Table of Contents As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 27, 2026 Registration No. 333- UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 5E Advanced Materials, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) Delaware 1400 87-3426517 (Primary Standard Industrial Classification Code Number) 9329 Mariposa Road, Suite 210 Hesperia, CA 92344 (442) 221-0225 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) (Address, including zip code, and tel ...

Core Viewpoint - 5E Advanced Materials, Inc. has filed an omnibus application for a proprietary in-situ leach mining process, which aims to strengthen its competitive position and market leadership in the borate industry [1] Group 1: Patent Application Details - The omnibus application includes 167 invention claims related to 5E's end-to-end borate mining process [1] - The proprietary process is designed to lower operating costs and reduce environmental impact [1] - If granted, the patent will create significant barriers for competitors attempting to replicate 5E's in-situ leach technology [1] Group 2: Company Profile - 5E Advanced Materials, Inc. is a U.S. development-stage company focused on becoming a vertically integrated global leader in refined borates and advanced boron derivative materials [1] - The company is actively working on the production of boric acid, gypsum, sodium chloride, and managing metal impurities [1]

Financial Data and Key Metrics Changes - The company reported a net present value (NPV) of $2.3 billion and an internal rate of return (IRR) of 23.2% [13] - The all-in sustaining cash cost for lithium carbonate production is $4,628 per tonne, placing it in the bottom quartile globally [15][20] - Annual revenue is projected to be $790 million with an annual EBITDA of $563 million over the first 25 years [16] Business Line Data and Key Metrics Changes - The ore reserve is now 265 million tonnes, sufficient for 77 years of mining at the current rate of 3.4 million tonnes per annum [14] - The total mineral resource is 549 million tonnes, indicating significant expansion potential [15] Market Data and Key Metrics Changes - The project is positioned within the lowest cost quartile globally for lithium carbonate equivalent production, benefiting from the co-production of boric acid [9][20] - Approximately 50% of the world's lithium production costs exceed $10,000 per tonne, while Rhyolite Ridge operates at a significantly lower cost [20] Company Strategy and Development Direction - The company aims to finalize a global strategic partnering process to secure capable equity partners for the Rhyolite Ridge project [4][9] - The project is designed to be a vertically integrated lithium-boron operation, enhancing the U.S. position as a significant producer of critical minerals [5][10] Management's Comments on Operating Environment and Future Outlook - Management expressed confidence that the coming year will be transformational, translating years of effort into long-term value [10] - The company acknowledges the volatile geopolitical environment affecting the lithium sector, which has led to an extension of the partnering process into 2026 [26][41] Other Important Information - The project has received a favorable record of decision from the Bureau of Land Management, completing the NEPA permitting process [5][6] - A $986 million loan from the U.S. Department of Energy has been secured, strengthening the project's financial foundation [6][22] Q&A Session Summary Question: Why does the U.S. government prioritize overseas supply deals despite domestic projects? - Management clarified that very few projects are shovel-ready for lithium production, with Ioneer being one of the few fully permitted projects [37][40] Question: What is the plan for completing the remaining 30% of design engineering? - The remaining design will be completed post-FID with the assistance of an EPC contractor, Fluor [42] Question: What reasons did Sibanye give for not proceeding with the project? - Sibanye cited a lack of capacity to fund their share and stated that the project did not meet their investment criteria [44]