Item 1A. Risk Factors
You should consider carefully the following information about the risks described below, together with the other information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and in our other public filings in evaluating our business. The risk factors set forth below with an asterisk (*) next to the title contain changes to the description of the risk factors associated with our business previously disclosed in Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects could be materially and adversely affected by these risks if any of them actually occurs. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock would likely decline. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks not currently known to us or other factors not perceived by us to present significant risks to our business at this time also may impair our business.
Risks Related to Our Business, Industry and Financial Condition
*There is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, which may hinder our ability to obtain further financing.
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared using the generally accepted accounting principles applicable to a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities in the normal course of business. However, as shown in our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2019, included in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, and in the financial statements accompanying this Report, we have sustained substantial recurring losses from operations. In addition, we have used, rather than provided, cash in our continuing operations. We will need significant funding to continue operations, satisfy our obligations and fund the future expenditures that will be required to conduct the clinical and regulatory work to develop our product candidates. Without obtaining additional capital, it would be unlikely for us to continue as a going concern. The above conditions raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should we be unable to continue in existence. Uncertainty concerning our ability to continue as a going concern, among other factors, may hinder our ability to obtain future financing. Continued operations and our ability to continue as a going concern are dependent, among other factors, on the market acceptance and success of our products and our ability to obtain additional required funding, and there are no assurances that such funding will be available at all or will be available in sufficient amounts or on reasonable terms. Without additional required funds from debt or equity financings, sales of assets, sales or out-licenses of intellectual property or technologies, or other transactions or sources, we will exhaust our resources and will be unable to continue operations. If we cannot continue as a viable entity, our stockholders would likely lose most or all of their investment in us.
*We may require additional funding to continue as a going concern.
We incurred a net loss of approximately $29.0 million and $29.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and the year ended December 31, 2019, respectively, and a net loss of approximately $39.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. At September 30, 2020, and December 31, 2019, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $12.4 million and $8.8 million, respectively, accounts receivable of approximately $0.9 million and $1.9 million, respectively, and liabilities of approximately $16.5 million and $11.8 million, respectively. The development of our business will require additional funding in 2021 and the future to help fund the development and commercialization of our products and product candidates and conduct research and development of other product candidates, as well as to fund capital expenditures and our ongoing operations at USC and satisfy our obligations and liabilities. In addition to product revenues, we have historically relied upon sales of our equity or debt securities to fund our operations. We currently have no available balance in our credit facility or committed sources of capital, and a number of factors limit our current ability to access capital markets. Delays in obtaining required funding could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercially introduce products and cause us to be unable to comply with our obligations under outstanding instruments.
Our ability to obtain financing if required will be subject to a number of factors, including without limitation market conditions, our operating performance and investor sentiment. If we are unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of one or more of our product candidates, restrict our operations or obtain funds by entering into agreements on unattractive terms, which would likely have a material adverse effect on our business, stock price and our relationships with third parties with whom we have business relationships, at least until additional funding is obtained, and which could result in additional dilution to our stockholders. If we do not have sufficient funds to continue operations, we could be required to seek bankruptcy protection or other alternatives that would likely result in our stockholders losing some or all of their investment in us.
Statements in this Report concerning our future plans and operations are dependent on our ability to secure adequate funding and the absence of unexpected delays or adverse developments. We may not be able to secure required funding.
The statements contained in this Report concerning future events or developments or our future activities, such as concerning current or planned clinical trials, anticipated research and development activities, anticipated dates for commencement of clinical trials, anticipated completion dates of clinical trials, anticipated meetings with the FDA or other regulatory authorities concerning our product candidates, anticipated dates for submissions to obtain required regulatory marketing approvals, anticipated dates for commercial introduction of products, and other statements concerning our future operations and activities, are forward-looking statements that in each instance assume that we have or are able to obtain sufficient funding to support such activities and continue our operations and planned activities in a timely manner. There can be no assurance that this will be the case. Also, such statements assume that there are no significant unexpected developments or events that delay or prevent such activities from occurring. Failure to timely obtain any required additional funding, or unexpected developments or events, could delay the occurrence of such events or prevent the events described in any such statements from occurring which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
*We have incurred losses since our inception, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur losses. We may never achieve or sustain profitability.
We incurred net losses of approximately $29.0 million and $29.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and the year ended December 31, 2019, respectively, and a net loss of approximately $39.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. From inception through September 30, 2020, we have an accumulated deficit of approximately $211.3 million. We expect that these losses may increase as we continue our research and development activities, seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates and seek to commercialize any approved products. These losses will cause, among other things, our stockholders’ equity and working capital to decrease. Any future earnings and cash flow from operations of our business are dependent on our ability to further develop our products and on revenue and profitability from sales of products.
There can be no assurance that we will be able to generate sufficient product revenue and amounts payable to us under our commercialization agreement with Sandoz or other commercialization agreements that we may enter into to become profitable at all or on a sustained basis. We expect to have quarter-to-quarter fluctuations in revenue and expenses, some of which could be significant, due in part to variations in expenses and activities relating to research, development, clinical trial, marketing and manufacturing. If our product candidates fail in clinical trials or do not gain regulatory approval, or if our products do not achieve market acceptance, we may never become profitable. As we commercialize and market products, we will need to incur expenses for product marketing and brand awareness and conduct significant research, development, testing and regulatory compliance activities that, together with general and administrative expenses, could result in substantial operating losses for the foreseeable future. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.
*We may never commercialize additional product candidates that are subject to regulatory approval or earn a profit.
Except for our SYMJEPI product, we have not received regulatory approval for any drugs or products. Since our fiscal 2010 year, except for revenues from sales of compounded pharmacy formulations after our acquisition of USC in 2016 and amounts that we have received and may receive in the future pursuant to our commercialization agreements relating to our SYMJEPI products, we have not generated commercial revenue from marketing or selling any drugs or other products. We expect to incur substantial net losses for the foreseeable future. We may never be able to commercialize any additional product candidates that are subject to regulatory approval or be able to generate revenue from sales of such products. Because of the risks and uncertainties associated with developing and commercializing our specialty pharmaceuticals and other product candidates, we are unable to predict when we may commercially introduce such products, the extent of any future losses or when we will become profitable, if ever.
On May 15, 2020, we resubmitted to the FDA our NDA relating to our ZIMHI product, responding to matters raised in the FDA’s previous CRL regarding our original NDA for ZIMHI and matters discussed in our Type A meeting with the FDA concerning the CRL. However, there are no assurances that the FDA will regard our resubmission as satisfactorily responding to the matters raised in the earlier CRL or in the Type A meeting, that the FDA will not issue another CRL, or that the FDA will not require additional studies or information. Receipt of an additional CRL or other adverse action by the FDA concerning our resubmitted NDA could result in significant additional time and expense before our ZIMHI NDA is approved, if approved at all, and marketing of ZIMHI could commence, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Our limited operating history may make it difficult to evaluate our business and our future viability.
We are in the relatively early stage of operations and development of our current product candidates (other than our SYMJEPI and ZIMHI products) and have only a limited operating history on which to base an evaluation of our business and prospects. Even if we successfully obtain additional funding, we are subject to the risks associated with early stage companies with a limited operating history, including without limitation: the need for additional financing; the uncertainty of research and development efforts resulting in successful commercial products, as well as the marketing and customer acceptance of such products; unexpected issues with the FDA or other federal or state regulatory authorities; regulatory setbacks and delays; unexpected delays in commercialization of products; competition from larger organizations; reliance on the proprietary technology of others; dependence on key personnel; uncertain patent protection; fluctuations in expenses; and dependence on corporate partners and collaborators. Any failure to successfully address these risks and uncertainties could 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 drug technologies, and the competitive and regulatory environment in which we operate or may choose to operate in the future.
*Many of our potential products and technologies are in early stages of development, or have been discontinued or are suspended.
The development of new pharmaceutical products is a highly risky undertaking, and there can be no assurance that any future research and development efforts we might undertake will be successful. In addition, development of some of our potential product candidates has been discontinued or suspended. Many of our potential products will require significant additional research and development before any commercial introduction. There can be no assurance that any future research, development or clinical trial efforts will result in viable products or meet efficacy standards. Future clinical or preclinical results may be negative or insufficient to allow us to successfully market our product candidates. Obtaining needed data and results may take longer than planned or may not be obtained at all. Any such delays or setbacks could have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our financial goals.
Our development plans concerning our products and product candidates are affected by many factors, the outcome of which are difficult to predict.
The anticipated dates for development and introduction of products in our product pipeline will depend on a number of factors, including the availability of adequate funding to support product development efforts.
Our product development plans concerning our allergy and respiratory products and product candidates, including APC-1000, APC-4000 and APC-6000, are affected by many factors, many of which are difficult to predict. Some of the factors that could affect our development plans for our products and product candidates include: general market conditions and developments in the marketplace including the introduction of potentially competing new products by our competitors; the availability of adequate funding to support product development efforts and sales and marketing efforts for approved products; the outcome of discussions with the FDA concerning the number and kind of clinical trials that the FDA will require before the FDA will consider regulatory approval of the applicable product; the outcome of discussions with the FDA concerning the regulatory approval pathway of the applicable product; the FDA’s review and acceptance of NDAs that we may file concerning our product candidates; any unexpected difficulties in licensing or sublicensing intellectual property rights that may be required for other components of the product patent infringement lawsuits relating to Paragraph IV certifications as part of any Section 505(b)(2) or ANDA filings; any unexpected difficulties in the ability of our suppliers to timely supply quantities for commercial launch of the product; and unexpected delays or difficulties in assembling and deploying an adequate sales force to market the product if we decide to market a product ourselves rather than seek a commercialization partner.
We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may be unable to obtain, or may experience delays in obtaining, regulatory approval, or may not be successful in commercializing our planned and future products.
Like many companies our size, we do not have the ability to conduct preclinical or clinical studies for our product candidates without the assistance of third parties who conduct the studies on our behalf. These third parties are usually toxicology facilities and clinical research organizations, or CROs, that have significant resources and experience in the conduct of pre-clinical and clinical studies. The toxicology facilities conduct the pre-clinical safety studies as well as associated tasks connected with these studies. The CROs typically perform patient recruitment, project management, data management, statistical analysis, and other reporting functions. We intend to rely on third parties to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates and to use third party toxicology facilities and CROs for our pre-clinical and clinical studies. We may also rely on academic institutions or clinical research organizations to conduct, supervise or monitor some or all aspects of clinical trials involving our products.
Our reliance on these third parties for development activities will reduce our control over these activities. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or for other reasons, we may be required to replace them, and our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated. Although we believe there are a number of third-party contractors that we could engage to continue these activities, replacing a third-party contractor may result in a delay of the affected trial.
*Business or economic disruptions or global health concerns, including the recent COVID-19 pandemic, could harm our business and increase our costs and expenses.
Broad-based business or economic disruptions could adversely affect our ongoing business and research, development and commercial activities and could include disruptions to the productivity of our employees working remotely or their ability to travel on matters relating to the Company’s business activities. The novel strain of coronavirus and the related COVID-19 pandemic in December 2019 and 2020 has spread throughout most of the world including the United States. As of the date of this Report, this outbreak has resulted in extended shutdowns of businesses in the United States and elsewhere and has had ripple effects on businesses and activities around the world. We could experience delays in obtaining products or services from our third party manufacturers or suppliers as a result of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on such parties. In addition, the pandemic and related matters could result in interruptions or delays in the operations of the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which may impact review and approval timelines relating to our NDAs or other actions relating to our products or product candidates. The outbreak and any preventative or protective actions that we, our customers, our respective manufacturers, suppliers or other third parties with which we have business relationships, or governments may take in respect of the coronavirus and COVID-19 outbreak could disrupt our business and the business of our customers or third parties with which we have business relationships. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to impact our business is difficult to predict and subject to change, and will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including without limitation the severity of the disease and duration of the outbreak, travel restrictions and social distancing requirements in the United States and other countries, and the effectiveness of actions taken in the United States and other countries to contain and treat the disease and address its impact. Global health concerns, such as coronavirus, could also result in social, economic, and labor instability in the countries in which we or the third parties with whom we engage operate. In addition, the COVID-19 outbreak has resulted in a severe economic downturn and has already significantly affected the financial markets of many countries. A severe or prolonged economic downturn or political disruption could result in a variety of risks to our business, including our ability to raise capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy or political disruption could also strain our manufacturers or suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause our customers to delay making purchases or payments for our products. Any of the foregoing could harm our business. In addition, the effects of applicable shelter-in-place orders and work from home policies may negatively impact productivity of our employees and disrupt our business activities, the magnitude of which will depend, in part, on the length and severity of the restrictions and our ability to conduct business in the ordinary course. Although we have taken precautions intended to avoid the spread of the coronavirus among our employees, it is possible that one or more members of our workforce could be diagnosed with COVID-19, which could adversely impact our operations. As of this report, we cannot presently predict the long-term impact to the scope and severity of potential business shutdowns or disruptions, but if we, our customers, or any of the third parties with whom we engage, including the suppliers, manufacturers, regulators and other third parties with whom we conduct business or have business relationships, were to experience shutdowns or other business disruptions, our ability to conduct our business in the manner presently anticipated could be materially and negatively impacted.
*Delays in the commencement or completion of clinical testing of our product candidates could result in increased costs and delay our ability to generate significant revenues.
The actual timing of commencement and completion of clinical trials can vary dramatically from our anticipated timing due to factors such as funding limitations, scheduling conflicts with participating clinicians and clinical institutions, and the rate of patient enrollment. Clinical trials involving our product candidates may not commence or be completed as forecast. Delays in the commencement or completion of clinical testing could significantly impact our product development costs. We do not know whether current or planned clinical trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement of clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays in:
|
|
●
|
obtaining required funding;
|
|
|
●
|
obtaining regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial;
|
|
|
●
|
reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations and clinical trial sites;
|
|
|
●
|
obtaining sufficient quantities of clinical trial materials for product candidates;
|
|
|
●
|
obtaining institutional review board approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective site;
|
|
|
●
|
recruiting participants for a clinical trial; and
|
|
|
●
|
delays related to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
|
In addition, once a clinical trial has begun, it may be suspended or terminated by us or the FDA or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including:
|
|
●
|
failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
●
|
inspection of the clinical trial operations or clinical trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold;
|
|
|
●
|
failure to achieve certain efficacy and/or safety standards; or
|
|
|
●
|
lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial.
|
Clinical trials require sufficient participant enrollment, which is a function of many factors, including the size of the target patient population, the nature of the trial protocol, the proximity of participants to clinical trial sites, the availability of effective treatments for the relevant disease, the eligibility criteria for our clinical trials and competing trials. Delays in enrollment can result in increased costs and longer development times. Our failure to enroll participants in our clinical trials could delay the completion of the clinical trials beyond current expectations. In addition, the FDA could require us to conduct clinical trials with a larger number of participants than we may project for any of our product candidates. As a result of these factors, we may not be able to enroll a sufficient number of participants in a timely or cost-effective manner.
Furthermore, enrolled participants may drop out of clinical trials, which could impair the validity or statistical significance of the clinical trials. A number of factors can influence the discontinuation rate, including, but not limited to: the inclusion of a placebo in a trial; possible lack of effect of the product candidate being tested at one or more of the dose levels being tested; adverse side effects experienced, whether or not related to the product candidate; and the availability of numerous alternative treatment options that may induce participants to withdraw from the trial.
*We may be required to suspend, repeat or terminate our clinical trials if the trials are not well designed, do not meet regulatory requirements or the results are negative or inconclusive, which may result in significant negative repercussions on business and financial condition.
Before regulatory approval for a potential product can be obtained, we must undertake clinical testing on humans to demonstrate the tolerability and efficacy of the product. We cannot assure you that we will obtain authorization to permit product candidates that are in the preclinical development phase to enter the human clinical testing phase. In addition, we cannot assure you that any authorized preclinical or clinical testing will be completed successfully within any specified time period by us, or without significant additional resources or expertise to those originally expected to be necessary. We cannot assure you that such testing will show potential products to be safe and efficacious or that any such product will be approved for a specific indication. Further, the results from preclinical studies and early clinical trials may not be indicative of the results that will be obtained in later-stage clinical trials. In addition, we or regulatory authorities may suspend clinical trials at any time on the basis that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks.
We are subject to the risk of clinical trial and product liability lawsuits.
The testing of human health care product candidates entails an inherent risk of allegations of clinical trial liability, while the marketing and sale of approved products entails an inherent risk of allegations of product liability and associated adverse publicity. We currently maintain liability insurance coverage of up to a general aggregate of $3,000,000, with a $1,000,000 limit for each occurrence; and an excess liability insurance coverage of up to a general aggregate of $6,000,000, with a $4,000,000 limit for each occurrence. Such insurance policies are expensive and may not be available in the future on acceptable terms, or at all. As we conduct additional clinical trials and introduce products into the United States market, the risk of adverse events increases and our requirements for liability insurance coverage are likely to increase. We are subject to the risk that substantial liability claims from the testing or marketing of pharmaceutical products could be asserted against us in the future. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain insurance on acceptable terms, particularly in overseas locations, for clinical and commercial activities or that any insurance obtained will provide adequate protection against potential liabilities. An inability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage on reasonable terms or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims could inhibit our business.
Moreover, our current and future coverages may not be adequate to protect us from all of the liabilities that we may incur. If losses from liability claims exceed our insurance coverage, we may incur substantial liabilities that exceed our financial resources. In addition, a product or clinical trial liability action against us would be expensive and time-consuming to defend, even if we ultimately prevailed. If we are required to pay a claim, we may not have sufficient financial resources and our business and results of operations may be harmed. A product liability claim brought against us in excess of our insurance coverage, if any, could have a material adverse effect upon our business, financial condition and results of operations.
*We do not have commercial-scale manufacturing capability, and we lack commercial manufacturing experience. We will likely rely on third parties to manufacture and supply our product candidates for which we will be seeking FDA approval.
Except for our facilities at USC that are utilized to prepare compounded formulations, we do not own or operate manufacturing facilities for clinical or commercial production of pharmaceutical products and product candidates, we do not have any experience in drug formulation or manufacturing, and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. Accordingly, we expect to depend on third-party contract manufacturers for the foreseeable future. Any performance failure on the part of our contract manufacturers could delay clinical development, regulatory approval or commercialization of our current or future product candidates, depriving us of potential product revenue and resulting in additional losses. Any manufacturing problem or the loss of a contract manufacturer could be disruptive to our operations and result in lost sales. Additionally, we rely on third parties to supply the raw materials needed to manufacture our existing and potential products. Any business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism, adverse public health developments such as the outbreak of the COVID-19 coronavirus, or natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires, could adversely affect our supply chain. These risks and uncertainties are compounded in the presence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Any reliance on suppliers may involve several risks, including a potential inability to obtain critical materials and reduced control over production costs, delivery schedules, reliability and quality. Any unanticipated disruption to our manufacturers or suppliers could delay shipment of any of our products, increase our cost of goods sold and result in lost sales.
The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of pharmaceutical products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up initial production.
These problems can include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control (including stability of the product candidate and quality assurance testing), shortages of qualified personnel, and compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. If our third-party contract manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties or otherwise fail to comply with their obligations or under applicable regulations, our ability to provide product candidates to patients in our clinical trials or commercially would be jeopardized. If we file an application for marketing approval of the product and the FDA grants marketing approval, any delay or interruption in the supply of product could delay the commercial launch of the product or impair our ability to meet demand for the product. Difficulties in supplying products for clinical trials could increase the costs associated with our clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new trials or qualify new manufacturers at significant additional expense, possibly causing commercial delays or termination of the trials.
Our products can only be manufactured in a facility that has undergone a satisfactory inspection by the FDA and other relevant regulatory authorities. For these reasons, we may not be able to replace manufacturing capacity for our products quickly if we or our contract manufacturer(s) were unable to use manufacturing facilities as a result of a fire, natural disaster (including an earthquake), equipment failure, or other difficulty, or if such facilities were deemed not in compliance with the regulatory requirements and such non-compliance could not be rapidly rectified. An inability or reduced capacity to manufacture our products could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We are subject to substantial government regulation, which could materially adversely affect our business. If we do not receive regulatory approvals, we may not be able to develop and commercialize our technologies.
We need FDA approval to market our products in the United States that are subject to regulatory approval, and similar approvals from foreign regulatory authorities to market products outside the United States. The production and marketing of such products and potential products and our ongoing research and development, pre-clinical testing and clinical trial activities are subject to extensive regulation and review by numerous governmental authorities in the United States and will face similar regulation and review for overseas approval and sales from governmental authorities outside of the United States. The regulatory review and approval process, which may include evaluation of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our products that are subject to regulatory review, as well as the evaluation of manufacturing processes and contract manufacturers’ facilities, is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. We have limited experience in filing and pursuing applications necessary to gain regulatory approvals. Many of the product candidates that we are currently developing must undergo rigorous pre-clinical and clinical testing and an extensive regulatory approval process before they can be marketed. This process makes it longer, more difficult and more costly to bring our potential products to market, and we cannot guarantee that any of our potential products will be approved. Many products for which FDA approval has been sought by other companies have never been approved for marketing. In addition to testing and approval procedures, extensive regulations also govern marketing, manufacturing, distribution, labeling, and record-keeping procedures. If we or our collaboration partners do not comply with applicable regulatory requirements, such violations could result in non-approval, suspensions of regulatory approvals, civil penalties and criminal fines, product seizures and recalls, operating restrictions, injunctions, and criminal prosecution.
Regulatory authorities generally have substantial discretion in the approval process and may either refuse to accept an application, or may decide after review of an application that the data submitted is insufficient to allow approval of the proposed product. If regulatory authorities do not accept or approve our applications, they may require that we conduct additional clinical, preclinical or manufacturing studies and submit that data before regulatory authorities will reconsider such application. We may need to expend substantial resources to conduct further studies to obtain data that regulatory authorities believe is sufficient. Depending on the extent of these studies, approval of applications may be delayed by several years, or may require us to expend more resources than we may have available. It is also possible that additional studies may not suffice to make applications approvable. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to abandon our applications for approval.
Failure to obtain FDA or other required regulatory approvals, or withdrawal of previous approvals, would adversely affect our business. Even if regulatory approval of a product is granted, this approval may entail limitations on uses for which the product may be labeled and promoted, or may prevent us from broadening the uses of products for different applications.
Following regulatory approval of any of our drug candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and restrictions, which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize our potential products.
With regard to our drug candidates that are approved by the FDA or by another regulatory authority, we are held to extensive regulatory requirements over product manufacturing, labeling, packaging, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and record keeping. Regulatory approvals may also be subject to significant limitations on the indicated uses or marketing of the drug candidates. Potentially costly follow-up or post-marketing clinical studies may be required as a condition of approval to further substantiate safety or efficacy, or to investigate specific issues of interest to the regulatory authority. Previously unknown problems with the drug candidate, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, may result in restrictions on the marketing of the drug, and could include withdrawal of the drug from the market. In addition, the law or regulatory policies governing pharmaceuticals may change. New statutory requirements may be enacted or additional regulations may be enacted that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our drug candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or elsewhere. If we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we might not be permitted to market our drugs and our business could suffer.
We intend to pursue Section 505(b)(2) regulatory approval filings with the FDA for our products where applicable. Such filings involve significant costs, and we may also encounter difficulties or delays in obtaining regulatory approval for our products. Similar difficulties or delays may also arise in connection with any Abbreviated New Drug Applications that we may file.
We submitted a Section 505(b)(2) NDA regulatory filing to the FDA in connection with our approved SYMJEPI products, we submitted Section 505(b)(2) NDA regulatory filings to the FDA in connection with our ZIMHI (naloxone) Injection product candidate, and we intend to pursue Section 505(b)(2) NDA filings with the FDA in connection with our beclomethasone HFA and fluticasone DPI product candidates. A Section 505(b)(2) NDA is a special type of NDA that enables the applicant to rely, in part, on the FDA’s findings of safety and efficacy of an existing previously approved product, or published literature, in support of its application. Section 505(b)(2) NDAs often provide an alternate path to FDA approval for new or improved formulations or new uses of previously approved products. Such filings involve significant filing costs, including filing fees.
To the extent that a Section 505(b)(2) NDA relies on clinical trials conducted for a previously approved drug product or the FDA’s prior findings of safety and effectiveness for a previously approved drug product, the Section 505(b)(2) applicant must submit patent certifications in its Section 505(b)(2) application with respect to any patents for the previously approved product on which the applicant’s application relies and that are listed in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify for each listed patent that, in relevant part, (1) the required patent information has not been filed; (2) the listed patent has expired; (3) the listed patent has not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is not sought until after patent expiration; or (4) the listed patent is invalid, unenforceable or will not be infringed by the proposed new product. A certification that the new product will not infringe the previously approved product’s listed patent or that such patent is invalid or unenforceable is known as a Paragraph IV certification. If the applicant does not challenge one or more listed patents through a Paragraph IV certification, the FDA will not approve the Section 505(b)(2) NDA application until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.
If the Section 505(b)(2) NDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the owner of the referenced NDA for the previously approved product and relevant patent holders within 20 days after the Section 505(b)(2) NDA has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement suit against the Section 505(b)(2) applicant. Under the FDCA, the filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of receipt of the notification regarding a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the Section 505(b)(2) NDA until the earliest to occur of 30 months beginning on the date the patent holder receives notice, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, or until a court deems the patent unenforceable, invalid or not infringed.
If we rely in our Section 505(b)(2) regulatory filings on clinical trials conducted, or the FDA’s prior findings of safety and effectiveness, for a previously approved drug product that involves patents referenced in the Orange Book, then we will need to make the patent certifications or the Paragraph IV certification described above. If we make a Paragraph IV certification and the holder of the previously approved product that we referenced in our application initiates patent litigation within the time periods described above, then any FDA approval of our 505(b)(2) application would be delayed until the earlier of 30 months, resolution of the lawsuit, or the other events described above. Accordingly, our anticipated dates relating to review and approval of a product that was subject to such litigation would be delayed. In addition, we would incur the expenses, which could be material, involved with any such patent litigation. As a result, we may invest a significant amount of time and expense in the development of our product only to be subject to significant delay and patent litigation before our product may be commercialized, if at all.
In addition, even if we submit a Section 505(b)(2) application, such as we may submit for other future products, that relies on clinical trials conducted for a previously approved product where there are no patents referenced in the Orange Book for such other product with respect to which we have to provide certifications, we are subject to the risk that the FDA could disagree with our reliance on the particular previously approved product that we chose to rely on, conclude that such previously approved product is not an acceptable reference product, and require us instead to rely as a reference product on another previously approved product that involves patents referenced in the Orange Book, requiring us to make the certifications described above and subjecting us to additional delay, expense and the other risks described above.
Similarly, if we submit one or more ANDA applications to the FDA pursuant to Section 505(j) of the FDCA in connection with one or more of our product candidates, we could encounter generally similar difficulties or delays, including difficulties or delays resulting from the Paragraph IV certification process or from any clinical trials that might be required in connection with any such ANDAs.
If we fail to obtain acceptable prices or appropriate reimbursement for our products, our ability to successfully commercialize our products will be impaired.
Government and insurance reimbursements for healthcare expenditures play an important role for all healthcare providers, including physicians and pharmaceutical companies such as Adamis, that plan to offer various products in the United States and other countries in the future. Physicians and patients may decide not to order our products unless third-party payors, such as managed care organizations as well as government payors such as Medicare and Medicaid, pay a substantial portion of the price of the products. Market acceptance and sales of our specialty pharmaceutical products, other than our compounding formulations sold by USC, which are less affected by the willingness of third party payors to pay a substantial portion of the price of such products, and potential products will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for the costs of such products will be available from government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers, managed care organizations, and other organizations. In the United States, our ability to have our products eligible for Medicare, Medicaid or private insurance reimbursement will be an important factor in determining the ultimate success of our products. If, for any reason, Medicare, Medicaid or the insurance companies decline to provide reimbursement for our products, our ability to commercialize our products would be adversely affected.
Third-party payors may challenge the price of medical and pharmaceutical products. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend on a number of factors, including a payor’s determination that our product candidates are:
|
|
●
|
not experimental or investigational;
|
|
|
●
|
effective;
|
|
|
●
|
medically necessary;
|
|
|
●
|
appropriate for the specific patient;
|
|
|
●
|
cost-effective;
|
|
|
●
|
supported by peer-reviewed publications; and
|
|
|
●
|
included in clinical practice guidelines.
|
If purchasers or users of our products and related treatments are not able to obtain appropriate reimbursement for the cost of using such products, they may forego or reduce such use. Significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved pharmaceutical products, and there can be no assurance that adequate third-party coverage will be available for any of our products. Even if our products are approved for reimbursement by Medicare, Medicaid and private insurers, of which there can be no assurance, the amount of reimbursement may be reduced at times or even eliminated. This would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Legislative or regulatory reform of the healthcare system may affect our ability to sell our products profitably.
In both the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been and are expected to be a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably, including the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law in the United States in March 2010. Given the enactment of these laws and other federal and state legislation and regulations relating to the healthcare system, their impact on the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries and our business is uncertain. The U.S. Congress continues to consider issues relating to the healthcare system, and future legislation or regulations may affect our ability to market and sell products on favorable terms, which would affect our results of operations, as well as our ability to raise capital, obtain additional collaborators or profitably market our products. Such legislation or regulation may reduce our revenues, increase our expenses or limit the markets for our products. In particular, we expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our products due to the influence of health maintenance and managed health care organizations and additional legislative proposals.
We have limited sales, marketing and distribution experience.
We have limited experience in the sales, marketing, and distribution of pharmaceutical products. There can be no assurance that we will be able to establish sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities or make arrangements with collaborators or others to perform such activities or that such efforts will be successful. If we decide to market any products directly ourselves, we would be required to either acquire or internally develop a marketing and sales force with technical expertise and with supporting distribution capabilities. The acquisition or development of a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure would require substantial resources, which may not be available to us or, even if available, could divert the attention of our management and key personnel and have a negative impact on further product development efforts.
We may seek to enter into arrangements to develop and commercialize our products. These collaborations, even if secured, may not be successful.
We have entered and sought to enter into arrangements with third parties regarding development or commercialization of some of our products or product candidates and may in the future seek to enter into collaborative arrangements to develop and commercialize some of our potential products both in North America and international markets. There can be no assurance that we will be able to negotiate commercialization or collaborative arrangements on favorable terms or at all or that our current or future collaborative arrangements will be successful. The amount and timing of resources such third parties will devote to these activities may not be within our control. There can be no assurance that such parties will perform their obligations as expected. There can be no assurance that our collaborators will devote adequate resources to our products.
*Even if they are approved and commercialized, if our potential products are unable to compete effectively with current and future products targeting similar markets as our potential products, our commercial opportunities will be reduced or eliminated.
The markets for our SYMJEPI products and ZIMHI product candidate, our allergy and respiratory product candidates, and our other product candidates, are intensely competitive and characterized by rapid technological progress. We face competition from numerous sources, including major biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies worldwide. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial and technical resources, and development, production and marketing capabilities, than we do. Our SYMJEPI product will compete with a number of other currently marketed epinephrine products for use in the emergency treatment of acute allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Our ZIMHI product, if commercialized, will compete with a number of other currently marketed products utilizing naloxone,
for the treatment of acute opioid overdose. Certain companies have established technologies that may be competitive with our product candidates and any future products that we may develop or acquire. Some of these products may use different approaches or means to obtain results, which could be more effective or less expensive than our products for similar indications. In addition, many of these companies have more experience than we do in pre-clinical testing, performance of clinical trials, manufacturing, and obtaining FDA and foreign regulatory approvals. They may also have more brand name exposure and expertise in sales and marketing. We also compete with academic institutions, governmental agencies and private organizations that are conducting research in the same fields.
Competition among these entities to recruit and retain highly qualified scientific, technical and professional personnel and consultants is also intense. As a result, there is a risk that one or more of our competitors will develop a more effective product for the same indications for which we are developing a product or, alternatively, bring a similar product to market before we can do so. Failure to successfully compete will adversely impact the ability to raise additional capital and ultimately achieve profitable operations.
Our product candidates may not gain acceptance among physicians, patients, or the medical community, thereby limiting our potential to generate revenue, which will undermine our future growth prospects.
Even if our pharmaceutical product candidates are approved for commercial sale by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, the degree of market acceptance of any approved product candidate by physicians, health care professionals and third-party payors, and our profitability and growth will depend on a number of factors, including:
|
|
●
|
the ability to provide acceptable evidence of safety and efficacy;
|
|
|
●
|
pricing and cost effectiveness, which may be subject to regulatory control;
|
|
|
●
|
our ability to obtain sufficient third-party insurance coverage or reimbursement;
|
|
|
●
|
effectiveness of our or our collaborators’ sales and marketing strategy;
|
|
|
●
|
relative convenience and ease of administration;
|
|
|
●
|
the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects; and
|
|
|
●
|
availability of alternative treatments.
|
If any product candidate that we develop does not provide a treatment regimen that is at least as beneficial as the current standard of care or otherwise does not provide some additional patient benefit over the current standard of care, that product will likely not achieve market acceptance and we will not generate sufficient revenues to achieve profitability.
If we suffer negative publicity concerning the safety of our products in development, our sales may be harmed and we may be forced to withdraw such products.
If concerns should arise about the safety of any of our products that are marketed, regardless of whether or not such concerns have a basis in generally accepted science or peer-reviewed scientific research, such concerns could adversely affect the market for these products. Similarly, negative publicity could result in an increased number of product liability claims, whether or not these claims are supported by applicable law.
Our failure to adequately protect or to enforce our intellectual property rights or secure rights to third party patents could materially harm our proprietary position in the marketplace or prevent the commercialization of our products.
Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain protection in the United States and other countries for the intellectual property covering or incorporated into our technologies and products. The patents and patent applications in our existing patent portfolio are either owned by us or licensed to us. Our ability to protect our product candidates from unauthorized use or infringement by third parties depends substantially on our ability to obtain and maintain, or license, valid and enforceable patents. Due to evolving legal standards relating to the patentability, validity and enforceability of patents covering pharmaceutical inventions and the scope of claims made under these patents, our ability to obtain and enforce patents is uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles are unresolved.
There is a substantial backlog of patent applications at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO. There can be no assurance that any patent applications relating to our products or methods will be issued as patents, or, if issued, that the patents will not be challenged, invalidated or circumvented or that the rights granted thereunder will provide a competitive advantage. We may not be able to obtain patent rights on products, treatment methods or manufacturing processes that we may develop or to which we may obtain license or other rights. Even if we do obtain patents, rights under any issued patents may not provide us with sufficient protection for our product candidates or provide sufficient protection to afford us a commercial advantage against our competitors or their competitive products or processes. It is possible that no patents will be issued from any pending or future patent applications owned by us or licensed to us. Others may challenge, seek to invalidate, infringe or circumvent any patents we own or license. Alternatively, we may in the future be required to initiate litigation against third parties to enforce our intellectual property rights. The defense and prosecution of patent and intellectual property claims are both costly and time consuming, even if the outcome is favorable to us. Any adverse outcome could subject us to significant liabilities, require us to license disputed rights from others, or require us to cease selling our future products.
In addition, many other organizations are engaged in research and product development efforts that may overlap with our products. Such organizations may currently have, or may obtain in the future, legally blocking proprietary rights, including patent rights, in one or more products or methods under development or consideration by us. These rights may prevent us from commercializing technology, or may require us to obtain a license from the organizations to use the technology. We may not be able to obtain any such licenses that may be required on reasonable financial terms, if at all, and we cannot be sure that the patents underlying any such licenses will be valid or enforceable. As with other companies in the pharmaceutical industry, we are subject to the risk that persons located in other countries will engage in development, marketing or sales activities of products that would infringe our patent rights if such activities were conducted in the United States.
Our patents also may not afford protection against competitors with similar technology. We may not have identified all patents, published applications or published literature that affect our business either by blocking our ability to commercialize our product candidates, by preventing the patentability of our products or by covering the same or similar technologies that may affect our ability to market or license our product candidates. Many companies have encountered difficulties in protecting and defending their intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. If we encounter such difficulties or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting our intellectual property rights in either the United States or foreign jurisdictions, our business prospects could be substantially harmed. In addition, because of funding limitations and our limited cash resources, we may not be able to devote the resources that we might otherwise desire to prepare or pursue patent applications, either at all or in all jurisdictions in which we might desire to obtain patents, or to maintain already-issued patents.
*We may become involved in patent litigation or other intellectual property proceedings relating to our future product approvals, which could result in liability for damages or delay or stop our development and commercialization efforts.
The pharmaceutical industry has been characterized by significant litigation and other proceedings regarding patents, patent applications, trademarks, and other intellectual property rights. The situations in which we may become parties to such litigation or proceedings may include any third parties initiating litigation claiming that our products infringe their patent or other intellectual property rights, or that one of our trademarks or trade names infringes the third party’s trademark rights; in such case, we will need to defend against such proceedings. For example, the field of generic pharmaceuticals is characterized by frequent litigation that occurs in connection with the regulatory filings under Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA and attempts to invalidate the patent of the reference drug.
The costs of resolving any patent litigation or other intellectual property proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Many of our potential competitors will be able to sustain the cost of such litigation and proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other intellectual property proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace. Patent litigation and other intellectual property proceedings may also consume significant management time.
In the event that a competitor infringes upon our patent or other intellectual property rights, enforcing those rights may be costly, difficult, and time-consuming. Even if successful, litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights or to defend our patents against challenge could be expensive and time-consuming and could divert our management’s attention. We may not have sufficient resources to enforce our intellectual property rights or to defend our patent or other intellectual property rights against a challenge. If we are unsuccessful in enforcing and protecting our intellectual property rights and protecting our products, it could materially harm our business.
*If we determine that our intangible assets have become impaired in the future, our total assets and earnings could be adversely affected.
Goodwill represents the purchase price of acquisitions in excess of the amounts assigned to acquired tangible or intangible assets and assumed liabilities. Goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets are not amortized but rather are evaluated for impairment annually or more frequently, if indicators of impairment exist. Finite lived intangible assets are evaluated for impairment annually or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. If the impairment evaluations for goodwill and intangible assets indicate the carrying amount exceeds the estimated fair value, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. As of March 31, 2020, in light of recent events associated with the global spread of COVID-19 and other factors, we performed a goodwill impairment interim review and recorded a charge of approximately $3,143,000 for impairment of goodwill during the first quarter of 2020. If in the future we determine that our intangible assets have become impaired, our total assets, financial results, and earnings could be adversely affected.
We depend on our officers. If we are unable to retain our key employees or to attract additional qualified personnel, our product operations and development efforts may be seriously jeopardized.
Our success will be dependent upon the efforts of our management team and staff, including Dennis J. Carlo, Ph.D., our chief executive officer. The employment of Dr. Carlo may be terminated at any time by either us or Dr. Carlo. We currently do not have key person life insurance policies covering any of our executive officers or key employees. If key individuals leave us, we could be adversely affected if suitable replacement personnel are not quickly recruited. There is competition for qualified personnel in all functional areas, which makes it difficult to attract and retain the qualified personnel necessary for the operation of our business. Our success also depends in part on our ability to attract and retain highly qualified scientific, commercial and administrative personnel. If we are unable to attract new employees and retain existing key employees, the development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed or negatively impacted. In addition, any staffing interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism, adverse public health developments such as the outbreak of the COVID-19 coronavirus, or natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires, could have an adverse effect on our business.
We may experience difficulties in managing growth.
We are a small company. Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to identify, attract, retain, motivate and integrate highly skilled personnel. We may increase the number of employees in the future depending on the progress of our development of our products and technologies. Our future financial performance and our ability to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. To that end, we must be able to:
|
|
●
|
manage our clinical studies effectively;
|
|
|
●
|
integrate additional management, administrative, manufacturing and regulatory personnel;
|
|
|
●
|
maintain sufficient administrative, accounting and management information systems and controls; and
|
|
|
●
|
hire and train additional qualified personnel.
|
We may not be able to accomplish these tasks, and our failure to accomplish any of them could harm our financial results.
There are significant limitations on our ability in the future to utilize any net operating loss carry forwards for federal and state income tax purposes.
At December 31, 2019, we had federal and state net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, and credit carryforwards which, subject to certain limitations, we may use to reduce future taxable income or offset income taxes due. Insufficient future taxable income will adversely affect our ability to utilize these NOLs and credit carryforwards. Pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 382, the annual use of the NOLs and research and development tax credits could be limited by any greater than 50% ownership change during any three-year testing period. As noted in Note 20 to the consolidated financial statements appearing in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, our existing NOLs are subject to limitations arising from previous ownership changes, and if we undergo additional ownership changes, our ability to use our NOLs could be further limited by Section 382 of the Code. As a result of these limitations, we may be materially limited in our ability to utilize our NOLs and credit carryforward.
We are subject to certain data privacy and security requirements, which are very complex and difficult to comply with at times. Any failure to ensure adherence to these requirements could subject us to fines and penalties, and damage our reputation.
We are required to comply, as applicable, with numerous federal and state laws, including state security breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws and federal and state consumer protection laws, which govern the collection, use and disclosure of personal information. Other countries also have, or are developing, laws governing the collection, use and transmission of personal information. In addition, most healthcare providers who may prescribe products we may sell in the future and from whom we may obtain patient health information are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA and comparable state laws. These laws could create liability for us or increase our cost of doing business, and any failure to comply could result in harm to our reputation, and potentially fines and penalties.
Our business and operations would suffer in the event of cybersecurity or other system failures. Our business depends on complex information systems, and any failure to successfully maintain these systems or implement new systems to handle our changing needs could materially harm our operations.
In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our suppliers, as well as personally identifiable information of employees. Similarly, our third-party providers possess certain of our sensitive data. The secure maintenance of this information is material to our operations and business strategy. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. Any such breach could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing amount of focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect our business, including recently enacted laws in a majority of states requiring security breach notification. Thus, any access, disclosure or other loss of information, including our data being breached at our partners or third-party providers, could result in legal claims or proceedings and liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, disrupt our operations, and damage our reputation which could adversely affect our business.
Risks Related to Our Compounding Pharmacy Business
Our Inability to Successfully Manage USC’s Operations Could Adversely Affect Our Operations; Need for Additional Financing.
Our acquisition of USC represented a significant investment. Managing USC’s operations requires significant attention and resources, which could reduce the likelihood of achievement of other corporate goals. There is no assurance that we will realize the benefits of the USC acquisition that we hope will be achieved.
USC could receive additional Form 483 inspectional observations, warning letters or other communications from the FDA or state regulatory authorities, and federal or state proceedings alleging non-compliance with FDA requirements and other applicable federal or state regulatory legal requirements could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Human drug compounding outsourcing facilities have historically been subject to FDA inspections on an irregular basis and are now subject to FDA inspections on a risk-based schedule in accordance with DQSA Section 503B(b)(4). Observations by the FDA of potentially violative conditions during inspections are required to be reported to facility management at the close of the inspection on FDA Form 483. It is common for such reports to be provided in connection with inspections of compounding outsourcing facilities, and observations may be further followed by warning letters and other enforcement actions as the FDA deems warranted. In March 2014, August 2015, July 2016, and February 2019, USC received Form 483 inspectional observations following FDA inspections of its outsourcing facility, noting inspectional observations of a number of observed potential deficiencies relating to USC’s facility and practices.
Following the August 2015 Form 483 observations, and prior to our acquisition of USC, USC temporarily suspended production of sterile products and voluntarily recalled certain lots of sterile product. USC determined there was no evidence that any compounded sterile products were defective, but decided to voluntarily recall all sterile product that remained within expiry and temporarily halt sterile production. USC responded to the August 2015 Form 483 observations and took a number of corrective actions, including enhancing quality control and production systems. Approximately around the time of its acquisition by Adamis, USC resumed production and sale of its sterile products. In July 2016, USC received Form 483 observations following FDA inspections of its outsourcing facility, noting inspectional observations of a number of observed deficiencies relating to USC’s facility and practices. USC responded in writing to the inspectional observations in July 2016 and provided supplemental responses to FDA in April 2017. In October 2017, USC received a Warning Letter referencing the August 2015 and July 2016 Form 483 inspectional observations. USC provided a written response to the FDA that further described the completed corrective actions that were taken in response to the inspectional observations. In November 2018, FDA responded to the 2017 Warning Letter Response submitted by USC and indicated it would look for evidence of corrective action and further clarification of policies and procedures on a future inspection. USC was inspected by FDA in the early part of 2019, with a Form 483 issued to site management in February 2019. USC duly responded to the inspectional observations in writing to the FDA in March 2019, and provided an initial update in April 2019 and a comprehensive update of completed corrective actions and milestones in August 2019. In August 2020, USC received a Regulatory Meeting Letter from FDA as a follow up to USC’s correspondence and corrective actions related to the February 2019 Form 483. In October 2020, USC responded to the requests made in the Regulatory Meeting Letter and USC now awaits the scheduling of a Compliance Conference with FDA to determine the efficacy of USC’s corrective actions. If FDA is not satisfied with the efficacy of USC’s corrective actions, then after the Compliance Conference FDA could take enforcement action, which could include a cease operations or recall. Any enforcement action may adversely affect USC’s and our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
Following the suspension and voluntary recall in 2015, state pharmacy regulatory agencies in certain states initiated inquiries or took other actions regarding sales of USC products in such states. All of these state matters have been resolved; however, future proceedings by the FDA or state regulatory agencies alleging violation of applicable federal or state laws or regulations, could require significant time and financial resources, and an adverse outcome in one or more of these proceedings could adversely affect USC’s business, results of operations and financial condition. The suspension of sterile production and voluntary product recall had an adverse effect on USC’s revenues, income, and financial condition for calendar years 2015 and 2016 and adversely affected its relationships with certain of its customers that established relationships with other suppliers during USC’s suspension of sterile production.
USC’s compounded preparations and the pharmacy compounding industry are subject to regulatory and customer scrutiny, which may impair our growth and sales.
Compounded drugs are not FDA-approved. As a 503B drug compounding outsourcing facility, USC’s human compounded formulations are not subject to the FDA drug approval process. This means that FDA does not verify the safety or effectiveness of the medications compounded and distributed by USC, but rather FDA establishes standards for manufacturing processes controls to ensure drug quality. Consumers and health professionals rely on the drug approval process to ensure that drugs are safe and effective and made in accordance with Federal quality standards. Compounded drugs also lack an FDA finding of manufacturing quality before such drugs are marketed. Drugs available through branded and generic drug companies have been approved for marketing and sale by the FDA and are subject to many more requirements than drugs compounded in outsourcing facilities. In addition, some compounding pharmacies have been the subject of widespread negative media coverage in recent years. As a result, some physicians may be hesitant to prescribe, and some patients may be hesitant to purchase and use, compounded drugs. Other reasons physicians may be unwilling to prescribe or patients may be unwilling to use USC’s compounded formulations could include the following, among others: applicable law limits our ability to discuss the efficacy or safety of USC’s formulations with potential users to the extent applicable data is available; and our compounded preparations are primarily sold on a cash-pay basis and reimbursement may or may not be available from third-party payors, including the private payors and government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid programs. Failure by physicians, patients, other potential customers, or third-party payors, to accept compounded drugs could substantially limit USC’s market and cause its and our business and operations to suffer.
Formulations prepared and dispensed by compounding pharmacies contain ingredients purchased from FDA-registered suppliers, but the finished compounded drug products are not themselves approved by the FDA. The drug products available through branded and generic drug companies have been approved for marketing and sale by the FDA and are required to be manufactured in facilities compliant with cGMP standards. In addition, certain compounding pharmacies have been the subject of widespread negative media coverage in recent years, and the actions of these pharmacies have resulted in increased scrutiny of compounding pharmacy activities from the FDA and state governmental agencies. For example, the FDA has in the past requested that a number of compounding pharmacies conduct a recall of all non-expired, purportedly sterile drug products and cease sterile compounding operations due to lack of sterility assurance, and additional compounding pharmacies have suspended sterile production or voluntarily recalled certain sterile compounding products after an FDA inspection of the relevant facilities. As a result, some physicians may be hesitant to prescribe, and some patients may be hesitant to purchase and use, these compounded formulations. Other reasons physicians may be unwilling to prescribe or patients may be unwilling to use USC’s compounded formulations could include the following, among others: applicable law limits our ability to discuss the efficacy or safety of USC’s formulations with potential users to the extent applicable data is available; our compounded preparations are primarily sold on a cash-pay basis and reimbursement may or may not be available from third-party payors, including the government Medicare and Medicaid programs; or ordering physicians or their delegates may be unwilling or logistically unable to provide attestation of clinical need as required by FDA pursuant to guidance documents published in 2018. Any failure by physicians, patients, or third-party payors, to accept compounded formulations could substantially limit USC’s market and cause its and our business and operations to suffer. An incident similar to the fungal meningitis outbreak in 2012, which was caused by a compounding pharmacy, could cause USC’s customers to reduce their use of outsourced compounded medications significantly or even stop using outsourced compounded medications altogether. States have in the past enacted, and could in the future enact, regulations prohibiting or restricting the use of outsourcing compounded medication service providers in response to such incidents. Such prohibitions or restrictions on outsourced compounded preparations by states, or reduced customer demand as a result of an incident with compounded medication providers, could have a material adverse effect on USC’s and our business, results of operations and financial condition.
In addition, in 2017, a lawsuit was filed by a pharmaceutical company, Endo International plc, alleging that FDA has improperly enforced DQSA related to its interim draft guidance on compounding from bulk drug ingredients. In September 2019, Endo withdrew this lawsuit based on the FDA’s evaluation that outsourcing facilities should not be able to compound drugs products that contain vasopressin, the basis of Endo’s complaint. FDA has indicated it intends to take similar action relative to nine other bulk drug substances, including ephedrine sulfate. Ephedrine sulfate represents a portion of USC’s hospital outsourcing business, which could result in a loss of revenue resulting from affected USC products. USC is working proactively with industry stakeholders and regulatory authorities regarding the FDA’s guidance and actions, and believes that the impact on USC and other 503B outsourcing facilities of the regulatory expectations regarding bulk substances will depend in part on how the guidance is implemented, interpreted, and applied over time.
*We expect increased competition in the future regarding USC’s compounded pharmacy products. If we fail to respond to such competition successfully, USC’s and our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.
The pharmaceutical and pharmacy industries are highly competitive. We compete against other registered outsourcing facilities, branded drug companies, generic drug companies, regional compounders that provide patient-specific compounding that decide to expand to 503B outsourcing, non-patient-specific compounding, large hospitals and integrated delivery networks, other compounding pharmacies, and new entrants to the industry. Increased competition could reduce revenue and gross profit and otherwise materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Many competitors that market and sell compounded preparations have longer operating histories and may have greater financial, marketing, and other resources than we do. We are significantly smaller than some of such competitors, and we may lack the financial and other resources needed to develop, produce, distribute, market, and commercialize any of USC’s formulations or compete for market share in these sectors. These potential competitors could leverage existing resources and experience operating in industries that are subject to significant regulatory oversight in order to overcome certain barriers to entry. Consequently, competitors may be able to develop products and services competitive with, or superior to, USC’s products and services. Furthermore, we may not be able to differentiate USC’s compounded preparations and services from those of our competitors, successfully develop or introduce new services—on a timely basis or at all—that are less costly than those of our competitors or offer customers payment and other commercial terms as favorable as those offered by our competitors. We expect competition to intensify as technology advances, such as those in the field of robotics and automation, and consolidation continues. Also, new developments by pharmaceutical manufacturers, such as increasing the number of abbreviated new drug applications, to cover less frequently used drug formulations, could render some or most of USC’s products or services obsolete. In addition, the drug products available through branded and generic drug companies with which USC’s formulations compete have been approved for marketing and sale by the FDA and are required to be manufactured in facilities compliant with cGMP standards. USC’s compounded formulations are not required to be, and have not been, approved for marketing and sale by the FDA. As a result, some physicians may be unwilling to prescribe, and some patients may be unwilling to use, USC’s formulations. The DQSA prohibits compounding facilities, both 503A and 503B, from compounding products that are considered “essentially a copy” of approved drug products offered by traditional pharmaceutical manufacturers. In January 2018, FDA published Final Guidance on what it considers to be “essentially a copy” of approved drug products for outsourcing facilities. This guidance documents added the requirement that purchasers and prescribers document on each order and prescription the specific clinical need for the compounded medication. Some purchasers and prescribers may be unwilling to complete this additional documentation, resulting in decreased demand for the compounded drug products.
Our failure to anticipate or appropriately adapt to changes or trends within the pharmaceutical industry could have a significant negative impact on our ability to compete successfully.
The pharmaceutical and pharmacy industries are highly competitive. We compete against other registered outsourcing facilities, branded drug companies, generic drug companies, regional compounders that provide patient-specific compounding that decide to expand to 503B outsourcing, non-patient-specific compounding, large hospitals and integrated delivery networks, other compounding pharmacies, and new entrants to the industry. Increased competition could reduce revenue and gross profit and otherwise materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Many competitors that market and sell compounded preparations have longer operating histories and may have greater financial, marketing and other resources than we do. We are significantly smaller than some of such competitors, and we may lack the financial and other resources needed to develop, produce, distribute, market and commercialize any of USC’s formulations or compete for market share in these sectors. These potential competitors could leverage existing resources and experience operating in industries that are subject to significant regulatory oversight in order to overcome certain barriers to entry. Consequently, competitors may be able to develop products and services competitive with, or superior to, USC’s products and services. Furthermore, we may not be able to differentiate USC’s compounded preparations and services from those of our competitors, successfully develop or introduce new services—on a timely basis or at all—that are less costly than those of our competitors or offer customers payment and other commercial terms as favorable as those offered by our competitors. We expect competition to intensify as technology advances, such as those in the field of robotics and automation, and consolidation continues. Also, new developments by pharmaceutical manufacturers, such as increasing the number of abbreviated new drug applications, to cover less frequently used drug formulations, could render some or most of USC’s products or services obsolete. In addition, the drug products available through branded and generic drug companies with which USC’s formulations compete have been approved for marketing and sale by the FDA and are required to be manufactured in facilities compliant with cGMP standards. USC’s compounded formulations are not required to be, and have not been, approved for marketing and sale by the FDA. As a result, some physicians may be unwilling to prescribe, and some patients may be unwilling to use, USC’s formulations. The DQSA prohibits compounding facilities, both 503A and 503B, from compounding products that are considered “essentially a copy” of approved drug products offered by traditional pharmaceutical manufacturers.
If a compounded drug formulation provided through our compounding services leads to patient injury or death or results in a product recall, we may be exposed to significant liabilities and reputational harm.
The production, labeling and packaging of compounded sterile preparations, or CSPs, is inherently risky. The success of USC’s compounded formulations and pharmacy operations depends to a significant extent upon medical and patient perceptions of USC and us and the safety and quality of USC’s products. We could be adversely affected if USC, any other compounding pharmacies or USC’s formulations and technologies, are subject to negative publicity. We could also be adversely affected if any of USC’s formulations or other products, any similar products sold by other companies, or any products sold by other compounding pharmacies, prove to be, or are asserted to be, harmful to patients. There are a number of factors that could result in the injury or death of a patient who receives one of USC’s compounded formulations, including quality issues, manufacturing or labeling flaws, improper packaging or unanticipated or improper uses of the products, any of which could result from human or other error. Any of these situations could lead to a recall of, or safety alert relating to, one or more of USC’s products. Similarly, to the extent any of the components of approved drugs or other ingredients used by USC to produce compounded formulations have quality or other problems that adversely affect the finished compounded preparations, USC’s and our sales could be adversely affected. In addition, in the ordinary course of business, we may voluntarily retrieve products in response to a customer complaint. Because of our dependence upon medical and patient perceptions, any adverse publicity associated with illness or other adverse effects resulting from the use or misuse of USC’s products, any similar products sold by other companies or any other compounded formulations, could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We could become subject to product recalls and termination or suspension of our state pharmacy licenses if laboratory testing does not identify all contaminated products or if our products otherwise cause or appear to have caused injury or harm to patients. In addition, such laboratory testing may produce false positives, which could harm our business and impact our pharmacy operations even if the impacted formulations are ultimately found to be sterile and no patients are harmed by them. If adverse events or deaths or a product recall, either voluntarily or as required by the FDA or a state board of pharmacy, were associated with one of USC’s formulations or compounds, USC’s and our reputation could suffer, physicians may be unwilling to prescribe USC’s products or order any prescriptions from such pharmacies, we could become subject to product and professional liability lawsuits, and USC’s or our state pharmacy or other required licenses could be terminated or restricted.
Any retrieval or recall, whether voluntary or requested by the FDA or state regulatory authorities, could result in significant costs and lead to product withdrawals and harm USC’s or our ability to successfully launch new products and services. These problems could also result in enforcement actions by state and federal authorities or other healthcare self-regulatory bodies, or product liability claims or lawsuits, including those brought by individuals or groups seeking to represent a class or establish multi-district litigation proceedings. Any such action, litigation, recall or reputational harm, even recalls or negative publicity resulting from patient harm or death caused by compounded medications prepared by a competitor or a hospital pharmacy, could result in a material adverse effect on USC’s and our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. Current or future insurance coverage may prove insufficient to cover any liability claims brought against USC or us. Because of the increasing cost of insurance coverage, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.
USC’s ability to generate revenues will be diminished if it fails to obtain acceptable prices.
Currently, USC is paid directly by most of its customers and does not submit large amounts of claims for reimbursement through Medicare, Medicaid or other third-party payors, although its customers may choose to seek available reimbursement opportunities to the extent that they exist. Many third-party payors have imposed significant restrictions on reimbursement for compounded formulations in recent years. Moreover, third-party payors, including Medicare, are increasingly attempting to contain health care costs by limiting coverage and the level of reimbursement for new drugs and by refusing, in some cases, to provide coverage for uses of approved products for disease indications for which the FDA has not granted labeling approval. The continued efforts of health maintenance organizations, managed care organizations, government programs (such as Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state-funded programs) and other third-party payors to limit reimbursements to USC’s customers may adversely impact our financial results. Further, HIPAA, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“PPACA”) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2012 (collectively referred to as the “Health Reform Law”), may have a considerable impact on the existing U.S. system for the delivery and financing of health care and could conceivably adversely affect USC’s business. As a result, reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid and other third-party payors may cease to be available for USC’s products or may not be sufficient to allow USC to sell products on a competitive basis and at desirable price points. If government and other third-party payors do not provide adequate coverage and reimbursement levels for USC’s formulations, the market acceptance for USC’s formulations may be limited. We expect cost pressures from third party payors to continue, and USC’s customers have limited bargaining power to counter payor demands for reduced reimbursement rates. If USC’s customers increasingly insource pharmaceutical preparations or use alternative third-party providers due to these pressures, USC’s and our business, results of operations and financial condition may be materially adversely impacted.
Consolidation in the health care industry could lead to demands for price concessions, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Because health care costs have risen significantly, numerous initiatives and reforms by legislatures, regulators, and third-party payors to curb these cost increases have resulted in a trend in the health care industry to consolidate product suppliers and purchasers. Many healthcare industry participants are consolidating to create integrated healthcare delivery systems with significant market power, and we expect this trend to continue. As provider networks consolidate, thereby decreasing the number of market participants, competition to provide products and services such as those offered by USC will become more intense, and the importance of establishing relationships with key industry participants will become greater. In addition, industry participants may try to use their increased market power to negotiate price reductions for USC’s products and services. If we are forced to reduce prices as a result of either an imbalance of market power or decreased demand for USC’s products, our business, financial conditions and results of operations would be adversely affected.
If we are unable to maintain our GPO relationships, our revenue could decline.
USC currently derives, and expects to continue to derive, a significant portion of its revenue from end-user customers that are members of group purchasing organizations, or GPOs. USC is also a member of one or more GPOs. GPOs negotiate pricing arrangements that are then made available to a GPO’s affiliated hospitals and other members. GPOs provide end-users access to a broad range of pharmaceutical products and services from multiple suppliers at competitive prices and, in certain cases, exercise influence over the purchasing decisions of such end-users. Hospitals and other end-users contract with the GPO of their choice for their purchasing needs in an effort to lower costs. Maintaining USC’s contractual relationships with GPOs will, we believe, help allow USC to continue to provide outsourced compounded formulations, offer a broad product line, and remain price competitive, and failure to maintain such relationships could adversely affect USC’s ability to obtain supplies at competitive prices. The GPOs with which USC currently has contractual relationships, or other GPS, may have relationships with USC’s customers, and as such the GPOs may influence the customers’ buying patterns regarding USC’s products or those of our competitors. If we are unable to maintain USC’s relationships with GPOs, USC’s and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.
USC relies on third parties to provide active pharmaceutical ingredients and components. If these third parties do not deliver as expected, if USC’s agreements with them terminate or if the FDA prohibits use of these active pharmaceutical ingredients, USC’s and our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected.
USC has contractual relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers and other suppliers of active pharmaceutical ingredients and containers. Any changes to these relationships, including, but not limited to, a loss of a supplier relationship, product shortages or changes in pricing, could have an adverse effect on USC’s and our business, financial condition and results of operations.
USC’s business depends to a significant extent on the reliable delivery of drugs from its key suppliers, some of which provide favorable terms in exchange for USC’s or our commitment to purchase minimum volumes of, or in some cases all of USC’s needs for, one or more drugs. We strive to identify and maintain relationships with more than one source for active pharmaceutical ingredients and containers used in USC’s CSPs. If a drug for which we have not qualified an alternative source becomes unavailable, we may not be able to identify and qualify a replacement supplier or may suffer a delay in doing so, which could adversely affect USC’s and our revenues. Further, we may not receive the same pricing from an alternative supplier. A price increase resulting from using alternative suppliers or due to a shortage of a particular drug, a manufacturer gaining an exclusive right to market and sell a given drug, or any other reason could make USC’s compounded preparations containing that drug more expensive, and therefore potentially less attractive, to USC’s customers. In addition, active pharmaceutical ingredients and containers that we purchase may not always be available in sufficient quantities to meet USC’s needs and the needs of USC’s customers. Some pharmaceutical ingredients are only available through a single supplier and may be subject to limits on distribution. Additionally, some of the containers that USC uses in its compounded preparations are particular to a supplier, and USC’s customers may use a drug delivery system of a particular supplier. Therefore, if there is a shortage or interruption in the supply of a certain supplier’s containers, USC may not be able to sell compounded preparations in alternative containers to certain of its customers. USC regularly searches for and qualifies backup vendors for ingredients and components to improve supply chain security and business continuity. In addition, there is a risk that one or more suppliers could be acquired by another company that owns registered 503B outsourced compounding facilities, in which case we could be required to purchase ingredients or containers from a competitor, which could harm our business.
In 2018, the FDA published a number of draft guidance materials that could have a substantial impact on USC’s business. In March 2018, the FDA published the draft guidance “Evaluation of Bulk Drug Substances Nominated for Use in Compounding Under Section 503 of the Federal Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act.” The FDA also updated its interim lists of bulk drug substances on several occasions in 2018. In March 2019, the FDA issued final guidance and moved to formally remove two substances from the interim list that permitted their use; while the specific substances at issue in FDA’s March 2019 guidance were not of material importance to USC, FDA has announced its intent to take similar action regarding nine other bulk drug substances, including ephedrine sulfate, that represent a portion of USC’s hospital outsourcing business, which could result in a loss of revenue resulting from affected USC products. USC is working proactively with industry stakeholders and regulatory authorities regarding the FDA’s guidance and actions, and believes that the impact on USC and other 503B outsourcing facilities of the regulatory expectations regarding bulk substances will depend in part on how the guidance is implemented, interpreted and applied over time.
USC experiences supply interruptions and shortages from time to time. USC retains inventory of drug components and containers in order to help provide our customers continuity of service, but its inventory may not be sufficient. If a supply disruption results in the inability to obtain compounding components, USC’s and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.
USC’s reliance on suppliers also exposes USC and us to risks that are not within our control, including the following:
|
|
●
|
USC relies on suppliers to provide it with drugs, diluents and containers of an acceptable quality in a timely fashion. Any quality issues, recalls, or supply delay or interruption could harm USC’s ability to sell products and may subject USC or us to product liability claims.
|
|
|
●
|
USC’s suppliers’ facilities must satisfy production and quality standards set by the FDA and other regulatory authorities that periodically inspect facilities to determine compliance. If our suppliers fail to satisfy these requirements, their facilities could be shut down permanently or for an extended period of time.
|
|
|
●
|
USC’s suppliers may not be able to produce the volume that USC requires or may experience disruptions or delays due to market conditions, natural disasters, labor-related disruptions, failure in supply or other logistical channels or other reasons.
|
|
|
●
|
A supplier could decide to terminate its contract or supply arrangement with USC due to a disagreement with USC or us.
|
Each of these risks could delay the production of USC’s products or result in higher costs or deprive USC and us of potential revenues. Further, delays or interruptions in supply could limit or curtail USC’s ability to meet customer demand for its CSPs. Any such delay or interruption could harm USC’s reputation as a provider of outsourced CSPs, cause USC’s customers to find alternative sources for CSPs or reduce their use of outsourced CSPs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on USC’s and our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
A disruption in USC’s operations, including as a result of cybersecurity or other system failures, or the delivery of compounded preparations to customers could damage relations with customers.
USC’s success depends upon its ability to provide timely, reliable and consistent services and products to its customers. Natural disasters or other catastrophic events, including tornadoes, hurricanes, blizzards and other weather conditions, terrorist attacks, power and data interruptions, fires as well as logistical or delivery disruptions could disrupt USC’s or its suppliers’ and vendors’ operations and impede USC’s ability to provide services and deliver products to customers, which could adversely impact USC’s and our results of operations. For example, USC’s CSPs have expiration dates, and USC’s compounded preparations must remain under specified storage conditions, including some items that must remain refrigerated or frozen or those that are sensitive to excessive heat. Any disruption or delay in delivery may cause spoilage and the need to retrieve and replace products. In the event that USC experiences a temporary or longer term interruption in its ability to deliver services or products, USC’s and our revenues could be reduced, USC’s reputation could be damaged and USC’s and our business could be materially and adversely affected. For example, USC’s suspension of sterile product production during portions of the second half of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016 adversely affected its relationships with some of its customers and sales personnel, and resulted in revenues in 2016 that were below our expectations. In addition, any continuing disruption in either USC’s or our computer systems or telephone system could adversely affect USC’s or our ability to receive and process customer orders and ship products on a timely basis, and could adversely affect USC’s or our relations with customers, potentially resulting in reduction in orders or loss of customers.
*We have incurred significant indebtedness, which will require substantial cash to service and which subjects us to certain financial requirements and business restrictions; Paycheck Protection Loan.
As we have previously disclosed in our SEC filings, in connection with our acquisition of USC and the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement relating to the USC acquisition, we assumed approximately $5,722,000 principal amount of debt obligations under two loan agreements and related loan documents relating to the building, real property and equipment that certain third parties agreed to transfer to the company or USC in connection with the merger, as well as the two loan agreements to which USC is a party, a working capital loan and an equipment loan, and related loan documents evidencing loans previously made to USC, and we agreed to become an additional co-borrower under the Loan Documents. The lender in all of the Loan Documents was First Federal Bank and/or its successor Bear State Bank, and/or Arvest Bank, as successor in interest to Bear State Bank, referred to as Lender or the Bank. We have previously entered into amendments of these loan agreements with the Bank, or the Amended Loan Documents. We are required to make current periodic interest and principal payments under the Amended Loan Documents, in an amount of approximately $19,000 per month; the amount of required interest payments is subject to change depending on future changes in interest rates.
The Amended Loan Documents with the Bank include a variety of representations, warranties and covenants that we are required to comply with. If we do not comply with the provisions of such agreements and documents and the Bank declares an event of default, the Bank would be entitled to accelerate the maturity date of the loans, the principal and accrued interest would become due and payable, and the Bank could elect to exercise its remedies as a secured creditor under the loan documents and applicable law. At September 30, 2020, our aggregate indebtedness under the Amended Loan Documents was approximately $2,092,000.
Our ability to make scheduled payments on our indebtedness depends on our future performance and ability to raise additional capital if required, which is subject to economic, financial, competitive and other factors, some of which are beyond our control. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash to service our debt, we may be required to adopt one or more alternatives, such as selling assets, attempting to restructure our debt or obtaining additional capital through sales of equity or incurrence of additional debt on terms that may be onerous or highly dilutive to our stockholders. Our ability to engage in any of these activities would depend on the capital markets and our financial condition at such time, and we may not be able to do so when needed, on desirable terms or at all, which could result in a default on our debt obligations. Additionally, the Amended Loan Documents contain various restrictive covenants, including, among others, our obligation to deliver to the Bank certain financial and other information, our obligation to comply with certain notice and insurance requirements, and our inability, without the Bank’s prior consent, to dispose of certain of our assets, incur certain additional indebtedness, enter into certain merger, acquisition or change of control transactions, pay certain dividends or distributions on or make certain repurchases of our capital stock or incur any lien or other encumbrance on our assets, subject to certain permitted exceptions. Any failure by us to comply with any of these covenants, subject to certain cure periods, or to make all payments under the debt instruments when due, would cause us to be in default under the applicable debt instrument. In the event of any such default, the Bank may be able to foreclose on the assets that secure the debt or declare all borrowed funds, together with accrued and unpaid interest, immediately due and payable, thereby potentially causing all of our available cash to be used to pay our indebtedness or forcing us into bankruptcy or liquidation if we do not then have sufficient cash available. Any such event or occurrence could severely and negatively impact our business, financial conditions or results of operations.
In addition, in April 2020, we received $3,191,700 in loan funding from the Paycheck Protection Program (the “PPP”), established pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) and administered by the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”). The unsecured loan (the “PPP Loan”) is evidenced by a promissory note of the Company (the “PPP Note”), in the principal amount of $3,191,700, to Arvest Bank, the Lender. Under the terms of the PPP Note and the PPP Loan, interest accrues on the outstanding principal at the rate of 1.0% per annum. The term of the PPP Note is two years, unless sooner provided in connection with an event of default under the PPP Note. To the extent the loan amount is not forgiven under the PPP, the Company is obligated to make equal monthly payments of principal and interest, beginning seven months from the date of the PPP Note (or later if a timely loan forgiveness application has been submitted), until the maturity date. The CARES Act and the PPP provide a mechanism for a borrower to apply for forgiveness of up to the full amount borrowed. The amount of loan proceeds eligible for forgiveness is based on a formula that takes into account a number of factors, including the amount of loan proceeds used by the Company during a specified period after the loan origination for certain purposes including payroll costs, interest on certain mortgage obligations, rent payments on certain leases, and certain qualified utility payments, provided that at least certain specified percentages of the loan amount is used for eligible payroll costs; the employer maintaining or rehiring employees and maintaining salaries at certain levels; and other factors. Subject to the other requirements and limitations on loan forgiveness, only loan proceeds spent on payroll and other eligible costs during the covered eight-week or 24-week period will qualify for forgiveness. There is no assurance that we will be granted forgiveness of some or all of the amount of the PPP Loan. After the CARES Act was passed and we applied for and obtained the PPP Loan, the SBA issued new guidance that, among other things, questioned whether a public company with substantial market value and access to capital markets would qualify to participate in the PPP and be able to make the required certification that current economic uncertainty makes the loan request necessary to support the ongoing operations of the applicant. Subsequently, the Secretary of the Treasury and SBA has issued guidance that the government will review all PPP loans of more than $2 million for which the borrower applies for forgiveness, and that all PPP loans in excess of $2 million, and other PPP loans as appropriate, will be subject to review by SBA for compliance with program requirements set forth in the PPP Interim Final Rules and in the Borrower Application Form. On October 19, 2020, we submitted our application for the forgiveness of the full amount of the PPP Loan. However, should we be audited or reviewed by federal or state regulatory authorities as a result of filing an application for forgiveness of the PPP Loan or otherwise, such audit or review could result in the diversion of management’s time and attention and legal and reputational costs. If we were to be audited or reviewed and receive an adverse determination or finding in such audit or review, we could be required to return or repay the full amount of the PPP Loan and could be subject to fines or penalties, which could reduce our liquidity and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If we are unable to maintain an effective sales and marketing infrastructure, USC’s success in selling products will be inhibited.
If USC’s sales increase in the future, it may need to expend significant resources to further grow its sales and marketing employees and internal infrastructure and properly train sales personnel, including without limitation with respect to regulatory compliance matters. We may not be able to secure sales personnel or relationships that are adequate in number or expertise to successfully market and sell USC’s products and services. A failure to maintain compliant and adequate sales and marketing capabilities could have a material adverse effect on USC’s and our business, financial conditions, and results of operations.
USC’s formulations and technologies could potentially conflict with the rights of others.
The preparation or sale of USC’s formulations and use of USC’s technologies may infringe on the patent or other intellectual property rights of others. If USC’s products infringe or conflict with the patent or other intellectual property rights of others, third parties could bring legal actions against us claiming damages and seeking to enjoin our manufacturing and marketing of the affected products. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming and may divert management’s attention and our resources. We may not have sufficient resources to bring any such actions to a successful conclusion. If we are not successful in defending against these legal actions should they arise, we may be subject to monetary liability or be forced to alter our products, cease some or all of our operations relating to the affected products, or seek to obtain a license in order to continue manufacturing and marketing the affected products, which may not available on acceptable terms or at all. The lawsuit filed against FDA by Endo in 2017 and the suits filed by Allergan against a number of compounding facilities indicate the traditional pharmaceutical manufacturing industry is aggressively defending its patent and intellectual property rights as they perceive them. This trend could progress to include some of USC’s compounded drug product formulations, resulting in legal expenses and potential product discontinuation.
Risks Related to Regulation
*Our business is significantly impacted by state and federal statutes and regulations, including regulatory risks associated with operation of USC’s 503B registered outsourcing facility.
The marketing and sale of compounded formulations is subject to and must comply with extensive and evolving state and federal statutes and regulations governing compounding entities. These statutes and regulations include, among other things, for certain kinds of compounding pharmacies restrictions on compounding for office use or in advance of receiving a patient-specific prescription or, for outsourcing facilities registered under Section 503B of the FDCA such as USC’s registered outsourcing facility, requirements regarding preparation, such as regular FDA inspections and cGMP requirements, prohibitions on compounding drugs that are essentially copies of FDA-approved drugs, restrictions on the use of bulk active ingredients, limitations on the volume of compounded formulations that may be sold across state lines, prohibitions on wholesaling or reselling, and how the FDA treats the compounding of animal drugs from a 503B registered outsourcing facility. These and other restrictions on the activities of compounding pharmacies and outsourcing facilities may limit the market available for compounded formulations, as compared to the market available for FDA-approved drugs.
USC’s pharmacy business is impacted by federal and state laws and regulations governing, among other things: the purchase, distribution, management, compounding, dispensing, reimbursement, marketing, and labeling of prescription drugs and related services; FDA and/or state regulation affecting the pharmacy and pharmaceutical industries, including state pharmacy, manufacturer, wholesaler and distribution licensure and registration or permit standards; rules and regulations issued pursuant to HIPAA, and other state and federal laws related to the use, disclosure and transmission of health information; and state and federal controlled substance laws. USC’s or our failure to comply with any of these laws and regulations could severely limit or curtail USC’s or our pharmacy operations, which could materially harm USC’s and our business, financial conditions and results of operations. Further, our business could be adversely affected by changes in these or any newly enacted laws and regulations, as well as federal and state agency interpretations of such statutes and regulations. We could incur significant costs in order to comply with such regulations.
*We are subject to significant costs and uncertainties related to compliance with the extensive regulations that govern the compounding, labeling and distribution of pharmaceutical products and services, in general, and compounded formulations, in particular. If our compounding facility fails to comply with the Controlled Substances Act, FDCA, or state statutes and regulations, USC could be required to cease operations or become subject to restrictions that could adversely affect our business.
The production, distribution, processing, formulation, packaging and labeling of pharmaceutical products and services such as USC’s compounded formulations are subject to extensive regulation by federal agencies, including the FDA and the DEA. We and USC are also subject to a significant number of state and local laws and regulations. Compliance with these federal, state and local laws and regulations, including compliance with any newly enacted regulations, requires the substantial expenditure of time, money and effort. Failure to comply with FDA requirements and other federal or state governmental laws and regulations can result in fines, disgorgement, unanticipated compliance expenditures, recall or seizure of products, exposure to product liability claims, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, enforcement actions, injunctions and civil or criminal prosecution, any of which could have a material adverse effect on USC’s and our business, financial condition or results of operations. Further, the publicity of any violations or perceived violations of these laws and regulations could result in significant reputational harm to USC’s or our business.
The federal, state and local laws and regulations applicable to the pharmaceutical and compounding industries are subject to frequent change, whether through change in law or through interpretation. Changes in these laws and regulations may require changes to USC’s or our business and operations that may be difficult to implement and require significant expenditures. For example, as a result of the increased scrutiny resulting from the 2012 meningitis outbreak that was traced to a Massachusetts compounding pharmacy, in 2013 the U.S. Congress passed the DQSA, which sets forth new standards applicable to outsourcing facilities such as USC’s and invites voluntary registration with the FDA. The DQSA also permits states to continue to impose separate regulatory requirements. Under the DQSA, USC has registered with the FDA as a Section 503B outsourcing facility and has implemented policies and procedures that are intended to achieve compliance with the DQSA requirements for such facilities. However, there can be no assurance that we or USC are fully compliant with these requirements, and any failure to comply may result in additional costs to bring such facilities into compliance. Moreover, the FDA continues to issue draft and final guidance under the DQSA, including those relating to cGMPs, which may require further changes to USC’s business, facilities or processes, some of which may be significant.
State legislatures and regulatory authorities also reacted to the fungal meningitis outbreak by imposing additional regulatory requirements on compounding activities for outsourcing compounders and reminding outsourcing compounders of regulatory requirements already in effect. Since 2012, the FDA has convened a number of inter-governmental working meetings with government officials from each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, to discuss topics such as oversight of compounding, including the implementation of the DQSA, and opportunities to better protect public health by strengthening oversight of compounders through improved collaboration between the FDA and the states. As a result of such meetings, the FDA and the states committed, among other things, to enhance inter-agency communication surrounding the implementation of the DQSA, which may lead to additional guidance or regulation in the future. If federal, state or local regulatory authorities place new restrictions or limitations on USC’s or our operations, USC’s or our business, financial conditions or results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
State pharmacy laws require facilities dispensing or distributing into that state to be licensed accordingly, and many states require separate licenses for the various activities that USC performs. Various state pharmacy boards have enacted laws and/or adopted rules or regulations directed at restricting the operation of out-of-state pharmacies by, among other things, requiring compliance with all laws of the states into which the out-of-state pharmacy dispenses medications, whether or not those laws conflict with the laws of the state in which the pharmacy is located, or requiring the pharmacist-in-charge to be licensed in that state.
Pharmacy and controlled substance laws often address the qualification of an applicant’s personnel, the adequacy of its prescription fulfillment and inventory control practices and the adequacy of its facilities, and subject pharmacies to oversight by state boards of pharmacy and other regulators that could impose burdensome requirements or restrictions on operations if a pharmacy is found not to comply with these laws. If our or USC’s activities fail to comply with such requirements, we could be forced to permanently or temporarily cease or limit the applicable compounding operations, which could severely limit USC’s ability to market and sell formulations in such states and could materially harm USC’s and our business, financial condition and results of operations. Any such noncompliance could also result in complaints or adverse actions by other state boards of pharmacy, FDA inspection of the facility to determine compliance with the FDCA, loss of FDCA exemptions provided under Section 503A or 503B, warning letters, injunctions, prosecution, fines and loss of required government licenses, certifications and approvals, any of which could involve significant costs and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Further, the, the FDA seeks to limit, under Section 503A of the FDCA, the amount of compounded products that a pharmacy not registered as an outsourcing facility under Section 503B of the FDCA can dispense interstate. The interpretation and enforcement of this provision is dependent on the FDA entering into a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with each state setting forth limits on interstate compounding. The final draft of the MOU presented by the FDA in May 2020 proposed that interstate shipments of compounded drug units in excess of 50% of all compounded and non-compounded units dispensed or distributed by a 503A facility per month will trigger increased federal oversight, potential state investigation, and adverse event reporting requirements regarding prescriptions compounded in their respective states and dispensed or distributed out of state. The FDA stated in the final MOU that the document does not apply to outsourcing facilities or to veterinary drug products. Section 503A facilities in states that do not sign the MOU will be prohibited from distributing more than 5% of their compounded drugs out of state. As of the date of this Report, in part due to a reorganization of state government, USC does not know when the Arkansas State Board of Pharmacy, or its umbrella organization the Department of Health, will make a decision regarding the MOU. If the final MOU is not signed by the state of Arkansas, where USC is located, then interstate shipments of compounded preparations from a 503A facility will be limited to quantities not greater than 5% of total prescriptions dispensed or distributed by the 503A facility (the 5% rule).The FDA has announced a 365-day period for states to agree to the finalized MOU, after which it will begin to enforce the 5% rule. As of October 22, 2020, the Office of Management and Budget approved the MOU with no changes. We expect the FDA to publish a Notice on the Federal Register to finalize the process and start the 365-day period for states to sign onto and execute the MOU. FDA enforcement of either the 5% rule or the final MOU requirements could limit any interstate sales from a 503A facility. To the extent that USC’s operations include sale of products pursuant to Section 503A, the limitations outlined above could apply to a portion of USC’s business.
In January 2018, the FDA published a statement outlining its compounding priorities for 2018 (the “2018 Compounding Plan”) which provided an overview of the key priorities the FDA plans to focus on in 2018 in connection with compounding regulations. Included in the 2018 Compounding Plan were references to forthcoming regulations on compounding from bulk drug substances, determination of clinical need, and a revised memorandum of understanding between the FDA and State Boards of Pharmacy setting forth limits on interstate compounding under Section 503A of the FDCA. In keeping with this 2018 Compounding Plan, in March 2018 the FDA issued a draft guidance proposing a framework for determining the clinical need sufficient to permit an outsourcing facility to compound from bulk drug substances (“Bulks Guidance”), and in May 2020 the FDA issued a revised final MOU (“Revised Final MOU”). As with other FDA regulations and guidance, this guidance and MOU potentially could limit the number and type of products USC is permitted to compound as well as interstate shipping of compounded medications thereby adversely affecting sales of our compounded medications. The Bulks Guidance received numerous comments, and final guidance was published in March 2019 relating to the method by which the FDA will evaluate bulk drug substances for inclusion/exclusion on the final bulk substances lists. To date, FDA has excluded two substances and has proposed excluding an additional 28, while moving to include four substances. FDA is currently accepting comments from industry on these proposals, but no timeline is currently available by which the lists are expected to be finalized. Until FDA makes a final determination , the interim bulk substances lists are effective, and USC does not compound with bulk drug substances not on the interim list as approved for use.
In November 2019, FDA issued a draft Guidance for Industry #256: Compounding Animal Drugs from Bulk Drug Substances (the “Draft GFI #256”). This guidance describes the FDA’s policy regarding the compounding of animal drugs from bulk substances and limits the circumstances in which a compounder may use bulk substances to compound animal medication. Industry comments to the Draft GFI #256 were due by October 15, 2020. As with other FDA regulations and guidance, when finalized, this guidance could limit the number and type of products USC is permitted to compound for animal use.
USC is currently compounding animal medication in its registered Section 503B outsourcing facility. Section 503B of the FDCA does not apply to animal medication and FDA does not expressly allow 503B registered outsourcing facilities to compound animal medication. However, FDA’s August 2015 guidance on whether an entity should register as an outsourcing facility contemplates that outsourcing facilities will be compounding animal medication in addition to human medication and FDA has not taken action to date against a Section 503B registered outsourcing facility that is compounding both human and animal medications. Nevertheless, as FDA has not expressly stated its position on the compounding of animal medication in a 503B outsourcing facility, there is a risk that FDA could, in the future, consider animal medication compounded in a 503B outsourcing facility to not be exempt from new drug approval requirements, and enforce new drug approval requirements on animal medication compounding in Section 503B outsourcing facilities.
In the future, we may not be able to satisfy applicable federal and state licensing and other requirements for USC’s pharmacy business in a timely manner or at all, changes to federal and state pharmacy regulations may restrict compounding operations or make them more costly, we may be unable to achieve a sufficient physician and patient customer base to sustain our pharmacy operations, or market acceptance of compounding pharmacies generally may be curtailed or delayed.
*We must compound in conformity with applicable cGMP requirements; failure to maintain compliance with applicable cGMP requirements may prevent or delay the compounding or marketing of our compounded preparations.
USC’s 503B outsourcing facility operations must continually adhere to (i) applicable cGMP requirements, which are issued and enforced by the FDA through regulations and guidance and interpreted and enforced through its inspection programs, and (ii) sterile product requirements under applicable state law, such as General Chapter <797> (“USP <797>“), published by the U.S. Pharmacopeia or USP Convention, a scientific standard-setting organization, which have been codified in many states and which have historically been enforced by applicable state boards of pharmacy through inspection programs but are also enforceable by the FDA. In complying with applicable cGMPs and USP <797>, we must expend time, money and effort in production, record-keeping, and quality control to ensure that USC’s products and services meet applicable specifications and requirements. Revisions to USP <797> have been proposed by USP, but postponed for the foreseeable future and current USP <797> remains in effect. In July 2014, the FDA issued draft guidance for cGMPs for human drug compounding outsourcing facilities, such as USC’s. This draft guidance was revised in December 2018. USC has assessed this revised draft guidance and is implementing pertinent improvements or changes to its processes, procedures, policies, or facility to achieve the expected level of compliance. Because this cGMP draft guidance has not been finalized and may be significantly changed prior to being made final, we may need to expend substantial additional resources to comply with the final applicable cGMPs, along with any additional modifications over time.
The FDA and other governmental entities enforce compliance with regulations and guidance through periodic risk-based inspections. We received FDA Form 483 observations following inspections in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2019. If any of these entities were to deem inspectional observations at USC’s facilities or our responses to such observations to be unsatisfactory, operations at such facility could be interrupted or halted, and we may incur unanticipated compliance expenditures and be subject to enforcement actions such as recall or seizure of USC products, injunctions, civil penalties and criminal prosecution. In addition, any regulatory deficiencies or suspension resulting in compounding interruptions or halts may disrupt USC’s or our ability to meet our production and contractual obligations to USC’s customers and lead to significant delays in the availability of USC’s compounded preparations, which could have a material adverse effect on USC’s and our business, results of operations and financial condition. Similarly, any adverse publicity associated with any such events could have a material impact on USC’s and our reputation and results of operations.
Certain of USC’s customers are contractually permitted to inspect USC’s facilities to ensure compliance with industry standards. The failure to achieve a compliance level satisfactory to such customers may result in immediate contract termination, penalties or volume reductions or loss of customers immediately or upon the expiration of existing contracts.
Certain of USC’s compounded preparations contain controlled substances, and extensive regulation of such controlled substances could have a negative effect on our business, financial conditions or results of operations.
Certain of USC’s compounded preparations contain controlled substances or “certain list I chemicals,” which are subject to extensive regulation by the DEA regarding procurement, manufacture, storage, shipment, sale, and use. These regulations are also imposed on USC and its suppliers, vendors and customers and add additional complications and costs to the storage, use, sale and distribution of such products. Government quotas on controlled substances limit the supply of components for certain of USC’s compounded preparations and restrict the ability to distribute those preparations. Our inability to obtain authorization from the DEA to procure the controlled or listed substances used in USC’s compounded preparations could have an adverse impact on USC’s and our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
The FDA reviews the safety of controlled substances on an ongoing basis, and it is possible that these regulatory agencies could impose additional restrictions on marketing or distribution of such products, or could withdraw regulatory approval for materials that USC uses as components in its products. Failure to comply with relevant regulations governing controlled substances could result in civil penalties, refusal to renew necessary registrations, initiation of proceedings to revoke such registrations, reductions of the amounts of controlled substances that USC may obtain and, in certain circumstances, criminal prosecution. If the FDA or the DEA withdraw the approval of, or placed additional significant restrictions on, USC’s products or the components used in them, sales of USC products and the ability to promote USC products and services could be materially and adversely affected. Also, the DEA or applicable state regulatory bodies may in the future seek to regulate additional ingredients in USC’s compounded preparations as controlled substances or listed chemicals.
*USC and its customers are subject to a variety of federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the general healthcare industry, which are subject to frequent change.
Participants in the healthcare industry, including USC and its suppliers and customers, are subject to a variety of federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Laws and regulations in the healthcare industry are extremely complex and, in many instances, industry participants do not have the benefit of significant regulatory or judicial interpretation. Though certain of these healthcare laws and regulations are not directly applicable to USC or us, they may be applicable to USC’s customers, third-party vendors, and other supply chain partners. For example, the PPACA was enacted in 2010, and many of the structural changes enacted by the PPACA were implemented in 2014. However, some of the applicable regulations and sub-regulatory guidance under the PPACA have not yet been issued or finalized. These reforms affect the coverage and plan designs that are or will be provided by many of USC’s customers’ third-party payors. As a result, such reforms could affect the ability of our USC’s to purchase USC products or services and, as a result, adversely impact our revenues. We cannot predict what effect, if any, the PPACA, related regulations and sub-regulatory guidance may have on USC’s or our business.
In addition, we are subject to the federal anti-kickback statute, which prohibits the knowing and willful offer, payment, solicitation or receipt of any form of remuneration in return for, or to induce, the referral of business or ordering of services paid for by Medicare or other federal programs. We are also subject to state anti-kickback laws and regulations. Violations of the anti-kickback statutes can result in imprisonment, civil or criminal fines, and fines and disciplinary actions relating to our state licensure. Any violation or alleged violation of such federal or state laws could harm USC’s or our reputation, customer relationships or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Such laws and regulations are subject to change and often are uncertain in their application. As controversies continue to arise in the healthcare industry, federal, state and local regulation and enforcement priorities may increase. There can be no assurance that USC, or one of its customers, third party vendors or other supply chain partners, will not be subject to scrutiny or challenge under one or more of these laws or regulations or that any such challenge would not be successful. Any such challenge, whether or not successful, could adversely affect USC’s or our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Changes in the healthcare industry that are beyond our control may have an adverse impact on our business.
The healthcare industry is changing rapidly as consumers, governments, medical professionals and the pharmaceutical industry examine ways to broaden medical coverage while controlling the increase in healthcare costs. Such changes could include changes to make the government’s Medicare reimbursement programs more restrictive, which could limit or curtail the potential for USC’s formulations to obtain eligibility for reimbursement from such payors, or changes to expand the reach of HIPAA or other health privacy laws, which could make compliance with these laws costlier and more burdensome. Further, the Health Reform Law may have a considerable impact on the existing U.S. system for the delivery and financing of health care and could adversely affect USC’s or our business. Any changes to laws and regulations affecting the healthcare industry could impose significant additional costs on USC’s and our operations in order to maintain compliance or could otherwise negatively affect USC’s or our business, financial conditions or results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
Provisions of our charter documents could discourage an acquisition of our company that would benefit our stockholders and may have the effect of entrenching, and making it difficult to remove, management.
Provisions of our restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us, even if a change of control would benefit our stockholders. For example, shares of our preferred stock may be issued in the future without further stockholder approval, and upon such terms and conditions, and having such rights, privileges and preferences, as our board of directors may determine, including, for example, rights to convert into our common stock. The rights of the holders of our common stock will be subject to, and may be adversely affected by, the rights of the holders of any of our preferred stock that may be issued in the future. The issuance of our preferred stock could have the effect of making it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us. This could limit the price that certain investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock and discourage those investors from acquiring a majority of our common stock. Similarly, our bylaws require that any stockholder proposals or nominations for election to our board of directors must meet specific advance notice requirements and procedures, which make it more difficult for our stockholders to make proposals or director nominations. The existence of these charter provisions could have the effect of entrenching management and making it more difficult to change our management. Furthermore, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. These provisions may prohibit or restrict large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us, unless one or more exemptions from such provisions apply. These provisions under Delaware law could discourage potential takeover attempts and could reduce the price that investors might be willing to pay for shares of our common stock in the future.
*The price of our common stock may be volatile.
The market price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially. For example, from January 2018 to September 30, 2020, the market price of our common stock has fluctuated between $0.27 and $5.10. Market prices for securities of early-stage pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences companies have historically been particularly volatile. Some of the factors that may cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate include:
|
|
●
|
relatively low trading volume, which can result in significant volatility in the market price of our common stock based on a relatively smaller number of trades and dollar amount of transactions;
|
|
|
●
|
the timing and results of our current and any future preclinical or clinical trials of our product candidates;
|
|
|
●
|
our ability to successfully expand sales of our compounded pharmacy formulations;
|
|
|
●
|
the entry into or termination of key agreements, including, among others, key collaboration and license agreements;
|
|
|
●
|
the results and timing of regulatory reviews relating to the approval of our product candidates;
|
|
|
●
|
the timing of, or delay in the timing of, commercial introduction of any of our product;
|
|
|
●
|
the initiation of, material developments in, or conclusion of, litigation to enforce or defend any of our intellectual property rights;
|
|
|
●
|
failure of any of our product candidates, if approved, to achieve commercial success;
|
|
|
●
|
general and industry-specific economic conditions that may affect our research and development expenditures;
|
|
|
●
|
the results of clinical trials conducted by others on products that would compete with our product candidates;
|
|
|
●
|
issues in manufacturing our product candidates or any approved products;
|
|
|
●
|
the loss of key employees;
|
|
|
●
|
the introduction of technological innovations or new commercial products by our competitors;
|
|
|
●
|
changes in estimates or recommendations by securities analysts, if any, who cover our common stock;
|
|
|
●
|
future sales of our common stock;
|
|
|
●
|
period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results;
|
|
|
●
|
publicity or announcements regarding regulatory developments relating to our products;
|
|
|
●
|
period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results, including our cash and cash equivalents balance, operating expenses, cash burn rate or revenue levels;
|
|
|
●
|
common stock sales in the public market by one or more of our larger stockholders, officers or directors;
|
|
|
●
|
our filing for protection under federal bankruptcy laws;
|
|
|
●
|
a negative outcome in any litigation or potential legal proceeding;
|
|
|
●
|
the effect of public health crises, pandemics or epidemics, such as the coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak; or
|
|
|
●
|
other potentially negative financial announcements, such as a review of any of our filings by the SEC, changes in accounting treatment or restatement of previously reported financial results or delays in our filings with the SEC.
|
The stock markets in general have experienced substantial volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of individual companies. These broad market fluctuations may also adversely affect the trading price of our common stock. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders have often instituted class action securities litigation against those companies. Such litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management attention and resources, which could significantly harm our profitability and reputation.
*Trading of our common stock is limited.
Trading of our common stock is limited, and trading restrictions imposed on us by applicable regulations may further reduce our trading, making it difficult for our stockholders to sell their shares.
Prior to the listing of our common stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market, trading of our common stock was conducted on the OTCQB. The liquidity of our common stock is limited, not only in terms of the number of shares that can be bought and sold at a given price, but also as it may be adversely affected by delays in the timing of transactions and reduction in security analysts’ and the media’s coverage of us, if at all.
The foregoing factors may result in lower prices for our common stock than might otherwise be obtained and could also result in a larger spread between the bid and asked prices for our common stock. In addition, without a large public float, our common stock is less liquid than the stock of companies with broader public ownership, and as a result, the trading price of our common stock may be more volatile. In the absence of an active public trading market, an investor may be unable to liquidate his or her investment in our common stock. Trading of a relatively small volume of our common stock may have a greater impact on the trading price of our stock than would be the case if our public float were larger. We cannot predict the price at which our common stock will trade at any given time.
There is no assurance that we will be able to maintain compliance with NASDAQ continued listing standards, and Nasdaq has the ability to suspend trading in our common stock or remove our common stock from listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market for a variety of reasons under its continued listing standards. Any delisting from Nasdaq could result in further reductions in the market prices of our common stock, substantially limit the liquidity of our common stock, and materially adversely affect our ability to raise capital or pursue strategic restructuring, refinancing or other transactions on acceptable terms, or at all. Delisting from the Nasdaq Capital Market could also have other negative results, including the potential loss of institutional investor interest and fewer business development opportunities. In the event of a delisting, we would attempt to take actions to restore our compliance with Nasdaq’s listing requirements, but we can provide no assurance that any such action taken by us would allow our common stock to become listed again, stabilize the market price or improve the liquidity of our common stock, prevent our common stock from dropping below the Nasdaq minimum bid price requirement or prevent future non-compliance with Nasdaq’s listing requirements.
* Our failure to meet the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq could result in a delisting of our common stock, which could negatively impact the market price and liquidity of our common shares and our ability to access the capital markets.
Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market. If we fail to satisfy the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq, such as the corporate governance requirements or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq may take steps to delist our common stock. Such a delisting would have a negative effect on the price of our common stock and would impair the ability to sell or purchase our common stock when persons wish to do so.
On October 11, 2019, we received a notice from the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Department of The NASDAQ Capital Market (“Nasdaq”) that, because the closing bid price of our common stock had been below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive business days, we no longer complied with the minimum bid price requirement for continued listing on The Nasdaq Capital Market. Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Rule”) requires listed securities to maintain a minimum bid price of $1.00 per share, and Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A) provides that a failure to meet the minimum bid price requirement exists if the deficiency continues for a period of 30 consecutive business days. The Notice had no immediate effect on the listing or the trading of our common stock on The Nasdaq Capital Market. Pursuant to Nasdaq Marketplace Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), we were provided an initial compliance period of 180 calendar days, or until April 8, 2020, to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement. To regain compliance, the closing bid price of our common stock must meet or exceed $1.00 per share for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days during the 180 calendar day grace period. The Company received additional communications from Nasdaq in April 2020 that ultimately extended the deadline to regain compliance to December 21, 2020.
On August 5, 2020, we received a letter from the Listing Qualifications Department of Nasdaq notifying us that as a result of the closing bid price of the Company’s common stock having been at $1.00 per share or greater for at least ten consecutive business days, the Company had regained compliance with Nasdaq’s minimum bid price requirement under Nasdaq’s Marketplace Rule 5550(a)(2) for continued listing on The NASDAQ Capital Market, and the matter was now closed.
On September 29, 2020, we received a notice from Nasdaq notifying the Company that for 30 consecutive business days, the closing bid price of the Company’s common stock was below $1.00 per share and a result the Company no longer complied with the Rule. This notice has no immediate effect on the Company’s Nasdaq listing or the trading of its common stock. In accordance with Nasdaq Marketplace Rule and 5810(c)(3)(A), the Company has a period of 180 calendar days from the date of notification, or until March 29, 2021, to regain compliance. If at any time before March 29, 2021, the bid price of the Company’s common stock closes at or above $1.00 per share for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days, Nasdaq will provide written notification that the Company has achieved compliance with the minimum bid price requirement, and the matter would be resolved. The notice letter also disclosed that if the Company does not regain compliance within the initial compliance period, it may be eligible for an additional 180-day compliance period. To qualify for additional time, the Company would be required to meet the continued listing requirement for market value of publicly held shares and all other initial listing standards for The Nasdaq Capital Market, with the exception of the bid price requirement, and would need to provide written notice of a plan to cure the deficiency during the second compliance period. If the Company meets these requirements, Nasdaq will inform the Company that it has been granted an additional 180 calendar days to regain compliance. However, if it appears to the staff of Nasdaq that the Company will not be able to cure the deficiency, or if the Company is otherwise not eligible, the staff would notify the Company that it will not be granted additional 180 days for compliance and will be subject to delisting at that time. In the event of such notification, the Company may appeal the staff’s determination to delist its securities. There are no assurances that the Company will be able to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirements or will otherwise be in compliance with other Nasdaq listing rules. The Company intends to monitor the closing bid price for its common stock and will consider available strategies in an effort to satisfy the minimum bid price requirement.
Our common stock could become subject to additional trading restrictions as a “penny stock,” which could adversely affect the liquidity and price of such stock. If our common stock became subject to the SEC’s penny stock rules, broker-dealers may experience difficulty in completing customer transactions and trading activity in our securities may be adversely affected.
Prior to the listing of our common stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market, our common stock was traded on the OTCQB. The OTCQB, the OTC Bulletin Board and Pink Sheets are viewed by most investors as a less desirable, and less liquid, marketplace. As a result, if our common stock was delisted from the NASDAQ Capital Market and was traded on the OTCQB, the OTC Bulletin Board or the Pink Sheets, an investor could find it more difficult to purchase, dispose of or obtain accurate quotations as to the value of our common stock.
Unless our common stock is listed on a national securities exchange, such as the NASDAQ Capital Market, our common stock may also be subject to the regulations regarding trading in “penny stocks,” which are those securities trading for less than $5.00 per share, and that are not otherwise exempted from the definition of a penny stock under other exemptions provided for in the applicable regulations. The following is a list of the general restrictions on the sale of penny stocks:
|
|
●
|
Before the sale of penny stock by a broker-dealer to a new purchaser, the broker-dealer must determine whether the purchaser is suitable to invest in penny stocks. To make that determination, a broker-dealer must obtain, from a prospective investor, information regarding the purchaser’s financial condition and investment experience and objectives. Subsequently, the broker-dealer must deliver to the purchaser a written statement setting forth the basis of the suitability finding and obtain the purchaser’s signature on such statement.
|
|
|
●
|
A broker-dealer must obtain from the purchaser an agreement to purchase the securities. This agreement must be obtained for every purchase until the purchaser becomes an “established customer.”
|
|
|
●
|
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, requires that before effecting any transaction in any penny stock, a broker-dealer must provide the purchaser with a “risk disclosure document” that contains, among other things, a description of the penny stock market and how it functions and the risks associated with such investment. These disclosure rules are applicable to both purchases and sales by investors.
|
|
|
●
|
A dealer that sells penny stock must send to the purchaser, within 10 days after the end of each calendar month, a written account statement including prescribed information relating to the security.
|
These requirements can severely limit the liquidity of securities in the secondary market because fewer brokers or dealers are likely to be willing to undertake these compliance activities. If our common stock is not listed on a national securities exchange, the rules and restrictions regarding penny stock transactions may limit an investor’s ability to sell to a third party and our ability to raise additional capital. We make no guarantee that market-makers will make a market in our common stock, or that any market for our common stock will continue.
Our stockholders may experience significant dilution as a result of any additional financing using our securities, or as the result of the exercise or conversion of our outstanding securities.
In the future, to the extent that we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities or securities convertible into or exercisable for equity securities, our stockholders may experience significant dilution. In addition, conversion or exercise of other outstanding options, warrants or convertible securities could result in there being a significant number of additional shares outstanding and dilution to our stockholders. If additional funds are raised through the issuance of preferred stock, holders of preferred stock could have rights that are senior to the rights of holders of our common stock, and the agreements relating to any such issuance could contain covenants that would restrict our operations.
We have not paid cash dividends on our common stock in the past and do not expect to pay cash dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable future. Any return on investment may be limited to the value of our common stock.
No cash dividends have been paid on our common stock, and we do not expect to pay cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Payment of dividends would depend upon our profitability at the time, cash available for those dividends, and other factors as our board of directors may consider relevant. If we do not pay dividends, our common stock may be less valuable because a return on a stockholder’s investment will only occur if our stock price appreciates.
*A sale of a substantial number of shares of our common stock may cause the price of our common stock to decline and may impair our ability to raise capital in the future.
There have been and may continue to be periods when our common stock could be considered “thinly-traded,” meaning that the number of persons interested in purchasing our common stock at or near bid prices at any given time may be relatively small or non-existent. Finance transactions resulting in a large amount of newly issued shares that become readily tradable, conversion of outstanding convertible notes or exercise of outstanding warrants and sale of the shares issuable upon conversion of such notes or exercise of such warrants, issuance of shares following vesting of outstanding restricted stock units, or other events that cause stockholders to sell shares, could place downward pressure on the trading price of our stock. In addition, the lack of a robust resale market may require a stockholder who desires to sell a large number of shares of common stock to sell the shares in increments over time to mitigate any adverse impact of the sales on the market price of our stock. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell for various reasons, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline. Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock may make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and price that we deem reasonable or appropriate.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or if they change their recommendations regarding our stock adversely, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. We may never obtain substantial research coverage by industry or financial analysts. If no or few analysts commence or continue coverage of us, the trading price of our stock would likely decrease. Even if we do obtain analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade our stock, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.
The rights of the holders of common stock may be impaired by the potential issuance of preferred stock.
Our restated certificate of incorporation gives our board of directors the right to create new series of preferred stock. As a result, the board of directors may, without stockholder approval, issue preferred stock with voting, dividend, conversion, liquidation or other rights which could adversely affect the voting power and equity interest of the holders of common stock. Preferred stock, which could be issued with the right to more than one vote per share, could be utilized as a method of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change of control. The possible impact on takeover attempts could adversely affect the price of our common stock.
*Future sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or the possibility that such sales could occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
If in the future we sell additional equity securities to help satisfy funding requirements, those securities may be subject to registration rights or may include warrants with anti-dilutive protective provisions. Future sales in the public market of our common stock, or shares issued upon exercise of our outstanding stock options, warrants or convertible securities, or the perception by the market that these issuances or sales could occur, could lower the market price of our common stock or make it difficult for us to raise additional capital. Our stockholders may experience substantial dilution and a reduction in the price that they are able to obtain upon the sale of their shares. Also, new equity securities issued may have greater rights, preferences or privileges than our existing common stock.
As of September 30, 2020, we had 93,657,628 shares of common stock issued and outstanding, substantially all of which we believe may be sold publicly, subject in some cases to volume and other limitations, provisions or limitations in registration rights agreements, or prospectus-delivery or other requirements relating to the effectiveness and use of registration statements registering the resale of such shares.
As of September 30, 2020, we had reserved for issuance 6,590,387 shares of our common stock issuable upon the exercise of outstanding stock options under our equity incentive plans at a weighted-average exercise price of $4.31 per share, we had outstanding restricted stock units covering 2,345,630 shares of common stock, and we had outstanding exercisable warrants to purchase 24,634,670 shares of common stock at a weighted-average exercise price of $1.22 per share. Subject to applicable vesting requirements, upon exercise of these options or warrants or issuance of shares following vesting of the restricted stock units, the underlying shares may be resold into the public market, subject in some cases to volume and other limitations or prospectus delivery requirements pursuant to registration statements registering the resale of such shares. In the case of outstanding options or warrants that have exercise prices that are below the market price of our common stock from time to time, or upon issuance of shares following vesting of restricted stock units, our stockholders would experience dilution upon the exercise of these options.
*Exercise of our outstanding warrants may result in dilution to our stockholders.
As of September 30, 2020, we had outstanding warrants, other than the warrants described in the next sentence, to purchase 58,824 shares of common stock, at a weighted average exercise price of $8.50 per share. As of September 30, 2020, 13,800,000 shares of our common stock were issuable (subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations) upon exercise of warrants, at an exercise price of $1.15 per share, that we issued in connection with our underwritten public offering of common stock and warrants in August 2019; 8,700,000 shares of our common stock were issuable (subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations) upon exercise of warrants, at an exercise price of $0.70 per share, that we issued in connection with our private placement of warrants in February 2020 and 2,075,846 shares of our common stock were issuable (subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations) upon exercise of warrants that we issued in the following transactions: warrants to purchase 1,183,432 shares at an exercise price of $4.10 per share in our January 2016 Series A-1 Convertible Preferred Stock transaction; warrants to purchase 192,414 shares at an exercise price of $2.90 per share in our July 2016 Series A-2 Convertible Preferred transaction; and warrants to purchase 700,000 shares at an exercise price of $2.98 per share in our August 2016 registered direct offering of common stock and warrants.
*Our principal stockholders have significant influence over us, they may have significant influence over actions requiring stockholder approval, and your interests as a stockholder may conflict with the interests of those persons.
Based on
the number of outstanding shares of our common stock held by our stockholders as of September 30, 2020, our directors,
executive officers and their respective affiliates owned approximately 1.0% of our outstanding shares of common stock and we
believe that our largest stockholder owned approximately 3.7% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. As a result,
those stockholders have the ability to exert a significant degree of influence with respect to the outcome of matters
submitted to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors and any merger, consolidation or sale of all
or substantially all of our assets. The interests of these persons may not always coincide with our interests or the
interests of our other stockholders. This concentration of ownership could harm the market price of our common stock by (i)
delaying, deferring or preventing a change in corporate control, (ii) impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover or other
business combination involving us, or (iii) discouraging a potential acquirer from making a tender offer or otherwise
attempting to obtain control of us. The significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the trading price
of our common stock due to investors’ perception that conflicts of interest may exist or arise.
*Our Bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for a wide variety of disputes between us and our stockholders, and that the federal district courts of the United States of the America are the sole and exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. Exclusive forum provisions in our Bylaws could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.
Our Bylaws, as amended, provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for most legal actions involving actions brought against us by stockholders, including (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of the Company; (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of the Company to the Company or the Company’s stockholders; (iii) any action asserting a claim against the Company or any director or officer or other employee of the Company arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, the certificate of incorporation or the Bylaws of the Company, or as to which the Delaware General Corporation Law confers jurisdiction on the Courts of Chancery of the State of Delaware; or (iv) any action asserting a claim against the Company or any director or officer or other employee of the Company governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in all cases subject to the court’s having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants (including without limitation as a result of the consent of such indispensable party to the personal jurisdiction of such court). The Bylaws provide that the foregoing provisions do not apply to actions or suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. As a result, the exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. Our Bylaws do not relieve us of our duties to comply with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, and our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with these laws, rules and regulations. In addition, our Bylaws, as amended, provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the federal district courts of the United States of America shall be the sole and exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to these provisions.
Under the Securities Act, federal and state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act. There is uncertainty as to whether a court (other than state courts in the State of Delaware, where the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware decided in March 2020 that exclusive forum provisions for causes of action arising under the Securities Act are facially valid under Delaware law) would enforce forum selection provisions and whether investors can waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. We believe the forum selection provisions in Bylaws, as amended, may benefit us by providing increased consistency in the application of Delaware law and federal securities laws by chancellors and judges, as applicable, particularly experienced in resolving corporate disputes, efficient administration of cases on a more expedited schedule relative to other forums and protection against the burdens of multi-forum litigation. However, these provisions may have the effect of discouraging lawsuits against us and/or our directors, officers and employees as it may limit any stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that such stockholder finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees. In addition, stockholders who do bring a claim in the Court of Chancery in the State of Delaware could face additional litigation costs in pursuing any such claim, particularly if they do not reside in or near Delaware. The enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ charter documents has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that, in connection with any applicable action brought against us, a future court could find the choice of forum provisions contained in our Bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in such action. If a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our Bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
If we fail to comply with the rules under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 related to disclosure controls and procedures, or, if we discover material weaknesses and other deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting, our stock price could decline and raising capital could be more difficult.
If we fail to comply with the rules under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 related to disclosure controls and procedures, or, if we discover material weaknesses and other deficiencies in our internal control and accounting procedures, our stock price could decline significantly and raising capital could be more difficult. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. If material weaknesses or significant deficiencies are discovered or if we otherwise fail to achieve and maintain the adequacy of our internal control, we may not be able to ensure that we can conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Moreover, effective internal controls are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and are important to helping prevent financial fraud. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our business and operating results could be harmed, investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, and the trading price of our common stock could drop significantly.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over our financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act. In the future, our management may determine that our disclosure controls and procedures are ineffective or that there are one or more material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting, resulting in a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement to the annual or interim financial statements would not have been prevented or detected. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Accordingly, a material weakness increases the risk that the financial information we report contains material errors. Any system of internal controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Efforts to correct any material weaknesses or deficiencies that may be identified could require significant financial resources to address. Moreover, if remedial measures are insufficient to address the deficiencies that are determined to exist, we may fail to meet our future reporting obligations on a timely basis, our consolidated financial statements could contain material misstatements, we could be required to restate our prior period financial results, our operating results may be harmed, and we could become subject to class action litigation. Internal control deficiencies and ineffective disclosure controls and procedures could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information. We can give no assurance that any material weaknesses or restatements of financial results will not arise in the future due to a failure to implement and maintain adequate internal control over financial reporting or adequate disclosure controls and procedures or circumvention of these controls. In addition, controls and procedures may not be adequate to prevent or identify irregularities or errors or to facilitate the fair presentation of our consolidated financial statements. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our business and operating results could be harmed, investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, and the trading price of our common stock could decline. Failure to comply with reporting requirements could also subject us to sanctions and/or investigations by the SEC, the Nasdaq Stock Market or other regulatory authorities.