection laws and regulations will

49

develop in the medium to longer term, and how data transfers to and from the United Kingdom will be regulated in the long term. These changes will lead to additional costs and increase our overall risk exposure.

Although we work to comply with applicable laws, regulations and standards, our contractual obligations and other legal obligations, these requirements are evolving and may be modified, interpreted and applied in an inconsistent manner from one jurisdiction to another, and may conflict with one another or other legal obligations with which we must comply. Any failure or perceived failure by us or our employees, representatives, contractors, consultants, collaborators, or other third parties to comply with such requirements or adequately address privacy and security concerns, even if unfounded, could result in additional cost and liability to us, damage our reputation, and adversely affect our business, financial condition and prospects.

Risks Related to Alpha Tau’s Reliance on Third Parties

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

We rely on a limited number of third-party suppliers and, in some cases, sole suppliers, for the majority of our components, subassemblies and materials and may not be able to find replacements or immediately transition to alternative suppliers.

We rely on several sole suppliers for certain components of our Alpha DaRT technology. These sole suppliers, and any of our other suppliers, may be unwilling or unable to supply components of these systems to us reliably and at the levels we anticipate or are required by us. For us to be successful, our suppliers must be able to provide us with products and components in substantial quantities, in compliance with regulatory requirements, in accordance with agreed upon specifications, at acceptable costs and on a timely basis. If we obtain marketing authorization or certification, and we encounter delays or difficulties in securing these components, an interruption in our commercial operations could occur if we cannot then obtain an acceptable substitute. If we are required to transition to new third-party suppliers for certain components of our Alpha DaRT technology or any future product or product candidates, we believe that there are a few other manufacturers that are currently capable of supplying the necessary components. In addition, the use of components or materials furnished by these alternative suppliers could require us to alter our operations. Any such interruption or change in supplier could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations.

Furthermore, if we are required to change the manufacturer of a critical component of our product candidates, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities, procedures and operations that comply with our quality and applicable regulatory requirements, which could further impede our ability to manufacture our implant systems in a timely manner. We currently do not carry inventory for components for more than three months at any given time. Transitioning to a new supplier could be time-consuming and expensive, may result in interruptions in our operations and product delivery, could affect the performance specifications of our product candidates or could require that we modify their design. If the change in manufacturer results in a significant change to any product after its authorization or certification for marketing, a new 510(k) clearance from the FDA or similar international regulatory authorization or certification may be necessary before we implement the change, which could cause substantial delays. The occurrence of any of these events could harm our ability to meet the demand for our products in a timely manner or cost-effectively.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to secure alternative equipment and materials and utilize such equipment and materials without experiencing interruptions in our workflow. If we should encounter delays or difficulties in securing, reconfiguring or revalidating the equipment and components we require for our implant systems, our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted.

50

We currently rely, and plan to rely in the future, on third parties to conduct and support our portions of our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not properly and successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain marketing authorization or certification of or commercialize our product candidates.

We have utilized and plan to continue to utilize and depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as medical institutions, CROs, contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, and strategic partners to conduct and support portions of our preclinical studies and clinical trials under agreements with us. We expect to have to negotiate budgets and contracts with CROs, trial sites and CMOs and we may not be able to do so on favorable terms, which may result in delays to our development timelines and increased costs. We will rely heavily on these third parties over the course of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. As a result, we will have less direct control over the conduct, timing and completion of these preclinical studies and clinical trials and the management of data developed through preclinical studies and clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and these third parties are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites.

If we or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities or other bodies may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications or certifications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, such regulatory authorities will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with the GCP regulations. In addition, our product candidates must be produced in accordance with cGMP requirements known as the QSR. Our failure or any failure by these third parties to comply with these regulations or to recruit a sufficient number of patients may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the marketing authorization or certification process. Moreover, our business may be implicated if any of these third parties violates federal, state or foreign fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.

Any third parties conducting or supporting portions of our clinical trials will not be our employees and, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our product candidates. These third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials, or other product development activities, which could affect their performance on our behalf. If these third parties 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 clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to complete development of, obtain marketing authorizations or certifications for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be adversely affected, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

Switching or adding third parties to conduct or support portions of our preclinical studies and clinical trials involves substantial cost and requires extensive management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines.

51

If we or third parties, such as CROs or trial sites, use hazardous and biological materials in a manner that causes injury or violates applicable law, we may be liable for damages.

Our research and development activities involves the controlled use of potentially hazardous substances, including radiological materials, by us or third parties, such as CROs and CMOs. Our use of radioactive materials is regulated by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and specified agencies of certain states, as well as the Israeli Ministry for Environmental Protection, for the possession, transfer, import, export, use, storage, handling and disposal of radioactive materials. We are also subject to international laws and regulations that apply to manufacturers of radiation-emitting devices and products utilizing radioactive materials. These are often comparable to, if not more stringent than, the equivalent regulations in the United States. The use of Thorium-228 in our manufacturing processes, and Radium-224 in our Alpha DaRT technology, involves the inherent risk of exposure from alpha and beta particle emissions to the patient receiving the sources implanted, the clinicians administering the Alpha DaRT technology, our employees and others who may handle our products, which can alter or harm healthy cells in the body. Additionally, as we continue to develop our Alpha DaRT technology we may experiment with increased amounts of radiation in an attempt to increase the potential efficacy of our technology, which could heighten the potential risk of radiation exposure. We and such third parties are subject to the Israeli and U.S. federal, state, provincial and local laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling, and disposal of radiological, medical and hazardous materials. Although we believe that our and such third-parties’ procedures for using, handling, storing and disposing of these materials comply with legally prescribed standards, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury resulting from radiological, medical or hazardous materials. As a result of any such contamination or injury, we may incur liability or Israeli and U.S. local, city, state, provincial or federal authorities may curtail the use of these materials and interrupt our business operations. In the event of an accident, we could be held liable for damages or penalized with fines, and the liability could exceed our resources. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our research, development and production efforts, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition, or results of operations. We currently maintain insurance coverage for injuries resulting from the hazardous materials we use; however, future claims may exceed the amount of our coverage. Also, we do not have insurance coverage for pollution cleanup and removal. Currently the costs of complying with such Israeli and U.S. federal, state, provincial, local and foreign environmental regulations are not significant, and consist primarily of waste disposal expenses. However, they could become expensive, and current or future environmental laws or regulations may impair our research, development, production and commercialization efforts.

Additionally, our manufacture and distribution of devices utilizing radioactive material or emitting radiation also requires us to obtain a number of licenses and certifications for these devices and materials. Handling of these products must also be in accordance with a specific radioactive materials license. Obtaining licenses and certifications may be time consuming, expensive, and uncertain. If we fail to obtain such licenses and registrations or if substantial delays are incurred in obtaining such licenses and registrations, we may be unable to manufacture, distribute and ultimately sell our Alpha DaRT technology, if approved or certified. Additionally, any lapse in our licenses, or the licenses of our facilities, could increase our costs and adversely affect our operations and financial results.

We may be unable to obtain a sufficient or sufficiently pure supply of radioisotopes to support clinical development or at commercial scale.

Thorium-228 is a key component of our Alpha DaRT technology, as it naturally decays into Radium-224 that is collected onto the sources which comprise an integral part of our Alpha DaRT technology. We have entered into a multi-year supply contract with Eckert & Ziegler AG in Germany, and also acquire Thorium-228 from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory of the United States Department of Energy. We are also aware of or have spoken with other potential suppliers of Thorium-228, such that we anticipate a steady, unrestricted supply of thorium for the production of the Alpha DaRT. We will continually evaluate Thorium-228 manufacturers and suppliers and intend to have redundant suppliers prior to the commercial launch of the Alpha DaRT technology,

52

if approved. While we consider Thorium-228 to be readily available, there can be no guarantee that we will be able to secure another Thorium-228 supplier or obtain on terms that are acceptable to us.

Our ability to conduct clinical trials to advance our Alpha DaRT technology is dependent on our ability to obtain the radioisotope Thorium-228 and other isotopes we may choose to utilize in the future. Currently, we are dependent on third-party manufacturers and suppliers for our isotopes. These suppliers may not perform their contracted services or may breach or terminate their agreements with us, or may provide a product not of sufficient quality to allow successful use in our manufacturing processes. Our suppliers are subject to regulations and standards that are overseen by regulatory and government agencies and we have no control over our suppliers’ compliance to these standards. Failure to comply with regulations and standards may result in their inability to supply isotope could result in delays in our clinical trials, which could have a negative impact on our business. We have developed intellectual property, know-how and trade secrets related to the manufacturing process of the Alpha DaRT technology.

We may form or seek collaborations or strategic alliances or enter into additional licensing arrangements in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such collaborations, alliances or licensing arrangements.

We may form or seek strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations, or enter into additional licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our Alpha DaRT technology and any future products or product candidates that we may develop. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing shareholders or disrupt our management and business.

In addition, we face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for our product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view our product candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety, potency and quality and obtain marketing authorization or certification.

Further, collaborations involving our product candidates are subject to numerous risks, which may include the following:

53

As a result, if we enter into collaboration agreements and strategic partnerships or license our product candidates, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business. We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction. Any delays in entering into new collaborations or strategic partnership agreements related to our product candidates could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates in certain geographies for certain indications, which would harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Alpha Tau’s Intellectual Property

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent or other intellectual property protection for our Alpha DaRT technology and for any other products or product candidates that we develop, or if the scope of the patent or other intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to ours, and our ability to commercialize any product candidates we may develop, and our technology may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patents, trademarks and other intellectual property rights in the United States and other countries with respect to our Alpha DaRT technology or other products or product candidates we may develop, their respective components, formulations, combination therapies, methods used to manufacture them and methods of treatment and development that are important to our business, as well as our ability to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of others. We rely on a combination of contractual provisions, patent protection, as well as a combination of trade secret and trademark laws, to protect our core technology and commercial products and prevent others from copying our treatment delivery devices and methods. However, these legal measures afford only limited protection, and competitors or others may gain access to or use of our intellectual property and proprietary information. For example, patent protection and intellectual property laws may not: (i) prevent competitors from obtaining access to our trade secrets, proprietary information, data, know-how and technology; (ii) prevent others from copying our systems and methods; or (iii) provide a sustained competitive advantage. If we do not adequately protect our intellectual property rights, competitors may be able to erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could harm our business and ability to achieve profitability.

To protect our proprietary position, we file patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel product candidates that are important to our business. We may in the future also license or purchase patents and patent applications owned or controlled by others. As of September 30, 2021, our patent portfolio included 82 issued patents, and 71 pending patent applications including two allowed patent applications, in the United States, Europe, Canada, Japan, Australia, China, South Korea, Russia, Mexico, India, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Africa

54

and the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization, or the ARIPO. Some of our earlier filed patents are expected to expire between 2024 and 2026, subject to patent term extensions and adjustments that may be available in certain jurisdictions. When key patents covering our core technology expire, competitors and other third parties may be able to make competing products and encroach on our market share.

It is possible that defects of form in the preparation or filing of our patents or patent applications may exist, or may arise in the future, for example with respect to proper priority claims, inventorship, claim scope, or requests for patent term adjustments. If we are unable to secure or maintain patent protection with respect to our Alpha DaRT technology and any proprietary products and technology we develop, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects could be materially harmed. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection of our product candidates or their intended uses against competitors, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, invalidated by third parties, or effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies, products or product candidates. Further, some of our pending patent applications may be allowed in the future, but we cannot be certain that an allowed patent application will become an issued patent. There may be events that cause withdrawal of the allowance of a patent application. For example, after a patent application has been allowed, but prior to being issued, material that could be relevant to patentability may be identified. In such circumstances, the applicant may pull the application from allowance in order for the USPTO to review the application in view of the new material. We cannot be certain that the USPTO will issue the application in view of the new material. We anticipate additional patent applications will be filed both in the United States and in other countries, as appropriate. However, we cannot predict: (i) if additional patent applications covering new technologies related to our product candidates will be filed; (ii) if and when patents will issue; (iii) the degree and range of protection any issued patents will afford us against competitors, including whether third parties will find ways to invalidate or otherwise circumvent our patents; (iv) whether any of our intellectual property will provide any competitive advantage; (v) whether any of our patents that may be issued may be challenged, invalidated, modified, revoked, circumvented, found to be unenforceable or otherwise provide any competitive advantage; (vi) whether others will obtain patents claiming inventions similar to those covered by our patents and patent applications; or (vii) whether we will need to initiate or defend litigation or administrative proceedings which may be costly regardless of whether we win or lose. The patent prosecution process is complex, expensive, time-consuming and inconsistent across jurisdictions. We may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, or license all necessary or desirable patent rights at a commercially reasonable cost or in a timely manner. In addition, we may not pursue or obtain patent protection in all relevant markets. It is possible that we will fail to identify important patentable aspects of our research and development efforts in time to obtain appropriate or any patent protection. If we delay filing a patent application, and a competitor files a patent application on the same or a similar invention before we do, our ability to secure patent rights may be limited. We may not be able to patent the invention at all. Even if we can patent the invention, we may be able to patent only a limited scope of the invention, and the limited scope may be inadequate to protect our products, or to block competitor products that are similar or adjacent to ours. Our earliest patent filings have been published. A competitor may review our published patents and arrive at the same or similar technology advances for our products as we developed. If the competitor files a patent application on such an advance before we do, then we may no longer be able to protect that aspect of our products and we may require a license from the competitor. If the license is not available on commercially-viable terms, then we may not be able to launch our product.

Going forward, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire or in-license additional proprietary rights. For example, our programs may involve additional product candidates that may require the use of additional proprietary rights held by third parties. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any relevant third-party intellectual property rights that we identify as necessary or important to our business operations. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all, which would adversely affect our business. We may need to cease use of, and may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on, such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays and such alternative approaches may not be feasible. Even if we are able to obtain a

55

license under such intellectual property rights, any such license may be non-exclusive, and may allow our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us.

The patent positions of medical device companies may involve complex legal and factual questions and have been the subject of much litigation in recent years, and therefore, the scope, validity and enforceability of any patent claims that we have or may obtain cannot be predicted with certainty. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued in the United States or in other jurisdictions that protect our technology or products or that effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our products and inventions to the same extent as the laws of the United States. While we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development efforts, including for example, our employees, corporate collaborators, external academic scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby endangering our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, publications of discoveries in the scientific and scholarly literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not until issuance as a patent. Consequently, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file for patent protection on the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications. In addition, the USPTO might require that the term of a patent issuing from a pending patent application be disclaimed and limited to the term of another patent that is commonly owned or names a common inventor. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain.

Our competitors may be able to circumvent our owned or any future in-licensed patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its scope, validity or enforceability, and our owned and future in-licensed patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. For example, we may become involved in opposition, interference, derivation, inter partes review or other proceedings challenging our patent rights, and the outcome of any proceedings are highly uncertain. Such challenges may result in the patent claims of our owned or any future in-licensed patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop or prevent us from stopping others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products.

In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. Moreover, some of our patents and patent applications are, and may in the future be, co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we or our future licensors may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our owned and in-licensed patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us or our future licensors. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product candidates for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our

56

products are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product, we may be open to competition. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new products, patents protecting such products might expire before or shortly after such products are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours for a meaningful amount of time, or at all.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we seek to rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by our patents. Elements of our products, including processes for their preparation and manufacture, may involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents, and thus for these aspects we may consider trade secrets and know-how to be our primary intellectual property. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. Because we expect to rely on third parties in the development and manufacture of our products, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We require all of our employees to enter into written employment agreements containing provisions of confidentiality and obligations to assign any inventions generated in the course of their employment to us. Further, we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with our corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract research organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and any other third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology. With our consultants, contractors, and outside scientific collaborators, these agreements typically include invention assignment obligations. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. We cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. We may need to share our proprietary information, including trade secrets, with future business partners, collaborators, contractors and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, including through direct intrusion by private parties or foreign actors, and those affiliated with or controlled by state actors. Further, if any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third-party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor or other third-party, our competitive position would be harmed.

In addition, we take other appropriate precautions, such as physical and technological security measures, to guard against misappropriation of our proprietary technology by third parties. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. We have also adopted policies and conduct training that provides guidance on

57

our expectations, and our advice for best practices, in protecting our trade secrets. Despite these undertakings, we may not be able to effectively protect our trade secrets.

We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent, which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products.

The intellectual property landscape around our radiopharmaceutical product candidates is crowded, rapidly evolving and interdisciplinary, and it is difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate without infringing on third-party rights. We may analyze patents or patent applications of our competitors that we believe are relevant to our activities, and consider that we are free to operate in relation to our product candidates, but our competitors may obtain issued claims, including in patents we consider to be unrelated to our products or activities, which block our efforts or may potentially result in our product candidates or our activities infringing such claims. We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction.

The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect. For example, we may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain. Defending against such law suits will be costly and time consuming, and an unfavorable outcome in that litigation would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to avoid infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation involving the infringement of patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may be exposed to, or threatened with, future litigation by third parties having patent or other intellectual property rights and who allege that our product candidates, uses and/or other proprietary technologies infringe their intellectual property rights. Numerous United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk that our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others increases. Moreover, it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents exist which may be found to cover various types of products or their methods of use or manufacture. Thus, because of the large number of patents issued and patent applications currently pending in our fields, there may be a risk that third parties may allege they have patent rights which are infringed by our product candidates, technologies or methods.

If a third party alleges that we infringe its intellectual property rights, we may face a number of issues, including, but not limited to:

58

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Generally, conducting preclinical and clinical trials or investigations and other development activities in the United States is not considered an act of infringement. If our product candidate is approved by the FDA, a third party may then seek to enforce its patent by filing a patent infringement lawsuit against us. While we may believe that patent claims or other intellectual property rights of a third party would not have a materially adverse effect on the commercialization of our product candidates, we may be incorrect in this belief, or we may not be able to prove it in litigation. In this regard, patents issued in the United States by law enjoy a presumption of validity that can be rebutted only with evidence that is “clear and convincing,” a heightened standard of proof. There may be issued third-party patents of which we are currently unaware with claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Patent applications can take many years to issue. There may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that may be infringed by our product candidates. Moreover, we may fail to identify relevant patents or incorrectly conclude that a patent is invalid, not enforceable, exhausted, or not infringed by our activities. If any third-party patents, held now or obtained in the future by a third party, were found by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of our product candidates, constructs or molecules used in or formed during the manufacturing process, or any final product or methods use of the product, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or they are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Similarly, if any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover any aspect of our formulations, any combination therapies or patient selection methods, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, our ability to commercialize our product candidates may be impaired or delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. Even if we obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize our current or future product candidates.

Parties making claims against us may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may

59

have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need or may choose to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights through acquisitions and in-licenses to product components and processes that may be required to complete development of and commercialize our Alpha DaRT Technology.

Presently we own various patents and patent applications related to our Alpha DaRT technology and we are not a party to any license agreements with third parties that enable us to utilize third-party technology. Because our Alpha DaRT technology, including the use in connection with other therapies, may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties in the future, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use such third-party proprietary rights.

The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive practice, and companies that may be more established, or have greater resources than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive for commercializing our product candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their larger size and cash resources or greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete such negotiations and ultimately acquire the rights to the intellectual property surrounding the additional product candidates that we may seek to acquire. We may be unable to acquire or in-license methods of use, processes or other intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary or important to our business operations. If we fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all, it would harm our business. We may need to cease use of the compositions or methods covered by such third-party intellectual property rights, and/or may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if it is possible and we were able to develop such alternatives. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies that we have licensed. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technologies. Moreover, we may need to rely on our future licensors to obtain, maintain and enforce patent rights for the licensed intellectual property; however, they may not successfully prosecute, maintain or enforce such licensed intellectual property. We may have limited control over the manner in which our future licensors initiate an infringement proceeding against a third-party infringer of the intellectual property rights, or defend certain of the intellectual property that is licensed to us. It is possible that the future licensors’ infringement proceeding or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves. Further, our future licensors may retain certain rights under their agreements with us, including the right to use the underlying technology for noncommercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology. It would be difficult to monitor whether our future licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to our licensed technology in the event of misuse. Also, the United States federal government retains certain rights in inventions produced with its financial assistance under the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act, or the Bayh-Dole Act. The federal government retains a “nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license” for its own benefit. The Bayh-Dole Act also provides federal agencies with “march-in rights.” March-in rights allow the government, in specified circumstances, to require the contractor or successors in title to the patent to grant a “nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license” to a “responsible applicant or applicants.” If the patent owner refuses to do so, the government may grant the license itself. We sometimes

60

collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development. While it is our policy to avoid engaging our university partners in projects in which there is a risk that federal funds may be commingled, we cannot be sure that any co-developed intellectual property will be free from government rights pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act. If, in the future, we co-own or license in technology which is critical to our business that is developed in whole or in part with federal funds subject to the Bayh-Dole Act, our ability to enforce or otherwise exploit patents covering such technology may be adversely affected.

Additionally, we have and may continue to collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. In certain cases, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to others, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property or to maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of such program and our business and financial condition could suffer.

Further, our future intellectual property license agreements may impose on us various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones, royalties or other amounts and other obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements (including as a result of COVID-19 impacting our operations), we use the licensed intellectual property in an unauthorized manner or we are subject to bankruptcy-related proceedings, the terms of the licenses may be materially modified, such as by rendering currently exclusive licenses non-exclusive, or it may give our future licensors the right to terminate their respective agreement with us, which could limit our ability to implement our current business plan and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, disputes may arise between us and our future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including: (i) the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues; (ii) whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the license agreement; (iii) our right to sublicense patents and other rights to third parties; (iv) our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to our development and commercialization of our product candidates, and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations; (v) our right to transfer or assign the license; and (vi) the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our future licensors and us and our partners. If disputes over intellectual property that we license in the future prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, certain of our future agreements with third parties may limit or delay our ability to consummate certain transactions, may impact the value of those transactions, or may limit our ability to pursue certain activities. For example, we may in the future enter into license agreements that are not assignable or transferable, or that require the licensor’s express consent in order for an assignment or transfer to take place.

We may be involved in lawsuits or litigation to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could result in substantial costs and liability and prevent us from commercializing our potential products.

Competitors may infringe our patents, trademarks or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to take legal action to enforce our patents against such infringing activity. Such enforcement proceedings against infringers can be expensive and time-consuming. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the

61

technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In such a case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such marks. In any intellectual property litigation, even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we receive may not be commercially valuable. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Defense against these assertions, non-infringement, invalidity or unenforceability regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

We may be required to protect our patents through procedures created to attack the validity of a patent at the USPTO. The USPTO hears post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. Post-grant proceedings may be provoked by third parties or brought by the USPTO to determine the validity or priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. An unfavorable outcome could result in a loss of our current patent rights and could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, there could 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 substantial adverse effect on the price of our common shares.

In addition, if our product candidates are found to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, these third parties may assert infringement claims against our licensees and other parties with whom we have business relationships, and we may be required to indemnify those parties for any damages they suffer as a result of these claims. The claims may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of licensees and other parties regardless of the merits of these claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of those parties or may be required to obtain licenses for the products they use.

62

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign countries may require the payment of maintenance fees or patent annuities during the lifetime of a patent application and/or any subsequent patent that issues from the application. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process and following the issuance of a patent. While an inadvertent lapse, including due to the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on us or our patent maintenance vendors, can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application. Such noncompliance can result in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. Such an event could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Any issued patents we own covering our product candidates could be narrowed or found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before the administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, including the USPTO.

Any of our intellectual property rights could be challenged or invalidated despite measures we take to obtain patent and other intellectual property protection with respect to our product candidates and proprietary technology. For example, if we initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate, as applicable, is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States and in some other jurisdictions, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld material information from the USPTO or the applicable foreign counterpart, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. A litigant or the USPTO itself could challenge our patents on this basis even if we believe that we have conducted our patent prosecution in accordance with the duty of candor and in good faith. The outcome following such a challenge is unpredictable.

Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, inter partes review, post-grant review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (such as opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates.

The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our patent counsel and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, or if we are otherwise unable to adequately protect our rights, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize or license our technology and product candidates. Even if a defendant does not prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, our patent claims may be construed in a manner that would limit our ability to enforce such claims against the defendant and others. The cost of defending such a challenge, particularly in a foreign jurisdiction, and any resulting loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on one or more of our product candidates and our business. Any efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights are also likely to be costly and may divert the efforts of our scientific and management personnel.

63

Changes to patent law in the United States and in foreign jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs, and may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain, and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our owned and licensed patents. Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the Leahy-Smith Act), signed into law on September 16, 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third- party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Further, because of a lower evidentiary standard in these USPTO post-grant proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before we file an application covering the same invention, could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Moreover, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions 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 our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. We cannot predict how future decisions by the courts, Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents. Changes in the laws and regulations governing patents in other jurisdictions could similarly have an adverse effect on our ability to obtain and effectively enforce our patent rights.

64

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world, and different jurisdictions may grant patent rights of differing scope.

Certain of our key patent families have been filed in the United States; however, we have less robust intellectual property rights outside the United States, and, in particular, we may not be able to pursue patent coverage of our product candidates in certain countries outside of the United States. Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States may be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to certain territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. Most of our patent portfolio is at the very early stage. We will need to decide whether and in which jurisdictions to pursue protection for the various inventions in our portfolio prior to applicable deadlines. We may decide to abandon national and regional patent applications before they are granted. The examination of each national or regional patent application is an independent proceeding. As a result, patent applications in the same family may issue as patents in some jurisdictions, such as in the United States, but may issue as patents with claims of different scope or may be refused in other jurisdictions. It is also quite common that depending on the country, the scope of patent protection may vary for the same product or technology. For example, certain jurisdictions do not allow for patent protection with respect to method of treatment.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protections, particularly those relating to biopharmaceutical products. This difficulty with enforcing patents could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products otherwise generally in violation of our proprietary rights. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Further, many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of its patents. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position in the relevant jurisdiction may be impaired and our business prospects may be materially adversely affected.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent,

65

conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our product candidates or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we 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 our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Our future licensors may have relied on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties, such as the U.S. government, such that our future licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other third parties have ownership rights or other rights to our future in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

While it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Such claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information or alleged trade secrets of third parties or competitors or are in breach of non-competition or non-solicitation agreements with our competitors or their former employers.

We have received confidential and proprietary information from third parties. In addition, as is common in the biotechnology, medical device and pharmaceutical industries, we employ individuals and engage the services of consultants who were previously employed or engaged at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although no claims against us are currently pending, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of these third parties or our employees’ former employers or our consultants’ or contractors’ current or former clients or customers. In addition, we may in the future be subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and employees. If we are not successful, in addition to paying monetary damages, we could lose access or exclusive access to valuable intellectual property rights or lose valuable personnel. Any litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our ability to hire employees. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to commercialize product candidates, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our marks of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

We use and will continue to use registered and/or unregistered trademarks or trade names to brand and market ourselves and our products. Our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We rely on both registration and common law protection for our trademarks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names or

66

may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. During the trademark registration process, we may receive office actions from the USPTO objecting to the registration of our trademark. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those objections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and/or to seek the cancellation of registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. Additionally, we may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and tradenames by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names.

Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our product candidate in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. Similar requirements exist in Europe. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA (or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction) objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, it may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA (or the relevant administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction). Furthermore, in many countries, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark.

Numerous factors may limit any potential competitive advantage provided by our intellectual property rights.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights, whether owned or in-licensed, is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business, provide a barrier to entry against our competitors or potential competitors, or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. Moreover, if a third party has intellectual property rights that cover the practice of our technology, we may not be able to fully exercise or extract value from our intellectual property rights. The following examples are illustrative:

67

Should any of these events occur, they could materially harm our business and the results of our operation.

Risks Related to Alpha Tau’s Employee Matters and Managing Growth

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

We are highly dependent on our key personnel, and if we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy.

Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology, medical device and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our management, scientific and medical personnel, including Uzi Sofer, our Chief Executive Officer. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, other key employees and other scientific and medical advisors, and an inability to find suitable replacements, could result in delays in product development and harm our business.

We conduct the majority of our operations at our facility in Israel. The region is headquarters to many other biopharmaceutical and medical device companies and many academic and research institutions. Competition for skilled personnel in our market is intense and may limit our ability to hire and retain highly qualified personnel on acceptable terms or at all. Changes to Israeli or similar immigration and work authorization laws and regulations, including those that restrain the flow of scientific and professional talent, can be significantly affected by political forces and levels of economic activity. Our business may be materially adversely affected if legislative or administrative changes to Israeli or similar foreign immigration or visa laws and regulations, including as a result of the restrictions on international travel due to the global COVID-19 pandemic, impair our hiring processes and goals or projects involving personnel who are not Israeli citizens.

To encourage valuable employees to remain at our company, in addition to salary and cash incentives, we have provided stock options that vest over time. The value to employees of stock options that vest over time may be significantly affected by movements in our share price that are beyond our control, and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us on short notice. Although we have employment agreements with our key employees, these employment agreements provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled junior, mid-level and senior managers as well as junior, mid-level and senior scientific and medical personnel.

We will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.

As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, and as we transition into operating as a public company, we expect to need additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial and other personnel, as well as additional facilities to expand our operations. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

68

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities.

We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on certain independent organizations, advisors and consultants to provide certain services, including certain aspects of regulatory approval, clinical trial management and construction of manufacturing facilities. There can be no assurance that the services of independent organizations, advisors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed, or that we can find qualified replacements. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by consultants is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval or certification of our Alpha DaRT technology or other future products or product candidates or otherwise advance our business. There can be no assurance that we will be able to manage our existing consultants or find other competent outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all. If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, or we are not able to effectively build out new facilities to accommodate this expansion, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

We may explore strategic collaborations that may never materialize or we may be required to relinquish important rights to and control over the development and commercialization of our product candidates to any future collaborators.

Our business strategy includes broadening our platform by potentially exploring strategic partnerships that maximize the potential of our Alpha DaRT technology. As a result, we intend to periodically explore a variety of possible strategic partnerships in an effort to gain access to additional resources, indications or combination therapy opportunities, or development of supportive or complementary products. These strategic partnerships may include partnerships with large strategic partners. At the current time however, we cannot predict what form such a strategic collaboration might take. We are likely to face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic collaborators, and strategic collaborations can be complicated and time consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate strategic collaborations on acceptable terms, if at all. If and when we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of a product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of our Alpha DaRT technology to the third party. We are unable to predict when, if ever, we will enter into any strategic partnerships because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with establishing them, including:

Strategic partners may also delay clinical trials, experience financial difficulties, provide insufficient funding, terminate a clinical trial or abandon an indication or combination therapy, which could negatively

69

impact our development efforts. Additionally, strategic partners may not properly maintain, enforce or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in a manner that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial position and operations.

Our internal computer systems, or those of any of our existing or potential future collaborators, trial sites, CROs or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches, which could result in a material disruption of our product development programs.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our current and any future trial sites, CROs and other contractors, consultants and collaborators are vulnerable to damage from cyberattacks, “phishing” attacks, computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Attacks upon information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees and collaborators who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. Furthermore, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. We may also experience security breaches that may remain undetected for an extended period. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our development programs, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets or other similar disruptions. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in our efforts to obtain marketing authorization or certification and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. In addition, such a breach may require notification to governmental agencies, the media or individuals pursuant to applicable data privacy and security law and regulations. We would also be exposed to a risk of loss, including financial assets or litigation and potential liability, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We also rely on third parties to manufacture our product candidates, and similar events relating to their computer systems could also have a material adverse effect on our business. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed.

If our security measures are breached or unauthorized access to individually identifiable health information or other personally identifiable information is otherwise obtained, our reputation may be harmed, and we may incur significant liabilities.

Unauthorized access to, or security breaches of, our systems and databases could result in unauthorized access to data and information and loss, compromise or corruption of such data and information. Present and future trial sites, CROs, contractors and consultants also could experience breaches of security leading to the exposure of confidential and sensitive information. Such breaches of security could be caused by computer hacking, phishing attacks, ransomware, dissemination of computer viruses, worms and other destructive or disruptive software, denial of service attacks, and other malicious activity, which may be heretofore unknown. The number and complexity of these threats continue to increase over time.

Most healthcare providers, including research institutions from which we obtain patient health information, are subject to privacy and security regulations promulgated under HIPAA, as amended by the HITECH. We are not currently classified as a covered entity or business associate under HIPAA and thus are not directly subject to its requirements or penalties. However, any person may be prosecuted under HIPAA’s criminal provisions either directly or under aiding-and-abetting or conspiracy principles. Consequently, depending on the facts and circumstances, we could face substantial criminal penalties if we knowingly receive individually identifiable

70

health information from a HIPAA-covered healthcare provider or research institution that has not satisfied HIPAA’s requirements for disclosure of individually identifiable health information. In addition, we may in the future maintain sensitive personally identifiable information, including health information, that we receive throughout the clinical trial process, in the course of our research collaborations, and directly from individuals (or their healthcare providers) who enroll in our patient assistance programs. As such, we may be subject to state laws requiring notification of affected individuals and state regulators in the event of a breach of personal information, which is a broader class of information than the health information protected by HIPAA.

Furthermore, certain health privacy laws, data breach notification laws, consumer protection laws and genetic testing laws may apply directly to our operations and/or those of our collaborators and may impose restrictions on our collection, use and dissemination of individuals’ health information. Patients about whom we or our collaborators obtain health information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may have statutory or contractual rights that limit our ability to use and disclose the information. We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to ensure ongoing compliance with applicable privacy and data security laws. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

In the event of a security breach, our company could suffer loss of business, severe reputational damage adversely affecting investor confidence, regulatory investigations and orders, litigation, indemnity obligations, damages for contract breach, penalties for violation of applicable laws or regulations, significant costs for remediation and other liabilities. For example, the loss of preclinical study or clinical trial data from completed or future preclinical studies or clinical trials could result in delays in our efforts to obtain marketing authorization or certification and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed.

We have incurred and expect to incur significant expenses to prevent security breaches, including costs related to deploying additional personnel and protection technologies, training employees, and engaging third-party solution providers and consultants. Although we expend significant resources to create security protections that shield our data against potential theft and security breaches, such measures cannot provide absolute security. Moreover, given that we have outsourced our information systems to vendors and rely on cloud-based information systems, we face related security risks which require us to expend resources to protect our technology and information systems.

Business disruptions could seriously harm our future revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Our operations, and those of our CROs, CMOs and other contractors and consultants, could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or man-made disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. Our ability to obtain clinical supplies of our product candidates could be disrupted if the operations of these suppliers are affected by a man-made or natural disaster or other business interruption.

We are an international business, and we are exposed to various global risks that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

As an international business, which operates in multiple jurisdictions, we are exposed to trends and financial risks of international markets, and are also required to comply with varying legal and regulatory requirements in

71

such multiple jurisdictions. Profitability from international operations may be limited by risks and uncertainties related to regional and global economic conditions, regulatory clearances, approvals or certifications and reimbursement approvals, and our ability to implement our overall business strategy in various jurisdictions. We expect these risks will increase as we pursue our strategy to expand operations into new geographic markets. We may not succeed in developing and implementing effective policies and strategies in each location where we conduct business. Any failure to do so may harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

International sales and operations are subject to a variety of risks, including:

International markets are also affected by economic pressure to contain reimbursement levels and healthcare costs. Profitability from international operations may be limited by risks and uncertainties related to regional economic conditions, regulatory clearances and approvals and reimbursement approvals, competing products, infrastructure development, intellectual property rights protection and our ability to implement our overall business strategy. We expect these risks will increase as we pursue our strategy to expand operations into new geographic markets. We may not succeed in developing and implementing effective policies and strategies in each location where we conduct business. Any failure to do so may harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the planned clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if our Alpha DaRT technology or any future products or product candidates we develop, cause or are perceived to cause injury or are found to be otherwise unsuitable during clinical trials, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product (which may include inherent dangers in the use of radioactive materials), negligence, strict liability or a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer

72

protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates. Even successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Failure to obtain or retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of products we develop, alone or with corporate collaborators. Although we have clinical trial insurance, our insurance policies also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We may have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts. Even if our agreements with any future corporate collaborators entitle us to indemnification against losses, such indemnification may not be available or adequate should any claim arise.

The increasing use of social media platforms presents new risks and challenges.

Social media is increasingly being used to communicate about our clinical development programs for our Alpha DaRT technology and the diseases our technology is being developed to treat, and we intend to utilize appropriate social media in connection with our commercialization efforts following marketing authorization or certification of our Alpha DaRT technology or other future products or product candidates, if any. Social media practices in the medical device, biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries continue to evolve and regulations and regulatory guidance relating to such use are evolving and not always clear. This evolution creates uncertainty and risk of noncompliance with regulations applicable to our business, resulting in potential regulatory actions against us, along with the potential for litigation related to off-label marketing or other prohibited activities and heightened scrutiny by the FDA, the SEC and other regulators. For example, patients may use social media channels to comment on their experience in a future blinded clinical trial or to report an alleged adverse event. If such disclosures occur, there is a risk that trial enrollment may be adversely impacted, that we may fail to monitor and comply with applicable adverse event reporting obligations or that we may not be able to defend our business or the public’s legitimate interests in the face of the political and market pressures generated by social media due to restrictions on what we may say about our Alpha DaRT technology or other future products or product candidates. There is also a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us on any social networking website. In addition, we may encounter attacks on social media regarding our company, management, our Alpha DaRT technology or other future products or product candidates. If any of these events were to occur or we otherwise fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face regulatory actions or incur other harm to our business.

73

Our business could be disrupted by catastrophic events.

Occurrence of any catastrophic event, including a global pandemic like the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, earthquake, fire, flood, tsunami or other weather event, power loss, telecommunications failure, software or hardware malfunction, cyber-attack, war or terrorist attack, explosion or pandemic could impact our business. Our insurance coverage may not compensate us for losses that may occur in the event of an earthquake or other significant natural disaster. If any disaster were to occur, our ability to operate our business at our facilities could be impaired and we could incur significant losses, require substantial recovery time and experience significant expenditures in order to resume operations. If we are unable to develop adequate plans to ensure that our business functions continue to operate during and after a disaster and to execute successfully on those plans in the event of a disaster or emergency, our business would be harmed.

Risks Related to Being a Public Company

In this section “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Alpha Tau.

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

Upon the completion of the Business Combination, we will become a public company subject to reporting requirements in the United States, and will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company, and these expenses may increase even more after we are no longer an emerging growth company, as defined in Section 2(a) of the Securities Act. As a public company, we will be 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. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, we expect these rules and regulations to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly. The increased costs will increase our net loss. For example, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we may be forced to accept reduced policy limits or incur substantially higher costs to maintain the same or similar coverage. We cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

A market for our securities may not develop or be sustained, which would adversely affect the liquidity and price of our securities.

Following the Business Combination, the price of our securities may fluctuate significantly due to the market’s reaction to the Business Combination and general market and economic conditions. An active trading market for our securities following the Business Combination may never develop or, if developed, it may not be sustained. In addition, the price of our securities after the Business Combination can vary due to general economic conditions and forecasts, HCCC’s general business condition and the release of HCCC’s financial reports. Additionally, if our securities become delisted from Nasdaq and are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board (an inter-dealer automated quotation system for equity securities that is not a national securities exchange) or the combined company’s securities are not listed on Nasdaq and are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, the liquidity and price of our securities may be more limited than if we were quoted or listed on the NYSE, Nasdaq or another national securities exchange. You may be unable to sell your securities unless a market can be established or sustained.

74

Our internal controls over financial reporting may not be effective and our independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to certify as to their effectiveness, which could have a significant and adverse effect on our business and reputation.

After the Business Combination, the combined company will carry out our business and will be subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of Nasdaq. We expect that the requirements of these rules and regulations will continue to increase its legal, accounting and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming and costly, and place significant strain on its personnel, systems and resources.

The applicable provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act require, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. We are continuing to develop and refine our disclosure controls, internal control over financial reporting and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we will file with the SEC is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and that information required to be disclosed in reports under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our principal executive and financial officers.

Our current controls and any new controls that it develops may become inadequate because of changes in conditions in its business. Further, weaknesses in our internal controls may be discovered in the future. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls, or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement, could adversely affect our operating results or cause us to fail to meet its reporting obligations and may result in a restatement of our financial statements for prior periods. Any failure to implement and maintain effective internal controls also could adversely affect the results of periodic management evaluations and annual independent registered public accounting firm attestation reports regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting that it is required to include in its periodic reports we will file with the SEC under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial and other information.

In order to maintain and improve the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, we have expended and anticipates that it will continue to expend significant resources, including accounting-related costs, and provide significant management oversight. Any failure to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls, or consequent inability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis, could increase our operating costs and could materially and adversely affect our ability to operate our business. In the event that our internal controls are perceived as inadequate or that we are unable to produce timely or accurate financial statements, investors may lose confidence in our operating results and the share price of the combined company could decline. In addition, if we are unable to continue to meet these requirements, the combined company may not be able to obtain or maintain listing on Nasdaq.

The combined company’s independent registered public accounting firm is not required to formally attest to the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting until after the combined company is no longer an emerging growth company. At such time, the combined company’s independent registered public accounting firm may issue a report that is adverse in the event it is not satisfied with the level at which our controls are documented, designed or operating. Any failure to maintain effective disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting could have a material and adverse effect on the combined company’s business and operating results.

Risks Related to Ownership of the Combined Company’s Shares

The Alpha Tau Articles and Israeli law could prevent a takeover that shareholders consider favorable and could also reduce the market price of Alpha Tau ordinary shares.

Certain provisions of Israeli law and the Alpha Tau Articles could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire Alpha Tau or for Alpha Tau’s

75

shareholders to elect different individuals to its board of directors, even if doing so would be beneficial to its shareholders, and may limit the price that investors may be willing to pay in the future for the Alpha Tau ordinary shares. Among other things:

Furthermore, under the Encouragement of Research, Development and Technological Innovation in the Industry Law 5744-1984 (formerly known as the Law for the Encouragement of Research and Development in Industry 5744-1984), and the regulations and guidelines promulgated thereunder, or the Innovation Law, to which Alpha Tau is subject due to its receipt of grants from the Israel Innovation Authority, or IIA (formerly known as the Office of the Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Economy and Industry, or the OCS), a recipient of IIA grants such as Alpha Tau must report to the IIA regarding any change of control of the company or regarding any change in the holding of the means of control of the company which results in any non-Israeli citizen or entity becoming an “interested party”, as defined in the Innovation Law, in the company, and in the latter event, the non-Israeli citizen or entity will be required to execute an undertaking in favor of IIA, in a form prescribed by IIA, acknowledging the restrictions imposed by such law and agreeing to abide by its terms.

Further, Israeli tax considerations may make potential transactions undesirable to Alpha Tau or to some of its shareholders whose country of residence does not have a tax treaty with Israel granting tax relief to such shareholders from Israeli tax. See the section titled “Certain Material Israeli Tax Considerations—Taxation of Alpha Tau shareholders.”

Alpha Tau does not intend to pay dividends for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, you may not receive any return on investment unless you sell your Alpha Tau ordinary shares for a price greater than the price you paid for the HCCC Common Stock.

Alpha Tau has never declared or paid any cash dividends on its shares. It currently intends to retain all available funds and any future earnings for use in the operation of its business and does not anticipate paying any dividends on the Alpha Tau ordinary shares in the foreseeable future. Consequently, you may be unable to realize a gain on your investment except by selling such shares after price appreciation, which may never occur.

76

Alpha Tau’s board of directors has sole discretion whether to pay dividends. If Alpha Tau’s board of directors decides to pay dividends, the form, frequency, and amount will depend upon its future, operations and earnings, capital requirements and surplus, general financial condition, contractual restrictions and other factors that its directors may deem relevant. The Israeli Companies Law, 1999 (the “Companies Law”) imposes restrictions on Alpha Tau’s ability to declare and pay dividends. See the section titled “Description of Alpha Tau ordinary shares—Dividend and Liquidation Rights” for additional information. Payment of dividends may also be subject to Israeli withholding taxes. See the section titled “Certain Material Israeli Tax Considerations” for additional information.

The Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants may not be listed on a national securities exchange after the Business Combination, which could limit investors’ ability to make transactions in such securities and subject Alpha Tau to additional trading restrictions.

Alpha Tau intends to apply to have the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants approved for listing on Nasdaq after the consummation of the Business Combination. Alpha Tau will be required to meet certain initial listing requirements to be listed. Alpha Tau may not be able to meet the initial listing requirements in connection with the Business Combination. Further, even if the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants are so listed, Alpha Tau may be unable to maintain the listing of such securities in the future. If Alpha Tau fails to meet the initial listing requirements and Nasdaq does not list the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants (and the related closing condition with respect to the listing of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares is waived by the parties), Alpha Tau could face significant material adverse consequences, including:

The market price and trading volume of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares may be volatile and could decline significantly following the Business Combination.

The stock markets, including Nasdaq on which Alpha Tau intends to list the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants to be issued in the Business Combination under the symbol “DRTS,” and “DRTSW,” respectively, have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. Even if an active, liquid and orderly trading market develops and is sustained for the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants following the Business Combination, the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants ordinary shares may be volatile and could decline significantly. In addition, the trading volume in the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. If the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants ordinary shares declines significantly, you may be unable to resell your shares or warrants at or above the market price of the ordinary shares Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants as of the date immediately following the consummation of the Business Combination. Alpha Tau and HCCC cannot assure you that the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants ordinary shares will not fluctuate widely or decline significantly in the future in response to a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

77

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 HCCC’s management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Alpha Tau’s quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly and could fall below the expectations of securities analysts and investors due to seasonality and other factors, some of which are beyond its control, resulting in a decline in its stock price.

Alpha Tau’s quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly because of several factors, including:

If, following the Business Combination, securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about Alpha Tau, its business, or its market, or if they change their recommendations regarding the Alpha Tau ordinary shares adversely, then the price and trading volume of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares could decline.

The trading market for the Alpha Tau ordinary shares will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about its business. Alpha Tau does not control these analysts, or the content

78

and opinions included in their reports. As a new public company, Alpha Tau may be slow to attract research coverage and the analysts who publish information about the Alpha Tau ordinary shares will have had relatively little experience with Alpha Tau, which could affect their ability to accurately forecast Alpha Tau’s results and make it more likely that Alpha Tau fails to meet their estimates. In the event Alpha Tau obtains industry or financial analyst coverage, if any of the analysts who cover Alpha Tau issues an inaccurate or unfavorable opinion regarding it, Alpha Tau’s share price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of Alpha Tau or fail to publish reports on it regularly, Alpha Tau’s visibility in the financial markets could decrease, which in turn could cause its share price or trading volume to decline.

Alpha Tau’s failure to meet the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq could result in a delisting of its Securities.

If, after listing, Alpha Tau fails to satisfy the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq such as the corporate governance requirements or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq may take steps to delist its securities. Such a delisting would likely have a negative effect on the price of the securities and would impair your ability to sell or purchase the securities when you wish to do so. In the event of a delisting, Alpha Tau can provide no assurance that any action taken by it to restore compliance with listing requirements would allow its securities to become listed again, stabilize the market price or improve the liquidity of its securities, prevent its securities from dropping below the Nasdaq minimum bid price requirement or prevent future non-compliance with Nasdaq’s listing requirements. Additionally, if Alpha Tau’s securities are not listed on, or become delisted from, Nasdaq for any reason, and are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, an inter-dealer automated quotation system for equity securities that is not a national securities exchange, the liquidity and price of Alpha Tau’s securities may be more limited than if it were quoted or listed on Nasdaq or another national securities exchange. You may be unable to sell your securities unless a market can be established or sustained.

Alpha Tau will be eligible to be treated as an emerging growth company, as defined in the Securities Act, and Alpha Tau cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make the Alpha Tau ordinary shares less attractive to investors because Alpha Tau may rely on these reduced disclosure requirements.

Alpha Tau will qualify as an emerging growth company within the meaning of the Securities Act, and if Alpha Tau takes advantage of certain exemptions from disclosure requirements available to emerging growth companies, this could make Alpha Tau’s securities less attractive to investors and may make it more difficult to compare Alpha Tau’s performance with other public companies.

Alpha Tau is eligible to be treated as an emerging growth company, as defined in Section 2(a) of the Securities Act, as modified by the JOBS Act. Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can delay adopting new or revised financial accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. Alpha Tau intends to take advantage of this extended transition period under the JOBS Act for adopting new or revised financial accounting standards.

For as long as Alpha Tau continues to be an emerging growth company, it may also take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including presenting only limited selected financial data and not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. As a result, its shareholders may not have access to certain information that they may deem important. Alpha Tau could be an emerging growth company for up to five years, although circumstances could cause it to lose that status earlier, including if its total annual gross revenue exceeds $1.07 billion, if it issues more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt securities during any three-year period, or if before that time it is a “large accelerated filer” under U.S. securities laws.

Alpha Tau cannot predict if investors will find Alpha Tau ordinary shares less attractive because it may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find Alpha Tau ordinary shares less attractive as a result, there may be a

79

less active trading market for Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau’s share price may be more volatile. Further, there is no guarantee that the exemptions available to Alpha Tau under the JOBS Act will result in significant savings. To the extent that Alpha Tau chooses not to use exemptions from various reporting requirements under the JOBS Act, it will incur additional compliance costs, which may impact Alpha Tau’s financial condition.

Alpha Tau will be a foreign private issuer and, as a result, it will not be subject to U.S. proxy rules and will be subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a U.S. domestic public company.

Upon the closing of the Business Combination, Alpha Tau will report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because Alpha Tau qualifies as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, it is exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (1) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act, (2) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their share ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time and (3) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, although it is subject to Israeli laws and regulations with regard to certain of these matters and intend to furnish comparable quarterly information on Form 6-K. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year and U.S. domestic issuers that are large accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 60 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from Regulation FD, which is intended to prevent issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of all of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of a company that is not a foreign private issuer.

Alpha Tau may lose its foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional costs and expenses.

As discussed above, Alpha Tau is a foreign private issuer, and therefore is not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. 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 Alpha Tau on June 30, 2022. In the future, Alpha Tau would lose its foreign private issuer status if (1) more than 50% of its outstanding voting securities are owned by U.S. residents and (2) a majority of its directors or executive officers are U.S. citizens or residents, or it fails to meet additional requirements necessary to avoid loss of foreign private issuer status. If Alpha Tau loses its foreign private issuer status, it will be required to file with the SEC periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms, which are more detailed and extensive than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. Alpha Tau would also have to mandatorily comply with U.S. federal proxy requirements, and its officers, directors and principal shareholders will become subject to the short-swing profit disclosure and recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act. In addition, it would lose its ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements under the listing rules of Nasdaq. As a U.S. listed public company that is not a foreign private issuer, Alpha Tau would incur significant additional legal, accounting and other expenses that it will not incur as a foreign private issuer.

As Alpha Tau will be a “foreign private issuer” and intends to follow certain home country corporate governance practices, its shareholders may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to all Nasdaq corporate governance requirements.

As a foreign private issuer, following the closing of the Business Combination, Alpha Tau will have the option to follow certain home country corporate governance practices rather than those of Nasdaq, provided that

80

it discloses the requirements it is not following and describes the home country practices it is following. Alpha Tau intends to rely on this “foreign private issuer exemption” with respect to the Nasdaq rules for shareholder meeting quorums and Nasdaq rules requiring shareholder approval. Alpha Tau may in the future elect to follow home country practices with regard to other matters. As a result, its shareholders may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to all Nasdaq corporate governance requirements.

The Alpha Tau Articles will provide that unless Alpha Tau consents to an alternate forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the exclusive forum of resolution of any claims arising under the Securities Act.

The Alpha Tau Articles will provide that, unless Alpha Tau consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the sole and exclusive forum for any claim asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act (for the avoidance of any doubt, such provision does not apply to any claim asserting a cause of action arising under the Exchange Act). Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both U.S. state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with Alpha Tau or our directors, officers or other employees and may increase the costs associated with such lawsuits, which may discourage such lawsuits against Alpha Tau and our directors, officers and employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find these provisions of the Alpha Tau Articles inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, Alpha Tau may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect Alpha Tau’s business and financial condition. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in Alpha Tau’s share capital shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to the choice of forum provisions of the Alpha Tau Articles described above. This provision would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the U.S. federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

The listing of Alpha Tau securities on Nasdaq will not benefit from the process undertaken in connection with an underwritten initial public offering, which could result in diminished investor demand, inefficiencies in pricing and a more volatile public price for Alpha Tau’s securities.

Alpha Tau will apply to list the Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants on Nasdaq under the symbols “DRTS” and “DRTSW,” respectively, to be effective at the Closing. Unlike an underwritten initial public offering of the Alpha Tau securities, the initial listing of Alpha Tau’s securities as a result of the Business Combination will not benefit from the following:

Underwriters have liability under the U.S. securities laws for material misstatements or omissions in a registration statement pursuant to which an issuer sells securities. Section 11 of the Securities Act (“Section 11”) imposes liability on parties, including underwriters, involved in a securities offering if the registration statement contains a materially false statement or material omission. To effectively establish a due diligence defense against a cause of action brought pursuant to Section 11, a defendant, including an underwriter, carries the burden of proof to demonstrate that he or she, after reasonable investigation, believed that the statements in the

81

registration statement were true and free of material omissions. In order to meet this burden of proof, underwriters in a registered offering typically conduct extensive due diligence of the registrant and vet the registrant’s disclosure. Due diligence entails engaging legal, financial and/or other experts to perform an investigation as to the accuracy of an issuer’s disclosure regarding, among other things, its business, prospects and financial results. In making their investment decision, investors have the benefit of such diligence in underwritten public offerings. HCCC’s investors must rely on the information in this proxy statement/prospectus and will not have the benefit of an independent review and investigation of the type normally performed by an independent underwriter in a public securities offering. While sponsors, private investors and management in a business combination undertake a certain level of due diligence, it is not necessarily the same level of due diligence undertaken by an underwriter in a public securities offering and, therefore, there could be a heightened risk of an incorrect valuation of Alpha Tau’s business or material misstatements or omissions in this proxy statement/prospectus.

In addition, because there are no underwriters engaged in connection with the Transactions, prior to the opening of trading on the trading day immediately following the Closing Date, there will be no traditional “roadshow” or book building process, and no price at which underwriters initially sold shares to the public to help inform efficient and sufficient price discovery with respect to the initial post-closing trades. Therefore, buy and sell orders submitted prior to and at the opening of initial post-closing trading of Alpha Tau’s securities will not have the benefit of being informed by a published price range or a price at which the underwriters initially sold shares to the public, as would be the case in an underwritten initial public offering. There will be no underwriters assuming risk in connection with an initial resale of Alpha Tau’s securities or helping to stabilize, maintain or affect the public price of Alpha Tau’s securities following the closing. Moreover, neither Alpha Tau nor HCCC will engage in, nor will they, directly or indirectly, request financial advisors to engage in, any special selling efforts or stabilization or price support activities in connection with the Alpha Tau’s securities that will be outstanding immediately following the closing. In addition, since Alpha Tau’s will become public through a merger, securities analysts of major brokerage firms may not provide coverage of Alpha Tau since there is no incentive to brokerage firms to recommend the purchase of its ordinary shares. No assurance can be given that brokerage firms will, in the future, want to conduct any offerings on Alpha Tau’s behalf. All of these differences from an underwritten public offering of Alpha Tau’s securities could result in a more volatile price for the Alpha Tau’s securities.

In addition, the Sponsor, certain members of HCCC’s board of directors and its officers, as well as their respective affiliates and permitted transferees, have interests in the Transactions that are different from or are in addition to those of holders of HCCC’s or Alpha Tau’s securities following completion of the Proposed Transactions, and that would not be present in an underwritten public offering of Alpha Tau’s securities. Such interests may have influenced the board of directors of HCCC in making their recommendation that HCCC shareholders vote in favor of the approval of the Business Combination Proposal and the other proposals described in this proxy statement/prospectus. See the section entitled “Proposal One —The Business Combination Proposal —Interests of Certain Persons in the Business Combination.”

Such differences from an underwritten public offering may present material risks to unaffiliated investors that would not exist if Alpha Tau became a publicly listed company through an underwritten initial public offering instead of upon completion of the merger. Further, the lack of such processes in connection with the listing of Alpha Tau’s securities could result in diminished investor demand, inefficiencies in pricing and a more volatile public price for Alpha Tau’s securities during the period immediately following the listing than in connection with an underwritten initial public offering.

Risks Related to Alpha Tau’s Incorporation and Location in Israel

Conditions in Israel could materially and adversely affect Alpha Tau’s business.

Many of Alpha Tau’s employees, including certain management members operate from its offices that are located in Jerusalem, Israel. In addition, a number of Alpha Tau’s officers and directors are residents of Israel.

82

Accordingly, political, economic, and military conditions in Israel and the surrounding region may directly affect Alpha Tau’s business and operations. Recently, there has been an unprecedented degree of political instability in Israel, with four sets of elections for the Israeli parliament, or Knesset, in a two-year period. While a new government was formed in June 2021, there is no guarantee that it will last for a significant portion of its full four-year term and provide political stability. On the military front, in recent years, Israel has been engaged in sporadic armed conflicts with Hamas, an Islamist terrorist group that controls the Gaza Strip, with Hezbollah, an Islamist terrorist group that controls large portions of southern Lebanon, and with Iranian-backed military forces in Syria. In addition, Iran has threatened to attack Israel and may be developing nuclear weapons. Some of these hostilities were accompanied by missiles being fired from the Gaza Strip, Lebanon and Syria against civilian targets in various parts of Israel, including areas in which Alpha Tau’s employees are located, which negatively affected business conditions in Israel. Any hostilities involving Israel, regional political instability or the interruption or curtailment of trade between Israel and its trading partners could materially and adversely affect Alpha Tau’s operations and results of operations.

Alpha Tau’s commercial insurance does not cover losses that may occur as a result of events associated with war and terrorism. Although the Israeli government currently covers the reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war, Alpha Tau cannot assure you that this government coverage will be maintained or that it will sufficiently cover Alpha Tau’s potential damages. Any losses or damages incurred by Alpha Tau could have a material adverse effect on its business. Any armed conflicts or political instability in the region would likely negatively affect business conditions and could harm Alpha Tau’s results of operations.

Further, in the past, the State of Israel and Israeli companies have been subjected to economic boycotts. Several countries still restrict business with the State of Israel and with Israeli companies. These restrictive laws and policies may have an adverse impact on Alpha Tau’s results of operations, financial condition or the expansion of its business. A campaign of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions has been undertaken against Israel, which could also adversely affect Alpha Tau’s business. Actual or perceived political instability in Israel or any negative changes in the political environment, may individually or in the aggregate adversely affect the Israeli economy and, in turn, Alpha Tau’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

In addition, many Israeli citizens are obligated to perform several weeks of annual military reserve duty each year until they reach the age of 40 (or older, for reservists who are military officers or who have certain occupations) and, in the event of a military conflict, may be called to active duty. In response to increases in terrorist activity, there have been periods of significant call-ups of military reservists. It is possible that there will be military reserve duty call-ups in the future. Alpha Tau’s operations could be disrupted by such call-ups, which may include the call-up of members of its management. Such disruption could materially adversely affect its business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

Alpha Tau may become subject to claims for remuneration or royalties for assigned service invention rights by Alpha Tau’s employees, which could result in litigation and adversely affect Alpha Tau’s business.

A significant portion of Alpha Tau’s intellectual property has been developed by its employees in the course of their employment by Alpha Tau. Under the Israeli Patents Law, 5727-1967 (the “Patents Law”), inventions conceived by an employee during and as a result of his or her employment with a company are regarded as “service inventions,” which belong to the employer, absent an agreement between the employee and employer providing otherwise. The Patents Law also provides that if there is no agreement between an employer and an employee determining whether the employee is entitled to receive consideration for service inventions and on what terms, this will be determined by the Israeli Compensation and Royalties Committee (the “Committee”), a body constituted under the Patents Law. Case law clarifies that the right to receive consideration for “service inventions” can be waived by the employee and that in certain circumstances, such waiver does not necessarily have to be explicit. The Committee will examine, on a case-by-case basis, the general contractual framework between the parties, using interpretation rules of the general Israeli contract laws. Further, the Committee has not

83

yet determined one specific formula for calculating this remuneration, but rather uses the criteria specified in the Patents Law. Although Alpha Tau generally enters into agreements with its employees pursuant to which such individuals assign to it all rights to any inventions created during and as a result of their employment with Alpha Tau, Alpha Tau may face claims demanding remuneration in consideration for assigned inventions. As a consequence of such claims, Alpha Tau could be required to pay additional remuneration or royalties to its current and/or former employees, or be forced to litigate such monetary claims (which will not affect Alpha Tau’s proprietary rights), which could negatively affect its business.

Certain tax benefits that may be available to Alpha Tau, if obtained by Alpha Tau, would require it to continue to meet various conditions and may be terminated or reduced in the future, which could increase Alpha Tau’s costs and taxes.

Alpha Tau may be eligible for certain tax benefits provided to “Preferred Technological Enterprises” under the Israeli Law for the Encouragement of Capital Investments, 5719-1959, referred to as the Investment Law. If Alpha Tau obtains tax benefits under the “Preferred Technological Enterprises” regime then, in order to remain eligible for such tax benefits, it will need to continue to meet certain conditions stipulated in the Investment Law and its regulations, as amended. If these tax benefits are reduced, cancelled or discontinued, Alpha Tau’s Israeli taxable income may be subject to Israeli corporate tax rates of 23% in 2018 and thereafter. Additionally, if Alpha Tau increases its activities outside of Israel through acquisitions, for example, its activities might not be eligible for inclusion in future Israeli tax benefit programs. See “Certain Material Israeli Tax Considerations.”

It may be difficult to enforce a U.S. judgment against Alpha Tau, its officers and directors and the Israeli experts named in this proxy statement/prospectus in Israel or the United States, or to assert U.S. securities laws claims in Israel or serve process on Alpha Tau’s officers and directors and these experts.

Most of Alpha Tau’s directors or officers are not residents of the United States and most of their and Alpha Tau’s assets are located outside the United States. Service of process upon Alpha Tau or its non-U.S. resident directors and officers and enforcement of judgments obtained in the United States against Alpha Tau or its non-U.S. directors and executive officers may be difficult to obtain within the United States. Alpha Tau have been informed by its legal counsel in Israel that it may be difficult to assert claims under U.S. securities laws in original actions instituted in Israel or obtain a judgment based on the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal securities laws. Israeli courts may refuse to hear a claim based on a violation of U.S. securities laws against Alpha Tau or its non-U.S. officers and directors because Israel may not be the most appropriate forum to bring such a claim. In addition, even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in Israel addressing the matters described above. Israeli courts might not enforce judgments rendered outside Israel, which may make it difficult to collect on judgments rendered against Alpha Tau or its non-U.S. officers and directors.

Moreover, an Israeli court will not enforce a non-Israeli judgment if (among other things) it was given in a state whose laws do not provide for the enforcement of judgments of Israeli courts (subject to exceptional cases), or if its enforcement is likely to prejudice the sovereignty or security of the State of Israel, or if it was obtained by fraud or in absence of due process, or if it is at variance with another valid judgment that was given in the same matter between the same parties, or if a suit in the same matter between the same parties was pending before a court or tribunal in Israel, at the time the foreign action was brought. For more information, see “Enforceability of Civil Liabilities.”

Your rights and responsibilities as a shareholder of Alpha Tau will be governed by Israeli law, which may differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders of U.S. corporations.

Alpha Tau is incorporated under Israeli law. The rights and responsibilities of holders of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares are governed by the Alpha Tau Articles and the Companies Law. These rights and

84

responsibilities differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders in typical U.S. corporations. In particular, pursuant to the Companies Law each shareholder of an Israeli company has to act in good faith and in a customary manner in exercising his or her rights and fulfilling his or her obligations toward the company and other shareholders and to refrain from abusing his or her power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at the general meeting of shareholders and class meetings, on amendments to a company’s articles of association, increases in a company’s authorized share capital, mergers, and transactions requiring shareholders’ approval under the Companies Law. In addition, a controlling shareholder of an Israeli company or a shareholder who knows that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a shareholder vote or who has the power to appoint or prevent the appointment of a director or officer in the Company, or has other powers toward the Company has a duty of fairness toward the Company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness. There is limited case law available to assist in understanding the implications of these provisions that govern shareholder behavior.

If Alpha Tau or any of its subsidiaries are characterized as a Passive Foreign Investment Company (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes, U.S. Holders may suffer adverse tax consequences.

A non-U.S. corporation generally will be treated as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, in any taxable year if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for such year is passive income or (2) at least 50% of the value of its assets (generally based on an average of the quarterly values of the assets) during such year is attributable to assets that produce or are held for the production of passive income. Alpha Tau believes it was not a PFIC in 2020. Based on the current and anticipated composition of the income, assets and operations of Alpha Tau and its subsidiaries, there is a risk that Alpha Tau may be treated as a PFIC for the taxable year that includes the Business Combination and for future taxable years. Moreover, the application of the PFIC rules is subject to uncertainty in several respects, and Alpha Tau cannot assure you that the IRS will not take a contrary position or that a court will not sustain such a challenge by the IRS.

Whether Alpha Tau or any of its subsidiaries are a PFIC for any taxable year is a factual determination that depends on, among other things, the composition of Alpha Tau’s income and assets, and the market value of its and its subsidiaries’ shares and assets. Changes in the composition of our income or composition of Alpha Tau or any of its subsidiaries assets may cause us to be or become a PFIC for the current or subsequent taxable years. Whether Alpha Tau is treated as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes is a factual determination that must be made annually at the close of each taxable year and, thus, is subject to significant uncertainty.

If Alpha Tau is a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder of Alpha Tau ordinary shares may be subject to adverse tax consequences and may incur certain information reporting obligations. For a further discussion, see “Certain Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—U.S. Holders—Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules.” U.S. Holders of Alpha Tau ordinary shares and Alpha Tau warrants are strongly encouraged to consult their own advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to Alpha Tau and the ownership of Alpha Tau ordinary shares and/or Alpha Tau warrants.

If a U.S. Holder is treated as owning at least 10% of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares, such U.S. Holder may be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, if a U.S. Holder is treated as owning (directly, indirectly or constructively) at least 10% of the value or voting power of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares, such person may be treated as a “United States shareholder” with respect to Alpha Tau, or any of its subsidiaries, if Alpha Tau or such subsidiary is a “controlled foreign corporation.” If Alpha Tau has one or more U.S. subsidiaries, certain of Alpha Tau’s non-U.S. subsidiaries could be treated as a controlled foreign corporation regardless of whether Alpha Tau is treated as a controlled foreign corporation (although there are recently promulgated final and currently proposed Treasury regulations that may limit the application of these rules in certain circumstances).

Certain United States shareholders of a controlled foreign corporation may be required to report annually and include in their U.S. federal taxable income their pro rata share of the controlled foreign corporation’s

85

“Subpart F income” and, in computing their “global intangible low-taxed income,” “tested income” and a pro rata share of the amount of certain U.S. property (including certain stock in U.S. corporations and certain tangible assets located in the United States) held by the controlled foreign corporation regardless of whether such controlled foreign corporation makes any distributions. The amount includable by a United States shareholder under these rules is based on a number of factors, including potentially, but not limited to, the controlled foreign corporation’s current earnings and profits (if any), tax basis in the controlled foreign corporation’s assets, and foreign taxes paid by the controlled foreign corporation on its underlying income. Failure to comply with these reporting obligations (or related tax payment obligations) may subject such United States shareholder to significant monetary penalties and may extend the statute of limitations with respect to such United States shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax return for the year for which reporting (or payment of tax) was due. Alpha Tau cannot provide any assurances that it will assist U.S. Holders in determining whether Alpha Tau or any of its subsidiaries are treated as a controlled foreign corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or whether any U.S. Holder is treated as a United States shareholder with respect to any of such controlled foreign corporations or furnish to any holder information that may be necessary to comply with reporting and tax paying obligations if Alpha Tau, or any of its subsidiaries, is treated as a controlled foreign corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

The Alpha Tau Articles provide that unless Alpha Tau consents otherwise, the competent courts of Tel Aviv, Israel shall be the sole and exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between Alpha Tau and its shareholders under the Companies Law and the Israeli Securities Law.

The competent courts of Tel Aviv, Israel shall, unless Alpha Tau consents otherwise in writing, be the exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of Alpha Tau, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of Alpha Tau to Alpha Tau or Alpha Tau’s shareholders, or (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Companies Law or the Israeli Securities Law, 5728-1968 (the “Israeli Securities Law”). This exclusive forum provision is intended to apply to claims arising under Israeli law and would not apply to claims brought pursuant to the Securities Act or the Exchange Act or any other claim for which federal courts would have exclusive jurisdiction. Such exclusive forum provision in the Alpha Tau Articles will not relieve Alpha Tau of its duties to comply with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, and shareholders of Alpha Tau will not be deemed to have waived Alpha Tau’s compliance with these laws, rules and regulations. This exclusive forum provision may limit a shareholders ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum of its choosing for disputes with Alpha Tau or its directors or other employees which may discourage lawsuits against Alpha Tau, its directors, officers and employees.

Risks Related to the Business Combination and the Combined Company

HCCC may not have sufficient funds to consummate the Business Combination.

As of September 30, 2021, HCCC had approximately $0.7 million available to it outside the Trust Account to fund its working capital requirements. If HCCC is required to seek additional capital, it would need to borrow funds from the Sponsor, its management team or other third parties to operate or it may be forced to liquidate. None of such persons is under any obligation to advance funds to HCCC in such circumstances. Any such advances would be repaid only from funds held outside the Trust Account or from funds released to HCCC from the Trust Account upon completion of the Business Combination. If HCCC is unable to consummate the Business Combination because it does not have sufficient funds available, and if HCCC is not able to consummate another business combination within the timeline set forth in its Charter, HCCC may be forced to cease operations and liquidate the Trust Account. Consequently, HCCC’s public stockholders may receive less than $10 per share and their warrants will expire worthless.

86

If HCCC’s stockholders fail to properly demand redemption rights, they will not be entitled to convert their HCCC Class A common stock into a pro rata portion of the Trust Account.

HCCC stockholders holding public shares may demand that HCCC convert their public shares into a pro rata portion of the Trust Account, calculated as of two (2) business days prior to the special meeting. To demand redemption rights, HCCC stockholders must deliver their shares (either physically or electronically) to HCCC’s transfer agent no later than two (2) business days prior to the special meeting. Any stockholder who fails to properly demand redemption rights by delivering his, her or its shares will not be entitled to convert his, her or its shares into a pro rata portion of the Trust Account. See the section of this proxy statement/prospectus titled “Special Meeting of HCCC Stockholders—Redemption Rights” for the procedures to be followed if you wish to redeem your shares for cash.

The Business Combination remains subject to conditions that HCCC cannot control and if such conditions are not satisfied or waived, the Business Combination may not be consummated.

The Business Combination is subject to a number of conditions, including the condition that HCCC have at least $5,000,001 of net tangible assets (as determined in accordance with Rule 3a51-5(g)(1) of the Exchange Act) immediately after consummation of the Business Combination, that there is no legal prohibition against consummation of the Business Combination, that the Alpha Tau ordinary shares be approved for listing on Nasdaq subject only to official notice of issuance thereof, receipt of securityholder approvals, continued effectiveness of the registration statement of which this proxy statement/prospectus is a part, the truth and accuracy of HCCC’s and Alpha Tau’s representations and warranties made in the Merger Agreement, the non-termination of the Merger Agreement and agreements by both HCCC and Alpha Tau. There are no assurances that all conditions to the Business Combination will be satisfied or that the conditions will be satisfied in the time frame expected.

If the conditions to the Business Combination are not met (and are not waived, to the extent waivable), either HCCC or Alpha Tau may, subject to the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement, terminate the Merger Agreement. See the section of this proxy statement/prospectus titled “The Merger Agreement—Termination.”

The exercise of HCCC’s directors’ and officers’ discretion in agreeing to changes or waivers in the terms of the Business Combination may result in a conflict of interest when determining whether such changes to the terms of the Business Combination or waivers of conditions are appropriate and in HCCC’s stockholders’ best interest.

In the period leading up to the closing of the Business Combination, events may occur that, pursuant to the Merger Agreement, would require HCCC to agree to amend the Merger Agreement, to consent to certain actions taken by Alpha Tau or to waive rights that HCCC is entitled to under the Merger Agreement. Waivers may arise because of changes in the course of Alpha Tau’s business, a request by Alpha Tau to undertake actions that would otherwise be prohibited by the terms of the Merger Agreement or the occurrence of other events that would have a material adverse effect on Alpha Tau’s business and would entitle HCCC to terminate the Merger Agreement. In any of such circumstances, it would be at HCCC’s discretion, acting through its board of directors, to grant its consent or waive those rights. The existence of the financial and personal interests of the directors and officers described in these risk factors may result in a conflict of interest on the part of one or more of the directors or officers between what he or they may believe is best for HCCC and what he or they may believe is best for himself or themselves in determining whether or not to take the requested action. As of the date of this proxy statement/prospectus, HCCC does not believe there will be any changes or waivers that HCCC’s directors and officers would be likely to make after stockholder approval of the Business Combination Proposal has been obtained. While certain changes could be made without further stockholder approval, HCCC will circulate a new or amended proxy statement/prospectus and resolicit HCCC’s stockholders if changes to the terms of the Business Combination that would have a material impact on its stockholders or represent a fundamental change in the proposals being voted upon.

87

Alpha Tau may issue additional Alpha Tau ordinary shares or other equity securities without seeking approval of the Alpha Tau shareholders, which would dilute your ownership interests and may depress the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares.

Upon consummation of the Business Combination, Alpha Tau will have warrants outstanding to purchase up to an aggregate of 24,129,741 Alpha Tau ordinary shares. Further, Alpha Tau may choose to seek third party financing to provide additional working capital for the Alpha Tau business, in which event Alpha Tau may issue additional equity securities. Following the consummation of the Business Combination, Alpha Tau may also issue additional Alpha Tau ordinary shares or other equity securities of equal or senior rank in the future for any reason or in connection with, among other things, future acquisitions, the redemption of outstanding warrants or repayment of outstanding indebtedness, without shareholder approval, in a number of circumstances.

The issuance of additional Alpha Tau ordinary shares or other equity securities of equal or senior rank would have the following effects:

Future resales of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares issued in connection with the Business Combination may cause the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares to drop significantly, even if Alpha Tau’s business is doing well.

Certain equityholders of Alpha Tau and certain equityholders of HCCC entered into Support Agreements with Alpha Tau. Pursuant to the Sponsor Support Agreement certain HCCC equityholders have agreed that, until the earlier of (x) one year following the Closing Date and (y) following the date that the last sale price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares equals or exceeds $12.00 per share (subject to certain adjustments) for any 20 trading days within any 30 trading day period commencing at least 150 days after the Closing Date, they will not transfer any Alpha Tau securities. Additionally, pursuant to the Alpha Tau Shareholder Support Agreement, such Alpha Tau equityholders have agreed that, until the earlier of (x) 180 days following the Closing Date and (y) following the date that the last sale price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares equals or exceeds $12.00 per share (subject to certain adjustments) for any 20 trading days within any 30 trading day period commencing at least 150 days after the Closing Date. See the section of this proxy statement/prospectus titled “Agreements Entered Into in Connection with the Business Combination—Support Agreements.”

Further, certain stockholders of HCCC will become parties to the Amended IRA by executing a joinder thereto. Pursuant to the Amended IRA, the shareholders party thereto will be entitled to customary “demand” and “piggyback” registration rights.

Upon expiration of the applicable lockup periods set forth in the Support Agreements and upon the effectiveness of any registration statement Alpha Tau files pursuant to the above-referenced Amended IRA, in a registered offering of securities pursuant to the Securities Act or otherwise in accordance with Rule 144 under the Securities Act, the Alpha Tau shareholders may sell large amounts of Alpha Tau ordinary shares and warrants in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions, which could have the effect of increasing the volatility in the trading price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares or the Alpha Tau warrants or putting significant downward pressure on the price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares or warrants. Additionally, downward pressure on the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares or Alpha Tau warrants likely will result from sales of Alpha Tau ordinary shares issued in connection with the exercise of warrants. Further, sales of Alpha Tau ordinary shares or

88

warrants upon expiration of the applicable Lockup Period could encourage short sales by market participants. Generally, short selling means selling a security, contract or commodity not owned by the seller. The seller is committed to eventually purchase the financial instrument previously sold. Short sales are used to capitalize on an expected decline in the security’s price. Short sales of Alpha Tau ordinary shares or warrants could have a tendency to depress the price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares or the Alpha Tau warrants, respectively, which could increase the potential for short sales.

Additionally, through the Subscription Agreements, Alpha Tau has agreed with the PIPE Investors to register the PIPE Shares on a resale registration statement following the closing of the Transactions. These shares will be freely tradable without restriction or further registration under the Securities Act, unless the shares are held by any of HCCC’s “affiliates” as such term is defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. This additional liquidity in the market for Alpha Tau ordinary shares may lead to downward pressure on the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares.

We cannot predict the size of future issuances of Alpha Tau ordinary shares or warrants or the effect, if any, that future issuances and sales of shares of Alpha Tau ordinary shares or warrants will have on the market price of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares or warrants. Sales of substantial amounts of Alpha Tau ordinary shares (including those shares issued in connection with the Business Combination), or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices of Alpha Tau ordinary shares or warrants.

HCCC’s board of directors did not obtain a third-party fairness opinion in determining whether or not to proceed with the Business Combination.

HCCC’s board of directors did not obtain a third-party fairness opinion in connection with their determination to approve the Business Combination. In analyzing the Business Combination, HCCC’s board of directors and management conducted due diligence on Alpha Tau and researched the industry in which Alpha Tau operates and concluded that the Business Combination was fair to and in the best interest of HCCC and its stockholders. Accordingly, investors will be relying solely on the judgment of HCCC’s board of directors and management in valuing Alpha Tau’s business, and HCCC’s board of directors and management may not have properly valued such business. The lack of a third-party fairness opinion may lead an increased number of stockholders to vote against the proposed Business Combination or demand redemption of their shares for cash, which could potentially impact HCCC’s ability to consummate the Business Combination or adversely affect Alpha Tau’s liquidity following the consummation of the Business Combination.

HCCC and Alpha Tau will incur significant transaction and transition costs in connection with the Transactions.

HCCC and Alpha Tau have both incurred and expect to incur significant, non-recurring costs in connection with consummating the Transactions and operating as a public company following the consummation of the Transactions. Alpha Tau may also incur additional costs to retain key employees. All expenses incurred in connection with the Transactions, including all legal, accounting, consulting, investment banking and other fees, expenses and costs, will be for the account of the party incurring such fees, expenses and costs or paid by Alpha Tau following the Closing.

Subsequent to the completion of the Business Combination, the combined company may be required to take write-downs or write-offs, restructuring and impairment or other charges that could have a significant negative effect on its financial condition, results of operations and the combined company’s ordinary share price, which could cause you to lose some or all of your investment.

Although HCCC has conducted extensive due diligence on Alpha Tau, HCCC cannot assure you that this diligence will surface all material issues that may be present in Alpha Tau’s business, that it would be possible to uncover all material issues through a customary amount of due diligence, or that factors outside of Alpha Tau’s

89

business and outside of its control will not later arise. As a result of these factors, the combined company may be forced to later write-down or write-off assets, restructure its operations, or incur impairment or other charges that could result in its reporting losses. Even if HCCC’s due diligence successfully identified certain risks, unexpected risks may arise and previously known risks may materialize in a manner not consistent with HCCC’s preliminary risk analysis. Even though these charges may be non-cash items and would not have an immediate impact on the combined company’s liquidity, the fact that the combined company reports charges of this nature could contribute to negative market perceptions of the combined company or its securities. In addition, charges of this nature may cause the combined company to violate net worth or other covenants to which the combined company may be subject as a result of assuming pre-existing debt held by Alpha Tau’s business or by virtue of the combined company obtaining post-combination debt financing. Accordingly, any shareholders of Alpha Tau following the Business Combination could suffer a reduction in the value of their shares. Such shareholders are unlikely to have a remedy for such reduction in value.

The Alpha Tau securities to be received by HCCC’s securityholders as a result of the Business Combination will have different rights from HCCC securities.

Following completion of the Business Combination, HCCC’s securityholders will no longer be securityholders of HCCC but will instead be securityholders of Alpha Tau. There will be important differences between your current rights as a HCCC securityholder and your rights as an Alpha Tau securityholder. See “Comparison of Rights of Alpha Tau Shareholders and HCCC Stockholders” for a discussion of the different rights associated with the Alpha Tau securities.

HCCC’s stockholders will have a reduced ownership and voting interest after consummation of the Business Combination and will exercise less influence over management.

After the completion of the Business Combination, HCCC’s current stockholders will own a smaller percentage of the combined company than they currently own of HCCC. At the Closing, existing Alpha Tau shareholders would hold approximately 56.3% of the issued and outstanding Alpha Tau ordinary shares and current stockholders of HCCC (including the Sponsor) and the PIPE Investors (as defined below) will own the remaining Alpha Tau ordinary shares (assuming no holder of Class A common stock exercises redemption rights as described in this proxy statement/prospectus). Consequently, HCCC’s current stockholders, as a group, will have reduced ownership and voting power in the combined company compared to their ownership and voting power in HCCC.

Even if the Business Combination is consummated, there is no guarantee that the Alpha Tau warrants will ever be in the money, and they may expire worthless and the terms of HCCC’s warrants may be amended.

The exercise price for the Alpha Tau warrants will be $11.50 per ordinary share. Upon consummation of the Business Combination, each HCCC warrant will become one Alpha Tau warrant, and the exercise price and number of shares issuable upon exercise of such warrants may change if the Share Split is not effected or does not result in a price per Alpha Tau ordinary share of $10.00. There is no guarantee that the Alpha Tau warrants, following the Business Combination, will ever be in the money prior to their expiration, and as such, the warrants may expire worthless.

HCCC’s current directors’ and executive officers’ affiliates own shares of HCCC Common Stock and private placement warrants that will be worthless if the Business Combination is not approved. Such interests may have influenced their decision to approve the Business Combination.

If the Business Combination or another business combination is not consummated by January 20, 2023 (or such later date as may be approved by HCCC’s stockholders in an amendment to the HCCC Charter), HCCC will cease all operations except for the purpose of winding up, redeeming 100% of the outstanding public shares for cash and, subject to the approval of its remaining stockholders and its board of directors, dissolving and

90

liquidating. In such event, the 6,875,000 shares of Class B common stock held by the Sponsor, which is affiliated with certain of HCCC’s directors and officers and other certain officers, that were acquired for an aggregate purchase price of $25,000 prior to the HCCC IPO, would be worthless because the holders are not entitled to participate in any redemption or distribution with respect to such shares. Further, the Sponsor purchased an aggregate of 6,800,000 private placement warrants at a price of $1.00 per warrant, simultaneously with the consummation of the HCCC IPO and the subsequent exercise of the underwriter’s overallotment option, for an aggregate purchase price of $6,800,000. The Class B common stock and the private placement warrants will become worthless if HCCC does not consummate a business combination by January 20, 2023 (or such later date as may be approved by HCCC’s stockholders in an amendment to the HCCC Charter). On the other hand, if the Business Combination is consummated, each outstanding share of Class B common stock (other than the shares forfeited pursuant to the Sponsor Support Agreement) will convert into one Alpha Tau ordinary share, subject to adjustment described herein, at the closing and each outstanding HCCC warrant (other than the warrants forfeited pursuant to the Sponsor Support Agreement) will become an Alpha Tau warrant. Such shares and warrants had an aggregate market value of approximately $57.85 million and approximately $3.33 million, respectively, based upon the closing price of $9.90 per share and $0.49 per warrant on Nasdaq on January 11, 2022.

As such, the Sponsor will benefit from the completion of a business combination and may be incentivized to complete an acquisition of a less favorable target company or on terms less favorable to shareholders rather than liquidate. In addition, based on the difference in the purchase price of $0.004 that the Sponsor paid for the founder shares, as compared to the purchase price of $10.00 per Public Unit sold in the IPO, the Sponsor may earn a positive rate of return even if the share price of the Combined Company after the Closing falls below the price initially paid for the Public Units in the IPO and the Public Shareholders experience a negative rate of return following the Closing of the Business Combination. In the event that a business combination is not effected, the Sponsor will not be entitled to any reimbursement of funds invested in HCCC. In total, the Sponsor has invested $6,825,000 for securities that would be worthless absent the completion of a business combination. The Sponsor, its affiliates and HCCC’s officers and directors have no loans outstanding to HCCC.

These financial interests may have influenced the decision of HCCC’s directors and officers to approve the Business Combination and to continue to pursue the Business Combination. In considering the recommendations of HCCC’s board of directors to vote for the Business Combination Proposal and other proposals, its stockholders should consider these interests. See the section of this proxy statement/prospectus titled “Proposal One—The Business Combination Proposal—Interests of Certain Persons in the Transactions.”

The Sponsor, an affiliate of current officers and directors of HCCC, is liable to ensure that proceeds of the Trust Account are not reduced by vendor claims in the event the Business Combination is not consummated. Such liability may have influenced HCCC’s board of directors’ decision to pursue the Business Combination and HCCC’s board of directors’ decision to approve it.

If the Business Combination or another business combination is not consummated by HCCC on or before January 20, 2023, the Sponsor, an affiliate of current officers and directors of HCCC, will be liable to ensure that the proceeds in the Trust Account are not reduced by the claims of target businesses or claims of vendors or other entities that are owed money by HCCC for services rendered or contracted for or for products sold to HCCC, but only if such a vendor or target business has not executed a waiver agreement. If HCCC consummates a business combination, on the other hand, HCCC will be liable for all such claims. HCCC has no reason to believe that the Sponsor will not be able to fulfill its indemnity obligations to HCCC.

These obligations of the Sponsor may have influenced HCCC’s board of directors’ decision to pursue the Business Combination with Alpha Tau or HCCC’s board of directors’ decision to approve the Business Combination. In considering the recommendations of HCCC’s board of directors to vote for the Business Combination Proposal and other proposals, stockholders should consider these interests. See the section of this proxy statement/prospectus titled “Proposal One—The Business Combination Proposal—Interests of Certain Persons in the Transactions.”

91

HCCC’s directors may decide not to enforce the indemnification obligations of the Sponsor, resulting in a reduction in the amount of funds in the Trust Account available for distribution to HCCC’s public stockholders in the event a business combination is not consummated.

If proceeds in the Trust Account are reduced below $10.00 per public share and the Sponsor asserts that it is unable to satisfy its indemnification obligations or that it has no indemnification obligations related to a particular claim, HCCC’s independent directors would determine whether to take legal action against the Sponsor to enforce its indemnification obligations. While HCCC currently expects that its independent directors would take legal action on HCCC’s behalf against the Sponsor to enforce the Sponsor’s indemnification obligations, it is possible that HCCC’s independent directors in exercising their business judgment may choose not to do so in any particular instance. If HCCC’s independent directors choose not to enforce these indemnification obligations, the amount of funds in the Trust Account available for distribution to HCCC’s public stockholders may be reduced below $10.00 per share.

Activities taken by existing HCCC stockholders to increase the likelihood of approval of the Business Combination Proposal and other proposals could have a depressive effect on the HCCC Class A common stock.

At any time prior to the special meeting, during a period when they are not then aware of any material nonpublic information regarding HCCC or its securities, HCCC, the Sponsor, HCCC’s officers and directors, Alpha Tau, the Alpha Tau officers and directors and/or their respective affiliates may purchase HCCC Class A common stock from institutional and other investors who vote, or indicate an intention to vote, against the Business Combination Proposal, or execute agreements to purchase such shares from such investors in the future, or they may enter into transactions with such investors and others to provide them with incentives to acquire shares of HCCC Class A common stock or vote their shares of HCCC Class A common stock in favor of the Business Combination Proposal. The purpose of such purchases and other transactions would be to increase the likelihood of approval of the Business Combination Proposal by the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of HCCC Class A common stock and ensure that HCCC has in excess of $5,000,001 of net assets to consummate the Business Combination where it appears that such requirement would otherwise not be met. While the exact nature of any such incentives has not been determined as of the date of this proxy statement/prospectus, they might include, without limitation, arrangements to protect such investors or holders against potential loss in value of their shares, including the granting of put options and the transfer to such investors or holders of shares owned by the Sponsor for nominal value. Entering into any such arrangements may have a depressive effect on the HCCC Class A common stock. For example, as a result of these arrangements, an investor or holder may have the ability to effectively purchase shares of HCCC Class A common stock at a price lower than market and may therefore be more likely to sell the HCCC Class A common stock he owns, either prior to or immediately after the special meeting.

In addition, if such purchases are made, the public “float” of the Alpha Tau ordinary shares following the Business Combination and the number of beneficial holders of Alpha Tau securities may be reduced, possibly making it difficult to obtain or maintain the quotation, listing or trading of Alpha Tau securities on Nasdaq or another national securities exchange or reducing the liquidity of the trading market for the Alpha Tau ordinary shares.

The Business Combination may be completed even though material adverse effects may result from the announcement of the Business Combination, industry-wide changes and other causes.

In general, either HCCC or Alpha Tau may refuse to complete the Business Combination if there is a material adverse effect affecting the other party between the signing date of the Merger Agreement and the planned closing. However, certain types of changes do not permit either party to refuse to consummate the Business Combination, even if such change could be said to have a material adverse effect on Alpha Tau or HCCC, including the following events (except, in certain cases where the change has a disproportionate effect on a party):