CYBI Cybex International, Inc. (MM)

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(unaudited)

NOTE 1 — BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Cybex International, Inc. (the “Company” or “Cybex”), a New York corporation, is a manufacturer of exercise equipment and develops, manufactures and markets strength and cardiovascular fitness equipment products for the commercial and, to a lesser extent, consumer markets. Most of the Company’s products are sold under the brand name “Cybex.” The Company operates in one business segment.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and, therefore, do not include all information and footnotes necessary for a complete presentation of financial position, results of operations and cash flows in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 29, 2012 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the entire year.

It is recommended that these consolidated financial statements be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and other information included in the Company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

On October 17, 2012, the Company’s Board of Directors approved an Agreement and Plan of Merger pursuant to which all of the Company’s outstanding common stock, exclusive of shares owned by the Company’s largest shareholder, UM Holdings, Ltd. (“UM”), its subsidiaries, and John Aglialoro and Joan Carter, would be converted into $2.55 per share payable in cash, in a “going private” merger transaction. Consummation of the merger is subject to various conditions, including shareholder approval of the Merger Agreement and consummation of financing. See Note 14 for a description of this transaction.

NOTE 2 — RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In June 2011, the FASB issued guidance to increase the prominence of other comprehensive income in the financial statements. This guidance eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in shareholders’ equity, and instead requires presentation of the statement of net income and other comprehensive income either in a continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. The standard also requires that items reclassified from other comprehensive income to net income be presented on the face of the financial statements. However, in December 2011, the FASB finalized a proposal to defer the requirement to present reclassifications from other comprehensive income to net income on the face of the financial statements and require that reclassification adjustments be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements, consistent with the existing disclosure requirements. The deferral does not change the requirement to present net income, components of other comprehensive income, and total comprehensive income in either one continuous statement or two separate but consecutive statements. This guidance was effective for the periods beginning after December 15, 2011 and early adoption was permitted. The Company adopted these requirements during 2011, with retrospective application to all periods presented, except with regard to the requirements to present reclassifications from other comprehensive income to net income on the face of the financial statements. The adoption of this guidance did not have any impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

6

Table of Contents

NOTE 3 — CONCENTRATION OF RISK AND GEOGRAPHIC SEGMENT DATA

Sales to one customer represented 15% of consolidated net sales for the three and nine months ended September 29, 2012 and 13% of consolidated net sales for the three and nine months ended September 24, 2011, respectively. Accounts receivable from this customer were $1,556,000 and $1,641,000 at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Sales to another customer represented 12% and 11% of consolidated net sales for the three and nine months ended September 29, 2012 and 8% and 9% of consolidated net sales for the three and nine months ended September 24, 2011, respectively. Accounts receivable from this customer were $2,923,000 and $2,252,000 at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. No other single customer accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s net sales in any of those periods.

Sales outside of North America represented 32% of consolidated net sales for the three and nine months ended September 29, 2012 and 32% of consolidated net sales for the three and nine months ended September 24, 2011, respectively. No single country besides the United States accounts for greater than 10% of consolidated net sales.

NOTE 4 — ACCOUNTING FOR GUARANTEES

The Company arranges equipment leases and other financings for certain of its customers. While most of these financings are without recourse, in certain cases the Company may offer a guarantee or other recourse provisions. In such situations, the Company ensures that the transaction between the independent leasing company and the end user customer represents a sales-type lease. The Company monitors the payment status of the lessee under these arrangements and provides a reserve in situations when collection of the lease payments is not probable. At September 29, 2012, the maximum contingent liability under all recourse and guarantee provisions was approximately $2,023,000. A reserve for estimated losses under recourse provisions of $126,000 and $203,000 has been recorded based on historical experience, and is included in accrued liabilities at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

The Company as guarantor will recognize, at the inception of certain guarantees, a liability for the fair value of the obligation undertaken in issuing such guarantees. The Company has recorded a net liability of $16,000 and $27,000 at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, for the estimated fair value of the Company’s guarantees. The fair value of the guarantees is determined based on the estimated cost for a customer to obtain a letter of credit from a bank or similar institution. This liability is reduced on a straight-line basis over the term of each respective guarantee. In most cases, if the Company is required to fulfill its obligations under the guarantee, it has the right to repossess the equipment from the customer. It is not practicable to estimate the approximate amount of proceeds that would be generated from the sale of these assets in such situations.

Additionally, the Company provides a warranty on its products for labor of one to three years and for parts ranging from one to ten years depending on the part and type of equipment. The accrued warranty obligation is provided at the time of product sale based on management estimates which are developed from historical information and certain assumptions about future events, which are subject to change.

The following table sets forth the change in the reserve for product warranties during the nine months ended September 29, 2012:

7

Table of Contents

NOTE 5 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

The Company records stock-based compensation to recognize the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments, with such cost recognized over the period that the employee is required to perform services in exchange for the award. The Company measures the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award based on the grant date fair value of the award.

For the three months ended September 29, 2012, the Company recorded stock-based compensation expense of $15,000 consisting of expenses related to stock options ($10,000) and stock issued to directors ($5,000). For the nine months ended September 29, 2012, the Company recorded stock-based compensation expense of $42,000, consisting of expenses related to stock options ($30,000) and stock issued to directors ($12,000). For the three months ended September 24, 2011, the Company recorded stock-based compensation expense of $42,000, consisting of expenses related to stock options ($39,000) and stock issued to directors ($3,000). For the nine months ended September 24, 2011, the Company recorded stock-based compensation expense of $130,000, consisting of expenses related to stock options ($122,000) and stock issued to directors ($8,000).

Cybex’s 2005 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Omnibus Plan”) is designed to provide incentives that will attract and retain individuals key to the success of the Company through direct or indirect ownership of the Company’s common stock. The Omnibus Plan provides for the granting of stock options, stock appreciation rights, stock awards, performance awards and bonus stock purchase awards. The Company reserved 1,000,000 shares of common stock for issuance pursuant to the Omnibus Plan. A registration statement was filed for the Omnibus Plan and the Company provides newly-issued shares of registered common stock upon the exercise of options and upon stock grants under the Omnibus Plan.

The terms and conditions of each award are determined by a committee of the Board of Directors of the Company. Under the Omnibus Plan, the committee may grant either qualified or nonqualified stock options with a term not to exceed ten years from the grant date and at an exercise price per share that the committee may determine (which in the case of incentive stock options may not be less than the fair market value of a share of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant). The options generally vest over a three to five year period (with some cliff vesting).

A summary of the status of the Company’s stock option plans as of September 29, 2012 is presented below:

The intrinsic value of options exercised in the three months ended September 29, 2012 and September 24, 2011 was $1,000 and $0, respectively. The intrinsic value of options exercised in the nine months ended September 29, 2012 and September 24, 2011 was $1,000 and $0, respectively.

As of September 29, 2012, there was $78,000 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation arrangements, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.68 years.

At September 29, 2012, there are 613,000 shares available for future issuance pursuant to the 2005 Omnibus Incentive Plan.

8

Table of Contents

In June 2007, a $13,000,000 mortgage loan was advanced to the Company pursuant to the loan agreement (the “Citizens Loan Agreement”) with RBS Citizens, National Association (“Citizens”). The proceeds of this loan were used to finance a portion of the acquisition of an approximate 340,000 square foot manufacturing, office and warehouse facility located in Owatonna, Minnesota. The principal of the Owatonna real estate loan is being retired by eighty-three equal monthly payments of $43,000 along with a balloon payment of $9,403,000 at July 2, 2014.

In July 2008, the Company entered into a credit agreement (the “Citizens Credit Agreement”) with Citizens, providing for a revolving line of credit of up to the lesser of a ceiling or an amount determined by reference to a borrowing base composed of designated percentages of the Company’s eligible accounts receivable and eligible inventory.

In March 2012, the Citizens Credit Agreement and Loan Agreement were amended to among other things increase the ceiling of the revolving line of credit under the Credit Agreement to $18,000,000 and provide under the Loan Agreement an additional $8,122,000 mortgage loan on the Company’s Medway facility. This additional borrowing capacity was used in part to finance a portion of the March 2012 settlement payments in the Barnhard product liability suit (see Note 12). The principal of the Medway real estate loan is being retired by sixty equal monthly payments of $45,000 along with a balloon payment of $5,415,000 at March 15, 2017.

Availability under the revolving loan fluctuates daily based on the borrowing base, and is reduced by outstanding advances and letters of credit. At September 29, 2012, the net availability under the revolving line of credit was $16,869,000. The Citizens revolving line of credit is available to July 2, 2013.

In June 2010, the Company entered into a Master Lease Agreement (the “Citizens Equipment Facility”) with an affiliate of Citizens, RBS Asset Finance, Inc. (referred to herein as “Citizens”), pursuant to which $4,999,000 of equipment lease financing was advanced. Proceeds of the advance were used to retire in full equipment term loans from Wells Fargo Bank, NA (“Wells Fargo”) and related obligations. The Citizens Equipment Facility is being retired by 60 equal monthly payments of fixed rent plus interest. While the documentation for this transaction is structured as a lease, the advances under the facility are treated for all purposes as a loan.

9

Table of Contents

The Citizens real estate loans and revolving line of credit are secured by substantially all of the Company’s assets. Amounts outstanding under the Citizens Equipment Facility are secured by designated equipment owned by the Company and cross-collateralized by the Company’s accounts receivable and inventory.

The Citizens revolving line of credit and Owatonna real estate loan bore interest from June 30, 2009 to March 15, 2012 at LIBOR plus 2.5% to 3.0% based on a performance grid. From March 15, 2012, the Citizens Owatonna and Medway real estate loans bear interest at LIBOR plus 2.5% and the Citizens revolving line of credit bears interest at LIBOR plus 2.0% to 3.75% based on a performance grid. The Citizens Equipment Facility bears interest at a floating rate equal to LIBOR plus 3%. LIBOR was .21% at September 29, 2012.

There were no revolving loans outstanding during the nine months ended September 24, 2011. The average outstanding revolving loan balance during the nine months ended September 29, 2012 was $1,087,000.

The Company’s credit facilities require the Company to maintain various financial covenants. At September 29, 2012, the Company was in compliance with all financial covenants included within the credit facilities. While there can be no assurance, the Company believes that it will remain in compliance with its financing agreements during at least the next twelve months.

The Company’s various credit agreements contain cross default provisions.

At September 29, 2012 long-term debt maturities are as follows:

NOTE 8 — DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES

The Company uses certain financial derivatives to mitigate its exposure to volatility in interest rates. The Company uses these derivative instruments to hedge exposures in the ordinary course of business and does not invest in derivative instruments for speculative purposes.

Interest rate swap agreements are utilized to reduce the impact of changes in interest rates on certain debt. These agreements were designated as cash flow hedges, therefore, the unrealized gains and losses are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss.

In June 2006, the Company entered into a forward starting interest rate swap agreement with Citizens which commenced on June 29, 2007 to hedge the LIBOR-based Citizens Owatonna real estate loan. The notional amount of the swap amortizes based on the same amortization schedule as the Citizens Owatonna real estate loan and the hedged item (one-month LIBOR) is the same as the basis for the interest rate on the loan. The swap effectively converts the rate from a floating rate based on LIBOR to a fixed rate which from June 30, 2009 to March 15, 2012 equaled 8.25% or 8.75% based on a performance grid and from March 15, 2012 equals 8.25%. The swap and interest payments on the debt settle monthly. The real estate loan and the swap both mature on July 2, 2014. There was no initial cost of the interest rate swap. The Company designates the interest rate swap as a derivative hedging instrument and, accordingly, changes in the fair value of this swap are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss.

10

Table of Contents

The following table presents the fair values of derivatives included within the consolidated balance sheets:

The following table presents the amounts affecting the consolidated statements of operations and accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for the three and nine months ended September 29, 2012 and September 24, 2011, respectively:

See Note 9 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments for a description of how the above financial instruments are valued.

The Company is exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties to these financial instruments. The counterparties to all derivative transactions are major financial institutions with investment grade credit ratings, and although no assurances can be given, the Company does not expect any of the counterparties to fail to meet its obligations. The credit exposure related to these financial instruments is represented by the fair value of contracts with a positive fair value at the reporting date. Therefore, the Company had no exposure to its counterparties as of September 29, 2012.

For the cash flow hedges referred to above, the amounts in accumulated other comprehensive loss are reclassified into earnings as the underlying hedged item affects earnings. Based on current interest rates, the amount expected to be reclassified into pre-tax earnings in the next twelve months is $227,000. The timing of actual amounts reclassified into earnings is dependent on future movement in interest rates.

NOTE 9 — FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

The Company’s financial instruments consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, long-term debt and derivative instruments. The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable are considered to be representative of their respective fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments. Based on the terms of the Company’s debt instruments, as amended, that are outstanding as of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, the carrying values are considered to approximate their respective fair values. See Note 7 for the terms and carrying values of the Company’s various debt instruments.

The following table presents the Company’s financial assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value

11

Table of Contents

on a recurring basis as of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, and are categorized using the fair value hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy has three levels based on the reliability of the inputs used to determine fair value and is described below:

The level in the fair value hierarchy within which a fair value measurement in its entirety falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. There were no transfers between levels 1, 2, or 3 during 2012 or 2011.

The valuation of the interest rate swap agreement is based on quoted prices from the counterparty that values this instrument using proprietary models and market information at the date presented, as well as consideration of the impact of the risk of non-performance of the counterparty and the Company.

There were no non-financial assets or liabilities subject to measurement at fair value on a non-recurring basis at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

NOTE 10 — STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Preferred Stock:

The Company’s Board has the ability to issue, without approval by the common shareholders, up to 500,000 shares of $1 par value preferred stock having rights and preferences as the Board may determine in its sole discretion.

Common Stock:

At September 29, 2012, there are 1,299,125 shares of common stock reserved for future issuance pursuant to the exercise or issuance of stock options and warrants.

Warrants:

On March 15, 2012, the Company issued to Citizens Bank a warrant to purchase 75,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.10 per share in connection with the March 2012 financing described in Note 7. The warrant has a term of ten years. The fair value of the warrant of $163,000 was recorded as a deferred financing cost which is being amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.

Comprehensive Income (Loss):

Comprehensive Income (loss) is the change in equity of a business enterprise from transactions and other events and circumstances from non-owner sources. Excluding net income (loss), the components of comprehensive income (loss) are from foreign currency translation adjustments and changes in the fair value of hedging instruments.

12

Table of Contents

The following summarizes the components of accumulated other comprehensive loss at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011:

For the three and nine months ended September 29, 2012, options and warrants to purchase 221,000 and 193,000 shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.51 to $7.37 per share and $1.81 - $7.37 per share, respectively, were outstanding but were not included in the computation of diluted net income per share as the result would be anti-dilutive. For the three and nine months ended September 24, 2011, options to purchase 679,875 shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.17 to $7.37 per share were outstanding but were not included in the calculation of diluted net loss per share as the result would be anti-dilutive.

NOTE 12 — CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

Barnhard v. Cybex International, Inc., et al.

This product liability litigation was commenced in 2005 in the Supreme Court, Eighth District, State of New York. The plaintiff, who was rendered a quadriplegic after she pulled a Cybex weight machine over onto herself, asserted that Cybex was at fault for the accident due to the design of the machine and a failure to warn. On December 7, 2010, the jury returned a $66 million verdict, apportioned 75% to Cybex, 20% to third party defendant Amherst Orthopedic Physical Therapy, P.C. and 5% to the plaintiff.

In April 2011, a judgment was entered for $63,075,000 against Cybex. Under New York law, Cybex was responsible for payment of the judgment but could seek reimbursement from the third party defendant of approximately 21% of its payments on the judgment. The Company filed an appeal of the judgment with the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, and in May 2011, the Appellate Division granted the

13

Table of Contents

Company’s motion for a stay of enforcement of the Barnhard judgment during the pendency of the Company’s appeals, subject to the posting of $10,000,000 of collateral. In November 2011, the Appellate Division reduced the judgment to approximately $44 million and otherwise affirmed the judgment.

In February 2012, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. Pursuant to this settlement, Cybex in March 2012 paid to the plaintiff $18,500,000 and agreed to pay an additional sum of approximately $1,000,000 over seven years, the parties provided cross-releases of all claims, and a satisfaction of judgment has been recorded. The Company recorded a reduction of the related litigation charge in the fourth quarter of 2011 to reflect the settlement of the litigation. At September 29, 2012, the net present value of the future amounts payable to the plaintiff is $817,000, of which $144,000 is included in accrued liabilities and $673,000 is included in other long-term liabilities.

United Leasing, Inc. v. Cybex International, Inc., et al.

The Company on February 25, 2009 was served with an Amended Complaint which added the Company and its wholly owned subsidiary, Cybex Capital Corp. (collectively with the Company referred to herein as Cybex), as additional defendants in this action originally venued in the Circuit Court for Williamson County, State of Tennessee. The plaintiff, United Leasing, Inc., provided a series of lease financings for the sale of Cybex equipment to a purchaser/lessee which has since entered bankruptcy, many of which sales were made by an independent dealer, also a defendant in the action. The plaintiff alleged that it was induced to finance in excess of the purchase price for certain of the equipment based primarily upon alleged rebates to the purchaser/lessee made by the independent dealer. Cybex Capital assisted in the lease financing and the plaintiff asserted that Cybex participated in the alleged scheme and was liable for any resulting damages. During March 2009, this action was removed to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.

In January 2011, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. Pursuant to this settlement, Cybex paid to the plaintiff the sum of $938,000, the parties provided cross-releases of all claims and the litigation has been dismissed with prejudice.

Other

The Company is involved in certain other legal actions, contingencies and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate disposition of these other matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Legal fees related to those matters are charged to expense as incurred.

Product Liability

As a manufacturer of fitness products, the Company is inherently subject to the hazards and uncertainties of product liability litigation. The Company has maintained, and expects to continue to maintain, product liability insurance, and it includes reserves for self insured retention in accrued liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets. The Company’s product liability insurance, which is on a claims made basis, provides an aggregate of $25,000,000 of annual coverage for claims made on or after December 1, 2011, $10,000,000 of annual coverage for claims made on or after December 1, 2008 and before December 1, 2011, and $5,000,000 of annual coverage for claims made prior to December 1, 2008. The amount of coverage for a claim is reduced as payments are made under the policy for that policy year. These policies include a deductible of $250,000 per claim ($100,000 for claims between December 1, 2007 and December 1, 2008), with an annual aggregate deductible of $1,000,000 on claims made on or after December 1, 2008 and $750,000 on claims made prior to December 1, 2008.

While the Company believes that its insurance coverage is adequate in light of the risks of product liability claims and awards, the Company may be subject to product liability claims which assert damages

14

Table of Contents

materially in excess of the limits of its insurance coverage. In December 2010, a significant jury verdict was rendered in the Barnhard product liability suit discussed above. This matter was settled in 2012 for an amount substantially in excess of the insurance coverage available for this claim, which had been asserted in 2005 at a time during which the annual coverage was $5,000,000.

The Company records a reserve for the self insured retention portion of product liability matters for which it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the range of the loss can be determined, and a corresponding insurance receivable to the extent the product liability exposure is recoverable from the Company’s insurance carrier. Excluding the Barnhard matter, the product liability claims accrual is included as a component of accrued liabilities ($1,785,000 and $1,934,000 at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively) and other long-term liabilities ($169,000 and $859,000 at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively) and the insurance recoverable is included as a component of other assets ($169,000 and $859,000 at September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively). In addition, the Company recorded a $27,004,000 litigation reserve at December 31, 2011, as a current liability pertaining to the Barnhard judgment and settlement, and a corresponding litigation related receivable of $7,561,000, representing the amount recoverable in the matter from the third party defendant and under the Company’s insurance policies. The Company reviews and adjusts each product liability claim and corresponding receivable on a quarterly basis.

NOTE 13 — INCOME TAXES

For the nine months ended September 29, 2012 and September 24, 2011, an income tax benefit of (16.5%) of income before taxes and an income tax benefit of (24.7%) of loss before taxes was recorded, totaling ($49,000) and ($149,000), respectively. The amount of income tax benefit for the nine months ended September 29, 2012 is comprised of the reduction in the amount of federal and state income taxes paid in the prior year compared to the amount provided, primarily due to timing of expense payments, offset by the amount of state taxes currently payable. During the first quarter of 2011, a refund of federal alternative minimum taxes paid in the prior year of $257,000 was received, which was recorded as a benefit in the current period since it was fully reserved at December 31, 2010. This was offset by state and federal alternative minimum taxes payable of $108,000 during the nine months ended September 24, 2011.

At December 31, 2011, U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $9,535,000 were available to offset future taxable income and, as of such date, the Company had foreign net operating loss carryforwards of $6,626,000, which have an unlimited life, federal alternative minimum tax credit carryforwards of $539,000, which do not expire, and federal research and development tax credit carryforwards of $490,000, which begin to expire in 2021 and various net operating loss and credit carryforwards for state tax purposes. The U.S. federal operating loss carryforwards begin to expire in 2021. These amounts do not include the settlement payment in the Barnhard matter (see Note 12) of $18,500,000 that was made in March 2012, which is deductible in 2012.

The Company established a valuation allowance to fully offset net deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2010 due to the uncertainty created by the unfavorable Barnhard jury verdict. A valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is recorded to the extent it cannot be determined that the realization of these assets is more likely than not. Since the March 2012 settlement payment in the Barnhard litigation will increase the Company’s net operating loss carryforwards by $18,500,000, and since the Company incurred cumulative losses during the three year period ended September 29, 2012, it was determined that a valuation allowance against the entire amount of deferred tax assets continues to be appropriate as of September 29, 2012. Therefore, the Company’s net deferred tax assets of $18,256,000 are fully reserved as of September 29, 2012, and the need for this valuation allowance will be assessed in future periods. As of September 29, 2012, approximately $47,000,000 of future taxable income is needed to fully realize the Company’s deferred tax assets. The difference between this figure and the net operating loss carryforwards and credits is primarily cumulative book versus tax differences related to various expenses.

15

Table of Contents

The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, the United Kingdom and various state jurisdictions. The Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal, United Kingdom and state income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 2007.

The Company has evaluated any uncertain tax positions in its federal income tax return, United Kingdom return and the state tax returns it is currently filing. The Company has also made an evaluation of the potential impact of additional state taxes being assessed by jurisdictions in which the Company does not currently consider itself liable. Based on this analysis, there has been a decrease of $101,000 in the balance of unrecognized tax liability for the nine months ended September 29, 2012, which is $221,000 as of September 29, 2012.