Edgar Filing: HOLOGIC INC

Form 10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

x	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended: September 25, 2010

¨	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 0-18281

Hologic, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)


Delaware		04-2902449
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(IRS Employer Identification No.)

35 Crosby Drive, Bedford, Massachusetts 01730

(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code (781) 999-7300

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:


Title of Each Class		Name of Each Exchange on which Registered
Common Stock, $.01 par value		Nasdaq Global Select Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Rights to Purchase Preferred Stock

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (Check one).

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of March 25, 2010 was $4,709,015,506 based on the price of the last reported sale on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on that date.

As of November 17, 2010, there were 259,890,069 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, $.01 par value, outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement for the registrant’s annual meeting of stockholders to be filed within 120 days of the end of its fiscal year ended September 25, 2010 are incorporated into Part III (Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14) of this Annual Report on Form 10-K where indicated.

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the statements contained in this report are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our or our industry’s actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding:

•

the effect of the continuing worldwide macroeconomic uncertainty on our business and results of operation;

•

the coverage and reimbursement decisions of third party payors relating to the use of our products and treatments;

•

the uncertainty of the impact of federal healthcare reform legislation, including the excise tax on the sale of most medical devices, on our business and results of operation;

•

the impact and anticipated benefits of recently completed acquisitions and acquisitions we may complete in the future;

•

our goal of expanding our market positions;

•

the development of new competitive technologies and products;

•

regulatory approval and clearances for our products;

•

production schedules for our products;

•

the anticipated development of our markets and the success of our products in these markets;

•

the anticipated performance and benefits of our products;

•

business strategies;

•

dependence on significant or sole source suppliers;

•

the impact and costs and expenses of any litigation we may be subject to now or in the future;

•

compliance with covenants contained in our long-term leases;

•

anticipated trends relating to our financial condition or results of operations; and

•

our capital resources and the adequacy thereof.

In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential” and similar expressions intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Also, these forward-looking statements represent our estimates and assumptions only as of the date of this report. Except as otherwise required by law, we expressly disclaim any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement contained in this report to reflect any change in our expectations or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any of our forward-looking statements are based. Factors that could cause or contribute to differences in our future financial results include those discussed in the Risk Factors set forth in Part I Item 1A below as well as those discussed elsewhere in this report. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

PART I

Item 1.

Business

Overview

We are a developer, manufacturer and supplier of premium diagnostics, medical imaging systems and surgical products dedicated to the healthcare needs of women. Our core business segments are focused on breast health, diagnostics, GYN surgical and skeletal health.

Our breast health products include a broad portfolio of breast imaging and related products and accessories, including digital and film-based mammography systems, magnetic resonance imaging (“MRI”) breast coils, computer-aided detection (“CAD”) for mammography and MRI, minimally invasive breast biopsy devices, breast biopsy site markers, breast biopsy guidance systems, breast imaging comfort pads, and breast brachytherapy products. We have also developed a new breast imaging platform, Dimensions, which utilizes a new technology, tomosynthesis, to produce three dimensional (“3D”) images, as well as conventional two dimensional (“2D”) full field digital mammography (“FFDM”) images. In the U.S., our Dimensions product has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for providing conventional 2D images, and we have submitted a pre-market approval (“PMA”) application for the 3D configuration. Our Dimensions 3D system was reviewed by the Radiological Devices Panel of the FDA on September 24, 2010 as part of our PMA application. In connection with that review, the panel unanimously voted that the system was both safe and effective for both screening and diagnostic mammography. On November 22, 2010, we received an approvable letter from the FDA for our Dimensions 3D system. Final approval of our PMA application for our system remains subject to satisfactory review and inspection of our manufacturing facility, methods and controls. Even with the approvable letter, we cannot assure that the FDA will approve our system for either use on a timely basis, if at all. In addition, even if approved, the FDA could impose conditions to such approval that would significantly limit the use or commercialization of the system. Our Dimensions platform received CE mark approval in Europe during fiscal 2008 and Canadian registration in March 2009, both for 2D and 3D modes of imaging.

In August 2010, we acquired Sentinelle Medical Inc. (“Sentinelle Medical”), a company that develops, manufactures and markets MRI breast coils, patient positioners and visualization software. Sentinelle Medical, which is included within our breast health segment, is dedicated to developing advanced imaging technologies used in high-field strength MRI systems.

Our diagnostics products include the ThinPrep System (“ThinPrep”), which is primarily used in cytology applications such as cervical cancer screening, the Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test, which assists physicians in assessing the risk of pre-term birth, and our molecular diagnostic reagents used for a wide variety of DNA and RNA analysis applications based on our proprietary Invader chemistry. Our current clinical diagnostic offerings based upon this Invader chemistry include products to assist in the diagnosis of human papillomavirus (“HPV”), cystic fibrosis, cardiovascular risk and other diseases. We received FDA approval of our Cervista HPV tests in March 2009, and CE mark approval in Europe for Cervista HPV high risk (“HR”) in January 2009 and in May 2009 for Cervista HPV 16/18.

Our GYN surgical products include the NovaSure Endometrial Ablation System (“NovaSure System”) and the Adiana Permanent Contraception System (“Adiana System”). The NovaSure System enables physicians to treat women suffering from excessive menstrual bleeding in a minimally invasive manner in order to eliminate or reduce their bleeding. The Adiana System is a form of permanent female contraception intended as an alternative to tubal ligation. We received FDA approval of the Adiana System in July 2009 and CE mark approval for the system in Europe in December 2008.

Our skeletal health products include dual-energy X-ray bone densitometry systems, an ultrasound-based osteoporosis assessment product, and our Fluoroscan mini C-arm imaging products.

We were incorporated in Massachusetts in October 1985 and reincorporated in Delaware in March 1990. Unless the context otherwise requires, references to us, Hologic or our company refer to Hologic, Inc. and each of its consolidated subsidiaries.

Trademark Notice

Hologic is a trademark of Hologic, Inc. Other trademarks, logos, and slogans registered or used by Hologic and its divisions and subsidiaries in the United States and other countries include, but are not limited to, the following:

Adiana, AEG, ATEC, BioLucent, Celero, Cervista, Cytyc, Dimensions, DirectRay, Eviva, Fluoroscan, Gestiva, Invader, LORAD, MammoPad, MammoSite, MultiCare, NovaSure, PreservCyt, QDR, R2, Rapid fFN, Sahara, SecurView, Selenia, Sentinelle Medical, StereoLoc, Suros, TechMate, ThinPrep, Third Wave, and TLI IQ.

Available Information

Our Internet website address is http://www.hologic.com. Through our website, we make available, free of charge, our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These SEC reports can be accessed through the investor relations section of our website. The information found on our website is not part of this or any other report we file with or furnish to the SEC.

You may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding the Company and other issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The SEC’s Internet website address is http://www.sec.gov.

Products

We view our operations and manage our business in four principal reporting segments: Breast Health, Diagnostics, GYN Surgical and Skeletal Health. Financial information concerning these segments is provided in Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report.

Breast Health Products

Our breast health products include a broad portfolio of breast imaging and related products and accessories, including digital and film-based mammography systems, MRI breast coils, CAD for mammography and MRI, minimally invasive breast biopsy devices, breast biopsy site markers, breast biopsy guidance systems, breast imaging comfort pads, and breast brachytherapy products. We have also developed a new breast imaging platform, Dimensions, which utilizes a new technology, tomosynthesis, to produce 3D images. In fiscal 2009, our breast health segment also included the sale of digital detectors to an original equipment manufacturer, and our organic photoconductor coating business in Shanghai, China acquired in connection with the acquisition of our selenium coating capabilities for our mammography digital detectors. In fiscal 2010, we did not generate revenues from these two sources, which contributed approximately $17.5 million of revenue in fiscal 2009.

Selenia Full Field Digital Mammography System

The Selenia full field digital mammography system is based on our proprietary DirectRay digital detector, which preserves image quality by using a compound known as amorphous selenium to directly convert x-rays to electronic signals. Many other digital technologies employ an indirect two-step process by first converting x-ray energy into light and then converting the light energy into electrical signals. We believe that digital x-ray imaging technologies that require light conversion may compromise image resolution, lessening detection capability. Our DirectRay flat panel detector technology employs an amorphous selenium photoconductor to directly convert x-ray photons into an electrical signal. No intensifying screens or additional processes are required to capture and convert the x-ray energy, enabling high imaging resolution and contrast sensitivity.

The Selenia product family has a number of other features designed to improve image quality and patient throughput. The open architecture of the system’s design provides for full integration with existing enterprise Picture Archiving and Communications Systems (“PACS”) and Radiology Information Systems (“RIS”). The Selenia product family includes the Selenia base configuration, the Selenia S configuration (a screening-only configuration), the Selenia Value (a lower cost alternative to the Selenia base configuration) and the Selenia Encore (refurbished units), each of which offer customers varying performance capabilities and product costs.

Breast Tomosynthesis

Our Dimensions platform includes a mammography gantry capable of performing both 2D and 3D image acquisition and display. When operating in 3D mode, the system acquires a series of low dose x-ray images taken in a scanning motion at various angles. The images are mathematically processed into a series of small slices, revealing breast tissue from a 3D perspective. We believe that by allowing the clinician to review breast tissue in three dimensional space, the more subtle architecture of various types of suspicious lesions may be able to be better interpreted, which may ultimately increase cancer detection and reduce unnecessary patient callbacks. In the United States, our Dimensions product has been approved by the FDA for providing conventional 2D images, and we have submitted a PMA application for the 3D configuration. Our Dimensions 3D system was reviewed by the Radiological Devices Panel of the FDA on September 24, 2010 as part of our PMA application. In connection with that review, the panel unanimously voted that the system was both safe and effective for both screening and diagnostic mammography. On November 22, 2010, we received an approvable letter from the FDA for our Dimensions 3D system. Final approval of our PMA application for our system remains subject to satisfactory review and inspection of our manufacturing facility, methods and controls. Even with the approvable letter, we cannot assure that the FDA will approve our system for either use on a timely basis, if at all. In addition, even if approved, the FDA could impose conditions to such approval that would significantly limit the use or commercialization of the system. Our Dimensions 2D and 3D configurations received CE mark approval in Europe in fiscal 2008 and Canadian registration in March 2009.

Screen-Film Mammography Systems

Our screen-film mammography systems include our LORAD M-IV and M-IV Platinum systems. These systems are less expensive than our digital systems and further offer customers varying performance capabilities and product costs.

SecurView Workstation

The images captured by digital mammography systems are typically transmitted electronically for review by a radiologist at a work station. Early product development activities focused on improving digital workflow in the breast-imaging suite due to limited PACS mammography functionality. To this end, we developed the SecurViewDX breast imaging softcopy workstation, approved for interpretation of digital mammograms from most vendors as well as images from other diagnostic breast modalities. To complement this product, we also developed the SecurViewRT workstation, a technologist workstation enabling bi-directional exchange of electronic communications between the reviewer and the technologist.

CAD Systems

We have developed CAD software tools for our mammography and MRI products. Mammography CAD is used by radiologists as “a second pair of eyes” when reading a woman’s mammogram. Use of this technology provides reviewers with the potential to detect findings that might otherwise be overlooked during the review process, thus increasing cancer detection. We have integrated our mammography applications CAD software tools into our line of multi-modality breast imaging workstations. We also market an MRI CAD product, which manages the data set from an MRI procedure, designed to improve data workflow for the physician and provide analytical tools to aid in the identification and evaluation of the extent of disease.

Stereotactic Breast Biopsy Systems

We provide clinicians with the flexibility of choosing upright or prone systems for breast biopsy by offering two minimally invasive stereotactic breast biopsy guidance systems, the MultiCare Platinum dedicated, prone breast biopsy table and the StereoLoc II upright attachment. The StereoLoc II attachment is used in conjunction with our M-IV series of screen-film mammography systems and our Selenia full field digital mammography systems. These breast biopsy systems provide an alternative to open surgical biopsy, and can be performed as an outpatient procedure under local anesthesia, allowing shorter recovery times.

Breast Biopsy Products

We offer a broad range of minimally invasive products for breast biopsy and site marking. Our breast biopsy technologies, which include a patented fluid management system, enables the removal of tissue under stereotactic x-ray, ultrasound, MRI and molecular breast imaging guidance. Our Automated Tissue Excision and Collection (ATEC) product line includes percutaneous, automatic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy collection systems, a disposable device used to collect samples, and biopsy site markers. The ATEC line of products is designed to accommodate a broad range of clinical and patient presentations. Our Celero product is a vacuum-assisted, spring-loaded, large-core biopsy device designed for use under ultrasound guidance to access hard-to-reach lesions in the axilla, near the chest wall, near implants or behind the nipple. Our Eviva stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy device is our premium device offering several enhanced features, including improved compatibility with the MultiCare Platinum prone breast biopsy table, an integrated firing mechanism, and an integrated, end deploy site marking system.

Breast Brachytherapy Products

The MammoSite Radiation Therapy System is a breast brachytherapy technology that offers accelerated partial breast irradiation (“APBI”) therapy to treat breast cancer. A MammoSite balloon, which is inserted into the surgical cavity remaining after a lumpectomy, delivers a 5-day course of concentrated radiation to the tissue most likely to contain residual cancerous cells following surgery, while reducing radiation exposure to adjacent healthy tissue. We introduced our multi-lumen device, the MammoSite ML radiation therapy system, in the fourth quarter of 2009. The MammoSite ML system allows radiation oncologists to shape the radiation dose for typical cases and treat patients who are otherwise not appropriate candidates for traditional brachytherapy. The MammoSite ML device has a central lumen, similar to the original MammoSite device, and three offset lumens parallel to the central lumen. In addition to allowing greater flexibility in radiation treatment planning, the use of a multiple-lumen device typically results in a higher reimbursement rate.

MammoPad Breast Cushion

Our mammography related products include a proprietary MammoPad breast cushion. The MammoPad cushion is designed to reduce the discomfort women often experience during mammography. The cushion’s grip-like surface also holds breast tissue in place to improve breast positioning. The radiolucent cushion does not interfere with image quality and can be used with both digital and analog mammography.

Photoconductor Coatings

Our AEG Elektrofotografie GmbH (“AEG”) subsidiary is our sole supplier of the amorphous selenium photoconductor coatings employed in our Selenia and Dimensions full-field digital mammography detectors. AEG also develops, manufactures, and sells non-medical selenium and organic photoconductor materials for use in a variety of other electro photographic applications, including copying and printing. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, we closed our organic photoconductor drum coatings manufacturing operations in Shanghai, China, and completed the sale of the capital stock of this operation in the second quarter of fiscal 2010.

Sentinelle Medical MRI Breast Coils and Workstation

Through our acquisition of Sentinelle Medical, we now develop, manufacture and sell a suite of high performance breast MRI coils. MRI coils are antenna receivers that are used to collect radio-frequency information emitted from a patient during an MR imaging procedure. These signals are fed into the MRI magnet system which produces a 3D image from the information. The coils are tuned to specific frequencies and positioned in calculated geometries to provide high quality signal to noise performance of the MRI system. The coils are integrated into various MRI scanning systems, and employ a unique variable coil geometry to obtain improved image quality by positioning the coils in close proximity to the tissue. The coil is not fixed and allows the healthcare provider to adjust positioning to each patient’s unique anatomy. This close positioning results in higher signal to noise ratio and improved image resolution. The improved resolution also enhances guidance for biopsy targeting. We are also developing coils for other indications, including prostate cancer. In addition, Sentinelle Medical sells an MRI CAD workstation designed to simplify workflow and improve diagnostic capabilities.

Diagnostic Products

Our diagnostic product offerings include the ThinPrep System used primarily for cytology applications, such as cervical cancer screening, and the Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test for pre-term birth risk assessment. Our molecular diagnostic reagents are used for a wide variety of DNA and RNA analysis applications based on our proprietary Invader chemistry, including our two HPV tests approved by the FDA in 2009.

ThinPrep System

The ThinPrep System is the most widely used method for cervical cancer screening in the United States. If detected in the pre-cancerous stage, most cervical cancer cases are preventable. The ThinPrep System consists of any one or more of the following: the ThinPrep 2000 Processor, ThinPrep 3000 Processor, ThinPrep Imaging System, and related reagents, filters and other supplies, such as the ThinPrep Pap Test and our proprietary ThinPrep PreservCyt Solution.

The ThinPrep Process. The ThinPrep process begins with the patient’s cervical sample being obtained by the physician using a cervical sampling device that, rather than being smeared on a microscope slide as in a conventional Pap smear, is inserted into a vial filled with our proprietary PreservCyt Solution. This enables most of the patient’s cell samples to be preserved before the cells can be damaged by air drying. The ThinPrep specimen vial is then labeled and sent to a laboratory equipped with a ThinPrep Processor for slide preparation. At the laboratory, the ThinPrep specimen vial is inserted into a ThinPrep Processor, a proprietary sample preparation device which automates the process of preparing cervical slides for staining and microscopic examination.

In the case of manual screening, the cytotechnologist screens each Pap test slide with a microscope to first determine the adequacy of the slide and then to examine the entire slide to differentiate diseased or abnormal cells from normal cells. With the ThinPrep Imaging System, the screening process has been automated to combine the power of computer imaging technology and human interpretive skills. Prior to human review, the ThinPrep Imaging System rapidly scans and locates areas of interest for review. By directing the cytotechnologist to areas of interest on a slide, the system may increase a cytology laboratory’s screening productivity and diagnostic accuracy. In Europe, where laboratories tend to be smaller, processing fewer tests, we also offer lower throughput imaging device, which we introduced in September 2009 to assist in the detection of cervical cancer.

Additional Applications. In addition to serving as a replacement for the conventional Pap smear, the ThinPrep System can also be used for non-gynecological cytology screening applications. Non-gynecological cytology applications include fine-needle aspiration specimens (e.g., breast, thyroid, lung or liver), lavage specimens (e.g., breast, gastrointestinal), body fluids (e.g., urine, pleural fluid, ascitic fluid, pericardial fluid), respiratory specimens (e.g., sputum, brushing of respiratory tracts) and ancillary testing (e.g., cell blocks, immunocytochemistry, special stains).

Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test

The Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test is a patented single-use disposable test used to determine a woman’s risk of preterm birth by detecting the presence of a specific protein, fetal fibronectin, in vaginal secretions during pregnancy. This test is approved by the FDA for use in assessing the risk of preterm birth. The test utilizes a single-use, disposable cassette and is analyzed on our patented instrument, the TLiIQ System.

HPV Offering and InVitro Diagnostics

Invader Chemistry. Our Invader chemistry platform is a DNA probe-based system for highly sensitive detection of specific nucleic acid sequences. It is an accurate and specific method for detecting single-base pair changes, insertions, deletions, gene copy number, infectious agents, and gene expression. Invader reactions can be performed using genomic DNA, amplified RNA, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or real-time PCR products.

HPV Tests. HPV is the most common sexually transmitted disease in the U.S. and is recognized as the cause of most cervical cancer. We offer two HPV tests: the Cervista HPV HR and the Cervista HPV 16/18. These tests employ our proprietary Invader technology and are performed out of the ThinPrep PreservCyt collection vial. The Cervista HPV HR test is an in vitro diagnostic test for the qualitative detection of DNA from the fourteen high-risk HPV types responsible for most cervical disease. The Cervista HPV 16/18 test is an in vitro diagnostic test for the qualitative detection of DNA from HPV types 16 and 18, the types that cause approximately 70% of cervical cancer. We received FDA approval for these two tests in March 2009 and CE mark approval in Europe for Cervista HPV HR in January 2009 and in May 2009 for Cervista HPV 16/18.

Cervista HPV HR has been approved for triaging women with undetermined cervical cytology and co-testing with cervical cytology for women 30 years and older. Our Cervista HPV 16/18 has been approved to be used adjunctively with Cervista HPV HR in combination with cervical cytology to assess the presence of high risk HPV types, as well as to triage women with undetermined cervical cytology results along with our HPV HR test.

We are currently developing a high throughput instrumentation solution for Cervista testing. The instrument in development automates the DNA extraction step in the testing process.

Other Invader Products. Other current clinical diagnostic offerings based upon our Invader chemistry include the following:

•

A molecular assay is cleared for use to identify patients who may be at increased risk of adverse reaction to the chemotherapy drug Camptosar (irinotecan) by detecting and identifying specific mutations in the UGT1A1 gene that have been associated with that risk.

•

Products to assist in the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis, cardiovascular risk and other diseases.

•

Agricultural products.

We also have an active out-licensing and partner program in areas outside of our core business that allows us to further realize the value of the Invader Chemistry.

GYN Surgical Products

Our surgical product offerings include the NovaSure System and the Adiana System.

NovaSure System

The NovaSure System is a minimally-invasive procedure that allows physicians to treat women suffering from excessive menstrual bleeding. The system consists of a disposable device and a controller that delivers

radio frequency, or RF, energy to ablate the endometrial lining of the uterus in order to eliminate or reduce the patient’s bleeding. The NovaSure disposable device is a hand-held, single-use device that incorporates a flexible gold-plated mesh electrode used to deliver the RF energy during the NovaSure procedure. The NovaSure RF Controller generates and delivers the RF energy customized for each patient, monitors several critical treatment and safety parameters, and automatically controls other aspects of the procedure.

The NovaSure System is a “second generation” endometrial ablation therapy approved by the FDA to be performed without drug or surgical pre-treatment. Pre-treatment can be time-consuming, expensive and inconvenient for both patients and physicians and can result in uncomfortable or painful side effects and complications. In contrast, the NovaSure procedure is typically performed as an outpatient procedure in the hospital, ambulatory surgery center or physician’s office and often does not require the use of general anesthesia.

Adiana System

The Adiana System is a minimally invasive procedure for permanent female contraception that requires no incisions and can be performed in the doctor’s office using local anesthesia. Patients are often able to return to work or resume their daily activities within one day. In contrast, tubal ligation, a traditional method of female permanent contraception, requires more invasive surgical procedures, is usually conducted in a hospital under general anesthesia and typically requires several days of recovery.

During the Adiana procedure, a slender, flexible instrument is passed through the body’s natural openings to deliver a low level of RF energy to a small section of each fallopian tube. A tiny, soft insert, about the size of a grain of rice, is then placed in each fallopian tube in the location where the energy was applied. During the three months following the procedure, the patient continues to use temporary birth control while new tissue grows in and around the Adiana inserts, eventually blocking the fallopian tubes. At three months, a special x-ray test (called a hysterosalpingogram or “HSG”) is performed to confirm the fallopian tubes are completely blocked and the patient may begin relying on the Adiana System for permanent contraception. Because the Adiana insert is fully contained within the fallopian tube and does not use metal, the procedure leaves nothing in the uterus that could interfere with future intra-uterine procedures such as endometrial ablation.

Skeletal Health Products

Our skeletal health products include a family of QDR dual energy x-ray bone densitometers and the Sahara Clinical Bone Sonometer and our mini C-arm imaging products.

QDR X-Ray Bone Densitometers

Bone densitometry is the measurement of bone density to assist in the diagnosis and monitoring of osteoporosis and other metabolic bone diseases that can lead to debilitating bone fractures. Osteoporosis is a disease that is most prevalent in post-menopausal women. Our proprietary QDR x-ray bone densitometers incorporate dual-energy x-ray technology to precisely assess bone density of the most important fracture sites, the spine and hip. Since our commercial introduction of the first bone densitometer employing dual-energy x-ray technology in 1987, we have continually improved upon our technology, and the use of dual-energy x-ray technology has become and remains a leading bone densitometry assessment tool. We offer a range of bone densitometers with various features and options to address the requirements of our diverse customer base.

Sahara Clinical Bone Sonometers

We have developed and sell a relatively low-cost, lightweight, portable ultrasound bone analyzer, which assesses the bone density of the heel that can assist in initial screening for osteoporosis.

Mini C-arm Imaging

We manufacture and distribute Fluoroscan mini C-arm imaging systems. Mini C-arms provide low intensity, real-time x-ray imaging, with high-resolution images at radiation levels and at a cost below those of conventional x-ray and fluoroscopic equipment. Mini C-arm systems are used primarily by orthopedic surgeons to perform minimally invasive surgical procedures on a patient’s extremities, such as the hand, wrist, knee, foot and ankle.

Recent Acquisitions

Our strategy to provide a broad range of best-in-class products for screening, diagnosis and treatment to help women lead longer, healthier lives requires a wide variety of technologies, products and capabilities. To achieve this goal, in addition to internally developed growth through research and development efforts, we have obtained products and the necessary specialized expertise in different areas through acquisitions. We expect to continue to make future investments or acquisitions to further strengthen our existing businesses, including our presence in selected geographic markets. Mergers and acquisitions of medical technology companies and companies in diverse geographical locations are inherently risky and we cannot assure that any of our previous or future acquisitions will be successful or will not materially adversely impact our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

In August 2010, we acquired Sentinelle Medical, a Canadian-based company that develops, manufactures and markets MRI breast coils, patient positioners and visualization software. Sentinelle Medical is dedicated to developing advanced imaging and related technologies used in high-field strength MRI systems, including to help in the earlier detection and treatment of breast cancer. Consideration under the terms of the agreement included an up-front payment of $84.8 million, which was net of certain adjustments, and potential additional payments of up to $250 million for the achievement of certain performance milestones based upon incremental increases in revenue over a period of two years following the acquisition.

In July 2008, we acquired Third Wave Technologies, Inc. (“Third Wave”), a company that develops and markets molecular diagnostic reagents for a wide variety of DNA and RNA analysis applications based on its proprietary Invader chemistry. Total consideration for the transaction was $591.1 million, including the payment of direct acquisition costs and the fair value of vested stock options exchanged.

In October 2007, we merged with Cytyc Corporation (“Cytyc”), a company that develops, manufactures and markets innovative and clinically effective diagnostics and surgical products that cover a range of cancer and women’s health applications, including cervical cancer screening, prenatal diagnostics, treatment of excessive menstrual bleeding and radiation treatment of early-stage breast cancer. Total consideration for the transaction was approximately $6.2 billion, including the assumption and settlement of existing Cytyc debt, fair value of vested stock options exchanged and payment of direct acquisition costs.

Additional information pertaining to our acquisitions in fiscal 2010 and 2008 is contained in Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report.

Marketing, Sales and Service

We sell and service our products through a combination of direct sales and service forces and a network of independent distributors and sales representatives. In fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, no customer accounted for more than 10% of our consolidated revenues. In fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, foreign sales accounted for approximately 21%, 20% and 20% of our product sales, respectively. See Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for geographical information concerning those sales.

As of October 23, 2010, our direct sales and service force consisted of approximately 1,571 people.

U.S Marketing and Sales

Our U.S. Breast Health and Skeletal Health sales force is comprised of full line modality account managers selling mammography and bone densitometry products, assisted by women’s health product specialists. Our biopsy and MRI sales specialists, who often work together with account managers, sell breast biopsy devices and breast biopsy site markers to radiologists and breast surgeons, as well as custom MRI coils and patient positioning systems to radiologists. Our territory sales specialists sell both our MammoSite and breast biopsy and site marker products and target breast surgeons and radiation oncologists. In addition to our MRI sales specialists, our Sentinelle Medical MRI business also supports the original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) channel with product specialists and sales support. Our U.S. sales efforts also include the use of national account managers focused on obtaining purchasing contracts from large purchasing entities, such as managed care organizations, integrated delivery networks (“IDNs”) and government healthcare facilities. In addition, in certain regions of the U.S., we use a limited number of independent dealers or distributors to sell and service our product. These relationships enable us to sell into accounts where we might not otherwise have access.

Our U.S. Diagnostics and GYN Surgical sales forces focus on clinical laboratories, healthcare providers, and third-party payors. A critical element of our strategy in the United States has been to utilize the results of our clinical trials and expanded FDA labeling to demonstrate safety, efficacy and productivity improvements to our target customers. Our Diagnotics’ sales force focuses on selling to clinical laboratories and OB/GYN offices, while our GYN Surgical sales force targets GYN surgeons in both hospital and office settings.

International Marketing and Sales

We sell our breast health and skeletal health products in international markets through a network of independent distributors and sales representatives, as well as a direct sales and service force in Belgium, Germany and Australia. We offer our products in Europe, Latin America, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico, and Pacific Rim countries, including China, Japan, Australia, South Korea, Thailand and Taiwan, through local sales representatives and distributors or entering into strategic marketing alliances in those territories.

Our Diagnostics and GYN Surgical products are marketed outside of the United States by maintaining a presence in Canada, Europe, Australia and Hong Kong. We established these operations to manage sales, service, training and distribution in the Canadian, European and Asia/Pacific markets. We also utilize a network of third-party distributors in various other countries throughout the world, including Japan and China. We believe that in order to effectively market our current products and any other new products and applications on a worldwide basis, we will need to continue to increase our international marketing, sales, and service capabilities.

Service

Our service organization is responsible for installing our products and providing warranty and repair services, applications training and biomedical training. Products sold by our direct sales force typically carry limited warranties covering parts and labor for twelve months. Products sold through dealers also carry limited warranties that typically last for twelve months and cover only parts or components. We also offer service contracts to our customers that generally last one to five years after the original warranty period. We provide both repair services and routine maintenance services under these arrangements, and also offer repair and maintenance services on a time and materials basis to customers that do not have service contracts. Internationally, we primarily use distributors, sales representatives and third parties to provide maintenance service for our products.

As of October 23, 2010, we employed approximately 655 people as field service engineers, internal technical support personnel and related administrative personnel.

Competition

The healthcare industry, in general, and the markets in which our products compete are highly competitive and characterized by continual change and improvement in technology. A number of companies have developed, or are expected to develop products that compete or will compete with our products. Many of these competitors offer a range of products in areas other than those in which we compete, which may make these competitors more attractive to hospitals, radiology clients, group purchasing organizations, laboratories, physicians and other potential customers. In addition, many of our competitors and potential competitors are larger and have greater financial resources than we do and offer a range of competitive products broader than our product portfolio. Some of the companies with whom we compete have or may have more extensive research, sales, marketing and manufacturing capabilities and significantly greater technical resources than we do, and may be better positioned to continue to improve their technology in order to compete in an evolving industry. Competitors may develop superior products or products of similar quality for sale at the same or lower prices. Moreover, our products could be rendered obsolete by new industry standards or changing technology. We cannot assure that we will be able to compete successfully with existing or new competitors.

Our mammography and related products and subsystems compete on a worldwide basis with products offered by a number of competitors, including GE, Siemens, Philips, PlanMed, Agfa, Carestream Health, Fuji, IMS Giotto, Sectra and Toshiba. Our full field digital mammography systems compete with products such as GE’s and Siemens’ full field digital mammography systems, as well as Fuji’s Computed Radiography (“CR”) mammography system, a lower-priced alternative to digital mammography. Agfa, Carestream Health, Cedara and Sectra have introduced mammography workstations and are marketing these in competition with our line of radiologist review stations. Other companies are marketing digital mammography systems or technologies in Europe and other international markets, and have or are expected to apply for FDA clearance in the U.S. Recently, the FDA issued a notice that they have down-classified 2D digital mammography systems from Class III to Class II. As a result, it is expected that effective early December 2010, these systems will require a 510(k) submission rather than a PMA, which will make it easier for other mammography vendors to gain approval in the United States. We anticipate that competition in the digital mammography market will intensify as more companies and products enter this market.

While we offer a broad product line of breast imaging and related products, we compete most effectively in the high-end segment of the mammography market. We believe that our continued success will depend upon the continued success of our Selenia and Dimensions full field digital mammography system, as well as our ability to maintain our technology leadership through product enhancements and the development of new products and technologies, such as our Dimensions 3D tomosynthesis product, which is currently sold in Europe and Canada. Our PMA application to market the 3D configuration of this product in the United States is currently under review by the FDA, and on November 22, 2010, we received an approvable letter from the FDA for our Dimensions 3D system. Final approval of our PMA application for our system remains subject to satisfactory review and inspection of our manufacturing facility, methods and controls.

Our Sentinelle Medical MRI breast coils compete primarily with those sold by Invivo, acquired by Philips in 2006, to end users and OEMs, as well as other smaller third party coil designers and the OEMs themselves. We believe that these products compete on the basis of a number of factors including image quality, ease-of-use, product reliability and price.

The primary competitors for our breast biopsy product line are Devicor Medical Products, which acquired the Mammotone product line from Ethicon, a Johnson & Johnson company, and C.R. Bard, which recently acquired SenorRx. In addition, other competitors include CareFushion, Sanarus and Intact Medical. We believe that competition for our breast biopsy product line is based largely on tissue sampling quality, speed of procedure, ease of use, product reliability and price.

Our MammoSite systems face competition from companies also selling accelerated partial breast irradiation products, including C.R. Bard and Cianna Medical, as well as from other technologies, such as treatments using external beam whole breast radiation, which has longer-term data on patient outcomes. Alternative radiation

therapy methods, such as intraoperative radiation therapy, are being used by some institutions; however, such alternative methods have not yet achieved widespread commercial use. The breast brachytherapy market has and will continue to experience certain challenges including downward pressure on procedure volumes due to the continuing adverse economic environment and current trends in breast cancer management, as well as competitive pricing pressures and competition from existing and alternative new technologies.

Our ThinPrep liquid-based slide preparation faces direct competition in the United States primarily from Becton, Dickinson and Company, which manufactures liquid-based slide preparation systems and slide imaging systems. We also compete with the conventional Pap smear and other alternative methods for detecting cervical cancer and/or its precursors. Internationally, our ThinPrep product competes with a variety of companies and other “off-market” (non-FDA-approved) tests, since fewer regulatory barriers exist in most international markets as compared to the United States. Our products compete on the basis of a number of factors, including clinical performance, product quality, marketing and sales capabilities, manufacturing efficiency, price and customer service and support.

With our Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test, we are currently the only provider of a molecular test for predicting the risk of preterm birth. However, this product could experience competition from companies that manufacture and market pregnancy-related diagnostic products and services. In addition, healthcare providers use diagnostic techniques such as clinical examination and ultrasound to diagnose the likelihood of preterm birth. Healthcare providers may choose to continue using these techniques to assess their patients, rather than use the Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test. They may also choose to use these techniques in conjunction with our Rapid Test to predict preterm birth.

In the molecular diagnostics market, our products compete with many companies in the U.S. and abroad engaged in the development, commercialization and distribution of similar products intended for clinical molecular diagnostic applications. These companies may have or develop products competitive with the products offered by us. Clinical laboratories also may offer testing services that are competitive with our products and may use reagents purchased from us or others to develop their own diagnostic tests. Such laboratory-developed tests may not be subject to the same requirements for clinical trials and FDA submission requirements that may apply to our products.

In the clinical market, we compete with several companies offering alternative technologies to the Invader chemistry including Abbott Laboratories, Siemens, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Qiagen, Roche Diagnostics Corporation, Gen-Probe, Applera Corporation, Applied Biosystems, Celera, Innogenetics, Inc., and Luminex Corporation. Our Cervista HPV HR test, which was approved by the FDA in March 2009, compete with a test marketed by Qiagen, which received FDA approval in 1999. In addition, we understand that Roche Diagnostics has submitted a PMA application for a high risk HPV test. We believe the primary competitive factors of our products are their performance, reliability, cost and ease of use. However, we believe the successful completion of our initiative of automating our laboratory products, including our Cervista HPV tests, will be essential to securing the higher volume laboratories as customers.

Our NovaSure System currently faces direct competition from Johnson & Johnson, Boston Scientific and CooperSurgical, each of which currently markets an FDA-approved “second generation” endometrial ablation device for the treatment of excessive menstrual bleeding. In addition to these devices, there exist alternative treatments to our NovaSure System, such as drug therapy, IUDs, hysterectomy, dilation and curettage and rollerball ablation. Internationally our products compete with drug therapy, as well as other endometrial ablation devices, including Johnson & Johnson’s Thermachoice, Boston Scientific’s HTA, and two other relatively small companies that market products that are not FDA approved. Because drug therapy is an alternative to our NovaSure procedure, NovaSure’s competitors also include many major pharmaceutical companies that manufacture hormonal drugs for women. We believe that the success of our NovaSure product has been primarily based upon its efficacy, ease of use, including limited patient pre-treatment requirements, and patient recovery.

Our Adiana System, fully introduced commercially during our recently completed fiscal year, is the only non-incisional, non-hormonal permanent contraception method available that does not leave metal in the uterus potentially limiting future options for gynecological tests or procedures. Our Adiana product competes directly with Conceptus, Inc.’s Essure product, which is the only other option for hysteroscopic sterilization on the market. As a result of its earlier introduction, the Essure product has an established market position. However, we believe the Adiana System has significant advantages in safety and ease of use, including the fact that the Essure product leaves metal in the patient that could interfere with future intra-uterine procedures such as endometrial ablation. In addition, the Adiana System competes with traditional permanent contraception methods, such as tubal ligation and vasectomy, as well as with other products used for temporary birth control methods, such as diaphragms, condoms, spermicides, birth control pills and IUDs.

GE is the primary competitor in the bone densitometry market, and we have faced competition from Orthoscan in the mini-C arm market. We believe that competition for our products in the skeletal health markets in which we participate is based upon product versatility and features, price, precision, speed of measurement, reputation, product reliability, and quality of service.

Manufacturing

We have historically purchased many of the components and raw materials used in our products from numerous suppliers worldwide. For reasons of quality assurance, sole source availability or cost effectiveness, certain components and raw materials used in the manufacture of our products are available only from one supplier. We have worked closely with our suppliers to develop contingency plans to assure continuity of supply while maintaining high quality and reliability, and in some cases, we have established long-term supply contracts with our suppliers. In certain instances, we have developed in-house capability to offset potential shortages caused by sole source suppliers. Due to the high standards and FDA requirements applicable to the manufacturing of our products, we may not be able to quickly establish additional or replacement sources for certain components or materials. In the event that we are unable to obtain sufficient quantities of raw materials or components on commercially reasonable terms or in a timely manner, our ability to manufacture our products on a timely and cost-competitive basis may be compromised, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We manufacture our direct radiography detectors at our manufacturing facilities in Newark, Delaware and Warstein, Germany. We manufacture substantially all of our mammography and certain of our breast biopsy systems at our manufacturing facilities in Danbury, Connecticut. We manufacture our CAD line of products, the SecurView Work Stations, our osteoporosis assessment and our mini C-arm imaging systems at our headquarters in Bedford, Massachusetts. We continue to develop our software for our CAD products at our Santa Clara, California facility. The MammoPad breast cushion is manufactured by third parties and drop-shipped from our suppliers directly to our customers. Our breast biopsy disposable products are manufactured in Indianapolis, Indiana. Our ATEC control consoles for breast biopsy are manufactured by a third party, with quality control performed by our employees. Our Sentinelle Medical MRI breast coils are manufactured at our Toronto, Canada location.

Our ThinPrep Processors and ThinPrep Imaging Systems are assembled at our facility in Marlborough, Massachusetts. Our ThinPrep PreservCyt vials are filled at our facility in Londonderry, New Hampshire. Our ThinPrep System filters are manufactured at both our Marlborough and Londonderry facilities. The manufacture of our NovaSure disposable devices occurs at our facility in Alajuela, Costa Rica. The production of the RF Controller component of our NovaSure System takes place at our Marlborough facility. We contract with several third-parties to manufacture certain components of our MammoSite System, and we complete the manufacturing process at our Costa Rica and/or Marlborough locations, depending on the configuration. We manufacture our Adiana System at our manufacturing facility in Costa Rica, although the Adiana RF Controller, SureSound and the Tower-Free Hysteroscopy System (“THS”) are supplied through third-parties.

We manufacture our molecular diagnostics products at our facility in Madison, Wisconsin and source certain components from various contract manufacturers.

As noted above, we manufacture our products at a number of different facilities located throughout the world. An interruption in manufacturing capabilities at any of these facilities, as a result of equipment failure or other reasons, could reduce, delay or prevent the production of our products. Our manufacturing facilities are subject to the risk of catastrophic loss due to unanticipated events, such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods or weather conditions. Our manufacturing facilities may experience plant shutdowns, strikes or other labor disruptions, or periods of reduced production as a result of equipment failures, loss of power, gray outs, delays in deliveries or extensive damage to any of our facilities, which could harm our business and prospects. Because some of our manufacturing operations are located in Germany and Costa Rica, those manufacturing operations are also subject to additional challenges and risks associated with international operations described below.

Backlog

Our backlog as of November 7, 2010 totaled $274.4 million. Backlog consists of customer orders for which a delivery schedule within the next twelve months has been specified. Orders included in backlog may be canceled or rescheduled by customers without significant penalty. Backlog as of any particular date should not be relied upon as indicative of our net revenues for any future period.

Research and Development

The markets in which we participate are characterized by rapid technological change, frequent product introductions and evolving customer requirements. Investment in research and development is critical to driving our future growth. Our research and development efforts are focused on the further development and improvement of our existing products, the design and development of innovative medical diagnostic and interventional devices, therapeutic applications, and regulatory compliance. During fiscal 2010, our development projects included the ongoing development, clinical trials and other support for the FDA clearance or approval process for our 3D Dimensions product, as well as the development of improvements to next generation laboratory automation and GYN surgical products. We anticipate continuing research and development to support these ongoing efforts.

In addition to product development, our research and development personnel play an active role in the review of product specifications, clinical protocols and FDA submissions, as well as ensuring that certain of our products conform to European health, safety and environmental requirements (“CE” marking). Our research and development expenses were $104.3 million, $102.5 million and $88.2 million in fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. These expenses do not include acquired in-process research and development expenses of $2.0 million and $565.2 million in fiscal 2010 and 2008, respectively.

Patents and Proprietary Rights

We rely primarily on a combination of trade secrets, patents, copyrights and confidentiality procedures to protect our technology. Due to the rapid technological changes that characterize the markets we operate in, we believe that the improvement of existing products, reliance upon trade secrets and unpatented proprietary know-how and the development of new products are generally as important as patent protection in establishing and maintaining a competitive advantage. Nevertheless, we have obtained patents and will continue to make efforts to obtain patents, when available, in connection with our product development program.

We own numerous U.S. patents and have applied for numerous additional U.S. patents relating to our technologies. We also own or have applied for corresponding patents in selected foreign countries. These patents relate to various aspects of most of our products. We do not know if current or future patent applications will be

issued with the scope of the claims sought, if at all, or whether any patents issued will be challenged or invalidated. There is a risk that our patent applications will not be granted or that the patent or patent application will not provide significant protection for our products and technology. Unauthorized third parties may infringe our intellectual property rights, copy or reverse engineer portions of our technology. Our competitors may independently develop similar technology that our patents do not cover. In addition, because patent applications in the U.S. are not generally publicly disclosed until eighteen months after the application is filed, applications may have been filed by third parties that relate to our technology. Moreover, there is a risk that foreign intellectual property laws will not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as intellectual property laws in the U.S. The rights provided by a patent are finite in time. Over the coming years, certain patents relating to current products will expire in the U.S. and abroad thus allowing third parties to utilize certain of our technologies. In the absence of significant patent protection, we may be vulnerable to competitors who attempt to copy our products, processes or technology.

In addition to the patents we have been issued or we have acquired, we license patents from others on a variety of terms and conditions.

We are engaged in intellectual property litigation as described in Item 3, Legal Proceedings, and may be notified in the future of claims that we may be infringing intellectual property rights possessed by other third parties. In connection with any such litigation or if any claims are asserted against us or our products, we may seek to enter into settlement and/or licensing arrangements. There is a risk in these situations that no license will be available or that a license will not be available on reasonable terms. Alternatively, we may decide to litigate such claims or to design around the patented technology. These actions could be costly and would divert the efforts and attention of our management and technical personnel. As a result, any infringement claims by third parties or other claims for indemnification by customers resulting from infringement claims, whether or not proven to be true, may harm our business and prospects.

Regulation

The manufacture, sale, lease and service of medical diagnostic and surgical devices intended for commercial use are subject to extensive governmental regulation by the FDA in the United States and by a variety of regulatory agencies in other countries. Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, known as the FD&C Act, manufacturers of medical products and devices must comply with certain regulations governing the design, testing, manufacturing, packaging, servicing and marketing of medical products. Some of our products are also subject to the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act, administered by the FDA, which imposes performance standards and record keeping, reporting, product testing and product labeling requirements for devices that emit radiation, such as x-rays.

The FDA generally must clear the commercial sale of new medical devices. Commercial sales of our medical devices within the United States must be preceded by either a pre-market notification filing pursuant to Section 510(k) of the FD&C Act or the granting of a PMA. A 510(k) pre-market notification filing must contain information establishing that the device to be sold is substantially equivalent to a device commercially distributed prior to May 28, 1976.

The PMA procedure involves a complex and lengthy testing and review process by the FDA and may require several years to obtain. We may need to first obtain an investigational device exemption, known as an IDE, in order to conduct extensive clinical testing of the device to obtain the necessary clinical data for submission to the FDA. The FDA will grant a PMA only if after evaluating clinical data it finds that the safety and effectiveness of the product has been sufficiently demonstrated. This approval may restrict the number of devices distributed or require additional patient follow-up for an indefinite period of time. In the United States, our Dimensions product has been approved by the FDA for providing conventional 2D images, and we have submitted a PMA application for the 3D configuration. Our Dimensions 3D system was reviewed by the Radiological Devices Panel of the FDA on September 24, 2010 as part of our PMA application. In connection

with that review, the panel unanimously voted that the PMA application demonstrated both the effectiveness and safety of the Dimensions 3D system for both screening and diagnostic mammography. On November 22, 2010, we received an approvable letter from the FDA for our Dimensions 3D system. Final approval of our PMA application for our system remains subject to satisfactory review and inspection of our manufacturing facility, methods and controls. Even with the approvable letter, we cannot assure that the FDA will approve our system for either use on a timely basis, if at all. In addition, even if approved, the FDA could impose conditions to such approval that would significantly limit the use or commercialization of the system.

Sales of medical devices outside of the United States are subject to foreign regulatory requirements that vary widely from country to country. The time required to obtain approval from a foreign country to market and sell our products may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval and the requirements may differ. In addition, we may be required to meet the FDA’s export requirements or receive FDA export approval for export of our products to foreign countries. Moreover, some of our technology is governed by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations of the United States Department of State. As a result, the export of some of our systems to some countries may be limited or prohibited.

Recently, the FDA issued a notice that they have down-classified 2D digital mammography systems from Class III to Class II. As a result, it is expected that effective early December 2010, these systems will require a 510(k) submission rather than a PMA, which will make it easier for other mammography vendors to gain approval in the United States.

Our manufacturing processes and facilities are subject to continuing review by the FDA and foreign governments or their representatives. Adverse findings could result in various actions against us, including withdrawal of approvals and product recall.

The laboratories that purchase our ThinPrep System, ThinPrep Imaging System, Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test and Cervista HPV tests are subject to extensive regulation under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (“CLIA”), which requires laboratories to meet specified standards in the areas of personnel qualifications, administration, participation in proficiency testing, patient test management, quality control, quality assurance and inspections. We believe that the ThinPrep System (including the ThinPrep Imaging System), Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test and Cervista HPV tests operate in a manner that will allow laboratories purchasing these products to comply with CLIA requirements. However, we cannot assure that adverse interpretations of current CLIA regulations or future changes in CLIA regulations would not have an adverse effect on sales of the ThinPrep System, ThinPrep Imaging System, the Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test, and the Cervista HPV tests.

The majority of the current clinical diagnostic products we acquired as part of the Third Wave acquisition were sold as Analyte Specific Reagents, known as ASRs. The FDA restricts the sale of these products to clinical laboratories certified under CLIA to perform high complexity testing and also restricts the types of products that can be sold as ASRs. In 2006, followed by additional clarification in 2007, the FDA issued guidance concerning acceptable examples of reagents that meet the threshold of the ASR regulations. In this guidance, the FDA outlined examples of products and marketing practices that go beyond the scope of the ASR regulations making the reagent part of a test system potentially subject to premarket review. These examples include combining, or promoting for use, a single ASR with another product such as other ASRs, general purpose reagents, controls, laboratory equipment, software, etc., or promoting an ASR with specific analytical or performance claims, instructions for use in a particular test, or instructions for validation of a specific test using the ASR. As a result of this guidance we took appropriate steps to discontinue certain Third Wave products that were previously sold as ASRs. We received investigational device exemptions for the remaining products allowing us the ability to continue commercialization while we obtain FDA clearance through the 510(k) process.

We cannot assure that the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies will give the requisite approvals or clearances for any of our medical devices under development on a timely basis, if at all. Moreover, after clearance is given, these agencies can later withdraw the clearance or require us to change the device or its manufacturing process or labeling, to supply additional proof of its safety and effectiveness, or to recall, repair, replace or refund the cost of the medical device, if it is shown to be hazardous or defective. The process of obtaining clearance to market products is costly and time-consuming and can delay the marketing and sale of our products.

We are subject to various federal and state laws pertaining to healthcare fraud and abuse, including federal and state anti-kickback laws, as well as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”). Anti-kickback laws make it illegal for an entity to solicit, offer, receive, or pay remuneration or anything of value in exchange for, or to induce, the referral of business or the purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any item or service paid for by Medicare, Medicaid or certain other federal and state healthcare programs. The statute has been broadly interpreted to cover a wide array of practices. Some states have passed similar laws and also regulate the interactions with Health Care Providers (“HCP”) as well as the requirement to disclose payments to HCPs. The federal government has published regulations that identify “safe harbors,” which if applicable will assure that certain arrangements will not be found to violate the federal anti-kickback statutes. Similarly, our international operations are subject to the provisions of the FCPA, which prohibits U.S. companies and their representatives from offering, promising, authorizing, or making payments to foreign officials for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of such official in his or her official capacity, inducing the official to do any act in violation of his or her lawful duty, or to secure any improper advantage in obtaining or retaining business. In many countries, the healthcare professionals we regularly interact with may meet the definition of a foreign official for purposes of the FCPA. While we make every effort to comply with applicable law and regulations, it is possible that our practices might be challenged under federal or state anti-kickback, FCPA or similar laws due to the breadth of the statutory provisions and the absence of extensive guidance regarding compliance. Violations of these laws may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, as well as the possibility of exclusion from federal healthcare programs (including Medicare and Medicaid). If the government were to raise questions about our behavior or find that we have violated these laws, there could be a material adverse effect on our business. Our activities could be subject to challenge for the reasons discussed above, due to the broad scope of these laws and the increasing attention being given to them by law enforcement authorities.

We are also subject to numerous federal, state and local laws relating to safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, environmental protection, fire hazard control and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances, among others. We may be required to incur significant costs to comply with these laws and regulations in the future, and complying with these laws may result in a material adverse effect upon our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Federal, state and foreign regulations regarding the manufacture and sale of medical devices and pharmaceuticals are subject to future change. We cannot predict what impact, if any, such changes might have on our business.

Reimbursement

In the U.S., the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, known as CMS, establishes policies for the coverage and reimbursement of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. Under current CMS policies, varying reimbursement levels have been established for bone density assessment, endometrial ablations, mammography and other imaging, diagnostic tests and surgical procedures performed using our products. Coverage policies for Medicare patients may vary by regional Medicare carrier in the absence of a National Coverage Decision and reimbursement rates for procedures will vary based on the geographic price index. Coverage and reimbursement for patients with private insurance is dependent on the individual private payer’s decisions and may not follow the policies and rates established by CMS for Medicare. Moreover, private insurance carriers may choose not to follow the CMS reimbursement policies. The use of our products outside the U.S. is similarly affected by reimbursement policies adopted by foreign regulatory and insurance carriers.

In November 2010, CMS announced 2011 reimbursement rates for physician, hospital and ambulatory surgical center payments. For 2011, as part of US healthcare reform legislation, which was passed on March 23, 2010, reimbursement for bone density screening was adjusted to 70% of the 2006 rates for 2010 and 2011. This resulted in an approximate increase of 60% of the rates published in the 2010 CMS Physician Fee Schedule. However, unless future legislation is adopted, the reimbursement for bone density screening will revert in 2012 to the then CMS Physician Fee Schedule, which could result in a substantial reduction in reimbursement for such screening. The CMS reductions that would affect the reimbursement for the use of our products also include a general reduction of 24% in the Sustainable Growth Rate (“SGR”) factor. This factor is used by CMS in a formula to determine doctor reimbursements. Congress has, from time to time, overridden some or all of the proposed reductions in reimbursement. However, we cannot assure that Congress will override any part of the recent proposed reductions. Significant reductions in reimbursement rates proposed or implemented for the use of any our products has had and may continue to have a material adverse affect on the sales of those products.

Political, economic and regulatory influences, including those envisioned by the recent adoption, in March 2010, of U.S. healthcare reform may subject the healthcare industry to fundamental changes. We anticipate that the federal government and certain state legislatures will continue to review and assess alternative healthcare delivery systems and payment methods with an objective of ultimately reducing healthcare costs and expanding access. Healthcare reform proposals and medical cost containment measures in the United States and in many foreign countries could, among other things, limit the use of our products and treatments and further reduce reimbursement available for such use. These reforms or cost containment measures, including the uncertainty in the medical community regarding their nature and effect, could have an adverse effect on our customers’ purchasing decisions regarding our products and treatments and could harm our business, result of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Employees

As of October 23, 2010, we had approximately 4,220 full-time employees, including 1,606 in manufacturing operations, 500 in research and development, 1,692 in marketing, sales and support services, and 422 in finance and administration. The non-management employees of our AEG subsidiary are represented by a union. AEG’s approximate 205 non-management German employees were subject to collective bargaining agreements negotiated on a national and regional basis between Unternehmens-Verband Südöstliches Westfalen e.V., the Employers Association of North Rhine-Westphalia, and the German Metal Workers Union, IndustrieGewerkschaft Metall. In addition, AEG’s German employees are represented by a works council, a Betriebsrat, with respect to various shop agreements for social matters and working conditions. We believe that our relationship with our employees is good. Except as described herein, none of our other employees are represented by a union.

Seasonality

Worldwide sales, including U.S. sales, do not reflect any significant degree of seasonality; however, customer purchases of our GYN Surgical products have been historically less in the second fiscal quarter of the year as compared to other quarters. In addition, the summer months, which is during our fiscal fourth quarter, typically have had lower order rates for most of our products.

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

This report contains forward-looking information that involves risks and uncertainties, including statements regarding our plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. Such statements made in this report should be read as applicable to all forward-looking statements wherever they appear in this report. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed herein. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include those discussed below, as well as those discussed elsewhere in this report.

Risks Related to our Business

The continuing worldwide macroeconomic uncertainty may adversely affect our business and prospects.

Market acceptance of our medical products in the United States and other countries is dependent upon the medical equipment purchasing and procurement practices of our customers, patient demand for our products and procedures and the reimbursement of patient’s medical expenses by government healthcare programs and third-party payors. The continuing uncertainty surrounding world financial markets and continuing weak worldwide macroeconomic conditions have caused and may continue to cause the purchasers of medical equipment to decrease their medical equipment purchasing and procurement activities. Additionally, constrictions in world credit markets have caused and may continue to cause our customers to experience increased difficulty securing the financing necessary to purchase our products. Economic uncertainty has and may result in cost-conscious consumers making fewer elective trips to their physicians and specialists, which in turn would adversely affect demand for our products and procedures. Furthermore, governments and other third party payors around the world facing tightening budgets could move to further reduce the reimbursement rates or the scope of coverage offered, which could adversely affect sales of our products. If the current adverse macroeconomic conditions continue, our business and prospects may be adversely affected.

Sales and market acceptance of our products is dependent upon the coverage and reimbursement decisions made by third party payors. The failure of third party payors to provide appropriate levels of coverage and reimbursement for the use of our products and treatments facilitated by our products could harm our business and prospects.

Sales and market acceptance of our medical products and the treatments facilitated by our products in the United States and other countries is dependent upon the coverage decisions and reimbursement policies established by government healthcare programs and private health insurers. Market acceptance of our products and treatments has and will continue to depend upon our customers’ ability to obtain an appropriate level of coverage for, and reimbursement from third-party payors for, these products and treatments. In the U.S., the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, known as CMS, establish coverage and reimbursement policies for healthcare providers treating Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. Under current CMS policies, varying reimbursement levels have been established for our products and treatments. Coverage policies for Medicare patients may vary by regional Medicare carriers in the absence of a National Coverage Decision and reimbursement rates for treatments may vary based on the geographic price index. Coverage and reimbursement policies and rates applicable to patients with private insurance are dependent upon individual private payor decisions which may not follow the policies and rates established by CMS. The use of our products and treatments outside the United States is similarly affected by coverage and reimbursement policies adopted by foreign governments and private insurance carriers.

On November 2, 2010, CMS announced 2011 reimbursement rates for physician, hospital and ambulatory surgical center payments. The CMS announcement included many reimbursement reductions, including a general reduction of 24% in the Sustainable Growth Rate (“SGR”) factor impacting physician services reimbursement. This factor is used by CMS in a formula to determine physician reimbursement rates. Significant reductions in reimbursement rates proposed or implemented for the use of any of our products, and uncertainties relating to such reimbursement rates, have had and may continue to have a material adverse affect on the sales of those products.

The adoption of healthcare reform in the United States and the uncertainty surrounding the implementation of these reforms could harm our business and prospects.

In recent years, the healthcare industry has undergone significant change driven by various efforts to reduce costs, trends toward managed care, cuts in Medicare, consolidation of healthcare distribution companies and collective purchasing arrangements by office-based healthcare practitioners. The effect of the implementation of the new U.S. health care reform law adopted in March 2010 on our business is uncertain. Among other things, the law requires the medical device industry to subsidize healthcare reform in the form of a 2.3% excise tax on U.S. sales of certain medical devices beginning in 2013. We expect that this excise tax will apply to our products. U.S. net product sales represented 79% and 80% of our worldwide net product sales in fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively. Various healthcare reform proposals have also emerged at the state level. The new law and these proposals could reduce medical procedure volumes and impact the demand for our products or the prices at which we sell our products. In addition, the excise tax will increase our costs of doing business. The impact of this law and these proposals could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition. Public debate of these issues will likely continue in the future. Healthcare reform proposals and medical cost containment measures in the United States and in many foreign countries could:

•

limit the use of our products and treatments;

•

reduce reimbursement available for such use;

•

further tax the sale or use of our products; or

•

adversely affect the use of new therapies for which our products may be targeted.

These reforms, cost containment measures and new taxes, including the uncertainty in the medical community regarding their nature and effect, could have an adverse effect on our customers’ purchasing decisions regarding our products and treatments and could harm our business, result of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Changes in laws affecting the healthcare industry could adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

We operate in a highly regulated industry. As a result, governmental actions may adversely affect our business, operations or financial condition, including:

•

new laws, regulations or judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or decisions, related to health care availability, method of delivery and payment for health care products and services;

•

changes in the FDA and foreign regulatory approval processes that may delay or prevent the approval of new products and treatments and result in lost market opportunity;

•

changes in FDA and foreign regulations that may require additional safety monitoring, labeling changes, restrictions on product distribution or use, or other measures after the introduction of our products and treatments to market, which could increase our costs of doing business, adversely affect the future permitted uses of approved products or treatments, or otherwise adversely affect the market for our products and treatments; and

•

new laws, regulations and judicial decisions affecting pricing or marketing practices.

We anticipate that the government will continue to scrutinize our industry closely and that additional regulation by governmental authorities may increase compliance costs, exposure to litigation and other adverse effects to our operations.

Guidelines, recommendations and studies published by various organizations can reduce the use of our products.

Professional societies, government agencies, practice management groups, private health/science foundations, and organizations involved in healthcare issues may publish guidelines, recommendations or studies to the healthcare and patient communities from time to time. Recommendations of government agencies or these other groups/organizations may relate to such matters as usage, cost-effectiveness, and use of related therapies. Organizations like these have in the past made recommendations about our products and those of our competitors. Recommendations, guidelines or studies that are followed by patients and healthcare providers could result in decreased use of our products. For example, during calendar 2009, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists changed their recommendations for pap smear screening, and the United States Preventive Services Task Force changed their recommendations for mammography screening. These new recommendations, if implemented, could significantly reduce the amount of screening using our ThinPrep, mammography and related products and adversely affect the sale of those products. Moreover, the perception by the investment community or stockholders that recommendations, guidelines or studies will result in decreased use of our products could adversely affect prevailing market price for our common stock.

Our long-term success will depend upon our ability to successfully develop and commercialize new products and treatments and enhance our existing products and treatments.

We are expending significant resources on our continuing research and development programs which are designed to develop new products and treatments and to enhance and improve our existing products and treatments. The successful development of our products and product enhancements is subject to numerous risks, both known and unknown, including:

•

unanticipated delays in development, clinical trials or the FDA’s approval or clearance process;

•

access to capital;

•

budget overruns;

•

third party intellectual property;

•

technical problems; and

•

other difficulties that could result in the abandonment or substantial change in the design, development and commercialization of these new products, including, for example, changes requested by the FDA in connection with pre-market approval applications for products or 510(k) clearance.

Given the uncertainties inherent with product development, introduction, and enhancement our efforts may not be completed on a timely basis or within budget, if at all. Our failure to develop new products and product enhancements, such as our digital mammography tomosynthesis product, on a timely basis or within budget, if at all, could harm our business and prospects.

If we fail to achieve and maintain the high manufacturing standards that our products require, we may not be successful in developing and marketing those products.

The manufacture of many of our products is highly complex and requires precise high quality manufacturing that is difficult to achieve. We have in the past and may in the future experience difficulties in manufacturing our products in sufficient quantities. These difficulties have primarily related to delays and difficulties associated with ramping up production of newly introduced products. Our difficulties may lead to increased delivery lead-times and increased costs of manufacturing these products. Our failure, including the failure of our contract manufacturers, to achieve and maintain the required high manufacturing standards could result in further delays or failures in product testing or delivery, cost overruns, product recalls or withdrawals, increased warranty costs or other problems that could harm our business and prospects.

Our business could be harmed if products contain undetected errors or defects or do not meet customer specifications.

We are continuously developing new products and improving our existing products. Our existing and newly introduced products can contain undetected errors or defects. In addition, these products may not meet their performance specifications under all conditions or for all applications. If, despite internal testing and testing by customers, any of our products contain errors or defects or fail to meet customer specifications, then we may be required to enhance or improve those products or technologies. We may not be able to do so on a timely basis, if at all, and may only be able to do so at considerable expense. In addition, any significant reliability problems could result in adverse customer reaction, negative publicity, mandatory or voluntary recall or legal claims and could harm our business and prospects.

Our products may be subject to recalls even after receiving FDA clearance or approval, which could harm our business and prospects.

The FDA and similar governmental bodies in other countries have the authority to require the recall of medical products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. A government mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of component failures, manufacturing errors or design defects, including defects in labeling. Any recall could harm the reputation of our products and adversely affect our business and prospects.

Interruptions, delays, shutdowns or damage at our manufacturing facilities could harm our business.

We manufacture our products at a number of different facilities located throughout the world. An interruption in manufacturing capabilities at any of these facilities, as a result of equipment failure or other reasons, could reduce, delay or prevent the production of our products. Our manufacturing facilities are subject to the risk of catastrophic loss due to unanticipated events, such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods or weather conditions. Our manufacturing facilities may experience plant shutdowns, strikes or other labor disruptions, or periods of reduced production as a result of equipment failures, loss of power, gray outs, delays in deliveries or extensive damage to any of our facilities, which could harm our business and prospects. Because some of our manufacturing operations are located in Germany and Costa Rica, those manufacturing operations are also subject to additional challenges and risks associated with international operations described below.

Our delay or inability to obtain any necessary United States or foreign regulatory clearances or approvals for our newly developed products and treatments or product enhancements could harm our business and prospects.

Our products and treatments are subject to a high level of regulatory oversight. Our delay or inability to obtain any necessary United States or foreign regulatory clearances or approvals for our newly developed products or product enhancements, such as our Dimensions digital mammography tomosynthesis product, could harm our business and prospects. The process of obtaining clearances and approvals can be costly and time-consuming. We had previously encountered delays in the FDA approval process relating to the 3D configuration of our Dimensions digital mammography tomosynthesis product and conducted additional clinical trials in support of our application to for a PMA for that product. On September 24, 2010, the Radiological Devices Panel of the FDA unanimously voted that the PMA application demonstrated both the effectiveness and safety of the Dimensions 3D system for both screening and diagnostic mammography. On November 22, 2010, we received an approvable letter from the FDA for our Dimensions 3D system. Final approval of our PMA application for our system remains subject to satisfactory review and inspection of our manufacturing facility, methods and controls. Even with this approvable letter, we cannot assure that we will be able to obtain FDA approval to market the product, or the scope of any such approval, if and when obtained. Additionally, there is a risk that any approvals or clearances, once obtained, may be withdrawn or modified.

Medical devices cannot be marketed in the United States without clearance or approval by the FDA. Any modifications to a device that has received a pre-market approval that affect its safety or effectiveness require a pre-market approval supplement or possibly a separate pre-market approval, either of which is likely to be time-

consuming, expensive and uncertain to obtain. If the FDA requires us to seek one or more pre-market approval supplements or new pre-market approvals for any modification to a previously approved device, we may be required to cease marketing or to recall the modified device until we obtain approval, and we may be subject to significant criminal and/or civic sanctions, including but not limited to, regulatory fines or penalties.

Medical devices sold in the United States must also be manufactured in compliance with FDA Good Manufacturing Practices, which regulate the design, manufacture, packing, storage and installation of medical devices. Moreover, medical devices are required to comply with FDA regulations relating to investigational research and labeling. States may also regulate the manufacture, sale and use of medical devices, particularly those that employ x-ray technology. Our products are also subject to approval and regulation by foreign regulatory and safety agencies.

The markets for our newly developed products and treatments and newly introduced enhancements to our existing products and treatments may not develop as expected.

The successful commercialization of our newly developed products and treatments and newly introduced enhancements to our existing products and treatments are subject to numerous risks, both known and unknown, including:

•

uncertainty of the development of a market for such product or treatment;

•

trends relating to, or the introduction or existence of, competing products, technologies or alternative treatments or therapies that may be more effective, safer or easier to use than our products, technologies, treatments or therapies;

•

perceptions of our products or treatments as compared to other products and treatments;

•

recommendation and support for the use of our products or treatments by influential customers, such as hospitals, radiological practices, breast surgeons and radiation oncologists and treatment centers;

•

the availability and extent of data demonstrating the clinical efficacy of our products or treatments;

•

competition, including the presence of competing products sold by companies with longer operating histories, more recognizable names and more established distribution networks; and

•

other technological developments.

Often, the development of a significant market for a product or treatment will depend upon the establishment of a reimbursement code or an advantageous reimbursement level for use of the product or treatment. Moreover, even if addressed, such reimbursement codes or levels frequently are not addressed until after a product or treatment is developed and commercially introduced, which can delay the successful commercialization of a product or treatment.

If we are unable to successfully commercialize and create a significant market for our products and treatments, such as those noted above, as well as our Dimensions digital mammography tomosynthesis product, due to, among other things, the lack of reimbursement codes or disadvantageous reimbursement levels for such products or treatments, our sales growth, business and prospects could be harmed.

Our business may be harmed by recently completed acquisitions or acquisitions we may complete in the future.

We have acquired a number of businesses, technologies, product lines and products, and may make additional acquisitions in the future. The long-term success of our recently completed acquisitions and any additional acquisitions we may complete in the future will depend upon our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from combining the acquired businesses with our business. We may fail to realize anticipated benefits for a number of reasons, including the following:

•

problems may arise with our ability to successfully integrate the acquired businesses, which may result in us not operating as effectively and efficiently as expected, and may include:

•

diversion of management time, as well as a shift of focus from operating the businesses to issues related to integration and administration or inadequate management resources available for integration activity and oversight;

•

failure to retain and motivate key employees;

•

failure to successfully obtain FDA approval or clearance for products under development;

•

failure to successfully manage relationships with customers, distributors and suppliers;

•

failure of customers to accept new products;

•

failure to effectively coordinate sales and marketing efforts;

•

failure to combine product offerings and product lines quickly and effectively;

•

failure to effectively enhance acquired technology and products or develop new products relating to the acquired businesses;

•

potential difficulties and inefficiencies in managing and operating businesses in multiple locations or operating businesses in which we have either limited or no direct experience;

•

potential difficulties integrating financial reporting systems;

•

potential difficulties in the timely filing of required reports with the SEC; and

•

potential difficulties in implementing controls, procedures and policies, including disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting, appropriate for a larger public company at companies that, prior to the acquisition of such companies, had lacked such controls, procedures and policies, which may result in ineffective disclosure controls and procedures or material weaknesses in internal controls over financial reporting;

•

we may not be able to achieve the expected synergies from an acquisition or it may take longer than expected to achieve those synergies;

•

an acquisition may result in future impairment charges related to diminished fair value of businesses acquired as compared to the price we paid for them;

•

an acquisition may involve restructuring operations or reductions in workforce which may result in substantial charges to our operations;

•

an acquisition may involve unexpected costs or liabilities, or the effects of purchase accounting may be different from our expectations; and

•

the acquired businesses may be adversely affected by future legislative, regulatory, or tax decisions and/or changes as well as other economic, business and/or competitive factors.

Our failure to realize the anticipated benefits from combining acquired businesses could harm our business and prospects and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

If we are successful in pursuing future acquisitions, we may be required to expend significant funds, incur additional debt or issue additional securities, which may negatively affect our results of operations and be dilutive to our stockholders. If we spend significant funds or incur additional debt, our ability to obtain financing for working capital or other purposes could decline, and we may be more vulnerable to economic downturns and competitive pressures. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to finance additional acquisitions or that we will realize any anticipated benefits from acquisitions that we complete.

It may be difficult for us to implement our strategies for improving growth.

Some of the markets in which we compete have been flat or declining over the past several years. To address this issue, we are pursuing a number of strategies to improve our growth, including:

•

expanding our product offerings;

•

allocating research and development funding to products with higher growth prospects;

•

developing new applications for our technologies;

•

strengthening our presence in selected geographic markets;

•

acquiring technologies and businesses that complement or augment our existing products and services;

•

implementing targeted customer initiatives; and

•

supporting cross-selling opportunities of products and services to take advantage of our breadth in product offerings.

We may not be able to successfully implement these strategies, and these strategies may not result in the growth of our business.

Our inability to successfully identify and complete acquisitions or successfully integrate any new or previous acquisitions could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our business strategy includes the acquisition of technologies and businesses that complement or augment our existing products and services. Promising acquisitions are difficult to identify and complete for a number of reasons, including competition among prospective buyers and the need for regulatory, including antitrust, approvals. We may not be able to identify and successfully complete transactions. Any acquisition we may complete may be made at a substantial premium over the fair value of the net assets of the acquired company. Further, we may not be able to integrate any acquired businesses successfully into our existing businesses, make such businesses profitable, or realize anticipated cost savings or synergies, if any, from these acquisitions, which could adversely affect our business. In addition, acquisitions in foreign countries may be more difficult to complete, integrate and operate and could adversely affect our business.

We are dependent upon a relatively small number of large clinical laboratory customers in the United States for a significant portion of our sales of the ThinPrep System and our molecular diagnostic products. Due in part to a trend toward consolidation of clinical laboratories in recent years and the relative size of the largest United States laboratories, it is likely that a significant portion of these sales will continue to be concentrated among a relatively small number of large clinical laboratories. Our business and prospects may be harmed if we are unable to increase sales to, or maintain pricing levels with our existing customers and establish new customers both within and outside the United States.

Our business could be harmed if we are unable to protect our proprietary technology.

We have relied primarily on a combination of trade secrets, patents, and copyrights to protect our products and technology. Despite these precautions, unauthorized third parties may infringe our intellectual property, copy or reverse engineer portions of our technology. We do not know if current or future patent applications will be

issued with the scope of the claims sought, if at all, or whether any patents issued will be challenged or invalidated. In addition, we have obtained or applied for corresponding patents and patent applications in several foreign countries for some of our patents and patent applications. There is a risk that these patent applications will not be granted or that the patent or patent application will not provide significant protection for our products and technology. The rights provided by a patent are finite in time. Over the coming years, certain patents relating to current products will expire in the U.S. and abroad thus allowing third parties to utilize certain of our technologies. Our competitors may independently develop similar technology that our patents do not cover. In addition, because patent applications in the United States are not generally publicly disclosed until eighteen months after the application is filed, applications may have been filed by third parties that relate to our technology. Moreover, there is a risk that foreign intellectual property laws will not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as intellectual property laws in the U.S. Even if we believed our proprietary information is protected by patents or otherwise, the initiation of actions to protect our proprietary information could be costly and divert the efforts and attention of our management and technical personnel, and the outcome of such litigation is often uncertain. As a result of these uncertainties, we could also elect to forego such litigation or settle such litigation without fully enforcing our proprietary rights. In the absence of significant patent protection, we may be vulnerable to competitors who attempt to copy our products, processes or technology.

Our business could be harmed if we infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others.

There has been substantial litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the medical device and related industries. We have been involved in patent litigation, and may in the future be subject to claims of infringement of intellectual property rights possessed by third parties. For further information concerning such ongoing litigation, please refer to Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

In connection with claims of patent infringement, we may seek to enter into settlement and/or licensing arrangements. There is a risk in these situations that no license will be available or that a license will not be available on reasonable terms. Alternatively, we may decide to litigate such claims or to design around the patented technology. These actions could be costly and would divert the efforts and attention of our management and technical personnel. As a result, any infringement claims by third parties or claims for indemnification by customers resulting from infringement claims, whether or not proven to be true, may harm our business and prospects.

Our international operations and foreign acquisitions expose us to additional operational challenges that we might not otherwise face.

We are subject to a number of additional risks and expenses due to our international operations. Any of these risks or expenses could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. These risks and expenses include:

•

difficulties in staffing and managing operations in multiple locations as a result of, among other things, distance, language and cultural differences;

•

protectionist laws and business practices that favor local companies;

•

greater difficulties in trade accounts receivable collection;

•

difficulties and expenses related to implementing internal controls over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures;

•

expenses associated with customizing products for clients in foreign countries;

•

possible adverse tax consequences;

•

the inability to obtain favorable third-party reimbursements;

•

the inability to obtain required regulatory approvals;

•

governmental currency controls;

•

multiple, conflicting and changing government laws and regulations (including, among other things, antitrust and tax requirements, international trade regulations and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act);

•

reduced protection for intellectual property rights in some countries;

•

political and economic changes and disruptions;

•

clone or “knock off” products;

•

the inability to effectively obtain or enforce intellectual property rights;

•

export/import controls; and

•

tariff regulations.

We utilize distributors for a portion of our sales, the loss of which could harm our revenues in the territory serviced by these distributors.

We have strategic relationships with a number of key distributors for sales and service of our products, principally in foreign countries. If these strategic relationships are terminated and not replaced, our revenues and/or ability to service our products in the territories serviced by these distributors could be adversely affected.

Fluctuations in the exchange rates of European currencies and the other foreign currencies in which we conduct our business, in relation to the U.S. dollar, could harm our business and prospects.

We maintain sales and service offices outside the United States, have manufacturing facilities in Germany, Costa Rica and Canada, and conduct business worldwide. The expenses of our international offices are denominated in local currencies, except at our Costa Rica subsidiary, where the majority of business is conducted in U.S. dollars. Our foreign sales may be denominated in local currencies, the Euro or U.S. dollar. Historically, a majority of our sales of capital equipment to international dealers have been denominated in U.S. dollars; however in the second half of fiscal 2010 we began to invoice more of our European sales in the Euro.

Fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates could affect our revenues, cost of goods and operating margins and could result in exchange losses. In addition, currency devaluation can result in a loss if we hold deposits of that currency. In the last few years we have not hedged foreign currency exposures, but we may in the future hedge foreign currency denominated sales. There is a risk that any hedging activities will not be successful in mitigating our foreign exchange risk exposure and may adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on one or only a limited number of suppliers for some key components or subassemblies for our products. This reliance could harm our business and prospects.

We rely on one or only a limited number of suppliers for some key components or subassemblies for our products. Obtaining alternative sources of supply of these components could involve significant delays and other costs and regulatory challenges, and may not be available to us on reasonable terms, if at all. The failure of a component supplier or contract assembler to provide sufficient quantities, acceptable quality and timely components or assembly service at an acceptable price, or an interruption of supplies from such a supplier could harm our business and prospects. Any disruption of supplies of key components could delay or reduce shipments, which could result in lost or deferred sales.

We face intense competition from other companies and may not be able to compete successfully.

A number of companies have developed, or are expected to develop, products that compete or will compete with our products. Some of our competitors are large companies that may enjoy significant competitive advantages over us, including:

•

significantly greater name recognition;

•

established, or larger, distribution networks;

•

additional product lines, and the ability to offer rebates or bundle products to offer discounts or incentives to gain a competitive advantage;

•

more extensive research, development, sales, marketing, manufacturing and financial capabilities; and

•

greater financial resources allowing them to continue to improve their technology in order to compete in an evolving industry.

The markets in which we sell our products are intensely competitive, subject to rapid technological change and may be significantly affected by new product introductions and other market activities of industry participants. Other companies may develop products that are superior to or less expensive, or both, than our products. Improvements in existing competitive products or the introductions of new competitive products may reduce our ability to compete for sales, particularly if those competitive products demonstrate better safety or effectiveness, clinical results, ease of use or lower costs.

If we are unable to compete effectively against existing and future competitors and existing and future alternative treatments, our business and prospects could be harmed.

Our success depends upon our ability to adapt to rapid changes in technology and customer requirements.

The markets for our products have been characterized by rapid technological change, frequent product introductions and evolving customer requirements. These trends will likely continue into the foreseeable future. Our success depends, in part, upon our ability to enhance our existing products, successfully develop new products that meet increasing customer requirements and gain market acceptance. If we fail to do so our products may be rendered obsolete or uncompetitive by new industry standards or changing technology.

Our results of operations are subject to significant quarterly variation.

Our results of operations have been and may continue to be subject to significant quarterly variation. Our results for a particular quarter may also vary due to a number of factors, including:

•

the overall state of healthcare and cost containment efforts;

•

the timing and level of reimbursement for our products domestically and internationally;

•

the development status and demand for our products;

•

the development status and demand for therapies to treat the health concerns addressed by our products and treatments;

•

economic conditions in our markets;

•

foreign exchange rates;

•

the timing of orders;

•

the timing of expenditures in anticipation of future sales;

•

the mix of products we sell and markets we serve;

•

regulatory approval of products;

•

the introduction of new products and product enhancements by us or our competitors;

•

pricing and other competitive conditions;

•

unanticipated expenses;

•

complex revenue recognition rules pursuant to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP);

•

asset impairments; and

•

seasonality of sales of certain of our products.

Customers may also cancel or reschedule shipments. Production difficulties could also delay shipments. Any of these factors also could harm our business and prospects.

Recent changes to reclassify full-field digital mammography to permit 510(k) clearance could increase competition for our digital mammography products.

Some of our activities may subject us to risks under federal and state laws prohibiting “kickbacks” and false or fraudulent claims.

We are subject to the provisions of a federal law commonly known as the Medicare/Medicaid anti-kickback law, and several similar state laws, which prohibit payments intended to induce physicians or others either to refer patients or to acquire or arrange for or recommend the acquisition of healthcare products or services. While the federal law applies only to referrals, products or services for which payment may be made by a federal healthcare program, state laws often apply regardless of whether federal funds may be involved. These laws constrain the sales, marketing and other promotional activities of manufacturers of medical devices by limiting the kinds of financial arrangements, including sales programs, with hospitals, physicians, laboratories and other potential purchasers of medical devices. Other federal and state laws generally prohibit individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payors that are false or fraudulent, or are for items or services that were not provided as claimed. Anti-kickback and false claims laws prescribe civil and criminal penalties (including fines) for noncompliance that can be substantial. Similarly, our international operations are subject to the provisions of the FCPA, which prohibits U.S. companies and their representatives from offering, promising, authorizing, or making payments to foreign officials for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of such official in his or her official capacity, inducing the official to do any act in violation of his or her lawful duty, or to secure any improper advantage in obtaining or retaining business. In many countries, the healthcare professionals we regularly interact with may meet the definition of a foreign official for purposes of the FCPA. While we continually strive to comply with these complex requirements, interpretations of the applicability of these laws to marketing practices is ever evolving and even an unsuccessful challenge could cause adverse publicity and be costly to respond to, and thus could harm our business and prospects. Moreover, our failure to comply with domestic or foreign laws could result in various adverse consequences, including possible delay in approval or refusal to approve a product, recalls, seizures, withdrawal of an approved product from the market, and the imposition of civil or criminal sanctions.

We are subject to the risk of product liability claims relating to our products.

Our business involves the risk of product liability and other claims inherent to the medical device business. If even one of our products is found to have caused or contributed to injuries or deaths, we could be held liable for substantial damages. We maintain product liability insurance subject to deductibles and exclusions. There is a risk that the insurance coverage will not be sufficient to protect us from product and other liability claims, or that product liability insurance will not be available to us at a reasonable cost, if at all. An under-insured or uninsured claim could harm our business and prospects. In addition, claims could adversely affect the reputation of the related product, which could damage that product’s competitive position in the market.

The sale and use of one of our diagnostic products could also lead to the filing of product liability claims if someone were to allege that one of our products contained a design or manufacturing defect that resulted in the failure to detect a disorder for which it was being used to screen, inaccurate test results or caused injuries to a

patient. Any product liability claim brought against us, with or without merit, could result in the increase of our product liability insurance rates or the inability to secure additional coverage in the future. Also, even a meritless or unsuccessful product liability claim could be time consuming and expensive to defend, which could result in a diversion of management’s attention from our business and could adversely affect the perceived safety and efficacy of our products, and could harm our business and prospects.

We use hazardous materials and products.

Our research and development and manufacturing processes involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, such as toxic and carcinogenic chemicals and various radioactive compounds. Although we believe that our safety procedures for handling and disposing of such materials comply with the standards prescribed by federal, state and local regulations, the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be eliminated. In the event of this type of accident, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any such liability could be extensive. We are also subject to substantial regulation relating to occupational health and safety, environmental protection, hazardous substance control, and waste management and disposal. The failure to comply with such regulations could subject us to, among other things, fines and criminal liability.

Our future success depends on the continued services of key personnel.

The loss of any of our key personnel, particularly key research and development personnel, could harm our business and prospects and could impede the achievement of our research and development, operational or strategic objectives. Our success also depends upon our ability to attract and retain other qualified managerial and technical personnel. Competition for such personnel, particularly software engineers and other technical personnel, is intense. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel necessary for the development of our business.

Our failure to manage current or future alliances or joint ventures effectively may harm our business and prospects.

We have entered into alliances, joint ventures or other business relationships. Alliances with certain partners or companies could make it more difficult for us to enter into advantageous business transactions or relationships with others. Moreover, we may not be able to:

•

identify appropriate candidates for alliances or joint ventures;

•

assure that any alliance or joint venture candidate will provide us with the support anticipated;

•

successfully negotiate an alliance or joint venture on terms that are advantageous to us; or

•

successfully manage any alliance or joint venture.

Furthermore, any alliance or joint venture may divert management time and resources. Entering into a disadvantageous alliance or joint venture, failing to manage an alliance or joint venture effectively, or failing to comply with obligations in connection therewith, could harm our business and prospects.

An adverse change in the projected cash flows from our business units or the business climate in which they operate, including the continuation of the current financial and economic downturn, could require us to incur an impairment charge which could have an adverse impact on our operating results.

At least annually we review the carrying value of our goodwill, and for other long-lived assets when indicators of impairment are present, to determine if any adverse conditions exist or a change in circumstances has occurred that would indicate impairment of the value of these assets. Conditions that could indicate impairment and necessitate an evaluation of these assets include, but are not limited to, a significant adverse change in the business climate or the legal or regulatory environment within which we operate. In addition, the

deterioration of a company’s market capitalization significantly below its net book value is an indicator of impairment. We assess goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level and in evaluating the potential impairment of goodwill, we make assumptions regarding the amount and timing of future cash flows, terminal value growth rates and appropriate discount rates.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010 in connection with our annual budgeting process and future revenue forecasting, we determined that indicators of impairment existed in our MammoSite reporting unit as the breastbrachy therapy market has and will continue to experience certain challenges, including the impact of the continued adverse economic environment negatively impacting procedure volume as well as current trends in breast cancer management, competitive pricing pressures and competition from existing and alternative new technologies. This updated market view resulted in us lowering our long-term financial projections. As a result, we performed the first step in the long-lived assets impairment test and compared MammoSite’s forecasted undiscounted cash flows to the carrying value of its net assets, and these cash flows were insufficient to recover MammoSite’s carrying value. Therefore, we determined the fair value of MammoSite’s long-lived assets, which are primarily intangible assets, using a discounted cash flow technique, considering market participant assumptions, and recorded an impairment charge of $143.5 million to write these intangible assets down to their fair value. In addition, under the annual goodwill impairment test, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $76.7 million. For further information of these charges, refer to Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, we performed our annual impairment test of goodwill for our other reporting units, and no additional impairment charges were required. In connection with this review, we identified one reporting unit with a material amount of goodwill that is of higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the impairment test in future reporting periods. Although we use reasonable methodologies for developing assumptions and estimates underlying the fair value calculations used in our impairment tests, these estimates are uncertain by nature and can vary from actual results. It is possible that the continuation of the current global financial and economic uncertainty could negatively affect our anticipated future cash flows, or the discount rates used to value the cash flows for each reporting unit, to such an extent that we could be required to perform an interim impairment test in fiscal 2011. Such a requirement could result in a material impairment charge that would have an adverse impact on our operating results.

During fiscal 2009, driven by a combination of factors, including the deteriorating macro-economic environment, declines in the stock market and the decline of our market capitalization significantly below the book value of our net assets, we performed an interim goodwill impairment test and recorded an aggregate goodwill impairment charge of $2.34 billion in the second quarter of fiscal 2009. This impairment charge was comprised of $1.17 billion for GYN Surgical, $908.3 million for Diagnostics, and $265.9 million for Breast Health. For further information of these charges, please refer to Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report.

Our effective tax rate may fluctuate and we may incur obligations in tax jurisdictions in excess of amounts that have been accrued.

We are subject to income taxes in both the United States and various foreign jurisdictions. We take certain income tax positions on our tax returns that we provide additional taxes for if it is more likely than not they will not withstand challenge by tax authorities. We are subject to ongoing tax audits in various jurisdictions, including the United States, and tax authorities may disagree with certain positions we have taken and assess additional taxes. We regularly evaluate the likely outcomes of these audits in order to determine the appropriateness of our tax provision and tax reserves. However, there can be no assurance that we will accurately predict the outcomes of these audits, and the actual outcomes could have a material impact on our net income of financial condition. In addition, our effective tax rate may be lower or higher than experienced in the past due to numerous factors, including a change in the mix of our profitability from country to country and changes in tax laws. Any of these factors could cause us to experience an effective tax rate significantly different from previous periods or our current expectations, which could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Changes in tax laws or tax rulings could materially impact our effective tax rate. There are several proposals to reform U.S. tax rules being considered by U.S. law makers, including proposals that may reduce or eliminate the deferral of U.S. income tax on our unrepatriated earnings, potentially requiring those earnings to be taxed at the U.S. federal income tax rate, reduce or eliminate our ability to claim foreign tax credits, and eliminate various tax deductions until foreign earnings are repatriated to the U.S. Our future reported financial results may be adversely affected by tax rule changes which restrict or eliminate our ability to claim foreign tax credits or deduct expenses attributable to foreign earnings, or otherwise affect the treatment of our unrepatriated earnings.

Risks Related to our Indebtedness

We have incurred significant indebtedness that limits our operating flexibility, and could adversely affect our operations and financial results and prevent us from fulfilling our obligations.

On December 10, 2007, we issued $1.725 billion of 2.00% convertible notes due 2037, which are unsecured and subordinated to our secured indebtedness. On November 18, 2010, we entered into separate, privately-negotiated exchange agreements under which we retired $450.0 million in aggregate principal of our Original Notes for $450.0 million in aggregate principal of new 2.00% Convertible Exchange Senior Notes due 2037. Following these transactions, $1.275 billion in principal amount of the Original Notes remain outstanding. Our level of indebtedness may:

•

make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to our outstanding indebtedness;

•

increase our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions, including increases in interest rates;

•

require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to interest and principal payments on our indebtedness, which would reduce the availability of our cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, expansion efforts and other general corporate purposes;

•

limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate;

•

place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt; and

•

limit our ability to borrow additional funds for working capital, capital expenditures, general corporate purposes or acquisitions.

If there were an event of default under our convertible notes or a change of control, the holders of the notes may be permitted to cause all amounts outstanding with respect to that debt to be due and payable immediately and may be cross-defaulted to other debt. Our assets or cash flow may not be sufficient to fully repay borrowings under our convertible notes if accelerated upon an event of default, and there is no guarantee that we would be able to repay, refinance or restructure the payments on that debt.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow to service all of our obligations.

Our ability to make payments on our convertible notes or any other of our obligations and to fund planned capital expenditures, strategic transactions and expansion efforts will depend on our ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.

Our business may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow from operations, and we cannot assure that future borrowings will be available to us in amounts sufficient to enable us to pay our indebtedness as such indebtedness matures and to fund our other liquidity needs. If this is the case, we will need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness on or before maturity, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to refinance any of our indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. We may need to implement one or more

alternatives, such as reducing or delaying planned expenses and capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring debt, or obtaining additional equity or debt financing. These financing strategies may not be affected on satisfactory terms, if at all. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness or obtain additional financing, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, will depend on, among other things, our financial condition at the time, restrictions in agreements governing our indebtedness, and other factors, including the condition of the financial markets and the markets in which we compete.

If we do not generate sufficient cash flow from operations, and additional borrowings, refinancings or proceeds of asset sales are not available to us, we may not have sufficient cash to enable us to meet all of our obligations.

Risks Related to our Common Stock and Convertible Notes

Future issuances of common stock and hedging activities may depress the trading price of our common stock and our convertible notes.

Any future issuance of equity securities, including the issuance of shares upon conversion of our convertible notes, could dilute the interests of our existing stockholders, including holders who have received shares upon conversion of our convertible notes, and could substantially decrease the trading price of our common stock and our convertible notes. We may issue equity securities in the future for a number of reasons, including to finance our operations and business strategy (including in connection with acquisitions, strategic collaborations or other transactions), to adjust our ratio of debt to equity, to satisfy our obligations upon the exercise of outstanding warrants or options or for other reasons.

In addition, the price of our common stock could also be affected by possible sales of our common stock by investors who view our convertible notes as a more attractive means of equity participation in our company and by hedging or arbitrage trading activity that we expect to develop involving our common stock. The hedging or arbitrage could, in turn, affect the trading price of our convertible notes, or any common stock that note holders receive upon conversion of their notes.

Future sales of our common stock in the public market or the issuance of securities senior to our common stock could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock and the value of our convertible notes and our ability to raise funds in new securities offerings.

Future sales of our common stock, the perception that such sales could occur or the availability for future sales of shares of our common stock or securities convertible into or exercisable for our common stock could adversely affect the market prices of our common stock and the value of our convertible notes prevailing from time to time and could impair our ability to raise capital through future offerings of equity or equity-related securities. In addition, we may issue common stock or equity securities senior to our common stock in the future for a number of reasons, including to finance our operations and business strategy, to adjust our ratio of debt to equity, satisfy our obligations upon the exercise of options or for other reasons.

Provisions in our charter and bylaws and our stockholder rights plan may have the effect of discouraging advantageous offers for our business or common stock and limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock.

Our charter, bylaws and the provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law include provisions that may have the effect of discouraging or preventing a change in control. In addition, we have a stockholder rights plan that may have the effect of discouraging or preventing a change in control. These provisions could limit the price that our stockholders might receive in the future for shares of our common stock.

Our stock price is volatile.

The market price of our common stock has been, and may continue to be, highly volatile. We believe that a variety of factors could cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate, perhaps substantially, including:

•

new, or changes in, recommendations, guidelines or studies that could affect the use of our products;

•

announcements and rumors of developments related to our business, including changes in reimbursement rates or regulatory requirements, proposed and completed acquisitions, or the industry in which we compete;

•

published studies and reports relating to the comparative efficacy of products and markets in which we participate;

•

quarterly fluctuations in our actual or anticipated operating results and order levels;

•

general conditions in the worldwide economy;

•

announcements of technological innovations;

•

new products or product enhancements by us or our competitors;

•

developments in patents or other intellectual property rights and litigation;

•

developments in relationships with our customers and suppliers; and

•

the implementation of recently adopted healthcare reform legislation and the adoption of additional reform legislation in the future.

The price of our common stock also may be adversely affected by the amount of common stock issuable upon conversion of our Convertible Notes. In addition, in recent years the stock market in general and the markets for shares of “high-tech” companies, have experienced extreme price fluctuations which have often been unrelated to the operating performance of affected companies. Any such fluctuations in the future could adversely affect the market price of our common stock, and the market price of our common stock may decline.

Conversion of our Convertible Notes will dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders, including holders who had previously converted their notes.

To the extent we issue any shares of our common stock upon conversion of our Convertible Notes, the conversion of some or all of our Convertible Notes will dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders, including holders who have received shares of our common stock upon prior conversion of our Convertible Notes. Any sales in the public market of the common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock. In addition, the existence of our Convertible Notes may encourage short selling by market participants because the conversion of our Convertible Notes could depress the price of our common stock.

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

None

Item 2.

Properties

We own and lease the real property identified below. We believe that we have adequate space for our anticipated needs and that suitable additional space will be available at commercially reasonable prices as needed. See the Business and Manufacturing sections above for a description of the products manufactured at the facilities described below.


Principal Properties Owned:	Primary Use	Floor Space
Newark, DE(a)	DirectRay digital detector research and development and plate manufacturing operations	164,000 sq. ft.
Warstein, Germany	AEG’s manufacturing operations, research and development and administrative functions	201,000 sq. ft.
Londonderry, NH	Manufacturing operations	2.7 acres of land and 47,000 sq. ft.

Principal Properties

Leased:

Primary Use

Floor Space

Lease
Expiration
(fiscal year)

Renewals

Bedford, MA

Headquarters, including research and development, administrative and manufacturing operations

207,000 sq. ft.

2022

4, five-yr. periods

Danbury, CT

Lorad manufacturing facility

62,000 sq. ft.

2022

4, five-yr. periods

Marlborough, MA

Administrative, research and development, manufacturing and distribution operations

216,000 sq. ft.

2019

2, five-yr. periods

Marlborough, MA

Manufacturing operations

146,000 sq. ft.

2019

2, five-yr. periods

Danbury, CT

Manufacturing operations and research and development

60,000 sq. ft.

2013

2, five-yr. periods

Alajuela,Costa Rica

Manufacturing facility

164,000 sq. ft.

2018

2, five-yr. periods

Madison, WI

Manufacturing operations and research and development

62,000 sq. ft.

2014

None

(a)	We currently occupy approximately 59,000 square feet of this building, which houses our plate manufacturing facility, including both a Class 1 and a Class 2 clean room. We lease approximately 105,000 square feet of the facility to Siemens under a lease which expires in April 2015.

We lease other facilities utilized for office space and manufacturing and distribution operations across the United States, Europe, Canada and Hong Kong. We also lease several sales and service offices throughout the world.

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

On May 22, 2009, Conceptus, Inc. filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California seeking a declaration by the Court that Hologic’s planned importation, use, sale or offer to sell of its forthcoming Adiana Permanent Contraception System would infringe five Conceptus patents. On July 9, 2009, Conceptus filed an amended complaint alleging infringement of the same five patents by the Adiana System. The complaint seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and unspecified monetary damages. In addition to the amended complaint, Conceptus also filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to preliminarily enjoin sales of the Adiana System based on alleged infringement of certain claims of three of the five patents. A hearing on Conceptus’ preliminary injunction motion was held on November 4, 2009, and on November 6, 2009, the judge issued an order denying the motion. On January 19, 2010, upon stipulation of the parties, the Court dismissed all claims relating to three of the five asserted patents with prejudice. A Markman hearing on claim construction took place on March 10, 2010 and a ruling was issued on March 24, 2010. On April 12, 2010, in

response to Hologic’s counterclaims of unfair competition filed in October of 2009, the Court granted Conceptus leave to amend its counterclaims adding charges of unfair competition. On June 23, 2010, upon stipulation of the parties, the Court dismissed the asserted claims of an additional patent leaving three claims of U.S. patent 7,506,650 being asserted against the Company in the case. On August 10, 2010, the parties entered into a settlement agreement dismissing all unfair competition claims against each other. Both parties have filed motions for summary judgment and a hearing on these motions is scheduled for December 9, 2010. A trial date has been scheduled for February 28, 2011 for the remaining patent claim. Based on available information regarding this litigation, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome of this case.

The Company is a party to various other legal proceedings and claims arising out of the ordinary course of its business. The Company believes that except for those described above there are no other proceedings or claims pending against it the ultimate resolution of which would have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.

PART II

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information. Our common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “HOLX.” The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices per share of our common stock, as reported by the Nasdaq Global Select Market.


Fiscal Year Ended September 25, 2010	High		Low
First Quarter	$	16.96	$	13.26
Second Quarter		19.72		14.46
Third Quarter		18.85		13.85
Fourth Quarter		16.93		13.22

Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2009	High		Low
First Quarter	$	19.95	$	10.54
Second Quarter		14.52		9.31
Third Quarter		15.91		11.36
Fourth Quarter		17.83		12.52

Number of Holders. As of November 17, 2010, there were approximately 1,548 holders of record of our common stock, including multiple beneficial holders at depositaries, banks and brokers listed as a single holder in the street name of each respective depositary, bank or broker.

Dividend Policy. We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock, and we have no plans to do so. Our current policy is to retain all of our earnings to finance future growth.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities. We did not sell unregistered securities during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010.

Issuer’s Purchases of Equity Securities. For the majority of restricted stock units granted, the number of shares issued on the date that the restricted stock units vest is net of the minimum statutory tax withholding requirements that we pay in cash to the appropriate taxing authorities on behalf of our employees. The following table sets forth information about repurchases of our common stock to cover employee income tax withholding obligations in connection with the vesting of restricted stock units under our equity incentive plans for the three months ended September 25, 2010 (shares in thousands):


Period of Repurchase	Total Number of Shares Purchased		Average Price Paid Per Share		Total Number of Shares Purchased As Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Program
June 27, 2010—July 24, 2010		—		—		—
July 25, 2010—August 21, 2010		63	$	14.14		—
August 22, 2010—September 25, 2010		47		14.80		—

Total		110	$	14.42		—

Stock Performance Graph

The following graph compares cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock since September 24, 2005 with the cumulative total return of the Russell 1000 Index and the Standard & Poor’s Health Care Supplies Index. This graph assumes the investment of $100 on September 24, 2005 in our common stock, the Russell 1000 Index and the S&P Health Care Supplies Index. Measurement points are the last trading day of each respective fiscal year.

COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*

Among Hologic, Inc., the Russell 1000 Index

and the S&P Health Care Supplies Index

LOGO

*	$100 invested on 9/24/05 in stock or index, including reinvestment of dividends.

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data.

The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, beginning on page F-1. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, we acquired Sentinelle Medical Inc. (“Sentinelle Medical”). In the first and fourth quarters of fiscal 2008, we acquired Cytyc Corporation (“Cytyc”) and Third Wave Technologies, Inc. (“Third Wave”), respectively. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, we acquired BioLucent, Inc. (“BioLucent”). In fiscal 2006, we acquired AEG Elektrofotografie (“AEG”), R2 Technology, Inc. (“R2”) and Suros Surgical, Inc. (“Suros”), and we also acquired the intellectual property relating to Fischer Imaging Corporation’s mammography business. Results of operations for each of these businesses are included in our consolidated financial statements from the date of acquisition.


	Fiscal Years Ended
	September 25, 2010 (4)			September 26, 2009 (3)			September 27, 2008 (2)			September 29, 2007		September 30, 2006 (1)
	(In thousands, except per share data)
*Consolidated Statement of Operations Data*
Total revenues	$	1,679,552		$	1,637,134		$	1,674,499		$	738,368	$	462,680
Total costs and expenses	$	1,609,615		$	3,653,808		$	1,872,041		$	590,616	$	412,341
Net (loss) income	$	(62,813	)	$	(2,216,642	)	$	(415,588	)	$	94,578	$	27,423
Basic net (loss) income per common share	$	(0.24	)	$	(8.64	)	$	(1.69	)	$	0.88	$	0.29
Diluted net (loss) income per common share	$	(0.24	)	$	(8.64	)	$	(1.69	)	$	0.86	$	0.28

*Consolidated Balance Sheet Data*
Working capital	$	656,969		$	489,335		$	352,703		$	220,568	$	123,493
Total assets	$	5,625,834		$	5,684,226		$	8,126,812		$	1,066,349	$	856,205
Line of credit		—			—			—			—	$	55,000
Long-term obligations (5)	$	1,479,379		$	1,545,528		$	1,774,834		$	9,222	$	6,163
Total stockholders’ equity	$	2,698,549		$	2,725,977		$	4,895,936		$	805,723	$	605,750

(1)

Included in total costs and expenses in fiscal 2006 is a charge of $4.2 million for in-process research and development from the acquisition of Fischer Imaging Corporation, a charge of $0.6 million for in-process research and development from the acquisition of AEG, a charge of $10.2 million for in-process research and development from the acquisition of R2 and a charge of $4.9 million for in-process research and development from the acquisition of Suros.

(2)	Included in total costs and expenses in fiscal 2008 is a charge of $370.0 million for in-process research and development from the acquisition of Cytyc and a charge of $195.2 million for in-process research and development from the acquisition of Third Wave.

(3)	Included in total costs and expenses in fiscal 2009 is an aggregate goodwill impairment charge of $2.34 billion comprised of $1.17 billion for GYN Surgical, $908.3 million for Diagnostics and $265.9 million for Breast Health.

(4)

Included in total costs and expenses in fiscal 2010 are impairment charges of $143.5 million for intangible assets and $76.7 million for goodwill, both of which are related to our MammoSite reporting unit within Breast Health. Also included in total costs and expenses is $11.4 million of net charges for litigation-related settlements.

(5)	Long-term obligations are net of the unamortized debt discount related to our convertible notes of $277.9 million, $351.1 million and $418.8 million for fiscal years 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the information described under the caption “Risk Factors” included elsewhere in this report.

OVERVIEW

Our skeletal health products include dual-energy X-ray bone densitometry systems, an ultrasound-based osteoporosis assessment product, and our Fluoroscan mini C-arm imaging products.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Market acceptance of our medical products in the United States and other countries is dependent upon the medical equipment purchasing and procurement practices of our customers, patient demand for our products and procedures and the reimbursement of patients’ medical expenses by government healthcare programs, private insurers or other healthcare payors. Since the end of calendar 2008, the uncertainty surrounding world financial markets and slowdown in worldwide macroeconomic conditions have caused and may continue to cause the purchasers of medical equipment to decrease their medical equipment purchasing and procurement activities. Additionally, constrictions in world credit markets have caused and continue to cause our customers to experience difficulty securing the financing necessary to purchase our products. Economic uncertainty and unemployment have and may continue to result in cost-conscious consumers focusing on acute care rather than wellness, which has and may continue to adversely affect demand for our products and procedures. Furthermore, governments and other third party payors around the world facing tightening budgets could move to further reduce the reimbursement rates or the scope of coverage offered, which could adversely affect sales of our products. If the current adverse macroeconomic conditions continue, our business and prospects may be negatively impacted.

In March 2010, significant reforms to the healthcare system were adopted as law in the United States. The law includes provisions that, among other things, reduce and/or limit Medicare reimbursement, require all individuals to have health insurance (with limited exceptions) and imposes new and/or increased taxes. Specifically, the law requires the medical device industry to subsidize healthcare reform in the form of a 2.3% excise tax on U.S. sales of certain medical devices beginning in 2013. We expect that our products will fall under the government classification requiring the excise tax. U.S. net product sales represented 79% and 80% of our worldwide net product sales in fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively.

As we operate in a highly regulated industry, other governmental actions may adversely affect our business, operations or financial condition, including, without limitation: new laws, regulations or judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or decisions, related to health care availability, method of delivery and payment for health care products and services; changes in the FDA and foreign regulatory approval processes that may delay or prevent the approval of new products and result in lost market opportunity; changes in FDA and foreign regulations that may require additional safety monitoring, labeling changes, restrictions on product distribution or use, or other measures after the introduction of our products to market, which could increase our costs of doing business, adversely affect the future permitted uses of approved products, or otherwise adversely affect the market for our products and treatments; new laws, regulations and judicial decisions affecting pricing or marketing practices; and changes in the tax laws relating to our operations, including those associated with the recently adopted healthcare reform law discussed above, could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.

Professional societies, government agencies, practice management groups, private health/science foundations, and organizations involved in healthcare issues may publish guidelines, recommendations or studies to the healthcare and patient communities from time to time. Recommendations of government agencies or these other groups/organizations may relate to such matters as usage, cost-effectiveness, and use of related therapies. Organizations like these have in the past made recommendations about our products and those of our competitors. Recommendations, guidelines or studies that are followed by patients and healthcare providers could result in decreased use of our products. For example, in November 2009, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists changed their recommendations for pap smear screening, and the United States Preventive Services Task Force changed their recommendations for mammography screening. These new recommendations could significantly reduce the amount of screening using our ThinPrep, Selenia and related products and adversely affect the sale of those products.

In recent history, there have been periodic significant fluctuations in foreign currencies relative to the U.S. dollar. The ongoing fluctuations of the value of the U.S. dollar may cause our products to be less competitive in international markets and may impact sales and profitability over time. Historically, a majority of our capital

equipment sales to international dealers have been denominated in U.S. dollars. However, we expect there to be a shift to more sales denominated in the Euro compared to the U.S. dollar for our Euro zone dealers. In addition, we have international sales, principally in our Diagnostics segment, that are denominated in foreign currencies. The value of these sales is also impacted by fluctuations in the value of the U.S. dollar. Given the uncertainty in the worldwide financial markets, foreign currency fluctuations may be significant in the future, and if the U.S. dollar strengthens, we may experience a material adverse effect on our international revenues and operating results.

ACQUISITIONS

Fiscal 2010 Acquistions:

Sentinelle Medical Inc.

On August 5, 2010, we completed our acquisition of Sentinelle Medical, a privately held company located in Toronto, Canada. The purchase price is comprised of an $84.8 million cash payment, which was net of certain adjustments, plus a two-year contingent earn out up to a maximum of $250.0 million in cash. We have concluded that the acquisition of Sentinelle Medical did not represent a material business combination and therefore no pro forma financial information has been provided herein. Subsequent to the acquisition date, our results of operations include the results of Sentinelle Medical, which is a component of our Breast Health reporting segment. We adopted Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 805, Business Combinations, effective September 27, 2009 and have accounted for the Sentinelle Medical acquisition as a purchase of a business under this business combination accounting standard.

The allocation of the purchase price is based upon preliminary estimates of the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of August 5, 2010. The purchase price in excess of net tangible assets acquired was allocated to identifiable intangible assets aggregating $67.6 million, primarily comprised of developed technology of $60.9 million and in-process research and development projects of $4.8 million, based upon a detailed valuation that relies on projections and assumptions. The excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed was allocated to goodwill of $48.9 million.

The amount allocated to acquired in-process research and development represented the estimated fair value of in-process projects based on risk-adjusted cash flows utilizing a discount rate of 17%. These in-process projects had not yet reached technological feasibility and had no future alternative uses as of the date of the acquisition. The primary basis for determining the technological feasibility of these projects was obtaining regulatory approval to market the underlying products. The acquired in-process research and development assets are not subject to amortization until the projects are complete, at which time, they will be amortized over their estimated remaining useful lives ranging from 10 to 20 years. These projects relate to a prostrate MRI coil and certain software, and the projects are expected to be completed in fiscal 2011 at a cost of approximately $1.0 million. If the projects are not successful or completed in a timely manner, we may not realize the financial benefits expected for these projects or for the transaction as a whole.

The contingent earn out will be based on a multiple of incremental revenue growth during the two-year period following the completion of the acquisition. As required by ASC 805, we have recorded an estimate of the fair value of the contingent consideration liability based on future revenue projections of the Sentinelle Medical business under various potential scenarios and weighted probability assumptions of these outcomes. These cash flow projections have been discounted using a rate of 16.5%. This analysis resulted in an initial contingent consideration liability of $29.5 million, which will be adjusted periodically as a component of operating expenses based on changes in fair value of the liability, primarily driven by assumptions pertaining to the achievement of the defined revenue growth milestones. This fair value measurement is based on significant inputs not observable in the market and thus represents a Level 3 measurement as defined in ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements. As of September 25, 2010, there were no significant changes in the estimated outcomes for the contingent consideration recognized. Actual amounts paid may differ from the liability recorded.

Fiscal 2008 Acquisitions:

Third Wave Technologies, Inc.

On July 24, 2008, we completed our acquisition of Third Wave pursuant to a definitive agreement dated June 8, 2008. We paid $11.25 per share of Third Wave, for an estimated aggregate purchase price of $591.1 million, including $8.1 million for the estimated fair value of fully vested stock-based awards and $7.6 million in acquisition-related expenses. We concluded that the acquisition of Third Wave did not represent a material business combination and therefore no pro forma financial information has been provided herein. Our results of operations include the results of Third Wave since the acquisition date, as a component of our Diagnostics reporting segment.

Our acquisition of Third Wave was accounted for using the purchase method of accounting, and the total purchase price was allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on our estimate of their fair values as of the date of the acquisition. The excess of purchase price over those fair values was recorded as goodwill. As a result of this acquisition, we recorded a $195.2 million charge for acquired in-process research and development in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, and we have recorded additional amortization expense for the acquired intangible assets and additional interest expense on the funds we borrowed to complete the acquisition in both fiscal 2009 and 2008.

The allocation of the purchase price was based upon preliminary estimates of the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of July 24, 2008. We finalized the allocation of the purchase price in fiscal 2009 once we had all necessary information to complete our estimates. The purchase price in excess of net tangible assets acquired was allocated to identifiable intangible assets, including in-process research and development, based upon a detailed valuation that relies on information and assumptions further described below. The excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed was allocated to goodwill.

As part of the purchase price allocation, $195.2 million of the purchase price was allocated to acquired in-process research and development projects. The amounts allocated to acquired in-process research and development represents programs for which some research and development has been completed, but technological feasibility has not been determined or FDA approval is pending. The amount allocated to acquired in-process research and development represents the estimated fair value based on risk-adjusted cash flows related to these projects using a discount rate of 20%. The primary basis for determining the technological feasibility of these projects was obtaining regulatory approval to market the underlying products. The fair value attributable to these in-process projects was expensed at the time of the acquisition. If the projects are not successful or completed in a timely manner, we may not realize the financial benefits expected for these projects or for the transaction as a whole.

The most significant acquired in-process technology related to the Cervista HPV HR screening, for which we estimated a value of $151.2 million. At the time of, and subsequent to the acquisition, we sold HPV reagents that detect certain high risk HPV types as Analyte Specific Reagents (“ASRs”). In 2006, Third Wave began clinical trials for PMA submissions to the FDA for Cervista HPV HR. Third Wave submitted the PMAs in April 2008 and received FDA approval in the second quarter of fiscal 2009. Since receiving FDA approval, we have begun to transition to only selling HPV IVDs. The HPV in-process research and development related only to the HPV IVDs and the HPV ASRs were valued as developed technology.

The estimated cost to complete Third Wave’s remaining in-process research and development projects as of September 25, 2010 in the aggregate was approximately $2.8 million.

On July 17, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated credit agreement with Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and certain other lenders and borrowed $540.0 million under that facility to finance our acquisition of Third Wave. We paid off amounts outstanding under this amended and restated credit agreement in fiscal 2010 and terminated this agreement in third quarter of fiscal 2010.

Cytyc Corporation

On October 22, 2007, we completed our merger with Cytyc, pursuant to which Cytyc became our wholly-owned subsidiary. Under the terms of the merger agreement, Cytyc shareholders received 1.04 shares of our common stock and $16.50 in cash for each share of Cytyc common stock held by them. The aggregate consideration we paid for Cytyc, including liabilities assumed in connection with the transaction, was $6.2 billion comprised as follows:

•

merger consideration paid to the former Cytyc stockholders of $5.8 billion, consisting of approximately $2.1 billion in cash and approximately 132.0 million shares of our common stock with an estimated fair value of approximately $3.7 billion;

•

16.5 million of fully vested stock options issued upon conversion of Cytyc stock options with an estimated fair value of approximately $241.4 million;

•

the assumption of obligations of Cytyc under its 2.25% Senior Convertible Notes due 2024 with a principal amount outstanding as of October 22, 2007 of approximately $73.0 million and an estimated fair value of approximately $125.0 million; and

•

direct acquisition costs of $24.2 million.

In connection with the merger, we entered into a credit agreement relating to a senior secured credit facility with Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and certain other lenders, in which the lenders committed to provide, in the aggregate, senior secured financing of up to approximately $2.55 billion to pay for the cash portion of the merger consideration, for repayment of existing debt of Cytyc, for expenses relating to the merger and for working capital following the completion of the merger. As of the closing of the merger, we borrowed $2.35 billion under the credit facility. In December 2007, we refinanced a substantial portion of this credit facility through the issuance of 2.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2037 in the principal amount of $1.725 billion. On July 17, 2008, after having paid off all outstanding term loans under the credit facility, we amended and restated the credit facility to finance our acquisition of Third Wave.

Our merger with Cytyc was accounted for using the purchase method of accounting, and we were considered to be the acquirer of Cytyc for accounting purposes. Our results of operations after completion of the merger include the operations of Cytyc. As a result of the acquisition, we recorded an in-process research and development of $370.0 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2008.

We allocated the purchase price to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on our estimate of their estimated fair values. We then allocated the purchase price in excess of net tangible assets acquired to identifiable intangible assets, including in-process research and development, based upon a detailed valuation that relies on information and assumptions further described below. The excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed was allocated to goodwill.

Identifiable Intangible Assets

As part of the purchase price allocation, we determined that Cytyc’s identifiable intangible assets included existing technology, customer relationships and trade names. Cytyc’s existing technology related to patents, patent applications and know-how with respect to the technologies embedded in its currently marketed products. In determining the allocation of the purchase price to existing technology, consideration was only given to patent and patent applications that relate to products that have been approved by the FDA. Cytyc’s customer relationship assets relate to relationships that Cytyc’s sales force has developed with OB/GYNS, breast surgeons, clinical laboratories and other physicians. The trade names related to both the Cytyc name as well as key product names.

We used the income approach to value the existing technology and marketing based intangibles. This approach calculates fair value by discounting the after-tax cash flows back to a present value. The baseline data for this analysis was the cash flow estimates used to price the transaction. Cash flows were forecasted for each intangible asset, and then discounted based on an appropriate discount rate. The discount rates applied were benchmarked with reference to the implied rate of return from the transaction model as well as Cytyc’s weighted average cost of capital based on the capital asset pricing model.

In estimating the useful life of the acquired assets, we considered ASC 350, Intangible—Goodwill and Other, Subsection 30-35-3, which lists the pertinent factors to be considered when estimating the useful life of an intangible asset. These factors included a review of the expected use by the combined company of the assets acquired, the expected useful life of another asset (or group of assets) related to the acquired assets, legal, regulatory or other contractual provisions that may limit the useful life of an acquired asset or may enable the extension of the useful life of an acquired asset without substantial cost, the effects of obsolescence, demand, competition and other economic factors, and the level of maintenance expenditures required to obtain the expected future cash flows from the asset. We are amortizing these intangible assets over their estimated useful lives either using a method that is based on estimated future cash flows as we believe this will approximate the pattern in which the economic benefits of the assets will be utilized, or on a straightline basis if those cash flows are not reliably determinable.

In connection with our review of long-lived assets, we recorded a $143.5 million intangible asset impairment charge related to our MammoSite reporting unit, which was acquired in the merger with Cytyc and is within our Breast Health segment, in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010. See the Critical Accounting Policies below for additional information pertaining to the impairment analysis.

Acquired In-Process Research and Development

As part of the purchase price allocation for our merger with Cytyc, we allocated $370.0 million of the purchase price to acquired in-process research and development projects. The amount allocated to acquired in-process research and development represented the estimated fair value based on risk-adjusted cash flows related to in-process projects that had not yet reached technological feasibility and had no alternative future uses as of the date of the merger. The primary basis for determining the technological feasibility of these projects was obtaining regulatory approval to market the underlying products. The fair value attributable to these in-process projects was expensed at the time of the merger. If the projects are not successful or completed in a timely manner, we may not realize the financial benefits expected for these projects or for the transaction as a whole.

The fair value assigned to acquired in-process research and development was determined by estimating the costs to develop the acquired technology into commercially viable products, estimating the resulting net cash flows from the projects, and discounting the net cash flows to their present value. The revenue projections used to value the acquired in-process research and development was based on estimates of relevant market sizes and growth factors, expected trends in technology, and the nature and expected timing of new product introductions by us and our competitors. The resulting net cash flows from such projects were based on our estimates of cost of sales, operating expenses, and income taxes from such projects.

The rates utilized to discount the net cash flows to their present value were based on estimated cost of capital calculations and the implied rate of return from the transaction model plus a risk premium. Due to the nature of the forecasts and the risks associated with the developmental projects, appropriate risk-adjusted discount rates were used for the in-process research and development projects. The discount rates were based on the stage of completion and uncertainties surrounding the successful development of the purchased in-process technology projects.

The acquired in-process research and development of Cytyc related to the following research and development projects: Adiana System and expanded labeling of the NovaSure System, Gestiva, the ThinPrep Imaging System, the ThinPrep Processor and Helica.

The most significant acquired in-process technology related to the Adiana System for which we estimated a value of approximately $220.0 million. The system is an incisionless trans-cervical permanent sterilization device intended to be used during an office or hospital based procedure. In January 2008, the FDA requested an additional year of clinical trial data for the product, and in July 2009, we received FDA approval for the product.

On January 16, 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our rights to Gestiva, a drug being developed to be used in the prevention of preterm birth in pregnant women with a history of spontaneous preterm birth, to K-V Pharmaceutical Company (KV) for a total purchase price of $82.0 million. We subsequently amended the agreement with KV to increase the purchase price to $199.5 million. For additional information, refer to the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of this management discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations. We had allocated $53.4 million to acquired in-process research for this product as part of the initial purchase price allocation.

Subsequent to the merger with Cytyc, we decided to discontinue the development of Cytyc’s Helica Thermal Coagulator System product. We will not incur any further costs or realize any future cash flows from this product. Our intangible asset valuation for Cytyc included $2.9 million related to customer relationships for Helica. As a result of the Helica product discontinuation, we recorded an impairment charge of $2.9 million during the first quarter of fiscal 2008.

The other in-process research and development projects we acquired in our merger with Cytyc were at different stages of development, ranging from the early stages of development to Phase IIb prototype building, ongoing clinical trials and submission to the FDA of PMA and drug applications. FDA approval or clearance had not been granted for any of the products classified as in-process research and development, nor had Cytyc received any foreign approvals or clearances for any of these products. All products classified as in-process research and development require various levels of in-house and external testing, clinical trials and approvals from the FDA before these future products can be marketed. The estimated cash requirements to complete the remaining products as of September 25, 2010 were expected to be approximately $2.4 million.

The successful development of new products and product enhancements is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, both known and unknown, including, unanticipated delays, access to capital, budget overruns, technical problems and other difficulties that could result in the abandonment or substantial change in the design, development and commercialization of these new products and enhancements, including, for example changes requested by the FDA in connection with PMA or NDA applications for products or 510(k) notification. Given the uncertainties inherent with product development and introduction, we cannot provide assurance that any of our product development efforts will be successful on a timely basis or within budget, if at all. Our failure to develop new products and product enhancements on a timely basis or within budget could harm our results of operations and financial condition.

Goodwill

The purchase price allocation for Cytyc initially resulted in goodwill of approximately $3.84 billion. The factors contributing to the recognition of this amount of goodwill were based upon several strategic and synergistic benefits that were expected to be realized from the combination. These benefits included the expectation that our complementary products and technologies would create a leading women’s healthcare company with an enhanced presence in hospitals, private practices and healthcare organizations. We also expected to realize substantial synergies through the use of Cytyc’s OB/GYN and breast surgeon sales channel to cross-sell our existing and future products. Our merger with Cytyc provided us broader channel coverage within the United States and expanded geographic reach internationally, as well as increased scale and scope for further expanding operations through product development and complementary strategic transactions.

In connection with our fiscal 2010 annual goodwill impairment test, performed on the first day of our fiscal fourth quarter, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $76.7 million related to our MammoSite reporting

unit. As a result of our interim impairment analysis of goodwill as of December 27, 2008, we recorded an impairment charge of $2.34 billion related to the goodwill from the merger with Cytyc. See the Critical Accounting Policies below for additional information pertaining to the interim impairment analysis of our goodwill.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the percentage of total revenues represented by items as shown in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. All dollar amounts in tables are presented in thousands.


	Fiscal Years Ended
	September 25, 2010			September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008
Revenues:
Product sales		84.2	%		87.2	%		89.7	%
Service and other revenues		15.8			12.8			10.3

		100.0			100.0			100.0

Costs and expenses:
Cost of product sales		29.0			28.3			31.6
Cost of product sales—amortization of intangible assets		10.2			9.5			5.7
Cost of product sales—impairment of intangible assets		7.3			0.2			—
Cost of service and other revenues		9.6			9.6			9.4
Research and development		6.2			6.3			5.3
Selling and marketing		14.7			14.6			15.6
General and administrative		8.8			8.6			8.4
Amortization of intangible assets		3.3			3.1			1.5
Impairment of goodwill		4.6			142.9			—
Impairment of intangible assets		1.2			—			0.2
Litigation-related settlement charges, net		0.7			—			—
Acquired in-process research and development		0.1			—			33.7
Restructuring and divestiture charges		0.1			0.0			0.4

		95.8			223.2			111.8

Income (loss) from operations		4.2			(123.2	)		(11.8	)
Interest income		0.1			0.1			0.3
Interest expense		(7.6	)		(8.2	)		(7.9	)
Other income (expense) income, net		0.1			(0.2	)		(0.1	)

Loss before income taxes		(3.2	)		(131.5	)		(19.5	)
Provision for income taxes		0.5			3.9			5.3

Net loss		(3.7	)%		(135.4	)%		(24.8	)%

Fiscal Year Ended September 25, 2010 Compared to Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2009

Product Sales.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010					September 26, 2009					Change
	Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount			%
Product Sales
Breast Health	$	525,622		31	%	$	553,065		34	%	$	(27,443	)		(5	)%
Diagnostics		548,832		33	%		544,143		33	%		4,689			1	%
GYN Surgical		281,364		17	%		263,187		16	%		18,177			7	%
Skeletal Health		59,082		3	%		66,591		4	%		(7,509	)		(11	)%

	$	1,414,900		84	%	$	1,426,986		87	%	$	(12,086	)		(1	)%

In fiscal 2010, our product sales decreased $12.1 million, or 1%, compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to a decrease of $27.4 million in our Breast Health products and to a lesser extent a $7.5 million decline in Skeletal Health products partially offset by increases in GYN Surgical and Diagnostic products of $18.2 million and $4.7 million, respectively.

Breast Health product sales decreased 5% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to a $13.9 million decline in digital mammography systems revenues principally due to product mix as we sold a greater number of defeatured Selenia systems, which have lower average selling prices than our full featured models, a shift to a higher level of international sales, and to a lesser extent, we experienced slight pressure on average selling prices. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in the number of units sold of our new 2D/3D Dimensions systems. The decline in revenue is also due to phasing out the supply of digital detectors to an OEM and closing our AEG organic photoconductor drum coatings manufacturing operations in Shanghai, which in aggregate accounted for $17.5 million in revenues in fiscal 2009. These decreases were partially offset by a $9.3 million increase in revenues due to higher volumes of our breast biopsy products, offset in part by a slight reduction in average selling prices for these products. We also generated $2.4 million in revenues from sales of MRI breast coils through our acquisition of Sentinelle Medical in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010.

Diagnostics product sales increased 1% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to an increase in sales of our Cervista HPV tests, and to a lesser extent other molecular tests. Partially offsetting these increases was a decrease in ThinPrep pap test volume domestically due to the decline in doctor visits, which we believe is attributable to the lagging effects of unemployment, continuing economic uncertainty and recent changes in cervical cancer screening guidelines to extend the recommended intervals between such screenings, and the discontinuance of certain molecular ASRs, which contributed $3.5 million of revenue in 2009. In addition, we have seen laboratory consolidation, which impacts our average selling prices due to volume purchase discounts to the larger laboratories.

GYN Surgical product sales increased 7% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to growing sales of the Adiana System, which was approved by the FDA in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, and to a lesser extent, an increase in the number of NovaSure products sold. We also experienced a slight increase in NovaSure average selling prices.

Skeletal Health product sales decreased 11% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to a decrease in mini C-arms sales of $4.6 million as a result of a reduction in the number of units sold. In addition, there was a $3.6 million decrease in osteoporosis assessment product sales principally due to a decrease in the number of bone densitometry systems sold worldwide. This product line has experienced a difficult capital equipment environment worldwide and the ongoing effects of the reduction in reimbursement for osteoporosis exams in the U.S. Recently the reimbursement situation improved, which may benefit future demand for this product line.

In fiscal 2010, approximately 79% of product sales were generated in the United States, 12% in Europe, 5% in Asia, and 4% in other international markets. In fiscal 2009, approximately 80% of product sales were generated in the United States, 12% in Europe, 4% in Asia, and 4% in other international markets.

Service and Other Revenues.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010					September 26, 2009					Change
	Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		%
Service and Other Revenues	$	264,652		16	%	$	210,148		13	%	$	54,504		26	%

Service and other revenues are primarily comprised of revenue generated from our field service organization to provide ongoing service, installation and repair of our products. Service and other revenues increased 26% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily in our Breast Health business due to an increase in the number of service contracts driven by an increase in our installed base of our full field digital mammography systems.

Cost of Product Sales.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010					September 26, 2009					Change
	Amount		% of Product Sales			Amount		% of Product Sales			Amount		%
Cost of Product Sales	$	487,057		34	%	$	463,066		33	%	$	23,991		5	%
Cost of Product Sales—Amortization of Intangible Assets		171,447		12	%		155,519		11	%		15,928		10	%
Cost of Product Sales—Impairment of Intangible Assets		123,350		9	%		4,065		0	%		119,285		2,934	%

	$	781,854		55	%	$	622,650		44	%	$	159,204		26	%

Product sales gross margin decreased to 45% in fiscal 2010 compared to 56% in fiscal 2009 primarily due to the significant intangible asset impairment charge of $123.4 million recorded in fiscal 2010.

Cost of Product Sales. The cost of product sales as a percentage of product sales in fiscal 2010 was 34% compared to 33% in fiscal 2009. Cost of product sales as a percentage of product revenues increased across our business segments, except Skeletal Health which remained relatively flat with the prior year. The decline in gross margin in the current year was driven by a shift in product mix of our Selenia digital mammography systems to lower margin configurations, a higher level of international sales, and a slight reduction in average selling prices in our Breast Health segment. In addition, we experienced unfavorable manufacturing variances related to our Adiana System and lower absorption of manufacturing costs.

Cost of Product Sales—Amortization of Intangible Assets. Amortization of intangible assets relates to acquired developed technology. These intangible assets are generally being amortized over their estimated useful lives of between 8.5 and 20 years using a straight-line method or, if reliably determinable, based on the pattern in which the economic benefits of the assets are expected to be consumed. The increase in amortization in fiscal 2010 is due to the method of recognition based on the expected economic benefits of the underlying assets, and is primarily related to the intangible assets acquired in the Cytyc merger in the first quarter of fiscal 2008.

Cost of Product Sales—Impairment of Intangible Assets. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010 in connection with our Company-wide annual budgeting and strategic planning process, we determined that indicators of impairment existed in our MammoSite reporting unit due to changing market conditions for the

breast brachytherapy market, including downward pressure on procedure volumes due to the continuing adverse macroeconomic environment and current trends in breast cancer management, as well as competitive pricing pressures and competition from existing and alternative new technologies. These factors resulted in lowering our financial projections for MammoSite. We performed the first step in the long-lived assets impairment test and compared MammoSite’s forecasted undiscounted cash flows to the carrying value of its net assets, which indicated that these cash flows were insufficient to recover MammoSite’s carrying value. Therefore, we determined the fair value of MammoSite’s long-lived assets, which are primarily intangible assets, using a discounted cash flow technique. Based on the fair value of the long-lived assets, we recorded an impairment charge of $123.4 million to developed technology in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010. During the second quarter of fiscal 2009, we decided to discontinue selling a certain product acquired in the Third Wave acquisition, which was an indicator of impairment, and therefore, we performed an impairment test. Due to the insufficient cash flows to be generated, the Company determined that the related asset group’s fair value was de minimus and recorded an impairment charge of $4.1 million comprised of developed technology of $2.6 million and capitalized license fees of $1.5 million.

Cost of Service and Other Revenues.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010					September 26, 2009					Change
	Amount		% of Service and Other Revenues			Amount		% of Service and Other Revenues			Amount		%
Cost of Service and Other Revenues	$	161,060		61	%	$	156,998		75	%	$	4,062		3	%

Service and other revenues gross margin has improved to 39% in fiscal 2010 from 25% in fiscal 2009 due in part to the improved absorption of fixed service costs as a result of the continued growth of service contract revenue, primarily in the Breast Health business. We have been able to convert a high percentage of our domestic installed base of full field digital mammography systems to service contracts upon the expiration of the warranty period.

Operating Expenses.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010					September 26, 2009					Change
	Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount			%
Operating Expenses
Research and Development	$	104,305		6	%	$	102,453		6	%	$	1,852			2	%
Selling and Marketing		247,374		15	%		238,977		15	%		8,397			4	%
General and Administrative		148,340		9	%		140,700		9	%		7,640			5	%
Amortization of Intangible Assets		54,858		3	%		51,210		3	%		3,648			7	%
Impairment of Goodwill		76,723		5	%		2,340,023		143	%		(2,263,300	)		(97	)%
Impairment of Intangible Assets		20,117		1	%		—		—			20,117			100	%
Litigation-related Settlement Charges, Net		11,403		1	%		—		—			11,403			100	%
Acquired In-process Research and Development		2,000		0	%		—		—			2,000			100	%
Restructuring and Divestiture Charges		1,581		0	%		797		0	%		784			98	%

	$	666,701		40	%	$	2,874,160		176	%	$	(2,207,459	)		(77	)%

Research and Development Expenses. Research and development expenses increased 2% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 due to an increase in clinical trial costs, primarily related to our tomosynthesis product,

the addition of expenses from Sentinelle Medical since August 5, 2010 (the acquisition date), compensation and benefits, and engineering programs for a number of projects for product enhancements and new products. These increases were offset in part by a reduction of pre-release production costs that were incurred in fiscal 2009 related to the Adiana System that are no longer being incurred due to its FDA approval and commercial release in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009. Research and development primarily reflects spending on new product development programs, regulatory compliance and clinical research and trials. At any point in time, we have a number of different research projects and clinical trials being conducted and the timing of these projects and related costs can vary period to period.

Selling and Marketing Expenses. Selling and marketing expenses increased 4% in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to higher distributor and third-party commissions, additional expenses related to recently released products, trade shows and website marketing partially offset by lower compensation and expenditures for advertising and medical education. We expect to incur additional expenses in fiscal 2011 with the launch of our direct-to-consumer advertising campaign for our NovaSure product.

General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses increased 5% primarily due to higher legal fees related to increased litigation related activities, principally the Ethicon and SenoRx lawsuits, and higher employee compensation and benefits principally due to a transition payment to the former CEO of $1.7 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2010 and related continuing retention compensation, an increase in the value of our Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”), and increased bonuses, offset slightly by lower costs from the departure of certain employees that were not replaced. In addition, transaction costs related to acquisitions are now recorded as an expense and not capitalized as part of the purchase price, increasing general and administrative expenses in fiscal 2010. The increase in general and administrative expenses was partially offset by lower fees for accounting, tax and other consulting services, lower bad debt expense, and lower charges for the write-off of certain corporate-related fixed assets in fiscal 2010.

Amortization of Intangible Assets. Amortization of intangible assets results from customer relationships and trade names related to our acquisitions. These intangible assets are generally being amortized over their estimated useful lives of between 2 and 30 years using a straight-line method or, if reliably determinable, based on the pattern in which the economic benefits of the assets are expected to be consumed.

Impairment of Goodwill. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, in connection with performing our Company-wide annual budgeting and forecasting process, we determined that indicators of impairment existed in our MammoSite reporting unit and recorded intangible asset impairment charges discussed above and below. The fair value of this reporting unit declined from fiscal 2009 primarily due to our reassessment of the overall market size of breast brachytherapy and a reduction in long-term growth projections. After determining the fair values of MammoSite’s long-lived assets, other than goodwill, and writing these assets down to their fair values, we performed the 2-step goodwill impairment test for MammoSite. As a result of this analysis, we recorded a $76.7 million goodwill impairment charge. No other reporting units were deemed to be impaired in fiscal 2010. During the first quarter of fiscal 2009, based upon a combination of factors, including the deteriorating macro-economic environment, declines in the stock market and the decline of our market capitalization significantly below the book value of our net assets, we concluded that potential goodwill impairment indicators existed as of December 27, 2008. As a result, we performed an interim goodwill impairment analysis as of December 27, 2008. Step 1 of the impairment analysis indicated that the carrying value of the net assets of certain of our reporting units, acquired in connection with the Cytyc acquisition, exceeded the estimated fair value of those reporting units. As a result, we were required to complete Step 2 of the impairment analysis to determine the amount, if any, of goodwill impairment charges. We completed Step 2 of this analysis during the second quarter of fiscal 2009 and recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $2.34 billion in the three month period ended March 28, 2009. Refer to Note 2—“Intangible Assets and Goodwill” contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information.

Impairment of Intangible Assets. As noted above under Cost of Product Sales—Impairment of Intangible Assets, we determined that the long-lived assets in the MammoSite reporting unit were impaired. As a result of

this analysis, we recorded a $20.1 million charge to write down customer relationships and trade name intangible assets to their fair values. Refer to Note 2—“Intangible Assets and Goodwill” contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information.

Litigation-Related Settlement Charges, Net. These charges are primarily comprised of our litigation with Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. (“Ethicon”), a Johnson & Johnson operating company. We had been engaged in litigation in which Ethicon had alleged patent infringement by our ATEC biopsy system of certain of their patents, and Ethicon had made similar claims of our Eviva biopsy system. On February 17, 2010, we entered into a settlement agreement with Ethicon, and all outstanding litigation between the parties was dismissed. In connection with the settlement agreement, we agreed to make a one-time payment to Ethicon of $12.5 million and ongoing royalties for sales of our ATEC and EVIVA products, and Ethicon agreed to pay us ongoing royalties for sales of its Mammotome magnetic resonance imaging product.

Acquired In-Process Research and Development Expenses. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, we acquired certain assets that were determined to have no future alternative use and recorded a $2.0 million charge within our Diagnostics segment.

Restructuring and Divestiture Charges. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, we terminated the employment of certain employees in connection with completing the Sentinelle Medical acquisition and recorded severance and related benefit costs of $0.9 million. Certain employees will also receive stay bonuses, which are being recorded over the required service period. The terminations occurred prior to September 25, 2010. During the second quarter of fiscal 2010, we completed the sale of the capital stock of our organic photoconductor drum coating manufacturing operation in Shanghai, China for a net sales price of $3.8 million resulting in a loss on disposal of $0.3 million. During the fourth quarter of 2009, we closed this manufacturing operation due to Chinese government requirements to move the facility. In connection with this action, we recorded restructuring costs for severance benefits and other costs of $0.8 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009. In fiscal 2010, we incurred clean-up and closure costs of $0.3 million, net.

Interest Income.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010		September 26, 2009		Change
	Amount		Amount		Amount		%
Interest Income	$	1,278	$	1,161	$	117		10	%

Interest income increased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to an increase in invested balances partially offset by a decline in interest rates.

Interest Expense.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010			September 26, 2009			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount		%
Interest Expense	$	(127,107	)	$	(134,957	)	$	7,850		6	%

Interest expense consists primarily of the interest costs and the related amortization of the debt discount of our 2.00% Convertible Notes as well as the amortization of deferred financing costs. In fiscal 2010, we adopted a new accounting standard, FASB Staff Position APB 14-1, Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash Settlement) (FSP APB 14-1) (codified within Accounting Standards Codification 470, Debt), that changed the accounting for convertible debt instruments with

cash settlement features and required us to allocate a portion of our Convertible Notes to equity based on the relative fair value of the embedded conversion feature in our Convertible Notes. This component is recorded as a debt discount and is amortized to interest expense. This new accounting standard was retrospectively applied to prior periods (see Note 5(a) contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for additional information). In addition, we incurred interest costs and the related amortization of deferred financing costs of our senior secured credit agreement. Interest expense decreased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to paying down the outstanding principal amounts under our senior secured credit agreement, which were fully paid off in the third quarter of this year, partially offset by higher overall interest expense on our Convertible Notes due to using the effective interest method to amortize the debt discount.

Other Income (Expense), net.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010		September 26, 2009			Change
	Amount		Amount			Amount		%
Other Income (Expense), net	$	901	$	(3,660	)	$	4,561		125	%

In fiscal 2010, this account was primarily comprised of an increase in the cash surrender value of life insurance contracts related to our SERP of $1.3 million, which is driven by changes in stock market valuation, an increase related to non-income tax related government credits of $0.8 million partially offset by the write-off of a cost-method investment of $1.1 million due to an other-than-temporary impairment charge. In fiscal 2009, this account was primarily comprised of other-than-temporary impairment charges of cost-method investments of $2.2 million and foreign currency transaction losses of $2.3 million, offset by a $0.7 million increase in the cash surrender value of life insurance contracts related to our SERP.

Provision for Income Taxes.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010		September 26, 2009		Change
	Amount		Amount		Amount			%
Provision for Income Taxes	$	7,822	$	62,512	$	(54,690	)		(87	)%

Our effective tax rate for fiscal 2010 was 14.2% of the pre-tax loss compared to 2.9% of the pre-tax loss in fiscal 2009. Our effective tax rate for fiscal 2010 was significantly impacted by the $76.7 million goodwill impairment charge recorded in the fourth quarter, substantially all of which was not deductible for tax purposes. The effective tax rate for fiscal 2009 was significantly impacted by the $2.34 billion goodwill impairment charge recorded in the second quarter of fiscal 2009, substantially all of which was not deductible for tax purposes.

We anticipate an effective tax rate of approximately 35% to 36% of pre-tax earnings in fiscal 2011.

Segment Results of Operations

We report our business as four segments: Breast Health, Diagnostics, GYN Surgical and Skeletal Health. The accounting policies of the segments are the same as those described in the footnotes to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report. We measure segment performance based on total revenues and operating income or loss. Revenues from product sales of each of these segments are described in further detail above. The discussion that follows is a summary analysis of total revenues and the primary changes in operating income or loss by segment.

Breast Health.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010			September 26, 2009			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount		%
Total Revenues	$	755,542		$	728,884		$	26,658		4	%

Operating Loss	$	(93,623	)	$	(122,559	)	$	28,936		24	%

Operating Loss as a % of Segment Revenue		(12	)%		(17	)%

Breast Health revenues increased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to a $54.1 million increase in service revenues that is substantially related to additional service contracts for the increased number of Selenia systems in our installed base partially offset by the decrease in product revenues of $27.4 million discussed above.

The operating loss for this business segment decreased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to a $220.2 million intangible asset and goodwill impairment charge related to our MammoSite reporting unit recorded in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to the $265.9 million goodwill impairment charge related to our MammoSite reporting unit recorded in the second quarter of fiscal 2009. Excluding the impact of these goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges, operating income decreased $16.8 million in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to the $12.5 million litigation settlement charge recorded in the second quarter of fiscal 2010 for the settlement of the Ethicon matter discussed above. Overall, our gross margins declined significantly to 31% due to the intangible asset impairment charge to write down developed technology related to our MammoSite reporting unit. Excluding this impairment, gross margins were relatively flat at 47% in both the current and prior year periods. Gross margin was positively impacted by an improved service revenues gross margin as a result of our relatively fixed cost structure to support service contracts, which was partially offset by a reduction in product gross margin to 54% from 58% in fiscal 2009 primarily due to a shift in product mix of our Selenia digital mammography systems to lower margin configurations, a higher level of international sales, and slight pressure on average selling prices. In addition, the increase in service revenues, which have lower gross margins than product sales, resulted in overall lower gross margins. The fiscal 2010 operating loss included higher clinical trial expenses principally related to clinical trials for our tomosynthesis product, increased litigation costs and higher third-party commissions compared to fiscal 2009. Fiscal 2010 also included Sentinelle Medical operating expenses and acquisition related transaction costs and charges aggregating approximately $5.0 million.

Diagnostics.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010			September 26, 2009			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount		%
Total Revenues	$	552,501		$	547,892		$	4,609		1	%

Operating Income (Loss)	$	100,469		$	(809,640	)	$	910,109		112	%

Operating Income (Loss) as a % of Segment Revenue		18	%		(148	)%

Diagnostics revenues increased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to product sales discussed above.

Operating income for this business segment in fiscal 2010 increased compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to a $908.3 million goodwill impairment charge and a $4.1 million intangible asset charge recorded in the second

quarter of fiscal 2009. Excluding the impact of these charges, operating income was essentially flat in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 due to lower operating expenses, which declined $7.5 million, partially offset by a reduction in gross margin to 53% from 55%. Gross margin declined primarily due to lower absorption of manufacturing costs as a result of lower volumes of ThinPrep, and higher intangible asset amortization expense. Gross margin in fiscal 2009 included a $4.1 million intangible asset charge. Operating expenses declined due to lower legal expenses, lower employee compensation and benefits as a result of the departure of certain senior personnel. Operating expenses in fiscal 2010 included an acquired in-process research and development charge of $2.0 million for the acquisition of certain assets which had no future alternative use.

GYN Surgical.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010			September 26, 2009			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount		%
Total Revenues	$	283,142		$	264,900		$	18,242		7	%

Operating Income (Loss)	$	53,071		$	(1,097,685	)	$	1,150,756		105	%

Operating Income (Loss) as a % of Segment Revenue		19	%		(414	)%

GYN Surgical revenues increased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to the increase in product sales discussed above.

The operating loss in this segment in fiscal 2009 included a $1.17 billion goodwill impairment charge recorded in the second quarter of fiscal 2009. Excluding the impact of the goodwill impairment charge, operating income in fiscal 2010 decreased $15.1 million compared to fiscal 2009 due to a reduction in gross margin to 61% from 67% and higher operating expenses of $10.6 million compared to the corresponding period in the prior year. The decrease in gross margin is primarily due to unfavorable manufacturing variances related to the Adiana System, higher manufacturing and material costs related to our next generation NovaSure product and higher intangible asset amortization expense. Operating expenses increased primarily due to higher compensation costs for sales and marketing personnel as a result of an increase in headcount, higher commissions driven by an increase in revenues, and higher intangible asset amortization expense. In addition, we had higher Adiana System product launch activities as FDA approval was received in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009.

Skeletal Health.


	Years Ended
	September 25, 2010			September 26, 2009			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount			%
Total Revenues	$	88,367		$	95,458		$	(7,091	)		(7	)%

Operating Income	$	10,020		$	13,210		$	(3,190	)		(24	)%

Operating Income as a % of Segment Revenue		11	%		14	%

Skeletal Health revenues decreased in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 primarily due to the decline in product sales discussed above.

Operating income for this business segment decreased primarily due to lower sales and higher operating expenses. Gross margin in fiscal 2010 was relatively flat at 42% compared to 41% in fiscal 2009.

Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2009 Compared to Fiscal Year Ended September 27, 2008

Product Sales.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009					September 27, 2008					Change
	Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount			%
Product Sales
Breast Health	$	553,065		34	%	$	731,267		44	%	$	(178,202	)		(24	)%
Diagnostics		544,143		33	%		474,633		28	%		69,510			15	%
GYN Surgical		263,187		16	%		219,305		13	%		43,882			20	%
Skeletal Health		66,591		4	%		77,242		5	%		(10,651	)		(14	)%

	$	1,426,986		87	%	$	1,502,447		90	%	$	(75,461	)		(5	)%

In fiscal 2009, our product sales decreased 5% compared to fiscal 2008, primarily due to a $178.2 million decrease in revenues from our Breast Health products and, to a lesser extent, a $10.7 million decrease in revenues from our Skeletal Health products, partially offset by increased revenues in our Diagnostics and GYN Surgical segments of $69.5 million and $43.9 million, respectively. These increases were due in part to a full year of revenue for these segments in fiscal 2009 compared to the inclusion of only 49 weeks of operating results for fiscal 2008 as we acquired these segments with the Cytyc merger on October 22, 2007. Included in the increased Diagnostics’ revenue is additional revenue from Third Wave of $31.2 million. We acquired Third Wave in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008 and as such had a full year of revenue in fiscal 2009 compared to 11 weeks in fiscal 2008.

Breast Health product sales decreased 24% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008, primarily due to a $150.0 million decrease in digital mammography systems sales caused primarily by a reduction in the number of Selenia full field mammography systems and related components, including our CAD software, sold domestically, and to a lesser extent, internationally. In addition, we experienced a slight deterioration of average selling prices, both domestically and internationally, driven by the current economic environment for capital purchases, and less expensive configurations of the units being sold. Also contributing to the decrease was a $15.6 million decrease in multicare stereotactic table sales primarily attributable to a decrease in the number of systems sold, principally in the U.S. We attribute the decline in sales of breast health capital equipment and related products primarily to the more difficult economic and capital spending environment. We also experienced a decline in our MammoSite single-lumen products of $10.2 million due to increased competition as a result of lower reimbursement rates compared to multi-lumen products. Partially offsetting the declines in sales referenced above was an $18.2 million increase in revenues from our breast biopsy products.

Diagnostics product sales, which include ThinPrep, Rapid Fetal Fibronectin Test and our Third Wave products, increased 15% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. This increase was primarily due to the addition of Third Wave revenues of $37.1 million in fiscal 2009 compared to $5.9 million in fiscal 2008 and, to a lesser extent, an increase in the number of ThinPrep Pap Tests. The increase in fiscal 2009 is also due to the inclusion of Cytyc’s results for the full fiscal year versus 49 weeks in fiscal 2008. While we received FDA approval of the Cervista HPV HR and Cervista HPV 16/18 tests in March 2009, the revenue contribution was modest in fiscal 2009.

GYN Surgical product sales, which include our NovaSure System and Adiana System, increased 20% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. This increase was primarily due to a significant increase in the number of NovaSure systems sold. The increase is also due to the inclusion of GYN Surgical’s revenue for the full fiscal year versus 49 weeks in fiscal 2008. Revenues from the Adiana System, which we received FDA approval on July 6, 2009, were modest as the US and international market launches were limited.

Skeletal Health product sales decreased 14% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008, primarily due to a $5.8 million decrease in osteoporosis assessment product sales caused primarily by a decrease in the number of bone densitometry systems sold worldwide and lower average selling prices. This product line has faced a difficult capital equipment environment in the U.S. and the effects of the reduction in reimbursement for osteoporosis assessment exams in the U.S. In addition, we experienced a reduction in revenues of $2.8 million in mini-C arm sales and a decrease in extremity MRI sales of $2.1 million. The decrease in mini-C arm and extremity MRI sales was due to a decrease in the number of systems sold.

In fiscal 2009 and 2008, approximately 80% of product sales were generated in the U.S., 12% in Europe, 4% in Asia, and 4% in other international markets.

Service and Other Revenues.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009					September 27, 2008					Change
	Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		%
Service and Other Revenues	$	210,148		13	%	$	172,052		10	%	$	38,096		22	%

Service and other revenues is primarily comprised of revenue generated from our field service organization to provide ongoing service, installation and repair of our products. Service and other revenues increased 22% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008, primarily in our Breast Health segment, due to an increase in the number of service contracts executed driven by an increase in the installed base of our full field digital mammography systems and detectors.

Cost of Product Sales.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009					September 27, 2008					Change
	Amount		% of Product Sales			Amount		% of Product Sales			Amount			%
Cost of Product Sales	$	463,066		33	%	$	528,528		35	%	$	(65,462	)		(12	)%
Cost of Product Sales—Amortization of Intangible Assets		155,519		11	%		95,310		6	%		60,209			63	%
Cost of Product Sales—Impairment of Intangible Assets		4,065		0	%		—		—			4,065			100	%

	$	622,650		44	%	$	623,838		42	%	$	(1,188	)		(0	)%

Product sales gross margin decreased to 56% in fiscal 2009 compared to 58% in fiscal 2008 primarily due to the significant increase in intangible asset amortization expense of $60.2 million, partially offset by the increase in sales of our higher gross margin disposable products in our Diagnostics and GYN Surgical segments.

Cost of Product Sales. The cost of product sales as a percentage of product sales in fiscal 2009 was 33% compared to 35% in fiscal 2008. This improvement was primarily attributable to the increase in sales of our Diagnostics and GYN Surgical segments as a percentage of our total product sales as these products have a lower product cost as a percent of revenue compared to our Breast Health and Skeletal Health products. In addition, our cost of product sales in fiscal 2008 included additional costs associated with the write-up of acquired inventory to fair value in purchase accounting of $42.4 million related to the merger with Cytyc and $3.9 million related to the Third Wave acquisition. In fiscal 2009, the impact of these costs was only $1.2 million related to the Third Wave inventory write-up. Our margins in fiscal 2009 were also positively impacted by our cost reduction

initiatives implemented in the first half of 2009, which included securing lower material costs from our vendors. Partially offsetting these improvements, was a decrease in gross margin in our Breast Health segment, primarily attributable to lower absorption of manufacturing costs due to lower volumes and to a lesser extent, a slight deterioration of average selling prices, driven by the current economic environment for capital purchases, and less expensive configurations of the units being sold.

Fiscal 2009 and 2008 cost of product sales included charges of $0.7 million and $4.5 million, respectively, for impairment of MRI inventory and a related purchase obligation, which was fulfilled in fiscal 2009.

Cost of Product Sales—Amortization of Intangible Assets. Amortization of intangible assets relates to acquired developed technology, which are generally being amortized over their estimated useful lives of between 8.5 and 15 years using a straight-line method or, if reliably determinable, based on the pattern in which the economic benefits of the assets are expected to be consumed utilizing expected undiscounted future cash flows. The increase in amortization expense is due partly to the method of recognition based on expected economic benefits of the underlying assets, primarily related to the intangible assets acquired in the merger with Cytyc, which increased to $133.2 million from $80.2 million in fiscal 2008, and a full year of Third Wave related amortization of $7.8 million compared to $1.1 million in fiscal 2008.

Cost of Product Sales—Impairment of Intangible Assets. During the second quarter of fiscal 2009, we decided to discontinue selling a certain product acquired in the Third Wave acquisition as a result of communications from the FDA in the second quarter of fiscal 2009 regarding the approval process. This decision was an indicator of impairment, and we performed an impairment test, which indicated the undiscounted cash flows the asset group would generate over its remaining estimated useful life would not be sufficient to recover the carrying value of the asset group. Due to the insufficient cash flows to be generated, the Company determined that the related asset group’s fair value was de minimus and recorded an impairment charge of $4.1 million comprised of developed technology of $2.6 million and capitalized license fees of $1.5 million.

Cost of Service and Other Revenues.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009					September 27, 2008					Change
	Amount		% of Service and Other Revenues			Amount		% of Service and Other Revenues			Amount			%
Cost of Service and Other Revenues	$	156,998		75	%	$	158,140		92	%	$	(1,142	)		(1	)%

Service and other revenues gross margin improved to 25% in fiscal 2009 from 8% in fiscal 2008 due in part to the improved absorption of fixed service costs and the continued growth of service contract revenue, primarily in the Breast Health segment. We increased the number of service contracts due to our increased installed base of our full field digital mammography systems and detectors. In addition, warranty costs decreased due to lower failure rates in our products.

Operating Expenses.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009					September 27, 2008					Change
	Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount		% of Total Revenue			Amount			%
Operating Expenses
Research and Development	$	102,453		6	%	$	88,184		5	%	$	14,269			16	%
Selling and Marketing		238,977		15	%		261,524		16	%		(22,547	)		(9	)%
General and Administrative		140,700		9	%		140,642		8	%		58			0	%
Amortization of Intangible Assets		51,210		3	%		25,227		1	%		25,983			103	%
Impairment of Goodwill		2,340,023		143	%		—		—			2,340,023			100	%
Impairment of Intangible Assets		—		—			2,900		0	%		(2,900	)		(100	)%
Acquired In-process Research and Development		—		—			565,200		34	%		(565,200	)		(100	)%
Restructuring Charges		797		0	%		6,383		1	%		(5,586	)		(88	)%

	$	2,874,160		176	%	$	1,090,060		65	%	$	1,784,100			164	%

Research and Development Expenses. Research and development expenses increased 16% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. These increases were primarily due to a full year of expenses of $20.7 million related to Third Wave compared to $3.7 million in fiscal 2008, and to a lesser extent a full year of operations from Cytyc in fiscal 2009 compared to 49 weeks in fiscal 2008. In addition, there was an increase in expenses related to the anticipated launch of the Adiana System and additional clinical spending for a number of projects. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in related headcount, bonus and other discretionary areas resulting from a number of cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of 2009. In fiscal 2008, we recorded a $1.8 million charge related to a change in control payment associated with the merger with Cytyc.

Selling and Marketing Expenses. Selling and marketing expenses decreased 9% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 primarily due to lower commission expenses as a result of lower product revenues, lower bonuses driven by the Company’s operating results, reduced advertising and trade show expenditures, and other cost reductions including lower employee headcount resulting from our cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of 2009. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of $6.8 million related to the inclusion of a full year of operations of Third Wave, as well as a full year of operations from Cytyc in fiscal 2009 compared to 49 weeks in fiscal 2008.

General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses were unchanged in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. In fiscal 2009, these expenses increased $7.4 million related to the inclusion of a full year of operations of Third Wave, as well as a full year of operations from Cytyc in fiscal 2009 compared to 49 weeks in fiscal 2008. In addition, stock-based compensation expense was higher by $5.2 million in fiscal 2009. Offsetting these increases was a decrease in bonus, headcount and related compensation, and other expenses as a result of our cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of 2009.

Amortization of Intangible Assets. Amortization of intangible assets results from customer relationships and trade names related to our acquisitions. These intangible assets are being amortized over their estimated useful lives of between 8.5 and 30 years using a straight-line method or, if reliably determinable, based on the pattern in which the economic benefits of the assets are expected to be consumed utilizing expected undiscounted future cash flows. The increases in these costs primarily relate to additional Cytyc-related amortization based on the pattern of economic benefit.

Impairment of Goodwill. Based upon a combination of factors, including the deteriorating macro-economic environment, declines in the stock market and the decline of our market capitalization significantly below the book value of our net assets, we concluded that potential goodwill impairment indicators existed as of

December 27, 2008. As a result, we performed an interim goodwill impairment analysis as of December 27, 2008. Step 1 of the impairment analysis indicated that the carrying value of the net assets of certain of our reporting units, acquired in connection with the Cytyc acquisition, exceeded the estimated fair value of those reporting units. As a result, we were required to complete Step 2 of the impairment analysis to determine the amount, if any, of goodwill impairment charges. We completed Step 2 of this analysis during the second quarter of fiscal 2009 and recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $2.34 billion in the second quarter of fiscal 2009. Refer to Note 2 in our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information. We completed our fiscal 2009 annual goodwill impairment analysis as of the first day of our fourth quarter and no additional impairments were recorded.

Impairment of Intangible Assets. Subsequent to the merger with Cytyc, we discontinued the development of Cytyc’s Helica Thermal Coagulator System product, used for the treatment of endometriosis. We will not realize any future cash flows from this product. Our intangible asset valuation for Cytyc included approximately $2.9 million related to customer relationships for Helica. As a result of the Helica product discontinuation, we recorded an impairment charge of $2.9 million in fiscal 2008.

Acquired In-Process Research and Development Expenses. The $565.2 million charge for in-process research and development expense is comprised of a $370.0 million charge recorded in connection with our merger with Cytyc and a $195.2 million charge recorded in connection with the Third Wave acquisition. Both of these charges are described in further detail above under the respective acquisitions.

Restructuring Charges. During the fourth quarter of 2009, we closed our manufacturing facility in Shanghai, China due to Chinese government requirements to move the facility. This facility, which manufactured organic photoconductor drum coatings, was acquired in connection with the AEG acquisition in 2006, and contributed approximately $9.7 million of revenue to our Breast Health business in fiscal 2009. In connection with this action, we recorded severance benefits and other costs of $0.8 million. The majority of employees were terminated and all termination benefits were paid as of September 26, 2009. Other costs were recorded in connection with this closure of $1.9 million primarily related to the impairment of manufacturing equipment, accelerated depreciation expense, and the write-off of inventory, all of which was recorded in cost of product sales. During the third quarter of fiscal 2008, we recorded $6.4 million in compensation charges, including $1.9 million in stock-based compensation, related to the resignation of our former Executive Chairman, which was effective May 20, 2008. The cash payments were made during fiscal 2008.

Interest Income.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009		September 27, 2008		Change
	Amount		Amount		Amount			%
Interest Income	$	1,161	$	4,528	$	(3,367	)		(74	)%

Interest income decreased in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 primarily due to a decline in interest rates.

Interest Expense.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount		%
Interest Expense	$	(134,957	)	$	(133,043	)	$	1,914		1	%

Interest expense consists primarily of the interest costs on our debt, amortization of the debt discount on our 2.00% Convertible Notes, and amortization of deferred financing costs for both our senior secured credit agreement entered into on October 22, 2007 in connection with the merger with Cytyc and amended on July 17,

2008 in connection with the Third Wave acquisition and our 2.00% Convertible Notes that were issued in December 2007 to pay down a portion of the term loans, which had higher interest rates. Effective in fiscal 2010, we implemented FSP APB 14-1 that changed the accounting for convertible debt instruments with cash settlement features, which is applicable to our Convertible Notes. FSP APB 14-1 has been retrospectively applied to fiscal 2009 and 2008 beginning December 10, 2007, the date the Convertible Notes were issued. The impact of adoption of FSP APB 14-1 increased net interest expense in fiscal 2009 and 2008 by $65.5 million and $48.1 million, respectively. See Note 5(a) contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information.

Interest expense in fiscal 2009 increased slightly compared to fiscal 2008 primarily due to an increase in the amortization of the debt discount on our Convertible Notes of $67.7 million in fiscal 2009 compared to $50.1 million in fiscal 2008. This increase was offset by lower interest expense from lower term loan balances as we paid them down quarterly and lower interest rates on those balances. In addition to the required principal payments, we made voluntary payments throughout the year resulting in a total decrease of $290.8 million in the principal of our term loans during fiscal 2009. Additionally, we had the benefit of the lower interest rates from our Convertible Notes for all of fiscal 2009 compared to approximately nine months in fiscal 2008 as prior to the issuance of the Convertible Notes we were paying a higher interest rate on the term loans, which had higher outstanding balances.

Other (Expense) Income, net.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount		%
Other (Expense) Income, net	$	(3,660	)	$	(1,215	)	$	2,445		201	%

In fiscal 2009, other (expense) income, net primarily includes other-than-temporary impairment charges of cost-method investments of $2.2 million and foreign currency transaction losses of $2.3 million, offset by an increase of $0.7 million in the cash surrender value of life insurance contracts related to our SERP. Included in the foreign currency transaction losses is a gain of $0.7 million related to the elimination of the cumulative translation adjustment related to our manufacturing facility in Shanghai, China due to its closure. In fiscal 2008, these balances were primarily related to a decrease in the cash surrender value of life insurance contracts related to our SERP of $1.4 million and foreign currency transaction losses of $0.7 million. The increase in foreign currency losses is due to the significant volatility of exchange rates during fiscal 2009, primarily the Euro.

Provision for Income Taxes.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009		September 27, 2008		Change
	Amount		Amount		Amount			%
Provision for Income Taxes	$	62,512	$	88,316	$	(25,804	)		(29	)%

Our effective tax rate for fiscal 2009 was 2.9% of the pre-tax loss compared to 27.0% of the pre-tax loss in fiscal 2008. Our effective tax rate for fiscal 2009 was significantly impacted by the $2.34 billion goodwill impairment charge recorded in the second quarter of fiscal 2009, substantially all of which is not deductible for tax purposes. The effective tax rate for fiscal 2008 was significantly impacted by the acquired in-process research and development charge related to the merger with Cytyc and Third Wave acquisition, which is not tax deductible.

Segment Results of Operations

The discussion that follows is a summary analysis of total revenues and the primary changes in operating income or loss by segment.

Breast Health.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount			%
Total Revenues	$	728,884		$	860,848		$	(131,964	)		(15	)%

Operating (Loss) Income	$	(122,559	)	$	211,704		$	(334,263	)		(158	)%

Operating (Loss) Income as a % of Segment Revenue		(17	)%		25	%

Breast Health revenues decreased in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 primarily due to the $178.2 million decrease in product sales discussed above, partially offset by an increase of $46.2 million in service revenues that is substantially related to additional service contracts for the increased number of Selenia systems in our installed base.

This segment incurred an operating loss in fiscal 2009 compared to operating income in fiscal 2008 primarily due to a $265.9 million goodwill impairment charge recorded in the second quarter related to our MammoSite reporting unit in addition to the reduction of revenue discussed above and lower gross margins, partially offset by a reduction of operating expenses from our cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of fiscal 2009. Our gross margin in this business segment was 47% in fiscal 2009 compared to 51% in fiscal 2008. The decrease in gross margin was primarily attributable to lower absorption of manufacturing costs due to lower volumes, an increase of $8.8 million in amortization expense of intangible assets, and to a lesser extent, a slight deterioration of average selling prices driven by the current economic environment for capital purchases, and less expensive configurations of the units being sold. In addition, included in cost of product sales was approximately $1.9 million of costs related to the closure of our manufacturing facility in Shanghai. This segment incurred charges of $3.3 million in fiscal 2008 related to sales of acquired MammoSite inventory that was written up to fair value for purchase accounting purposes.

Diagnostics.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount			%
Total Revenues	$	547,892		$	485,004		$	62,888			13	%

Operating Loss	$	(809,640	)	$	(172,538	)	$	(637,102	)		369	%

Operating Loss as a % of Segment Revenue		(148	)%		(36	)%

Diagnostics revenues increased in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 primarily due to the increase in product sales discussed above.

The operating loss in this segment in fiscal 2009 included a $908.3 million goodwill impairment charge recorded in the second quarter, intangible asset amortization of $119.2 million and a full year of operating costs related to Third Wave compared to 11 weeks in fiscal 2008. Partially offsetting these additional charges in fiscal 2009 were reduced operating expenses resulting from our cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of fiscal 2009. The operating loss in fiscal 2008 included a $195.2 million charge for in-process research and

development related to the Third Wave acquisition, an $85.2 million charge for in-process research and development related to the merger with Cytyc, intangible asset amortization of $68.7 million, and a $3.6 million restructuring charge in the third quarter related to the resignation of our former Executive Chairman in May 2008. Gross margin in fiscal 2009 was 55% compared to 56% in fiscal 2008. The reduction in gross margin was primarily due to an increase in amortization expense due to an increase of $27.6 million and $6.7 million in the amortization of Cytyc and Third Wave related intangible assets, respectively. In addition, gross margin in fiscal 2009 included the write-off of intangible assets of $4.1 million and $1.2 million of charges for the write-up to fair value of acquired inventory sold by Third Wave in fiscal 2009. Gross margin in fiscal 2008 included charges of $26.6 million and $3.9 million, respectively, for the write-up to fair value of acquired Cytyc and Third Wave inventory sold during fiscal 2008.

GYN Surgical.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount			%
Total Revenues	$	264,900		$	221,069		$	43,831			20	%

Operating Loss	$	(1,097,685	)	$	(241,450	)	$	(856,235	)		355	%

Operating Loss as a % of Segment Revenue		(414	)%		(109	)%

GYN Surgical revenues increased in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 due to the increase in product sales discussed above. The operating loss in this segment in fiscal 2009 included a $1.17 billion goodwill impairment charge recorded in the second quarter and additional amortization expense of $26.5 million. Partially offsetting these charges in fiscal 2009 was the increase in revenue discussed above as well as a decrease in operating expenses as a result of cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of this year. The operating loss in fiscal 2008 included a $284.8 million charge for in-process research and development related to the merger with Cytyc, a $2.9 million impairment charge for the Helica Thermal Coagulator System intangibles and a $2.4 million restructuring charge in the third quarter related to the resignation of our former Executive Chairman in May 2008. Our gross margin in this business segment was 67% in both fiscal 2009 and 2008. Gross margin in fiscal 2009 and 2008 included amortization expense from intangible assets of $38.2 million and $21.0 million, respectively, and fiscal 2008 included a $12.4 million charge for the write-up to fair value of Cytyc inventory that was sold during the first quarter of fiscal 2008.

Skeletal Health.


	Years Ended
	September 26, 2009			September 27, 2008			Change
	Amount			Amount			Amount			%
Total Revenues	$	95,458		$	107,578		$	(12,120	)		(11	)%

Operating Income	$	13,210		$	4,742		$	8,468			179	%

Operating Income as a % of Segment Revenue		14	%		4	%

Skeletal Health revenues decreased in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 primarily due to the decline in product sales discussed above. Our gross margin in this business segment was 41% compared to 34% in fiscal 2008. The improvement was primarily due to reductions in material costs and in manufacturing spending. Operating income for this segment improved due to the improved gross margin and from cost reduction initiatives implemented in the first half of 2009. The operating income and gross margin in fiscal 2009 included a $0.7 million charge associated with MRI inventory and purchase obligations compared to $4.5 million in fiscal 2008.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

At September 25, 2010, we had $657.0 million of working capital, and our cash and cash equivalents totaled $515.6 million. Our cash and cash equivalents increased $222.4 million during fiscal 2010, primarily from cash generated from our operations and the receipt of a $70.0 million payment related to the potential sale of our Gestiva assets. These cash sources were partially offset by our financing activities relating to our repayment of amounts outstanding under our credit agreement and cash used in our investing activities primarily to pay the consideration for the Sentinelle Medical acquisition and to a lesser extent for purchases of property and equipment and placement of equipment under customer usage agreements.

Our operating activities generated $456.7 million of cash, which included a net loss of $62.8 million reduced primarily by non-cash charges for goodwill and intangible asset impairments of $220.2 million, depreciation and amortization expense of $294.8 million, non-cash interest expense of $86.6 million, and stock-based compensation expense of $34.2 million. These adjustments to net loss were partially offset by a decrease in our net deferred taxes liabilities of $121.7 million primarily the result of our amortization of intangible assets as well as our intangible asset impairment charges. Cash provided by operations also included changes in our operating assets and liabilities reflecting an increase in deferred revenue of $21.3 million and an increase in accounts payable of $7.2 million. The increase in deferred revenue was primarily due to an increase in the number of service contracts as our installed base of our Breast Health products continues to grow. The increase in accounts payable was primarily due to the timing of payments. Cash provided by operations was offset by an increase in accounts receivable of $20.2 million, an increase of inventories of $5.2 million and an increase in prepaid income taxes of $3.8 million. The increase in accounts receivable was primarily due to higher revenues in the current quarter compared to the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009. The increase in inventories was primarily related to the increase in components on hand in support of our higher sales volume as well as production of newly released products. The increase in prepaid income taxes is based on timing of estimated tax payments relative to our income tax provision.

During fiscal 2010, we used $67.0 million of cash in investing activities. This use of cash was primarily attributable to the net payment of $84.3 million of consideration for the Sentinelle Medical acquisition and $28.0 million for purchases of property and equipment, which consisted primarily of manufacturing equipment, and computer software and hardware. We also invested $18.6 million in equipment under customer usage agreements, and we purchased of $5.3 million of life insurance contracts to fund future payments under our SERP. These uses of cash were partially offset by the receipt of a $70.0 million payment from KV in connection with an amendment to the existing agreement to sell the rights to our Gestiva asset to KV upon FDA approval.

During fiscal 2010, we used $167.6 million of cash in financing activities, substantially for repayments of the term loans under our credit agreement of $174.2 million and repayments of $2.8 million under certain notes payable. We also purchased substantially all of the remaining non-controlling interest of our Third Wave Japan subsidiary for $2.7 million. Offsetting these payments was proceeds of $12.6 million from the exercise of stock options and the purchase of common shares under the employee stock purchase plan.

Debt

We had total recorded debt outstanding of $1.45 billion at September 25, 2010, which is primarily comprised of our Convertible Notes of $1.45 billion (principal $1.725 billion).

Convertible Notes.

Original Convertible Notes. On December 10, 2007, we issued and sold $1.725 billion, at par, of our 2.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2037 (“Original Notes”). The net proceeds from the offering was approximately $1.69 billion, after deducting the underwriters’ discounts and estimated offering expenses of approximately $1.5 million payable by us, and was used to repay a portion of our then outstanding senior secured indebtedness under our Credit Agreement. At September 25, 2010, the Original Notes are recorded at $1.45 billion, which is net of the unamortized debt discount attributed to the embedded conversion feature of the Original Notes in accordance

with FSP APB 14-1. See Note 5(a) contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information. On November 18, 2010, we entered into separate, privately-negotiated exchange agreements under which we retired $450.0 million in aggregate principal of our Original Notes for $450.0 million in aggregate principal of new 2.00% Convertible Exchange Senior Notes due 2037 (“Exchange Notes”). Following these transactions, $1.275 billion in principal amount of the Original Notes remain outstanding.

Holders may require us to repurchase the Original Notes on December 13, 2013, and on each of December 15, 2017, 2022, 2027 and 2032 at a repurchase price equal to 100% of their accreted principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest. We may redeem any of the Original Notes beginning December 18, 2013, by giving holders at least 30 days’ notice. We may redeem the Original Notes either in whole or in part at a redemption price equal to 100% of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, including contingent interest and liquidated damages, if any, to, but excluding, the redemption date.

The Original Notes bear interest at a rate of 2.00% per year on the principal amount, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on June 15 and December 15 of each year, beginning June 15, 2008, and ending on December 15, 2013 and will accrete principal from December 15, 2013 at a rate that provides holders with an aggregate annual yield to maturity of 2.00% per year. Beginning with the six month interest period commencing December 15, 2013, we will pay contingent interest during any six month interest period to the holders of Original Notes if the “trading price”, as defined, of the Original Notes for each of the five trading days ending on the second trading day immediately preceding the first day of the applicable six month interest period equals or exceeds 120% of the accreted principal amount of the Original Notes. The holders of the Original Notes may convert the Original Notes into shares of our common stock at a conversion price of approximately $38.60 per share, subject to adjustment, prior to the close of business on September 15, 2037, subject to prior redemption or repurchase of the Original Notes, under any of the following circumstances: (1) during any calendar quarter after the calendar quarter ending December 31, 2007 if the last reported sale price of our common stock exceeds 130% of the conversion price for at least 20 trading days in the 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the preceding calendar quarter; (2) during the five business day period after any five consecutive trading day period in which the trading price per note for each day of such period was less than 98% of the product of the last reported sale price of our common stock and the conversion rate on each such day; (3) if the Original Notes have been called for redemption; or (4) upon the occurrence of specified corporate events.

In lieu of delivery of shares of our common stock in satisfaction of our obligation upon conversion of the Original Notes, we may elect to deliver cash or a combination of cash and shares of our common stock. If we elect to satisfy our conversion obligation solely in cash, we will deliver cash in an amount as provided in the indenture for the Original Notes. If we elect to satisfy our conversion obligation in a combination of cash and shares of our common stock, we will deliver up to a specified dollar amount of cash per $1,000 original principal amount of Original Notes, and will settle the remainder of our conversion obligation in shares of our common stock, in each case based on the daily conversion value calculated as provided in the indenture for the Original Notes. In addition, at any time on or prior to the 35th scheduled trading day prior to the maturity date of the Original Notes, we may make an irrevocable election to settle conversions of the Original Notes either solely in cash or in a combination of cash and shares of our common stock with a specified cash amount at least equal to the accreted principal amount of the Original Notes. This net share settlement election is in our sole discretion and does not require the consent of holders of the Original Notes. It is our current intent and policy to settle any conversion of the Original Notes as if we had elected to make the net share settlement election.

The Original Notes are our senior unsecured obligations and rank equally with all of our existing and future senior unsecured debt and prior to all future subordinated debt. The Original Notes are effectively subordinated to any future secured indebtedness to the extent of the collateral securing such indebtedness, and structurally subordinated to all indebtedness and other liabilities (including trade payables) of our subsidiaries.

Exchange Convertible Notes. On November 18, 2010, pursuant to separate, privately-negotiated exchange agreements, we retired $450.0 million in aggregate principal of our Original Notes for $450.0 million in aggregate principal of new 2.00% Convertible Exchange Senior Notes due 2037 (Exchange Notes).

Holders may require us to repurchase the Exchange Notes on December 15, 2016, and on each of December 15, 2020, December 15, 2025, December 13, 2030 and December 14, 2035 or upon a fundamental change, as described in the Second Supplemental Indenture, at a repurchase price equal to 100% of their accreted principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest. We may redeem any of the notes beginning December 19, 2016, by giving holders at least 30 days’ notice. We may redeem the Exchange Notes either in whole or in part at a redemption price equal to 100% of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, including contingent interest and liquidated damages, if any, to, but excluding, the redemption date.

The Exchange Notes bear interest at a rate of 2.00% per year on the principal amount, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on June 15 and December 15 of each year, beginning December 15, 2010, and ending on December 15, 2016 and will accrete principal from December 15, 2016 at a rate that provides holders with an aggregate annual yield to maturity of 2.00% per year. Beginning with the six month interest period commencing December 15, 2016, we will pay contingent interest during any six month interest period to the holders of Exchange Notes if the “trading price”, as defined, of the Exchange Notes for each of the five trading days ending on the second trading day immediately preceding the first day of the applicable six month interest period equals or exceeds 120% of the accreted principal amount of the Exchange Notes. The holders of the Exchange Notes may convert the Exchange Notes into shares of our common stock at a conversion price of approximately $23.03 per share, subject to adjustment, prior to the close of business on September 15, 2037, subject to prior redemption or repurchase of the Exchange Notes, under any of the following circumstances: (1) during any calendar quarter after the calendar quarter ending December 31, 2010 if the last reported sale price of our common stock exceeds 130% of the conversion price for at least 20 trading days in the 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the preceding calendar quarter; (2) during the five business day period after any five consecutive trading day period in which the trading price per note for each day of such period was less than 98% of the product of the last reported sale price of our common stock and the conversion rate on each such day; (3) if the Exchange Notes have been called for redemption; or (4) upon the occurrence of specified corporate events.

In lieu of delivery of shares of our common stock in satisfaction of our obligation upon conversion of the Exchange Notes, we may elect to deliver cash or a combination of cash and shares of our common stock. If we elect to satisfy our conversion obligation solely in cash, we will deliver cash in an amount as provided in the indenture for the Exchange Notes. If we elect to satisfy our conversion obligation in a combination of cash and shares of our common stock, we will deliver up to a specified dollar amount of cash per $1,000 original principal amount of Exchange Notes, and will settle the remainder of our conversion obligation in shares of our common stock, in each case based on the daily conversion value calculated as provided in the indenture for the Exchange Notes. In addition, at any time on or prior to the 35th scheduled trading day prior to the maturity date of the Exchange Notes, we may make an irrevocable election to settle conversions of the Exchange Notes either solely in cash or in a combination of cash and shares of our common stock with a specified cash amount at least equal to the accreted principal amount of the Exchange Notes. This net share settlement election is in our sole discretion and does not require the consent of holders of the Exchange Notes. It is our current intent and policy to settle any conversion of the Exchange Notes as if we had elected to make the net share settlement election.

The Exchange Notes are our senior unsecured obligations and rank equally with all of our existing and future senior unsecured debt and prior to all future subordinated debt. The Exchange Notes are effectively subordinated to any future secured indebtedness to the extent of the collateral securing such indebtedness, and structurally subordinated to all indebtedness and other liabilities (including trade payables) of our subsidiaries.

Credit Agreement

In 2008, in connection with our acquisition of Third Wave, we entered into an amended and restated credit agreement (the Amended Credit Agreement) with Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and certain other lenders (collectively, the Lenders) and secured financing in an aggregate amount of up to $800 million. The credit facility consisted of $400 million under a senior secured tranche A term loan (Term Loan A); $200 million under a senior secured tranche B term loan (Term Loan B); and $200 million under a senior secured revolving credit facility (the Revolving Facility). We borrowed $540 million under the term loans. During fiscal 2010, we paid

off the remaining outstanding principal under the term loans. On June 24, 2010, we gave notice of the termination of the Amended Credit Agreement to the Lenders, as a result the Revolving Facility is no longer available.

Sale of Gestiva

On January 16, 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement to sell full U.S. and world-wide rights to our Gestiva pharmaceutical product to K-V Pharmaceutical Company (“KV”) upon approval of the pending Gestiva new drug application (the “Gestiva NDA”) by the FDA for a purchase price of $82.0 million. The Gestiva product is a drug that, if approved by the FDA, could be used in the prevention of preterm births in pregnant women with a history of at least one spontaneous preterm birth. Under this agreement, we received $9.5 million of the purchase price in fiscal 2008, and the balance was due upon final approval of the Gestiva NDA by the FDA on or before February 19, 2010 and the production of a quantity of Gestiva suitable to enable the commercial launch of the product. This $9.5 million was recorded as a deferred gain within current liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Either party had the right to terminate the agreement if FDA approval was not obtained by February 19, 2010. On January 8, 2010, the parties executed an amendment to the agreement eliminating the date by which FDA approval must be received and extending the term indefinitely. In consideration of executing this amendment, the purchase price was increased to $199.5 million. We received $70.0 million upon the signing of the amendment, which has been recorded as a deferred gain, and are due to receive an additional $25.0 million upon FDA approval of the product and an additional $95.0 million over a nine-month period beginning one year following FDA approval.

Under the arrangement, we are continuing our efforts to obtain FDA approval of the Gestiva NDA. All costs incurred in these efforts are being reimbursed by KV and recorded as a credit against research and development expenses. These reimbursed costs have not been material to date on an annual basis. We expect that the amounts recorded in deferred gain will be recognized upon the closing of the transaction following final FDA approval of the Gestiva NDA. We cannot assure that we will be able to obtain the requisite FDA approval, that the transaction will be completed or that we will receive the balance of the purchase price. Moreover, if KV terminates the agreement prior to the transfer of the rights to the Gestiva product as a result of a breach by us of a material representation, warranty, covenant or agreement, we will be required to return the funds previously received as well as expenses reimbursed by KV.

Contingent Earn-Out Payments.

As a result of the merger with Cytyc, we assumed the obligation to the former Adiana stockholders to make contingent earn-out payments tied to the achievement of milestones. The milestone payments include potential contingent payments of up to $155 million based on worldwide sales of the Adiana System in the first year following FDA approval (“First Contingent Period”) and on annual incremental sales growth thereafter through December 31, 2012. We received FDA approval of the Adiana System on July 6, 2009, and we began accruing contingent consideration in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009 based on the defined percentage of worldwide sales of the product. These amounts are being recorded as additional purchase price. The total accrued contingent consideration, net at September 25, 2010 is $30.9 million, of which $25.1 million was earned during the First Contingent Period. Under the terms of the agreement, the First Contingent Period payment was paid to the Adiana shareholders in October 2010, net of certain holdbacks. The agreement includes an indemnification provision that provides for the reimbursement of qualifying legal expenses in defense of the Adiana intellectual property, and we have the right to offset contingent consideration payments to the Adiana shareholders with these qualifying legal costs.

On August 5, 2010, we acquired Sentinelle Medical. In addition to the up-front cash payment of $84.8 million, which was net of certain adjustments, we incurred the obligation to the former Sentinelle Medical stockholders to make contingent payouts over a two-year period of up to a maximum of $250 million. The contingent payments are based on a multiple of incremental revenue growth during the two-year period following the completion of the acquisition. In accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, we recorded

the acquisition date fair value of the contingent consideration obligation of $29.5 million based on our estimates and assumptions of revenue growth. Of this amount, $21.7 million is recorded as a current liability and $7.8 million is recorded as a long-term liability.

The contractual obligations table below does not include the obligation to pay contingent consideration to the shareholders of Sentinelle Medical or Adiana.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations and commitments as of September 25, 2010:


	Payments Due by Period
Contractual Obligations	Less than 1 year		1-3 years		3-5 years		More than 5 years		Total
Long-Term Debt Obligations (1)	$	1,362	$	—	$	1,725,000	$	—	$	1,726,362
Interest on Long-Term Debt Obligations		34,541		69,000		17,250		—		120,791
Operating Leases		18,123		29,829		21,095		40,267		109,314
Purchase Obligations		29,204		2,289		144		—		31,637
Financing Leases (2)		2,543		5,361		5,704		9,401		23,009
Long-Term Supply Contracts (3)		3,037		3,750		—		—		6,787
Pension Obligations (4)		337		728		809		7,219		9,093
Private Equity Investment (5)		674		—		—		—		674

Total Contractual Obligations	$	89,821	$	110,957	$	1,770,002	$	56,887	$	2,027,667

(1)

Our Convertible Notes can first be put to us on December 13, 2013 and we have assumed for purpose of the above table that they will be paid off in fiscal 2014. On November 18, 2010, we exchanged Exchange Notes in an aggregate principal amount of $450.0 million for Original Notes in the aggregate principal amount of $450.0 million. The first put date on the Exchange Notes is December 15, 2016. The above table does not reflect this exchange. See above under Convertible Notes for additional information.

(2)

We acquired the financing leases in connection with our acquisition of Cytyc in fiscal 2008. Cytyc had executed two leases for an office building and for a manufacturing facility, which were required to be recorded on our balance sheet under US GAAP. See Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information.

(3)

This represents certain non-cancelable supply contracts. For reasons of quality assurance, sole source availability or cost effectiveness, certain key components and raw materials are available only from a sole supplier. To assure continuity of supply while maintaining high quality and reliability, long-term supply contracts have been executed with these suppliers. In certain of these contracts, a minimum purchase commitment has been established.

(4)	Pension obligations do not include our obligation under the SERP of $15.9 million, which is recorded as a current liability. The SERP benefits are generally paid out at retirement or termination of employment.

(5)	This represents a private equity investment commitment with a limited liability partnership, which could be paid over the succeeding two years.

The above table does not reflect our long-term liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions recorded under FIN 48 (codified primarily in ASC 740, Income Taxes) totaling $18.5 million. Due to the complexity associated with tax uncertainties, we cannot reasonably make a reliable estimate of the period in which we expect to settle these non-current liabilities. See Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 15 of this Annual Report for more information on our unrecognized tax benefits. In addition, certain of our cost method equity investments give us the option to acquire the company in the future. Since it is not possible to estimate when, or even if, we will exercise our option to acquire these companies, we have not included these future potential payments in the table above.

Future Liquidity Considerations

We expect to continue to review and evaluate potential acquisitions of businesses, products or technologies, and strategic alliances that we believe will complement our current or future business. Subject to the Risk Factors set forth in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report and the general disclaimers set forth in our Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements at the outset of this Report, we believe that cash flow from operations will provide us with sufficient funds in order to fund our expected operations over the next twelve months. Our longer-term liquidity is contingent upon future operating performance. We may also require additional capital in the future to fund capital expenditures, acquisitions or other investments, or to repay our convertible notes. The holders of the Original Notes in the principal amount of $1.275 billion may require us to repurchase the notes on December 13, 2013, and on each of December 15, 2017, 2022, 2027 and 2032 at a repurchase price equal to 100% of their accreted principal amount, and the holders of the Exchange Notes in the principal amount of $450.0 million may require us to repurchase the notes on December 15, 2016, December 15, 2020, December 15, 2025, December 13, 2030 and December 14, 2035. These capital requirements could be substantial. Our operating performance may also be affected by matters discussed under the above-referenced Risk Factors as elsewhere in this report. These risks, trends and uncertainties may also adversely affect our long-term liquidity.

Legal Contingencies

We are currently involved in certain legal proceedings and claims. In connection with these legal proceedings and claims, management periodically reviews estimates of potential costs to be incurred by us in connection with the adjudication or settlement, if any, of these proceedings. These estimates are developed in consultation with outside counsel and are based on an analysis of potential litigation outcomes and settlement strategies. In accordance with ASC 450, Contingencies, loss contingencies are accrued if, in the opinion of management, an adverse outcome is probable and such outcome can be reasonably estimated. It is possible that future results for any particular quarter or annual period may be materially affected by changes in our assumptions or the effectiveness of our strategies relating to these proceedings.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to revenue recognition for multiple element arrangements, allowance for doubtful accounts, reserves for excess and obsolete inventories, valuations and purchase price allocations related to business combinations, expected future cash flows including growth rates, discount rates, terminal values and other assumptions used to evaluate the recoverability of long-lived assets and goodwill, estimated fair values of intangible assets and goodwill, amortization methods and periods, warranty reserves, certain accrued expenses, restructuring and other related charges, stock-based compensation, contingent liabilities, tax reserves and recoverability of our net deferred tax assets and related valuation allowance. We base our estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ from these estimates if past experience or other assumptions do not turn out to be substantially accurate. Any differences may have a material impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

The following is a discussion of what we believe to be the more significant critical accounting policies and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

Inventory

Our inventories include material, labor and overhead, and are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market. As a developer and manufacturer of high technology medical equipment, we may be exposed to a number of economic and industry factors that could result in portions of our inventory becoming either obsolete

or in excess of anticipated usage. These factors include, but are not limited to, technological changes in our markets, our ability to meet changing customer requirements, competitive pressures on products and prices, reliability and replacement of and the availability of key components from our suppliers. Our policy is to establish inventory reserves when conditions exist that suggest that our inventory may be in excess of anticipated demand or is obsolete based upon our assumptions about future demand for our products and market conditions. We regularly evaluate our ability to realize the value of our inventory based on a combination of factors including the following: historical usage rates, forecasted sales or usage, product expiration or end of life dates, estimated current and future market values and new product introductions. Assumptions used in determining our estimates of future product demand may prove to be incorrect, in which case the provision required for excess and obsolete inventory would have to be adjusted in the future. If inventory is determined to be overvalued, we would be required to recognize such costs as cost of goods sold at the time of such determination. Although considerable effort is made to ensure the accuracy of our forecasts of future product demand, any significant unanticipated changes in demand could have a significant negative impact on the value of our inventory and our reported operating results. Additionally, purchasing requirements and alternative usage avenues are explored within these processes to mitigate inventory exposure. When recorded, our reserves are intended to reduce the carrying value of our inventory to its net realizable value.

Provisions for excess or obsolete inventory are primarily based on our estimates of forecasted net sales and service usage levels. A significant change in the timing or level of demand for our products as compared to forecasted amounts may result in recording additional provisions for excess or expired inventory in the future. We record provisions for excess or obsolete inventory as cost of product revenue.

Accounts Receivable Reserves

We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments. We regularly evaluate the collectability of our trade receivables based on a combination of factors, including a dialogue with the customer to determine the cause of non-payment, and evaluation of the customer’s current financial situation. In the event it is determined that the customer may not be able to meet its full obligation to us, we record a specific allowance to reduce the receivable to the amount that we expect to recover given all information present. We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers and adjust credit limits based upon payment history and our assessment of the customer’s current credit worthiness. We continuously monitor collections from our customers and maintain a provision for estimated credit losses based upon our historical experience and any specific customer collection issues that we have identified. While such credit losses have historically been within our expectations and the provisions established, we cannot guarantee that we will continue to experience the same credit loss rates in the future. If the financial condition of our customers were to deteriorate, for example as a result of the recent financial and economic turmoil or otherwise, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make payments, additional allowances may be required.

We also record a provision for estimated sales returns and allowances on product and service related sales in the same period as the related revenues are recorded. These estimates are based on the specific facts and circumstances of particular orders, analysis of credit memo data and other known factors. If the data we use to calculate these estimates do not properly reflect reserve requirements, then a change in the allowances would be made in the period in which such a determination is made and revenues in that period could be adversely affected.

Valuation of Business Combinations

We record tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed in business combinations under the purchase method of accounting. Amounts paid for each acquisition are allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their fair values at the dates of acquisition. As a result of our adoption of ASC 805 in fiscal 2010, contingent consideration is recorded at fair value as measured on the date of acquisition. The value recorded is based on estimates of future financial projections under various potential scenarios, which are probability weighted as to the outcome of each scenario. These cash flow projections are discounted with an

appropriate risk adjusted rate. On an ongoing basis until such contingent amounts are earned, the fair value of the liability is reassessed at each reporting period and adjusted as a component of operating expenses based on changes to the underlying assumptions. The estimates used to determine the fair value of the contingent consideration liability are subject to significant judgment and actual results are likely to differ from the amounts originally recorded.

The fair value of identifiable intangible assets is based on detailed valuations that use information and assumptions provided by management. We allocate any excess purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed to goodwill. The valuation of purchased research and development represents the estimated fair value at the date of acquisition related to in-process projects. Our purchased research and development represents the value of in-process projects that have not yet reached technological feasibility and have no alternative future uses as of the date of acquisition. As a result of our adoption of ASC 805, we capitalize these assets and record them in our consolidated balance sheet. Under ASC 805, in-process research and development assets are evaluated for impairment similar to goodwill and once the project is complete, if at all, the asset is amortized over its remaining useful life. Prior to the adoption of ASC 805, we expensed the value attributable to these in-process projects at the time of the acquisition. If the projects are not successful or completed in a timely manner, we may not realize the financial benefits expected for these projects or for the acquisitions as a whole and impairments may result.

We use the income approach to determine the fair values of our purchased research and development. This approach determines fair value by estimating the after-tax cash flows attributable to an in-process project over its useful life and then discounting these after-tax cash flows back to a present value. We base our revenue assumptions on estimates of relevant market sizes, expected market growth rates, expected trends in technology and expected product introductions by competitors. In arriving at the value of the in-process projects, we consider, among other factors, the in-process projects’ stage of completion, the complexity of the work completed as of the acquisition date, the costs already incurred, the projected costs to complete, the contribution of core technologies and other acquired assets, the expected introduction date and the estimated useful life of the technology. We base the discount rate used to arrive at a present value as of the date of acquisition on the time value of money and medical technology investment risk factors. For the in-process projects we acquired in connection with our fiscal 2010 and 2008 acquisitions, we used risk-adjusted discount rates to discount our projected cash flows, ranging from 12.5% to 20%. We believe that the estimated purchased research and development amounts so determined represent the fair value at the date of acquisition and do not exceed the amount a third party would pay for the projects.

We have also used the income approach, as described above, to determine the estimated fair value of certain other identifiable intangible assets including developed technology, customer relationships and trade names. Developed technology represents patented and unpatented technology and know-how. Customer relationships represent established relationships with customers, which provide a ready channel for the sale of additional products and services. Trade names represent acquired product names that we intend to continue to utilize.

Intangible Assets and Goodwill

Intangible Assets

We amortize our intangible assets that have finite lives using either the straight-line method or, if reliably determinable, based on the pattern in which the economic benefit of the asset is expected to be consumed utilizing expected undiscounted future cash flows. Amortization is recorded over the estimated useful lives ranging from 2 to 30 years. We review our intangible assets subject to amortization to determine if any adverse conditions exist or a change in circumstances has occurred that would indicate impairment or a change in the remaining useful life. If the carrying value of an asset exceeds its undiscounted cash flows, we will write-down the carrying value of the intangible asset to its fair value in the period identified. In assessing fair value, we must make assumptions regarding estimated future cash flows and discount rates. If these estimates or related assumptions change in the future, we may be required to record impairment charges. We generally calculate fair

value as the present value of estimated future cash flows to be generated by the asset using a risk-adjusted discount rate. If the estimate of an intangible asset’s remaining useful life is changed, we will amortize the remaining carrying value of the intangible asset prospectively over the revised remaining useful life.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, in connection with our company-wide annual budgeting and strategic planning process, we determined that indicators of impairment existed in our MammoSite reporting unit, which is included in the Breast Health reportable segment, due to changing market conditions for the brachytherapy market, including downward pressure on procedure volumes due to the continuing adverse economic environment and current trends in breast cancer management, as well as competitive pricing pressures and competition from existing and alternative new technologies. These factors resulted in us lowering the financial projections for MammoSite. As a result, we performed the first step in the long-lived assets impairment test pursuant to ASC 360 and compared MammoSite’s forecasted undiscounted cash flows to the carrying value of its net assets. These undiscounted cash flows were insufficient to recover MammoSite’s carrying value. Therefore, we determined the fair value of MammoSite’s long-lived assets, which are primarily intangible assets, using a discounted cash flow technique. The expected future cash flows are Level 3 inputs under ASC 820 and are those expected to be generated by the market participants, discounted at an appropriate risk-adjusted rate. Based on the fair value of the long-lived assets, we recorded an aggregate impairment charge of $143.5 million to write these intangible assets down to their fair value. The charge was comprised of $123.4 million related to developed technology, which was recorded in cost of product sales, $11.8 million related to customer relationships and $8.3 million related to trade names, which were recorded in impairment of intangible assets. In addition, under the annual goodwill impairment test, the Company recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $76.7 million (see below for further discussion).

Goodwill

We test goodwill at the reporting unit level for impairment on an annual basis and between annual tests if events and circumstances indicate it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying value. Events that would indicate impairment and trigger an interim impairment assessment include, but are not limited to current economic and market conditions, including a decline in market capitalization, a significant adverse change in legal factors, business climate or operational performance of the business, and an adverse action or assessment by a regulator. Our annual impairment test date is the first day of our fiscal fourth quarter.

In performing the test, we utilize the two-step approach prescribed under ASC 350. The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units, as defined, to the fair value of these units. We consider a number of factors to determine the fair value of a reporting unit, including an independent valuation to conduct this test. The valuation is based upon expected future discounted operating cash flows of the reporting unit as well as analysis of recent sales or offerings of similar companies. We base the discount rate used to arrive at a present value as the date of the impairment test on the weighted average cost of capital (“WACC”) of market participants. If the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, we will perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill to its carrying value.

We conducted our fiscal 2010 annual impairment test on the first day of the fourth quarter, consistent with our policy. We utilized discounted cash flow (“DCF”) and market approaches to estimate the fair value of our reporting units as of June 27, 2010, and believe we have used reasonable estimates and assumptions about future revenue, cost projections, cash flows and market multiples. As a result of completing Step 1, all of the Company’s reporting units, except MammoSite, had fair values exceeding their carrying values, and as such, Step 2 of the impairment test was not required for these reporting units. MammoSite’s fair value has declined from fiscal 2009 primarily due to a reduction in its long-term growth rates. The changes in MammoSite’s financial projections are a result of changing market conditions for the brachytherapy market, including downward pressure on procedure volumes due to the continuing adverse economic environment and current

trends in breast cancer management, as well as competitive pricing pressures and competition from existing and alternative new technologies. The DCF calculation of fair value was positively impacted by a reduction in the discount rate to 11.0% from 12.5% used in the fiscal 2009 annual impairment test.

We performed the Step 2 analysis for MammoSite, consistent with the procedures described above, and recorded a $76.7 million goodwill impairment charge. For illustrative purposes had the fair value of MammoSite been 10% lower, the charge would have been higher by $2.5 million. If the fair value of the Company’s other reporting units had been lower by 10%, one reporting unit would have failed Step 1 requiring a Step 2 analysis. This reporting unit is in the Breast Health reportable segment and had a fair value at the annual impairment measurement date that exceeded its carrying value by 4% with goodwill of $256.5 million. The fair value of the reporting unit is determined by use of the DCF, and the key assumptions that drive the fair value in this model are the WACC, terminal values, growth rates, and the amount and timing of expected future cash flows. If the current economic environment were to deteriorate, this would likely result in a higher WACC because market participants would require a higher rate of return. In the DCF as the WACC increases, the fair value decreases. The other significant factor in the DCF is our projected financial information (i.e., amount and timing of expected future cash flows and growth rates) and if these assumptions were to be adversely impacted, this could result in a reduction of the fair value of this reporting unit. For our other reporting units with goodwill aggregating $1.85 billion, we believe that these reporting units are not at risk of failing Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test.

During the first quarter of fiscal 2009, based upon a combination of factors, including the deteriorating macro-economic environment, declines in the stock market and the decline of our market capitalization significantly below the book value of our net assets, we concluded that potential goodwill impairment indicators existed as of December 27, 2008. As a result, we performed an interim goodwill impairment analysis as of December 27, 2008. Step 1 of the impairment analysis indicated that the carrying value of the net assets of certain reporting units, acquired in connection with the Cytyc acquisition, exceeded the estimated fair value of those reporting units. As a result, we were required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test to determine the amount, if any, of goodwill impairment charges for each of the applicable reporting units. The Step 2 analysis required us to perform a hypothetical purchase price allocation for each of these reporting units to determine the implied fair value of goodwill and to compare the implied fair value of goodwill to the recorded amount of goodwill by reporting unit. Due to the complexities and time involved in preparing the Step 1 analysis, we had not commenced the Step 2 analysis as of February 5, 2009, the date we filed our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 27, 2008. As a result of the fact that we had not commenced the Step 2 analysis and the complexity of the analysis required to complete the Step 2 analysis, we were unable to determine that an impairment loss, in accordance with ASC 450, was both probable and reasonably estimable at December 27, 2008. We completed the Step 2 analysis during our second quarter of fiscal 2009, which resulted in an aggregate goodwill impairment charge of $2.34 billion. This impairment charge is comprised of $1.17 billion for GYN Surgical, $908.3 million for Diagnostics, and $265.9 million for Breast Health related to our MammoSite reporting unit acquired from Cytyc. We believe that our procedures and related assumptions for estimating the reporting units’ fair value are reasonable and consistent with the market conditions that existed at the time of the impairment test.

For illustrative purposes, had the fair values of each reporting unit for which we recorded goodwill impairment charges in the second quarter of fiscal 2009 been lower by 10% as of December 27, 2008, we would have recorded an additional impairment charge of $435.5 million. Based on our estimates as of December 27, 2008, the impact of reducing our fair value estimates for our other reporting units, for which we did not record any goodwill impairment charges, by 10% would have had no impact on the goodwill assessment for those reporting units.

We conducted our annual impairment test as of the first day of the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009. In order to complete the annual impairment test, we updated our interim impairment test results and performed detailed analyses estimating the fair value of most of our reporting units utilizing our fiscal 2010 forecast with updated

long-term growth assumptions. For one reporting unit, we utilized the results of our interim impairment test. Pursuant to ASC 350-20-35-29, we concluded that it met the required criteria to use the estimated fair value determined from its interim impairment analysis for this reporting unit because 1) the composition of the assets and liabilities of this reporting unit had not changed significantly since the most recent fair value determination, 2) the most recent fair value determination resulted in a fair value that exceeded the carrying value of the reporting unit by a substantial margin, and 3) management concluded, based on an analysis of current events that had occurred and circumstances that had changed since the most recent fair value determination, that it is remote that the current fair value of the reporting unit would not exceed their carrying amounts.

As a result of completing Step 1, all of our reporting units, except one, had a fair value exceeding their carrying value, and as such Step 2 of the impairment test was not required for these reporting units. For the reporting unit that failed Step 1, we completed Step 2 and determined that an impairment charge was not required due to the fair value of the implied goodwill exceeding the carrying value of the reporting unit’s goodwill. For illustrative purposes, had the fair value of this reporting unit at June 28, 2009 been lower by 10%, the Company still would not have recorded any impairment charge. If the fair value of our other reporting units had been lower by 10%, two reporting units would have failed Step 1 requiring a Step 2 analysis. These reporting units, one in the Diagnostics reportable segment and one in the Skeletal Health reportable segment, had fair values at June 28, 2009 that exceeded their carrying values by 9% and 2%, respectively, and goodwill of $236.0 million and $8.2 million, respectively. We did not record goodwill impairment charges in fiscal 2010 for either of these reporting units.

The estimate of fair value requires significant judgment. Any loss resulting from an impairment test would be reflected in operating income (loss) in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. The annual impairment testing process is subjective and requires judgment at many points throughout the analysis. If these estimates or their related assumptions change in the future, we may be required to record impairment charges for these assets not previously recorded.

Revenue Recognition

We generate revenue from the sale of products, primarily medical imaging systems and diagnostic and surgical disposable products, and related services, which are primarily support and maintenance services on our medical imaging systems.

In September 2009, the FASB ratified ASC Update (ASU) No. 2009-13, Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (ASU 2009-13). ASU 2009-13 amends existing revenue recognition accounting standards that are currently within the scope of ASC, Subtopic 605-25, which is the revenue recognition standard for multiple-element arrangements. ASU 2009-13 provides for three significant changes to the existing multiple element revenue recognition guidance as follows:

Removes the requirement to have objective and reliable evidence of fair value for undelivered elements in an arrangement. This may result in more deliverables being treated as separate units of accounting.

Modifies the manner in which the arrangement consideration is allocated to the separately identified deliverables. ASU 2009-13 requires an entity to allocate revenue in an arrangement using its best estimate of selling prices (“ESP”) of deliverables if a vendor does not have vendor-specific objective evidence of selling price (“VSOE”) or third-party evidence of selling price (“TPE”), if VSOE is not available. Each separate unit of accounting must have a selling price, which can be based on management’s estimate when there is no other means (VSOE or TPE) to determine the selling price of that deliverable. The arrangement consideration is allocated based on the elements’ relative selling prices.

Eliminates use of the residual method and requires an entity to allocate revenue using the relative selling price method, which results in the discount in the transaction being evenly allocated to the separate units of accounting.

In September 2009, the FASB ratified ASU No. 2009-14, Certain Revenue Arrangements that Include Software Elements (ASU 2009-14). ASU 2009-14 amends the existing revenue recognition accounting standards to remove tangible products that contain software components and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality from the scope of industry specific software revenue recognition guidance.

As permitted, we elected to early adopt these new accounting standards at the beginning of our first quarter of fiscal 2010 on a prospective basis for transactions originating or materially modified on or after September 27, 2009. These accounting standards generally do not change the units of accounting for our revenue transactions, and most products and services qualify as separate units of accounting. The impact of adopting these new accounting standards was not material to our financial statements for the year ended September 25, 2010, and if they were applied in the same manner to fiscal 2009 and 2008 would not have had a material impact to revenue recorded in fiscal 2009 or 2008, or any of the interim periods therein.

We recognize product revenue upon shipment provided that there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, there are no uncertainties regarding acceptance, the sales price is fixed or determinable, no right of return exists and collection of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured. Generally, our product arrangements for capital equipment sales, primarily in our Breast Health and Skeletal Health reporting segments, are multiple-element arrangements, including services, such as installation and training, and multiple products. In accordance with ASC 605-25, based on the terms and conditions of the product arrangements, we believe that these services and undelivered products can be accounted for separately from the delivered product element as our delivered products have value to our customers on a stand-alone basis. Accordingly, services not yet performed at the time of product shipment are deferred and recognized as revenue as such services are performed. The relative selling price of any undelivered products is also deferred at the time of shipment and recognized as revenue when these products are delivered. There is no customer right of return in our sales agreements.

Service revenues primarily consist of amounts recorded under service and maintenance contracts and repairs not covered under warranty, installation and training, and shipping and handling costs billed to customers. Service and maintenance contract revenues are recognized ratably over the term of the contract. Other service revenues are recognized as the services are performed.

We typically determine the selling price of our products and services based on VSOE and determine VSOE based on our normal pricing and discounting practices for the specific product or service when sold on a stand-alone basis. In determining VSOE, our policy requires a substantial majority of selling prices for a product or service to be within a reasonably narrow range. We also consider the class of customer, method of distribution, and the geographies into which our products and services are sold when determining VSOE. We typically have had VSOE for our products and services.

If VSOE cannot be established, which may occur in instances when a product or service has not been sold separately, stand-alone sales are too infrequent, or product pricing is not within a narrow range, we attempt to establish the selling price based on TPE. TPE is determined based on competitor prices for similar deliverables when sold separately.

When we cannot determine VSOE or TPE, we use ESP in the allocation of arrangement consideration. The objective of ESP is to determine the price at which we would typically transact a stand-alone sale of the product or service. ESP is determined by considering a number of factors including our pricing policies, internal costs and gross margin objectives, method of distribution, information gathered from experience in customer negotiations, market research and information, recent technological trends, competitive landscape and geographies.

Some of our products have both software and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2009-14, we had determined that except for our CAD products and Dimensions 2D/3D full field digital mammography products (“Dimensions”), the software element in our other products was incidental in accordance with the software revenue recognition rules and were

not within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules, ASC 985-605, Software—Revenue Recognition. We had determined that given the significance of the software component’s functionality to our CAD systems and Dimensions products, which are in the Breast Health segment, these products were within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules.

ASC 985-605 generally requires revenue earned on software arrangements involving multiple elements to be allocated to each element based on their relative VSOE of fair value. If VSOE does not exist for a delivered element, the residual method is applied in which the arrangement consideration is allocated to the undelivered elements based on VSOE with the remaining consideration recognized as revenue for the delivered elements. For multiple-element software arrangements where VSOE of fair value of Post-Contract Customer Support (“PCS”) has been established, we recognize revenue using the residual method at the time all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Upon the release of the Dimensions product in fiscal 2009, we completed an evaluation of the software component in accordance with the software revenue recognition rules. As a result, we had determined that the Dimensions product contained software that was more than incidental to the product as a whole and should be accounted for under the software revenue recognition rules.

In connection with the adoption of ASU 2009-14, we re-evaluated the appropriate revenue recognition treatment of our products and determined that the Dimensions products, which have both software and non-software components that function together to deliver the products’ essential functionality (i.e., it is a tangible product), are scoped out of ASC 985-605, however, our CAD products will continue to be subject to ASC 985-605. Dimensions transactions entered into prior to the first quarter of fiscal 2010 will continue to be accounted for under ASC 985-605.

Under customer usage agreements, we install certain equipment (for example, a ThinPrep Processor or a ThinPrep Imaging System) at customer sites and customers commit to purchasing minimum quantities of disposable products at a stated price (generally including a usage fee for the equipment) over a defined contract term, which is typically between three and five years. Revenue is recognized over the term of the customer usage agreement as disposable products are delivered. We also rent certain equipment to customers and revenue from rental agreements is recorded over the term of the rental agreements.

Product Warranties

Products sold are generally covered by a warranty for a period of one year. We accrue a warranty reserve at the time of revenue recognition for estimated costs to provide warranty services. Our estimate of costs to service our warranty obligations is based on historical experience and expectation of future conditions. To the extent we experience increased or decreased warranty claim activity or increased or decreased costs associated with servicing those claims, our warranty accrual will increase or decrease, respectively, resulting in decreased or increased gross profit. Our warranty accrual was approximately $2.8 million, $5.6 million and $9.1 million in fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Stock-Based Compensation

We recognize stock-based compensation expense associated with the fair value of stock options and restricted stock units that we issue to our employees. Determining the amount of stock-based compensation to be recorded requires us to develop estimates to be used in calculating the grant-date fair value of stock options. We use a binomial lattice model to determine the fair value of our stock options. We consider a number of factors to determine the fair value of stock options including the advice of an outside valuation advisor and the advisor’s model. The model requires us to make estimates of the following assumptions:

Expected volatility—We are responsible for estimating volatility and have considered a number of factors, including third-party estimates, when estimating volatility. We currently use a combination of historical and implied volatility, which is weighted based on a number of factors.

Expected term—We use historical employee exercise and option expiration data to estimate the expected term assumption. We believe that this historical data is currently the best estimate of the expected term of a new option, and that generally, all of our employees exhibit similar exercise behavior.

Risk-free interest rate—The yield on zero-coupon U.S. Treasury securities for a period that is commensurate with the expected term assumption is used as the risk-free interest rate.

The amount of stock-based compensation expense recognized during a period is based on the value of the portion of the awards that are ultimately expected to vest. ASC 718, Stock Compensation, requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. Based on an analysis of historical forfeitures, we have determined a specific forfeiture rate for certain employee groups and have applied forfeiture rates ranging from 0% to 5% as of September 25, 2010 depending on the specific employee group. This analysis is re-evaluated periodically and the forfeiture rate is adjusted as necessary. Ultimately, the actual expense recognized over the vesting period will only be for those awards that vest.

We recognized $34.2 million, $32.9 million and $25.7 million of stock-based compensation expense for employee equity awards in fiscal years 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. As of September 25, 2010, there was $32.7 million and $32.5 million of unrecognized compensation expense related to stock options and restricted stock units, respectively, that we expect to recognize over a weighted-average period of 3.3 years and 2.0 years, respectively.

Income Taxes

We use the asset and liability method for accounting for income taxes. Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the difference between financial reporting and taxes bases of our assets and liabilities. We measure deferred tax assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when we expect the differences to reverse.

We have recognized net deferred tax liabilities of $882.8 million at September 25, 2010 and $993.0 million at September 26, 2009. The liabilities primarily relate to deferred taxes associated with our acquisitions and the debt discount and original issuance discount on our Convertible Notes. The tax assets relate primarily net operating loss carryforwards, accruals and reserves, stock-based compensation, research credits and the payment we received on the sale of the Gestiva asset. We record a valuation allowance to reduce our deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. While we have considered future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in assessing the need for the valuation allowance, in the event we were to determine that we would be able to realize our deferred tax assets in the future in excess of the net recorded amount, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset would increase income in the period such determination was made. Likewise, should we determine that we would not be able to realize all or part of our net deferred tax asset in the future, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset would be charged to income in the period such determination was made.

On September 30, 2007, we adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation (FIN) No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes—an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (codified primarily in ASC 740, Income Taxes), which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements. FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement criteria for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition and defines the criteria that must be met for the benefits of a tax position to be recognized. As a result of our adoption of FIN 48, we recorded the cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle of $0.5 million as a decrease to opening retained earnings.

We had gross unrecognized tax benefits, including interest, of approximately $33.5 million as of September 25, 2010 and $29.2 million as of September 26, 2009. At September 25, 2010, $33.5 million represents the amount of unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would result in a reduction of the Company’s effective tax rate. In the next twelve months, it is reasonably possible that we will reduce our unrecognized tax benefits by $4.7 million due to expiration of statute of limitations and settlements with taxing authorities, of which $3.5 million will reduce the Company’s effective tax rate.

In the ordinary course of global business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. Judgment is required in determining our worldwide income tax provision. In our opinion, we have made adequate provisions for income taxes for all years subject to audit. Although we believe our estimates are reasonable, no assurance can be given that the final tax outcome of these matters will not be different than that which is reflected in our historical income tax provisions and accruals. In the event our assumptions are incorrect, the differences could have a material impact on our income tax provision and operating results in the period in which such determination is made.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In December 2007, the FASB issued ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations (formerly SFAS No. 141 (Revised 2007), Business Combinations). This Statement retains the fundamental requirements in SFAS 141 that the acquisition method of accounting (which SFAS 141 called the purchase method) be used for all business combinations and for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination. ASC 805 requires an acquirer to recognize the assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree at the acquisition date, measured at their fair values as of that date, with limited exceptions. ASC 805 replaces SFAS 141’s cost-allocation process, which required the cost of an acquisition to be allocated to the individual assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their estimated fair values. ASC 805 retains the guidance in SFAS 141 for identifying and recognizing intangible assets separately from goodwill. ASC 805 will now require acquisition costs to be expensed as incurred, and changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances and income tax uncertainties after the acquisition date generally to affect income tax expense. ASC 805 applies prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. We adopted ASC 805 effective September 27, 2009. The impact of the adoption of ASC 805 is reflected in our fiscal 2010 consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements—An amendment of ARB No. 51 (codified within ASC Topic 810, Consolidation). SFAS 160 amends Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB) No. 51 to establish accounting and reporting standards for the noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. The amount of net income attributable to the noncontrolling interest will be included in consolidated net income on the face of the income statement. This accounting standard clarifies that changes in a parent’s ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in deconsolidation are equity transactions if the parent retains its controlling financial interest. In addition, this Statement requires that a parent recognize a gain or loss in net income when a subsidiary is deconsolidated. This accounting guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning on or after December 15, 2008, which is our 2010 fiscal year. The adoption of this accounting guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R) (SFAS 167) (codified in ASU 2009-17). SFAS 167 modifies how a company determines when an entity that is insufficiently capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be consolidated. SFAS 167 clarifies that the determination of whether a company is required to consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entity’s purpose and design and a company’s ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly

impact the entity’s economic performance. SFAS 167 requires an ongoing reassessment of whether a company is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity. SFAS 167 also requires additional disclosures about a company’s involvement in variable interest entities and any significant changes in risk exposure due to that involvement. SFAS 167 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2009, which is our 2011 fiscal year. We have not completed our assessment of the impact SFAS 167, if any, will have on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Item 7A.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Financial Instruments, Other Financial Instruments, and Derivative Commodity Instruments. ASC 825, Financial Instruments, requires disclosure about fair value of financial instruments. Financial instruments consist of cash equivalents, accounts receivable, cost-method investments, accounts payable and debt obligations. Except for our outstanding convertible note, the fair value of these financial instruments approximates their carrying amount. At September 25, 2010, we had $1.725 billion of principal of Convertible Notes outstanding, which was recorded at $1.45 billion, net of the unamortized debt discount. The fair value of our Convertible Notes was approximately $1.62 billion as of September 25, 2010 based on the trading price as of that date.

Primary Market Risk Exposures. Our primary market risk exposure is in the areas of interest rate risk and foreign currency exchange rate risk. The return from cash and cash equivalents will vary as short-term interest rates change. A hypothetical 10% increase or decrease in interest rates, however, would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk. Our international business is subject to risks, including, but not limited to: unique economic conditions, changes in political climate, differing tax structures, other regulations and restrictions, and foreign exchange rate volatility. Accordingly, our future results could be materially adversely impacted by changes in these or other factors.

We conduct business worldwide and maintain sales and service offices outside the United States as well as manufacturing facilities in Germany, Costa Rica and Canada. The expenses of our international offices are denominated in local currencies, except at our Costa Rica subsidiary, where the majority of the business is conducted in U.S. dollars. Our international sales are denominated in a number of currencies, primarily the Euro and U.S. dollar. Fluctuations in the foreign currency rates could affect our sales, cost of goods and operating margins and could result in exchange losses. In addition, currency devaluations can result in a loss if we hold deposits of that currency.

We believe that the operating expenses of our international subsidiaries that are incurred in local currencies will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. Our operating results and certain assets and liabilities that are denominated in the Euro are affected by changes in the relative strength of the U.S. dollar against the Euro. Our expenses denominated in Euros are positively affected when the United States dollar strengthens against the Euro and adversely affected when the United States dollar weakens. However, we believe that the foreign currency exchange risk is not significant. A hypothetical 10% increase or decrease in foreign currencies that we transact in would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. During fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, we incurred net foreign exchange losses of $1.1 million, $2.3 million and $0.7 million, respectively.

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

Our Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data are listed under Part IV, Item 15, in this report.

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

None.

Item 9A.

Controls and Procedures.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Securities Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, as ours are designed to do, and management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.

As of September 25, 2010, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

Report of Management on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as a process designed by, or under the supervision of our principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by our board of directors, management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

•

pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and disposition of our assets;

•

provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorization of our management and directors; and

•

provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Our internal control system was designed to provide reasonable assurance to our management and board of directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Management has assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of September 25, 2010. In making this assessment, we used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.

Based on management’s assessment, we believe that, as of September 25, 2010, our internal control over financial reporting is effective at a reasonable assurance level based on these criteria.

Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. This report in which they expressed an unqualified opinion is included below.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Hologic, Inc.:

We have audited Hologic Inc.’s (the “Company”) internal control over financial reporting as of September 25, 2010, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Report of Management on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, Hologic, Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of September 25, 2010, based on the COSO criteria.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Hologic, Inc. as of September 25, 2010 and September 26, 2009 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and other comprehensive loss and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended September 25, 2010 of Hologic, Inc. and our report dated November 24, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

November 24, 2010

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

During the quarter ended September 25, 2010, there have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Item 9B.

Other Information.

None.

PART III

Item 10.

Directors, and Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

Pursuant to Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we have adopted a Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers that applies to our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and controller, and other persons performing similar functions. Our Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers is publicly available on our website at www.hologic.com under Investor Relations. We intend to satisfy the disclosure requirement under Item 5.05 of Current Report on Form 8-K regarding an amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of this code by posting such information on our website, at the address specified above.

The additional information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our Definitive Proxy Statement for our annual meeting of stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the close of our fiscal year.

Item 11.

Executive Compensation.

The information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our Definitive Proxy Statement for our annual meeting of stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the close of our fiscal year.

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.

We maintain a number of equity compensation plans for employees, officers, directors and others whose efforts contribute to our success. The table below sets forth certain information as of the end of our fiscal year ended September 25, 2010 regarding the shares of our common stock available for grant or granted under stock option plans and equity incentives that (i) were approved by our stockholders, and (ii) were not approved by our stockholders.

Equity Compensation Plan Information


Plan Category	Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights (a)		Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights (b)		Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)) (c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders		18,778,182	$	13.73		11,290,731
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders (1)		442,577	$	3.96		—

Total		19,220,759	$	13.51		11,290,731

(1)	Includes the following plans: 1997 Employee Equity Incentive Plan and 2000 Acquisition Equity Incentive Plan. A description of each of these plans is as follows:

1997 Employee Equity Incentive Plan. The purposes of the 1997 Employee Equity Incentive Plan (the “1997 Plan”), adopted by the Board of Directors in May 1997, were to attract and retain key employees, consultants and advisors, to provide an incentive for them to assist us in achieving long-range performance goals, and to enable such person to participate in our long-term growth. In general, under the 1997 Plan, all employees,

consultants, and advisors who were not executive officers or directors were eligible to participate in the 1997 Plan. The 1997 Plan is administered by our Compensation Committee. Participants in the 1997 Plan are eligible to receive non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and performance shares. A total of 4,400,000 shares of our common stock were reserved for issuance under the 1997 Plan. Of the shares reserved for issuance under the 1997 Plan, options to purchase 263,747 shares are outstanding as of September 25, 2010. In September 2005, our Compensation Committee determined that no further awards would be made under this plan and cancelled all remaining 332,168 shares available for issuance under the 1997 Plan that were not subject to outstanding stock option awards.

2000 Acquisition Incentive Plan. The purpose of the 2000 Acquisition Equity Incentive Plan (the “2000 Plan”), adopted by the Board of Directors in April 2001, was to attract and retain (a) employees, consultants and advisors, of newly acquired businesses who have been or were being hired as employees, consultants or advisors of our company or any of our consolidated subsidiaries, and (b) employees, consultants and advisors, of our company who have or were anticipated to provide significant assistance in connection with the acquisition of a newly acquired business or its integration with our company, and to provide such persons an incentive for them to achieve long-range performance goals, and to enable them to participate in our long-term growth. In general, under the 2000 Plan, only employees, consultants and advisors who were not officers or directors of our company were eligible to participate in the 2000 Plan. The 2000 Plan was administered by our Compensation Committee. Participants in the 2000 Plan were eligible to receive non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and performance shares. A total of 3,200,000 shares of our common stock were reserved for issuance under the 2000 Plan. Of the shares reserved for issuance under the 2000 Plan, options to purchase 178,830 shares were outstanding as of September 25, 2010. In September 2005, our Compensation Committee determined that no further awards would be made under this plan and cancelled all remaining 835,408 shares, available for issuance under the 2000 Plan that were not subject to outstanding stock option awards.

Item 13.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.

Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

PART IV

Item 15.

Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:

(1) Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Consolidated Financial Statements

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 25, 2010 and September 26, 2009

Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended September 25, 2010, September 26, 2009 and September 27, 2008

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity and Comprehensive Loss for the years ended September 25, 2010, September 26, 2009 and September 27, 2008

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended September 25, 2010, September 26, 2009 and September 27, 2008

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(2) Financial Statement Schedules

All schedules have been omitted because they are not required or because the required information is given in the Consolidated Financial Statements or Notes thereto.

(b) Listing of Exhibits


			Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit Number		Exhibit Description	Form	Filing Date/ Period End Date

	2.1	Agreement and Plan of Merger between Hologic, Nor’easter Corp. and Cytyc dated May 20, 2007.	8-K	05/21/2007

	2.2	Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of June 8, 2008, by and among Hologic, Thunder Tech Corp. and Third Wave Technologies, Inc.	8-K	06/09/2008

	3.1	Certificate of Incorporation of Hologic.	S-1	01/24/1990

	3.2	Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of Hologic.	10-Q	03/30/1996

	3.3	Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of Hologic.	10-K	09/24/2005

	3.4	Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of Hologic.	8-K	10/22/2007

	3.5	Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation of Hologic.	8-K	03/11/2008

	3.6	Second Amended and Restated By-laws of Hologic, as amended.	8-K	11/09/2009

	3.7	Amended and Restated Certificate of Designations of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of Hologic.	8-A	04/03/2008

	4.1	Specimen Certificate for Shares of Hologic’s Common Stock.	8-A	01/31/1990

	4.2	Description of Capital Stock (Contained in Hologic’s Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, filed as Exhibits 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 hereto).

	4.3	Amended and Restated Rights Agreement dated April 2, 2008.	8-A	04/03/2008

	4.4	Form of Rights Certificate.	8-K	09/26/2002


			Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit Number		Exhibit Description	Form	Filing Date/ Period End Date

	4.5	Indenture, dated as of December 10, 2007, by and between Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, and Hologic.	8-K	12/10/2007

	4.6	First Supplemental Indenture, dated December 10, 2007, by and between Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, and Hologic.	8-K	12/10/2007

	4.7**	Second Supplemental Indenture, dated November 23, 2010, by and between Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, and Hologic.

	10.01*	Second Amended and Restated 1990 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan.	10-Q	03/30/1996

	10.02*	1995 Combination Stock Option Plan.	10-Q	03/30/1996

	10.03*	Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity Incentive Plan.	10-Q	03/25/2006

	10.04*	Amendment No. 1 to Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity Incentive Plan.	S-8	10/23/2007

	10.05*	Amendment No. 2 to Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	10/22/2007

	10.06*	Amendment No. 3 to Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	12/12/2008

	10.07	1997 Employee Equity Incentive Plan.	S-8	08/20/1997

	10.08	2000 Acquisition Equity Incentive Plan.	10-K	09/29/2001

	10.09*	Hologic 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	03/11/2008

	10.10*	Form of Employee Stock Option Award Agreement under 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	11/17/2008

	10.11*	Form of Employee Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement Under 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	11/17/2008

	10.12*	Form of Special Retention Employee Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement Under 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.	10-Q	06/26/2010

	10.13*	Form of Independent Director Stock Option Award Agreement under 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	12/12/2008

	10.14*	Form of Independent Director Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement Under 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.	8-K	12/12/2008

	10.15*	Amended and Restated 2008 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.	10-K	09/26/2009

	10.16*	Hologic 2010 Short-Term Incentive Plan.	8-K	11/17/2009

	10.17*	Cytyc Corporation 1995 Stock Plan.	S-8	10/23/2007

	10.18*	Cytyc Corporation 1995 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan.	S-8	10/23/2007

	10.19*	Cytyc Corporation 1998 Stock Plan of Pro Duct Health, Inc.	S-8	10/23/2007

	10.20*	Cytyc Corporation 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan.	S-8	10/23/2007

	10.21*	Cytyc Corporation 2004 Omnibus Stock Plan.	S-8	10/23/2007


			Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit Number		Exhibit Description	Form	Filing Date/ Period End Date

	10.22*	Form of Indemnification Agreement (as executed with each director of Hologic).	8-K	03/06/2009

	10.23*	Amended and Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.	10-Q	12/27/2008

	10.24*	Rabbi Trust Agreement.	10-K	09/30/2006

	10.25*	Form of Officer Severance Agreement including list of officers to whom provided.	10-Q	03/25/2006

	10.26*	Transition Agreement dated November 5, 2009, by and between Hologic and John W. Cumming.	8-K	11/09/2009

	10.27*†	Form of Senior Vice President Change of Control Agreement including list of officers to whom provided.	10-Q	12/27/2008

	10.28*	Form of Senior Executive Officer Change of Control Agreement including list of officers to whom provided.	8-K	11/17/2009

	10.29*	Second Retention Agreement with Robert A. Cascella dated as of October 22, 2007.	8-K	10/22/2007

	10.30*	Restricted Stock Grant Agreement with Robert A. Cascella dated as of October 22, 2007.	8-K	10/22/2007

	10.31*	Executive Financial Services Program.	10-K	09/27/2008

	10.32	Facility Lease (Danbury) dated as of December 30, 1995 by and among Melvin J. Powers and Mary P. Powers D/B/A M&N Realty and Lorad.	Trex Medical Corporation S-1	03/29/1996

	10.33	Lease Agreement (Danbury and Bedford) by and between BONE (DE) QRS 15-12, INC., and Hologic dated as of August 28, 2002.	10-K	09/28/2002

	10.34	First Amendment to Lease Agreement (Danbury and Bedford) by and between BONE (DE) QRS 15-12, INC., and Hologic dated as of October 29, 2007.	10-K	09/29/2007

	10.35	Office Lease dated December 31, 2003 between Cytyc and Marlborough Campus Limited Partnership.	Cytyc Corporation 10-K	12/31/2003

	10.36	Lease Agreement by and between Zona Franca Coyol S.A. and Cytyc Surgical Products Costa Rica S.A. dated April 23, 2007.	10-K	09/29/2007

	10.37	Lease Agreement by and between 445 Simarano Drive, Marlborough LLC and Cytyc dated July 11, 2006.	10-K	09/29/2007

	10.38	Lease Guaranty dated October 22, 2007 between Bel Marlborough I LLC and Hologic, as guarantor thereunder.	8-K	10/22/2007

	10.39	Supply Agreement between Cytyc, Whatman, Inc. and Whatman SA dated as of December 31, 2000, as amended, October 16, 2001 and May 2, 2002.	Cytyc Corporation 10-K	12/31/2002

	10.40	Form of Exchange Agreement.	8-K	11/18/2010


		Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	Filing Date/ Period End Date

12.1**	Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

14.1	Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers.	8-K	10/22/2007

21.1**	Subsidiaries of Hologic.

23.1**	Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

31.1**	Certification of Hologic’s CEO pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2**	Certification of Hologic’s CFO pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1***	Certification of Hologic’s CEO pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.2***	Certification of Hologic’s CFO pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101.INS****	XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH****	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

101.CAL****	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

101.DEF****	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document

101.LAB****	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

101.PRE****	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

*	Indicates management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

**	Filed herewith.

***	Furnished herewith.

****

Pursuant to applicable securities laws and regulations, the Company is deemed to have complied with the reporting obligation relating to the submission of interactive data files in such exhibits and is not subject to liability under any anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws as long as the Company has made a good faith attempt to comply with the submission requirements and promptly amends the interactive data files after becoming aware that the interactive data files fails to comply with the submission requirements. Users of this data are advised that, pursuant to Rule 406T, these interactive data files are deemed not filed and otherwise are not subject to liability.

†	Exhibit 10.27 filed herewith contains an updated list of officers to whom this agreement is provided.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


HOLOGIC, INC.

By:		/s/ ROBERT A. CASCELLA
		Robert A. Cascella
		*Chief Executive Officer*

Date: November 24, 2010

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.


Signature	Title	Date

/s/ ROBERT A. CASCELLA ROBERT A. CASCELLA	Director, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)	November 24, 2010

/s/ GLENN P. MUIR GLENN P. MUIR	Director, Executive Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer, (Principal Financial Officer)	November 24, 2010

/s/ ROBERT H. LAVALLEE ROBERT H. LAVALLEE	Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)	November 24, 2010

/s/ JOHN W. CUMMING JOHN W. CUMMING	Chairman, Director and Executive Officer	November 24, 2010

/s/ SALLY W. CRAWFORD SALLY W. CRAWFORD	Director	November 24, 2010

/s/ DAVID R. LAVANCE, JR. DAVID R. LAVANCE, JR.	Lead Independent Director	November 24, 2010

/s/ NANCY L. LEAMING NANCY L. LEAMING	Director	November 24, 2010

/s/ LAWRENCE M. LEVY LAWRENCE M. LEVY	Director	November 24, 2010

/s/ ELAINE S. ULLIAN ELAINE S. ULLIAN	Director	November 24, 2010

/s/ WAYNE WILSON WAYNE WILSON	Director	November 24, 2010

Hologic, Inc.

Consolidated Financial Statements

Years ended September 25, 2010, September 26, 2009 and September 27, 2008

Contents


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Consolidated Financial Statements			F-2

Consolidated Financial Statements

Consolidated Balance Sheets			F-3

Consolidated Statements of Operations			F-4

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity and Comprehensive Loss			F-5

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows			F-6

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements			F-8

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

on Consolidated Financial Statements

The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Hologic, Inc.:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Hologic, Inc. as of September 25, 2010 and September 26, 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended September 25, 2010. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial