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 December 31, 2008
|
|
or
|
|
|
o
|
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 001-33874
Xcorporeal,
Inc.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
75-2242792
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
Incorporation
or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
Number)
|
12121
Wilshire Blvd., Suite 350
Los
Angeles, California 90025
(Address
of principal executive offices and zip code)
Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code: (310) 923-9990
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which
Registered
|
Common
Stock, $0.0001 par value
|
|
NYSE
Amex
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes £ No x
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 if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K(§229.405 of this chapter) 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.
Large
accelerated filer £
|
Accelerated
filer £
|
Non-accelerated
filer £
(Do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Smaller
reporting company x
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes £ No x
The
aggregate market value of the voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the
registrant computed by reference to the closing price of the registrant’s common
stock on June 30, 2008, as reported on the NYSE Amex, was approximately
$7,288,459. For purposes of this disclosure, shares of common stock held by
persons who hold more than 5% of the outstanding shares of common stock and
shares held by executive officers and directors of the registrant have been
excluded because such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination
of executive officer or affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive
determination for other purposes.
As of
March 23, 2009, the registrant had issued and outstanding 14,754,687 shares of
common stock, $0.0001 par value per share.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Forward
Looking Statements
|
3
|
|
PART
I
|
|
Item
1.
|
Business
|
4
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
11
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
20
|
Item
2.
|
Properties
|
20
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
20
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
22
|
|
PART
II
|
|
Item
5.
|
Market
For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Maters and Issuer
Purchases of Equity
|
23
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
23
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
23
|
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
28
|
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
29
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
|
50
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
50
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
51
|
|
PART
III
|
|
Item
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
52
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
54
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
|
62
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions and Director
Independence
|
63
|
Item
14:
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
64
|
|
|
|
PART
IV
|
|
|
|
Item
15:
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
65
|
Signatures
|
|
66
|
FORWARD
LOOKING STATEMENTS
Unless
the context otherwise indicates or requires, as used in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K, or the “Annual Report”, references to “Xcorporeal, ”“we,” “us,” “our”
or the “Company” refer to Xcorporeal, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and prior to
October 12, 2007, the company which is now our subsidiary and known as
Xcorporeal Operations, Inc., or “Operations”.
This
Annual Report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the financial
condition, results of operations, business strategies, operating efficiencies or
synergies, competitive positions, growth opportunities for existing products,
plans and objectives of management, markets for our stock and other matters.
Statements in this Annual Report that are not historical facts are
“forward-looking statements” for the purpose of the safe harbor provided by
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the “Exchange
Act”, and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, or the “Securities Act”.
Forward-looking
statements reflect our current expectations or forecasts of future events.
Forward-looking statements generally can be identified by the use of
forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,”
“intend,” “estimate,” “believe,” “project,” “continue,” “plan,” “forecast,” or
other similar words. Such forward-looking statements, including, without
limitation, those relating to our future business prospects, revenues and
income, wherever they occur, are necessarily estimates reflecting the best
judgment of our senior management on the date on which they were made, or if no
date is stated, as of the date of this Annual Report. These forward-looking
statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those
described in the “Risk Factors” described below, that may affect the operations,
performance, development and results of our business. Because the factors
discussed in this Annual Report could cause our actual results or outcomes to
differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by
us or on our behalf, you should not place undue reliance on any such
forward-looking statements. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not
possible for us to predict which factors will arise. In addition, we cannot
assess the impact of each factor on our business or the extent to which any
factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially
from those contained in any forward-looking statements.
You
should understand that, in addition to those factors discussed in the section
captioned “Risk Factors,” and events discussed in the section captioned
“Business - Recent Developments,” factors that could affect our future results
and could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed in
such forward-looking statements, include, but are not limited to:
·
|
the
effect of receiving a “going concern” statement in our independent
registered public accounting firm’s report on our 2008 financial
statements;
|
·
|
our
significant capital needs and ability to obtain financing both on a
short-term and a long-term basis;
|
·
|
the
results of the arbitration proceeding with National Quality Care, Inc., or
“NQCI”;
|
·
|
our
ability to meet continued listing standards of NYSE Amex (formerly
American Stock Exchange);
|
·
|
our
ability to successfully research and develop marketable
products;
|
·
|
our
ability to obtain regulatory approval to market and distribute our
products;
|
·
|
anticipated
trends and conditions in the industry in which we operate, including
regulatory changes;
|
·
|
general
economic conditions; and
|
·
|
other
risks and uncertainties as may be detailed from time to time in our public
announcements and filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, or the “SEC”.
|
Although
we believe that our expectations are reasonable, we cannot assure you that our
expectations will prove to be correct. Should any one or more of these risks or
uncertainties materialize, or should any underlying assumptions prove incorrect,
actual results may vary materially from those described in this annual report as
anticipated, believed, estimated, expected or intended.
These
factors are not exhaustive, and new factors may emerge or changes to the
foregoing factors may occur that could impact our business. Except to the extent
required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise
any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future
events or any other reason. All subsequent forward-looking statements
attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in
their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to herein. In
light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events
discussed in this Annual Report may not occur. You should review carefully the
sections captioned “Risk Factors,” “Business - Recent Developments” and
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” included elsewhere in this Annual Report for a more complete
discussion of these and other factors that may affect our business.
PART
I
Item
1. Business
Overview
We are a
medical device company developing an innovative extra-corporeal platform
technology to be used in devices to replace the function of various human
organs. These devices will seek to provide patients with improved, efficient and
cost effective therapy. The platform leads to three initial
products:
·
|
A
Portable Artificial Kidney, or “PAK”, for attended care Renal Replacement
Therapy, or “RRT”, for patients suffering from Acute Renal Failure, or
“ARF”
|
·
|
A
PAK for home hemodialysis for patients suffering from End Stage Renal
Disease, or “ESRD”
|
·
|
A
Wearable Artificial Kidney, or “WAK”, for continuous ambulatory
hemodialysis for treatment of ESRD
|
We have
completed functional prototypes of our attended care and home PAKs that we plan
to commercialize after obtaining notification clearance from the Food and Drug
Administration, or “FDA”, under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic, or “FDC”, Act based on the existence of predicate devices, which,
subject to our capital limitations described below, we plan to seek in the
future. We have demonstrated a feasibility prototype of the WAK and we will
determine whether to devote any available resources to the development of the
WAK; commercialization of the WAK will require development of a functional
prototype and likely a full pre-market approval, or “PMA”, by the FDA, which
could take several years or longer. Unless we are able to raise funds to satisfy
our current liabilities and other obligations as they become due and obtain
additional debt or equity financing, as more fully described below in section
captioned “Business - Recent Developments”, we will not be able to submit a
510(k) notification with the FDA for the PAK or the WAK.
Our PAK
for the attended care market is a portable, multifunctional renal replacement
device that will offer cost-effective therapy for those patients suffering from
ARF, causing a rapid decline in kidney function. We have completed our
functional prototype of this product, which is currently undergoing bench
testing, and, subject to our capital limitations described below, plan to submit
a 510(k) filing with the FDA in the future. We plan to commercialize this
product after receiving clearance from the FDA. Timing of FDA clearance is
uncertain at this time. Unless we are able to raise funds to satisfy our current
liabilities and other obligations as they become due and obtain additional debt
or equity financing, we will not be able to submit a 510(k) notification with
the FDA for this product.
Our PAK
for the home hemodialysis market is a device for patients suffering from ESRD,
in whom the kidneys have ceased to function. We have also completed our
functional prototype of this product, which is currently undergoing bench
testing, and, subject to our capital limitations described below, we intend to
submit a 510(k) with the FDA in the future. Unless we are able to raise funds to
satisfy our current liabilities and other obligations as they become due and
obtain additional debt or equity financing, we will not be able to submit a
510(k) notification with the FDA for this product. Clinical trials would be
anticipated to commence after the FDA clearance is received.
Our WAK
is a device for the chronic treatment of ESRD. We have successfully demonstrated
a prototype system that weighs less than 6 kg., is battery operated, and can be
worn by an ambulatory patient. Assuming that the Technology Transaction
described below closes and we are able to raise funds to satisfy our current
liabilities and other obligations as they become due and obtain additional debt
or equity financing, we will evaluate the feasibility of furthering our
development of this product over the next 12 months.
In 2009,
to the extent we have or are able to obtain sufficient funds to do so, we plan
to continue testing and developing the technology for our extra-corporeal platform. We
will also implement our validation and verification strategy including bench
testing, clinical testing and regulatory strategy in the U.S. and
abroad.
While we
may eventually exploit our technology’s potential Congestive Heart Failure, or
“CHF”, applications through licensing or strategic arrangements, we will focus
initially on the renal replacement applications described above.
We have
focused much of our efforts on development of the PAK, which we do not believe
has been derived from the Technology (as defined below) covered by the License
Agreement. As described in the section captioned “Background of the Technology
Transaction,” once the Technology Transaction has closed and the results of the
arbitration proceeding are final, we will determine whether to devote any
available resources to development of the WAK. Because none of our products is
yet at a stage where it can be marketed commercially and because of the capital
limitations that we are experiencing, we are not able to predict what portion of
our future business, if any, will be derived from each of our
products.
We are a
development stage company, have generated no revenues to date and have been
unprofitable since our inception, and will incur substantial additional
operating losses for at least the next twelve months as we continue, to the
extent available, to allocate resources to research, development, clinical
trials, commercial operations, and other activities. We do not believe our
existing cash reserves will be sufficient to satisfy our current liabilities and
other obligations before we achieve profitability. Our ability to meet such
obligations as they become due will depend on our ability to secure debt or
equity financing. Unless we are able to obtain funds sufficient to support our
operations and to satisfy our ongoing capital requirements, as more fully
described below, we will not be able to develop any of our products, submit
510(k) notifications or PMA applications to the FDA, conduct clinical trials or
otherwise commercialize any of our products. We may not be able to
obtain needed funds on acceptable terms, or at all, and there is substantial
doubt of our ability to continue as a going concern. Accordingly, our historical
operations and financial information are not indicative of our future operating
results, financial condition, or ability to operate profitably as a commercial
enterprise.
Our
History
We were
incorporated in the State of Delaware in 1992. As of June 30, 2007, we did not
conduct any active business and were considered a “shell company” as defined in
Rule 12(b)-2 promulgated under the Exchange Act. On August 10, 2007, we entered
into a merger agreement with Xcorporeal, Inc., referred to herein as “pre-merger
Xcorporeal”, which conducted the business described in this Annual Report before
the merger became effective on October 12, 2007. Pre-merger Xcorporeal became
our wholly-owned subsidiary and changed its name to “Xcorporeal Operations,
Inc”, referred to herein as “Operations.” We changed our name from “CT Holdings
Enterprises, Inc.” to “Xcorporeal, Inc.” All of our former officers and
directors resigned, and all of the officers and directors of pre-merger
Xcorporeal became our officers and directors, effective as of October 12,
2007.
On
September 1, 2006, Operations entered into a License Agreement with National
Quality Care, Inc. pursuant to which we obtained the exclusive rights to the
technology relating to our kidney failure treatment, and other medical devices.
As a result, we became a development stage company focused on researching,
developing and commercializing technology and products related to the treatment
of kidney failure. On December 1, 2006, Operations initiated arbitration
proceedings against NQCI for its breach of the License Agreement, which remains
pending. Throughout this Annual Report we refer to the License Agreement with
NQCI as the “License Agreement”. For a complete description of the License
Agreement and the arbitration proceedings please see section captioned “Recent
Developments - Background of the Technology Transaction” below and Item 3 -
Legal Proceedings.
Recent
Developments
Corporate Restructuring
The deterioration of the economy over
the last year, coupled with the prolonged and continuing delay in consummating
the Technology Transaction, has significantly adversely affected our Company.
Many of the expectations on which we had based our 2008 and 2009 business
development plans slowly eroded as a result of the lengthy arbitration
proceeding with NQCI commenced in 2006 and continuing into the second quarter of
2009. The possibility of an adverse decision in the arbitration proceeding with
respect to our ownership right to the Technology has been and continues to be a
major factor in our inability to secure debt or equity financing. Accordingly,
we have had to modify our activities and business. In response to the general
economic downturn affecting the development of our products and liquidity
condition, we have instituted a variety of measures in an attempt to conserve
cash and reduce our operating expenses. Our actions included:
·
|
Reductions
in our labor force – On March 13, 2009, we gave notice of employment
termination to 19 employees. This represents a total work-force reduction
of approximately 73%. We paid accrued vacation benefits of approximately
$70,000 to the terminated employees. The layoffs and our other efforts
focused on streamlining our operations designed to reduce our annual
expenses by approximately $3.5 million to a current operating burn rate of
approximately $200,000 per month. These actions had to be carefully and
thoughtfully executed and we will take additional actions, if necessary.
Most important to us in making these difficult decisions is to give as
much consideration as possible to all of our employees, whom we greatly
value. We hope to be in the financial position in the near future to offer
re-employment to certain of our terminated
employees.
|
·
|
Refocusing
our available assets and employee resources on the development of the
PAK.
|
·
|
Continuing
vigorous efforts to minimize or defer our operating
expenses.
|
·
|
Exploring
various strategic alternatives, which may include the license of certain
of our intellectual property rights, as a means to further develop our
technologies, among other possible transactions and
alternatives.
|
·
|
Intensifying
our search to obtain additional financing to support our operations and to
satisfy our ongoing capital requirements in order to improve our liquidity
position.
|
·
|
Continuing
to prosecute our patents and take other steps to perfect our intellectual
property rights.
|
In light of the unprecedented economic
slow down, lack of access to capital markets and prolonged arbitration
proceeding with NQCI, we were compelled to undertake the efforts outlined above
in order to remain in the position to continue our operations. We hope to be
able to obtain additional financing to meet our cash obligations as they become
due and otherwise proceed with our business plan. Our ability to execute on our
current business plan is dependent upon our ability to obtain equity or debt
financing, develop and market our products, and, ultimately, to generate
revenue. Unless we are able to raise financing sufficient to support our
operations and to satisfy our ongoing financing requirements, we will not be
able to develop any of our products, submit 510(k) notifications to the FDA,
conduct clinical trials or otherwise commercialize any of our products. We will
make every effort however, to continue the development of the PAK. As a result
of these conditions, there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as
a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is substantially
dependent on the successful execution of many of the actions referred to above,
on the timeline contemplated by our plans and our ability to obtain additional
financing. We cannot assure you that we will be successful now or in the future
in obtaining any additional financing on terms favorable to us, if at all. The
failure to obtain financing will have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and operations.
Other Considerations – Royalty and Other Payments Under
the License Agreement
As
consideration for entering into the License Agreement, we agreed to pay to NQCI
a minimum annual royalty of $250,000, or 7% of net sales. As a result of the
transfer of the Technology (as defined below) to us, we may be able to realize
additional savings of not having to compensate NQCI for any royalty payments
accrued and not yet paid. Although we have asserted that NQCI’s breaches of the
License Agreement excused our obligation to make the minimum royalty payments,
we recorded $583,333 in royalty expenses, covering the minimum royalties, from
commencement of the License Agreement through December 31, 2008. The License
Agreement expires in 2105. If we are able to acquire the Technology from NQCI,
the arbitrator, Richard C. Neal (Ret), has indicated that the License Agreement
would be terminated simultaneously with such acquisition. As a result of the
Technology becoming our sole and exclusive property, among other benefits, we
should be able to discontinue these royalty payments to NQCI and realize
corresponding savings.
The
License Agreement also requires us to reimburse NQCI’s reasonable and necessary
expenses incurred in the ordinary course of business consistent with past
practices, or the “Licensor Expenses”, until the closing or the termination of
the Merger Agreement (as defined below). The Second Interim Award (as defined
below) states that the License Agreement will remain in full force and effect
until the Technology Transaction closes or the arbitrator determines that it
will never close. Although we have contested its right to any further payments,
NQCI has made a claim for reimbursement of approximately $690,000 in alleged
expenses under the License Agreement as of December 31, 2008. As a result of the
Technology becoming our sole and exclusive property, among other benefits, we
may be able to realize additional savings of not having to reimburse NQCI for
any Licensor Expenses accrued and not yet paid. For a complete description of
the License Agreement and the arbitration proceedings please see below section
captioned “Background of the Technology Transaction” and Item 3 - Legal
Proceedings.
Technology
Transaction
Seeking Stockholder Approval
of the Technology Transaction
We are
currently in the process of seeking approval from our stockholders to issue
9,230,000 shares of our common stock to NQCI in order to obtain ownership of the
Technology. The stockholder approval is being sought in accordance with an
Interim Award issued by the arbitrator on June 9, 2008, referred to herein as
the “Interim Award”, in an arbitration proceeding with NQCI, as modified by
later decisions, including the Amended Order Re Interim Relief Etc. issued by
the arbitrator on January 30, 2009, referred to herein as the “Order”, and in
order to minimize the risk that the arbitrator will issue an alternative award
that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and
operations. The arbitrator has refused to issue a final award until stockholder
approval has been obtained from our stockholders, which may effectively prevent
us from obtaining effective court review of the arbitrator’s actions. The most
material terms of the proposed transaction are summarized as
follows:
·
|
Subject
to the satisfaction of the terms of the Interim Award, as modified by the
Order, NQCI will grant, transfer and assign to Operations all of the
Technology covered by the License Agreement currently in effect between
NQCI and Operations;
|
·
|
The
Technology includes all patents and patent applications related to a WAK
and other portable or continuous dialysis methods or
devices;
|
·
|
Under
the terms of the Interim Award, as modified by the Order, we filed a proxy
statement with the SEC to obtain stockholder approval for the issuance of
shares of our common stock to acquire the Technology and issue to NQCI
9,230,000 shares of our common
stock;
|
·
|
If
and when we are able to do so, we will issue and deliver to
NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our common stock in consideration for the
Technology. As a result, NQCI will own approximately 39% of our
outstanding common stock and become our largest
stockholder;
|
·
|
Except
for its definition, indemnification, representation and warranty
provisions, the License Agreement shall thereafter be terminated and be of
no further force or effect; and
|
·
|
After
the transfer of the Technology by NQCI to us, under the Interim Award, as
modified by the Order, we will be required to file a registration
statement with the SEC to register for resale under the Securities Act the
shares issued to NQCI, referred to herein as the “Registration
Statement”.
|
The SEC
is continuing to review our preliminary proxy statement. We cannot predict when
we would be able to hold our stockholder meeting to obtain stockholder approval
of the share issuance.
Background of the Technology
Transaction
On
September 1, 2006, Operations entered into the License Agreement with NQCI
pursuant to which we obtained exclusive rights to the technology relating to the
treatment of kidney failure and other applications, with no geographic
restrictions for a license term of 99 years (or, if earlier, until the
expiration of NQCI's proprietary rights in the Technology) for an annual royalty
of 7% of net sales, with a minimum annual royalty of $250,000. The Technology
relates primarily to the WAK, and also covers “Derivative Works,” such as an
original work that is based upon one or more pre-existing works.
On
September 1, 2006, Operations also entered into a Merger Agreement with NQCI,
referred to herein as the “Merger Agreement”, which contemplated that we would
acquire NQCI as a wholly owned subsidiary pursuant to a triangular merger,
referred to herein as the “NQCI Merger”, or we would issue shares of our common
stock to NQCI stockholders in consideration of the assignment of the Technology,
referred to herein as the “Technology Transaction”. The Merger Agreement
provided that Operations had no obligation to issue or deliver any shares after
December 31, 2006, unless the parties mutually agreed to extend such date, which
they did not. In addition, on December 29, 2006, NQCI served us with written
notice that it was terminating the Merger Agreement, which we accepted.
Accordingly, the NQCI Merger was not consummated.
On
December 1, 2006, Operations initiated an arbitration proceeding against NQCI
for its breach of the License Agreement, which remains pending. NQCI claimed the
License Agreement was terminated, and we sought a declaration that the License
Agreement remained in effect until the closing of the NQCI merger or the
Technology Transaction. We later amended our claims to seek damages for NQCI’s
failure to perform its obligations under the License Agreement. NQCI filed
counterclaims seeking to invalidate the License Agreement and claiming monetary
damages against us. NQCI also filed claims against Victor Gura, M.D.,
our Chief Medical and Scientific Officer, claiming he breached his obligations
to NQCI by agreeing to serve on our Board of Directors. Following a hearing and
extensive briefing, the arbitrator denied both parties’ claims for damages.
Although NQCI never filed an amendment to its counterclaims to seek specific
performance, on June 9, 2008, the arbitrator issued an Interim Award granting
specific performance of the Technology Transaction.
The
Interim Award stated that the total aggregate shares of stock to be received by
NQCI stockholders at the closing of the Technology Transaction should equal 48%
of all Operations shares outstanding as of the date of the Merger Agreement. On
September 1, 2006, there were 10,000,000 shares of Operations common stock
outstanding.
On August
4, 2008, the arbitrator issued the Second Interim Award, referred to herein as
the “Second Interim Award”, modifying the initial Interim Award, stating that,
if we desire to close the Technology Transaction, we must obtain approval from a
majority of our stockholders and issue 9,230,000 shares of our common stock to
NQCI. As a result of our issuances of our common stock subsequent to the date of
the Merger Agreement and following the closing of the Technology Transaction,
NQCI would own approximately 39% of our total outstanding shares, which would
make NQCI our largest stockholder. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the
Second Interim Award, the arbitrator found that, with the exception of
stockholder approval, virtually all conditions to closing the Technology
Transaction have been waived, including virtually all of NQCI’s representations
and warranties concerning the Technology.
The
Second Interim Award also stated that, contrary to the assertions made by NQCI,
the License Agreement will remain in full force and effect until the Technology
Transaction closes or the arbitrator determines that it will never close. Upon
closing of the Technology Transaction and satisfaction of the terms of the
Interim Award, as modified by the Order, the License Agreement will terminate
and we will own all of the Technology.
On
September 4, 2008, the arbitrator ruled that, even though we are not a party to
any of the agreements or the arbitration, our shares of common stock should be
issued to NQCI rather than shares of Operations.
The
arbitrator has not ordered us to close the Technology Transaction. However, the
Second Interim Award states that, if our stockholders fail to approve the
issuance of stock to effectuate the Technology Transaction, all of the
Technology covered by the License shall be declared the sole and exclusive
property of NQCI, and the arbitrator shall schedule additional hearings to
address two questions: whether the PAK technology is included within that
Technology, and whether NQCI is entitled to compensatory damages and the amount
of damages under these circumstances. During the arbitration, NQCI took the
position that we had misappropriated trade secrets regarding the WAK and used
them to create the PAK. The arbitrator found that we had not misappropriated
NQCI’s trade secrets. However, should the Technology Transaction not close for
any reason, and the arbitrator rules that the licensed Technology must be
returned to NQCI, the arbitrator could find that the PAK is derived in whole or
in part from licensed Technology, and could rule that Operations must “return”
the PAK technology to NQCI or that NQCI is entitled to compensatory damages or
both.
The
Second Interim Award required that we file the Registration Statement within 30
days after the closing of the Technology Transaction. The arbitrator
acknowledged that our obligation is to file the Registration Statement and to
use reasonable efforts to have the shares registered and not to guarantee
registration and resultant actual public tradability. However, the arbitrator
nevertheless ordered that the Registration Statement must be declared effective
within 90 days. Pursuant to the terms of the Order, the arbitrator modified the
Second Interim Award by reserving on what the final terms of our obligation to
file the Registration Statement will be and stating that such registration
obligation shall be in accordance with applicable laws, including applicable
U.S. federal securities laws. While the arbitrator also retained jurisdiction to
monitor our compliance with such obligation, to award any appropriate relief to
NQCI if we fail to comply with such obligation and to render a decision on any
other matters contested in this proceeding, the time periods set forth in the
Second Interim Award and summarized in this paragraph are no longer
applicable.
The Order
also provided, among other things, that if we file the Proxy Statement, obtain
stockholder approval to issue to NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our common stock and
issue such shares to NQCI, the arbitrator’s awards requiring specific
performance of the Technology Transaction will be effectuated and the arbitrator
anticipates confirming that all of the Technology covered by the License
Agreement shall be declared our sole and exclusive property and that the
alternate relief NQCI seeks will be moot.
The
arbitrator held a conference call hearing with the Company and NQCI on March 13,
2009 in which the parties discussed the reasons for the difficulties in closing
the Technology Transaction and explored potential alternatives. The parties were
asked to submit letter briefs outlining their suggested alternatives for
consideration by the arbitrator. The parties submitted their respective letter
briefs on March 24, 2009.
As of the
date of this Annual Report, the arbitration proceeding with NQCI continues and
the arbitrator has not yet issued a final award to either party and has not made
a final ruling with respect to whether the closing of the Technology Transaction
shall occur or whether potential alternatives should be pursued.
The
Technology
The
Merger Agreement provides that, at the closing of the Technology Transaction,
NQCI shall absolutely, unconditionally, validly and irrevocably sell, transfer,
grant and assign to Operations all of the Technology, including, but not limited
to, the inventions embodied or described in the Licensor Patents and Patent
Applications as defined in the License Agreement.
“Technology”
includes all existing and hereafter developed Intellectual Property, Know-How,
Licensor Patents, Licensor Patent Applications, Derivative Works, and any other
technology invented, improved or developed by NQCI, or as to which NQCI owns or
holds any rights, arising out of or relating to the research, development,
design, manufacture or use of:
|
(a)
|
any
medical device, treatment or method as of September 1,
2006;
|
|
(b)
|
any
portable or continuous dialysis methods or devices, specifically including
any wearable artificial kidney, or “Wearable Kidney”, and related
devices;
|
|
(c)
|
any
device, methods or treatments for congestive heart failure;
and
|
|
(d)
|
any
artificial heart or coronary
device.
|
“Intellectual
Property” includes:
|
(a)
|
patents,
patent applications, and patent rights;
|
|
(b)
|
trademarks,
trademark registrations and applications;
|
|
(c)
|
copyrights,
copyright registrations, and applications; and
|
|
(d)
|
trade
secrets, confidential information and
know-how.
|
“Licensed
Products” includes all products based on or derived from the Technology,
including, but not limited to the Wearable Kidney and all related devices,
whether now-existing or hereafter developed.
Research
and Development
R&D
Team
In
addition, we had previously retained Aubrey Group, Inc. (“Aubrey”), an
FDA-registered third-party contract developer and manufacturer of medical
devices, to assist with the design and development of subsystems of the PAK,
referred to herein as the “Aubrey Agreement.” As of December 31, 2008, Aubrey
substantially completed its work and we intend to terminate this agreement. A
variation of this device will be developed for chronic home
hemodialysis.
We
incurred $20.9 million and $7.1 million in research and development costs in
fiscal years 2008 and 2007, respectively, including the August 4, 2008, $10.2
million fair value accrual for a potential 9.23 million shares issuance to
effectuate the Technology Transaction in accordance to the Second Interim Award.
Excluding the accrual for shares issuable, we incurred $10.7 million and $7.1
million in research and development costs in fiscal years 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Portable Artificial
Kidney
The PAK
is a multifunctional device that will perform hemodialysis, hemofiltration and
ultrafiltration under direct medical supervision. A variation of this device
will be developed for chronic home hemodialysis. An initial prototype of the
PAK, capable of performing the basic functions of a hemodialysis machine, and
demonstrating our unique new fluidics circuit, was completed at the end of 2007.
The first physical prototype including industrial design of the PAK was
completed in October 2008. We hope to further refine this prototype by adding to
it safety sensors and electronic controls. Subject to our ability to obtain debt
or equity financing to satisfy our current liabilities and other obligations as
they become due, as more fully described above in the section captioned “Recent
Developments,” we hope to complete the final product design of the PAK. The PAK
units will undergo final verification and validation prior to a 510(k)
submission for clinical use under direct medical supervision. A clinical study
will not be required for this submission.
Wearable Artificial
Kidney
In a
clinical feasibility study conducted in London in March 2007, a research
prototype of the WAK was demonstrated in eight patients with end-stage renal
disease. Patients were treated for up to eight hours with adequate clearances of
urea and creatinine. The device was well tolerated and patients were able to
conduct activities of normal daily living including walking and sleeping. There
were no serious adverse events although clotting of the dialyzer occurred in two
patients. To our knowledge, this is the first successful demonstration of a WAK
in humans. Assuming that the Technology Transaction closes and sufficient
working capital is available to us, we hope to make substantial improvements to
the WAK. This work will result in a WAK Generation 2.0. Pending FDA approval of
an investigational Device Exemption (IDE), additional clinical studies will be
conducted upon completion of the Generation 2.0 WAK prototype.
If we
successfully obtain additional financing, we plan to make improvements to the
WAK design intended to move it from a feasibility prototype to a product
prototype. These include improvement of the heparin pumping system intended to
address the dialyzer clotting problem, the addition of safety sensors required
for commercial dialysis equipment, the addition of electrical controls to
provide a convenient user interface, improvements to the blood flow circuit and
further miniaturization of the device to improve fit to the human body.
Additional clinical studies will be conducted upon completion of the
prototype.
Third-party
Arrangements
In July
2007, we entered into the Aubrey Agreement. The PAK will be designed for
intermittent hemodialysis or Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (CRRT) in an
attended care setting as well as for treatments in a home setting. As of
December 31, 2008, Aubrey substantially completed its work and we intend to
terminate this agreement. At the inception of the Aubrey Agreement, total labor
and material costs over the term of the agreement were budgeted to amount to
approximately $5.1 million and as of December 31, 2008, the agreement was
substantially completed under the budgeted amount at a cost of $3.2
million.
We also
contract with other third parties to assist in our research and development
efforts and to supplement our internal resources while we continue to grow our
organization.
Government
Regulation
US
Regulation
We are subject to extensive government
regulation relating to the development and marketing of our products. Due to the
relatively early nature of our development efforts, we have not yet confirmed
with the FDA its view of the regulatory status of any of our
products.
To support a regulatory submission,
the FDA may require clinical studies to show safety and effectiveness. While we
cannot currently state the nature of the studies the FDA may require due to our
early stage of product development, it is likely that some products we attempt
to develop will require time-consuming clinical studies in order to secure
approval.
Outside the US, our ability to market
potential products is contingent upon receiving market application
authorizations from the appropriate regulatory authorities. These foreign
regulatory approval processes may involve different requirements from those of
the FDA, but also generally include many, if not all, of the risks associated
with the FDA approval process described above, depending on the country
involved.
In the US, medical devices are
classified into three different classes, Class I, II and III, on the basis of
controls deemed reasonably necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of
the device. Class I devices are subject to general controls, including
labelling, pre-market notification and adherence to the FDA’s Good Manufacturing
Practices, or “GMP”, Class II devices are subject to general and special
controls, including performance standards, post-market surveillance, patient
registries and FDA guidelines, and Class III devices are those which must
receive pre-market approval by the FDA to ensure their safety and effectiveness,
that is, life-sustaining, life-supporting and implantable devices, or new
devices, which have been found not to be substantially equivalent to legally
marketed devices. Because of their breakthrough nature, some of our devices may
be considered Class III.
Before new class II medical devices,
such as our current and pipeline products, can be marketed, marketing clearance
must be obtained through a pre-market notification under Section 510(k) of the
FDC Act. Non-compliance with applicable requirements can result in fines,
injunctions, civil penalties, recall or seizure of products, total or partial
suspension of production, refusal to authorize the marketing of new products or
to allow us to enter into supply contracts and criminal prosecution. A 510(k)
clearance will typically be granted by the FDA if it can be established that the
device is substantially equivalent to a “predicate device,” which is a legally
marketed Class I or II device or a pre-amendment Class III device (that is, one
that has been marketed since a date prior to May 28, 1976), for which the FDA
has not called for PMA. The FDA has been requiring an increasingly rigorous
demonstration of substantial equivalence, which may include a requirement to
submit human clinical trial data. It generally takes 4 to 12 months from the
date of a 510(k) submission to obtain clearance, but it may take
longer.
If clearance or approval is obtained,
any device manufactured or distributed by us will be subject to pervasive and
continuing regulation by the FDA. We will be subject to routine inspection by
the FDA and will have to comply with the host of regulatory requirements that
usually apply to medical devices marketed in the U.S. including labelling
regulations, GMP requirements, Medical Device Reporting (MDR) regulation, which
requires a manufacturer to report to the FDA certain types of adverse events
involving its products, and the FDA’s prohibitions against promoting products
for unapproved or “off-label” uses.
International Organization for
Standards, or “ISO”, standards were developed by the European Community, or
“EC”, as a tool for companies interested in increasing productivity, decreasing
cost and increasing quality. The EC uses ISO standards to provide a universal
framework for quality assurance and to ensure the good quality of products and
services across borders. The ISO standards (now ISO13485) have facilitated trade
throughout the EC, and businesses and governments throughout the world are
recognizing the benefit of the globally accepted uniform standards. Any
manufacturer we utilize for purposes of producing our products (including us, if
we manufacture any of our own products) will be required to obtain ISO
certification to facilitate the highest quality products and the easiest market
entry in cross-border marketing. This will enable us to market our products in
all of the member countries of the EC. We also will be required to comply with
additional individual national requirements that are outside the scope of those
required by the European Economic Area.
Any medical device that is legally
marketed in the US may be exported anywhere in the world without prior FDA
notification or approval. The export provisions of the FDC Act apply only to
unapproved devices. While FDA does not place any restrictions on the export of
these devices, certain countries may require written certification that a firm
or its devices are in compliance with US law. In such instances FDA will
accommodate US firms by providing a Certificate for Foreign Government. In cases
where there are devices which the manufacturer wishes to export during the
interim period while their 510(k) submission is under review, exporting may be
allowed without prior FDA clearance under certain limited
conditions.
Competition
We compete directly and indirectly
with other biotechnology and healthcare equipment businesses, including those in
the dialysis industry. The major competitors for our platform technology are
those companies manufacturing and selling dialysis equipment and supplies. We
anticipate that some of our primary competitors will be companies such as
Baxter, Fresenius, Gambro, NxStage and B Braun. We will compete with these
companies in the critical care markets as well as dialysis clinics, and the home
and wearable application markets. In many cases, these competitors are larger
and more firmly established than we are. In addition, our competitors have
greater marketing and development budgets and greater capital resources than our
company. Others are working on portable and wearable peritoneal dialysis
machines and competitors are working on portable hemodialysis machines, but we
are not aware of any other wearable hemodialysis machines currently under
development.
Patents
and Trademarks
We have
exclusive licenses to three issued U.S. patents, U.S. Patent No. 7,309,323
entitled “Wearable continuous renal replacement therapy device,” No. 7,276,042
entitled “Low hydraulic resistance cartridge,” and No. 6,960,179 entitled
“Wearable continuous renal replacement therapy device.” We also have exclusive
licenses to several pending U.S. patent applications, including U.S. Patent
Application No. 11/500,572 entitled “Dual-ventricle pump cartridge, pump, and
method of use in a wearable continuous renal replacement therapy
device.”
In addition to our exclusive licenses,
we are actively protecting inventions that are commercially important to our
business by developing our own intellectual property and filing and prosecuting
our own patents. We currently have 24 pending U.S. patent applications and 3 PCT
applications.
We also have pending applications to
register our trademarks, “Xcorporeal” and “Xcorporeal WAK.”
Employees
As of December 31, 2008, we had
approximately 24 full-time employees. However, as discussed above in the section
captioned “Recent Developments,” during the first quarter of 2009, we had to
adjust our employee headcount to more closely match our capital availability
and, as a result, terminated the employment of 19 employees. Assuming that we
have sufficient resources, we hope to increase our headcount in the future. We
also utilize, whenever appropriate, contract and part-time professionals in
order to advance our technologies while conserving cash and
resources.
Reports
to Security Holders
Our
Internet address is www.xcorporeal.com. The content on our website is available
for information purposes only. It should not be relied upon for investment
purposes, nor is it incorporated by reference into this Annual
Report.
We
make available free of charge through our Internet website under the heading
“Investors,” our Annual Report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB, Quarterly
Reports on Form 10-Q or 10-QSB, current reports on Form 8-K, Proxy
Statements on Schedule 14A and amendments to those reports and statements after
we electronically file such materials with the SEC. Copies of our key corporate
governance documents, including our Code of Ethics and charters for the
Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Nominating
Committee are also available on our website. Our stockholders may
request free copies of these documents, including a copy of this Annual
Report, without charge by writing us at: Investor Relations, Xcorporeal, Inc,
12121 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 350, Los Angeles, California
90025.
Our
filed Annual and Quarterly Reports, Proxy Statements and other previously filed
SEC reports are also available to the public through the SEC’s website at
http://www.sec.gov. Materials we file with the SEC may also be read and copied
at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington D.C.
20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained
by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.
Item
1A. Risk
Factors
You should carefully consider and
evaluate all of the information in this Annual Report, including the risk
factors listed below. While we describe each risk separately, some of these
risks are interrelated and certain risks could trigger the applicability of
other risks described below. Also, the risks and uncertainties described below
are not the only ones that we may face. Additional risks and uncertainties not
presently known to us, or that we currently do not consider significant, could
also potentially impair, and have a material adverse effect on, our business,
results of operations and financial condition. If any of these risks occur, our
business, results of operations and financial condition could be harmed, the
price of our common stock could decline, and future events and circumstances
could differ significantly from those anticipated in the forward-looking
statements contained in this Annual Report.
Risks
Related to Our Business
There
is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern.
Our independent registered public
accounting firm has issued a report on our financial statements for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2008, that states that our recurring losses from
operations and net capital deficiency raise substantial doubt about our ability
to continue as a going concern. Our plans concerning these matters are discussed
in the section captioned “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and in Note 1, “Nature of Operations and
Going Concern Uncertainty” to the financial statements filed as part of this
Annual Report. Our ability to operate is dependent on meeting our cash
obligations as they become due which will depend on our ability to secure debt
or equity financing on acceptable terms or otherwise address these matters. If
we fail to do so for any reason, we would not be able to continue as a going
concern and could potentially be forced to seek relief through a filing under
the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
We
need financing to continue our ongoing operations and will need additional
financing in the future.
We need
financing to continue our ongoing operations and pay our liabilities and we will
need additional financing to maintain and expand our business, and financing may
not be available on favorable terms, if at all.
We may finance our business through the
private placement or public offering of equity or debt securities. If we raise
additional funds by issuing equity securities, such financing may result in
further dilution to our stockholders. Any equity securities issued also may
provide for rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of holders of our
common stock. If we raise additional funds by issuing additional debt
securities, these debt securities would have rights, preferences and privileges
senior to those of holders of our common stock, and the terms of the debt
securities issued could impose significant restrictions on our operations. If we
raise additional funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements, we
might be required to relinquish significant rights to our technology or
products, or to grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. If we need
funds and cannot raise them on acceptable terms, we may not be able to execute
our business plan and our stockholders may lose substantially all of their
investment.
We
expect to continue to incur operating losses, and if we are not able to raise
necessary additional funds we may have to reduce or stop
operations.
We have not generated revenues or
become profitable, may never do so, and may not generate sufficient working
capital to cover the cost of operations. Our existing cash, cash equivalents and
marketable securities may not be sufficient to fund our business until we can
become cash flow positive and we may never become cash flow positive. No party
has guaranteed to advance additional funds to us to provide for any operating
deficits. Until we begin generating revenue, we may seek funding through the
sale of equity, or securities convertible into equity, which could result in
further dilution to our then existing stockholders. If we raise additional
capital through the incurrence of debt, our business may be affected by the
amount of leverage we incur, and our borrowings may subject us to restrictive
covenants. Such funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at
all. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing on a timely basis, we may be
required to delay, reduce or stop operations, any of which would have a material
adverse effect on our business.
An
unfavorable result in the pending arbitration could have a material adverse
effect on our business.
We
consider the protection of our proprietary technology for treatment of kidney
failure, which we have licensed and are developing, to be critical to our
business prospects. We obtained the rights to some of our most significant
patented and patent-pending technologies through a License Agreement with NQCI.
On December 1, 2006, Operations initiated arbitration against NQCI for its
breach of the License Agreement, which remains pending. NQCI subsequently filed
counterclaims seeking to invalidate the License Agreement and claiming monetary
damages against us. On June 9, 2008, the arbitrator issued an Interim Award
granting specific performance of the Technology Transaction in consideration of
NQCI stockholders receiving 48% of all Operations shares outstanding as of the
date of the Merger Agreement. On August 4, 2008, the arbitrator issued a Second
Interim Award, modifying the initial Interim Award, stating that, if we desire
to close the Technology Transaction, we must obtain approval from a majority of
our stockholders and issue 9,230,000 shares of our common stock to NQCI. On
August 15, 2008, the arbitrator awarded NQCI $1.87 million of over $4 million it
claimed in attorneys’ fees and costs. The award has no effect on the additional
amount of approximately $690,000 claimed by NQCI in unpaid royalties and alleged
expenses under the License Agreement. The arbitrator has not yet ruled on this
claim.
On
September 4, 2008, the arbitrator issued an order that we should issue and
deliver the 9,230,000 shares directly to NQCI, rather than directly to NQCI
stockholders, if we obtain stockholder approval and elect to proceed with the
Technology Transaction.
On
January 30, 2009, the arbitrator issued the Order, which provides, among other
things, that if we file the Proxy Statement, obtain stockholder approval to
issue to NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our common stock as consideration for the
closing of the Technology Transaction and issue such shares to NQCI, the
arbitrator anticipates confirming that all of the Technology covered by the
License Agreement shall be declared our sole and exclusive
property.
The
arbitrator held a conference call hearing with the Company and NQCI on March 13,
2009 in which the parties discussed the reasons for the difficulties in closing
the Technology Transaction and explored potential alternatives. The parties were
asked to submit letter briefs outlining their suggested alternatives for
consideration by the arbitrator. The parties submitted their respective letter
briefs on March 24, 2009.
The
arbitrator has stated that he has not yet issued a final award that may be
confirmed or challenged in a court of competent jurisdiction. A party to the
arbitration could challenge the interim award in court, even after stockholders
approve the transaction. In addition, the arbitrator could again change the
award by granting different or additional remedies, even after stockholders
approve the transaction. We cannot guarantee that the arbitrator would order
that stockholders be given another opportunity to vote on the transaction, even
if such changes are material. Arbitrators have broad equitable powers, and
arbitration awards are difficult to challenge in court, even if the arbitrator
makes rulings that are inconsistent or not in accordance with the law or the
evidence.
Should
the arbitrator order a material change to the Second Interim Award, as modified
by the Order, after the vote of our stockholders, and further order that our
stockholders not be given another opportunity to vote on such proposal or on
such material change, such order could conflict with applicable federal
securities laws or NYSE Amex rules to which we are subject. In such event, we
would ask the arbitrator to amend such changed award or attempt to seek review
of the changed award in a court of competent jurisdiction. The closing of the
Technology Transaction may render any court review or appeal moot, effectively
preventing us from challenging any of the arbitrator’s awards in
court.
If the
arbitrator were to further modify any interim awards or orders, or if NQCI were
to prevail on some or all of its claims, we could be prevented from using some
or all of the patented technology we licensed from NQCI. That could
significantly impact our ability to use and develop our technologies, which
would have a material adverse effect on our business and results of
operations.
Our
limited operating history may make it difficult to evaluate our business to date
and our future viability.
We are in the early stage of
operations and development, and have only a limited operating history on which
to base an evaluation of our business and prospects, having commenced operations
in August 2006 in accordance with our new business plan and entry into the
medical devices industry. In addition, our operations and developments are
subject to all of the risks inherent in the growth of an early stage company. We
will be subject to the risks inherent in the ownership and operation of a
company with a limited operating history such as regulatory setbacks and delays,
fluctuations in expenses, competition, the general strength of regional and
national economies, and governmental regulation. Any failure to successfully
address these risks and uncertainties would seriously harm our business and
prospects. We may not succeed given the technological, marketing, strategic and
competitive challenges we will face. The likelihood of our success must be
considered in light of the expenses, difficulties, complications, problems and
delays frequently encountered in connection with the growth of a new business,
the continuing development of new technology, and the competitive and regulatory
environment in which we operate or may choose to operate in the future. We have
generated no revenues to date, and there can be no assurance that we will be
able to successfully develop our products and penetrate our target
markets.
Our
success will depend on our ability to retain our managerial personnel and to
attract additional personnel.
Competition for desirable personnel is
strong, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to attract and retain the
necessary staff. The loss of members of managerial, sales or scientific staff
could have a material adverse effect on our future operations and on successful
development of products for our target markets. The failure to maintain our
management, particularly Kelly J. McCrann, our Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer, Robert Weinstein, our Chief Financial Officer and Secretary,
and Victor Gura, M.D., our Chief Medical and Scientific Officer, and to attract
additional key personnel could materially adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations. Although we will provide
incentive compensation to attract and retain our key personnel, we cannot
guarantee that these efforts will be successful.
We will need to expand our finance,
administrative, product development, sales and marketing, and operations staff.
There are no assurances that we will be able to make such hires. However, as
discussed above in the section captioned “Recent Developments,” during the first
quarter of 2009, we had to adjust our employee headcount to more closely match
our capital availability and, as a result, terminated the employment of 19
employees. Assuming that we have sufficient resources, we hope to increase our
headcount in the future. In addition, we may be required to enter into
relationships with various strategic partners and other third parties necessary
to our business. Planned personnel may not be adequate to support our future
operations, management may not be able to hire, train, retain, motivate and
manage required personnel or management may not be able to identify, manage and
exploit existing and potential strategic relationships and market opportunities.
If we fail to manage our growth or personnel needs effectively, it could have a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial
condition.
We
need to develop our financial and reporting processes, procedures and controls
to support our anticipated growth.
We have begun investing in our
financial and reporting systems. To comply with our public reporting
requirements, and manage the anticipated growth of our operations and personnel,
we will be required to continue to improve existing or implement new operational
and financial systems, processes and procedures, and to expand, train and manage
our employee base. Our current and planned systems, procedures and controls may
not be adequate to support our future operations.
The laws and regulations affecting
public companies, including the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
rules adopted or proposed by the SEC, will result in increased costs to us as we
evaluate the implications of any new rules and respond to their requirements.
New rules could make it more difficult or more costly for us to obtain certain
types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we
may be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur
substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. In addition,
the need to comply with any new rules and regulations will continue to place
significant demands on our financial and accounting staff, financial, accounting
and information systems, and our internal controls and procedures, any of which
may not be adequate to support our anticipated growth. We cannot predict or
estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur or the timing of such
costs to comply with any new rules and regulations, or if compliance can be
achieved.
We
cannot assure you that we will be able to complete development and obtain
necessary approvals for our proposed products even if we obtain sufficient
funding.
We will need additional financing to
maintain and expand our business, and such financing may not be available on
favorable terms, if at all. Even if we obtain sufficient funding, no assurance
can be given that we will be able to design or have designed parts necessary for
the manufacture of our products or complete the development of our proposed
products within our anticipated time frames, if at all. Such a situation could
have a material adverse effect upon our ability to remain in business. For
additional risks that we may encounter as a result of our need for additional
financing, please see risk factor below captioned “We need financing to continue
our ongoing operations and will need additional financing in the
future”.
The
success of our business will depend on our ability to develop and protect our
intellectual property rights, which could be expensive.
Patent and other proprietary rights
are essential to our business. Our success and the competitiveness of our
products are heavily dependent upon our proprietary technology and our ability
to obtain and enforce patents and licenses to patent rights, both in the U.S.
and in other countries. We cannot be certain that the patents that we license
from others will be enforceable and afford protection against competitors. We
rely on a combination of trademark and copyright laws, trade secrets and
know-how to develop, confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to
maintain and strengthen our competitive position. Such means of protecting our
proprietary rights may not be adequate because such laws provide only limited
protection. While we protect our proprietary rights to the extent
possible, we cannot guarantee that third parties will not know, discover or
develop independently equivalent proprietary information or techniques, that
they will not gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our trade secrets to
the public. Therefore, we cannot guarantee that we can maintain and protect
unpatented proprietary information and trade secrets. Misappropriation of our
intellectual property would have an adverse effect on our competitive position,
may cause us to incur substantial litigation costs and could harm our business,
financial condition and results of operations and your investment.
Generally, we enter into
confidentiality and non-disclosure of intellectual property agreements with our
employees, consultants and many of our vendors, and generally control access to
and distribution of our proprietary information. Notwithstanding these
precautions, it may be possible for a third party to copy or otherwise obtain
and use our proprietary information without authorization or to develop similar
information independently.
Additionally, our patent rights may
not provide us with proprietary protection or competitive advantages against
competitors with similar technologies. Even if such patents are valid, we cannot
guarantee that competitors will not independently develop alternative
technologies that duplicate the functionality of our technology. Our competitors
may independently develop similar or superior technology. Policing unauthorized
use of proprietary rights is difficult, and some international laws do not
protect proprietary rights to the same extent as United States laws. Litigation
periodically may be necessary to enforce our intellectual property rights, to
protect our trade secrets or to determine the validity and scope of the
proprietary rights of others. Litigation is costly and may not be successful.
Our failure to protect our proprietary technology or manufacturing processes
could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations and your
investment.
We may be subject to claims that we
infringe the intellectual property rights of others and unfavorable outcomes
could harm our business.
Our future operations may be subject
to claims, and potential litigation, arising from our alleged infringement of
patents, trade secrets or copyrights owned by other third parties, including
third party rights in patents that have not yet been issued. We
intend to fully comply with the law in avoiding such infringements. However,
within the medical devices industry, established companies have actively pursued
such infringements, and have initiated such claims and litigation, which has
made the entry of competitive products more difficult. We may experience such
claims or litigation initiated by existing, better-funded
competitors.
If we do
infringe, the holder of the patent may seek to cause us to cease using the
technology subject to the patent, or require us to enter into a license or other
similar agreement and pay for our use of the intellectual property. In either
case, such event may have a material negative impact on our performance.
Court-ordered injunctions may prevent us from bringing new products to market,
and the outcome of litigation and any resulting loss of revenues and expenses of
litigation may substantially affect our ability to meet our expenses and
continue operations. Also, since we rely upon unpatented proprietary technology,
there is no assurance that others may not acquire or independently develop the
same or similar technology.
Patent
applications in the United States are maintained in secrecy until patents are
issued, and the publication of discoveries in the scientific literature tends to
lag behind actual discoveries. Therefore, we cannot guarantee that we will be
the first creator of future inventions for which we seek patents or the first to
file patent applications for any of our inventions.
Patent
applications filed in foreign countries are subject to laws, rules and
procedures which differ from those of the United States. We cannot be
certain that:
· patents
will be issued from future applications;
· any
future patents will be sufficient in scope or strength to provide meaningful
protection or any commercialadvantage to us;
· foreign
intellectual property laws will protect our intellectual property;
or
· others
will not independently develop similar products, duplicate our products or
design around any patentswhich may be issued to us.
Policing
unauthorized use of intellectual property is difficult. The laws of
other countries may afford little or no effective protection of our technology.
We cannot assure you that the steps taken by us will prevent misappropriation of
our technology, which may cause us to lose customers and revenue opportunities.
In addition, pursuing persons who might misappropriate our intellectual property
could be costly and divert the attention of management from the operation of our
business.
We are
not aware and do not believe that any of our technologies or products infringe
the proprietary rights of third parties. Nevertheless, third parties may claim
infringement with respect to our current or future technologies or products or
products manufactured by others and incorporating our technologies. Responding
to any such claims, whether or not they are found to have merit, could be time
consuming, result in costly litigation, cause development delays, require us to
enter into royalty or license agreements, or require us to cease using the
technology that is the intellectual property of a third party. Royalty or
license agreements may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. As a
result, infringement claims could have a material adverse affect on our
business, operating results, and financial condition.
Confidentiality
agreements with employees, licensees and others may not adequately prevent
disclosure of trade secrets and other proprietary information.
In order
to protect our proprietary technology and processes, we rely in part on
confidentiality provisions in our agreements with employees, licensees, and
others. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential
information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized
disclosure of confidential information. In addition, others may independently
discover trade secrets and proprietary information. Costly and time-consuming
litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our
proprietary rights, and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection
could adversely affect our competitive business position.
We
compete against other dialysis equipment manufacturers with much greater
financial resources and better established products and customer relationships,
which may make it difficult for us to penetrate the market and achieve
significant sales of our products.
Our proposed products will compete
directly against equipment produced by Fresenius Medical Care AG, Baxter
Healthcare Corporation, Gambro AB, NxStage Medical, Inc., B Braun and others,
each of which markets one or more FDA-cleared medical devices for the treatment
of acute or chronic kidney failure.
Each of these competitors offers
products that have been in use for a longer time than our products and are more
widely recognized by physicians, patients and providers. Most of our competitors
have significantly more financial and human resources, more established sales,
service and customer support infrastructures and spend more on product
development and marketing than we do. Many of our competitors also have
established relationships with the providers of dialysis therapy. Most of these
companies manufacture additional complementary products enabling them to offer a
bundle of products and have established sales forces and distribution channels
that may afford them a significant competitive advantage.
The healthcare business in general, and
the market for our products in particular, is competitive, subject to change and
affected by new product introductions and other market activities of industry
participants, including increased consolidation of ownership of clinics by large
dialysis chains. If we are successful, our competitors are likely to develop
products that offer features and functionality similar to our proposed products.
Improvements in existing competitive products or the introduction of new
competitive products may make it more difficult for us to compete for sales,
particularly if those competitive products demonstrate better safety,
convenience or effectiveness or are offered at lower prices. If we are unable to
compete effectively against existing and future competitors and existing and
future alternative treatments and pharmacological and technological advances, it
will be difficult for us to penetrate the market and achieve significant sales
of our products.
We
have not commissioned or obtained marketing studies which support the likelihood
of success of our business plan.
No independent studies with regard to
the feasibility of our proposed business plan have been conducted by any
independent third parties with respect to our present and future business
prospects and our capital requirements. In addition, there can be no assurances
that our products or our treatment modality for ESRD will find sufficient
acceptance in the marketplace to enable us to fulfil our long and short term
goals, even if adequate financing is available and our products are approved to
come to market, of which there can be no assurance.
Our
ability to utilize net operating loss carry forwards may be
limited.
At
December 31, 2008, we had net operating loss carry forwards (NOLs) for U.S.
federal and state income tax purposes of approximately $24.3 million. These NOLs
may be used to offset future taxable income, to the extent we generate any
taxable income, and thereby reduce or eliminate our future U.S. federal and
California income taxes otherwise payable. Section 382 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the “Code”, imposes limitations on
a corporation’s ability to utilize NOLs if it experiences an “ownership change”
as defined in Section 382 of the Code. In general terms, an ownership
change may result from transactions that have the effect of increasing the
percentage ownership of certain stockholders in the stock of a corporation by
more than 50 percentage points over a three-year period. In the event of an
ownership change, a corporation’s utilization of NOLs generated prior to the
ownership change is subject to an annual limitation determined by multiplying
the value of the corporation at the time of the ownership change by the
“applicable long-term tax-exempt rate,” as defined in the Code. Any unused
annual limitation may be carried over to later years. Our NOLs for federal and
state income tax purposes begin to expire in 2021.
In 2007,
we determined that an ownership change occurred under Section 382. The
utilization of our federal NOLs, capital loss carryforwards and other tax
attributes related to our company prior to the merger with pre-merger Xcorporeal
therefore will be limited to zero. Accordingly, we have reduced our NOLs and
capital loss and minimum tax credit carryforwards to the amount that we estimate
that we would be able to utilize in the future, if profitable, considering the
above limitations. At December 31, 2008, after Section 382 reductions we had
NOLs for U.S. federal income tax purposes of approximately $24.3 million which
NOLs will begin to expire in 2021. $24.3 million of the net NOLs are also valid
for state income tax purposes and will begin to expire in 2021.
The
occurrence of one or more natural disasters or acts of terrorism could adversely
affect our operations and financial performance.
The
occurrence of one or more natural disasters or acts of terrorism could result in
physical damage to or the temporary closure of our corporate office and/or
operating facility. It may also result in the temporary lack of an adequate work
force in a market and/or the temporary or long term disruption in the supply of
materials (or a substantial increase in the cost of those materials) from
suppliers. One or more natural disasters or acts of terrorism could materially
and adversely affect our operations and financial performance. Furthermore,
insurance costs associated with our business may rise significantly in the event
of a large scale natural disaster or act of terrorism.
Terrorist
attacks and other attacks or acts of war may adversely affect the markets on
which our common stock trades, which could have a materially adverse effect on
our financial condition, our results of operations and the price of our common
stock.
On
September 11, 2001, the United States was the target of terrorist attacks of
unprecedented scope. In March 2003, the United States and allied nations
commenced a war in Iraq. These attacks and the war in Iraq caused global
instability in the financial markets. There could be further acts of terrorism
in the United States or elsewhere that could have a similar impact. Armed
hostilities or further acts of terrorism could cause further instability in
financial markets and could directly impact our financial condition, our
results
of
operations and the price of our common stock.
Risks
Related to Our Industry
Our
business will always be strictly regulated by the federal and other governments
and we cannot assure you that we will remain in compliance with all applicable
regulation.
The
healthcare industry is highly regulated and continues to undergo significant
changes as third-party payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, traditional
indemnity insurers, managed care organizations and other private payers increase
efforts to control cost, utilization and delivery of healthcare services.
Healthcare companies are subject to extensive and complex federal, state and
local laws, regulations and judicial decisions. In addition, clinical testing,
manufacture, promotion and sale of our proposed products are subject to
extensive regulation by numerous governmental authorities in the U.S.,
principally the FDA, and corresponding foreign regulatory agencies. Compliance
with laws and regulations enforced by regulatory agencies who have broad
discretion in applying them may be required for the medical products developed
or used by us. Many healthcare laws and regulations applicable to our business
are complex, applied broadly and subject to interpretation by courts and
government agencies. Regulatory, political and legal action and pricing
pressures could prevent us from marketing some or all of our products and
services for a period of time or permanently. Moreover, changes in existing
regulations or adoption of new regulations or policies could prevent us from
obtaining, or affect the timing of, future regulatory approvals or clearances.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain necessary regulatory
clearances or approvals on a timely basis, or if at all, or that we will not be
required to incur significant costs in obtaining or maintaining such foreign
regulatory approvals. Delays in receipt of, or failure to receive, such
approvals or clearances, the loss of previously obtained approvals or clearances
or the failure to comply with existing or future regulatory requirements could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Any
enforcement action by regulatory authorities with respect to past or future
regulatory non-compliance could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations. Non-compliance with applicable
requirements can result in fines, injunctions, civil penalties, recall or
seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, refusal to
authorize the marketing of new products or to allow us to enter into supply
contracts and criminal prosecution.
Even if
our proposed products are approved for sale, we will be subject to continuing
regulation. We continuously will be subject to routine inspection by the FDA and
will have to comply with the host of regulatory requirements that usually apply
to medical devices marketed in the U.S. including labelling regulations, Quality
System requirements, MDR regulations (which requires a manufacturer to report to
the FDA certain types of adverse events involving its products), and the FDA’s
prohibitions against promoting products for unapproved or “off-label” uses. Our
failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in
enforcement action by the FDA, which could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
In
addition, foreign laws, regulations and requirements applicable to our business
and products are often vague and subject to change and interpretation. Failure
to comply with applicable international regulatory requirements can result in
fines, injunctions, civil penalties, recalls or seizures of products, total or
partial suspensions of production, refusals by foreign governments to permit
product sales and criminal prosecution. Furthermore, changes in existing
regulations or adoption of new regulations or policies could prevent us from
obtaining, or affect the timing of, future regulatory approvals or clearances.
There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain necessary regulatory
clearances or approvals on a timely basis, or if at all, or that we will not be
required to incur significant costs in obtaining or maintaining such foreign
regulatory approvals. Delays in receipt of, or failure to receive, such
approvals or clearances, the loss of previously obtained approvals or clearances
or the failure to comply with existing or future regulatory requirements could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations. Any enforcement action by regulatory authorities with respect to
past or future regulatory non-compliance could have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our
failure to respond to rapid changes in technology and its applications and
intense competition in the medical devices industry could make our treatment
system obsolete.
The medical devices industry is subject
to rapid and substantial technological development and product innovations. To
be successful, we must respond to new developments in technology, new
applications of existing technology and new treatment methods. Our response may
be stymied if we require, but cannot secure, rights to essential third-party
intellectual property. We may compete against companies offering alternative
treatment systems to ours, some of which have greater financial, marketing and
technical resources to utilize in pursuing technological development and new
treatment methods. Our financial condition and operating results could be
adversely affected if our medical device products fail to compete favorably with
these technological developments, or if we fail to be responsive on a timely and
effective basis to competitors’ new devices, applications, treatments or price
strategies.
Product
liability claims could adversely affect our results of operations.
The risk of product liability claims,
product recalls and associated adverse publicity is inherent in the testing,
manufacturing, marketing and sale of medical products. In an effort to minimize
our liability we purchase product liability insurance coverage. In the future,
we may not be able to secure product liability insurance coverage on acceptable
terms or at reasonable costs when needed. Any liability for mandatory damages
could exceed the amount of our coverage. A successful product liability claim
against us could require us to pay a substantial monetary award. Moreover, a
product recall could generate substantial negative publicity about our products
and business and inhibit or prevent commercialization of other future product
candidates.
Risks
Related to Our Common Stock
If
we fail to meet continued listing standards of NYSE Amex, our common stock may
be delisted which would have a material adverse effect on the price
of our common stock.
Our
common stock is currently traded on the NYSE Amex under the symbol “XCR”. In
order for our securities to be eligible for continued listing on NYSE Amex, we
must remain in compliance with certain NYSE Amex continued listing standards. As
of December 31, 2008 we were not in compliance with Sections 1003(a)(i),
1003(a)(ii) and 1003(a)(iii) of the Amex Company Guide because our stockholders’
equity was below the level required by the NYSE Amex continued listing
standards. Our stockholders’ equity fell below the required standard due to
several years of operating losses. NYSE Amex will normally consider suspending
dealings in, or removing from the listing of, securities of a company under
Section 1003(a)(i) for a company that has stockholders’ equity of less than
$2,000,000 if such company has sustained losses from continuing operations
and/or net losses in two of its three most recent fiscal years, under Section
1003(a)(ii) for a company that has stockholders’ equity of less than $4,000,000
if such company has sustained losses from continuing operations and/or net
losses in three of its four most recent fiscal years or under Section
1003(a)(iii) for a company that has stockholders’ equity of less than $6,000,000
if such company has sustained losses from continuing operations and/or net
losses in its five most recent fiscal years. As of December 31, 2008, our
stockholders' equity was below that required under Sections 1003(a)(i),
1003(a)(ii) and 1003(a)(iii) of the Amex Company Guide and we have sustained net
losses in our five most recent fiscal years. If we receive
notification from the NYSE Amex that we are no longer in compliance with their
minimum listing requirements and if we fail to regain compliance with such
continued listing requirements, our common stock may be delisted
which would have a material adverse affect on the price and liquidity of our
common stock.
Furthermore, we cannot assure you that
we will continue to satisfy other requirements necessary to remain listed on the
NYSE Amex or that the NYSE Amex will not take additional actions to delist our
common stock. As a result of the resignation of Marc Cummins from his positions
of a member of our Board of Directors and a member of the Audit Committee of the
Board of Directors, effective March 6, 2009, we are no longer in compliance with
Section 803(A)(1) of the Amex Company Guide because a majority of the members of
our Board of Directors are not independent directors. In order to fill the
vacancy in the Audit Committee created by such resignation, effective March 26,
2009, Hans-Dietrich Polaschegg, a member of our Board of Directors, was
appointed to the Audit Committee.
If for any reason, our common stock
were to be delisted from the NYSE Amex, we may not be able to list our common
stock on another national exchange or market. If our common stock is not listed
on a national exchange or market, the trading market for our common stock may
become illiquid.
If
we are delisted from NYSE Amex, our common stock may be subject to the “penny
stock” rules of the SEC, which would make transactions in our common stock
cumbersome and may reduce the value of an investment in our stock.
The
SEC has adopted Rule 3a51-1 under the Exchange Act which establishes the
definition of a “penny stock,” for the purposes relevant to us, as any equity
security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share or with an
exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. For
any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, Rule 15g-9
requires:
·
|
that a broker or dealer approve a person's account for
transactions in penny stocks; and
|
·
|
the broker or dealer receive from
the investor a written
agreement to
the transaction, setting forth the
identity and quantity of the penny stock to be
purchased.
|
In order
to approve a person's account for transactions in
penny stocks, the broker or dealer must:
|
·
|
obtain financial information and investment experience
objectives of the person; and
|
|
·
|
make
a reasonable determination that the transactions in
penny
stocks are suitable for that person and the person has
sufficient knowledge and experience in
financial matters to be capable of evaluating the risks of
transactions in penny stocks.
|
The
broker or dealer must also deliver, prior to
any transaction in a penny stock, a
disclosure schedule prescribed by the SEC relating to the
penny stock market, which, in highlight form:
|
·
|
sets forth the
basis on which the broker or dealer made
the suitability determination;
and
|
|
·
|
that
the broker or dealer received a
signed, written agreement from the investor prior to
the transaction.
|
Generally, brokers may be less willing
to execute transactions in securities subject to the “penny stock” rules. This
may make it more difficult for our investors to dispose of our common stock and
cause a decline in the market value of our stock.
Disclosure also has to be made about
the risks of investing in penny stocks in both public offerings and in secondary
trading and about the commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and the
registered representative, current quotations for the securities and the rights
and remedies available to an investor in cases of fraud in penny stock
transactions. Finally, monthly statements have to be sent to investors
disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and
information on the limited market in penny stocks.
Our
stock price is volatile and accordingly, you could lose all or part of the value
of your shares of our common stock.
Our
common stock is traded on the NYSE Amex and trading volume is often limited and
sporadic. As a result, the trading price of our common stock on NYSE Amex is not
necessarily a reliable indicator of our fair market value. The market price of
our common stock has historically been highly volatile and may continue to
fluctuate significantly due to a number of factors, some of which may be beyond
our control, including:
·
|
the
number of shares available for sale in the
market;
|
·
|
sales
of our common stock by shareholders because our business profile does not
fit their investment objectives;
|
·
|
actual
or anticipated fluctuations in our operating
results;
|
·
|
developments
relating to our products and related proprietary
rights;
|
·
|
actual
or anticipated announcements of new data and announcements relating to our
operating performance;
|
·
|
government
regulations and changes thereto and regulatory investigations or
determinations;
|
·
|
our
ability to meet continued listing standards of NYSE
Amex
|
·
|
announcements
of our competitors or their success in the biotechnology and healthcare
equipment business, including those in the dialysis
industry;
|
·
|
recruitment
or departures of key personnel;
|
·
|
the
gain or loss of significant
customers;
|
·
|
the
operating and stock price performance of other comparable
companies;
|
·
|
developments
and publicity regarding our industry;
and
|
·
|
general
economic and market conditions in our industry and the economy as a
whole.
|
In addition, the stock market in
general has experienced volatility that has often been unrelated to the
operating performance of individual companies. These broad market fluctuations
may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock, regardless of our
actual performance, and could enhance the effect of any fluctuations that do
relate to our operating results.
Over
42% of our stock is controlled by a single stockholder which has the ability to
substantially influence the election of directors and the outcome of matters
submitted to our stockholders.
As of December 31, 2008, Consolidated
National, LLC, a limited liability company, or “CNL”, of which Terren S. Peizer,
a member of our Board of Directors, is the sole managing member and beneficial
owner, directly owned approximately 6.23 million shares, representing
approximately 42.2% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, CNL and Mr.
Peizer presently have and are expected to continue to have the ability to
determine the outcome of issues submitted to our stockholders. The interests of
CNL or Mr. Peizer, acting in his capacity as a stockholder, may not always
coincide with our interests or the interests of our other stockholders and they
may act in a manner that advances their best interests and not necessarily those
of our stockholders. The ownership position of CNL and Mr. Peizer may make it
difficult for our stockholders to remove our management from office should they
choose to do so. It could also deter unsolicited takeovers, including
transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for
their shares over then current market prices.
Pursuant
to the terms of the Second Interim Award, as modified by the Order, if we desire
to close the Technology Transaction, we will be required to issue 9,230,000
shares of our common stock to NQCI and a result, NQCI would own approximately
39% of our total outstanding shares, making NQCI our largest stockholder and
giving NQCI the ability to substantially influence the election of directors and
the outcome of matters submitted to our stockholders.
On August 4, 2008, the arbitrator
issued a Second Interim Award, modifying the initial Interim Award, stating
that, if we desire to close the Technology Transaction, we must, among other
things, issue to NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our common stock. Accordingly,
following the closing of the Technology Transaction, NQCI would own
approximately 39% of our total outstanding shares, making NQCI our largest
stockholder. As a result, NQCI would have the ability to determine the outcome
of issues submitted to our stockholders. The interests of NQCI may not always
coincide with our interests or the interests of our other stockholders and it
may act in a manner that advances its best interests and not necessarily those
of our stockholders. The ownership position of NQCI may make it difficult for
our stockholders to remove our management from office should they choose to do
so. It could also deter unsolicited takeovers, including transactions in which
our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then
current market prices.
Sales
of common stock by our large stockholders, or the perception that such sales may
occur, could depress our stock price.
The market price of our common stock
could decline as a result of sales by, or the perceived possibility of sales by,
our large stockholders, including NQCI in the event that the Technology
Transaction closes. Most of our outstanding shares were registered on a Form S-4
registration statement in connection with our merger with pre-merger Xcorporeal,
and are eligible for public resale. As of December 31, 2008, approximately 58%
of our outstanding common stock was held by our officers, directors and
affiliates and may be sold pursuant to an effective registration statement or in
accordance with Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act or pursuant to
other exempt transactions. Pursuant to the terms of the Second Interim Award, as
modified by the order, we are required to issue NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our
common stock if we want to close the Technology Transaction. Future
sales of our common stock by our significant stockholders, including NQCI if it
acquires these shares, or the perception that such sales may occur, could
depress the market price of our common stock.
Investors’
interests in our company will be diluted and investors may suffer dilution in
their net book value per share if we issue additional shares of stock or raise
funds through the sale of equity securities.
In the event that we are required to
issue any additional shares of stock or enter into private placements to raise
financing through the sale of equity securities, investors’ interests in our
company will be diluted and investors may suffer dilution in their net book
value per share depending on the price at which such securities are sold. If we
issue any such additional shares, such issuances also will cause a reduction in
the proportionate ownership and voting power of all of our other stockholders.
Further, any such issuance may result in a change in our control of our
company.
We
have never paid cash dividends and do not intend to do so.
We have never declared or paid cash
dividends on our common stock. We currently plan to retain any earnings to
finance the growth of our business rather than to pay cash dividends. Payments
of any cash dividends in the future will depend on our financial condition,
results of operations and capital requirements, as well as other factors deemed
relevant by our Board of Directors.
There
is an increased potential for short sales of our common stock due to the sales
of shares issued upon exercise of the warrants or options, which could
materially affect the market price of the stock.
Downward pressure on the market price of
our common stock that likely will result from sales of our common stock issued
in connection with an exercise of warrants or options could encourage short
sales of our common stock by market participants. Generally, short selling means
selling a security, contract or commodity not owned by the seller. The seller is
committed to eventually purchase the financial instrument previously sold. Short
sales are used to capitalize on an expected decline in the security’s price. As
the holders exercise their warrants or options, we issue shares to the
exercising holders, which such holders may then sell into the market. Such sales
could have a tendency to depress the price of the stock, which could increase
the potential for short sales.
We
became a publicly traded company through a merger with a public shell company,
and we could be liable for unanticipated liabilities of our predecessor
entity.
We became a publicly traded company
through a merger between Xcorporeal, Inc. and CT Holdings Enterprises, Inc., a
publicly traded “shell company” that had previously provided management
expertise including consulting on operations, marketing and strategic planning
and a single source of capital to early stage technology
companies. Although we believe the shell company had substantially no
assets and liabilities as of the merger, we may be subject to claims related to
the historical business of the shell, as well as costs and expenses related to
the merger.
Item
1B. Unresolved
Staff Comments
Not applicable.
Item
2: Properties
Corporate
Office and Operating Facility
As of
February 22, 2008, we entered into a 5 year lease agreement for 4,352 square
feet of corporate office space located in Los Angeles, California. The total
lease payments will be $1,096,878 over the 5 year period with the lease expiring
on February 28, 2013. On October 6, 2008, as modified on October 23, 2008, we
also entered into a 5 year lease agreement, commencing November 27, 2008,
through November 26, 2013, with early possession on October 27, 2008, for our
new operating facility which consists of approximately 21,400 square feet of
office and lab space in Lake Forest, California. The total lease payments will
be $1,367,507 over the lease term. Additionally, we lease two corporate
apartments, approximately 800 and 550 square feet, expiring March 31, 2009 and
April 18, 2009, respectively, located in Irvine, California, for combined
monthly rent of $3,765, which we plan to vacate after the expiration of their
lease terms. All of the space is in good condition and we expect it to remain
suitable to meet our needs for the foreseeable future. Consistent with the
actions undertaken as part of our corporate restructuring described above in
section captioned “Business - Recent Developments”, we intend to consolidate our
offices and sublease our current corporate office located in Los Angeles,
California. For more information, please see Note 11, “Leases” to our financial
statements filed as part of this Annual Report.
Item
3. Legal
Proceedings
From time
to time we may be a defendant or plaintiff in various legal proceedings arising
in the normal course of our business. Except as set forth below, we are
currently not a party to any material pending legal proceedings or government
actions, including any bankruptcy, receivership, or similar proceedings. In
addition, except as set forth below, our management is not aware of any known
litigation or liabilities that could affect our operations. Furthermore, with
the exception of Dr. Gura, our Chief Medical and Scientific Officer, who
according to NQCI’s preliminary Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A, Amendment No.
2, filed with the SEC on February 13, 2009, owns 15,497,250 shares of NQCI’s
common stock which includes 800,000 shares held by Medipace Medical Group, Inc.
an affiliate of Dr. Gura and includes 250,000 shares subject to warrants held by
Dr. Gura which are currently exercisable, or approximately 20.9% of its total
outstanding shares as of January 31, 2009, we do not believe that there are any
proceedings to which any of our directors, officers, or affiliates, any owner of
record who beneficially owns more than five percent of our common stock, or any
associate of any such director, officer, affiliate of the Company, or security
holder is a party adverse to the Company or has a material interest adverse to
the Company.
On
December 1, 2006, Operations initiated arbitration proceedings against NQCI for
its breach of the License Agreement, which remains pending. NQCI claimed the
License Agreement was terminated, and we sought a declaration that the License
Agreement remained in effect until the closing of the Merger or the Technology
Transaction. We later amended our claims to seek damages for NQCI’s failure to
perform its obligations under the License Agreement. NQCI filed counterclaims
seeking to invalidate the License Agreement and claiming monetary damages
against us. NQCI also filed claims against Dr. Gura, claiming he breached his
obligations to NQCI by agreeing to serve on our Board of Directors. Following a
hearing and extensive briefing, the arbitrator denied both parties’ claims for
damages. Although NQCI never filed an amendment to its counterclaims to seek
specific performance, on June 9, 2008, the arbitrator, issued an Interim Award
granting specific performance of the Technology Transaction.
The
Interim Award stated that the total aggregate shares of stock to be received by
NQCI stockholders at the closing should equal 48% of all Operations shares
outstanding as of the date of the Merger Agreement. On September 1, 2006, there
were 10,000,000 shares of Operations common stock outstanding. NQCI proposed
four possible share interest awards, arguing that it was entitled to shares
representing a 48% or 54% interest based on Operations shares outstanding at the
time of the Merger Agreement or our present number of outstanding
shares.
On August
4, 2008, the arbitrator issued a Second Interim Award, modifying the initial
Interim Award, stating that, if we desire to close the Technology Transaction,
we must obtain approval from a majority of our stockholders and issue 9,230,000
shares of our common stock to NQCI. It is our understanding that the arbitrator
based his decision as to the number of shares that we must issue on the factors
set forth below. Our understanding set forth below is derived from the terms of
the Second Interim Award and the Order, which we strongly encourage you to read
and review carefully, copies of which were attached to our Proxy Statement on
Schedule 14A, Amendment No. 5, filed with the SEC on February 10,
2009.
·
|
In
accordance with the second paragraph of page 7 of the Award, under the
Merger Agreement, the number of shares of our common stock which NQCI was
to receive at the closing of the transaction contemplated by the Merger
Agreement was based on the number of shares or our common stock
outstanding as of the date of the Merger Agreement, or 10,000,000
shares.
|
·
|
If
the Merger Agreement was terminated, resulting in the closing of the
Technology Transaction, (i) pursuant to Section 6(B)(2)(i) of the Merger
Agreement, NQCI was to receive a 48% share of the aggregate amount of our
shares of common stock if we terminated the Merger Agreement for NQCI’s
breach or either party terminated under the December 1 or December 29
deadlines, and (ii) pursuant to Section 6(B)(2)(ii) of the Merger
Agreement, NQCI was to get a 54% share if we terminated for
dissatisfaction with our due diligence, or NQCI terminated for our breach
(as more fully described in the Merger
Agreement).
|
·
|
The
arbitrator determined that NQCI was not entitled to terminate the Merger
Agreement outright and that its notice of termination was improper.
Therefore, the arbitrator determined that, since NQCI was at fault, NQCI
is entitled to receive the lesser of the two alternatives (48% instead of
54%).
|
·
|
Therefore,
according to the arbitrator, in order to award a 48% share to NQCI,
assuming that there were 10,000,000 shares of our common stock outstanding
on the date of the Merger Agreement, we must issue to NQCI 9,230,000
shares of our common stock, which would represent 48% of the aggregate
total of 19,230,000 shares of our common stock which would have been
outstanding after giving effect to such
issuance.
|
Following
the closing of the Technology Transaction, NQCI would own approximately 39% of
our total outstanding shares, making NQCI our largest stockholder. The
arbitrator found that, with the exception of stockholder approval, virtually all
conditions to closing the Technology Transaction have been waived, including
virtually all of NQCI’s representations and warranties concerning the
Technology.
The
Second Interim Award also stated that, contrary to the assertions made by NQCI,
the License Agreement will remain in full force and effect until the Technology
Transaction closes or the arbitrator determines that it will never close. Upon
closing of the Technology Transaction and satisfaction of the terms of the
Award, as modified by the Order, the License Agreement will terminate and we
will own all of the Technology.
On
January 3, 2008, the arbitrator issued an order denying NQCI’s motion to amend
its counterclaim to add us as a successor company following the Merger. However,
in the Second Interim Award, the arbitrator found that we are the successor to
Operations as a result of the merger, even though we are not a party to any of
the agreements or the arbitration, and ordered that our shares should be issued
to NQCI rather than shares of Operations.
The arbitrator has not ordered us to
close the Technology Transaction. However, the Second Interim Award states that,
if our stockholders fail to approve the issuance of stock to effectuate the
Technology Transaction, all of the Technology covered by the License shall be
declared the sole and exclusive property of NQCI, and the arbitrator shall
schedule additional hearings to address two questions: whether the PAK
technology is included within that Technology, and whether NQCI is entitled to
compensatory damages and the amount of damages under these circumstances. During
the arbitration, NQCI took the position that we had misappropriated trade
secrets regarding the WAK and used them to create the PAK. The arbitrator found
that we had not misappropriated NQCI’s trade secrets. However, should the
Technology Transaction not close for any reason, and the arbitrator rules that
the licensed Technology must be returned to NQCI, the arbitrator could find that
the PAK is derived in whole or in part from licensed Technology, and could rule
that Operations must “return” the PAK technology to NQCI or that NQCI is
entitled to compensatory damages or both.
On August
15, 2008, the arbitrator awarded NQCI $1.87 million of over $4 million it
claimed in attorneys’ fees and costs. The award has no effect on the additional
amount of approximately $690,000 claimed by NQCI in alleged expenses, Licensor
Expenses, under the License Agreement. The arbitrator has not yet ruled on this
claim.
In an
August 29, 2008 Order Re Issuance of Xcorporeal Shares, the arbitrator stated
that the shares should be issued directly to NQCI’s stockholders. However, on
September 4, 2008, the arbitrator issued an order that we should issue and
deliver the 9,230,000 shares directly to NQCI, rather than directly to NQCI
stockholders, if we obtain stockholder approval and elect to proceed with the
Technology Transaction.
The
Second Interim Award required that we file a registration statement under the
Securities Act to register for resale the shares to be issued to NQCI within 30
days after the closing of the Technology Transaction. The arbitrator
acknowledged that our obligation is to file the registration statement and to
use reasonable efforts to have the shares registered and not to guarantee
registration and resultant actual public tradability. However, the arbitrator
nevertheless ordered that the registration statement must be declared effective
within 90 days.
On
January 30, 2009, the arbitrator issued the Order, in which the arbitrator
modified the Second Interim Award by reserving on what the final terms of our
obligation to file the resale registration statement will be and stating that
such registration obligation shall be in accordance with applicable laws,
including applicable U.S. federal securities laws. While the arbitrator also
retained jurisdiction to monitor our compliance with such obligation, to award
any appropriate relief to NQCI if we fail to comply with such obligation and to
render a decision on any other matters contested in this proceeding, the time
periods set forth in the Second Interim Award and summarized in the preceding
paragraph are no longer applicable. The Order also provided, among other things,
that if we file the Proxy Statement, obtain stockholder approval to issue to
NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our common stock as consideration for the closing of
the Technology Transaction and issue such shares to NQCI, the arbitrator
anticipates confirming that all of the Technology covered by the License
Agreement shall be declared our sole and exclusive property.
The
arbitrator held a conference call hearing with the Company and NQCI on March 13,
2009 in which the parties discussed the reasons for the difficulties in closing
the Technology Transaction and explored potential alternatives. The parties were
asked to submit letter briefs outlining their suggested alternatives for
consideration by the arbitrator. The parties submitted their respective letter
briefs on March 24, 2009.
As of the
date of this Annual Report, the arbitration proceeding with NQCI continues and
the arbitrator has not yet issued a final award to either party and has not made
a final ruling with respect to whether the closing of the Technology Transaction
shall occur or whether potential alternatives should be pursued.
Furthermore,
the arbitrator has stated that he has not yet issued a final award that may be
confirmed or challenged in a court of competent jurisdiction. A party to the
arbitration could challenge the interim award in court, even after stockholders
approve the transaction. In addition, the arbitrator could again change the
award by granting different or additional remedies, even after stockholders
approve the transaction. We cannot guarantee that the arbitrator would order
that stockholders be given another opportunity to vote on the transaction, even
if such changes are material. Arbitrators have broad equitable powers, and
arbitration awards are difficult to challenge in court, even if the arbitrator
makes rulings that are inconsistent or not in accordance with the law or the
evidence.
Should
the arbitrator order a material change to the Second Interim Award, as modified
by the Order, after the vote of stockholders on this proposal, and further order
that our stockholders not be given another opportunity to vote on this proposal
or on such material change, such order could conflict with applicable federal
securities laws or NYSE Amex rules to which we are subject. In such event, we
would ask the arbitrator to amend such changed award or attempt to seek review
of the changed award in a court of competent jurisdiction. The closing of the
Technology Transaction may render any court review or appeal moot, effectively
preventing us from challenging any of the arbitrator’s awards in
court.
Item
4. Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
None.
PART
II
Item
5. Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Maters and Issuer Purchases
of Equity Securities
Market
Information
Our
common stock is traded on the NYSE Amex (formerly American Stock Exchange) under
the symbol “XCR.” Prior to December 7, 2007, our common stock was quoted on the
Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol “XCPL”. Immediately
prior to our merger with the pre-merger Xcorporeal on October 12, 2007, a
one-for-8.27 reverse split of our common stock was executed. Historical stock
prices prior to October 12, 2007 have been adjusted for this reverse stock
split.
As of
March 4, 2009, there were approximately 797 record holders of our common stock,
representing approximately 3,654 beneficial owners.
Following
is a list by fiscal quarters of the split-adjusted closing sales prices of our
common stock. Such prices represent inter-dealer quotations, do not represent
actual transactions, and do not include retail mark-ups, markdowns or
commissions. Such prices were determined from information provided by a majority
of the market makers for the Company’s common stock.
|
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th
Quarter
|
|
$ |
0.50 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
3rd
Quarter
|
|
|
1.44 |
|
|
|
0.50 |
|
2nd
Quarter
|
|
|
4.21 |
|
|
|
1.00 |
|
1ST
Quarter
|
|
|
4.94 |
|
|
|
2.34 |
|
|
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th
Quarter
|
|
$ |
14.06 |
|
|
$ |
4.27 |
|
3rd
Quarter
|
|
|
17.45 |
|
|
|
3.39 |
|
2nd
Quarter
|
|
|
6.62 |
|
|
|
4.30 |
|
1ST
Quarter
|
|
|
13.89 |
|
|
|
2.40 |
|
We did
not pay any cash dividends in 2008 or 2007 and we do not intend to pay cash
dividends in the foreseeable future. It is our present intention to
utilize all available funds for the development of our business. Our future
dividend policy will depend on the requirements of financing agreements to which
we may be a party. Any future determination to pay dividends will be at the
discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend upon, among other factors,
our results of operations, financial condition, capital requirements and
contractual restrictions.
Securities
Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
The
following table provides information about our common stock that may be issued
upon the exercise of equity instruments under all of our existing equity
compensation plans as of December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
Available
|
|
|
|
Number
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
for
Future Issuances
|
|
|
|
to
be Issued
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Under
the Equity
|
|
|
|
Upon
Exercise of
|
|
|
Exercise
Price of
|
|
|
Compensation
Plans
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
Options,
|
|
|
Outstanding
Options,
|
|
|
(Excluding
Securities
|
|
Plan
Category
|
|
Warrants and
Rights
|
|
|
Warrants and
Rights
|
|
|
Reflected in
Column(a))
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
3,877,500
|
|
|
$
|
5.39
|
|
|
|
2,922,500
|
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
|
|
3,877,500
|
|
|
$
|
5.39
|
|
|
|
2,922,500
|
|
In connection with our merger with
pre-merger Xcorporeal on October 12, 2007, options to purchase 3,880,000 shares
of common stock that had been granted under pre-merger Xcorporeal’s 2006
Incentive Compensation Plan were assumed by us under the Merger Agreement. Of
these shares, 2,900,000 shares remain outstanding as of December 31, 2008. Any
of our options or warrants that were outstanding prior to the merger with
pre-merger Xcorporeal were cancelled upon effectiveness of the merger. Our 2007
Incentive Compensation Plan was approved by our Board of Directors and a
majority of our stockholders at the same time and in the same manner that the
Merger Agreement was approved, and was ratified by our stockholders on November
26, 2007. As of December 31, 2008, there were 3,900,000 shares of our common
stock authorized for issuance upon the exercise of options granted or to be
granted under our 2007 Incentive Compensation Plan, of which options to purchase
977,500 shares of our common stock have already been granted.
For further information, refer to Note
17, “Stock Options and Warrants” to our financial statements filed as part of
this Annual Report.
Performance
Graph
Not required for smaller reporting
companies.
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds from Registered
Securities
Other than set forth below, the
information regarding our sales of our unregistered securities for the fiscal
years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, has been previously furnished in our
Annual Reports on Form 10-K or 10-KSB, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or 10-QSB
and/or our Current Reports on Form 8-K.
On
November 10, 2008, we issued 50,000 restricted shares of our common stock to
certain third party consultant in consideration of consulting services provided
to us.
The foregoing issuance
was exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and/or
Rule 506 promulgated thereunder.
Use
of Proceeds from Registered Securities
None.
Purchases
of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers.
None.
Item
6. Selected
Financial Data.
Not required for smaller reporting
companies.
Item
7. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
In addition to reviewing this
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” section, you should also carefully review sections captioned
“Business - Recent Developments” and “Risk Factors” above for a more complete
discussion of the current events that are affecting and other factors that may
affect our business.
Recent
Developments
Corporate
Restructuring
The deterioration of the economy over
the last year, coupled with the prolonged and continuing delay in consummating
the Technology Transaction, has significantly adversely affected our Company.
Many of the expectations on which we had based our 2008 and 2009 business
development plans slowly eroded as a result of the lengthy arbitration
proceeding with NQCI commenced in 2006 and continuing into the second quarter of
2009. The possibility of an adverse decision in the arbitration proceeding with
respect to our ownership right to the Technology (as defined below) has been and
continues to be a major factor in our inability to secure debt or equity
financing. Accordingly, we have had to modify our activities and business. In
response to the general economic downturn affecting the development of our
products and liquidity condition, we have instituted a variety of measures in an
attempt to conserve cash and reduce our operating expenses. Our actions
included:
·
|
Reductions
in our labor force – On March 13, 2009, we gave notice of employment
termination to 19 employees. This represents a total work-force reduction
of approximately 73%. We paid accrued vacation benefits of approximately
$70,000 to the terminated employees. The layoffs and our other efforts
focused on streamlining our operations designed to reduce our annual
expenses by approximately $3.5 million to a current operating burn rate of
approximately $200,000 per month. These actions had to be carefully and
thoughtfully executed and we will take additional actions, if necessary.
Most important to us in making these difficult decisions is to give as
much consideration as possible to all of our employees, whom we greatly
value. We hope to be in the financial position in the near future to offer
re-employment to certain of our terminated
employees.
|
·
|
Refocusing
our available assets and employee resources on the development of the
PAK.
|
·
|
Continuing
vigorous efforts to minimize or defer our operating
expenses.
|
·
|
Exploring
various strategic alternatives, which may include the license of certain
of our intellectual property rights, as a means to further develop our
technologies, among other possible transactions and
alternatives.
|
·
|
Intensifying
our search to obtain additional financing to support our operations and to
satisfy our ongoing capital requirements in order to improve our liquidity
position.
|
·
|
Continuing
to prosecute our patents and take other steps to perfect our intellectual
property rights.
|
In light of the unprecedented economic
slow down, lack of access to capital markets and prolonged arbitration
proceeding with NQCI, we were compelled to undertake the efforts outlined above
in order to remain in the position to continue our operations. We hope to be
able to obtain additional financing to meet our cash obligations as they become
due and otherwise proceed with our business plan. Our ability to execute on our
current business plan is dependent upon our ability to obtain equity or debt
financing, develop and market our products, and, ultimately, to generate
revenue. Unless we are able to raise financing sufficient to support our
operations and to satisfy our ongoing financing requirements, we will not be
able to develop any of our products, submit 510(k) notifications to the FDA,
conduct clinical trials or otherwise commercialize any of our products. We will
make every effort however, to continue the development of the PAK. As a result
of these conditions, there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as
a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is substantially
dependent on the successful execution of many of the actions referred to above,
on the timeline contemplated by our plans and our ability to obtain additional
financing. We cannot assure you that we will be successful now or in the future
in obtaining any additional financing on terms favorable to us, if at all. The
failure to obtain financing will have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and operations.
Other
Considerations – Royalty and Other Payments Under the License
Agreement
As consideration for entering into the
License Agreement, we agreed to pay to NQCI a minimum annual royalty of
$250,000, or 7% of net sales. As a result of the transfer of the Technology to
us, we may be able to realize additional savings of not having to compensate
NQCI for any royalty payments accrued and not yet paid. Although we have
asserted that NQCI’s breaches of the License Agreement excused our obligation to
make the minimum royalty payments, we recorded $583,333 in royalty expenses,
covering the minimum royalties, from commencement of the License Agreement
through December 31, 2008. The License Agreement expires in 2105. The License
Agreement also requires us to reimburse NQCI’s Licensor Expenses until the
closing or the termination of the Merger Agreement. The Second Interim Award
states that the License Agreement will remain in full force and effect until the
Technology Transaction closes or the arbitrator determines that it will never
close. Although we have contested its right to any further payments, NQCI has
made a claim for reimbursement of approximately $690,000 in alleged expenses
under the License Agreement as of December 31, 2008. If we are able to acquire
the Technology from NQCI, the arbitrator has indicated that the License
Agreement would be terminated simultaneously with such acquisition. As a result
of the Technology becoming our sole and exclusive property, among other
benefits, we should be able to discontinue these royalty payments to NQCI,
realize corresponding savings and we may also be able to realize additional
savings of not having to reimburse NQCI for any Licensor Expenses accrued and
not yet paid.
Basis
of Presentation
This
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” section should be read in conjunction with the accompanying
financial statements which have been prepared assuming that we will continue as
a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and the
satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. Our recurring
losses from operations and net capital deficiency raise substantial doubt about
our ability to continue as a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going
concern is substantially dependent on the successful execution of many of the
actions referred to above and otherwise discussed in this “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”
section and in Note 1, “Nature of Operations and Going Concern Uncertainty” to
our financial statements filed as part of this Annual Report, on the timeline
contemplated by our plans and our ability to obtain additional financing. The
uncertainty of successful execution of our plans, among other factors, raises
substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern. The
accompanying financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
Results
of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007
We have
not generated any revenues since inception. We incurred a net loss of
$22,987,273 for the year ended December 31, 2008, compared to net loss of
$17,074,051 for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase in net loss was
primarily due to (i) research, development, and other expenses related to
advancing our kidney failure treatment technologies, (ii) stock compensation
expense related to options and warrants granted to directors, officer, employees
and consultants, and (iii) legal fees, (iv) common stock issuances as
compensation for consulting services, (v) accruals for alleged licensor expenses
and interim awards issued in the arbitration with NQCI, and (vi) increased
company personnel. At December 31, 2008, we had negative working capital of
$805,912 compared to positive working capital of $14,958,099 at the
beginning of the year. At December 31, 2008, our total assets were $4,351,073,
compared to $17,252,546 at the beginning of the year, which consisted primarily
of cash from the sale of our common stock sold in December 2006.
Interest
Income
Interest
income of $320,622 and $1,184,930 was reported for the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007, respectively.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
We expect
to incur operating losses and negative cash flows for the foreseeable future.
During the fourth quarter 2006, we raised approximately $27.3 million (net of
placement fees of $2.1 million) through a private placement. Our ability to
execute on our current business plan is dependent upon our ability to develop
and market our products, and, ultimately, to generate revenue.
As of
December 31, 2008, we had cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities of
approximately $3.4 million. We project to expend approximately $1.9 million
in the first quarter of 2009 and expend cash at a rate of approximately $0.2
million per month based upon the recent restructuring effected by our company
going forward. See above section captioned “Recent Developments”. In addition,
we may become obligated to pay damages, costs or legal fees in connection with
the ongoing arbitration described under Part I, Item 3-Legal Proceedings above,
in an amount of $1.87 million under the Interim Award issued on August 15, 2008.
At present rates, we will have to obtain additional debt or equity financing
during the next several months.
We expect
to incur negative cash flows and net losses for the foreseeable future. In
addition, we may become obligated to pay damages, costs or legal fees in
connection with the ongoing arbitration with NQCI. Based upon our current plans,
we believe that our existing cash reserves will not be sufficient to meet our
operating expenses and capital requirements before we achieve profitability.
Accordingly, we will be required to seek additional funds through public or
private placement of shares of our preferred or common stock or through public
or private debt financing. Our ability to meet our cash obligations as they
become due and payable will depend on our ability to sell securities, borrow
funds, reduce operating costs, or some combination thereof. We may not be
successful in obtaining necessary funds on acceptable terms, if at all. The
inability to obtain financing could require us to curtail our current plans in
order to decrease spending, which could have a material adverse effect on our
plan of operations. Our ability to execute on our current business plan is
dependent upon our ability to obtain equity financing, develop and market our
products, and, ultimately, to generate revenue. As a result of these conditions,
there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern.
Upon
receipt of the approximately $27.3 million raised through the private placement
of our common stock in the fourth quarter of 2006, we strategically began our
operating activities and research and development efforts which resulted in a
net loss of $23.0 million in 2008. In addition, we invested $25.0
million in high grade money market funds and marketable securities of which we
have sold $22.0 million, leaving a balance of $3.0 million as of December 31,
2008.
We have
focused much of our efforts on development of the PAK, which has not been
derived from the technology covered by the License Agreement. Through the
productive research and development efforts of the PAK, we have completed
functional prototypes of our attended care and home PAKs that we plan to
commercialize after 510(k) clearance from the FDA which we plan to submit in
2010. Prior to the 510(k) submission to the FDA for clinical use under direct
medical supervision, the units will undergo final verification and validation.
It generally takes 4 to 12 months from the date of a 510(k) submission to obtain
clearance from the FDA, although it may take longer. We expect that our monthly
expenditures will increase as we shift resources towards developing a marketing
plan for the PAK.
We have
used some of our resources for the development of the WAK and have demonstrated
a feasibility prototype. Commercialization of the WAK will require development
of a functional prototype and likely a full pre-market approval by the FDA,
which could take several years. Our rights to the WAK derive in part from the
License Agreement pursuant to which we obtained the exclusive rights to the
Technology. Once we acquire the Technology and the results of the arbitration
proceeding with NQCI are final, we will determine whether to devote additional
resources to development of the WAK.
If we
ever become obligated to reimburse all or a substantial portion of the $690,000
in NQCI’s alleged expenses related to the License Agreement and $1.87 million in
NQCI’s attorneys’ fees incurred in the arbitration awarded under the interim
award issued on August 15, 2008, these obligations could have a material adverse
effect on our liquidity and financial ability to continue with ongoing
operations as currently planned.
Because
neither the PAK nor the WAK is yet at a stage where it can be marketed
commercially, we are not able to predict the portion of our future business
which will be derived from each.
Research
and Development
Through
March 13, 2009, we employed an interdisciplinary team of scientists and
engineers who were developing the PAK and a separate, interdisciplinary team
developing the WAK. However, as discussed above during the first quarter of
2009, we had to adjust our employee headcount to more closely match our capital
availability and, as a result, terminated the employment of 19 employees. In
addition, we had retained Aubrey Group, Inc., an FDA-registered third-party
contract developer and manufacturer of medical devices, to assist with the
engineering of the PAK. As of December 31, 2008, Aubrey substantially completed
its work and we terminated this agreement. The PAK has been engineered to
perform both hemodialysis, hemofiltration and ultrafiltration under direct
medical supervision. A variation of this device will be developed for chronic
home hemodialysis. An initial laboratory prototype of the PAK, capable of
performing the functions of a hemodialysis machine, and demonstrating our unique
new fluidics circuit, was completed at the end of 2007. The first physical
prototype including industrial design of the PAK was completed in October 2008.
Further refinements to this prototype are now in progress. We hope to complete
the final product design of the PAK and submit the for final verification and
validation prior to a 510(k) submission for clinical use under direct medical
supervision. A clinical study is not required for this submission.
In a
clinical feasibility study conducted in London in March 2007, a research
prototype of the WAK was successfully demonstrated in eight patients with
end-stage renal disease. Patients were successfully treated for up to eight
hours with adequate clearances of urea and creatinine. The device was well
tolerated and patients were able to conduct activities of normal daily living
including walking and sleeping. There were no serious adverse events although
clotting of the dialyzer occurred in two patients. To our knowledge, this is the
first successful demonstration of a WAK in humans.
We
incurred $20.9 million and $7.1 million in research and development costs in the
fiscal years 2008 and 2007, respectively, including the August 4, 2008, $10.2
million fair value accrual for a potential 9.23 million shares issuance to
effectuate the Technology Transaction in accordance to the Second Interim Award
(as defined below). Less the accrual for shares issuable, we incurred $10.7
million and $7.1 million in research and development costs in the fiscal years
2008 and 2007, respectively. The increase in research and development costs in
2008 from 2007 is attributable to our efforts to advance our kidney failure
treatment technologies and an increase in personnel.
Contractual
Obligations and Commercial Commitments
The following table sets forth a
summary of our material contractual obligations and commercial commitments as of
December 31, 2008.
Contractual
Obligations:
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less than 1
year
|
|
|
1 - 3 years
|
|
|
3 - 5 years
|
|
|
More
than 5 years
|
|
Capital Lease
Obligations
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Operating Lease Obligations
(1)
|
|
|
2,422,931 |
|
|
|
411,845 |
|
|
|
1,677,342 |
|
|
|
333,744 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Research & Development
Contractual Commitments
|
|
|
68,688 |
|
|
|
68,688 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
Liabilities
|
|
|
34,325 |
|
|
|
34,325 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
$ |
2,525,944 |
|
|
$ |
514,858 |
|
|
$ |
1,677,342 |
|
|
$ |
333,744 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
(1)
Operating lease commitments for our corporate office, operating facility, Dr.
Gura’s office (a related party transaction), two corporate apartments and
equipment.
Since
Aubrey substantially completed its work under the Aubrey Agreement and we intend
to terminate this agreement, this table excludes any remaining obligations under
the Aubrey Agreement.
As of
December 31, 2008, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are
reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition,
results of operations or cash flows.
Legal
Proceedings
We are
involved in arbitration against NQCI as described above in section captioned
“Item 3 - Legal Proceedings”. From time to time, we may be involved in
litigation relating to claims arising out of our operations in the normal course
of business. As of the date of this Annual Report, we are not currently involved
in any other legal proceeding that we believe would have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition or operating results.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
The
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is
based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Generally
accepted accounting principles require management to make estimates, judgments
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities,
revenues and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities.
We base our estimates on experience and on various other assumptions that we
believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the
basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities
that may not be readily apparent from other sources. Our actual results may
differ from those estimates.
We
consider our critical accounting policies to be those that involve significant
uncertainties, require judgments or estimates that are more difficult for
management to determine or that may produce materially different results when
using different assumptions. We consider the following accounting policies to be
critical:
Marketable
Securities
We
classify investments with maturity dates greater than three months when
purchased as marketable securities. Investments, including certificates of
deposit with maturity dates greater than three months when purchased and which
have readily determined fair values, are classified as available-for-sale
investments and reflected in current assets as marketable securities at fair
market value. Our investment policy requires that all investments be
investment grade quality and no more than ten percent of our portfolio may be
invested in any one security or with one institution.
As of
December 31, 2008 and 2007, short-term investments classified as
available-for-sale were as follows:
|
|
December 31,
2008 |
|
|
|
Aggregate
Fair
|
|
|
Gross
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
Fair
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Gains /
(Losses)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Commercial
paper
|
|
$ |
897,993 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
897,993 |
|
Corporate
securities fixed rate
|
|
|
457,930 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
457,930 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,355,923 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
1,355,923 |
|
|
|
December
31, 2007 |
|
|
|
Aggregate
Fair
|
|
|
Gross
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
Fair
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Gains /
(Losses)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Commercial
paper
|
|
$ |
10,283,818 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
10,283,818 |
|
Corporate
obligation
|
|
|
2,245,770 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,245,770 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
12,529,588 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
12,529,588 |
|
Xcorporeal
reviews impairments associated with the above in accordance with SFAS No. 115,
“Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,” and FASB
Staff Position FAS 115-1 and FAS 124-1, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments,” to determine the
classification of the impairment as temporary or other-than-temporary.
Xcorporeal considers these investments not to be impaired as of December 31,
2008 and 2007.
There
were no gross unrealized gains or losses as of December 31, 2008 and
2007.
Shares
Issuable
Pursuant
to the Second Interim Award issued on August 4, 2008, which stated that, if the
Technology Transaction is submitted to and approved by our stockholders,
9,230,000 shares of our common stock should be issued to NQCI to effectuate the
transaction, we accrued for the 9,230,000 shares of our common stock. As the
Second Interim Award stated that we must issue 9,230,000 upon the closing of the
Technology Transaction and we have been unable to consummate such transaction,
such contingency is not within our control and we have therefore, recorded the
issuance as a liability, rather than as an equity issuance. Until issuance, the
shares issuable will be recorded at fair value in accordance with EITF 00-19,
with subsequent changes in fair value recorded as non-operating change in fair
value of shares issuable to our statement of operations. The fair value of the
shares will be measured using the closing price of our common stock on the
reporting date. The measured fair value of $10,153,000 for the accrued 9,230,000
shares on August 4, 2008, the date of the Second Interim Award, was accrued
under “Shares issuable” and expensed to “Research and development.” From marking
to market, the fair value of the shares issuable was revalued at $1,569,100 as
of December 31, 2008. The resulting non-operating change in fair value of
$8,583,900 to our statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2008
was recognized as “Change in fair value of shares issuable.” Stockholder
approval for the issuance of 9,230,000 shares of our common stock to NQCI and
the issuance of such shares are pending to date.
Although
we are seeking stockholder approval for the issuance of 9,230,000 shares of our
common stock to effectuate the Technology Transaction, we are uncertain whether
the SEC will clear its review of the form of our proxy statement that we will
use to solicit stockholder approval of the transaction, whether our stockholders
will vote to approve the transaction, whether shares will be issued to NQCI, or
whether when filed, the SEC will declare effective the registration statement to
register the shares for resale. If the Technology Transaction does not close,
the arbitrator may issue alternative relief. In the event of an alternate
relief, the above accrual may be adjusted and the accrual or the actual
settlement will be recorded to coincide with the alternate award.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Statements
of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, (SFAS
123(R)) and Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting Bulletin
(SAB) No. 107 (SAB 107) require the measurement and recognition of compensation
expense for all share-based payment awards made to employees and directors based
on estimated fair values. We have applied the provisions of SAB 107 in its
adoption of SFAS 123(R).
In
determining stock based compensation, we consider various factors in our
calculation of fair value using a black-scholes pricing model. These factors
include volatility, expected term of the options and forfeiture rates. A change
in these factors could result in differences in the stock based compensation
expense.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued FASB
Statement No. 159, “The Fair
Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — Including an
Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities” (“SFAS No. 159”). SFAS No. 159 permits
an entity to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain items at
fair value. The objective of this standard is to improve financial reporting by
providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reporting
earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without
having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 permits all
entities to choose to measure eligible items at fair value at specified election
dates. Entities will report unrealized gains and losses on items for which the
fair value option has been elected in earnings at each subsequent reporting
date. The fair value option: (a) may be applied instrument by instrument, with a
few exceptions, such as investments accounted for by the equity method; (b) is
irrevocable (unless a new election date occurs); and (c) is applied only to
entire instruments and not to portions of instruments. SFAS No. 159 is effective
as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after November
15, 2007, which for us is our fiscal year beginning January 1, 2008. The
adoption of SFAS No. 159 did not have any effect on our consolidated financial
statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
141(R)”). SFAS 141(R) replaces SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations”, but
retains the requirement that the purchase method of accounting for acquisitions
be used for all business combinations. SFAS 141(R) expands on the disclosures
previously required by SFAS 141, better defines the acquirer and the acquisition
date in a business combination, and establishes principles for recognizing and
measuring the assets acquired (including goodwill), the liabilities assumed and
any non-controlling interests in the acquired business. SFAS 141(R) also
requires an acquirer to record an adjustment to income tax expense for changes
in valuation allowances or uncertain tax positions related to acquired
businesses. SFAS 141(R) is effective for all business combinations with an
acquisition date in the first annual period following December 15, 2008; early
adoption is not permitted. We will adopt this statement as of January 1, 2009.
The impact of SFAS 141(R) will have on our consolidated financial statements
will depend on the nature and size of acquisitions we complete after we adopt
SFAS 141(R).
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements-an amendment of ARB No. 51” (SFAS 160). SFAS
160 requires that non-controlling (or minority) interests in subsidiaries be
reported in the equity section of the company’s balance sheet, rather than in a
mezzanine section of the balance sheet between liabilities and equity. SFAS 160
also changes the manner in which the net income of the subsidiary is reported
and disclosed in the controlling company’s income statement. SFAS 160 also
establishes guidelines for accounting for changes in ownership percentages and
for deconsolidation. SFAS 160 is effective for financial statements for fiscal
years beginning on or after December 1, 2008 and interim periods within those
years. The adoption of SFAS 160 is not expected to have a material impact on our
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In
March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, Disclosures About Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, or “SFAS 161”. SFAS 161 enhances the
disclosure requirements for derivative instruments and hedging activities. This
Standard is effective January 1, 2009. Since SFAS 161 requires only
additional disclosures concerning derivatives and hedging activities, adoption
of SFAS 161 will not affect the Company’s financial condition or results of
operation.
In
May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (SFAS 162). SFAS 162 identifies the
sources of accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles
used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that
are presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the
United States (the GAAP hierarchy). SFAS 162 will become
effective November 15, 2008. The adoption of SFAS 162 did not have a material
impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In June
2008, the FASB reached a consensus on EITF Issue No. 07-5, Determining Whether an Instrument
(or an Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock, or “EITF
07-5”. EITF 07-5 requires that we apply a two-step approach in evaluating
whether an equity-linked financial instrument (or embedded feature) is indexed
to our own stock, including evaluating the instrument’s contingent exercise and
settlement provisions. EITF 07-5 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2008. We are currently evaluating the effects, if any, that EITF
07-5 will have on our consolidated financial statements.
Item
7A. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Not required for smaller reporting
companies.
Item
8. Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data.
CONTENTS
|
PAGE
|
|
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
|
30
|
|
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
BALANCE
SHEETS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
|
31
|
|
|
STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007, AND THE
PERIOD FROM INCEPTION (MAY 4, 2001) TO DECEMBER 31, 2008
|
32
|
|
|
STATEMENTS
OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT) FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008
AND 2007, AND THE PERIOD FROM INCEPTION (MAY 4, 2001) TO DECEMBER 31,
2008
|
33
|
|
|
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007, AND THE
PERIOD FROM INCEPTION (MAY 4, 2001) TO DECEMBER 31, 2008
|
34
|
|
|
NOTES
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
35
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of
Directors and Stockholders
Xcorporeal,
Inc.
(a
development stage company)
Los
Angeles, California
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Xcorporeal, Inc. as of
December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for each of the two years in
the period ended December 31, 2008 and the period from inception (May 4, 2001)
to December 31, 2008. 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 statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is
not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration
of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of
expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control
over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the
amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe
that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of Xcorporeal, Inc. at December
31, 2008 and 2007, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each
of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008 and the period from
inception (May 4, 2001) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
The
accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company
will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 to the financial
statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and has a
net capital deficiency that raise substantial doubt about its ability to
continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are
also described in Note 1. The financial statements do not include any
adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
/s/ BDO
Seidman, LLP
Los
Angeles, California
March 30,
2009
XCORPOREAL,
INC.
(a
Development Stage Company)
|
|
Years
ended
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
407,585 |
|
|
$ |
106,495 |
|
Marketable
securities, at fair value
|
|
|
2,955,714 |
|
|
|
16,401,898 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
301,675 |
|
|
|
68,016 |
|
Prepaid
expenses & other current assets
|
|
|
260,024 |
|
|
|
408,303 |
|
Tenant
improvement allowance receivable
|
|
|
87,658 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
4,012,656 |
|
|
|
16,984,712 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and equipment, net
|
|
|
337,554 |
|
|
|
266,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Assets
|
|
$ |
4,351,073 |
|
|
$ |
17,252,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
$ |
789,827 |
|
|
$ |
1,125,239 |
|
Accrued
legal fees & licensing expense
|
|
|
2,873,396 |
|
|
|
312,208 |
|
Accrued
royalties
|
|
|
583,333 |
|
|
|
83,333 |
|
Accrued
professional fees
|
|
|
211,820 |
|
|
|
113,020 |
|
Accrued
compensation
|
|
|
149,664 |
|
|
|
196,541 |
|
Accrued
other liabilities
|
|
|
54,429 |
|
|
|
68,946 |
|
Payroll
liabilities
|
|
|
7,448 |
|
|
|
11,926 |
|
Deferred
rent
|
|
|
148,651 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
115,400 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
4,818,568 |
|
|
|
2,026,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
issuable
|
|
|
1,569,100 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS
& CONTINGENCIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS'
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, $0.0001 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized, none
outstanding
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Common
stock, $0.0001 par value, 40,000,000 shares authorized, 14,754,687 and
14,372,472 issued and outstanding on December 31, 2008 and December 31,
2007, respectively
|
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
|
1,437 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
42,547,023 |
|
|
|
36,822,316 |
|
Deficit
accumulated during the development stage
|
|
|
(44,585,093 |
) |
|
|
(21,597,820 |
) |
Total
stockholders' (deficit) equity
|
|
|
(2,036,595 |
) |
|
|
15,225,933 |
|
Total
Liabilities & Stockholders' (Deficit) Equity
|
|
$ |
4,351,073 |
|
|
$ |
17,252,546 |
|
See
accompanying notes to these financial statements.
XCORPOREAL,
INC.
(a
Development Stage Company)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May
4, 2001 (Date
|
|
|
|
Years
ended
|
|
|
of
Inception) to
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Operating
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
$ |
9,001,819 |
|
|
$ |
11,084,040 |
|
|
$ |
23,404,511 |
|
Research and
development
|
|
|
20,914,825 |
|
|
|
7,141,170 |
|
|
|
29,343,317 |
|
Other
expenses
|
|
|
1,871,430 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,871,430 |
|
Depreciation and
amortization
|
|
|
104,719 |
|
|
|
32,171 |
|
|
|
136,985 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
before other income, income taxes, and other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expenses
|
|
|
(31,892,793
|
) |
|
|
(18,257,381
|
) |
|
|
(54,756,243
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
and other income
|
|
|
323,249 |
|
|
|
1,184,930 |
|
|
|
1,590,479 |
|
Change
in fair value of shares issuable
|
|
|
8,583,900 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,583,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
before income taxes and other expenses
|
|
|
(22,985,644
|
) |
|
|
(17,072,451
|
) |
|
|
(44,581,864
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
taxes
|
|
|
1,629 |
|
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
|
3,229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(22,987,273 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,074,051 |
) |
|
$ |
(44,585,093 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted loss per share
|
|
$ |
(1.57 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding
|
|
|
14,604,274 |
|
|
|
14,206,489 |
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to these financial statements.
XCORPOREAL,
INC.
(a
Development Stage Company)
For
the Period May 4, 2001 (Inception) to December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
During
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
Stock
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Stage
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Common
stock issued for cash at $0.01 per share
|
|
|
2,500,000 |
|
|
$ |
250 |
|
|
$ |
24,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
25,000 |
|
Net
Loss for the year ended December 31, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(40,255 |
) |
|
|
(40,255
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2001
|
|
|
2,500,000 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
24,750 |
|
|
|
(40,255
|
) |
|
|
(15,255
|
) |
Common
stock issued for cash at $0.05 per share
|
|
|
1,320,000 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
65,868 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66,000 |
|
Net
Loss for the year ended December 31, 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31,249
|
) |
|
|
(31,249
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2002
|
|
|
3,820,000 |
|
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
90,618 |
|
|
|
(71,504
|
) |
|
|
19,496 |
|
Net
Loss for the year ended December 31, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,962
|
) |
|
|
(12,962
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2003
|
|
|
3,820,000 |
|
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
90,618 |
|
|
|
(84,466
|
) |
|
|
6,534 |
|
Net
Loss for the year ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,338
|
) |
|
|
(23,338
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2004
|
|
|
3,820,000 |
|
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
90,618 |
|
|
|
(107,804
|
) |
|
|
(16,804
|
) |
Net
Loss for the year ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35,753
|
) |
|
|
(35,753
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2005
|
|
|
3,820,000 |
|
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
90,618 |
|
|
|
(143,557
|
) |
|
|
(52,557
|
) |
Common
stock issued for license rights at $0.0001 per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
share
|
|
|
9,600,000 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
Capital
stock cancelled
|
|
|
(3,420,000
|
) |
|
|
(342
|
) |
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Warrants
granted for consulting fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,162,611 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,162,611 |
|
Forgiveness
of related party debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,620 |
|
Common
stock issued for cash at $7.00, net of placement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fees
of $2,058,024
|
|
|
4,200,050 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
27,341,928 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,342,348 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
264,251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
264,251 |
|
Net
loss for the period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,380,212
|
) |
|
|
(4,380,212
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
14,200,050 |
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
|
|
29,924,410 |
|
|
|
(4,523,769
|
) |
|
|
25,402,061 |
|
Capital
stock cancelled
|
|
|
(200,000
|
) |
|
|
(20
|
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Common
stock issued pursuant to consulting agreement at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4.90
per share
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
97,998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98,000 |
|
Recapitalization
pursuant to merger
|
|
|
352,422 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
(37,406
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37,371
|
) |
Warrants
granted for consulting services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,917,309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,917,309 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,721,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,721,485 |
|
Additional
proceeds from the sale of common stock in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198,500 |
|
Net
loss for the period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17,074,051
|
) |
|
|
(17,074,051
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2007
|
|
|
14,372,472 |
|
|
|
1,437 |
|
|
|
36,822,316 |
|
|
|
(21,597,820
|
) |
|
|
15,225,933 |
|
Common
stock issued as compensation for consulting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
services
at $3.61 per share
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
721,980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
722,000 |
|
Common
stock issued as compensation for consulting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
services
at $3.80 per share
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
75,998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76,000 |
|
Cashless
exercise of warrants
|
|
|
112,215 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(11
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
Common
stock issued as compensation for consulting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
services
at $0.32 per share
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
15,995 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,000 |
|
Reversal
of liability from the sale of common stock in 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,400 |
|
Warrants
granted for consulting services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91,306 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,704,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,704,039 |
|
Net
loss for the period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,987,273
|
) |
|
|
(22,987,273
|
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2008
|
|
|
14,754,687 |
|
|
$ |
1,475 |
|
|
$ |
42,547,023 |
|
|
$ |
(44,585,093 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,036,595 |
) |
See
accompanying notes to these financial statements.
XCORPOREAL,
INC.
(a
Development Stage Company)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May
4, 2001 (Date
|
|
|
|
Years
ended
|
|
|
of
Inception) to
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Cash
flows used in operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss for the period
|
|
$ |
(22,987,273 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,074,051 |
) |
|
$ |
(44,585,093 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash (used in) operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock based
compensation
|
|
|
4,704,039 |
|
|
|
3,721,485 |
|
|
|
8,689,775 |
|
Non-employee stock based
compensation
|
|
|
91,306 |
|
|
|
2,917,309 |
|
|
|
5,171,226 |
|
Common stock issuance for
consulting services rendered
|
|
|
814,000 |
|
|
|
98,000 |
|
|
|
912,000 |
|
Increase in shares
issuable
|
|
|
10,153,000 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10,153,000 |
|
Mark to market of shares
issuable
|
|
|
(8,583,900
|
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(8,583,900
|
) |
Depreciation
|
|
|
104,660 |
|
|
|
32,093 |
|
|
|
136,848 |
|
Net change in assets and
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in
Receivables
|
|
|
(87,658
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(87,658
|
) |
Decrease (increase) in
prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
148,279 |
|
|
|
(318,075
|
) |
|
|
(260,024
|
) |
Decrease in other
assets
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
(863
|
) |
Increase (decrease) in
accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
2,758,704 |
|
|
|
(144,241
|
) |
|
|
4,632,546 |
|
Increase in deferred
rent
|
|
|
148,651 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
148,651 |
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(12,736,133
|
) |
|
|
(10,767,402
|
) |
|
|
(23,673,492
|
) |
Cash
flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
(175,302
|
) |
|
|
(295,676
|
) |
|
|
(474,402
|
) |
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
(233,659
|
) |
|
|
(68,016
|
) |
|
|
(301,675
|
) |
Purchase of marketable
securities
|
|
|
(8,598,102
|
) |
|
|
(25,000,000
|
) |
|
|
(33,598,102
|
) |
Sale of marketable
securities
|
|
|
22,044,286 |
|
|
|
8,598,102 |
|
|
|
30,642,388 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
13,037,223 |
|
|
|
(16,765,590
|
) |
|
|
(3,731,791
|
) |
Cash
flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital stock
issued
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
27,549,748 |
|
Advances from related
party
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
64,620 |
|
Additional proceeds from
the sale of common stock in 2006
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
198,500 |
|
|
|
198,500 |
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
198,500 |
|
|
|
27,812,868 |
|
Increase
(decrease) in cash during the period
|
|
|
301,090 |
|
|
|
(27,334,492
|
) |
|
|
407,585 |
|
Cash
at beginning of the period
|
|
|
106,495 |
|
|
|
27,440,987 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Cash
at end of the period
|
|
$ |
407,585 |
|
|
$ |
106,495 |
|
|
$ |
407,585 |
|
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information; cash paid for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Income
taxes
|
|
$ |
1,629 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
3,229 |
|
See
accompanying notes to these financial statements.
XCORPOREAL,
INC.
(A
DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
NOTES
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER
31, 2008
1.
|
NATURE
OF OPERATIONS AND GOING CONCERN
UNCERTAINTY
|
On
October 12, 2007, pursuant to a merger agreement with Xcorporeal, Inc.
(hereinafter referred to as “Operations”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, merged
with and into Operations, which became our wholly-owned subsidiary and changed
its name to “Xcorporeal Operations, Inc.” We changed our name from CT Holdings
Enterprises, Inc. (“CTHE”), to “Xcorporeal, Inc.” and amended our certificate of
incorporation and bylaws to read substantially as Operations. As a result, our
authorized common stock changed from 60,000,000 shares to 40,000,000 common
shares, and our authorized preferred stock changed from 1,000,000 shares to
10,000,000 shares, resulting in total authorized capital stock of 50,000,000
shares.
Immediately
prior to the merger, we caused a one-for-8.27 reverse split of our common stock.
Each share of Operations common stock was then converted into one share of our
common stock. In addition, we assumed all outstanding Operations’ options and
warrants to purchase Operations common stock.
In this
merger, CTHE was considered to be the legal acquirer and Xcorporeal to be the
accounting acquirer. As the former shareholders of Operations owned over 97% of
the outstanding voting common stock of CTHE immediately after the merger and
CTHE was a public shell company, for accounting purposes Operations was
considered the accounting acquirer and the transaction was considered to be a
recapitalization of Operations.
Historical
financial statements prior to the merger were restated to be those of
Operations. The merger was accounted for as if it were an issuance of the common
stock of Operations to acquire our net assets, accompanied by a
recapitalization. Historical stockholders’ equity of Operations was
retroactively restated for the equivalent number of shares received in the
merger, after giving effect to the difference in par value with an offset to
paid-in capital. The assets and liabilities of Operations were carried forward
at their predecessor carrying amounts. Retained deficiency of Operations was
carried forward after the merger. Operations prior to the merger were those of
Operations. Earnings per share for periods prior to the merger were restated to
reflect the number of equivalent shares received by Operations’ stockholders.
The costs of the transaction were expensed to the extent they exceed cash
received from CTHE. References to “we,” “us,” “our” and the “company” after
consummation of the merger include CTHE and Operations.
As a
result of the merger, we transitioned to a development stage company focused on
researching, developing, and commercializing technology and products related to
the treatment of kidney failure.
We expect to incur negative cash flows
and net losses for the foreseeable future. Based upon our current plans, we
believe that our existing cash reserves will not be sufficient to meet our
current liabilities and other obligations as they become due and payable.
Accordingly, we will need to seek to obtain additional debt or equity financing
through a public or private placement of shares of our preferred or common stock
or through a public or private financing. Our ability to meet such obligations
will depend on our ability to sell securities, borrow funds, reduce operating
costs, or some combination thereof. We may not be successful in obtaining
necessary financing on acceptable terms, if at all. As of December 31, 2008, we
had negative working capital of $805,912, accumulative deficit of $44,585,093,
and stockholders’ deficit of $2,036,595. Cash used in 2008 operations was
$12,736,133. As a result of these conditions, there is substantial doubt about
our ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements filed as
part of this Annual Report do not include any adjustments that might result from
the outcome of this uncertainty.
Upon
receipt of the approximate $27.3 million raised through a private placement of
our common stock which was completed in the fourth quarter of 2006, we
strategically began our operating activities and research and development
efforts which resulted in a net loss of $23.0 million in 2008 and $17.1 million
in 2007, including approximately a net $1.6 million fair value accrual of a
potential 9.23 million shares issuance discussed in Note 4, “Legal Proceedings”
below. In addition, we invested $25.0 million in high grade money market funds
and marketable securities. We sold $22.0 million of these investments leaving a
balance of $3.0 million as of December 31, 2008.
We are a
medical device company developing an innovative extra-corporeal platform
technology to be used in devices to replace the function of various human
organs. We hope that the platform will lead to three initial products: (i) a
Portable Artificial Kidney (PAK) for hospital Renal Replacement Therapy, (ii) a
PAK for home hemodialysis and (iii) a Wearable Artificial Kidney (WAK) for
continuous ambulatory hemodialysis. Our rights to the WAK derive in part from
the License Agreement between Operations and NQCI pursuant to which we obtained
the exclusive rights to the Technology. See Note 4, “Legal Proceedings”
below.
We have
focused much of our efforts on development of the PAK, which has not been
derived from the technology covered by the License Agreement. Through our
research and development efforts, we have completed functional prototypes of our
hospital and home PAKs that we plan to commercialize after 510(k) notification
clearance from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which we plan to seek in
the future. Prior to the 510(k) submission to the FDA for clinical use under
direct medical supervision, the units will undergo final verification and
validation. It generally takes 4 to 12 months from the date of a 510(k)
submission to obtain clearance from the FDA, although it may take longer. We
hope to begin to shift out of the development and build phase of the prototype
equipment and into product phase, which should help us to reduce the related
spending on research and development costs as well as consulting and material
costs. See Note 19, “Product Development Agreement” below. With this transition,
there will be a shift of resources towards verification and validation of our
devices along with developing a marketing plan for the PAK.
In
addition, we have used some of our resources for the development of the WAK of
which we have demonstrated a feasibility prototype. Commercialization of the WAK
will require development of a functional prototype and likely a full pre-market
approval by the FDA, which could take several years. Once the Technology
Transaction has closed and the results of the arbitration proceeding described
in Note 4, “Legal Proceedings” are final, we will determine whether to devote
available resources to development of the WAK.
Because
neither the PAK nor the WAK is yet at a stage where it can be marketed
commercially, we are not able to predict the portion of our future business
which will be derived from each.
2.
|
DEVELOPMENT STAGE
COMPANY
|
We are a
development stage company, devoting substantially all of our efforts to the
research, development, and commercialization of kidney failure treatment
technologies.
Risks and Uncertainties — We
operate in an industry that is subject to intense competition, government
regulation, and rapid technological change. Our operations are subject to
significant risk and uncertainties including financial, operational,
technological, legal, regulatory, and other risks associated with a development
stage company, including the potential risk of business failure.
3.
|
SUMMARY
OF ACCOUNTING POLICIES
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents —
Cash equivalents are comprised of certain highly liquid investments with
original maturities of less than three months.
Marketable Securities — We
classify investments with maturity dates greater than three months when
purchased as marketable securities. Investments, including certificates of
deposit with maturity dates greater than three months when purchased and which
have readily determined fair values, are classified as available-for-sale
investments and reflected in current assets as marketable securities at fair
market value. Our investment policy requires that all investments be investment
grade quality and no more than ten percent of our portfolio may be invested in
any one security or with one institution.
As of
December 31, 2008 and 2007, short-term investments classified as
available-for-sale were as follows:
|
|
December
31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Aggregate
Fair
|
|
|
Gross
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
Fair
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Gains
/ (Losses)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Commercial
paper
|
|
$ |
897,993 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
897,993 |
|
Corporate
securities fixed rate
|
|
|
457,930 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
457,930 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,355,923 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
1,355,923 |
|
|
|
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
|
Aggregate
Fair
|
|
|
Gross
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
Fair
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Gains
/ (Losses)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Commercial
paper
|
|
$ |
10,283,818 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
10,283,818 |
|
Corporate
obligation
|
|
|
2,245,770 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,245,770 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
12,529,588 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
12,529,588 |
|
We review
impairments associated with the above in accordance with SFAS No. 115,
“Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,” and FASB
Staff Position FAS 115-1 and FAS 124-1, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments,” to determine the
classification of the impairment as temporary or other-than-temporary. We
consider these investments not to be impaired as of December 31, 2008 and
2007.
There
were no gross unrealized gains or losses as of December 31, 2008 and
2007.
Property and Equipment —
Property and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation
and amortization, which are calculated using the straight-line method over the
shorter of the estimated useful lives of the related assets (generally ranging
from three to five years), or the remaining lease term when applicable. Gains
and losses on disposals are included in results of operations at amounts equal
to the difference between the book value of the disposed assets and the proceeds
received upon disposal. There were no gains or losses on disposals from
inception through the end of 2008. Expenditures for replacements and leasehold
improvements are capitalized, while expenditures for maintenance and repairs are
expensed as incurred.
Research and Development —
Research and development is expensed as incurred. Upfront and milestone
payments made to third parties in connection with research and development
collaborations prior to regulatory approval are expensed as incurred. Payments
made to third parties subsequent to regulatory approval are capitalized and
amortized over the shorter of the remaining license or product patent life. At
December 31, 2008, we had no such capitalized research and development
costs.
Income Taxes — Under SFAS
109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” deferred tax assets and liabilities are
recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between
the consolidated financial statements and their respective tax basis. Deferred
income taxes reflect the net tax effects of (a) temporary differences between
the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes
and the amounts reported for income tax purposes, and (b) tax credit
carry-forwards. We record a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets when,
based on management’s best estimate of taxable income in the foreseeable future,
it is more likely than not that some portion of the deferred income tax assets
may not be realized.
Earnings per Share — Under
SFAS 128, “Earnings per Share,” basic earnings per share is computed by dividing
net income available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of
common shares assumed to be outstanding during the period of computation.
Diluted earnings per share reflect the potential dilution that could occur if
securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted
into common stock. As we had net losses for all periods presented, basic and
diluted loss per share is the same across the periods and any additional common
stock equivalents would be anti-dilutive.
Share-Based Compensation —
Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted FASB Statement No. 123R, Share-Based Payment (“FAS
123R”) (see Note 17, “Stock Options and Warrants”). FAS 123R requires all
share-based payments to employees to be expensed over the requisite service
period based on the grant-date fair value of the awards and requires that the
unvested portion of all outstanding awards upon adoption be recognized using the
same fair value and attribution methodologies previously determined under FASB
Statement No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation. We continue to
use the Black-Scholes valuation method and applied the requirements of FAS 123R
using the modified prospective method. Prior to January 1, 2006, there was no
share-based compensation expense.
Use of Estimates — The
consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) and, accordingly,
include certain amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and
judgments. Estimates are used in determining such items as depreciable and
amortizable lives, amounts recorded for contingencies, share-based compensation,
taxes on income. Because of the uncertainty inherent in such estimates, actual
results may differ from these estimates.
Recently
Issued Accounting Standards
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued FASB
Statement No. 159, “The Fair
Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — Including an
Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities” (“SFAS No. 159”). SFAS No. 159 permits
an entity to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain items at
fair value. The objective of this standard is to improve financial reporting by
providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reporting
earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without
having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 permits all
entities to choose to measure eligible items at fair value at specified election
dates. Entities will report unrealized gains and losses on items for which the
fair value option has been elected in earnings at each subsequent reporting
date. The fair value option: (a) may be applied instrument by instrument, with a
few exceptions, such as investments accounted for by the equity method; (b) is
irrevocable (unless a new election date occurs); and (c) is applied only to
entire instruments and not to portions of instruments. SFAS No. 159 is effective
as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after November
15, 2007, which for us is our fiscal year beginning January 1, 2008. The
adoption of SFAS No. 159 did not have any effect on our consolidated financial
statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
141(R)”). SFAS 141(R) replaces SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations”, but
retains the requirement that the purchase method of accounting for acquisitions
be used for all business combinations. SFAS 141(R) expands on the disclosures
previously required by SFAS 141, better defines the acquirer and the acquisition
date in a business combination, and establishes principles for recognizing and
measuring the assets acquired (including goodwill), the liabilities assumed and
any non-controlling interests in the acquired business. SFAS 141(R) also
requires an acquirer to record an adjustment to income tax expense for changes
in valuation allowances or uncertain tax positions related to acquired
businesses. SFAS 141(R) is effective for all business combinations with an
acquisition date in the first annual period following December 15, 2008; early
adoption is not permitted. We will adopt this statement as of January 1, 2009.
The impact of SFAS 141(R) will have on our consolidated financial statements
will depend on the nature and size of acquisitions we complete after we adopt
SFAS 141(R).
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements-an amendment of ARB No. 51” (SFAS 160). SFAS
160 requires that non-controlling (or minority) interests in subsidiaries be
reported in the equity section of the company’s balance sheet, rather than in a
mezzanine section of the balance sheet between liabilities and equity. SFAS 160
also changes the manner in which the net income of the subsidiary is reported
and disclosed in the controlling company’s income statement. SFAS 160 also
establishes guidelines for accounting for changes in ownership percentages and
for deconsolidation. SFAS 160 is effective for financial statements for fiscal
years beginning on or after December 1, 2008 and interim periods within those
years. The adoption of SFAS 160 is not expected to have a material impact on our
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In
March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, Disclosures About Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, or “SFAS 161”. SFAS 161 enhances the
disclosure requirements for derivative instruments and hedging activities. This
Standard is effective as of January 1, 2009. Since SFAS 161 requires only
additional disclosures concerning derivatives and hedging activities, adoption
of SFAS 161 will not affect our financial condition or results of
operation.
In
May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (SFAS 162). SFAS 162 identifies the sources of
accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles used in the
preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that are
presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the
United States (the GAAP hierarchy). SFAS 162 became effective
November 15, 2008. The adoption of SFAS 162 did not have a material impact on
our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In June
2008, the FASB reached a consensus on EITF Issue No. 07-5, Determining Whether an Instrument
(or an Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock, or “EITF
07-5”. EITF 07-5 requires that we apply a two-step approach in evaluating
whether an equity-linked financial instrument (or embedded feature) is indexed
to our own stock, including evaluating the instrument’s contingent exercise and
settlement provisions. EITF 07-5 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2008. We are currently evaluating the effects, if any, that EITF
07-5 will have on our consolidated financial statements.
On
December 1, 2006, Operations initiated arbitration against NQCI for NQCI's
failure to fully perform its obligations under the License Agreement dated
September 1, 2006. On September 1, 2006, Operations also entered into a Merger
Agreement with NQCI which contemplated that Operations would acquire NQCI as a
wholly owned subsidiary pursuant to a triangular merger, or would issue to NQCI
shares of common stock in consideration of the assignment of the technology
relating to the WAK and other medical devices which, as listed under
“Technology” on the License Agreement, are “all existing and hereafter developed
Intellectual Property, Know-How, Licensor Patents, Licensor Patent Applications,
Derivative Works and any other technology, invented, improved or developed by
Licensor, or as to which Licensor owns or holds any rights, arising out of or
relating to the research, development, design, manufacture or use of (a) any
medical device, treatment or method as of the date of this Agreement, (b) any
portable or continuous dialysis methods or devices , specifically including any
wearable artificial kidney, or “Wearable Artificial Kidney”, and related
devices, (c) any device, methods or treatments for congestive heart failure, and
(d) any artificial heart or coronary device”, collectively referred to herein as
the “Technology Transaction”. The merger was never consummated.
On
January 3, 2008, the arbitrator issued an order denying NQCI’s motion to amend
its counterclaim to add us as a successor company following the merger. However,
in the Second Interim Award, the arbitrator found that we are the successor to
Operations as a result of the merger, even though we are not a party to any of
the agreements or the arbitration, and ordered that our shares should be issued
to NQCI rather than shares of Operations.
On June
9, 2008, the arbitrator issued an Interim Award granting specific performance of
the Technology Transaction. The Interim Award stated that the total aggregate
shares of stock to be received by NQCI at the closing should equal 48% of all
Operations shares outstanding as of the date of the Merger Agreement. On
September 1, 2006, there were 10,000,000 shares of Operations common stock
outstanding.
On August
4, 2008, the arbitrator issued a Second Interim Award, stating that 9,230,000
shares of our common stock should be issued to NQCI to effectuate the Technology
Transaction. As of December 31, 2008, there were 14,754,687 shares of our common
stock issued and outstanding. Accordingly, following closing of the Technology
Transaction, NQCI would be our largest stockholder and would own approximately
39% of our total outstanding shares.
The
arbitrator has not ordered us to close the Technology Transaction. However, the
arbitrator found that, with the exception of shareholder approval, virtually all
conditions to closing the Technology Transaction have been waived. The award
further states that, if we or our stockholders do not approve the issuance of
our stock to effectuate the Technology Transaction, all of the Technology
covered by the License Agreement will be declared the sole and exclusive
property of NQCI, and the arbitrator will schedule additional hearings to
address whether the PAK technology is included within that Technology, and
whether NQCI is entitled to compensatory damages and the amount of damages, if
any, under these circumstances. Upon closing of the Technology Transaction, the
License Agreement will terminate, and we will own all of the
Technology.
The
Second Interim Award also stated that the License Agreement will remain in full
force and effect until the Technology Transaction closes or the arbitrator
determines that it will never close. NQCI has made a claim for reimbursement of
approximately $690,000 in alleged expenses, Licensor Expenses, under the License
Agreement which were accrued under “Accrued legal fees & licensing expense”
as of December 31, 2008. The Licensor Expenses were accrued in the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2008, with the expenditure recorded as Licensing Expense
within research and development operating expenses.
On August
15, 2008, the arbitrator awarded NQCI $1.87 million to settle over $4 million
NQCI claimed in attorneys’ fees and costs which have been accrued under “Accrued
legal fees & licensing expense” as of December 31, 2008. The settlement of
legal fees was accrued in the year ended at December 31, 2008, with the
expenditure recognized as “Other expenses” and payment pending to
date.
The
Second Interim Award required that we file a registration statement under the
Securities Act to register for resale the shares to be issued to NQCI within 30
days after the closing of the Technology Transaction. The arbitrator
acknowledged that our obligation is to file the registration statement and to
use reasonable efforts to have the shares registered and not to guarantee
registration and resultant actual public tradability. However, the arbitrator
nevertheless ordered that the registration statement must be declared effective
within 90 days.
The
Second Interim Award requires that we file a registration statement under the
Securities Act to register for resale the shares to be issued to NQCI within 30
days after the closing of the Technology Transaction. The arbitrator
acknowledged that our obligation is to file the registration statement and to
use reasonable efforts to have the shares registered and not to guarantee
registration and resultant actual public tradability. However, the arbitrator
nevertheless ordered that the registration statement must be declared effective
within 90 days. We have no control over whether the registration statement will
be declared effective by the SEC, and no way to predict what further action, if
any, the arbitrator may order if it is not declared effective.
On
January 30, 2009, the arbitrator issued the Order, in which the arbitrator
modified the Second Interim Award by reserving on what the final terms of our
obligation to file the resale registration statement will be and stating that
such registration obligation shall be in accordance with applicable laws,
including applicable U.S. federal securities laws. While the arbitrator also
retained jurisdiction to monitor our compliance with such obligation, to award
any appropriate relief to NQCI if we fail to comply with such obligation and to
render a decision on any other matters contested in this proceeding, the time
periods set forth in the Second Interim Award and summarized in the preceding
paragraph are no longer applicable. The Order also provided, among other things,
that if we file the proxy statement, obtain stockholder approval to issue to
NQCI 9,230,000 shares of our common stock as consideration for the closing of
the Technology Transaction and issue such shares to NQCI, the arbitrator
anticipates confirming that all of the Technology covered by the License shall
be declared our sole and exclusive property.
The
Technology Transaction will be accounted for as a purchase of the Technology in
exchange for shares of our common stock. In accordance with FASB Concepts
Statement No. 7, Using Cash
Flow Information and Present Value in Accounting Measurements, the
Technology Transaction will be measured based on the fair value of the shares
issued, which is clearly more evident than the fair value of the intellectual
property. Through the evaluation of the components of the intellectual property
and information pursuant to the arbitration suggesting it may not be
proprietary, we have determined the intellectual property is not economically
viable. However, continuing research on the technology will be useful in
developing the prototype of our Wearable Artificial Kidney. In accordance with
FASB 2, Accounting for
Research and Development Costs, and its related interpretations, we have
expensed the value of the intellectual property, determined in process research
and development, at the date of acquisition. See Note 10, “Shares
Issuable”,
below.
Pursuant
to the Second Interim Award, which stated that, if the Technology
Transaction is submitted to and approved by our stockholders, 9,230,000 shares
of our common stock should be issued to NQCI to effectuate the transaction, we
accrued for the 9,230,000 shares of our common stock. As the Second Interim
Award states that we must issue 9,230,000 upon the closing of the Technology
Transaction and we have been unable to consummate such transaction, such
contingency is not within our control and we have therefore, recorded
the obligation to issue the shares as a liability, rather than as an
equity issuance. The fair value of the 9,230,000 shares was measured using the
closing price of our common stock on August 4, 2008, the date of the Second
Interim Award, and revalued, marked to market, as of the end of the year ending
at December 31, 2008. The fair value of the accrued shares on August 4, 2008,
was $10,153,000 which is reflected in research and development expense. The
obligation to issue the shares was revalued at $1,569,100 as of December 31,
2008, resulting in a $8,583,900 non-operating gain, classified as change in fair
value of shares issuable in the statement of operations for the year ended
December 31, 2008. The net fair value of $1,569,100 was accrued under “Shares
issuable” as of December 31, 2008. Stockholder approval and issuance
of the shares are pending to date.
We are
currently in the process of seeking approval from our stockholders to issue
9,230,000 shares of our common stock in order to obtain ownership of the
Technology. The stockholder approval is being sought in accordance with an
Interim Award issued on June 9, 2008, and in order to minimize the risk that the
arbitrator will issue an alternative award that could have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition and operations. The arbitrator has refused to
issue a final award until this stockholder approval has been obtained from our
stockholders, which may effectively prevent us from obtaining effective court
review of the arbitrator’s actions. If the Technology Transaction does not
close, the arbitrator may issue alternative relief. In the event of an
alternative award, the above accrual may be adjusted and the accrual or the
actual settlement will be recorded to coincide with the alternate
award.
If the
9,230,000 shares are issued pursuant to the approval of our stockholders, then
the $1,569,100 contingent liability recorded on our balance sheet will be
adjusted through earnings to an amount equal to the product of 9,230,000 shares
and the trading price of our common stock on that day and then be
eliminated by increasing the number of our issued and outstanding common shares
by 9,230,000 and increasing our stockholders’ equity by a
corresponding amount.
The
arbitrator held a conference call hearing with the Company and NQCI on March 13,
2009 in which the parties discussed the reasons for the difficulties in closing
the Technology Transaction and explored potential alternatives. The parties were
asked to submit letter briefs outlining their suggested alternatives for
consideration by the arbitrator. The parties submitted their respective letter
briefs on March 24, 2009.
As of the
date of this Annual Report, the arbitration proceeding with NQCI continues and
the arbitrator has not yet issued a final award to either party and has not made
a final ruling with respect to whether the closing of the Technology Transaction
shall occur or whether potential alternatives should be pursued.
The
arbitrator has stated that he has not yet issued a final award that may be
confirmed or challenged in a court of competent jurisdiction. A party to the
arbitration could challenge the interim award in court, even after stockholders
approve the transaction. In addition, the arbitrator could again change the
award by granting different or additional remedies, even after stockholders
approve the transaction. We cannot guarantee that the arbitrator would order
that our stockholders should be given another opportunity to vote on the
transaction, even if such changes are material. Arbitrators have broad equitable
powers, and arbitration awards are difficult to challenge in court, even if the
arbitrator makes rulings that are inconsistent or not in accordance with the law
or the evidence.
5.
|
CASH EQUIVALENTS AND MARKETABLE
SECURITIES
|
We invest
available cash in short-term commercial paper, certificates of deposit, money
market funds, and high grade marketable securities. We consider any liquid
investment with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased to
be cash equivalents. Investments, including certificates of deposit with
maturity dates greater than three months when purchased and which have readily
determined fair values, are classified as available-for-sale investments and
reflected in current assets as marketable securities at fair market value. Our
investment policy requires that all investments be investment grade quality and
no more than ten percent of our portfolio may be invested in any one security or
with one institution. At December 31, 2008, all of our cash was held in high
grade money market funds and marketable securities.
Restricted
cash represents deposits secured as collateral for a letter of credit pursuant
to our new operating facility lease agreement at December 31, 2008 and for a
bank credit card program at December 31, 2007.
6.
|
FAIR
VALUE MEASUREMENTS
|
Effective
January 1, 2008, we adopted SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements,” (“SFAS
157”). SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. This statement
does not require any new fair value measurements; rather, it applies to other
accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements. In
February 2008, FSP FAS 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 157”, was issued, which delays the effective date of SFAS 157 to
fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2008 for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities,
except for items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial
statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). We elected to defer the
adoption of the standard for these non-financial assets and
liabilities.
Fair
value is defined under SFAS 157 as the price that would be received to sell an
asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous
market in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement
date. SFAS 157 also establishes a three-level hierarchy, which requires an
entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of
unobservable inputs when measuring fair value.
Beginning
January 1, 2008, assets and liabilities recorded at fair value in the balance
sheets are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the
inputs used to measure their fair value. Level inputs, as defined by SFAS 157,
are as follows:
|
·
|
Level
I - inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices for identical assets or
liabilities in active markets at the measurement
date.
|
|
·
|
Level
II - inputs, other than quoted prices included in Level I, that are
observable for the asset or liability through corroboration with market
data at the measurement date.
|
|
·
|
Level III - unobservable inputs
that reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would
use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement
date.
|
The
following table summarizes fair value measurements by level at December 31, 2008
for assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring
basis:
|
|
Level
I
|
|
|
Level
II
|
|
|
Level
III
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
407,585 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
407,585 |
|
Marketable
securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
paper
|
|
|
897,993 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
897,993 |
|
Corporate securities fixed
rate
|
|
|
457,930 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
457,930 |
|
Money market
fund
|
|