UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
| x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| |
| For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 |
| |
| OR |
| |
| o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from _____________
to ______________
Commission File Number 001-33718
BIOHEART, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in
its charter)
| Florida |
|
65-0945967 |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or
organization) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification
No.) |
13794 NW 4th Street, Suite
212, Sunrise, Florida 33325
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including
area code (954) 835-1500
Securities registered pursuant to Section
12(b) of the Act:
None
Securities registered pursuant to Section
12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value
Indicate by check mark if the
registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o
No x
Indicate by check mark if the registrant
is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o
No x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
(1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark whether
registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to
be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). x Yes o
No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of
delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment
to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of
“large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act.
| Large accelerated filer o |
Accelerated filer o |
Non-accelerated filer o |
Smaller reporting company x |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o No x
As of June 30, 2014, the last day of registrant’s second
fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock, $0.001 par value, held by non-affiliates, computed
by reference to the closing sale price of the common stock reported on the OTCQB as of June 30, 2014, was approximately $10,546,291.00.
For purposes of the above statement only, all directors, executive officers and 10% shareholders are assumed to be affiliates.
This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
The number of shares outstanding of the
registrant’s Common Stock, $0.001 par value, as of March 16th, 2015 was 647,653,526.
Documents Incorporated By Reference
None
BIOHEART, INC.
INDEX TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2014
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This Annual Report
on Form 10-K includes “forward-looking” statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of 1995, as well as historical information. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and
other factors which may cause our actual results, performance or achievements, or industry results, to be materially different
from anticipated results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. When used in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K, statements that are not statements of current or historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking
statements. Without limiting the foregoing, the words “plan,” “intend,” “may,” “will,”
“expect,” “believe,” “could,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” or “continue”
or similar expressions or other variations or comparable terminology are intended to identify such forward-looking statements,
although some forward-looking statements are expressed differently. We remind readers that forward-looking statements are merely
predictions and therefore inherently subject to uncertainties and other factors and involve known and unknown risks that could
cause the actual results, performance, levels of activity or our achievements or industry results, to be materially different from
any future results, performance levels of activity or our achievements or industry results expressed or implied by such forward-looking
statements. Such forward looking statements appear in Item 1- “Business” and Item 7-“Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” as well as elsewhere in this Annual Report. Factors that could
cause our actual results to differ materially from anticipated results expressed or implied by forward-looking statements include,
among others:
• our ability to manage our business despite operating
losses and cash outflows;
• our ability to obtain sufficient capital or strategic
business arrangements to fund our operations and expansion plans, including meeting our financial obligations under various licensing
and other strategic arrangements and the funding of our clinical trials for product candidates in our development programs;
• our ability to build and maintain the management and
human resources infrastructure necessary to support the growth of our business;
• our ability to operate our subsidiary businesses successfully
and grow such subsidiary businesses as anticipated;
• whether a large global market is established for our
cellular-based products and services and our ability to capture a meaningful share of this market;
• scientific and medical developments beyond our control;
• our ability to obtain and maintain, as applicable, appropriate
governmental licenses, accreditations or certifications or comply with healthcare laws and regulations or any other adverse effect
or limitations caused by government regulation of our business;
• whether any of our current or future patent applications
result in issued patents, the scope of those patents and our ability to obtain and maintain other rights to technology required
or desirable for the conduct of our business; and
• our ability to complete our planned clinical trials (or
initiate other trials) in accordance with our estimated timelines due to delays associated with obtaining sufficient capital to
complete such trials, enrolling patients due to the novelty of the treatment, the size of the patient population and the need of
patients to meet the inclusion criteria of the trial or otherwise.
The factors discussed herein, including
those selected risks described in Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in the
Company’s other periodic filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) which are available for review
at www.sec.gov under “Search for Company Filings” could cause actual results and developments to be materially
different from those expressed or implied by such statements. All forward-looking statements attributable to us are expressly qualified
in their entirety by these and other factors. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements,
which speak only as of the date hereof. Except as required by law, the Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking
statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Unless otherwise
indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this Form 10-K to “we,” “us,”
“our,” “our company,” “Bioheart” or the “Company” refer to Bioheart, Inc. and
its subsidiaries.
PART I
Item 1. BUSINESS
OVERVIEW
Bioheart, Inc. is an
emerging enterprise in the regenerative medicine / cellular therapy industry. We are focused on the discovery, development and
commercialization of cell based therapeutics that prevent, treat or cure disease by repairing and replacing damaged or aged tissue,
cells and organs and restoring their normal function. We believe that regenerative medicine / cellular therapeutics will play a
large role in positively changing the natural history of diseases ultimately, we contend, lessening patient burdens as well as
reducing the associated economic impact disease imposes upon modern society.
Our business includes
the development of proprietary cell therapy products as well as revenue generating physician and patient based regenerative medicine
/ cell therapy training services, cell collection and cell storage services, the sale of cell collection and treatment kits for
humans and animals, and the operation of a cell therapy clinic. Management maintains that revenues and their associated cash in-flows
generated from our businesses will, over time, provide funds to support our clinical development activities as they do today for
our general business operations. We believe the combination of our own therapeutics pipeline combined with our revenue generating
capabilities provides the Company with a unique opportunity for growth and a pathway to profitability.
US Stem Cell Training,
(“SCT”), an operating division of Bioheart, Inc., is a content developer of regenerative medicine / cell therapy informational
and training materials for physicians and patients. SCT also provides in-person and online training courses which are delivered
through in-person presentations at SCT’s state of the art facilities and globally at university, hospital and physician’s
office locations as well as through online
webinars. Additionally, SCT provides hands-on
clinical application training for physicians and health care professionals interested in providing regenerative medicine / cell
therapy procedures.
Vetbiologics, (“VBI”),
an operating division of Bioheart, Inc., is a veterinary regenerative medicine company committed to providing veterinarians with
the ability to deliver the highest quality regenerative medicine therapies to dogs, cats and horses. VBI provides veterinarians
with extensive regenerative medicine capabilities including the ability to isolate regenerative stem cells from a patient’s
own adipose (fat) tissue directly on-site within their own clinic or stall-side. Regenerative stem cells isolated from adipose
tissue have been shown in studies (Harman, 2007 and 2009) to be effective in treating animal’s suffering from osteoarthritis,
joint diseases, tendon injuries, and heart disorders, among other conditions.
VBI
regenerative medicine technologies are designed, implemented and produced according to the highest standards. VBI follows the FDA
guidelines for human cellular therapy production which means each product produced must be validated and must pass stringent criteria.
The VBI cell isolation process has been designed by leading stem cell scientists and implemented in a manner consistent with FDA
guidelines. All VBI kits are manufactured according to the FDA Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) standards. VBI utilizes
high quality reagents that are consistently screened by stem cell scientists to ensure the highest yield of regenerative cells
per tissue sample.
US
Stem Cell Clinic, LLC, (“SCC”), a partially owned investment of Bioheart, Inc., is a physician run regenerative medicine
/ cell therapy clinic providing cellular treatments for patients afflicted with neurological, autoimmune, orthopedic and degenerative
diseases. SCC is operating in compliance with the FDA 1271s which allow for same day medical procedures to be considered the practice
of medicine. We isolate stem cells from bone marrow and adipose tissue and also utilize platelet rich plasma.
Bioheart’s
comprehensive map of products and services:
Bioheart was incorporated
in the State of Florida in August 1999. Our principal executive offices are located at 13794 NW 4th Street, Suite 212, Sunrise,
Florida 33325 and our telephone number is (954) 835-1500. Information about us is available on our corporate websites at www.bioheartinc.com,
www.usstemcelltraining.com, www.vetbiologics.com and www.usstemcellclinic.com. We include our website addresses in the Annual
Report on Form 10-K only as an interactive textual reference and do not intend it to be an active link to our website. The information
on our websites is not incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The Annual Report includes
the following trademarks, service marks and trade names owned by the Company: Bioheart, Inc. ™, US Stem Cell Training, Vetbiologics,
US Stem Cell Clinic, LLC. ™, MyoCell ™ and AdipoCell ™. These trademarks, service marks and trade names are the
property of Bioheart, Inc. and its affiliates.
REGENERATIVE MEDICINE / CELL THERAPY
INDUSTRY
Regenerative medicine
is defined as the process of replacing or regenerating human cells, tissues or organs to restore normal function. Among the categories
of therapeutic technology platforms within this field are cell therapy; tissue engineering; tools, devices and diagnostics; and
aesthetic medicine. Bioheart’s business model is focused on two of these areas. First, cell therapy, in which we introduce cells
(adult, donor or patient, stem cell or differentiated) into the body to prevent and treat disease; and second, we are a provider
of services and products to physicians and veterinaries who provide or seek to provide cellular therapies and direct patient care
for individuals and animals who may benefit from cellular therapy.
All living complex
organisms start as a single cell that replicates, differentiates (matures) and perpetuates in an adult organism through its lifetime.
Cellular therapy is the process that uses cells to prevent, treat or cure disease, or regenerate damaged or aged tissue. To date,
the most common type of cell therapy has been the replacement of mature, functioning cells such as through blood and platelet transfusions.
Since the 1970s, first bone marrow and then blood and umbilical cord-derived stem cells have been used to restore bone marrow,
as well as blood and immune system cells damaged by the chemotherapy and radiation that are used to treat many cancers. These types
of cell therapies are standard practice world-wide and are typically reimbursed by insurance.
Within the field of
cell therapy, research and development using stem cells to treat a host of diseases and conditions has greatly expanded. Stem cells
(in either embryonic or adult forms) are primitive and undifferentiated cells that have the unique ability to transform into or
otherwise affect many different cells, such as white blood cells, nerve cells or heart muscle cells. Bioheart’s cell therapy development
efforts are focused on the use of adult stem cells; those cells which are found in the muscle, fat tissue and peripheral blood.
There are two general
classes of cell therapies: Patient Specific Cell Therapies (“PSCTs”) and Off-the-Shelf Cell Therapies (“OSCTs”).
In PSCTs, cells collected from a person (“donor”) are transplanted, with or without modification, to a patient (“recipient”).
In cases where the donor and the recipient are the same individual, these procedures are referred to as “autologous”.
In cases in which the donor and the recipient are not the same individual, these procedures are referred to as “allogeneic.”
Autologous cells offer a low likelihood of rejection by the patient and we believe the long-term benefits of these PSCTs can best
be achieved with an autologous product. In the case of OSCT, donor cells are expanded many fold in tissue culture, and large banks
of cells are frozen in individual aliquots that may result in treatments for as many as 10,000 people from a single donor tissue.
By definition, OSCTs are always allogeneic in nature.
Various adult stem
cell therapies are in clinical development for an array of human diseases, including autoimmune, oncologic, neurologic and orthopedic,
among other indications. While no assurances can be given regarding future medical developments, we believe that the field of cell
therapy holds the promise to better the human experience and minimize or ameliorate the pain and suffering from many common diseases
and/or from the process of aging.
According to Robin
R. Young’s Stem Cell Summit Executive Summary-Analysis and Market Forecasts 2014-2024, the United States stem cell therapy
market is estimated to grow from an estimated $237 million in 2013 to more than $5.7 billion in 2020.
With approved cell
therapy products currently being sold in the United States and abroad, and an increasing number of Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials with
cell therapies underway, we believe the “promise” of cell therapy is becoming clearer. We contend that cell therapies,
if approved, should cut health care costs as they aim to facilitate functional restoration of damaged tissues and not just abate
or moderate symptoms. Safe and efficacious cell therapies for chronic diseases could potentially capture an increasing portion
of future healthcare spending in the United States, driven both by favorable demographics and meaningful pharmacoeconomic benefit.
Cellular
Therapy Product Development Pipeline
Specific to cellular
therapy, we are focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of autologous cellular therapies for the treatment
of chronic and acute heart damage as well as vascular and autoimmune diseases.
In our pipeline, we
have multiple product candidates for the treatment of heart damage, including MyoCell and Myocell SDF-1. MyoCell and MyoCell SDF-1
are autologous muscle-derived cellular therapies designed to populate regions of scar tissue within a patient’s heart with
new living cells for the purpose of improving cardiac function in chronic heart failure patients.
MyoCell SDF-1 is intended
to be an improvement to MyoCell. MyoCell SDF-1 is similar to MyoCell but the myoblast cells to be injected for use in MyoCell SDF-1
are modified prior to injection by an adenovirus vector or non-viral vector so that they will release extra quantities of the SDF-1
protein, which expresses angiogenic factors.
AdipoCell is a patient-derived
cell therapy proposed for the treatment of lower limb ischemia and potentially, among other autoimmune diseases, rheumatoid arthritis.
We hope to demonstrate that these product candidates are safe and effective complements to existing therapies for chronic and acute
heart damage.
Bioheart’s Clinical Development Pipeline Chart:
Status of Cellular
Therapy Product Development Clinical Trials.
MyoCell/MyoCell SDF-1
MyoCell is a regenerative,
cellular therapy intended to improve cardiac function for those with congestive heart failure and is designed to be utilized months
or even years after a patient has suffered severe heart damage due to a heart attack or other cause. We believe that MyoCell has
the potential to become a leading treatment for severe, chronic damage to the heart due to its perceived ability to satisfy, at
least in part, what we believe to be an unmet demand for more effective and/or more affordable therapies for chronic heart damage.
MyoCell uses myoblasts, cells that are precursors to muscle cells, from the patient’s own body. The myoblasts are removed
from a patient’s thigh muscle, isolated, grown through our proprietary cell culturing process, and injected directly in the
scar tissue of a patient’s heart. A qualified physician performs this minimally invasive procedure using an endoventricular
catheter. We entered into an agreement with Biosense Webster (a Johnson & Johnson company) to use its NOGA® Cardiac Navigation
System along with its MyoStar™ injection catheter for the delivery of MyoCell in the MARVEL Trial.
When injected into scar
tissue within the heart wall, myoblasts have been shown to be capable of engrafting in the damaged tissue and differentiating into
mature skeletal muscle cells. In a number of clinical and animal studies, the engrafted skeletal muscle cells have been shown to
express various proteins that are important components of contractile function. By using myoblasts obtained from a patient’s
own body, we believe MyoCell is
able to avoid certain challenges currently
faced by other types of cell-based clinical therapies including tissue rejection and instances of the cells differentiating into
cells other than muscle. Although a number of therapies have proven to improve the cardiac function of a damaged heart, no currently
available treatment, to our knowledge, has demonstrated an ability to generate new muscle tissue within the scarred regions of
a heart.
Our completed clinical
trials of MyoCell to date have been primarily targeted to patients with severe, chronic damage to the heart who are in Class II
or Class III heart failure according to the New York Heart Association, or NYHA, heart failure classification system. The NYHA
system classifies patients in one of four categories based on how limited they are during physical activity. NYHA Class II heart
failure patients have a mild limitation of activity and are generally comfortable at rest or with mild exertion while NYHA Class
III heart failure patients suffer from a marked limitation of activity and are generally comfortable only at rest.
We believe the market
for treating patients in NYHA Class II or NYHA Class III heart failure is significant. According to the American Heart Association
(“AHA”) Statistics and the European Society of Cardiology Task Force for the Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure, in
the United States and Europe there are approximately 5.2 million and 9.6 million, respectively, patients with heart failure. The
AHA Statistics further indicate that, after heart failure is diagnosed, the one-year mortality rate is high, with one in five dying
and that 80% of men and 70% of women under age 65 who have heart failure will die within eight years.
We believe that approximately
60% of heart failure patients are in either NYHA Class II or NYHA Class III heart failure based upon a 1999 study entitled “Congestive
Heart Failure Due to Diastolic or Systolic Dysfunction – Frequency and Patient Characteristics in an Ambulatory Setting”
by Diller, PM, et. al.
MyoCell SDF-1 is intended
to be an improvement to MyoCell. MyoCell SDF-1 is similar to MyoCell except that the myoblast cells to be injected for use in MyoCell
SDF-1 will be modified prior to injection by an adenovirus vector or non-viral vector so that they will release extra quantities
of the SDF-1 protein, which expresses angiogenic factors. AdipoCell is a patient-derived cell therapy proposed for the treatment
of acute myocardial infarction, chronic heart ischemia, and lower limb ischemia. We hope to demonstrate that these product candidates
are safe and effective complements to existing therapies for chronic and acute heart damage.
We have completed various
clinical trials for MyoCell including the SEISMIC Trial, a 40-patient, randomized, multicenter, controlled, Phase II-a study conducted
in Europe and the MYOHEART Trial, a 20-patient, multicenter, Phase I dose-escalation trial conducted in the United States. We were
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the “FDA”, to proceed with a 330-patient, multicenter Phase II/III
trial of MyoCell in North America and Europe, or the “MARVEL Trial”. We completed the MyoCell implantation procedure
on the first patient in the MARVEL Trial on October 24, 2007. Thus far, 20 patients, including 6 control patients, have been treated.
Initial results for the 20 patients were released at the Heart Failure Society of American meeting in September, 2009, showing
a significant (35%) improvement in the 6 minute walk for those patients who were treated, and no improvement for those who received
a placebo. On the basis of these results, we have applied for and received approval from the FDA to reduce the number of additional
patients in the trial to 134, for a total of 154 patients. We are planning, on the basis of these results, to request the FDA to
consider the MARVEL Trial a pivotal trial (pivotal from Phase II to Phase III) and to reduce the number of patients in the trial
to 150. No assurances can be provided that this request will be approved. We have also initiated the MIRROR trial, which is a Phase
III, double-blind placebo controlled study for centers outside the United States. The SEISMIC, MYOHEART, MARVEL and MIRROR Trials
have been designed to test the safety and efficacy of MyoCell in treating patients with severe, chronic damage to the heart. We
received approval from the FDA in July of 2009 to conduct a Phase I safety study on 15 patients of a combined therapy (MyoCell
with SDF-1) called the REGEN trial, during the first quarter of 2010. Advancement of the MyoCell and MyoCell SDF-1 clinical development
programs is contingent, among many factors, upon the Company obtaining access to sufficient funding to execute the necessary clinical
trials to achieve proof of efficacy and regulatory authorization to market such products. The Company is also presently seeking
a joint development partner for its MyoCell SDF-1 product candidate.
AdipoCell
Bioheart has successfully
completed various trials using adipose stem cells. We have completed the Phase 1 Angel Trial for AdipoCell (adipose derived stem
cells) in congestive heart failure patients. Five patients were enrolled and treated in the second quarter of 2013. At the twelve
(12) month time point, patients demonstrated a statistically significant average improvement in ejection fraction (“EF”)
by echocardiogram.
At the three (3) month
time point, 100% of the patients demonstrated either improvement or stayed the same. After three (3) months, patients showed
an average absolute improvement of 3 percentage points in EF. The patients continued to improve from 3 months to 6 months
with a statistically significant average absolute improvement of 10 percentage points (p=0.01) and at the 12 month follow up patients
showed this same level of improvement (p=0.01).
The adipose cells have
also been utilized in a phase I trial in Europe for critical limb ischemia (n=20). Patients enrolled in the trial were already
on the list for amputation. The cells were directly injected into the affected limbs in an effort to prevent the amputation. Seventy-five
percent of the patients were able to avoid amputation and progressed to wound healing. No adverse events or complications were
reported or linked to the cell therapy.
We have also initiated
several Institutional Review Board studies in 2013 using adipose derived stem cells for various indications including dry macular
degeneration, degenerative disc disease, erectile dysfunction and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
In the second quarter
of 2014, we announced the treatment of a patient in Honduras with congestive heart failure using AdipoCell and MyoCell. We believe
that this was the first patient treated in the world using a combination of stem cells.
We have begun two
clinical trials in India. The first cardiac patient has successfully been enrolled and treated in India using AdipoCell or adipose
derived stem cells. The second trial will involve the combination of AdipoCell and MyoCell or muscle derived stem cells for congestive
heart failure patients. These trials are active and ongoing.
We intend to focus our regulatory approvals
with the FDA on two different indications: critical limb ischemia and rheumatoid arthritis. The Adipocell treatment will follow
a device pathway with the US FDA and include the submission of an IDE.
Business Strategy
Bioheart’s mission
is to advance to market novel regenerative medicine and cellular therapy products that substantially benefit humankind. Our business
strategy is, to the extent possible, finance our clinical development pipeline through revenue (cash in-flows) generated through
the marketing and sales of unique educational and training services, animal health products and personalized cellular therapeutic
treatments.
A fundamental shift
in venture capital investment strategies where, management believes, financial sponsorship is now directed toward commercial or
near commercial enterprises has required Bioheart to adapt its mission combining immediate revenue generating opportunities with
longer-term development programs. Accordingly, Bioheart has developed a multifaceted portfolio of revenue generating products and
services in its US Stem Cell Training,Vetbiologics,and US Stem Cell Clinic, operating divisions that will, if successful, financially
support its clinical development programs. Our goal is to maximize shareholder value through the generation of short-term profits
that increase cash in-flows and decrease the need venture financings – a modern biotechnology company development strategy.
Today, Bioheart is a combination of opportunistic
business enterprises. We estimate that the products and services we offer through US Stem Cell Training, Vetbiologics, and US Stem
Cell Clinics has the potential, although we cannot provide assurances as to if and when it will be accomplished, to drive up to
$100 million dollars in cumulative peak annual revenues. What we are establishing is a foundation of value in the products and
services we are and plan to sell from US Stem Cell Training, Vetbiologics, and US Stem Cell clinics. Our strategy is to expand
the revenues generated from each of these operating divisions and to reinvest the profits we generate into our Bioheart clinical
development pipeline.
On January 29th,
2015 we announced an update and diversification of our clinical development pipeline. Our cardiovascular and vascular product candidates
have been streamlined, putting our best opportunities at the forefront of our efforts. The MYOCELL and MYOCELL SDF-1 candidates
will, in our opinion, advance forward in the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF). We are in active prospective partnering
discussion for the MYOCELL SDF-1 program. Partnering, we contend, will enhance our capabilities, reduce our development cost through
cost sharing and potentially accelerate our time to approval and commercialization. We will apply our ADIPOCELL technology to the
treatment of critical limb ischemia. Additionally, we have expanded and diversified our clinical development pipeline to include
autoimmune disease, specifically applying ADIPOCELL to the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). We believe that updating and
diversifying our clinical development programs increases the probability of our success, brings operational and fiscal clarity
to the Company, and will ultimately enhance shareholder value.
We will continue to
evaluate and act upon opportunities to increase our top line revenue position and that correspondingly increase cash in-flows.
These opportunities include but are not limited to the development and marketing of new products and services, mergers and acquisitions,
joint ventures, licensing deals and more.
Further, if the opportunity
presents itself whereby the Company can raise additional capital at a reasonable fair market value, the Company will do so. Accordingly,
we plan to continue in our efforts to restructure, equitize or eliminate legacy balance sheet issues that are obstacles to market
capitalization appreciation and capital fund raising.
US STEM CELL TRAINING
US Stem Cell Training
offers a variety of continuing medical education (CME) courses for physicians and other health care professionals. These courses
include didactic lecture series and hands-on clinical techniques in the field of regenerative medicine. We are currently hosting
these courses throughout the United States and in multiple countries. These courses are also available in an online format. Pricing
currently ranges from $500-$7500 depending on the location and modules.
BIOHEART, INC
Bioheart markets several
products to physicians for in clinic regenerative medicine use. These products include equipment (centrifuges, heating block, laminar
hood, autoclave) necessary to separate and obtain cellular medicine therapies. We are also providing a variety of materials necessary
to obtain fat and/or bone marrow including cannulas, trocars, syringes and other supplies. Bioheart also supplies laboratory kits
for processing adipose and bone marrow tissue to obtain a mixture of cells for use in clinic. These kits include disposables and
reagents and are prepared according to FDA cGMPs. Bioheart also provides banking services to patients interested in storing their
fat or bone marrow and the cells from this tissue. Bioheart is a registered FDA tissue bank in good standing.
VETBIOLOGICS
Vetbiologics is focused
on providing regenerative medicine therapies to veterinarians for use in both small and large animals. We provide a complete regenerative
medicine package which includes training, equipment and supplies necessary for in clinic cell therapy. We sell kits for isolating
stem cells from bone marrow and fat. We also provide kits for isolating platelet rich plasma. The kits include all of the disposables
and reagents necessary and
are produced according to FDA cGMPs. Vetbiologics
is also working on several off the shelf type products including an allogeneic stem cell source.
US STEM CELL CLINIC, LLC.
US Stem Cell Clinic
LLC, a partly owned investment, is offering in-clinic regenerative medicine treatments to patients suffering from degenerative
diseases. Adipose stem cells can be obtained from the patient easily, abundantly, and with minimal patient discomfort. Clinical
applications for patients can be performed in an office setting safely, legally, and ethically using autologous adipose-derived
stem cells. Current applications include orthopedic conditions (tendon/ligament injuries, osteoarthritis, etc.), degenerative conditions
(COPD, diabetes), neurological (MS, Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, autism, etc.) and auto-immune (RA, Crohn’s,
colitis, lupus). Pricing depends on application and ranges from $5000 to $12000.
Patents
and Proprietary Rights
We
own or hold licenses or sublicenses to an intellectual property portfolio consisting of numerous patents and patent applications
in the United States, and in foreign countries, for use in the field of heart muscle regeneration. References in this report to
“our” patents and patent applications and other similar references include the patents and patent applications that
are owned by us, and references to patents and patent applications that are “licensed” to us and other similar references
refer to patents, patent applications and other intellectual property that are licensed or sublicensed to us.
Patent
life determination depends on the date of filing of the application or the date of patent issuance and other factors as promulgated
under the patent laws. Under the U.S. Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, as amended, a patent
which claims a product, use or method of manufacture covering drugs and certain other products, including biologic products, may
be extended for up to five years to compensate the patent holder for a portion of the time required for research and FDA review
of the product. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug or biologic product is eligible for a patent term extension. This
law also establishes a period of time following approval of a drug or biologic product during which the FDA may not accept or approve
applications for certain similar or identical drugs or biologic products from other sponsors unless those sponsors provide their
own safety and efficacy data.
MyoCell
is no longer protected by patents, which means that competitors will be free to sell products that incorporate the same or similar
technologies that are used in MyoCell without infringing our patent rights. As a result, MyoCell, if approved for use, may
be vulnerable to competition. In addition, many of the patent and patent applications that have been licensed to us that pertain
to our other product candidates do not cover certain countries within Europe.
Our
commercial success will depend to a significant degree on our ability to:
| · | defend and enforce our patents and/or compel the owners of
the patents licensed to us to defend and enforce such patents, to the extent such patents may be applicable to our products and
material to their commercialization; |
| · | obtain additional patent and other proprietary protection
for MyoCell and our other product candidates; |
| · | obtain and/or maintain appropriate licenses to patents, patent
applications or other proprietary rights held by others with respect to our technology, both in the United States and other countries; |
| · | preserve company trade secrets and other intellectual property
rights relating to our product candidates; and operate without infringing the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. |
In
addition to patented intellectual property, we also rely on our own trade secrets and proprietary know-how to protect our technology
and maintain our competitive position, since patent protection may not be available or applicable to our technology. Our
policy is to require each of our employees, consultants and advisors to execute a confidentiality and inventions assignment agreement
before beginning their employment, consulting or advisory
relationship
with us. The agreements generally provide that the individual must keep confidential and not disclose to other parties any confidential
information developed or learned by the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us except in
limited circumstances. These agreements generally also provide that we shall own all inventions conceived by the individual in
the course of rendering services to us. Moreover, some of our academic institution licensors, collaborators and scientific advisors
have rights to publish data and information to which we have rights, which may impair our ability to protect our proprietary information
or obtain patent protection in the future.
We
work with others in our research and development activities and one of our strategies is to enter into collaborative agreements
with third parties to develop our proposed products. Disputes may arise about inventorship and corresponding rights in know-how
and inventions resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by us and our licensors, collaborators, consultants
and others. In addition, other parties may circumvent any proprietary protection we do have. As a result, we may not be able to
maintain our proprietary position.
We
are not currently a party to any litigation or other adverse proceeding related to our patents, patent licenses or intellectual
property rights. However, if we become involved in litigation or any other adverse intellectual property proceeding, for example,
as a result of an alleged infringement, or a third party alleging an earlier date of invention, we may have to spend significant
amounts of money and time and, in the event of an adverse ruling, we could be subject to liability for damages, including treble
damages, invalidation of our intellectual property and injunctive relief that could prevent us from using technologies or developing
products, any of which could have a significant adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation. In
addition, any claims relating to the infringement of third party proprietary rights, or earlier date of invention, even if not
meritorious, could result in costly litigation, lengthy governmental proceedings, divert management’s attention and resources
and require us to enter royalty or license agreements which are not advantageous, if available at all.
See
Item 1A. “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” for a discussion of additional risks
we face with respect to our intellectual property rights.
Primary
MyoCath Patent
The
Primary MyoCath Patent includes device claims that we believe covers, among other things, the structure of MyoCath. The Primary
MyoCath Patent expires in the United States in September 2017.
In
January 2000, we entered into a license agreement with Comedicus Incorporated pursuant to which Comedicus granted us a royalty-free,
fully paid-up, non-exclusive and irrevocable license to the Primary MyoCath Patent in exchange for a payment of $50,000. This agreement
was amended in August 2000 to provide us an exclusive license to the Primary MyoCath Patent in exchange for a payment of $100,000
and our loan of $250,000 to Comedicus. Pursuant to this amendment we also received the right, but not the obligation, with Comedicus’
consent, which consent is not to be unreasonably withheld, to defend the Primary MyoCath Patent against third party infringers.
In
June 2003, we entered into agreements with Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., or ACS, originally a subsidiary of Guidant Corporation
and now d/b/a Abbott Vascular, a division of Abbott Laboratories, pursuant to which we assigned our rights under the license agreement
with Comedicus, as amended, and committed to deliver 160 units of MyoCath and sold certain of our other catheter related intellectual
property, or, collectively, with the Primary MyoCath Patent (the Catheter IP), for aggregate consideration of $900,000. In connection
with these agreements, ACS granted to us a co-exclusive, irrevocable, fully paid-up license to the Catheter IP for the life of
the patents related to the Catheter IP.
ACS
has the exclusive right, at its own expense, to file, prosecute, issue, maintain, license, and defend the Catheter IP, and the
primary right to enforce the Catheter IP against third party infringers. If ACS fails to enforce the Catheter IP against a third
party infringer within a specified period of time, we have the right to do so at our expense. The party enforcing the Catheter
IP is entitled to retain any recoveries resulting from such enforcement. The asset purchase agreement only pertains to the Catheter
IP developed or acquired by us prior to June 24, 2003.
Our
subsequent catheter related developments and/or acquisitions, such as MyoCath II, were not sold or licensed to ACS.
MyoCell
SDF-1 Patents
To
develop our MyoCell SDF-1 product candidate, we rely primarily on patents. We had an agreement to license patents from Juventas.
These patents relate to methods of repairing damaged heart tissue by transplanting myoblasts that express SDF-1 and other
therapeutic proteins capable of recruiting other stem cells within a patient’s own body to the cell transplant area. We
believe we will also need to, among other things, license some additional intellectual property to commercialize MyoCell SDF-1
in the form we believe may prove to be the most safe and/or effective.
In
February 2006, we signed a patent licensing agreement with the Cleveland Clinic which provided us with the worldwide, exclusive
rights to three pending U.S. patent applications and certain corresponding foreign filings in the following jurisdictions: Australia,
Brazil, Canada, China, Europe and Japan, or, collectively, the Cleveland Clinic IP, related to methods of repairing damaged heart
tissue by transplanting myoblasts that express SDF-1 and other therapeutic proteins capable of recruiting other stem cells within
a patient’s own body to the cell transplant area. The term of our agreement with the Cleveland Clinic expired in July of
2009, when the license to the patents was turned over to a Cleveland Clinic affiliate, Juventas. We have an understanding
with Juventas to restore the license to the patents once certain milestones have been achieved by Bioheart.
In
2007, Bioheart signed a Letter of Intent with Ono Pharmaceutical which provided rights to conduct clinical development and testing
of MyoCell SDF-1 to determine the effectiveness of MyoCell SDF-1 for the treatment of damaged myocardium and tissues following
acute myocardial infarction, coronary arterial diseases or heart failure. If the results of this testing is deemed successful
then the parties agree to enter into good faith negotiations in an effort to reach a definitive license agreement that will allow
Bioheart to commercialize its MyoCell SDF-1 product candidate in all territories of the world except Japan.
MyoCath II Patents
In
April 2006, we entered into an agreement with Tricardia, LLC pursuant to which Tricardia granted us a sublicenseable license to
certain patents and patent applications in the United States, Australia, Canada, Europe and Japan covering the modified injection
needle we intend to use as part of MyoCath II, or the MyoCath II Patents, in exchange for a one-time payment of $100,000.
Our license covers and is exclusive with respect to products developed under the MyoCath II Patents for the delivery of therapeutic
compositions to the heart. Unless earlier terminated by mutual consent of the parties, our agreement with Tricardia will terminate
upon the expiration date of the last MyoCath II Patent. Tricardia has the obligation to take all actions necessary to file,
prosecute and maintain the MyoCath II Patents. We are required to reimburse Tricardia, on a pro-rata basis with other licensees
of Tricardia of the MyoCath II Patents, for all reasonable out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred by Tricardia in prosecuting
and maintaining the MyoCath II Patents. To the extent Tricardia determines not to initiate suit against any infringer, we
have the right, but not the obligation, to commence litigation for such alleged infringement with respect to any jurisdiction or,
in the alternative, the agreement will be automatically amended to exclude such jurisdiction.
Adipose-stem cell therapies
We previously partnered with the Global
Stem Cell Group to market and make available our AdipoCell adipose derived stem cell therapies to all doctors across the U.S. and
in foreign markets. On November 26, 2014, we terminated our relationship with Global Stem Cell Group.
GOVERNMENT REGULATION
The health care industry
is one of the most highly regulated industries in the United States and abroad. Various governmental regulatory authorities, as
well as private accreditation organizations, oversee and monitor the activities of individuals and businesses engaged in the development,
manufacture and delivery of health care
products and services. The following is
a general description of certain current laws and regulations that are relevant to our business.
HCT/P Regulations
Manufacturing facilities
that produce cellular therapies are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. In particular, FDA regulations set forth requirements
pertaining to establishments that manufacture human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products (“HCT/Ps”).
Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1271 provides for a unified registration and listing system, donor-eligibility, current
Good Tissue Practices (“cGTP”), and other requirements that are intended to prevent the introduction, transmission,
and spread of communicable diseases by HCT/Ps. More specifically, key elements of Part 1271 include:
• Registration and listing requirements for
establishments that manufacture HCT/Ps;
• Requirements for determining donor eligibility, including
donor screening and testing;
• cGTP requirements, which include requirements pertaining
to the manufacturer’s quality program, personnel, procedures, manufacturing facilities, environmental controls, equipment, supplies
and reagents, recovery, processing and process controls, labeling, storage, record-keeping, tracking, complaint files, receipt,
pre-distribution shipment, distribution, and donor eligibility determinations, donor screening, and donor testing;
• Adverse reaction reporting;
• Labeling of HCT/Ps; and
• FDA inspection, retention, recall, destruction, and cessation
of manufacturing operations.
Bioheart and its affiliated
entities currently collects, processes, stores and manufactures HCT/Ps, including the manufacture of cellular therapy products.
Therefore, Bioheart must comply with cGTP and with the current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”) requirements that
apply to biological products. Cell and tissue based products may also be subject to the same approval standards, including demonstration
of safety and efficacy, as other biologic and drug products if they meet certain criteria such as if the cells or tissues are more
than minimally manipulated or if they are intended for a non-homologous use. Management believes that requirements pertaining to
premarket approval, do not currently apply to Bioheart because those entities are not currently investigating, marketing or selling
cellular therapy products. If Bioheart changes its business operations in the future, the FDA requirements that apply to Bioheart
may also change.
Federal Regulation of Clinical Laboratories
The Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments (“CLIA”) extends federal oversight to clinical laboratories that examine or conduct testing
on materials derived from the human body for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of
disease or for the assessment of the health of human beings. CLIA requirements apply to those laboratories that handle biological
matter. CLIA requires that these laboratories be certified by the government, satisfy governmental quality and personnel standards,
undergo proficiency testing, be subject to biennial inspections, and remit fees. The sanctions for failure to comply with CLIA
include suspension, revocation, or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate necessary to conduct business, fines, or criminal
penalties. Additionally, CLIA certification may sometimes be needed when an entity, such as Bioheart, desire to obtain accreditation,
certification, or license from non-government entities for cord blood collection, storage, and processing. However, to the extent
that any of the activities of Bioheart (for example, with regard to processing or testing blood and blood products) require CLIA
certification, Bioheart intends to obtain and maintain such certification and/or licensure.
Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005
The Stem Cell Therapeutic
and Research Act of 2005 established a national donor bank of cord blood and created a national network for matching cord blood
to patients. The National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) carries out this legislation, which entails acting as the nation’s Cord Blood
Coordinating Center and actively recruiting parents for cord blood donations. The NMDP also administers the National Cord Blood
Inventory (NCBI), which has a goal of collecting 150,000 cord blood units that could be used to treat patients all over the United
States. Importantly, the legislation also authorized federal funding to support the legislation’s goals for collecting cord blood
units.
Pharmaceutical and Biologic Products
Government authorities
in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries, extensively regulate, among other things,
the research, development, testing, manufacture, including any manufacturing changes, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling,
advertising promotion, distribution, marketing, import and export of biological products such as MyoCell . The process of obtaining
required regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate statutes and regulations require the expenditure of
substantial time and money, and there is no guarantee that we will successfully complete the steps needed to obtain regulatory
approval of MyoCell or any future product candidates. In addition, these regulations may change and our product candidates may
be subject to new legislation or regulations.
In the United States,
pharmaceutical and biologic products, including cellular therapies, are subject to extensive pre- and post-market regulation by
the U.S. FDA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FD&C Act”), and other federal and state statutes and regulations,
govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion
and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products.
Biological products are approved for marketing under provisions of the Public Health Service Act, or PHS Act. However, because
most biological products also meet the definition of “drugs” under the FD&C Act, they are also subject to regulation
under FD&C Act provisions. The PHS Act requires the submission of a biologics license application (“BLA”), rather
than a New Drug Application (“NDA”), for market authorization. However, the application process and requirements for
approval of BLAs are similar to those for NDAs, and biologics are associated with similar approval risks and costs as drugs.
Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions,
such as FDA refusal to approve pending NDAs or BLAs, untitled or warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial
suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution.
Pharmaceutical product
development in the U.S. typically involves preclinical laboratory and animal tests, the submission to the FDA of a notice of claimed
investigational exemption or an investigational new drug application (“IND”), which must become effective before clinical
testing can commence, and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the drug or
biologic for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes
many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease.
Preclinical tests
include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics
and potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and
requirements including good laboratory practices. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND
along with other information including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls and a proposed clinical
trial protocol. Long term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after
the IND is submitted.
Submission of an IND
may not result in FDA authorization to initiate a clinical trial if FDA raises concerns or questions about the design of the clinical
trial or the preclinical or manufacturing information supporting it, including concerns that human research subjects will be exposed
to unreasonable health risks. A separate submission to an existing IND must also be made for each successive clinical trial conducted
during product development.
Clinical trials involve
the administration of the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator.
Clinical trials must be conducted in compliance with federal regulations; good clinical practice, or GCP, as set forth in FDA guidance,
which is meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators,
and monitors; as well as under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety
and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments
must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA regulated products, including drugs and biologics,
are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the product, patient population,
phase of investigation, study sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the
registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Competitors may use
this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.
The FDA may order
the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the
clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements, or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial
patients. The study protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an institutional
review board, or IRB, for approval. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or
permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions.
Clinical trials to
support NDAs or BLAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in four sequential phases, but the phases may overlap.
• Phase 1: Studies are initially conducted in a
limited population to test the product candidate for safety, dose tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and excretion
in healthy humans or, on occasion, in patients, such as cancer patients when the drug or biologic is too toxic to be ethically
given to healthy individuals.
• Phase 2: Studies are generally conducted in a
limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to determine the efficacy of the product for
specific targeted indications and to determine dose tolerance and optimal dosage. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted
by the sponsor to obtain information prior to beginning larger and more expensive Phase 3 clinical trials.
• Phase 3: These are commonly referred to as pivotal
studies. When Phase 2 evaluations demonstrate that a dose range of the product is effective and has an acceptable safety profile,
Phase 3 clinical trials are undertaken in large patient populations to further evaluate dosage, to provide substantial evidence
of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety in an expanded and diverse patient population at multiple, geographically-dispersed
clinical trial sites. In most cases FDA requires two adequate and well controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy
of the drug. A single Phase 3 trial with other confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in rare instances where the study is a large
multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect
on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and confirmation of the result
in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible.
• Phase 4: In some cases, FDA may condition approval
of an NDA or BLA for a product candidate on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional clinical trials after NDA or BLA approval.
In other cases, a sponsor may voluntarily carry out additional trials post approval to gain more information about the drug or
biologic. Such post approval trials are typically referred to as Phase 4 studies.
After completion of
the required clinical testing, an NDA or BLA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA or BLA is required before
marketing of the product may begin in the U.S. The NDA or BLA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical, and other
testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture, and controls. The cost of preparing
and submitting an NDA or BLA is substantial. Under federal law, the submission of most NDAs or BLAs is additionally subject to
a substantial application user fee, currently exceeding $2,169,000, and the manufacturer and/or sponsor under an approved new drug
application are also subject to annual product and establishment user fees, currently exceeding $104,000 per product and $554,000
per establishment. These fees are typically increased annually.
The FDA has 60 days
from its receipt of an NDA or BLA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold
determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA
begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs and BLAs. Most such applications
for standard review drug or biologic products are reviewed within ten to twelve months; most applications for priority review drugs
or biologics are reviewed in six to eight months. FDA can extend these reviews by three months. Priority review can be applied
to drugs or biologics that the FDA determines offer major advances in treatment, or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy
exists. For biologics, priority review is further limited only for products intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease
relative to the currently approved products.
The FDA may refer
applications for novel drug or biologic products, or drug or biologic products which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy,
to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation, and a recommendation
as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally
follows such recommendations.
Before approving an
NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will
inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless compliance
with cGMP - a quality system regulating manufacturing - is satisfactory and the NDA or BLA contains data that provide substantial
evidence that the drug or biologic is safe and effective in the indication studied.
After the FDA evaluates
the NDA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter
generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing or information in order for
the FDA to reconsider the application. If and when those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission
of the NDA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in 2 or 6 months depending
on the type of information included.
Additional Controls
The PHS Act also provides
authority to the FDA to immediately suspend licenses in situations where there exists a danger to public health, to prepare or
procure products in the event of shortages and critical public health needs, and to authorize the creation and enforcement of regulations
to prevent the introduction or spread of communicable diseases in the U.S. and between states.
Biosimilars
The Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act, or Affordable Care Act, signed into law on March 23, 2010, included a subtitle called the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCI Act, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown
to be highly similar to, or interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed reference biological product. This is conceptually similar to
the established process for generic drug approval in that it attempts to minimize duplicative testing. Biosimilarity, which requires
that there be no differences in conditions of use, route of administration, dosage form, and strength and there be no clinically
meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and
potency, must be shown through analytical
studies, animal studies, and at least one clinical study, absent a waiver by the Secretary. Interchangeability requires that a
product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product and, for products
administered multiple times, the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered
without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. No biosimilar
or interchangeable products have been approved under the BPCIA to date. Complexities associated with the larger and often more
complex structures of biological products, as well as the process by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles
to implementation that are still being worked out by the FDA.
A reference biologic
is granted twelve years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product, and no application for a biosimilar
can be submitted for four years from the date of licensure of the reference product. The first biologic product submitted under
the abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be interchangeable with the reference product has exclusivity against other
biologics submitting under the abbreviated approval pathway for the same condition for the lesser of (i) one year after first commercial
marketing of the first interchangeable biosimilar, (ii) eighteen months after the first interchangeable biosimilar is approved
if there is no legal challenge, (iii) 18 months after the resolution in the first interchangeable applicant’s favor of a lawsuit
challenging the reference biologics’ patents, or (iv) 42 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar’s application has been
approved if a lawsuit is ongoing within the 42 month period.
Post-Approval Regulation
Once an NDA or BLA
is approved, a product will be subject to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, FDA closely regulates the post-approval
marketing and promotion of drugs, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion,
industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. As a condition of NDA
or BLA approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the
product drug outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals,
and elements to assure safe use, or ETASU. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability
of the product.
Drugs may be marketed
only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. Changes to some of the conditions
established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require
submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or BLA or NDA supplement or BLA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA
or BLA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA
uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements and BLA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs or BLAs. The
FDA has broad enforcement authority under the FDC Act, and failure to abide by these regulations can result in enforcement action,
including the issuance of a Warning Letter directing entities to correct deviations from FDA standards, a requirement that future
advertising and promotional materials be pre-cleared by the FDA, and federal civil and criminal investigations, prosecutions and
penalties. State enforcement actions relating to promotional violations are also becoming more common.
Adverse experiences
associated with the use of the drug must be reported to the FDA and could result in the imposition of market restrictions through
labeling changes or in product removal. Product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory requirements is not maintained
or if problems concerning safety or efficacy of the product occur following approval. The FDA may also require a labeling change
if it becomes aware of new safety information that it believes should be included in the labeling of a drug.
Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP)
Standards
The FDA Act and FDA
regulations govern the quality control, manufacture, packaging, and labeling procedures of products regulated as a drug or biological
product, including cellular therapies comprised of HCT/Ps. These laws and regulations include requirements for cGMP. These requirements
are designed to ensure that a facility’s processes - and products resulting from those processes - meet defined safety requirements.
The cGMP
requirements, are federal regulations that
govern the manufacture, processing, packaging and holding of drug and cell therapy products.
The objective of compliance
with cGMP standards is to protect the public health and safety by ensuring that products (i) have the identity, strength, quality
and purity that they purport or are represented to possess; (ii) meet their specifications; and (iii) are free of objectionable
microorganisms and contamination.
A central focus of
the cGMP requirements is to design and build quality into the manufacturing processes and the facilities in which products are
produced and to ensure the consistency, product integrity, and reproducibility of results and product characteristics. This is
done by implementing quality systems and processes including specifications and documentation.
In addition, drug
manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with FDA and certain state agencies.
Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the agency inspects manufacturing
facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas
of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with cGMPs. Failure to comply with applicable FDA requirements can result
in regulatory inspections and associated observations, warning letters, other requirements of remedial action, and, in the case
of failures that are more serious, suspension of manufacturing operations, seizure, injunctions, product recalls, fines, and other
penalties. We believe that our facilities are in material compliance with applicable existing FDA requirements.
Additionally, FDA,
other regulatory agencies, or the United States Congress may be considering, and may enact laws or regulations regarding the use
and marketing of stem cells, cell therapy products, or products derived from human cells or tissue. These laws and regulations
can affect us directly or the business of some of Bioheart’s clients and therefore the amount of business Bioheart receives from
these clients.
Pediatric Information
Under the Pediatric
Research Equity Act, or PREA, NDAs or BLAs or supplements to NDAs or BLAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness
of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each
pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers or deferrals for submission
of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any drug for an indication for which orphan designation
has been granted.
The Best Pharmaceuticals
for Children Act, or BPCA, provides NDA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity-patent or non-patent-for a drug if certain
conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a
new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, FDA making a written request for pediatric
studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications
under the BPCA are treated as priority applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers.
Orphan Drugs
Under the Orphan Drug
Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition - generally a disease or
condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an
NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed
publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review
and approval process. The first NDA applicant to receive FDA approval for a particular active ingredient to treat a particular
disease with FDA orphan drug designation is entitled to a seven-year exclusive marketing period in the U.S. for that product, for
that indication. During the seven-year exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug
for the same disease, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the
product with orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan
drug exclusivity does not prevent FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a
different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a
waiver of the NDA application user fee.
Approval of Medical Devices
Medical
devices are also subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. To be commercially distributed in the United States, medical devices
must receive either 510(k) clearance or pre-market approval, or PMA, from the FDA prior to marketing. Devices deemed to pose relatively
low risk are placed in either Class I or II, which requires the manufacturer to submit a pre-market notification requesting
permission for commercial distribution, or 510(k) clearance. Devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining,
life-supporting or implantable devices, devices deemed not substantially equivalent to a previously 510(k) cleared device and certain
other devices are placed in Class III which requires PMA. We anticipate that MyoCath will be classified as a Class III
device.
To
obtain 510(k) clearance, a manufacturer must submit a pre-market notification demonstrating that the proposed device is substantially
equivalent in intended use and in safety and efficacy to a previously 510(k) cleared device, a device that has received PMA or
a device that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance pathway usually takes from
four to twelve months, but it can last longer.
After
a device receives 510(k) clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or efficacy, or that would constitute
a major change in its intended use, requires a new 510(k) clearance or could require PMA. The FDA requires each manufacturer to
make this determination, but the FDA can review any such decision. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s decision not
to seek a new 510(k) clearance, the agency may retroactively require the manufacturer to seek 510(k) clearance or PMA. The FDA
also can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until 510(k) clearance or PMA is obtained.
A
product not eligible for 510(k) clearance must follow the PMA pathway, which requires proof of the safety and efficacy of the device
to the FDA’s satisfaction. The PMA pathway is much more costly, lengthy and uncertain than the 510(k) approval pathway. A
PMA application must provide extensive preclinical and clinical trial data and also information about the device and its components
regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect
the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with quality system regulation requirements, which impose elaborate testing,
control, documentation and other quality assurance procedures. Upon acceptance by the FDA of what it considers a completed filing,
the FDA commences an in-depth review of the PMA application, which typically takes from one to two years, but may last longer.
The review time is often significantly extended as a result of the FDA asking for more information or clarification of information
already provided.
If
the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA application is favorable, and the applicant satisfies any specific conditions (e.g., changes
in labeling) and provides any specific additional information (e.g., submission of final labeling), the FDA will issue a PMA for
the approved indications, which can be more limited than those originally sought by the manufacturer. The PMA can include post-approval
conditions that the FDA believes necessary to ensure the safety and efficacy of the device including, among other things, restrictions
on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in an enforcement action,
which could have material adverse consequences, including the loss or withdrawal of the approval.
Even
after approval of a pre-market application, a new PMA or PMA supplement is required in the event of a modification to the device,
its labeling or its manufacturing process.
Post-Approval
Requirements
Even
if regulatory clearances or approvals for our product candidates are obtained, our products and the facilities manufacturing our
products will be subject to continued review and periodic inspections by the FDA. For example, as a condition of approval of a
new drug application, the FDA may require us to engage in post-marketing
testing
and surveillance and to monitor the safety and efficacy of our products. Holders of an approved new BLA, PMA or 510(k) clearance
product are subject to several post-market requirements, including the reporting of certain adverse events involving their products
to the FDA, provision of updated safety and efficacy information, and compliance with requirements concerning the advertising and
promotion of their products.
In
addition, manufacturing facilities are subject to periodic inspections by the FDA to confirm the facilities comply with cGMP requirements.
In complying with cGMP, manufacturers must expend money, time and effort in the area of production and quality control to ensure
full compliance. For example, manufacturers of biologic products must establish validated systems to ensure that products meet
high standards of sterility, safety, purity, potency and identity. Manufacturers must report to the FDA any deviations from cGMP
or any unexpected or unforeseeable event that may affect the safety, quality, or potency of a product. The regulations also require
investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose documentation requirements.
In
addition to regulations enforced by the FDA, we are also subject to regulation under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the
Environmental Protection Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and other federal, state
and local regulations. Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, chemicals, biological
materials and radioactive compounds.
Other Health Care Regulations
Health Privacy Laws
The Administrative
Simplification provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended
by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH Act”), require health care plans,
health care providers and health care clearinghouses, collectively defined under HIPAA as “Covered Entities,” to comply
with standards for the use and disclosure of health information within such organizations and with third parties. These include
standards for:
• Common health care transactions, such as claims information,
plan eligibility, payment information and the use of electronic signatures;
• Unique identifiers for providers, employers, health plans
and individuals; and
• Security and privacy of health information.
Although the obligations
of HIPAA only apply directly to Covered Entities, any Covered Entity that uses third parties (referred to in HIPAA as “Business
Associates”) to perform functions on its behalf involving the creation or use of certain patient health information is required
to have a contract with the Business Associate that limits the use and disclosure of such information by the Business Associate.
HIPAA does not preempt,
or override, state privacy laws that provide even more protection for individuals’ health information. These laws’ requirements
could further complicate Bioheart’s ability to obtain necessary research data from its collaborators. In addition, certain state
privacy and genetic testing laws may directly regulate our research activities, affecting the manner in which we use and disclose
individuals’ health information, potentially increasing the cost of doing business, and exposing us to liability claims. In addition,
patients and research collaborators may have contractual rights that further limit our ability to use and disclose individually
identifiable health information. Claims that we violated individuals’ privacy rights or breached its contractual obligations, even
if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm
the business.
While we believe that
the current business operations of Bioheart would not cause either of them to be considered a Covered Entity, there is a risk that
due to conflicting interpretations of the regulations, Bioheart may be
deemed to be a Covered Entity. If Bioheart
is a Covered Entity, there is a risk of liability that Bioheart may not be complying fully with all HIPAA requirements. Bioheart
has signed Business Associate Agreements where requested by Bioheart’s customers who are Covered Entities, which would require
compliance with certain privacy and security requirements relating to individually identifiable health information created or used
in connection with such relationships. Bioheart is in substantial compliance with such Business Associate Agreements. However,
given the law’s complexity and the possibility that the regulations may change and may be subject to changing and even conflicting
interpretation, Bioheart’s ability to comply fully with all of the HIPAA requirements and requirements of its Business Associate
Agreements is uncertain. Further, as a result of amendments the HITECH Act, Bioheart’s compliance burden has increased and they
will be subject to audit and enforcement by the federal government and, in some cases, by state authorities. Further, they are
obligated to publicly disclose wrongful disclosures or losses of personal health information.
Fraud and Abuse
Laws
In addition to FDA
restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, several other types of state and federal laws have been applied to restrict
certain marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry in recent years. These laws include anti-kickback statutes and false
claims statutes. The federal healthcare program anti-kickback statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering,
paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase,
lease or order of any healthcare item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federally financed healthcare programs.
This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers,
purchasers and formulary managers on the other. Violations of the anti-kickback statute are punishable by imprisonment, criminal
prosecution, civil monetary penalties and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. Although there are a number
of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution or other regulatory sanctions,
the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration intended to induce prescribing, purchases
or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor.
Federal false claims
laws prohibit any person from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government,
or knowingly making, or causing to be made, a false statement to have a false claim paid. Recently, several pharmaceutical and
other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly inflating drug prices they report to pricing services,
which in turn were used by the government to set Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, and for allegedly providing free product
to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. In addition, certain marketing
practices, including off-label promotion, may also violate false claims laws. The majority of States also have statutes or regulations
similar to the federal anti-kickback statute and false claims laws, which apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid
and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor.
Affordable Care
Act
In late March 2010,
the Federal government enacted the comprehensive health care reform package, the Affordable Care Act. Among other provisions, the
Affordable Care Act imposes individual and employer health insurance requirements, provides certain insurance subsidies (e.g.,
premiums and cost sharing), mandates extensive insurance market reforms, creates new health insurance access points (e.g., State
and federal-based health insurance exchanges), expands the Medicaid program, promotes research on comparative clinical effectiveness
of different technologies and procedures, and makes a number of changes to how products and services will be reimbursed by the
Medicare program. Amendments to the Federal False Claims Act under the Affordable Care Act have made it easier for private parties
to bring “qui tam” (whistleblower) lawsuits against companies, under which the whistleblower may be entitled to receive
a percentage of any money paid to the government.
There are a number
of provisions in the Affordable Care Act that may directly impact our customers and, therefore, indirectly affect us. For example,
the Affordable Care Act expands the number of individuals that will be covered by either private or public health insurance, which
may, in turn, increase the pool of potential purchasers for
our customers’ products to the extent they
are reimbursable by private or public health insurance. The Affordable Care Act also requires health insurance issuers in the individual
and small group markets to cover certain “essential health benefits,” which include prescription drugs and which may
increase coverage for our customers’ products. In addition, the Affordable Care Act reduces income and raises costs for our customers
through, for instance, the imposition of drug price discounts for Medicare Part D enrollees in the “donut hole” and
the imposition of an annual fee on prescription drug and biologic manufacturers. Such provisions may cause our customers to seek
to restrain costs in other areas, including the services that we provide. The effective dates of the various provisions within
the Affordable Care Act are staggered over the next several years, with some changes occurring immediately. Much of the interpretation
of the Affordable Care Act will be subject to administrative rulemaking, the development of agency guidance, and court interpretation.
Other Applicable
Laws
In addition to those
described above, other federal and State laws and regulations that could directly or indirectly affect our ability to operate the
business and/or financial performance include:
• state and local licensure, registration and regulation
of laboratories, the processing and storage of human cells and tissue, and the development and manufacture of pharmaceuticals and
biologics;
• other laws and regulations administered by the United
States FDA, including the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and related laws and regulations and the Public Health Service Act
and related laws and regulations;
• laws and regulations administered by the United States
Department of Health and Human Services, including the Office for Human Research Protections;
• state laws and regulations governing human subject research;
• federal and state coverage and reimbursement laws and
regulations, including laws and regulations administered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and State Medicaid
agencies;
• the federal Medicare and Medicaid Anti-Kickback Law and
similar state laws and regulations;
• the federal physician self-referral prohibition commonly
known as the Stark Law, and State equivalents of the Stark Law;
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”)
requirements;
• state and local laws and regulations dealing with the
handling and disposal of medical waste; and
• the Intermediate Sanctions rules of the IRS providing
for potential financial sanctions with respect to “Excess Benefit Transactions” with HUMC or other tax-exempt organizations.
Other Regulations
We are also subject
to various local, State and federal laws and regulations relating to safe working conditions, laboratory and manufacturing practices,
the experimental use of animals and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances, including chemicals,
micro-organisms and various radioactive compounds used in connection with our research and development activities. These laws include,
but are not limited to, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Toxic Test Substances Control Act and the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act. Although we believe that our safety procedures for handling and disposing of these materials comply with the
standards prescribed by state and federal regulations, there can be no assurances that accidental contamination or injury to employees
and third parties from these materials will not occur. Our insurance program does not include environmental coverage.
Regulation in the European Union
In the European Union,
or EU, medicinal products, including advanced therapy medicinal products, are subject to extensive pre- and post-market regulation
by regulatory authorities at both the EU and national levels. Advanced therapy medicinal products comprise gene therapy products,
somatic cell therapy products and tissue engineered products, which are cells or tissues that have undergone substantial manipulation
and that are administered to human beings in order to regenerate, repair or replace a human tissue. We anticipate that our cell
therapy products in development, including MyoCell , would be regulated as advanced therapy medicinal products in the EU.
Clinical Trials
Clinical trials of
medicinal products in the EU must be conducted in accordance with EU and national regulations and the International Conference
on Harmonization, or ICH, guidelines on Good Clinical Practices, or GCP. Additional GCP guidelines from the European Commission,
focusing in particular on traceability, apply to clinical trials of advanced therapy medicinal products. If the sponsor of the
clinical trial is not established within the EU, it must appoint an entity within the EU to act as its legal representative. The
sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU countries the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’
compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.
Prior to commencing
a clinical trial, the sponsor must obtain a clinical trial authorization from the competent authority, and a positive opinion from
an independent ethics committee. The application for a clinical trial authorization must include, among other things, a copy of
the trial protocol and an investigational medicinal product dossier containing information about the manufacture and quality of
the medicinal product under investigation. Currently, clinical trial authorization applications must be submitted to the competent
authority in each EU member state in which the trial will be conducted. Under proposed new rules, there will be a centralized application
procedure where one national authority takes the lead in reviewing the application and the other national authorities have only
a limited involvement. Any substantial changes to the trial protocol or other information submitted with the clinical trial applications
must be notified to or approved by the relevant competent authorities and ethics committees.
The sponsor of a clinical
trial must register the clinical trial in advance, and information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation,
study sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial will be made public as part of the registration. The results
of the clinical trial must be submitted to the competent authorities and, with the exception of non-pediatric Phase 1 trials, will
be made public at the latest within 12 months after the end of the trial.
During the development
of a medicinal product, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, and national medicines regulators within the EU provide the opportunity
for dialogue and guidance on the development program. At the EMA level, this is usually done in the form of scientific advice,
which is given by the Scientific Advice Working Party of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP. A fee is
incurred with each scientific advice procedure. Advice from the EMA is typically provided based on questions concerning, for example,
quality (chemistry, manufacturing and controls testing), nonclinical testing and clinical studies, and pharmacovigilance plans
and risk-management programs. Advice is not legally binding with regard to any future marketing authorization application of the
product concerned. To date, we have not initiated any scientific advice procedures or other discussions with the EMA or any national
regulatory authorities in the EU.
Marketing Authorizations
After completion of
the required clinical testing, we must obtain a marketing authorization before we may place a medicinal product on the market in
the EU. There are various application procedures available, depending on the type of product involved. All application procedures
require an application in the common technical document, or CTD, format, which includes the submission of detailed information
about the manufacturing and quality of the
product, and non-clinical and clinical
trial information. There is an increasing trend in the EU towards greater transparency and, while the manufacturing or quality
information is currently generally protected as confidential information, the EMA and national regulatory authorities are now liable
to disclose much of the non-clinical and clinical information in marketing authorization dossiers, including the full clinical
study reports, in response to freedom of information requests after the marketing authorization has been granted. The EMA is currently
considering a procedure under which clinical study reports would be posted on the agency’s website following the grant, denial
or withdrawal of a marketing authorization application, subject to procedures for limited redactions and protection against unfair
commercial use. A similar requirement is contained in a draft new Regulation on Clinical Trials that is expected to become applicable
in mid-2016 or later.
The centralized procedure
gives rise to marketing authorizations that are valid throughout the EU and, by extension (after national implementing decisions),
in Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, which, together with the EU member states, comprise the European Economic Area, or EEA. Applicants
file marketing authorization applications with the EMA, where they are reviewed by a relevant scientific committee, in most cases
the CHMP. The EMA forwards CHMP opinions to the European Commission, which uses them as the basis for deciding whether to grant
a marketing authorization. The centralized procedure is compulsory for medicinal products that (1) are derived from biotechnology
processes, (2) contain a new active substance (not yet approved) indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, such as HIV/AIDS,
cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative disorders, viral diseases or autoimmune diseases and other immune dysfunctions, (3) are orphan
medicinal products or (4) are advanced therapy medicinal products, such as cell therapy medicines. For medicines that do not fall
within these categories, an applicant may voluntarily submit an application for a centralized marketing authorization to the EMA,
as long as the CHMP agrees that (i) the medicine concerned contains a new active substance (not yet approved), (ii) the medicine
is a significant therapeutic, scientific, or technical innovation, or (iii) if its authorization under the centralized procedure
would be in the interest of public health.
For those medicinal
products for which the centralized procedure is not available, the applicant must submit marketing authorization applications to
the national medicines regulators through one of three procedures: (1) a national procedure, which results in a marketing authorization
in a single EU member state; (2) the decentralized procedure, in which applications are submitted simultaneously in two or more
EU member states; and (3) the mutual recognition procedure, which must be used if the product has already been authorized in at
least one other EU member state, and in which the EU member states are required to grant an authorization recognizing the existing
authorization in the other EU member state, unless they identify a serious risk to public health. A national procedure is only
possible for one member state; as soon as an application is submitted in a second member state the mutual recognition or decentralized
procedure will be triggered.
Under the centralized
procedure in the European Union, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of a marketing authorization application is 210 days.
However, this timeline excludes clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in
response to questions asked by the CHMP, so the overall process typically takes a year or more. Accelerated evaluation might be
granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is expected to be of a major public health interest, defined
by three cumulative criteria: the seriousness of the disease (e.g. heavy disabling or life-threatening diseases) to be treated;
the absence or insufficiency of an appropriate alternative therapeutic approach; and anticipation of high therapeutic benefit.
In this circumstance, EMA ensures that the opinion of the CHMP is given within 150 days.
Data Exclusivity
Marketing authorization
applications for generic medicinal products do not need to include the results of pre-clinical and clinical trials, but instead
can refer to the data included in the marketing authorization of a reference product for which regulatory data exclusivity has
expired. If a marketing authorization is granted for a medicinal product containing a new active substance, that product benefits
from eight years of data exclusivity, during which generic marketing authorization applications referring to the data of that product
may not be accepted by the regulatory authorities, and a further two years of market exclusivity, during which such generic products
may not be placed on the market. The two-year period may be extended to three years if during the first eight years a new therapeutic
indication with significant clinical benefit over existing therapies is approved.
There is a special
regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet
the definition of a generic medicinal product, for example, because of differences in raw materials or manufacturing processes.
For such products, the results of appropriate pre-clinical or clinical trials must be provided, and guidelines from the EMA detail
the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product. There are no such guidelines
for complex biological products, such as gene or cell therapy medicinal products, and so it is unlikely that biosimilars of those
products will currently be approved in the EU. However, guidance from the EMA states that they will be considered in the future
in light of the scientific knowledge and regulatory experience gained at the time.
Orphan Medicinal Products
The EMA’s Committee
for Orphan Medicinal Products, or COMP, may recommend orphan medicinal product designation to promote the development of products
that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions affecting
not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention
or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition and when, without incentives, it is
unlikely that sales of the product in the EU would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal
product. The COMP may only recommend orphan medicinal product designation when the product in question offers a significant clinical
benefit over existing approved products for the relevant indication. Following a positive opinion by the COMP, the European Commission
adopts a decision granting orphan status. The COMP will reassess orphan status in parallel with EMA review of a marketing authorization
application and orphan status may be withdrawn at that stage if it no longer fulfills the orphan criteria (for instance because
in the meantime a new product was approved for the indication and no convincing data are available to demonstrate a significant
benefit over that product). Orphan medicinal product designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of
fees or fee waivers and 10 years of market exclusivity is granted following marketing authorization. During this period, the competent
authorities may not accept or approve any similar medicinal product, unless it offers a significant clinical benefit. This period
may be reduced to 6 years if the orphan medicinal product designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that
the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. The EMA is currently preparing guidance
on assessing similarity of active ingredients for purposes of orphan exclusivity. It is possible that for biological products a
narrow interpretation of similarity will be adopted.
Pediatric Development
In the EU, companies
developing a new medicinal product must agree to a Pediatric Investigation Plan, or PIP, with the EMA and must conduct pediatric
clinical trials in accordance with that PIP, unless a waiver applies ( e.g. because the relevant disease or condition occurs
only in adults). The marketing authorization application for the product must include the results of pediatric clinical trials
conducted in accordance with the PIP, unless a waiver applies, or a deferral has been granted, in which case the pediatric clinical
trials must be completed at a later date. Products that are granted a marketing authorization on the basis of the pediatric clinical
trials conducted in accordance with the PIP are eligible for a six month extension of the protection under a supplementary protection
certificate (if any is in effect at the time of approval) or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two year extension of
the orphan market exclusivity. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when
data in compliance with the PIP are developed and submitted.
Post-Approval Controls
The holder of a marketing
authorization must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance,
or QPPV, who is responsible for oversight of that system. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse
reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports, or PSURs.
All new
marketing authorization applications must include a risk management plan, or RMP, describing the risk management system that
the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The
regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the marketing authorization. Such
risk-minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent
submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies. Risk management plans
and PSURs are routinely available to third parties requesting access, subject to limited redactions.
All advertising and
promotional activities for the product must be consistent with the approved summary of product characteristics, and therefore all
off-label promotion is prohibited. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is also prohibited in the EU. Although
general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products are established under EU directives, the details are governed
by regulations in each member state and can differ from one country to another.
Manufacturing
Medicinal products
may only be manufactured in the EU, or imported into the EU from another country, by the holder of a manufacturing authorization
from the competent national authority. The manufacturer or importer must have a qualified person, or QP, who is responsible for
certifying that each batch of product has been manufactured in accordance with EU standards of good manufacturing practice, or
GMP, before releasing the product for commercial distribution in the EU or for use in a clinical trial. Manufacturing facilities
are subject to periodic inspections by the competent authorities for compliance with GMP.
Human Cells and Tissues
Human cells and tissues
that are intended for human applications but that do not fall within the scope of rules governing medicinal products or medical
devices are not subject to premarket review and approval, nor do they require extensive preclinical and clinical testing. However,
there are EU rules governing the donation, procurement, testing and storage of human cells and tissues intended for human application,
whether or not they are advanced therapy medicinal products. These rules also cover the processing, preservation and distribution
of human cell and tissues that are not advanced therapy medicinal products. Establishments that conduct such activities must be
licensed and are subject to inspection by regulatory authorities. Such establishments must implement appropriate quality systems
and maintain appropriate records to ensure that cells and tissues can be traced from the donor to the recipient and vice versa.
There are also requirements to report serious adverse events and reactions linked to the quality and safety of cells and tissues.
More detailed rules may exist at the national level.
Named Patient Sales
The EU medicines rules
allow individual member states to permit the supply of a medicinal product without a marketing authorization to fulfill special
needs, where the product is supplied in response to a bona fide unsolicited order, formulated in accordance with the specifications
of a healthcare professional and for use by an individual patient under his direct personal responsibility. This may in certain
countries also apply to products manufactured in a country outside the EU and imported to treat specific patients or small groups
of patients. In addition, advanced therapy medicinal products do not need a marketing authorization if they are prepared on a non-routine
basis and are used within the same EU member state in a hospital in accordance with a medical prescription for an individual patient.
These exemptions may
allow us to make limited sales of our products before we obtain a marketing authorization in the EU. However, the exemptions could
also allow our competitors to make sales without having obtained a marketing authorization and without undergoing the expense of
clinical trials, especially if those competitors have cell processing facilities in the relevant EU member state. Similarly, certain
hospitals may be able to compete with us on the basis of these rules.
Pricing and Reimbursement
Governments influence
the price of medicinal products in the EU through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national healthcare systems
that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems
under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval,
some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product
candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor
and control company profits. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, has become
very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.
Regulation in Other Countries
We intend to seek to market our products in jurisdictions outside
the United States and the EU. Most of these jurisdictions have product approval and post-approval regulatory processes that are
similar in principle to those in the United States or EU. Any such considerations are in the early stages.
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
We file annual, quarterly and current reports,
proxy statements and other information with the SEC. Our SEC filings are available to the public over the Internet at the website
at http://www.sec.gov. The public may also read and copy any document we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room
at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549, on official business days during the hours of 10:00 am to 3:00 pm. The public may
obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
The risk factors required pursuant to Regulation
S-K, Item 503(c) are not required for smaller reporting companies. Accordingly, the Company has determined to provide particular
risk factors at this time .The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. Other events that we do
not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial also may affect our results of operations and financial condition.
If any events described in the risk factors actually occur, our business, operating results, prospects and financial condition
could be materially harmed. In connection with the forward looking statements that appear elsewhere in this annual report, you
should also carefully review the cautionary statement referred to under “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements.”
SHOULD ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOREGOING RISKS OR UNCERTAINTIES MATERIALIZE, OR SHOULD THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS OF OUR BUSINESS PROVE INCORRECT, ACTUAL RESULTS
MAY DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THOSE ANTICIPATED, BELIEVED, ESTIMATED, EXPECTED, INTENDED OR PLANNED.
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional
Financing
We will need to
secure additional financing in 2015 in order to continue to finance our operations. If we are unable to secure additional financing
on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be forced to curtail or cease our operations.
As of December 31,
2014, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $36,674 and an accumulated capital deficit of approximately $120,434,494.
As such, our existing cash resources are insufficient to finance even our immediate operations. Accordingly, we will need to secure
additional sources of capital to develop our business and product candidates as planned. We are seeking substantial additional
financing through public and/or private financing, which may include equity and/or debt financings, research grants and through
other arrangements,
including collaborative
arrangements. As part of such efforts, we may seek loans from certain of our executive officers, directors and/or current
shareholders. We may also seek to satisfy some of our obligations to the guarantors of our loan with Seaside National Bank
& Trust, or the Guarantors, through the issuance of various forms of securities or debt on negotiated terms. However,
financing and/or alternative arrangements with the Guarantors may not be available when we need it, or may not be available
on acceptable terms.
If we are unable to
secure additional financing in the near term, we may be forced to:
| · | curtail or abandon our existing business plans; |
| · | default on our debt obligations; |
| · | seek to sell some or all of our assets; and/or |
If we are forced to
take any of these steps, any investment in our common stock may be worthless.
If we raise additional
capital and/or secure alternative arrangements, with the Guarantors or otherwise, by issuing equity, equity-related or convertible
securities, the economic, voting and other rights of our existing shareholders may be diluted, and those newly issued securities
may be issued at prices that are a significant discount to current and/or then prevailing market prices. In addition, any such
newly issued securities may have rights superior to those of our common stock. If we obtain additional capital through collaborative
arrangements, we may be required to relinquish greater rights to our technologies or product candidates than we might otherwise
have or become subject to restrictive covenants that may affect our business.
Our independent
registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
Our independent registered
public accounting firm issued its report dated March 16th, 2015 in connection with the audit of our financial statements as of December
31, 2014, which included an explanatory paragraph describing the existence of conditions that raise substantial doubt about our
ability to continue as a going concern. In addition, our note to our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014
included an explanatory paragraph describing the existence of conditions that raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue
as a going concern. If we are not able to continue as a going concern, it is likely that holders of our common stock will lose
all of their investment. Our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
We are a development stage life sciences company with
a limited operating history and a history of net losses and negative cash flows from operations. We may never be profitable, and
if we incur operating losses and generate negative cash flows from operations for longer than expected, we may be unable to continue
operations.
We are a development
stage life sciences company and have a limited operating history, limited capital, limited sources of revenue and have incurred
losses since inception. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing our company, developing and engaging in clinical
trials of our MyoCell product candidate, expanding our pipeline of complementary product candidates through internal development
and third party licenses, expanding and strengthening our intellectual property position through internal programs and third party
licenses and recruiting management, research and clinical personnel. Consequently, it may be difficult to predict our future success
or viability due to our lack of operating history. As of December
31, 2014, we have accumulated a deficit of approximately $120.4 million. Our MyoCell product candidate has not received regulatory
approval or generated any material revenues and is not expected to generate any material revenues until commercialization of MyoCell,
if ever.
Our ability to generate
revenues from any of our product candidates will depend on a number of factors, including our ability to successfully complete
clinical trials, obtain necessary regulatory approvals and implement
our commercialization strategy. In addition,
even if we are successful in obtaining necessary regulatory approvals and bringing one or more product candidates to market, we
will be subject to the risk that the marketplace will not accept those products. We may, and anticipate that we will need to,
transition from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities and we
may not succeed in such a transition.
Because of the numerous
risks and uncertainties associated with our product development and commercialization efforts, we are unable to predict the extent
of our future losses or when or if we will become profitable. Our failure to successfully commercialize our product candidates
or to become and remain profitable could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, diversify our product offerings
and continue our operations.
Risks Related to Product Development
All of our product candidates are in an early stage of
development and we may never succeed in developing and/or commercializing them. We depend heavily on the success of our MyoCell
product candidate. If we are unable to commercialize MyoCell or any of our other product candidates or experience significant delays
in doing so, our business may fail.
| · | We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in our MyoCell product candidate and depend heavily
on its success. MyoCell is currently in the clinical testing stage of development, although we have suspended work under our clinical
trials as we seek to raise sufficient funds to complete the trials. |
| · | We need to devote significant additional research and development, financial resources and personnel to develop commercially
viable products, obtain regulatory approvals and establish a sales and marketing infrastructure. |
| · | We are likely to encounter hurdles and unexpected issues as we proceed in the development of MyoCell and our other product
candidates. There are many reasons that we may not succeed in our efforts to develop our product candidates, including the possibility
that: |
| · | our product candidates will be deemed ineffective, unsafe or will not receive regulatory approvals; |
| · | our product candidates will be too expensive to manufacture or market or will not achieve broad market acceptance |
| · | others will hold proprietary rights that will prevent us from marketing our product candidates; or |
| · | our competitors will market products that are perceived as equivalent or superior. |
Our approach of using cell-based therapy for the treatment
of heart damage is risky and unproven and no products using this approach have received regulatory approval in the United States
or Europe.
No company has yet been successful in its
efforts to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or Europe of a cell-based therapy product for the treatment of heart
damage. Cell-based therapy products, in general, may be susceptible to various risks, including undesirable and unintended side
effects, unintended immune system responses, inadequate therapeutic efficacy or other characteristics that may prevent or limit
their approval by regulators or commercial use. Many companies in the industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical
trials, despite promising results in earlier trials. One of our competitors exploring the use of skeletal myoblasts ceased enrolling
new patients in its European Phase II clinical trial based on the determination of its monitoring committee that there was a low
likelihood that the trial would result in the hypothesized improvement in heart function. Although our clinical research to date
suggests that MyoCell may improve the contractile function of
the heart, we have not yet been able to demonstrate a mechanism
of action and additional research is needed to precisely identify such mechanism.
If our clinical trials are unsuccessful or significantly
delayed, or if we do not complete our clinical trials, we will not receive regulatory approval for or be able to commercialize
our product candidates.
We cannot market any product candidate until
regulatory agencies grant approval or licensure. In order to obtain regulatory approval for the sale of any product candidate,
we must, among other requirements, provide the FDA and similar foreign regulatory authorities with preclinical and clinical data
that demonstrate to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities that our product candidates are safe and effective for each indication
under the applicable standards relating to such product candidate. The preclinical studies and clinical trials of any product candidates
must comply with the regulations of the FDA and other governmental authorities in the United States and similar agencies in other
countries.
Even if we achieve positive interim results
in clinical trials, these results do not necessarily predict final results, and positive results in early trials may not be indicative
of success in later trials. For example, MyoCell has been studied in a limited number of patients to date. Even though our early
data has been promising, we have not yet completed any large-scale pivotal trials to establish the safety and efficacy of MyoCell.
A number of participants in our clinical trials have experienced serious adverse events adjudicated or determined by trial investigators
to be potentially attributable to MyoCell. There is a risk that safety
concerns relating to our product candidates or cell-based therapies in general will result in the suspension or termination of
our clinical trials.
We may experience numerous unforeseen events
during, or as a result of, the clinical trial process that could delay or prevent regulatory approval and/or commercialization
of our product candidates, including the following:
| · | the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities may find that our product candidates are not sufficiently safe or effective
or may find our cell culturing processes or facilities unsatisfactory; |
| · | officials at the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities may interpret data from preclinical studies and clinical trials
differently than we do; |
| · | our clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results or may not meet the level of statistical significance required
by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional preclinical
studies and/or clinical trials or to abandon one or more of our development programs; |
| · | the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities may change their approval policies or adopt new regulations; |
| · | there may be delays or failure in obtaining approval of our clinical trial protocols from the FDA or other regulatory authorities
or obtaining institutional review board approvals or government approvals to conduct clinical trials at prospective sites; |
| · | we, or regulators, may suspend or terminate our clinical trials because the participating patients are being exposed to unacceptable
health risks or undesirable side effects; |
| · | we may experience difficulties in managing multiple clinical sites; |
| · | enrollment in our clinical trials for our product candidates may occur more slowly than we anticipate, or we may experience
high drop-out rates of subjects in our clinical trials, resulting in significant delays; |
| · | we may be unable to manufacture or obtain from third party manufacturers sufficient quantities of our product candidates for
use in clinical trials; and |
| · | our product candidates may be deemed unsafe or ineffective, or may be perceived as being unsafe or ineffective, by healthcare
providers for a particular indication. |
In the SEISMIC Trial, we experienced delays
attributable to slower than anticipated enrollment of patients. We may continue to experience difficulties in enrolling patients
in our clinical trials, which could increase the costs or affect the timing or outcome of these trials and could prevent us from
completing these trials.
Failures or perceived failures in our clinical
trials would delay and may prevent our product development and regulatory approval process, make it difficult for us to establish
collaborations, negatively affect our reputation and competitive position and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business.
We depend on third parties to assist us in the conduct
of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and any failure of those parties to fulfill their obligations could result in costs
and delays and prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval or successfully commercializing our product candidates on a timely
basis, if at all.
We engage consultants and CROs to help design, and to assist
us in conducting, our preclinical studies and clinical trials and to collect and analyze data from those studies and trials. The
consultants and contract research organizations we engage interact with clinical investigators to enroll patients in our clinical
trials. As a result, we depend on these consultants and CROs to perform the studies and trials in accordance with the investigational
plan and protocol for each product candidate and in compliance with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as “good
clinical practice”, for conducting, recording and reporting results of clinical trials to assure that the data and results
are credible and accurate and the trial participants are adequately protected, as required by the FDA and foreign regulatory agencies.
We may face delays in our regulatory approval process if these parties do not perform their obligations in a timely or competent
fashion or if we are forced to change service providers. The risk of delays is heightened for our clinical trials conducted outside
of the United States, where it may be more difficult for us to ensure that studies are conducted in compliance with foreign regulatory
requirements. Any third parties that we hire to conduct clinical trials may also provide services to our competitors, which could
compromise the performance of their obligations to us. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their duties or meet
expected deadlines, or if the quality, completeness or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to their failure to
adhere to our clinical trial protocols or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated or may
otherwise prove to be unsuccessful. If there are delays or failures in clinical trials or regulatory approvals as a result of the
failure to perform by third parties, our development costs will increase, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval
for our product candidates. In addition, we may not be able to establish or maintain relationships with these third parties on
favorable terms, if at all. If we need to enter into replacement arrangements because a third party is not performing in accordance
with our expectations, we may not be able to do so without undue delays or considerable expenditures or at all.
Our cell-based product candidates are based on novel technologies
and the FDA and regulatory agencies in other countries have limited experience reviewing product candidates using these technologies.
We are subject to the risks of failure inherent
in the development of product candidates based on new technologies. The novel nature of our product candidates creates significant
challenges in regards to product development and optimization, government regulation, third party reimbursement and market acceptance.
These include:
| · | the scientific basis of our technology could be determined to be less sound than we believe; |
| · | the time and effort required to solve novel technical problems could delay the development of our product candidates; |
| · | the FDA and regulatory agencies in other countries have relatively limited experience with therapies based upon cellular medicine
generally and, as a result, the pathway to regulatory approval for our cell-based product candidates may be more complex and lengthy;
and |
| · | the healthcare community has relatively little experience with therapies based upon cellular medicine and, accordingly, following
regulatory approval, if any, our product candidates may not become widely accepted by physicians, patients, third party payors
or the healthcare community. |
As a result, the development and commercialization
pathway for our cell-based therapies may be subject to increased uncertainty, as compared to the pathway for new conventional drugs.
There is substantial uncertainty as to the coverage that
may be available and the reimbursement rates that may be established for our product candidates. Any failure to obtain third party
coverage or an adequate level of reimbursement for our product candidates will likely have a material adverse effect on our business.
If we successfully develop, and obtain necessary
regulatory approvals for, our product candidates we intend to sell them initially in Europe and the United States. We have not
yet submitted any of our product candidates to CMS or any private or governmental third party payor in the United States to determine
whether or not our product candidates will be covered under private or public health insurance plans or, if they are covered, what
coverage or reimbursement rates may be available. Although we believe hospitals may be entitled to some procedure reimbursement
for MyoCell, we cannot assure you that such reimbursement will be adequate or available at all.
In Europe, the pricing of prescription pharmaceutical
products and services and the level of government reimbursement generally are subject to governmental control. Reimbursement and
healthcare payment systems in European markets vary significantly by country, and may include both government-sponsored healthcare
and private insurance. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take six to twelve months or
longer after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we
may be required to conduct one or more clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of our product candidates to other available
therapies. Conducting one or more clinical trials for this purpose would be expensive and result in delays in commercialization
of our product candidates. We may not obtain coverage or reimbursement or pricing approvals from countries in Europe in a timely
manner, or at all. Any failure to receive coverage or reimbursement or pricing approvals from one or more European countries could
effectively prevent us from selling our product candidates in those countries, which could materially adversely affect our business.
In the United States, our revenues
will depend upon the coverage and reimbursement rates and policies established for our product candidates by third party
payors, including governmental authorities, managed-care providers, public health insurers, private health insurers and other
organizations. These third party payors are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and
the level of reimbursement for new healthcare products approved for marketing by the FDA or regulatory agencies in other
countries. As a result, significant uncertainty exists as to whether newly approved medical products will be eligible for
coverage by third party payors or, if eligible for coverage, what the reimbursement rates will be for those products.
Furthermore, cell-based therapies like MyoCell may be more expensive than pharmaceuticals due to, among other things, the
higher cost and complexity associated with the research, development and production of these therapies. This, in turn, may
make it more difficult for us to obtain adequate reimbursement from third party payors, particularly if we cannot demonstrate
a favorable cost-benefit relationship. Third party payors may also deny coverage or offer inadequate levels of reimbursement
for our potential products if they determine that the product has not received appropriate clearances from the FDA or other
government regulators or is experimental, unnecessary or inappropriate. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that adequate third
party coverage or reimbursement will be available for any of our product candidates to allow us to successfully commercialize
these product candidates.
Coverage and reimbursement rates for our
product candidates may be subject to increased restrictions both in the United States and in other countries in the future. Coverage
policies and reimbursement rates are subject to change and we cannot guarantee that current coverage policies and reimbursement
rates will be applicable to our product candidates in the future. U.S. federal, state and foreign agencies and legislatures from
time to time may seek to impose restrictions on coverage, pricing, and reimbursement level of drugs, devices and healthcare services
in order to contain healthcare costs.
Product liability and other claims against us may reduce
demand for our products or result in substantial damages. We anticipate that we will need to obtain and maintain additional or
increased insurance coverage, and we may not be able to obtain or maintain such coverage on commercially reasonable terms, if at
all.
A product liability claim, a clinical trial
liability claim or other claim with respect to uninsured liabilities or for amounts in excess of insured liabilities could have
a material adverse effect on our business. Our business exposes us to potential liability risks that may arise from the clinical
testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and the manufacture and sale of any approved products. Any clinical
trial liability or product liability claim or series of claims or class actions brought against us, with or without merit, could
result in:
| · | liabilities that substantially exceed our existing clinical trial liability insurance, or any clinical trial liability or product
liability insurance that we may obtain in the future, which we would then be required to pay from other sources, if available; |
| · | an increase in the premiums we pay for our clinical trial liability insurance and any clinical trial liability or product liability
insurance we may obtain in the future or the inability to renew or obtain clinical trial liability or product liability insurance
coverage in the future on acceptable terms, or at all; |
| · | withdrawal of clinical trial volunteers or patients; |
| · | damage to our reputation and the reputation of our products, including loss of market share; |
| · | regulatory investigations that could require costly recalls or product modifications; |
| · | diversion of management’s attention from managing our business. |
We do not currently have product liability
insurance because none of our product candidates has yet been approved for commercialization. While we plan to seek product liability
insurance coverage if any of our product candidates are sold commercially, we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain
product liability insurance on commercially acceptable terms, if at all, or that we will be able to maintain such insurance at
a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect against potential losses.
Claims may be made by consumers, healthcare
providers, third party strategic collaborators or others selling our products if one of our products or product candidates causes,
or appears to have caused, an injury. We may be subject to claims against us even if an alleged injury is due to the actions of
others. For example, we rely on the expertise of physicians, nurses and other associated medical personnel to perform the medical
procedures and processes related to our product candidates. If these medical personnel are not properly trained or are negligent
in using our product candidates, the therapeutic effect of our product candidates may be diminished or the patient may suffer injury,
which may subject us to liability. In addition, an injury resulting from the activities of our suppliers may serve as a basis for
a claim against us.
We do not intend to promote, or to in any
way support or encourage the promotion of, our product candidates for off-label or otherwise unapproved uses. However, if our product
candidates are approved by the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities, we cannot prevent a physician from using them for
any off-label applications. If injury to a patient results from such an inappropriate use, we may become involved in a product
liability suit, which will likely be expensive to defend.
These liabilities could prevent or interfere
with our clinical efforts, product development efforts and any subsequent product commercialization efforts, all of which could
have a material adverse effect on our business.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
We hold limited patent and other intellectual property
rights, and our success will be dependent in large part on safeguarding our existing intellectual property rights and obtaining
patent and other proprietary protection for our product candidates.
We hold limited patent rights in our product
candidates. Our MyoCath product candidate is protected by a patent, expiring in September 2017, in which we have an irrevocable
co-exclusive license. Our MyoCell product candidate is no longer protected by patents, which means that competitors will be free
to sell products that incorporate the same or similar technologies that are used in MyoCell without infringing our patent rights.
As a result, MyoCell, if approved for use, may be vulnerable to competition in the form of products that use the same or similar
technologies. We have previously licensed certain patents and patent applications relating to our MyoCell product candidate. These
licenses have all lapsed as of the date of this report, although we have had discussions with the relevant licensor regarding a
potential reinstatement of our rights in such licenses.
Our commercial success will depend to a
significant degree on our ability to:
| · | compel the owners of the patents licensed to us to defend and enforce such patents, to the extent such patents may be applicable
to our products and material to their commercialization; |
| · | obtain new patent and other proprietary protection for MyoCell and our other product candidates; |
| · | obtain and/or maintain appropriate licenses to patents, patent applications or other proprietary rights held by others with
respect to our technology, both in the United States and other countries; |
| · | preserve intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates; and |
| · | operate without infringing the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. |
Failure to obtain adequate patent protection
for our product candidates, or the failure to protect our existing patent rights, may impair our ability to be competitive. The
availability of infringing products in markets where we have patent protection, or the availability of competing products in markets
where we do not have adequate patent protection, could erode the market for our product candidates, negatively impact the prices
we can charge for our product candidates, and harm our reputation if infringing or competing products are manufactured to inferior
standards.
Our most important license agreement with respect to MyoCath
is co-exclusive and the co-licensor of the intellectual property, a division of Abbott Laboratories, may also seek to commercialize
MyoCath.
In June 2003, we assigned our exclusive
license to the primary patent protecting MyoCath to ACS, originally a subsidiary of Guidant Corporation and now d/b/a Abbott Vascular,
a division of Abbott Laboratories. In connection with this agreement, ACS granted to us a co-exclusive, irrevocable, fully paid-up
license to this patent
for the life of the patent. Because our license is co-exclusive
with ACS, ACS may, parallel to our efforts, seek to commercialize MyoCath if MyoCath secures regulatory approval.
Accordingly, even if ACS does nothing to
assist us to secure regulatory approval of MyoCath, ACS may become a direct competitor in the MyoCath manufacturing and supply
business. In addition, pursuant to our agreement with ACS, we are prohibited from contracting with third parties for the distribution
of MyoCath.
Our patents may not be valid or enforceable, and may be
challenged by third parties.
We cannot assure you that any patents issued or licensed to
us would be held valid by a court or administrative body or that we would be able to successfully enforce our patents against infringers,
including our competitors. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its validity or enforceability, and the validity and
enforceability of a patent is susceptible to challenge on numerous legal grounds. Challenges raised in patent infringement litigation
brought by or against us may result in determinations that patents that have been issued or licensed to us or any patents that
may be issued to us or our licensors in the future are invalid, unenforceable or otherwise subject to limitations. In the event
of any such determinations, third parties may be able to use the discoveries or technologies claimed in these patents without paying
licensing fees or royalties to us, which could significantly diminish the value of our intellectual property and our competitive
advantage. Even if our patents are held to be enforceable, others may be able to design around our patents or develop products
similar to our products that are not within the scope of any of our patents.
In addition, enforcing the patents that
have been licensed to us and any patents that may be issued to us in the future against third parties may require significant expenditures
regardless of the outcome of such efforts. Our inability to enforce our patents against infringers and competitors may impair our
ability to be competitive and could have a material adverse effect on our business.
If we are not able to protect and control unpatented trade
secrets, know-how and other technological innovation, we may suffer competitive harm.
We rely to a large extent on unpatented
technology, trade secrets, confidential information and proprietary know-how to protect our technology and maintain our competitive
position, especially when we do not believe that patent protection is appropriate or can be obtained. Trade secrets are difficult
to protect. In order to protect proprietary technology and processes, we rely in part on confidentiality and intellectual property
assignment agreements with our employees, consultants and others. These agreements generally provide that the individual must keep
confidential and not disclose to other parties any confidential information developed or learned by the individual during the course
of the individual’s relationship with us except in limited circumstances. These agreements generally also provide that we
shall own all inventions conceived by the individual in the course of rendering services to us. These agreements may not effectively
prevent disclosure of confidential information or result in the effective assignment to us of intellectual property, and may not
provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information or other breaches of the agreements.
In addition, others may independently discover trade secrets and proprietary information that have been licensed to us or that
we own, and in such case we could not assert any trade secret rights against such party.
Enforcing a claim that a party illegally
obtained and is using trade secrets that have been licensed to us or that we own is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and
the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States may be less willing to protect trade secrets. Costly
and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to seek to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights, and failure
to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could have a material adverse effect on our business. Moreover, some of our academic
institution licensors, collaborators and scientific advisors have rights to publish data and information to which we have rights.
If we cannot maintain the confidentiality of our technologies and other confidential information in connection with our collaborations,
our ability to protect our proprietary information or obtain patent protection in the future may be impaired, which could have
a material adverse effect on our business.
Risks Related
to the Transactions with Magna Equities II, LLC
Funding from our Purchase Agreement
with Magna Equities II, LLC may be limited or insufficient to fund our operations or to implement our strategy.
Under our Purchase
Agreement with Magna Equities II, LLC, and following December 22, 2014, the date of effectiveness of the registration statement
of the shares underlying the Purchase Agreement , and subject to other conditions, we may direct Magna Equities II, LLC to purchase
up to $3,000,000 of our shares of common stock over a 24-month period. Although the Purchase Agreement provides that we may sell
up to $3,000,000 of our common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC, only 143,812,591 shares of our common stock were offered under
the prospectus of the Registration Statement and disclosed in the Purchase Agreement, which represents (i) 31,000,000 shares of
common stock that may be issued to Magna Equities II, LLC upon conversion of the Convertible Note, (ii) 12,000,000 shares of common
stock that we issued to Magna Equities II, LLC as Initial Commitment Shares on October 27, 2014, (iii) a maximum of 15,890,872
shares of common stock that we may be required to issue to Magna Equities II, LLC as Additional Commitment Shares and (iv) 87,812,591
shares of common stock that we may issue to Magna Equities II, LLC as Shares pursuant to draw downs under the Purchase Agreement.
At an assumed purchase
price of $0.01460 (equal to 93% of the closing price of our common stock of $0.01570 on November 10, 2014), and assuming the sale
by us to Magna Equities II, LLC of all of the 87,812,591 Shares, or approximately 15.7% of our issued and outstanding common stock,
including the issuance of such shares, being registered hereunder pursuant to draw downs under the Purchase Agreement, we would
receive only approximately $1,282,064 in gross proceeds. Furthermore, we may receive substantially less than $1,282,064 in gross
proceeds from the financing due to our share price, discount to market and other factors relating to our common stock. If we elect
to issue and sell more than the 87,812,591 Shares offered to Magna Equities II, LLC, which we have the right, but not the obligation,
to do, we must first register for resale under the Securities Act any such additional Shares, which could cause additional substantial
dilution to our stockholders. Based on the above assumptions, we would be required to register an additional approximately 117,666,849
shares of our common stock to obtain the balance of $1,717,936 of the Total Commitment that would be available to us under the
Purchase Agreement. We currently have authorized and available for issuance 2,000,000,000 shares of our common stock pursuant to
our charter. Depending on the price at which Shares are ultimately sold, we may have to increase the number of our authorized shares
in order to issue Shares to Magna Equities II, LLC.
There can be no assurance
that we will be able to receive all or any of the Total Commitment from Magna Equities II, LLC because the Purchase Agreement contains
certain limitations, restrictions, requirements, conditions and other provisions that could limit our ability to cause Magna Equities
II, LLC to buy common stock from us. For instance, we are prohibited from issuing a Draw Down Notice
if the amount requested in such Draw Down Notice exceeds the Maximum Draw Down Amount, or the
sale of Shares pursuant to the Draw Down Notice would cause us to sell or Magna Equities II, LLC to purchase an aggregate number
of shares of the Company’s common stock which would result in beneficial ownership by Magna Equities II, LLC of more than
9.99% of our common stock (as calculated pursuant to Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder).
Moreover, there are limitations with respect to the frequency with which we may provide Draw Down Notices to Magna Equities
II, LLC under the Purchase Agreement. Also, as discussed above, there must be an effective registration
statement covering the resale of any Shares to be issued pursuant to any draw down under the Purchase Agreement,. These
registration statements may be subject to review and comment by the staff of the Commission, and will require the consent of our
independent registered public accounting firm. Therefore, the timing of effectiveness of these registration statements cannot be
assured.
The extent to which
we rely on Magna Equities II, LLC as a source of funding will depend on a number of factors, including the amount of working capital
needed, the prevailing market price of our common stock and the extent to which we are able to secure working capital from other
sources. If obtaining sufficient funding from Magna Equities II, LLC were to prove unavailable or prohibitively dilutive, we would
need to secure another source of funding. Even if we sell all $3,000,000 of common stock under the Purchase Agreement with Magna
Equities II,
LLC, we will still need additional capital
to fully implement our current business, operating plans and development plans.
The sale or issuance of our common
stock to Magna Equities II, LLC at a discount may cause substantial dilution and the resale of the shares of common stock by Magna
Equities II, LLC into the public market, or the perception that such sales may occur, could cause the price of our common stock
to fall.
Under the Purchase
Agreement with Magna Equities II, LLC, and following December 22, 2014, the date of effectiveness of the registration statement
of the shares underlying the Purchase Agreement, and subject to other conditions, we may direct Magna Equities II, LLC to purchase
up to $3,000,000 of our shares of common stock over a 24-month period. We are registering an aggregate of 143,812,591 (including
12,000,000 shares already issued) shares of common stock in the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part pursuant
to the Registration Rights Agreement, representing shares which have been and may be issuable to Magna Equities II, LLC under the
Purchase Agreement and shares underlying the Convertible Note we issued to Magna Equities II, LLC. Notwithstanding Magna Equities
II, LLC’s beneficial ownership limitation set forth in the Purchase Agreement and the Convertible Note, if all of the 143,812,591
shares offered under that prospectus were issued and outstanding as of the effective date of the registration statement, such shares
would represent approximately 20.7% of the total number of shares of our common stock outstanding and 20.9% of the total number
of outstanding shares of our common stock held by non-affiliates, in each case as of November 20, 2014. The number of shares ultimately
offered for sale by Magna Equities II, LLC under that prospectus is dependent upon a number of factors, including the extent to
which Magna Equities II, LLC converts the Convertible Note into shares of our common stock and the number of Shares we ultimately
issue and sell to Magna Equities II, LLC under the Purchase Agreement. Because the actual purchase
price for the Shares that we may sell to Magna Equities II, LLC will fluctuate based on the market price of our common stock during
the term of the Purchase Agreement, we are not able to determine at this time the exact number of shares of our common stock that
we will issue under the Purchase Agreement and, therefore, the exact number of shares we will ultimately register for resale under
the Securities Act.
Specifically, because
the per share purchase price for the Shares subject to a Draw Down Notice will be equal to a 7% discount
to certain trading prices of our common stock as set forth in the Purchase Agreement, Magna Equities II, LLC will pay less than
the then-prevailing market price for our common stock, and the actual purchase price for the Shares that we may sell to
Magna Equities II, LLC will fluctuate based on the VWAPs and closing prices of our common stock during the term of the Purchase
Agreement. As a result of this discount, Magna Equities II, LLC may have a financial incentive to sell our common stock immediately
to realize the profit equal to the difference between the purchase price and the market price. If Magna Equities II, LLC sells
the common stock, the market price of our common stock could decrease. If the market price of our common stock decreases, Magna
Equities II, LLC may have a further incentive to sell the common stock that it holds. These sales may have a further impact on
the market price of our common stock.
Moreover, there is
an inverse relationship between the market price of our common stock and the number of shares of our common stock that may be sold
pursuant to the Purchase Agreement. That is, the lower the market price, the more shares of our common stock that may be sold under
the Purchase Agreement. Accordingly, if the market price of our common stock decreases (whether such decrease is due to sales by
Magna Equities II, LLC in the market or otherwise) and, in turn, the purchase price of our common stock sold to Magna Equities
II, LLC under the Purchase Agreement decreases, this could allow Magna Equities II, LLC to receive greater numbers of shares of
our common stock pursuant to draw downs under the Purchase Agreement. Although the number of shares of our common stock that our
existing stockholders own will not decrease, the common stock owned by our existing stockholders will represent a smaller percentage
of our total outstanding shares after any such sales to Magna Equities II, LLC. Depending on market liquidity at the time, the
sale of a substantial number of shares of our common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC at a discount to the then-prevailing market
price for our common stock under the Purchase Agreement, and the resale of such shares by Magna Equities II, LLC into the public
market, or the perception that such sales may occur, could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline, result in substantial
dilution to existing stockholders and make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at
a time and at a price that we might otherwise wish to effect sales.
You may experience
immediate and substantial dilution in the net tangible book value per share of the common stock you purchase.
The price per share
of our common stock being offered pursuant to the Purchase Agreement may be substantially higher than the net tangible book value
per share of our common stock. Therefore, if you purchase shares of common stock at the current market value, you may suffer immediate
and substantial dilution in the pro forma net tangible book value per share of common stock..
We may use the
net proceeds from sales of our common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement in ways with which you
may disagree.
We intend to use the
net proceeds from sales of our common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement for working capital and
general corporate purposes. As of the date of this report , we cannot specify with certainty all of the particular uses of the
proceeds from sales of common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement. Accordingly, we will have significant
discretion in the use of the net proceeds of sales of common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement.
It is possible that we may allocate the proceeds differently than investors in this offering desire or that we will fail to maximize
our return on these proceeds. We may, subsequent to this offering, modify our intended use of the proceeds from sales of common
stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement to pursue strategic opportunities that may arise, such as potential
acquisition opportunities. You will be relying on the judgment of our management with regard to the use of the net proceeds from
the sales of common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, and you will not have the opportunity,
as part of your investment decision, to assess whether the proceeds are being used appropriately. Any failure to apply the proceeds
from sales of common stock to Magna Equities II, LLC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement effectively could have a material adverse
effect on our business and cause a decline in the market price of our common stock.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
Our common stock may be considered a “penny stock,”
and thereby be subject to additional sale and trading regulations that may make it more difficult to sell.
Our common stock is considered to be a “penny
stock.” It does not qualify for one of the exemptions from the definition of “penny stock” under Section 3a51-1
of the Exchange Act. Our common stock is a “penny stock” because it meets one or more of the following conditions (i)
the stock trades at a price less than $5.00 per share; (ii) it is not traded on a “recognized” national exchange or
(iii) it is not quoted on the NASDAQ Global Market, or has a price less than $5.00 per share. The principal result or effect of
being designated a “penny stock” is that securities broker-dealers participating in sales of our common stock are subject
to the “penny stock” regulations set forth in Rules 15-2 through 15g-9 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act.
For example, Rule 15g-2 requires broker-dealers dealing in penny stocks to provide potential investors with a document disclosing
the risks of penny stocks and to obtain a manually signed and dated written receipt of the document at least two business days
before effecting any transaction in a penny stock for the investor’s account. Moreover, Rule 15g-9 requires broker-dealers
in penny stocks to approve the account of any investor for transactions in such stocks before selling any penny stock to that investor.
This procedure requires the broker-dealer to (i) obtain from the investor information concerning his or her financial situation,
investment experience and investment objectives; (ii) reasonably determine, based on that information, that transactions in penny
stocks are suitable for the investor and that the investor has sufficient knowledge and experience as to be reasonably capable
of evaluating the risks of penny stock transactions; (iii) provide the investor with a written statement setting forth the basis
on which the broker-dealer made the determination in (ii) above; and (iv) receive a signed and dated copy of such statement from
the investor, confirming that it accurately reflects the investor’s financial situation, investment experience and investment
objectives. Compliance with these requirements may make it more difficult and time consuming for holders of our common stock to
resell their shares to third parties or to otherwise dispose of them in the market or otherwise.
FINRA sales practice requirements may limit a shareholder’s
ability to buy and sell our common shares.
In addition to the “penny stock”
rules described above, FINRA has adopted rules that require that in recommending an investment to a customer, a broker-dealer must
have reasonable grounds for believing that the investment is suitable for that customer. Prior to recommending speculative low
priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about
the customer’s financial status, tax status, investment objectives and other information. Under interpretations of these
rules, FINRA believes that there is a high probability that speculative low priced securities will not be suitable for at least
some customers. FINRA requirements make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that their customers buy our common shares,
which may limit your ability to buy and sell our stock and have an adverse effect on the market for our shares.
Rule 144 sales in the future may have a depressive effect
on the company’s stock price as an increase in supply of shares for sale, with no corresponding increase in demand will cause
prices to fall.
All of the outstanding shares of common
stock held by the present officers, directors, and affiliate stockholders are “restricted securities” within the meaning
of Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. As restricted shares, these shares may be resold only pursuant to an
effective registration statement or under the requirements of Rule 144 or other applicable exemptions from registration under the
Securities Act of 1933 and as required under applicable state securities laws. Rule 144 provides in essence that a person who is
an affiliate or officer or director who has held restricted securities for six months may, under certain conditions, sell every
three months, in brokerage transactions, a number of shares that does not exceed the greater of 1.0% of a Company’s issued
and outstanding common stock. There is no limit on the amount of restricted securities that may be sold by a non-affiliate after
the owner has held the restricted securities for a period of six months if the Company is a current reporting company under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. A sale under Rule 144 or under any other exemption from the Securities Act of 1933, if available,
or pursuant to subsequent registration of shares of common stock of present stockholders, may have a depressive effect upon the
price of the common stock in any market that may develop. In addition, if we are deemed a shell company pursuant to Section 12(b)-2
of the Act, our “restricted securities”, whether held by affiliates or non-affiliates, may not be re-sold for a period
of 12 months following the filing of a Form 10 level disclosure or registration pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933.
Failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls
in accordance with section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.
It is time consuming, difficult and costly
for us to develop and maintain the internal controls, processes and reporting procedures required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and
as our business develops, we may need to hire additional financial reporting, internal auditing and other finance staff in order
to remain compliant. The cost of compliance will adversely affect our financial results, while, if we are unable to comply, we
may not be able to obtain the independent accountant certifications that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires of publicly traded companies.
If we fail to comply in a timely manner
with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act regarding internal control over financial reporting or to remedy
any material weaknesses in our internal controls that we may identify, such failure could result in material misstatements in our
financial statements, cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and have a negative effect on the
trading price of our common stock.
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act and current SEC regulations, we are required to prepare assessments regarding internal controls over financial reporting and
furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting. Failure to achieve and maintain an effective
internal control environment or complete our Section 404 certifications could have a material adverse effect on our stock price.
In addition, in connection with our on-going
assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, we may discover “material weaknesses”
in our internal controls as defined in standards established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or the PCAOB. A
material weakness is a
significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies,
that results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not
be prevented or detected. The PCAOB defines “significant deficiency” as a deficiency that results in more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not be prevented or detected.
In the event that a material weakness is
identified, upon receiving sufficient financing or generating sufficient revenues, we will employ qualified personnel and adopt
and implement policies and procedures to address any such material weaknesses. However, the process of designing and implementing
effective internal controls is a continuous effort that requires us to anticipate and react to changes in our business and the
economic and regulatory environments and to expend significant resources to maintain a system of internal controls that is adequate
to satisfy our reporting obligations as a public company. We cannot assure you that the measures we will take will remediate any
material weaknesses that we may identify or that we will implement and maintain adequate controls over our financial process and
reporting in the future.
Any failure to complete our assessment of
our internal control over financial reporting, to remediate any material weaknesses that we may identify or to implement new or
improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm our operating results, cause us to fail to meet
our reporting obligations or result in material misstatements in our financial statements. Any such failure could also adversely
affect the results of the periodic management evaluations of our internal controls and, in the case of a failure to remediate any
material weaknesses that we may identify, would adversely affect the annual auditor attestation reports regarding the effectiveness
of our internal control over financial reporting that are required under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Inadequate internal
controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect
on the trading price of our common stock.
The systems of internal controls and procedures
that we have developed and implemented to date are adequate in a business that has no revenue, few purchase and expense transactions,
and little in the way of tangible assets and working capital. However, the reliance on third party sub-contractors and lack of
employees makes it difficult to ensure segregation of key duties, provide multiple levels of review, and ensure that specified
checks and balances exist and are enforced and acted upon where necessary. The current transaction volume and limited transaction
channels mean that operating management, financial management, board members and auditor can, and do, efficiently perform a very
extensive and detailed transaction review to ensure compliance with the Company’s established procedures and controls. When
we secure purchase orders and start purchasing product from our sub-contract manufacturers, shipping product to our customers,
collecting receivables, and paying our vendors we will need to apply significantly more resources to the management of our controls
and procedures and to ensure and continue effective compliance. If our business grows rapidly, we may not be able to keep up with
recruiting and training personnel, and enhancing our systems of internal control in line with the growth in transaction volumes
and compliance risks which could result in loss of assets, profit, and ability to manage the daily operations of our Company.
Public disclosure requirements and compliance with changing regulation of corporate governance pose challenges for our management
team and result in additional expenses and costs which may reduce the focus of management and the profitability of our company.
Changing laws, regulations and standards
relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and SEC regulations, have created uncertainty for
public companies and significantly increased the costs and risks associated with accessing the U.S. public markets. Our management
team will need to devote significant time and financial resources to comply with both existing and evolving standards for public
companies, which will lead to increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from
revenue generating activities to compliance activities.
SHOULD ONE OR MORE OF THE FOREGOING RISKS OR UNCERTAINTIES
MATERIALIZE, OR SHOULD THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS PROVE INCORRECT, ACTUAL RESULTS MAY DIFFER
SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THOSE ANTICIPATED, BELIEVED, ESTIMATED,
EXPECTED, INTENDED OR PLANNED
Item B. Unresolved Staff Comments
This Item is not applicable to us as we
are not an accelerated filer, a large accelerated filer, or a well-seasoned issuer.
Item 2. Properties
Our headquarters are located in Sunrise, Florida and consists
of 4,860 square feet of space, which we lease at a current rent of approximately $82,620 per year. The lease expired in January
2013. In January 2013, the Company amended its facility lease to extend the term of the lease until April 30, 2013. In April 2013,
the Company amended its facility lease to extend the term of the lease until August 15, 2013. In September 2013, the Company amended
its facility lease to extend the term until August 2016.
In addition to our corporate offices, at
this location, we maintain:
| · | our MyoCell cell culturing facility for supply within the United States; and |
| · | a fully equipped cell culturing laboratory where we perform experimental work in the
areas of cell culturing, cell engraftment, and other advanced research projects related to our core business. |
We believe the space available at our headquarters
will be sufficient to meet the needs of our operations for the foreseeable future.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
On November 10, 2014, the Company was served
with a lawsuit by an alleged assignee and a guarantor to a Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement. These parties claim
breach of that Agreement and damages of approximately $2.3 Million plus interest. The assignor and assignee also sued the Company’s
directors and two past directors and an affiliate shareholder for breach of fiduciary duty, claiming damages as alleged creditors
arising out of these parties’ alleged participation in Northstar Biotech Group, LLC, a secured creditor of the Company.
Other than the above, we are not presently
engaged in any material litigation pursuant to Item 103 of Regulation S-K. However, the biotechnology and medical device industries
have been characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. In addition, from time
to time, we may become involved in litigation relating to claims arising from the ordinary course of our business.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity,
Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market Information
Our common stock is listed on the OTC
Markets under the symbol “BHRT.QB”. For the periods indicated, the following table sets forth the high and low bid
prices per share of common stock, as reported by the OTC Markets. These prices represent inter-dealer quotations
without retail markup, markdown, or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
| |
Fiscal Year 2013 |
| |
High |
Low |
| First Quarter |
$0.0565 |
$0.012 |
| Second Quarter |
$0.0474 |
$0.020 |
| Third Quarter |
$0.0300 |
$0.010 |
| Fourth Quarter |
$0.0135 |
$0.007 |
| |
Fiscal Year 2014 |
| |
High |
Low |
| First Quarter |
$0.080 |
$0.009 |
| Second Quarter |
$0.055 |
$0.020 |
| Third Quarter |
$0.038 |
$0.023 |
| Fourth Quarter |
$0.025 |
$0.011 |
Holders
As of December 31,
2014, there were approximately 445 shareholders of record of our common stock.
Dividends
We have never declared or paid any cash
dividends on our common stock or other securities and do not currently anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future. The declaration and payment of dividends by us are subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and the restrictions
specified in our articles of incorporation and by applicable law. In addition, under the terms of the Northstar loan, we are restricted
from paying cash dividends to our shareholders while the loan is outstanding. Any future determination to pay cash dividends will
depend on our results of operations, financial condition, capital requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors deemed
relevant by our Board of Directors.
Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans
The following table provides certain information
regarding our existing equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2014:
| |
|
Number
of
securities
to be issued upon
exercise of
outstanding
options |
|
Weighted-
average
exercise
price of
outstanding
options |
|
Number
of
securities
remaining
available
for issuance under
equity
compensation
plans |
| Equity compensation plans approved by security holders (1) |
|
66,925,209 |
|
0.056 |
|
96,560,000 |
| Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders (2) |
|
150,564,999 |
|
0.170 |
|
0 |
| (1) | Consists of our 1999 Officers and Employees Stock Option Plan, 1999 Directors and Consultants Stock Option Plan and Omnibus
Equity Compensation Plan, 2013 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan. |
| | | |
| | (2) | Includes: |
| |
· |
a warrant issued to Tissue Genesis, Inc. to purchase 1,544,450 shares of our common stock at $7.69 per share, which expires in December 2026 (See Note 3 “Collaborative License and Research/Development Agreements” of the Notes to the Financial Statements); |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
warrants issued to the Guarantors in connection with the former Bank of America Loan to purchase an aggregate of 764,519 shares of our common stock at $7.69 per share, which expire at various dates from May 2017 through October 2017 (See Note 6 “Notes Payable – Seaside Bank” of the Notes to the Financial Statements); |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
a warrant issued to one of our officers to purchase 188,423 shares of our common stock at $5.67 per share, which expires in August 2016; |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
warrants issued to BlueCrest Capital in connection with the BlueCrest Loan to purchase an aggregate of 3,137,838 shares of our common stock at prices ranging from $7.69 to $0.53 per share, which expire at various dates April 2019 through December 2019 (See Note 6 “Notes Payable – BlueCrest Capital Finance Note Payable” of the Notes to the Financial Statements); |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
a warrant issued to a strategic partner to purchase 32,515 shares of our common stock at $7.69 per share, which expires in February 2016; |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
warrants issued to consultants to purchase an aggregate of 154,411 shares of our common stock at prices ranging from $1.09 to $6.00 per share,
which expire at various dates through September 2017; |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
warrants issued in connection with Short Term Payables to purchase an aggregate of 475,043 shares of our common stock at prices ranging from $0.61 to $0.5321 per share, which expire at various dates April 2019 |
| |
|
through September 2019 (See Note 6 “Notes Payable – Short-term Note Payable” of the Notes to the Financial Statements); |
| |
|
| |
· |
warrants issued in connection with our private placements in 2011 to purchase an aggregate of 20,437,034 shares of our common stock at prices from $0.03 to $0.65 per share expiring three to six years from the date of issuance. |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
warrants issued in connection with forbearance agreement relating to our debt obligations in 2012 to purchase an aggregate of 20,000,000 shares of our common stock at prices from $0.014 to $0.02 per share expiring ten years from the date of issuance. |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
warrants issued in connection with our private placements in 2013 to purchase an aggregate of 50,350,536 shares of our common stock at prices from $0.011 to $0.0299 per share expiring ten years from the date of issuance. |
| |
|
|
| |
· |
8,000,000 warrants in connection with a
joint venture agreement dated March 10, 2014. The warrants are exercisable at $0.0217 for four years vesting from June 8, 2014
through March 10, 2016.
|
| |
· |
4,000,000 warrants in connection with use of certain intellectual property. The warrants are exercisable at $0.0481 for four years vesting from July 6, 2014 through April 6, 2017. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
· |
4,000,000 warrants in connection with the termination of a joint venture agreement. The warrants are exercisable at $0.0157 for four years vesting May 27, 2015. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
· |
warrants issued in connection with our private placements in 2014 to purchase an aggregate of 42,833,512 shares of our common stock at prices from $0.011 to $0.02325 per share expiring ten years from the date of issuance. |
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
In 2014, the Company sold an aggregate
of 42,066,606 shares of the Company’s common stock and warrants to purchase 42,833,512 shares of the Company’s common
stock for aggregate gross cash proceeds of $479,625. The warrants are (i) exercisable solely for cash at an exercise price of ranging
from $0.11 to $0.02325 per share, (ii) non-transferable for six months following issuance and (iii) exercisable, in whole or in
part, at any time during the period commencing on the date that is six months and one day following the date of issuance and ending
on the tenth year anniversary of the date of issuance.
The issuance of such
shares of our common stock was effected in reliance on the exemptions for sales of securities not involving a public offering,
as set forth in Rule 506 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as mended (the “Securities Act”) and in Section
4(2) of the Securities Act, based on the following: the investors confirmed to us that they were “accredited investors,”
as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act and had such background, education and experience in
financial and business matters as to be able to evaluate the merits and risks of an investment in the securities; (b) there was
no public offering or general solicitation with respect to the offering; (c) the investors were provided with certain disclosure
materials and all other information requested with respect to our company; (d) the investors acknowledged that all securities being
purchased were “restricted securities” for purposes of the Securities Act, and agreed to transfer such securities only
in a transaction registered under the Securities Act or exempt from registration under the Securities Act; and (e) a legend was
placed on the certificates representing each such security stating that it was restricted and could only be transferred if subsequent
registered under the Securities Act or transferred in a transaction exempt from registration under the Securities Act.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
None.
Transfer Agent: Continental Stock Transfer & Trust
Company, 17 Battery Place, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10004 acts as transfer agent for our common stock.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
Not required under Regulation S-K for “smaller
reporting companies.”
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following is management’s discussion
and analysis (“MD&A”) of certain significant factors that have affected our financial position and operating results
during the periods included in the accompanying financial statements, as well as information relating to the plans of our current
management. This report includes forward-looking statements. Generally, the words “believes,” “anticipates,”
“may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “estimate,”
“continue,” and similar expressions or the negative thereof or comparable terminology are intended to identify forward-looking
statements. Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, including the matters set forth in this report or other
reports or documents we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time, which could cause actual results or
outcomes to differ materially from those projected. Undue reliance should not be placed on these forward-looking statements which
speak only as of the date hereof. We undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking statements.
The following discussion and analysis should
be read in conjunction with our financial statements and the related notes thereto and other financial information contained elsewhere
in this Form 10-K
The Company’s MD&A is comprised
of significant accounting estimates made in the normal course of its operations, overview of the Company’s business conditions,
results of operations, liquidity and capital resources and contractual obligations. The Company did not have any off balance sheet
arrangements as of December 31, 2014 or 2013.
The discussion and analysis of the Company’s
financial condition and results of operations is based upon its financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (or “GAAP”). The preparation of those
financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities at the
date of its financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
Our Ability To Continue as a Going Concern
Our independent registered public accounting
firm has issued its report dated March 16th, 2015 in connection with the audit of our financial statements as of December 31, 2014
that included an explanatory paragraph describing the existence of conditions that raise substantial doubt about our ability to
continue as a going concern. Our financial statements as of December 31, 2014 have been prepared under the assumption that we will
continue as a going concern. If we are not able to continue as a going concern, it is likely that holders of our common stock will
lose all of their investment. Our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty.
Overview
We are a biotechnology company focused on
the discovery, development and, subject to regulatory approval, commercialization of autologous cell therapies for the treatment
of chronic and acute heart damage. Our lead product candidates are MyoCell and AdipoCell. MyoCell is an innovative clinical therapy
designed to populate regions of scar tissue within a patient’s heart with autologous muscle cells, or cells from a patient’s
body, for the purpose of improving cardiac function in chronic heart failure patients. AdipoCell is an innovative cell therapy
with multiple possible treatment applications using autologous adipose cells. We are presently investigating the use of adipose
cells in the treatment of critical limb ischemia and rheumatoid arthritis
Biotechnology Product Candidates
We are focused
on the discovery, development and, subject to regulatory approval, commercialization of autologous cell therapies for the
treatment of chronic and acute heart damage. In our pipeline, we have multiple product Candidates for the treatment of heart
damage, including MyoCell, Myocell SDF-1 and AdipoCell. MyoCell and MyoCell SDF-1 are clinical muscle-derived cell therapies
designed to populate regions of scar tissue within a patient’s heart with new living cells for the purpose of improving
cardiac function in chronic heart failure patients. MyoCell SDF-1 is intended to be an improvement to MyoCell. MyoCell SDF-1
is similar to MyoCell except that the myoblast cells to be injected for use in MyoCell SDF-1 will be modified prior to
injection by an adenovirus vector or non-viral vector so that they will release extra quantities of the SDF-1 protein, which
expresses angiogenic factors. AdipoCell is a patient-derived cell therapy proposed for the treatment of acute myocardial
infarction, chronic heart ischemia, and lower limb ischemia. We hope to demonstrate that these product candidates are safe
and effective complements to existing therapies for chronic and acute heart damage.
Our most recent completed
clinical trials of MyoCell are the SEISMIC Trial, a 40-patient, randomized, multicenter, controlled, Phase II-a study conducted
in Europe and the MYOHEART Trial, a 20-patient, multicenter, Phase I dose-escalation trial conducted in the United States.
We were approved by
the FDA, to proceed with a 330-patient, multicenter Phase II/III trial of MyoCell in North America and Europe, or the MARVEL Trial.
We completed the MyoCell implantation procedure on the first patient in the MARVEL Trial on October 24, 2007. Thus far, 20 patients,
including 6 control patients, have been treated. Initial results for the 20 patients were released at the Heart Failure Society
of American meeting in September, 2009, showing a significant (35%) improvement in the 6 minute walk for those patients who were
treated, and no improvement for those who received a placebo. On the basis of these results, we have applied for and received approval
from the FDA to reduce the number of additional patients in the trial to 134, for a total of 154 patients. The SEISMIC, MYOHEART
and MARVEL Trials have been designed to test the safety and efficacy of MyoCell in treating patients with severe, chronic damage
to the heart. Upon regulatory approval of MyoCell, we intend to generate revenue in the United States from the sale of MyoCell
cell-culturing services for treatment of patients by qualified physicians.
We received approval
from the FDA in July of 2009 to conduct a Phase I safety study on 15 patients of a combined therapy (Myocell with SDF-1), which
we believe was the first approval of a study combining gene and cell therapies. We initially commenced work on this study, called
the REGEN Trial, during the first quarter of 2010. We suspended activity on the trial in 2010 while seeking additional funding
necessary to conduct the trial. We are seeking to secure sufficient funds to reinitiate enrollment in the MARVEL and REGEN trials.
If we successfully secure such funds, we intend to re-engage a contract research organization, or CRO, investigators and certain
suppliers to advance such trials. We have initiated and enrolled our first patient in the MIRROR trial in 2013. The trial is very
similar to the MARVEL trial but focuses on sites outside the US. We will continue enrollment in the MIRROR trial once we have
secured sufficient funds.
We have completed the
Phase 1 Angel Trial for AdipoCell (adipose derived stem cells). Five patients were enrolled and treated in the second quarter of
2013. At the twelve (12) month time point, patients demonstrated a statistically significant average improvement in ejection fraction
(EF) by echocardiogram.
At the three (3) month
time point, 100% of the patients demonstrated either improvement or stayed the same. After three (3) months, patients showed an
average absolute improvement of 3 percentage points in EF. The patients continued to improve from 3 months to 6 months with a statistically
significant average absolute improvement of 10 percentage points (p=0.01) and at the 12 month follow up patients showed this same
level of improvement (p=0.01).
We have also initiated
several Institutional Review Board studies in 2013 using adipose derived stem cells for various indications including dry macular
degeneration, degenerative disc disease, erectile dysfunction and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the second quarter
of 2014, we announced the treatment of a patient in Honduras with congestive heart failure using AdipoCell and MyoCell. This was
the first patient treated in the world using a combination of stem cells. We have begun two clinical trials in India. The first
cardiac patient has successfully been enrolled and treated in India using AdipoCell or adipose derived stem cells. The second trial
will involve the combination of AdipoCellTM and MyoCell® or muscle derived stem cells for congestive heart failure patients.
These trials are active and ongoing.
MyoCath Product Candidate
The MyoCath is a deflecting tip needle injection
catheter that has a larger (25 gauge) needle to allow for better flow rates and less leakage than systems that are 27 gauge. This
larger needle allows for thicker compositions to be injected, which helps with cell retention in the heart. Also, the MyoCath needle
has more fluoroscopic brightness than the normally used nitinol needle, enabling superior visualization during the procedure. Seeing
the needle well during injections enables the physician who is operating the catheter to pinpoint targeted areas more precisely.
The MyoCath is used to inject cells into cardiac tissue in therapeutic procedures to treat chronic heart ischemia and congestive
heart failure. Investigators in our MARVEL Trial may use either our MyoCath catheters or Biosense Webster’s (a Johnson &
Johnson company) NOGA® Cardiac Navigation System along with the MyoStar™ injection catheter for the delivery of MyoCell
to patients enrolled in the trial. We are currently producing Myocath catheters with a contract manufacturer on an as needed basis.
We conduct operations in one business
segment. We may organize our business into more discrete business units when and if we generate significant revenue from the
sale of our product candidates. Our revenue since inception has been generated inside and outside the United States, and the
majority of our long-lived assets are located in the United States.
Securities Purchase Agreements
On October 7,
2014, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Magna Equities II, LLC, a
New York limited liability company (“Magna”). The Purchase Agreement provides that, upon the terms and subject to
the conditions set forth therein, Magna shall purchase from us, a senior convertible note with an initial principal amount of
$307,500 (the “Convertible Note”) for a purchase price of $205,000 (an approximately 33.33% original issue
discount). Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, we issued the Convertible Note to Magna. The Convertible Note matures on
August 7, 2015 and, in addition to the approximately 33.33% original issue discount, accrues interest at the rate of 12% per
annum. The Convertible Note is convertible at any time, in whole or in part, at Magna’s option into shares of the
Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Common Stock”), at a fixed conversion price of
$0.01035 per share. $40,000 of the outstanding principal amount of the Convertible Note (together with any accrued and unpaid
interest with respect to such portion of the principal amount) shall be automatically extinguished (without any cash payment
by us) under certain conditions described in the Purchase Agreement. In connection with the execution of the Purchase
Agreement, our company and Magna also entered into a registration rights agreement (the “Registration Rights
Agreement”). Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement, we agreed to file an initial registration statement
with the SEC to register the resale of the Common Stock into which the Convertible Note may be converted,
On October 23, 2014,
we entered into a common stock purchase agreement (the “Common Stock Purchase Agreement”) with Magna Equities II, LLC,
a New York limited liability company (the “Investor”). The Common
Stock Purchase Agreement provides that,
upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth therein, the Investor is committed to purchase up to $3,000,000 (the “Total
Commitment”) worth of our common stock, $0.001 par value (the “Shares”), over the 24-month term of the Common Stock Purchase
Agreement. In connection with the execution of the Common Stock Purchase Agreement, on the Closing Date, our company and the Investor
also entered into a registration rights agreement. We paid to the Investor a commitment fee for entering into the Common Stock Purchase Agreement
equal to $150,000 (or 5.0% of the Total Commitment under the Common Stock Purchase Agreement) in the form of 9,109,128 restricted shares of
our common stock, calculated using a per share price of $0.016467.
On December 22, 2014,
the registration statement of the shares underlying the Purchase Agreement and the Common Stock Purchase Agreement was declared
effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission, thus, registering an aggregate of 143,812,591 shares of common stock. During
the year ended December 31, 2014, we did not use the draw down on the equity line. Subsequent to December 31, 2104, we issued an
aggregate of 19,288,783 shares of our common stock in exchange of $151,763 draw down on the equity line.
Results of Operations Overview
Revenues
We have not generated any material revenues
from our MyoCell product candidate. The revenues we have recognized to date are related to (i) sales of MyoCath to ACS and other
parties, (ii) fees associated with our assignment to ACS of our rights relating to the Primary MyoCath Patent, (iii) revenues generated
from paid registry trials, (iv) revenues from the sale of our now discontinued tissue genesis system and related supplies and (v)
revenues generated for providing cell culturing services under exclusive supply agreements. Our revenue may vary substantially
from quarter to quarter and from year to year. We believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results of operations are not
meaningful and should not be relied upon as indicative of our future performance. We do not expect to generate substantial revenues
until we obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates, which we do not expect to occur before 2016.
We recognized revenues of $2,055,831 in
2014 compared to revenues of $96,085 in 2013. Our revenue in 2014 was generated from the sale of MyoCath catheters, AdipoCell and
laboratory services. Our revenues for 2013 were generated from the sale of MyoCath Catheters and laboratory services.
Cost of Sales
Cost of sales consists of the costs associated
with the production of MyoCath.
Cost of sales was $844,941 in the twelve-month
period ended December 31, 2014 compared to $30,831 in the twelve-months ended December 31, 2013.
Research and Development
Our research and development expenses consist
of costs incurred in identifying, developing and testing our product candidates. These expenses consist primarily of costs related
to our clinical trials, the acquisition of intellectual property licenses and preclinical studies. We expense research and development
costs as incurred.
Clinical trial expenses include costs related
to the culture and preparation of cells in connection with our clinical trials, costs of contract research, costs of clinical trial
facilities, costs of delivery systems, salaries and related expenses for clinical personnel and insurance costs. Preclinical study
expenses include costs of contract research, salaries and related expenses for personnel, costs of development biopsies, costs
of delivery systems and costs of lab supplies.
We are focused on the development of a number
of autologous cell-based therapies, and related devices, for the treatment of heart damage. Accordingly, many of our costs are
not attributable to a specifically identified product candidate. We use our employee and infrastructure resources across several
projects, and we do not account
for internal research and development costs on a product candidate
by product candidate basis. From inception through December 31, 2014, we incurred aggregate research and development costs of approximately
$65.4 million (unaudited) related to our product candidates We estimate that at least $48.4 million (unaudited) of these expenses
relate to our preclinical and clinical development of MyoCell and at least $5.2 million (unaudited) of these expenses relate to
our preclinical and clinical development of MyoCath.
Clinical trials and preclinical
studies are time-consuming and expensive. Our expenditures on current and future preclinical and clinical development
programs are subject to many uncertainties. We generally test our products in several preclinical studies and then conduct
clinical trials for those product candidates that we determine to be the most promising. As we obtain results from clinical
trials, we may elect to discontinue or delay trials for some product candidates in order to focus our resources on more
promising product candidates. Completion of clinical trials may take several years or more, but the length of time generally
varies substantially according to the type, size of trial and intended use of the product candidate.
Due to the risks inherent in the clinical
trial process, development completion dates and costs vary significantly for each product candidate, are difficult to estimate
and are likely to change as clinical trials progress.
The cost of clinical trials may vary significantly
over the life of a project as a result of a variety of factors, including the number of patients who participate in the clinical
trials, the number of sites included in the clinical trials, the length of time required to enroll trial participants, the efficacy
and safety profile of our product candidates and the costs and timing of and our ability to secure regulatory approvals.
Marketing, General and Administrative
Our marketing, general and administrative
expenses primarily consist of the costs associated with our general management and clinical marketing and trade programs, including,
but not limited to, salaries and related expenses for executive, administrative and marketing personnel, rent, insurance, legal
and accounting fees, consulting fees, travel and entertainment expenses, conference costs and other clinical marketing and trade
program expenses.
Stock-Based Compensation
Stock-based compensation which is included
in the Marketing, General and Administrative above, reflects our recognition as an expense of the value of stock options and other
equity instruments issued to our employees and non-employees over the vesting period of the options and other equity instruments.
We have granted to our employees options to purchase shares of common stock at exercise prices equal to the fair market value of
the underlying shares of common stock at the time of each grant, as determined by our Board of Directors, with input from management.
In valuing our common stock, our Board of
Directors considered a number of factors, including, but not limited to:
| |
· |
our financial position and historical financial performance; |
| |
· |
the illiquidity of our capital stock; |
| |
· |
arm’s length sales of our common stock; |
| |
· |
the development status of our product candidates; |
| |
· |
the business risks we face; |
| |
· |
vesting restrictions imposed upon the equity awards; |
| |
· |
an evaluation and benchmark of our competitors; and |
| |
· |
the prospects of a liquidity event. |
In April 1, 2013, the Board of Directors approved the establishment
of the Bioheart 2013 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan, or the “2013 Omnibus Plan”. The 2013 Omnibus Plan reserves up
to hundred million shares of common stock for issuance, as amended. The 2013 Omnibus Plan was approved by the majority of shareholders
at our annual meeting, dated February 2, 2015.
A summary of options at December 31, 2014 and activity during
the year then ended is presented below:
| | |
Shares | | |
Weighted-
Average
Exercise Price | | |
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term (in years) | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Options outstanding at January 1, 2013 | |
| 7,853,376 | | |
$ | 0.67 | | |
| 8.2 | |
| Granted | |
| 17,400,000 | | |
$ | 0.016 | | |
| 9.9 | |
| Exercised | |
| — | | |
$ | | | |
| | |
| Forfeited/Expired | |
| (1,340,433 | ) | |
$ | 1.08 | | |
| | |
| Options outstanding at December 31, 2013 | |
| 23,912,943 | | |
$ | 0.15 | | |
| 9.0 | |
| Granted | |
| 43,148,487 | | |
$ | 0.023 | | |
| 10.0 | |
| Exercised | |
| — | | |
| | | |
| | |
| Forfeited/Expired | |
| (136,221 | ) | |
$ | 5.2 | | |
| | |
| Options outstanding at December 31, 2014 | |
| 66,925,209 | | |
$ | 0.056 | | |
| 8.9 | |
| Options exercisable at December 31, 2014 | |
| 24,814,222 | | |
$ | 0.12 | | |
| 8.7 | |
| Available for grant at December 31, 2014 | |
| 96,500,000 | | |
| | | |
| | |
The following information applies to options outstanding and
exercisable at December 31, 2014:
| | |
Options Outstanding | | |
Options Exercisable |
| | |
| Shares | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | | |
| Shares | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | |
| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| $0.00 – $0.70 | |
| 66,438,487 | | |
| 9.0 | | |
$ | 0.03 | | |
| 24,327,500 | | |
$ | 0.03 | |
| $0.71 – $1.28 | |
| 149,930 | | |
| 3.8 | | |
$ | 0.81 | | |
| 149,930 | | |
$ | 0.81 | |
| $5.25 – $5.67 | |
| 312,080 | | |
| 1.6 | | |
$ | 5.53 | | |
| 312,080 | | |
$ | 5.53 | |
| $7.69 | |
| 24,712 | | |
| 1.6 | | |
$ | 7.69 | | |
| 24,712 | | |
$ | 7.69 | |
| | |
| 66,925,209 | | |
| 8.9 | | |
$ | 0.056 | | |
| 24,814,222 | | |
$ | 0.12 | |
On August 5, 2013, we re-priced options previously
issued from 2011 through 2012 for current employees and officers in aggregate of 4,890,000 options with previous exercise prices
from $0.03 to $0.21 per share to $0.01694 per share, all other terms remaining unchanged. The gross change in fair value,
determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model, of $1,630 was charged to current period operations.
On August 1, 2013, we granted an aggregate
15,000,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01576 per share vesting over four years. The
fair value of $245,749, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield:
0%; Volatility: 153.27% and Risk free rate: 2.74%, of which $25,599 was charged to current period operations.
On September 1, 2013, we granted an aggregate
2,400,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01654 per share, respectively; to officers and employees,
exercisable immediately. The fair value of $37,823, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 150.98% and Risk free rate: 2.78%, was charged to current period operations.
On February 24, 2014,
we issued an aggregate 15,000,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.019 per share to officers, vesting
at 25% immediately and the remainder over approximately 42 months, exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $282,597,
determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 163.63%
and Risk free rate: 2.75%.
On February 24, 2014,
we issued an aggregate 4,800,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.019 per share to officers, vesting
immediately and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $90,431, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing
model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 163.63% and Risk free rate: 2.75%.
On May 12, 2014, we
issued an aggregate 4,848,487 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.0272 per share to officers and employees,
vesting over four years at anniversary and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $130,135, determined using the
Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 161.36% and Risk free rate:
2.66%.
On August 1, 2014, we
issued an aggregate 15,000,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.02694 per share to officers and employees,
vesting at 25% immediately and 75% over three years at anniversary and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $391,798,
determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 168.62%
and Risk free rate: 2.52%.
On November 3, 2014,
we issued an aggregate 700,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01932 per share to officers and employees,
vesting at 25% each year over four years at anniversary and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $12,739, determined
using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 152.87% and Risk free
rate: 2.36%.
On November 3, 2014,
we issued an aggregate 2,800,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01932 per share to board of directors,
vesting immediately and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $54,957, determined using the Black Scholes option
pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 152.87% and Risk free rate: 2.36%.
The fair value of all
options vesting during the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 of $537,606 and $125,515, respectively, was charged to current
period operations.
Warrants
A summary of common stock purchase warrants at December 31,
2014 and activity during the year then ended is presented below:
| | |
Shares | | |
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | | |
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term (in
years) | |
| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| Outstanding at January 1, 2013 | |
| 74,073,322 | | |
$ | 0.37 | | |
| 4.5 | |
| Issued | |
| 50,350,536 | | |
$ | 0.16 | | |
| 9.2 | |
| Exercised | |
| — | | |
$ | 0.00 | | |
| | |
| Forfeited | |
| (6,345,002 | ) | |
$ | 0.38 | | |
| | |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2013 | |
| 118,078,856 | | |
$ | 0.22 | | |
| 6.3 | |
| Issued | |
| 57,582,469 | | |
$ | 0.02 | | |
| 8.2 | |
| Exercised | |
| (11,918,181 | ) | |
$ | 0.01 | | |
| | |
| Expired | |
| (13,178,145 | ) | |
$ | 0.08 | | |
| | |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2014 | |
| 150,564,999 | | |
$ | 0.17 | | |
| 6.6 | |
| Exercisable at December 31, 2014 | |
| 131,822,688 | | |
$ | 0.10 | | |
| 6.7 | |
The following information applies to common stock purchase warrants
outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2014:
| | |
Warrants Outstanding | |
Warrants Exercisable |
| | |
| Shares | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | | |
| Shares | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | |
| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| $0.01 – $0.50 | |
| 144,315,866 | | |
| 6.7 | | |
$ | 0.02 | | |
| 127,118,005 | | |
$ | 0.02 | |
| $0.52 – $0.68 | |
| 2,699,675 | | |
| 4.3 | | |
$ | 0.58 | | |
| 2,699,675 | | |
$ | 0.58 | |
| $0.70 – $1.62 | |
| 848,176 | | |
| 5.0 | | |
$ | 0.71 | | |
| 848,176 | | |
$ | 0.71 | |
| $5.67 – $7.69 | |
| 2,701,282 | | |
| 7.9 | | |
$ | 7.55 | | |
| 1,156,832 | | |
$ | 7.35 | |
| | |
| 150,564,999 | | |
| 6.6 | | |
$ | 0.17 | | |
| 131,822,688 | | |
$ | 0.10 | |
In conjunction with
the authorized issuance of common stock, we issued 41,582,469 common stock purchase warrants during the year ended December 31,
2014. In conjunction with the authorized issuance of common stock, we issued approximately 50 million common stock purchase warrants
during the year ended December 31, 2013.
During the year ended
December 31, 2014, we issued an aggregate of 8,000,000 common stock purchase warrants in connection with a revenue share agreement
dated March 10, 2014. The warrants are exercisable at $0.0217 for four years vesting from June 8, 2014 through March 10, 2016.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company charged $103,238 to current period operations.
During the year ended
December 31, 2014, we issued an aggregate of 4,000,000 common stock purchase warrants in connection with use of certain intellectual
property. The warrants are exercisable at $0.0481 for four years vesting from July 6, 2014 through April 6, 2017. During the year
ended December 31, 2014, the Company charged $32,878 to current period operations for the vesting portion.
During the year ended
December 31, 2014, we issued an aggregate of 4,000,000 common stock purchase warrants in connection with the termination of a revenue
share agreement. The warrants are exercisable at $0.0157 for four years vesting May 27, 2015. During the year ended December 31,
2014, the Company charged $54,146 to current period operations.
On November 3, 2014,
the Company extended an aggregate of 13,063,530 expiring common stock purchase warrants previously issued to the Company’s
Board of Directors for additional three years. The aggregate change in fair value of $148,517, determined using the Black Scholes
option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 152.87% and Risk free rate: 0.96% was charged
to current period operations.
During 2014 and 2013, we recognized stock-based
compensation expense of $636,123 and $125,515, respectively. The increase in stock based compensation from 2013 to 2014 was due
to 43.1 million common stock purchase options granted in 2013 compared to 17.4 million options in 2013, stock options granted to
officers, consultants and key employees. We intend to grant stock options and other stock-based compensation in the future and
we may therefore recognize additional stock-based compensation in connection with these future grants.
Interest Expense
Interest expense in 2014 and 2013 primarily
consists of interest incurred on the principal amount of the Northstar loan, our former Bank of America loan, the Seaside National
Bank loan, accrued fees and interest payable to the Guarantors, the amortization of related deferred loan costs and the amortization
of the fair value of warrants issued in connection with the loans. The deferred loan costs and fair value of warrants issued in
connection with the loans are being amortized to interest expense over the terms of the respective loans using the effective interest
method.
Critical Accounting Policies
Our discussion and analysis of our financial
condition and results of operations is based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. We base our estimates on historical
experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form
the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.
Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. While our critical accounting policies
are described in Note 1 to our financial statements appearing elsewhere in this report, we believe the following policies are important
to understanding and evaluating our reported financial results:
Revenue Recognition
At the time of each
transaction, we assess whether the fee associated with the transaction is fixed or determinable and whether or not collection is
reasonably assured. The assessment of whether the fee is fixed or determinable is based upon the payment terms of the transaction.
If a significant portion of a fee is due after our normal payment terms or upon implementation or client acceptance, the fee is
accounted for as not being fixed or determinable and revenue is recognized as the fees become due or after implementation or client
acceptance has occurred. Collectability is assessed based on a number of factors, including past transaction history with the client
and the creditworthiness of the client.
Revenues for test kits
and equipment sold are not recorded until test kits are delivered. The Company has revenue sharing arrangements for the sale of
goods whereby the Company is the primary obligor, sets pricing with the customers and bears all associated credit risks with the
customers. Sales under revenue share arrangements are recorded as gross sales and any portion shared with third parties under such
arrangements are recorded as cost of sales. Revenues from trainings are not recorded until the completion of the training. Any
cash received as a deposit for trainings are recorded by the company as a liability.
Patient treatments and
service revenue is recognized when those services have been completed or satisfied.
Stock-based compensation
(Included in Accounting Standards Codification
(“ASC”) 718 “Share Based Payment”, previously SFAS No. 123(R) “Accounting for stock based compensation”)
The Company will account for its employee
stock based compensation arrangements in accordance with the provisions of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion
No. 25. “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees”, and related interpretations. As such, compensation
expense for stock options, common stock and other equity instruments issued to non-employees for services received will be based
upon the fair value of the equity instruments issued, as the services are provided and the securities earned. SFAS No. 123,
“Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation”, requires entities that continue to apply the provisions of APB Opinion No.
25 for transactions with employees to provide pro forma net earnings (loss) and pro forma earnings (loss) per share disclosures
for employee stock option grants as if the fair-value-based method defined in SFAS No. 123 had been applied to these transactions.
For the period from inception (March 12, 2004) to December 31, 2012, no stock options were committed to be issued to employees.
The Company accounts for derivative instruments
in accordance with ASC 815, which establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities,
including certain derivative instruments embedded in other financial instruments or contracts and requires recognition of all derivatives
on the balance sheet at fair value, regardless of hedging relationship designation. Accounting for changes in fair value of the
derivative instruments depends on whether the derivatives qualify as hedge relationships and the types of relationships designated
are based on the exposures hedged. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company did not have any derivative instruments that were
designated as hedges.
Income taxes
Income taxes are accounted for under
the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable
to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases
and operating loss carry forwards that are available to be carried forward to future years for tax purposes. Deferred tax
assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary
differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax
rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. When it is not considered to be more likely
than not that a deferred tax asset will be realized, a valuation allowance is provided for the excess. Although the Company
has significant loss carry forwards available to reduce future income for tax purposes, no amount has been reflected on the balance
sheet for deferred income taxes as any deferred tax asset has been fully offset by a valuation allowance.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of the financial statements
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions, where
applicable, that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at
the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. While
actual results could differ from those estimates, management does not expect such variances, if any, to have a material effect
on the financial statements.
Research and Development Costs
Research and development costs are
expensed as incurred in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. Research
is planned search or critical investigation aimed at discovery of new knowledge with the hope that such knowledge will be useful
in developing a new product or service or a new process or technique or in bringing about a significant improvement to an existing
product or process. Development is the translation of research findings or other knowledge into a plan or design for a new
product or process or for a significant improvement to an existing product or process whether intended for sale or
use. It includes the conceptual formulation, design, and testing
of product alternatives, construction of prototypes, and operation of pilot plants. It does not include routine or periodic alterations
to existing products, production lines, manufacturing processes, and other on-going operations even though those alterations may
represent improvements and it does not include market research or market testing activities. Elements of costs shall be identified
with research and development activities as follows: The costs of materials and equipment or facilities that are acquired
or constructed for research and development activities and that have alternative future uses shall be capitalized as tangible assets
when acquired or constructed. The cost of such materials consumed in research and development activities and the depreciation of
such equipment or facilities used in those activities are research and development costs. However, the costs of materials, equipment,
or facilities that are acquired or constructed for a particular research and development project and that have no alternative future
uses and therefore no separate economic values are research and development costs at the time the costs are incurred. Salaries,
wages, and other related costs of personnel engaged in research and development activities shall be included in research and development
costs. The costs of contract services performed by others in connection with the research and development activities of an enterprise,
including research and development conducted by others in behalf of the enterprise, shall be included in research and development
costs.
Depreciation
Depreciation is computed using the
straight-line method over the assets’ expected useful lives.
Amortization
Deferred charges are amortized using
the straight-line method over five and six years.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash on
hand, deposits in banks with maturities of three months or less, and all highly liquid investments which are unrestricted as to
withdrawal or use, and which have original maturities of three months or less.
Options and warrants issued
The Company allocates the proceeds received
from equity financing and the attached options and warrants issued, based on their relative fair values, at the time of issuance.
The amount allocated to the options and warrants is recorded as additional paid in capital.
Related Parties
For the purposes of these financial statements,
parties are considered to be related if one party has the ability, directly or indirectly, to control the party or exercise significant
influence over the party in making financial and operating decisions, or vice versa, or where the Company and the party are subject
to common control or common significant influence. Related parties may be individuals or other entities.
Results of Operations
We are a development stage company and our MyoCell product candidate
has not received regulatory approval or generated any material revenues and is not expected to until 2016, if ever. We have generated
substantial net losses and negative cash flow from operations since inception and anticipate incurring significant net losses and
negative cash flows from operations for the foreseeable future as we continue clinical trials, undertake new clinical trials, apply
for regulatory approvals, make capital expenditures, add information systems and personnel, make payments pursuant to our license
agreements upon our achievement of certain milestones, continue development of additional product candidates using our technology,
establish sales and marketing capabilities and incur the additional cost of operating as a public company.
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2014 and December
31, 2013
Revenues
We recognized revenues of $2,055,831 in
2014, revenues generated from the sale of, kits and equipment, services, MyoCath Catheters, AdipoCell, and laboratory services.
In 2013, we recognized revenues of $96,085, revenues generated from the sales of MyoCath Catheters and laboratory services.
Cost of Sales
Cost of sales was $844,941 in 2014 and
$30,831 in 2013.
Research and Development
Research and development expenses were
$66,420 in 2014, a decrease of $560,563 from research and development expenses of $626,983 in 2013. The decrease was primarily
attributable to a decrease in the amount of available funds.
The timing and amount of our planned research and development
expenditures is dependent on our ability to obtain additional financing.
Marketing, General and Administrative
Marketing, general and administrative expenses
were $4,669,432 in 2014, an increase of $2,401,601 from marketing, general and administrative expenses of $2,267,831 in 2013. The
increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses is attributable, in part, to an increase in legal fees, salaries and
insurance expenses.
Interest Expense
Interest expense was $1,639,571 in 2014
compared to interest expense of $1,437,883 in 2013. Non cash interest comprised of amortization of debt discounts and warrants
issued in connection with debt totaled $1,252,680 in 2014 as compared to $597,339 in 2013.
Gain on settlement of debt
During the year ended December 31, 2014,
we settled an outstanding note payable and certain accounts payable by issuances of common stock. As such we realized a net $2,498,676
gain on extinguishment of debt during the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to $1,023,439 for same period last year.
Gain on change in fair value of derivative liabilities.
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, we issued
convertible notes and common stock purchase warrants with anti-dilutive provisions that had the possibility of exceeding our common
shares authorized when considering the number of possible shares that may be issuable to satisfy settlement provisions of these
agreements after consideration of all existing instruments that could be settled in shares. As such, we are required to determine
the fair value of this derivative and mark to market each reporting period. For the year ended December 31, 2014, we incurred a
$425,953 gain on change in fair value of our derivative liabilities compared to a gain of $29,179 the same period last year.
Inflation
Our opinion is that inflation has not had,
and is not expected to have, a material effect on our operations.
Climate Change
Our opinion is that neither climate change,
nor governmental regulations related to climate change, have had, or are expected to have, any material effect
on our operations.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
In 2014, we continued to finance our considerable
operational cash needs with cash generated from financing activities.
Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities was
$1,108,647 in 2014 as compared to $1,913,326 of cash used in 2013. Our use of cash for operations in 2014 reflected a net loss
generated during the period of $2,253,511, adjusted for non-cash items such as stock-based compensation of $537,606, amortization
of debt discounts associated with our convertible notes of $546,970,change in fair value of warrant modifications of $148,517,
warrants issued for intellectual property of $190,262, related party notes issued for services rendered of $800,000 ,non-cash interest
payments of $705,710 and depreciation expense of $4,490, net with gain on settlement of debt of $2,498,676 and gain on change
in fair value of derivative liabilities of $425,953 . A net increase in operating assets of $112,699 and a net increase in operating
liabilities of $1,172,038 contributed to our use of operating cash in 2014.
Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities was
$57,835 in 2014 compared to $9,425 in 2013.
Financing Activities
Net cash provided by financing activities
was $1,156,929 in 2014 as compared to $1,968,978 in 2013. In 2014, we sold, in a private placement and put agreements, shares of
common stock and warrants for aggregate net cash proceeds of approximately $479,626. In addition, we received an aggregate of $33,759
related party loans and advances, $136,000 from the exercise of options and warrants, and $740,500 from issuance of notes payable,
net of repayments of $232,956.
Existing Capital Resources and Future Capital Requirements
Our MyoCell product
candidate has not received regulatory approval or generated any material revenues. We do not expect to generate any material revenues
or cash from sales of our MyoCell product candidate until commercialization of MyoCell, if ever. We have generated substantial
net losses and negative cash flow from operations since inception and anticipate incurring significant net losses and negative
cash flows from operations for the foreseeable future. Historically, we have relied on proceeds from the sale of our common stock
and our incurrence of debt to provide the funds necessary to conduct our research and development activities and to meet our other
cash needs.
At December 31, 2014,
we had cash and cash equivalents totaling $36,674; our working capital deficit as of such date was $10,957,443. Our independent
registered public accounting firm has issued its report dated March 16th, 2015 in connection with the audit of our financial statements
as of December 31, 2014 that included an explanatory paragraph describing the existence of conditions that raise substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern.
As of December 31,
2014, we had $5,852,790 in outstanding loans.
On April 30, 2012,
we were informed that Northstar assumed all amounts outstanding under the BlueCrest loan. On April 30, 2012, Northstar agreed with
us to extend until May 1, 2012 the initial payment date for any and all required monthly payments and payable with respect to the
BlueCrest loan and to waive any and all defaults and/or events of default with respect to such payments. We are currently in discussions
regarding certain additional amendments to the terms of the loan.
On November 2, 2011,
we entered into a Standby Equity Distribution Agreement, or the SEDA, with Greystone Capital Partners, or GCP. Pursuant to the
SEDA’s terms, we may, at our sole discretion and upon giving written notice to GCP, each an “Advance Notice”,
periodically sell shares of our common stock to GCP. For each share of Common Stock purchased under the SEDA, GCP will pay us an
amount, referred to as the “Purchase Price”, that is eighty percent (80%) of the lowest daily volume weighted average
price of the Common Stock as quoted by Bloomberg, LP, during the five (5) consecutive Trading Days (as such term is defined in
the SEDA) immediately subsequent to the date of the relevant Advance Notice. We are not obligated to sell any shares of common
stock to GCP but may, over the term of the SEDA and in our sole discretion, sell to GCP that number of shares of common stock valued
at the Purchase Price from time to time in effect that equals up to one million dollars ($1,000,000) in the aggregate. GCP’s obligation
to purchase shares of Common Stock under the SEDA is subject to certain conditions, including (i) periodic sales of shares of our
common stock to GCP must be separated by a time period equal to five Trading Days, and (ii) the amount of any individual periodic
sale designated by us in any Advance Notice shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the average weekly volume of shares of our
common stock traded during the two (2) week period immediately prior to an Advance Notice, where a “week” is five (5)
consecutive Trading Days. GCP’s obligations under the SEDA are not transferable.
On October 7,
2014, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Magna Equities II, LLC, a
New York limited liability company (“Magna”). The Purchase Agreement provides that, upon the terms and subject to
the conditions set forth therein, Magna shall purchase from us, a senior convertible note with an initial principal amount of
$307,500 (the “Convertible Note”) for a purchase price of $205,000 (an approximately 33.33% original issue
discount). Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, we issued the Convertible Note to Magna. The Convertible Note matures on
August 7, 2015 and, in addition to the approximately 33.33% original issue discount, accrues interest at the rate of 12% per
annum. The Convertible Note is convertible at any time, in whole or in part, at Magna’s option into shares of the
Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Common Stock”), at a fixed conversion price of
$0.01035 per share. $40,000 of the outstanding principal amount of the Convertible Note (together with any accrued and unpaid
interest with respect to such portion of the principal amount) shall be automatically extinguished (without any cash payment
by us) under certain conditions described in the Purchase Agreement. In connection with the execution of the Purchase
Agreement, our company and Magna also entered into a registration rights agreement (the “Registration Rights
Agreement”). Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement, we agreed to file an initial registration statement
with the SEC to register the resale of the Common Stock into which the Convertible Note may be converted,
On October 23, 2014,
we entered into a common stock purchase agreement (the “Common Stock Purchase Agreement”) with Magna Equities II, LLC,
a New York limited liability company (the “Investor”). The Common Stock Purchase Agreement provides that, upon the
terms and subject to the conditions set forth therein, the Investor is committed to purchase up to $3,000,000 (the “Total
Commitment”) worth of our common stock, $0.001 par value (the “Shares”), over the 24-month term of the Common Stock Purchase
Agreement. In connection with the execution of the Common Stock Purchase Agreement, on the Closing Date, our company and the Investor
also entered into a registration rights agreement. We paid to the Investor a commitment fee for entering into the Common Stock Purchase Agreement
equal to $150,000 (or 5.0% of the Total Commitment under the Common Stock Purchase Agreement) in the form of 9,109,128 restricted shares of
our common stock, calculated using a per share price of $0.016467.
On December 22, 2014,
the registration statement of the shares underlying the Purchase Agreement and the Common Stock Purchase Agreement was declared
effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission, thus, registering an aggregate of 143,812,591 shares of common stock.
Cassel Salpeter &
Co.
On November 20, 2013,
we entered into an Investment Banking Agreement with Cassel Salpeter & Co. (“CSC”), who will act as exclusive third
party financial advisor in connection with investment banking matters. The term of the Investment Banking Agreement shall
be for a period of twenty four months unless terminated or extended in accordance with its terms. For these services, CSC will
receive monthly fees, have received 5,207,630 ten year common stock purchase warrants, exercisable at $.0113 and will receive applicable
consideration in the event the closing of a Mezzanine Financing consisting of non-convertible subordinated debt and/or sale of
equity securities. We will also reimburse CSC for its reasonable out-of-pocket expenses associated with the services provided
pursuant to the Investment Banking Agreement.
Cassel Salpeter &
Co. is an independent investment banking firm that provides advice to middle-market and emerging growth companies in the U.S. and
worldwide. Together, the firm’s professionals have more than 50 years of experience providing private and public companies
with a broad spectrum of investment banking and financial advisory services, including: mergers and acquisitions; equity and debt
capital raises; fairness and solvency opinions; valuations; and restructurings, such as 363 sales and plans of reorganization.
Co-founded by James Cassel and Scott Salpeter, the firm provides objective, unbiased, results-focused services that clients need
to achieve their goals. Personally involved at every stage of all engagements, the firm’s senior partners have forged relationships
and completed hundreds of transactions and assignments nationwide. The firm’s headquarters are in Miami.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements
that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition,
revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that are material to investors.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Refer to Note 1. Organization and Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies in the notes to our financial statements for a discussion of recent accounting pronouncements.
Item 7A. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Not required for smaller reporting companies.
Item 8. Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
Our Financial Statements begin on page
F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and are incorporated herein by reference.
Item 9. Changes in and
Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and
Procedures.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
(a) Evaluation
of disclosure controls and procedures. Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15 under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”)) as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no
matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In addition,
the design of disclosure controls and procedures must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and that management
is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to their costs.
Our
disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of our disclosure
control system are met. Because of inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute
assurance that all control issues, if any, within a company have been detected. Our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial
Officer have concluded, based on their evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this report, that our disclosure controls
and procedures were effective.
Management’s Report
on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our
management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is
defined In Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). The term “internal control over financial reporting” is defined as a process
designed by, or under the supervision of, the registrant’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons
performing similar functions, and effected by the registrant’s board of directors, management and other personnel,
·
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies
and procedures that:
·
pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect
the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the registrant;
·
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation
of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the
registrant are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the registrant; and
·
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition,
use or disposition of the registrant’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Our
internal control system is designed to provide reasonable assurance to our management and board of directors regarding the preparation
and fair presentation of published financial statements. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent
limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial
statement preparation and presentation. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints
and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. In addition, because of changes in conditions, the effectiveness
of internal control may vary over time.
As previously
disclosed in Item 9A of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, management concluded that there were material
weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting related to insufficient experience to account for and disclose complex
transactions under US GAAP and a limited segregation of duties within our accounting and financial reporting functions due to the
small number of employees assigned to positions that involve the processing of financial information.
During
the year ended December 31, 2014, remedial actions were implemented to address this weakness. We have devoted significant
effort and resources to remediation and improvement of our internal control over financial reporting. While we had processes in
place to identify and apply developments in accounting
standards, we enhanced these processes
to better evaluate our research of the nuances of complex accounting standards and engaged a third party financial reporting consultant to
assist the Company in its financial reporting compliance in the latter part of 2013. Our third party consultant is a
technical accounting professional, who assists us in the interpretation and application of new and complex accounting
guidance. Management will continue to review and make necessary changes to the overall design of our internal control environment,
if needed.
As
of December 31, 2014, management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
based on the criteria in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (1992) (“COSO”) and have concluded our controls are effective.
The
Company is a non-accelerated filer and is not subject to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes Oxley Act. Accordingly, this Annual Report
does not contain an attestation report of our independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial
reporting, since the rules for smaller reporting companies provide for this exemption.
(b) Changes
in internal control over financial reporting. There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2014, that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect
our internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other
Information
None.
PART III
Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
Executive Officers and Directors
Set forth below is information regarding our executive officers
and directors as of December 31, 2014
| Mike Tomas |
49 |
Director, President and Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer |
| William P. Murphy, Jr., M.D. |
91 |
Director, Chairman of the Board |
| Mark P. Borman |
60 |
Director |
| Charles A. Hart |
54 |
Director |
| Sam Ahn |
60 |
Director |
| Kristin Comella |
38 |
Director, Chief Scientific Officer |
| Sheldon T. Anderson |
64 |
Director |
Our Bylaws provide that we shall have that number of directors
determined by the majority vote of the board of directors. Currently we have seven directors. Each director will serve until
our next annual shareholder meeting. Directors are elected for one-year terms. Our Board of Directors elects our officers at the
regular annual meeting of the Board of Directors following the annual meeting of shareholders. Vacancies may be filled by a majority
vote of the remaining directors then in office. Our directors and executive officers are as follows:
Executive Officers and Directors
Mike Tomas. Mr. Mike Tomas was appointed
President and Chief Executive Officer and a member of our Board of Directors on June 19, 2010. Mike Tomas was appointed as the
Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer and as a director on June 19, 2010. In 2001, Mr. Tomás helped launch
The ASTRI Group, an early-stage private equity investment company providing capital, business development and strategic marketing
support to emerging private companies. Mr. Tomas will continue to serve as President of The ASTRI Group. Previously from 1983 to
2001, Mr. Tomas held ascending executive positions including Chief Marketing Officer at Avantel, a $1 billion dollar joint venture
with MCI. Upon retiring from MCI and WorldCom, Tomas joined other ex-MCI executives and helped raise venture capital to form Ineto,
an integrated customer communications software solution that was successfully sold in 2001.
Today Mr. Tomas sits on the boards of, Avisena (revenue cycle
management for medical practices) and Easy Solutions Total Fraud Protection (authentication, fraud prevention and anti-phishing
countermeasures). Mr. Tomas has been appointed to serve on the Career Source Florida Board of Directors by Florida Governor Rick
Scott.
Mr. Tomás is the current chairman of Florida International
University’s Global Entrepreneurship Center and a member of the board of advisors of Miami Dade College’s Idea Center,
the college’s entrepreneurial institute. Mr. Tomás is an inductee into the Miami-Dade College and WACE Halls of Fame
for business, an FIU Torch Award winner--and winner of top communications, medical innovations, education and entrepreneurial awards.
An avid athlete, he is also a Miami-Dade County Sports Commissioner. Mr. Tomas holds a Masters of Business Administration from
the University of Miami and a Bachelor’s degree from Florida International University.
William P. Murphy, Jr., M.D. Dr. Murphy
has served as a member of our Board of Directors since June 2003. Dr. Murphy founded Small Parts, Inc., a supplier of
high quality mechanical components for design engineers, in 1964 and served as its Chairman until his retirement in April 2005.
Small Parts, Inc. was acquired by Amazon.com, Inc. in March 2005. From October 1999 until October 2004, Dr. Murphy
served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Hyperion, Inc., a medical diagnosis company which had an involuntary bankruptcy
filed against it in December 2003. Dr. Murphy is the founder of Cordis Corporation (now Cordis Johnson & Johnson)
which he led as President, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at various times during his 28 years at Cordis until his retirement
in October 1985. Cordis Johnson & Johnson is a leading firm in cardiovascular instrumentation.
Dr. Murphy received an M.D. in 1947 from the University
of Illinois and a B.S in pre-medicine from Harvard College in 1946. He also studied physiologic instrumentation at Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, or MIT. After a two year rotating internship at St. Francis Hospital in Honolulu, he became a Research
Fellow in Medicine at the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston where he was the dialysis engineer on the first clinical dialysis
team in
the United States. He continued as an Instructor in Medicine
and then a research associate in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Murphy is the author of numerous papers and owns
17 patents. He is the recipient of a number of honors, including the prestigious Lemelson-MIT Lifetime Achievement Award, the MIT
Corporate Leadership Award, the Distinguished Service Award from North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology, and the
Jay Malina Award from the Beacon Council of Miami, Florida. He is also a member of the Inventors Hall of Fame
Mark P. Borman. Mr. Borman has served
as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors since May 2009. He is a seasoned financial officer with more than 30 years
of broad-based financial and investor relations experience. Mr. Borman is a member and Board Leadership Fellow of the National Association of Corporate Directors.
In addition to the valuable experience he gained working with entrepreneurs and their startups from 2009 to present,
Mr. Borman has experience with global, NASDAQ- and NYSE-listed companies in various executive and financial roles. He is currently the Chief Financial Officer of SheerWind and previously
served as Corporate Officer, Treasurer and Vice President of Investor Relations with ADC Telecommunications. During his career,
Mr. Borman has held positions with General Instrument Corporation, First Chicago Corporation, FMC Corporation, Price Waterhouse,
and KPMG. Mr. Borman received his B.A. in Accounting from Michigan State University and his M.B.A. from the University of Chicago
Graduate School of Business. He is a Certified Public Accountant and Chartered Financial Analyst and has experience as an
advisor, board member, faculty, speaker, and mentor.
Charles A. Hart. Mr. Hart has served
as a member of our Board of Directors since May 2009. Mr. Hart has more than 20 years of entrepreneurial experience. Mr. Hart founded
Hart Masonry, Inc. in 1986 and has served as its President since then. He is also the Founder and President of Wildridge Enterprises.
Mr. Hart is a member of the Board of Directors for Eagle Street Properties LLP.
Sam Ahn. Dr. Ahn previously served
as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors from January 2001 thru September 2008. Dr Ahn was one of the early pioneers in
developing the field of endovascular surgery by coordinating and leading the first endovascular training courses in the US
and Europe as well as developing some of the endovascular devices and techniques currently in clinical use today. He is a former
Professor of Surgery in the Division of Vascular Surgery at UCLA, where he was also the Director of the Endovascular Surgery Program.
In 2006 Dr. Ahn founded Vascular Management Associates, Inc., a consulting and management firm that sets up outpatient endovascular
centers across the US. VMA has set up 8 such sites to date and is on track to set up two more this year. In 2008, he co-founded
Wright-Ahn Technology, LLC, to develop and commercialize endovascular devices. In 2009, he co-founded MediBank International,
LLC, a global healthcare IT Company. Dr. Ahn graduated from the University of Texas, Southwestern Medical School in Dallas, and
received his general and vascular surgical residency training at UCLA. He also earned his MBA from the UCLA Anderson School of
Management in August, 2004. Dr. Ahn sits on five vascular journal editorial boards, and has published over 120 peer-reviewed manuscripts,
50 book chapters, and five textbooks, including the first and definitive textbook on Endovascular Surgery. During the past eighteen
years he has consulted for over 50 biomedical companies, both new and established, and has authored over 15 patents.
Kristin Comella. Ms. Comella was
appointed Chief Scientific Officer in September 2010. Ms. Comella has served as our Vice President of R&D and Corporate Development
since December 2008 and has played a major role in managing our product development, manufacturing and quality systems since joining
Bioheart in 2004. Ms. Comella has 15 years of industry experience with expertise in regenerative medicine, training and education,
research and product development, and currently serves on multiple advisory boards in the stem cell arena. Ms. Comella has many
years of cell culturing experience including building and managing the stem cell laboratory at Tulane University’s Center for Gene
Therapy and developing stem cell therapies for osteoarthritis at Osiris Therapeutics. Ms. Comella holds an M.S. in Chemical Engineering
from The Ohio State University and a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of South Florida. On March 12, 2013,
Kristin Comella was appointed to serve as a member of our Board of Directors.
Sheldon T. Anderson. Mr. Anderson
is Chairman of the Florida Advisory Board of Northern Trust Corporation. From 1992 through December 31, 2012, Mr. Anderson
served in a variety of executive capacities with Northern Trust Corporation, including his most recent position as Chairman and
Chief executive Officer Southeast Region of Northern Trust Corporation. Mr. Anderson is the Chair-elect of the Beacon Council,
Miami-Dade
County’s economic development agency. He is a Board member of
the Miami-Dade College Foundation, Inc.; Museum of Contemporary Art (MOCA); the New World Symphony; Baptist Health Systems Governing
Board and Carrollton School of the Sacred Heart. He is Past Chair and a member of the Advisory Council of the United Way of Miami-Dade
County. Anderson is President of the Board of Cleveland Orchestra Miami / Miami Music Association and also serves on the Advisory
Board of the University of Miami School of Law for Ethics& Public Service. He is a member of the Orange Bowl Committee
and the President’s Council of Florida International University. A Miami native, Sheldon holds a degree in International Studies
from Ohio State University.
Family Relationships
There are no family relationships among
our executive officers and directors.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act
requires our directors and executive officers, and persons who own more than ten percent (10%) of our outstanding Common Stock,
or the Reporting Persons, to file with the SEC initial reports of ownership on Form 3 and reports of changes in ownership
of Common Stock on Forms 4 or 5. Such persons are required by SEC regulation to furnish us with copies of all such reports they
file. Based solely on a review of Forms 3 and 4 furnished to us by the Reporting Persons
or prepared on behalf of the Reporting Persons by the Company and on written representations from certain Reporting Persons that
no Forms 5 were required, the Company believes that the Reporting Persons have complied with reporting requirements applicable
to them.
Conflicts of Interest
Members of our management are associated with other firms involved
in a range of business activities. Consequently, there are potential inherent conflicts of interest in their acting as officers
and directors of our company. Although the officers and directors are engaged in other business activities, we anticipate
they will devote an important amount of time to our affairs.
Our officers and directors are now and may in the future become
shareholders, officers or directors of other companies, which may be formed for the purpose of engaging in business activities
similar to ours. Accordingly, additional direct conflicts of interest may arise in the future with respect to such individuals
acting on behalf of us or other entities. Moreover, additional conflicts of interest may arise with respect to opportunities
which come to the attention of such individuals in the performance of their duties or otherwise. Currently, we do not have
a right of first refusal pertaining to opportunities that come to their attention and may relate to our business operations.
Our officers and directors are, so long as they are our officers
or directors, subject to the restriction that all opportunities contemplated by our plan of operation which come to their attention,
either in the performance of their duties or in any other manner, will be considered opportunities of, and be made available to
us and the companies that they are affiliated with on an equal basis. A breach of this requirement will be a breach of the
fiduciary duties of the officer or director. If we or the companies with which the officers and directors are affiliated
both desire to take advantage of an opportunity, then said officers and directors would abstain from negotiating and voting upon
the opportunity. However, all directors may still individually take advantage of opportunities if we should decline to do
so. Except as set forth above, we have not adopted any other conflict of interest policy with respect to such transactions.
Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings
None of the following events have occurred during the past ten
years and are material to an evaluation of the ability or integrity of any director or officer of the Company:
| |
1. |
A petition under the Federal bankruptcy laws or any state insolvency law was filed by or against, or a receiver, fiscal agent or similar officer was appointed by a court for the business or property of such person, |
| |
|
or any partnership in which he was a general partner at or within two years before the time of such filing, or any corporation or business association of which he was an executive officer at or within two years before the time of such filing; |
| |
2. |
Such person was convicted in a criminal proceeding or is a named subject of a pending criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations and other minor offenses); |
| |
3. |
Such person was the subject of any order, judgment, or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any court of competent jurisdiction, permanently or temporarily enjoining him from, or otherwise limiting, the following activities: |
| |
a. |
Acting as a futures commission merchant, introducing broker, commodity trading advisor, commodity pool operator, floor broker, leverage transaction merchant, any other person regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or an associated person of any of the foregoing, or as an investment adviser, underwriter, broker or dealer in securities, or as an affiliated person, director or employee of any investment company, bank, savings and loan association or insurance company, or engaging in or continuing any conduct or practice in connection with such activity; |
| |
b. |
Engaging in any type of business practice; or |
| |
c. |
Engaging in any activity in connection with the purchase or sale of any security or commodity or in connection with any violation of Federal or State securities laws or Federal commodities laws; |
| |
4. |
Such person was the subject of any order, judgment or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any Federal or State authority barring, suspending or otherwise limiting for more than 60 days the right of such person to engage in any activity described in paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this section, or to be associated with persons engaged in any such activity; |
| |
5. |
Such person was found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the Commission to have violated any Federal or State securities law, and the judgment in such civil action or finding by the Commission has not been subsequently reversed, suspended, or vacated; |
| |
6. |
Such person was found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to have violated any Federal commodities law, and the judgment in such civil action or finding by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has not been subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated; |
| |
7. |
Such person was the subject of, or a party to, any Federal or State judicial or administrative order, judgment, decree, or finding, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, relating to an alleged violation of: |
| |
a. |
Any Federal or State securities or commodities law or regulation; or |
| |
b. |
Any law or regulation respecting financial institutions or insurance companies including, but not limited to, a temporary or permanent injunction, order of disgorgement or restitution, civil money penalty or temporary or permanent cease-and-desist order, or removal or prohibition order; or |
| |
c. |
Any law or regulation prohibiting mail or wire fraud or fraud in connection with any business entity; or |
| |
8. |
Such person was the subject of, or a party to, any sanction or order, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any self-regulatory organization (as defined in Section 3(a)(26) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(26))), any registered entity (as defined in Section 1(a)(29) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1(a)(29)), or any equivalent exchange, association, entity or organization that has disciplinary authority over its members or persons associated with a member. |
Code of Ethics
As part of our system of corporate
governance, our Board of Directors has adopted a code of ethics that is specifically applicable to our Chief Executive
Officer and senior financial officers. This Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers, as well as our Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics, applicable to all directors, officers and employees. If we make substantive amendments to the Code of Ethics for Senior Financial
Officers or the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics or grant any waiver, including any
implicit waiver, we will disclose the nature of such amendment or waiver on our website or in a report on Form 8-K within four
days of such amendment or waiver.
Shareholder Recommendations for Board Nominees
There
have been no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to the Company’s Board of
Directors.
Audit Committee
The
Board of Directors has a separately-designated standing Audit Committee established in accordance with Section 3(a) (58) (A) of
the Exchange Act. The members of our Audit Committee are Mr. Borman, who serves as Chairperson of the Audit Committee, Dr. Murphy
and Mr. Hart. Our Board of Directors has determined that Mr. Borman qualifies as a “financial expert” as that term
is defined in the rules of the SEC implementing requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Item 11.
Executive Compensation.
Summary Compensation Table
The
following table sets forth, for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2014 and 2012, the aggregate compensation awarded to,
earned by or paid to our Chief Executive Officer and our two most highly compensated officers (other than the Chief Executive Officer),
who were serving as executive officers as of December 31, 2013, or the Named Executive Officers.
Name and
Principal
Position |
|
Fiscal
Year |
|
Salary
($) |
|
Bonus
($) |
|
|
Stock
Awards
($) |
|
Option
Awards ($) |
|
Non-
Equity
Incentive Plan
Compen-
sation
($) |
|
Change in
Pension
Value
and Non-
Qualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($) |
|
All Other
Compen-
sation
($) |
|
Total
($) |
|
Mike Tomas
CEO, President, |
|
2014 |
|
$766,586 |
|
$500,000 (1) |
|
|
$ — |
|
$587,895 (2)(3)(4)(5)(6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$1,854,481 |
|
| CFO and Director |
|
2013 |
|
391,667 |
|
375,000(7) |
|
|
— |
|
170,137 (8)(9) |
|
— |
|
— |
|
— |
|
936,804 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kristin Comella
Chief Science |
|
2014 |
|
371,331 |
|
300,000 (1) |
|
|
— |
|
240,187 (2)(3)(5)(6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
911,518 |
|
| Officer and Director |
|
2013 |
|
159,167 |
|
125,000 (7) |
|
|
— |
|
81,916 (8) |
|
— |
|
— |
|
— |
|
366,083 |
|
| (1) |
On February 24, 2014, Mr. Tomas and Ms.
Comella received $500,000 and $300,000, respectively, promissory notes for bonuses awarded.
The promissory notes bear 5% interest per annum, unsecured and were due January 1, 2015 |
| (2) |
On February 24, 2014, Mr. Tomas and Ms. Comella were granted 10,000,000 and 5,000,000, respectively, options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.019 per share for ten years, vesting ¼ immediately, with remainder vesting 1/3 on August 1st and September 1st, respectively, for three years. |
| (3) |
On February 24, 2014, Mr. Tomas and Ms. Comella, as members of the Company’s Board of Directors, were granted 800,000 and 400,000, respectively, options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.019 per share, vesting immediately. |
| (4) |
On May 12, 2014, Mr. Tomas was granted 4,298,487 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.02716 per share for ten years vesting annually over four years. |
| (5) |
On August 1, 2014, Mr. Tomas and Ms. Comella were granted 10,000,000 and 5,000,000, respectively, options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.2690 per share for ten years with ¼ vesting immediately, with remainder vesting 1/3 annually on the anniversary. |
| (6) |
On November 3, 2014, Mr. Tomas and Ms. Comella, as members of the Company’s Board of Directors, were granted 400,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01932 per share, vesting immediately. |
| (7) |
On August 1, 2013, Mr. Tomas and Ms. Comella received $375,000 and $125,000, respectively, promissory notes for bonuses awarded. The promissory notes bear 5% interest per annum, unsecured and are due on demand. |
| (8) |
On August 1, 2013, Mr. Tomas and Ms. Comella were granted 10,000,000 and 5,000,000, respectively, options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01576 per share for ten years, vesting annually over four years. |
| (9) |
On September 1, 2013, Mr. Tomas, as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, was granted 400,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01654 for ten years, vesting immediately. |
Our Stock Option Plans
In
December 1999, our Board of Directors and shareholders adopted our 1999 Officers and Employees Stock Option Plan, or the Employee
Plan, and the 1999 Directors and Consultants Stock Option Plan, or the Director Plan. The Employee Plan and the Director Plan are
collectively referred to herein as “the Plans”. The Plans are administered by the Board of Directors and the
Compensation Committee. The objectives of the Plans include attracting and retaining key personnel by encouraging stock ownership
in the Company by such persons. In February 2010 the Directors & Consultants Plan was amended to extend the termination date
of the Plan to December 1, 2011.
In
July 2008, the Board of Directors approved, subject to shareholder approval, the establishment of the Bioheart Omnibus Equity
Compensation Plan, or the “Omnibus Plan. The establishment of the Omnibus Plan was approved by the Company’s shareholders
at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders held on July 30, 2008. Pursuant to the Omnibus Plan, the Company may grant restricted
stock, incentive stock options, non-statutory stock options, stock appreciation rights, deferred stock, stock awards, performance
shares, and other stock-based awards consisting of cash, restricted stock or unrestricted stock in various combinations to the
Company’s employees, directors and consultants. 5,000,000 shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance under the
Omnibus Plan.
In fiscal, the
Board of Directors approved, subject to shareholder approval 2013 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan
or the “2013 Omnibus Plan. Pursuant to the 2013 Omnibus Plan, the Company may grant restricted stock, incentive stock options,
non-statutory stock options, stock appreciation rights, deferred stock, stock awards, performance shares, and other stock-based
awards consisting of cash, restricted stock or unrestricted stock in various combinations to the Company’s employees, directors
and consultants. 50,000,000 shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance under the 2013 Omnibus Plan.
Employment Agreements
As of this time, there are no employment
agreements with any named executive officer.
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End
The
following table sets forth outstanding equity awards held by our Named Executive Officers as of December 31, 2014:
| | |
Number of Securities Underlying | | |
Option | | |
|
| | |
Unexercised Options and Warrants | | |
Exercise Price | | |
Option Expiration |
| Name | |
Exercisable (#) | | |
Unexercisable (#) | | |
($/per share) | | |
Date |
| Mike Tomas | |
| 250,000 | | |
| 250,000 | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
1/16/2022 |
| | |
| 750,000 | | |
| 1,250,000 | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
8/6/2022 |
| Mike Tomas | |
| 125,000 | | |
| 375,000 | | |
| 0.50 | | |
06/18/2020 |
| | |
| 250,000 | | |
| 250,000 | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
08/12/2021 |
| | |
| — | | |
| 10,000,000 | | |
| 0.0158 | | |
8/1/2023 |
| | |
| 400,000 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.0165 | | |
9/1/2023 |
| Kristin Comella | |
| 187,500 | | |
| 312,500 | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
8/6/2022 |
| | |
| 12,356 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
08/31/2014 |
| | |
| 24,712 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
02/19/2015 |
| | |
| 618 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
12/30/2015 |
| | |
| 9,267 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
04/18/2016 |
| | |
| 6,178 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
01/01/2017 |
| | |
| 6,500 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
10/16/2017 |
| | |
| 19,700 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
01/09/2019 |
| | |
| 2,955 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.74 | | |
03/13/2019 |
| | |
| 30,000 | | |
| — | | |
| 0.85 | | |
05/28/2019 |
| | |
| 125,000 | | |
| 125,000 | | |
| 0.0158 | | |
08/21/2021 |
| | |
| — | | |
| 5,000,000 | | |
| 0.0158 | | |
08/1/2023 |
Outstanding Stock Awards at Year End
The outstanding equity awards as at December 31, 2014 are as
follows:
| | |
Stock awards | |
| Name |
|
|
Number of
shares
or units of stock
that have not
vested
(#) |
| |
Market value of
shares or units
of
stock that have
not
vested (#) | |
| Equity incentive plan
awards:
number of unearned
shares,
units or other rights that
have
not vested (#) | | |
| Equity incentive plan
awards:
market or payout value of
unearned shares, units or
other
rights that have not vested
($) | |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
| 1,750,000 | | |
0.0169 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
| 312,500 | | |
0.0169 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
| 125,000 | | |
0.0158 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
| 1,750,000 | | |
0.0169 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
| 375,000 | | |
0.50 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
| 10,000,000 | | |
0.0158 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
| 5,000,000 | | |
0.0158 per share | |
| 0 | | |
| 0 | |
Options Exercises and Stocks Vested
Options exercised and stocks vested as at December 31, 2014
are as follows:
| | |
Option awards | |
Stock awards |
| Name | |
Number of Shares Acquired
on Exercise (#) | |
Value Realized on
Exercise ($) | |
Number of Shares
Acquired on Vesting
(#) | |
Value
Realized on Investing ($) |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
Grants of Plan-Based Awards
Grants of plan-based awards as at December 31, 2014 are as follows:
| | |
| |
Estimated future payouts
under non-equity incentive
plan awards | |
Estimated future payouts
under equity incentive plan
awards | |
All other
stock
awards:
Number
of
shares
of stock
or units
(#) | |
All other
option
awards:
Number
of
securities
underlying
options
(#) | |
Exercise
or base
price of
option
awards
($/Sh) | |
Grant
date
fair
value
of
stock
and
option
awards |
| Name | |
Grant
date | |
Threshold
($) | |
Target
($) | |
Maximum
($) | |
Threshold
(#) | |
Target
(#) | |
Maximum
(#) | |
|
|
|
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
n/a | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
n/a | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
Reference – Grant Date - n/a = not applicable.
Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation
As at December 31,
2014 the Company had no formalized deferred compensation plan.
| Name | |
Executive
contributions
in last FY ($) | |
Registrant
contributions in
last FY ($) | |
Aggregate
earnings in last
FY ($) | |
Aggregate
withdrawals/
distributions ($) | |
Aggregate
balance at last
FYE ($) |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
Golden Parachute Compensation
As at December 31, 2014,
the Company had no arrangements in place relating to the termination of employees.
| Name | |
Cash
($) | |
Equity
($) | |
Pension/NQDC
($) | |
Perquisites/benefits
($) | |
Tax
reimbursement
($) | |
Other
($) | |
Total
($) |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
Compensation of Directors
Directors who provide services to the Company in other capacities
has been previously reported under “Summary Compensation”. The following table summarizes compensation paid to
or earned by our directors who are not Named Executive Officers for their service as directors of our company during the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2014.
| Name | |
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($) | |
Stock
Awards
($) | |
Option Awards (1)
($) | |
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
($) | |
Change in
Pension Value
and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($) | |
All other
Compensation
($) | |
Total (1)
($) |
| Mike Tomas, Director | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 |
| Charles A. Hart, Director | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 |
| William P. Murphy Jr., Director | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 |
| Samuel S. Ahn, Director | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 |
| Mark Bormon, Director | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 | |
$6,304 |
| (1) |
The values in the “Option Awards” and included within the “Total” columns above do not represent a cash payment of any kind. Rather these values represent the calculated Black-Scholes theoretical value of granted options. It is important to note that these granted options may or may not ever be exercised. Whether granted options are exercised or not will be based primarily, but not singularly, on the Company’s future stock price and whether the granted options become “in-the-money”. If these granted options are unexercised and expire, the cash value or benefit to the above noted individuals is $nil. |
Pension Benefits
As of December 31,
2014, the Company had no pension or retirement plans.
| Name | |
Plan name | |
Number of years
credited service
(#) | |
Present value of
accumulated benefit
($) | |
Payments during last
fiscal year ($) |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
not applicable | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
not applicable | |
0 | |
0 | |
0 |
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table sets forth information as of December 31,
2014 for all compensation plans under the Company’s Stock Option Plan
| | |
| | |
| |
Additional | | |
| | |
| | |
|
| | |
No. of | | |
| |
Consideration | | |
| | |
| | |
|
| | |
Shares of Common | | |
| |
to be Received | | |
| | |
| | |
|
| | |
Stock Underlying | | |
| |
Upon Exercise | | |
| | |
| | |
|
| | |
Unexercised | | |
| |
or Material | | |
| | |
Value | | |
|
| | |
Common Stock | | |
| |
Conditions | | |
Option | | |
Realized | | |
Option |
| | |
Purchase Options | | |
Date of | |
Required to | | |
Exercise | | |
if | | |
Expiration |
| Name | |
Exercisable (#) | | |
Grant | |
Exercise | | |
Price ($) | | |
Exercised ($) | | |
Date |
| Mike Tomas, NEO | |
| 375,000 | | |
9/18/2010 | |
$ | — | | |
$ | 0.50 | | |
$ | — | | |
6/18/2020 |
| | |
| 250,000 | | |
8/12/2011 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
| — | | |
8/12/2021 |
| | |
| 250,000 | | |
1/16/2012 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
| — | | |
1/16/2022 |
| | |
| 1,250,000 | | |
8/6/2012 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
| — | | |
8/6/2022 |
| | |
| 10,000,000 | | |
8/01/13 | |
| — | | |
| 0.01576 | | |
| — | | |
8/1/2023 |
| | |
| 400,000 | | |
9/1/13 | |
| | | |
| 0.01654 | | |
| | | |
9/1/23 |
| | |
| 10,000,000 | | |
2/24/14 | |
| — | | |
| 0.019 | | |
| — | | |
2/24/2024 |
| | |
| 4,298,487 | | |
5/12/14 | |
| | | |
| 0.02716 | | |
| | | |
5/12/214 |
| | |
| 10,000,000 | | |
8/01/14 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0269 | | |
| — | | |
8/1/24 |
| | |
| 400,000 | | |
11/3/14 | |
| — | | |
| 0.01932 | | |
| — | | |
11/3/24 |
| | |
| 400,000 | | |
9/1/2013 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0165 | | |
| — | | |
9/1/2023 |
| Kristin Comella, NEO | |
| 24,712 | | |
2/20/2005 | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
| — | | |
2/19/2015 |
| | |
| 9,267 | | |
4/19/2006 | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
| — | | |
4/19/2016 |
| | |
| 6,178 | | |
1/2/2007 | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
| — | | |
1/2/2017 |
| | |
| 6,500 | | |
10/17/2007 | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
| — | | |
10/17/2017 |
| | |
| 19,700 | | |
1/9/2009 | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
| — | | |
1/9/2019 |
| | |
| 2,955 | | |
3/13/2009 | |
| — | | |
| 0.71 | | |
| — | | |
3/13/2019 |
| | |
| 30,000 | | |
5/29/2009 | |
| — | | |
| 0.85 | | |
| — | | |
5/29/2019 |
| | |
| 125,000 | | |
8/12/2011 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
| — | | |
8/12/2021 |
| | |
| 187,500 | | |
8/06/2012 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0169 | | |
| — | | |
8/06/2022 |
| | |
| 5,000,000 | | |
8/01/13 | |
| — | | |
| 0.01576 | | |
| — | | |
8/1/2023 |
| | |
| 5,000,000 | | |
2/24/14 | |
| — | | |
| 0.019 | | |
| — | | |
2/24/2024 |
| | |
| 5,000,000 | | |
8/01/14 | |
| — | | |
| 0.0269 | | |
| — | | |
8/1/24 |
| | |
| 400,000 | | |
11/3/14 | |
| — | | |
| 0.01932 | | |
| — | | |
11/3/24 |
Director Compensation
As
of December 31, 2014, we had seven directors that qualified for compensation. Our non-employee directors do not receive cash compensation
for their services as directors. However, it is generally our policy to annually grant each non-employee director options to purchase
shares of our common stock provided that he or she has served as a member of our Board of Directors for at least six months and
one day of the twelve month period immediately preceding the date of grant. In addition, we reimburse non-employee directors for
actual out-of-pocket expenses incurred.
Item 12. Security Ownership
of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
The following table sets forth the beneficial
ownership (1) of our common stock as of December 31, 2014, based on an aggregate of 581,433,153 common shares issued
and outstanding and 108,001,736 shares issuance upon the conversion of securities, for each of our greater than 5% shareholders,
directors, named executive officers that continue to serve as executive officers of Bioheart and by all of our directors and named
executive officers as a group. Unless otherwise indicated, the address of each of the individuals and entities named below is:
c/o Bioheart, Inc., 13794 NW 4th Street, Suite 212, Sunrise, Florida 33325.Except as noted below, to our knowledge, each person
named in the table has sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of our common stock beneficially owned by them.
(1) The number and percentage of
shares beneficially owned is determined in accordance with Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act, and the information is not necessarily
indicative of beneficial ownership for any other purpose. The Company believes that each individual or entity named has sole
investment and voting power with respect to the securities indicated as beneficially owned by them, subject to community property
laws, where applicable, except where otherwise noted. The “Amount of Beneficial Ownership” in calculated based
on total shares held plus warrants held (plus stock options entitled to exercise). The aggregate of these items, which totals
689,434,889, will be used as the denominator for
the percentage calculation below.
| Name and Address of Beneficial Owner | |
Amount of
Beneficial
Ownership | |
Percent of Class |
| Mike Tomas, President, CEO, CFO, and Director | |
16,928,947 | (1) |
2.94 |
| | |
| |
|
| Kristin Comella, Chief Scientific Officer and Director | |
3,198,786 | (2) |
* |
| | |
| |
|
| William P. Murphy, Director** | |
21,837,295 | (3) |
3.7 |
| | |
| |
|
| Charles A. Hart, Director** | |
17,065,852 | (4) |
2.94 |
| | |
| |
|
| Sam Ahn, Director** | |
39,897,957 | (5) |
6.6 |
| | |
| |
|
| Mark P. Borman, Director | |
1,833,450 | (6) |
* |
| | |
| |
|
| Sheldon T. Anderson, Director | |
5,081,988 | (7) |
* |
| | |
| |
|
| All officers and directors as a group (7 persons) | |
105,844,275 | (8) |
16.72 |
| | |
| |
|
| Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC | |
47,368,582 | (9) |
8.2 |
* less than 1%
** Excludes Northstar Biotechnology Group,
LLC (“Northstar”), owned partly by certain directors and existing shareholders of the Company, including Dr. William
P. Murphy Jr., Dr. Samuel Ahn and Charles Hart.
| (1) |
(i) Includes shares are held by The Astri Group over which Mr. Tomas has shared voting and investment power and includes (i) includes 6,578,947 shares of common stock and (ii) 10,350,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options . |
| |
|
| (2) |
Includes 3,198,786 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options. |
| |
|
| (3) |
Includes (i) 19,113,766 shares of common stock and (ii) 2,723,529 shares of common stock issuable |
| |
upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options and warrants. Shares are directly owned by trusts controlled by Dr. Murphy and his spouse. |
| |
|
| (4) |
Includes (i) 9,194,422 shares of common stock and (ii) 7,871,430 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options and warrants. |
| |
|
| (5) |
Includes (i) 28,240,387 shares of common stock and (ii) 11,657,750 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options. |
| |
|
| (6) |
Includes (i) 23,450 shares of common stock and (ii) 1,810,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options |
| |
|
| (7) |
Includes (i) 1,940,994 shares of common stock and (ii) 3,140,994 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable warrants. |
| |
|
| (8) |
Includes an aggregate of (i) 46,827,505 shares of common stock and (ii) 25,489,251shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of presently exercisable stock options and warrants. |
| |
|
| (9) |
Excludes 20,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock (non-convertible) with each share of Series A Preferred Stock having voting power of twenty-five common shares.
|
DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES
The following statements relating to the
capital stock set forth the material terms of our securities; however, reference is made to the more detailed provisions of, and
such statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to, the Certificate of Incorporation, amendment to the Certificate
of Incorporation and the By-laws, copies of which are filed as exhibits to this registration statement.
COMMON STOCK
The holders of our Common Stock are entitled
to one vote per share on all matters to be voted on by our stockholders, including the election of directors. Our stockholders
are not entitled to cumulative voting rights, and, accordingly, the holders of a majority of the shares voting for the election
of directors can elect the entire board of directors if they choose to do so and, in that event, the holders of the remaining shares
will not be able to elect any person to our board of directors.
On February 4, 2013,
effective with the filing of the amendment to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation with the Florida
Secretary of State (confirmed as filed on February 11, 2013), the Company amended its Articles of Incorporation to increase
the authorized shares of capital stock of the Company to nine hundred and seventy million (970,000,000) shares of capital
stock consisting of nine hundred and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares
of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively.
Effective May 19, 2014,
the Company amended its articles of incorporation to increase the authorized shares of capital stock of the Company from nine hundred
and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par
value respectively, to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred
stock, both $.001 par value respectively.
The holders of the Company’s Common
Stock are entitled to receive ratably such dividends, if any, as may be declared from time to time by the board of directors, in
its discretion, from funds legally available there for and subject to prior dividend rights of holders of any shares of our Preferred
Stock which may be outstanding. Upon the Company’s liquidation, dissolution or winding up, subject to prior liquidation rights
of the holders of our Preferred Stock, if any, the holders of our Common Stock are entitled to receive on a pro rata basis our
remaining assets available for distribution. Holders of the Company’s Common Stock have no preemptive or other subscription
rights, and there are no conversion rights or redemption or sinking fund provisions with respect to such shares. All outstanding
shares of the Company’s Common Stock are, fully paid and not liable to further calls or assessment by the Company.
Preferred Stock
The Company is authorized to issue 20,000,000 shares of preferred
stock, par value $0.001. The designations, rights, and preferences of such preferred stock are to be determined by the Board of
Directors. Subsequently, 20,000,000 shares were designated as Series A Preferred Stock.
The Series A Preferred Stock collectively has voting rights
equal to 25 votes on all matters presented to be voted by the holders of common stock per share of preferred stock and the right
to convert to one share of common stock for each share of preferred stock. Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC was issued an aggregate
of 20,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock.
DIVIDENDS
Dividends, if any, will be contingent upon our revenues and
earnings, if any, capital requirements and financial conditions. The payment of dividends, if any, will be within the discretion
of our Board of Directors. We presently intend to retain all earnings, if any, for use in its business operations and accordingly,
the Board of Directors does not anticipate declaring any dividends prior to a business combination.
INDEMNIFICATION OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS.
We are incorporated under the laws of the State of Florida.
Our articles of incorporation require us to indemnify and limit the liability of directors to the fullest extent permitted by the
Florida Business Corporation Act, or the “FBCA”, as it currently exists or as it may be amended in the future.
Pursuant to the FBCA, a Florida corporation
may indemnify any person who may be a party to any third party proceeding by reason of the fact that such person is or was a director,
officer, employee or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee,
or agent of another entity, against liability incurred in connection with such proceeding (including any appeal thereof) if he
or she acted in good faith and in a manner he or she reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the
corporation, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was
unlawful.
In addition, in accordance with the FBCA,
a Florida corporation is permitted to indemnify any person who may be a party to a derivative action if such person acted in any
of the capacities set forth in the preceding paragraph, against expenses and amounts paid in settlement not exceeding, in the judgment
of the board of directors, the estimated expenses of litigating the proceeding to conclusion, actually and reasonably incurred
in connection with the defense or settlement of such proceeding (including appeals), provided that the person acted under the standards
set forth in the preceding paragraph. However, no indemnification shall be made for any claim, issue, or matter for which such
person is found to be liable unless, and only to the extent that, the court determines that, despite the adjudication of liability,
but in view of all the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnification for such expenses
which the court deems proper.
Any indemnification made under the above provisions, unless
pursuant to a court’s determination, may be made only after a determination that the person to be indemnified has met the
standard of conduct described above. This determination is to be made by a majority vote of a quorum consisting of the disinterested
directors of the board of directors, by duly selected independent legal counsel, or by a majority vote of the disinterested shareholders.
The board of directors also may designate a special committee of disinterested directors to make this determination. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, a Florida corporation must indemnify any director, officer, employee or agent of a corporation who has been successful
in the defense of any proceeding referred to above.
Generally, pursuant to the FBCA, a director of a Florida corporation
is not personally liable for monetary damages to our company or any other person for any statement, vote, decision, or failure
to act, regarding corporate management or policy, unless: (a) the director breached or failed to perform his duties as a director;
and (b) the director’s breach of, or failure to perform, those duties constitutes (i) a violation of criminal law,
unless the director
had reasonable cause to believe his conduct was lawful or had
no reasonable cause to believe his conduct was unlawful, (ii) a transaction from which the director derived an improper personal
benefit, either directly or indirectly, (iii) an approval of an unlawful distribution, (iv) with respect to a proceeding
by or in the right of the company to procure a judgment in its favor or by or in the right of a shareholder, conscious disregard
for the best interest of the company, or willful misconduct, or (v) with respect to a proceeding by or in the right of someone
other than the company or a shareholder, recklessness or an act or omission which was committed in bad faith or with malicious
purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety, or property. The term “recklessness,”
as used above, means the action, or omission to act, in conscious disregard of a risk: (a) known, or so obvious that it should
have been known, to the directors; and (b) known to the director, or so obvious that it should have been known, to be so great
as to make it highly probable that harm would follow from such action or omission.
Furthermore, under the FBCA, a Florida corporation is authorized
to make any other further indemnification or advancement of expenses of any of its directors, officers, employees or agents under
any bylaw, agreement, vote of shareholders or disinterested directors, or otherwise, both for actions taken in an official capacity
and for actions taken in other capacities while holding such office. However, a corporation cannot indemnify or advance expenses
if a judgment or other final adjudication establishes that the actions of the director, officer, employee, or agent were material
to the adjudicated cause of action and the director, officer, employee, or agent (a) violated criminal law, unless the director,
officer, employee, or agent had reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was unlawful, (b) derived an improper personal
benefit from a transaction, (c) was or is a director in a circumstance where the liability for unlawful distributions applies,
or (d) engaged in willful misconduct or conscious disregard for the best interests of the corporation in a proceeding by or
in right of the corporation to procure a judgment in its favor.
At present, there is no pending litigation or proceeding involving
any of our directors or executive officers as to which indemnification is required or permitted and we are not aware of any threatened
litigation or proceeding that may result in a claim for indemnification.
We maintain a liability insurance policy, pursuant to which
our directors and officers may be insured against liability they incur for serving in their capacities as directors and officers
of our company, including liabilities arising under the Securities Act or otherwise.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers or persons controlling us pursuant to the foregoing provisions, we have
been informed that, in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such indemnification is against public policy as
expressed in the Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities
(other than the payment by the registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer or controlling person of the registrant
in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such director, officer or controlling person in
connection with the securities being registered, we will, unless in the opinion of our counsel the matter has been settled by controlling
precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by us is against public policy
as expressed hereby in the Securities Act and we will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.
Amendment of our Bylaws
Our bylaws may be adopted, amended
or repealed by the affirmative vote of a majority of our outstanding shares. Subject to applicable law, our bylaws also may be
adopted, amended or repealed by our Board of Directors.
Item 13. Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.
Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions
Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC
On February 29, 2012,
a note issued to BlueCrest Master Fund Limited was assigned to Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC (“Northstar”), owned
partly by certain directors and existing shareholders of the Company, including Dr. William P. Murphy Jr., Dr. Samuel Ahn and Charles
Hart. At the date of the assignment, the principal amount of the BlueCrest note was $544,267.
On March 30, 2012, the
Company and Northstar agreed to extend until May 1, 2012 the initial payment date for any and all required monthly under the Note,
such that the first of the four monthly payments required under the Note will be due and payable on May, 2012 and all subsequent
payments will be due on a monthly basis thereafter commencing on June 1, 2012, and to waive any and all defaults and/or events
of default under the Note with respect to such payments. As of September 30, 2012, the Company was in default, however, subsequent
to September 30, 2012, the Company renegotiated the terms of the Note, Northstar has agreed to suspend the requirement of principal
payments by the Company and allow payment of interest-only in common stock.
On September 21, 2012,
the Company issued 5,000,000 common stock purchase warrants to Northstar that was treated as Additional interest expense upon issuance.
On October 1, 2012,
the Company and Northstar entered into a limited waiver and forbearance agreement providing a recapitalized new note balance comprised
of all sums due Northstar with a maturity date extended perpetually. The Company agreed to issue 5,000,000 shares of Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock and 10,000,000 of common stock in exchange for $210,000 as payment towards outstanding debt, default interest,
penalties, professional fees outstanding and due Northstar. In addition, the Company executed a security agreement granting Northstar
a lien on all patents, patent applications, trademarks, service marks, copyrights and intellectual property rights of any nature,
as well as the results of all clinical trials, know-how for preparing Myoblasts, old and new clinical data, existing approved trials,
all right and title to Myoblasts, clinical trial protocols and other property rights.
In addition, the Company
granted Northstar a perpetual license on products as described for resale, relicensing and commercialization outside the United
States. In connection with the granted license, Northstar shall pay the Company a royalty of up to 8% on revenues generated.
Effective October 1,
2012, the effective interest rate was 12.85% per annum. The parties agreed, as of February 28, 2013, to reduce the interest rate
to 7% per annum.
In connection with the
consideration paid, Northstar waived, from the effective date through the earlier of termination or expiration of the agreement,
satisfaction of the obligations as described in the forbearance agreement. In 2012, 5,000,000 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred
Stock were approved to be issued, which was subsequently increased to 20,000,000 shares of preferred stock as Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock. In addition, the Company is obligated to issue additional preferred stock equal in lieu of payment of cash of
accrued and unpaid interest on each six month anniversary of the effective date (October 1, 2012). In lieu of the initial two payments
in preferred stock, the parties have determined to modify the voting rights of the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock from 20
votes per share on matters to be voted on by the common stock holders to 25 votes per share on matters to be voted on by the common
stock holders and all prior and subsequent payments of interest will be in common stock. The Company is required to issue additional
shares of its common stock (as amended), in lieu of cash, each six month anniversary of the effective date for any accrued and
unpaid interest.
On April 2, 2014, the
Company issued 274,681 shares of its common stock in lieu of payment in cash of accrued and unpaid interest of $12,635 due April
1, 2014 per the forbearance agreement.
On September 17, 2014,
limited waiver and forbearance agreement was amended to provide that the perpetual license on products as described for resale,
relicensing and commercialization outside the United States was conditioned upon NorthStar providing certain financing, which financing
the Company, in its sole discretion, could decline and retain the license.
The Loan and Security Agreement relating
to the Northstar loan contains various provisions that restrict our operating flexibility. Pursuant to the agreement, we may not,
without Northstar’s authorization, among other things:
| | · | incur additional indebtedness, except for certain permitted indebtedness (generally, accounts payable incurred in the ordinary
course of business, leases of equipment or property incurred in the ordinary course of business not to |
| | · | exceed, in the aggregate, $250,000, any unsecured debt less than $20,000 or any debt not secured by the collateral pledged
to Northstar that is subordinated to the rights of Northstar pursuant to a subordination agreement satisfactory to Northstar in
its sole discretion); |
| | · | make any principal, interest or other payments arising under or in connection with our loan from Seaside National Bank or any
other debt subordinate to Northstar loan; |
| | · | incur additional liens on any of our assets, including any liens on our intellectual property, except for certain permitted
liens including but not limited to non-exclusive licenses or sub-licenses of our intellectual property in the ordinary course of
business and licenses or sub-licenses of intellectual property in connection with joint ventures and corporate collaborations (provided
that any proceeds from such licenses be used to pay down the Northstar loan); |
| | · | voluntarily prepay any debt prior to maturity, except for accounts payable incurred in the ordinary course of business, leases
of equipment or property incurred in the ordinary course of business not to exceed, in the aggregate, $250,000 and any unsecured
debt less than $20,000; |
| | · | convey, sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of property, except for sales of inventory in the ordinary course of business,
sales of obsolete or unneeded equipment and transfers or our intellectual property related to product candidates other than MyoCell
or MyoCell SDF-1 to a currently operating or newly formed wholly owned subsidiary; |
| | · | merge with or acquire any other entity if we would not be the surviving person following such transaction; |
| | · | pay dividends (other than stock dividends) to our shareholders; |
| | · | redeem any outstanding shares of our common stock or any outstanding options or warrants to purchase shares of our common stock
except in connection with a share repurchase pursuant to which we offer to pay our then existing shareholders not more than $250,000; |
| | · | enter into transactions with affiliates other than on arms-length terms; and |
| | · | make any change in any of our business objectives, purposes and operations which has or could be reasonably expected to have
a material adverse effect on our business. |
As of December 31, 2014,
the principle of this note was $362,000.
Lease Guarantee
The Company’s former Chairman of the
Board, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Technology Officer has personally guaranteed the Company’s obligations under its
lease for its facilities in Sunrise, Florida and has provided a personal guarantee for the Company credit card, which is for his
own use only.
Advances
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company
officers and directors have provided advances in the aggregate of $800,000 and $131,859 respectively, for working capital purposes.
The advances are unsecured, due on demand and non-interest bearing.
On August 1, 2013, advances in aggregate
of $22,750 were converted into a demand promissory note with 5% interest per annum. On September 30, 2013, the Company issued
1,995,614 shares of common stock in settlement of the $22,750 promissory note.
On September 30, 2013, the Company issued
8,771,929 shares of its common stock as payment of $100,000 towards cash advances.
Officer and Director Notes
On September 30, 2013,
the Company issued an aggregate of 15,350,876 shares of its common stock in settlement of $175,000 of these related party notes
payable.
On June 20, 2014, the
Company issued 4,045,796 shares of its common stock in settlement of $125,000 of a related party note payable and accrued interest
of $36,832.
On August 1, 2013, the
Company issued an aggregate of $500,000 promissory notes due on demand to officers and employees in settlement of accrued compensation.
The promissory notes bear interest of 5% per annum and due at various maturity dates. During the nine months ended September 30,
2014, the Company paid off $240,821 of the outstanding promissory notes. The principle outstanding balance remaining on these notes as of
September 30, 2014 was $189,813.
On July 1, 2014, the
Company issued an aggregate of $800,000 promissory notes to officers and employee in settlement of accrued compensation. The promissory
notes bear interest of 5% per annum and were due on January 1, 2015.
As of and December 31,
2014, the Company officers and directors have outstanding notes in aggregate of $1,971,060. The notes are range from 4.75% to 8%
per annum and are due upon payoff of the Northstar note payable described above.
On June 20, 2014, the
Company issued 10,333,475 shares of its common stock in settlement of $300,385 of a related party note payable and accrued interest
of $112,954.
Subordinated debt, related party
As of December 31, 2014, the Company officers and directors
have provided notes in aggregate of $1,500,000. The notes are at 8% per annum and are due upon payoff of the Northstar note payable
described above.
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and
Services. Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Fees
In December of 2012, Bioheart
engaged Fiondella, Milone, LaSaracina LLP (FML) to perform the 2012 audit. Aggregate fees billed to us for the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2014 and 2013 by our independent registered public accounting firms are as follows:
| Types of Fees | |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| Audit Fees (1) | |
$ | 50,000 | | |
$ | 65,500 | |
| Audit Related Fees | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| Tax Fees | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| All Other Fees | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| (1) |
This category also includes advice on audit and accounting matters that arose during, or as a result of, the audit of the annual financial statements or the reviews of the interim financial statements. |
Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policy
Consistent
with policies of the SEC regarding auditor independence, the Audit Committee has responsibility for the appointment, compensation
and oversight of the work of the independent auditor. As part of this responsibility, the Audit Committee has adopted, and our
Board has ratified, an Audit and Non-Audit Services Pre-Approval Policy pursuant to which the Audit Committee is required to pre-approve
the audit and non-audit services performed by our independent registered public accounting firm in order to assure that these services
do not impair the auditor’s independence from us.
Prior
to engagement of the independent auditor for the next year’s audit, the independent auditor and the Audit Committee will
review a list of services and related fees expected to be rendered during that year within each of four categories of services
to the Audit Committee for approval:
(i) Audit
Services: Audit services include the annual financial statement audit (including required quarterly reviews), equity investment
audits and other procedures required to be performed by the independent auditor to be able to form an opinion on our financial
statements. Audit Services also include information systems and procedural reviews and testing performed in order to understand
and place reliance on the systems of internal control, and consultations relating to the audit or quarterly review as well as the
attestation engagement for the independent auditor’s report on management’s report on internal controls for financial
reporting.
(ii) Audit-Related
Services: Audit-related services are assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit
or review of our financial statements, including due diligence related to potential business acquisitions/dispositions, accounting
consultations related to accounting, financial reporting or disclosure matters not classified as “Audit Services,”
assistance with understanding and implementing new accounting and financial reporting guidance from rulemaking authorities, financial
audits of employee benefit plans, agreed-upon or expanded audit procedures related to accounting and/or billing records required
to respond to or comply with financial, accounting or regulatory reporting matters and assistance with internal control reporting
requirements.
(iii) Tax
Services: Tax services include services such as tax compliance, tax planning and tax advice; however, the Audit Committee will
not permit the retention of the independent registered public accounting firm in connection with a transaction initially recommended
by the independent registered public accounting firm, the sole business purpose of which may be tax avoidance and treatment which
may not be supported in the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations.
(iv) All
Other Services: All other services are those permissible non-audit services that the Audit Committee believes are routine and recurring
and would not impair the independence of the auditor and are consistent with the SEC’s rules on auditor independence.
Prior to engagement, the
Audit Committee pre-approves the services and fees of the independent auditor within each of the above categories. During the year,
it may become necessary to engage the independent auditor for additional services not previously contemplated as part of the engagement.
In those instances, the Audit and Non-Audit Services Pre-Approval Policy requires that the Audit Committee specifically approve
the services prior to the independent auditor’s commencement of those additional services. Under the Audit and Non-Audit
Services Pre-Approval Policy, the Audit Committee may delegate the ability to pre-approve audit and non-audit services to one or
more of its members provided the delegate reports any pre-approval decision to the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting. As
of the date hereof, the Audit Committee has not delegated its ability to pre-approve audit services.
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement
Schedules.
(a)(1) Financial Statements
See Item 8. “Financial Statements
and Supplementary Data” for Financial Statements included with this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules
All schedules have been omitted because
the required information is not applicable or the information is included in the financial statements or the notes thereto.
(a)(3) Exhibits
| Exhibit No. |
|
Exhibit Description |
| |
|
|
| 3.1(6) |
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the registrant, as amended |
| 3.2(9) |
|
Articles of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation of the registrant |
| 3.3(8) |
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws |
| 4.1(5) |
|
Loan and Security Agreement, dated as of May 31, 2007 by and between BlueCrest Capital Finance, L.P. and the registrant |
| 4.2(12) |
|
Notice of Event of Default, from BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited to the Company, dated January 28, 2009 |
| 4.3(12) |
|
Notice of Acceleration, from BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited to the Company, dated February 2, 2009 |
| 4.4(13) |
|
Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement, between the Company and BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited, dated as of April 2, 2009 |
| 4.5(13) |
|
Grant of Security Interest (Patents), between the Company and BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited, dated as of April 2, 2009 |
| 4.6(13) |
|
Security Agreement (Intellectual Property), between the Company and BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited, dated as of April 2, 2009 |
| 4.7(13) |
|
Subordination Agreement, by Hunton & Williams, LLP in favor of BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited, entered into and effective April 2, 2009 |
| 4.8(13) |
|
Amended and Restated Promissory Note, dated April 2, 2009, by the Company to BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited |
| 4.9(13) |
|
Warrant to purchase 1,315,542 shares of the registrant’s common stock, dated April 2, 2009, issued to BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund Limited |
| 4.10(14) |
|
Warrant to purchase 451,043 shares of the registrant’s common stock, dated April 2, 2009, issued to Rogers Telecommunications Limited |
| 4.11(14) |
|
Warrant to purchase 173,638 shares of the registrant’s common stock, dated April 2, 2009, issued to Hunton & Williams, LLP |
| 4.12(4) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to Howard J. Leonhardt and Brenda Leonhardt |
| 4.12(19) |
|
10% Convertible Promissory Note Due July 23, 2010, in the amount of $20,000, payable to Dana Smith |
| 4.13(19) |
|
10% Convertible Promissory Note Due July 23, 2010, in the amount of $100,000, payable to Bruce Meyers |
| 4.14(19) |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 4.15(4) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to the R&A Spencer Family Limited Partnership |
| 4.15(19) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 4.16(19) |
|
Note Purchase Agreement, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 4.17(19) |
|
Closing Confirmation of Conversion Election, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 4.20(6) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to Samuel S. Ahn, M.D. |
| 4.23(7) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to Howard and Brenda Leonhardt |
| 4.27(11) |
|
Form of Warrant Agreement for October 2008 Private Placement |
| 4.30(19) |
|
10% Convertible Promissory Note Due July 23, 2010, in the amount of $100,000, payable to Bruce Meyers |
| 4.31 (34) |
|
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock |
| 4.32 (35) |
|
Amendment to the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock |
| 10.1**(1) |
|
1999 Officers and Employees Stock Option Plan |
| 10.2**(1) |
|
1999 Directors and Consultants Stock Option Plan |
| 10.3(1) |
|
Form of Option Agreement under 1999 Officers and Employees Stock Option
Plan |
| 10.4(3) |
|
Form of Option Agreement under 1999 Directors and Consultants Stock Option
Plan |
| 10.5**(4) |
|
Employment Letter Agreement between the registrant and Scott Bromley,
dated August 24, 2006. |
| 10.6(1) |
|
Lease Agreement between the registrant and Sawgrass Business Plaza, LLC,
as amended, dated November 14, 2006. |
| 10.7(1) |
|
Asset Purchase Agreement between the registrant and Advanced Cardiovascular
Systems, Inc., dated June 24, 2003. |
| 10.8(4) |
|
Conditionally Exclusive License Agreement between the registrant, Dr.
Peter Law and Cell Transplants International, LLC, dated February 7, 2000, as amended. |
| 10.9(4) |
|
Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2007,
by and between the registrant, Howard J. Leonhardt and Brenda Leonhardt |
| 10.10(4) |
|
Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2007,
by and between the registrant and William P. Murphy Jr., M.D. |
| 10.11(4) |
|
Loan Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2007, by and between the registrant
and Bank of America, N.A. |
| 10.13(4) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to
Howard J. Leonhardt and Brenda Leonhardt |
| 10.14(4) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to
William P. Murphy, Jr., M.D. |
| 10.16(4) |
|
Material Supply Agreement, dated May 10, 2007, by and between the registrant
and Biosense Webster |
| 10.17(5) |
|
Warrant to purchase shares of the registrant’s common stock issued to
BlueCrest Capital Finance, L.P. |
| 10.18(6) |
|
Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated as of September
12, 2007, by and between the registrant and Samuel S. Ahn, M.D. |
| 10.19(6) |
|
Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated as of September
12, 2007, by and between the registrant and Dan Marino |
| 10.21(6) |
|
Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated as of September
19, 2007, by and between the registrant and Jason Taylor |
| 10.22(7) |
|
Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated as of October 10,
2007, by and between the registrant and Howard and Brenda Leonhardt |
| 10.24(7) |
|
Second Amendment to Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated
as of October 10, 2007, by and between the registrant and Howard and Brenda Leonhardt |
| 10.25(7) |
|
Second Amendment to Loan Guarantee, Payment and Security Agreement, dated
as of October 10, 2007, by and between the registrant and William P. Murphy, Jr., M.D. |
| 10.26**(10) |
|
Bioheart, Inc. Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan |
| 10.28(11) |
|
Form of Registration Rights Agreement for October 2008 Private Placement |
| 10.29(19) |
|
10% Convertible Promissory Note Due July 23, 2010, in the amount of $20,000,
payable to Dana Smith |
| 10.31(19) |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 10.32(19) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 10.33(19) |
|
Note Purchase Agreement, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 10.34(19) |
|
Closing Confirmation of Conversion Election, dated July 23, 2009 |
| 10.35**(20) |
|
Amended and Restated 1999 Directors and Consultants Stock Option Plan |
| 10.36(21) |
|
Preliminary Commitment Letter with Seaside National Bank and Trust, dated
September 30, 2010. |
| 10.37(22) |
|
Loan Agreement with Seaside National Bank and Trust, dated
October 25, 2010. |
| 10.38(22) |
|
Promissory Note with Seaside National Bank and Trust, dated October 25, 2010. |
| 10.39(22) |
|
Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement with BlueCrest Venture Finance Master Fund
Limited, dated October 25, 2010. |
| 10.40(23) |
|
Form of Subscription Agreement, executed November 30, 2010. |
| 10.41(23) |
|
Form of Common Stock Purchase Warrant, issued November 30, 2010. |
| 10.42(23) |
|
Form of Registration Rights Agreement, dated November 30, 2010. |
| 10.43(24) |
|
Unsecured Convertible Promissory Note for $25,000, with Magna Group, LLC, dated January 3,
2011. |
| 10.44(24) |
|
Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Magna Group, LLC, dated January 3, 2011. |
| 10.45(24) |
|
Securities Purchase Agreement with Magna Group, LLC, dated January 3, 2011. |
| 10.46(24) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated January 3, 2011. |
| 10.47(24) |
|
Notice of Conversion Election, dated January 3, 2011. |
| 10.48(25) |
|
Unsecured Convertible Promissory Note for $34,750, with Magna Group, LLC, dated May 16, 2011. |
| 10.49(25) |
|
Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Magna Group, LLC, dated May 16, 2011. |
| 10.50(25) |
|
Securities Purchase Agreement with Magna Group, LLC, dated May 16, 2011. |
| 10.51(25) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated May 16, 2011. |
| 10.52(26) |
|
Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Lotus Funding Group, LLC, dated June 15, 2011. |
| 10.53(26) |
|
Partial Assignment and Modification Agreement, dated June 15, 2011. |
| 10.54(26) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated June 15, 2011. |
| 10.55(27) |
|
Promissory Note for $140,380.21 with Greystone Capital Partners, dated July 8, 2011. |
| 10.56(27) |
|
Partial Assignment and Modification Agreement, dated July 8, 2011. |
| 10.57 (28) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated July 8, 2011. |
| 10.58 (29) |
|
Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Greystone Capital Partners, dated August 1, 2011. |
| 10.59 (29) |
|
Partial Assignment and Modification Agreement, dated August 1, 2011. |
| 10.60 (29) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated August 1, 2011. |
| 10.61 (30) |
|
Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Greystone Capital Partners, dated September 1, 2011. |
| 10.62 (30) |
|
Partial Assignment and Modification Agreement, dated September 1, 2011. |
| 10.63 (30) |
|
Subordination Agreement, dated September 1, 2011. |
| 10.64 (31) |
|
Standby Equity Distribution Agreement dated as of November 2, 2011. |
| 10.65 (31) |
|
Registration Rights Agreement dated as of November 2, 2011. |
| 10.66(32) |
|
Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Greystone Capital Partners, dated
January 3, 2012 |
| 10.67(32) |
|
Term Note B Promissory Note for $139,728.82 with Greystone Capital Partners,
dated January 3, 2012 |
| 10.68(32) |
|
Unsecured Convertible Promissory Note for $63,000, with Asher Enterprises,
Inc. dated April 2, 2012 |
| 10.69(32) |
|
Unsecured Convertible Promissory Note for $125,000, with IBC Funds LLC.,
dated January 9, 2013 |
| 10.70(32) |
|
Unsecured Convertible Promissory Note for $37,500, with Asher Enterprises, Inc.
dated February 20, 2013 |
| 10.71(32) |
|
Unsecured Convertible Promissory Note for $42,500, with Asher Enterprises, Inc. dated January 9, 2013 |
| 10.80(33) |
|
2013 Bioheart, Inc. Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan |
| 10.81 (34) |
|
Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of October 7, 2014, by and between
Magna Holdings I, LLC and Bioheart, Inc. |
| 10.82(34) |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of October 7, 2014, by and between
Magna Holdings I, LLC and Bioheart, Inc. |
| 10.83(34) |
|
Common Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of October 23, 2014, by and
between Magna Equities II, LLC and Bioheart, Inc. |
| 10.84(34) |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of October 23, 2014, by and between
Magna Equities II, LLC and Bioheart, Inc. |
| 10.85**(35) |
|
2013 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan Amendment
One. |
| 21 |
|
Subsidiaries. |
| 14.2(2) |
|
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics |
| 31.1* |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| 32.1* |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| * |
|
Filed herewith |
| ** |
|
Indicates management contract or compensatory plan. |
| (1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on February 13, 2007. |
| (2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 1 to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the SEC on June 5, 2007. |
| (3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 2 to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the SEC on July 12, 2007. |
| (4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 3 to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the SEC on August 9, 2007. |
| (5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 4 to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the SEC on September 6, 2007. |
| (6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 5 to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the SEC on October 1, 2007. |
| (7) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Post-effective Amendment No. 1 to the Company’s Form S-1 filed with the SEC on October 11, 2007. |
| (8) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 3, 2008. |
| (9) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 8, 2008. |
| (10) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 14, 2008. |
| (11) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 14, 2008. |
| (12) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 3, 2009. |
| (13) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 8, 2009. |
| (14) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 15, 2009. |
| (15) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A filed with the SEC on April 30, 2009. |
| (16) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 18, 2009. |
| (17) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on May 20, 2009. |
| (18) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 9, 2009. |
| (19) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 3, 2009. |
| (20) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to the Company’s Post-Effective Amendment to Registration Statement on Form S-8/A, filed with the SEC on June 2, 2010. |
| (21) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 6, 2010. |
| (22) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 29, 2010. |
| (23) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 6, 2010. |
| (24) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 12, 2011. |
| (25) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011 |
| (26) |
|
Incorporated by
reference to the Company Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 21, 2011 |
| (27) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 15. 2011 |
| (28) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2011 |
| (29) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 13, 2012 |
| (30) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 30, 2012 |
| (31) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the SEC on February 8, 2012 |
| (32) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 29, 2013 |
| (33) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on May 9, 2013 |
| (34) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the SEC on December 12, 2014. |
| (35) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed with the SEC on December 19, 2014. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
| |
BIOHEART, INC. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
By: |
/s/ Mike Tomas |
|
| |
|
Mike Tomas
Chief Executive Officer & President
|
|
| |
March 16, 2015 |
|
| |
By: |
/s/ Mike Tomas |
|
| |
|
Mike Tomas
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer) |
| |
|
|
| |
March 16, 2015 |
|
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities
and on the dates indicated.
Each person whose signature appears below,
hereby authorizes Mike Tomas, as attorney in fact to sign on his or her behalf, individually, in each capacity stated below, and
to file all amendments or supplements to this annual report on Form 10-K.
| SIGNATURE |
|
TITLE |
|
DATE |
| /s/ William P. Murphy, Jr., M.D. |
|
Chairman of the Board |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| William P. Murphy, Jr., M.D. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| /s/ Mike Tomas |
|
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, & Director |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| Mike Tomas |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| /s/ Mark P. Borman |
|
Director |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| Mark Borman |
|
|
|
|
| /s/ Kristin Comella |
|
Director |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| Kristin Comella |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| /s/ Charles A. Hart |
|
Director |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| Charles A. Hart |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| /s/ Samuel S. Ahn, MD, MBA |
|
Director |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| Samuel S. Ahn, MD, MBA |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| /s/ Sheldon
Anderson
|
|
Director |
|
March 16, 2015 |
| Sheldon Anderson |
|
|
|
|
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
As required under Item 15. Exhibits, Financial
Statement Schedules, the exhibits filed as part of this report are provided in this separate section. The exhibits included in
this section are as follows:
| Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
| 21 |
|
Subsidiaries |
| 31.1 |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| 32.1 |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
Exhibit 21
US Stem Cell Training
Vetbiologics,
US Stem Cell Clinic, LLC (partially owned subsidiary of Bioheart,
Inc.)
FORM 10-K—ITEM 8
BIOHEART, INC.
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and
Stockholders of
Bioheart, Inc.
13794 NW 4th Street, Suite 212,
Sunrise, Florida 33325
We have audited the accompanying balance
sheets of Bioheart, Inc. (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related statements of operations,
stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for each of the years then ended. The Company’s management is responsible for
these financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance
with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform
the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The company
is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audit included
consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the
circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over
financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made
by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements
referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Bioheart, Inc. as of December 31, 2014 and
2013, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.
The accompanying financial statements
have been prepared assuming the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the
Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and used significant amounts of cash in its operations. In addition, at December
31, 2014 the Company’s current liabilities exceed its current assets by $10,957,443. These conditions raise substantial doubt
about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that
might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
/s/Fiondella, Milone & LaSaracina LLP
Glastonbury, Connecticut
March 16, 2015
BIOHEART, INC.
BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
| | |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| ASSETS | |
| | | |
| | |
| Current assets: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | |
$ | 36,674 | | |
$ | 46,227 | |
| Accounts receivable, net | |
| 95,409 | | |
| 19,913 | |
| Prepaid and other | |
| 9,255 | | |
| 784 | |
| Total current assets | |
| 141,338 | | |
| 66,924 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Property and equipment, net | |
| 12,686 | | |
| 9,055 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Other assets | |
| | | |
| | |
| Investments | |
| 40,597 | | |
| — | |
| Deposits | |
| 10,160 | | |
| 10,160 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Total assets | |
$ | 204,781 | | |
$ | 86,139 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT | |
| | | |
| | |
| Current liabilities: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Accounts payable | |
$ | 1,991,979 | | |
$ | 2,382,267 | |
| Accrued expenses | |
| 2,373,615 | | |
| 4,480,335 | |
| Advances, related party | |
| 148,759 | | |
| 416,198 | |
| Deposits | |
| 478,286 | | |
| 478,286 | |
| Subordinated debt, related party | |
| 1,500,000 | | |
| 1,500,000 | |
| Notes payable, related party | |
| 2,333,059 | | |
| 2,241,477 | |
| Notes payable, net of debt discount | |
| 1,531,812 | | |
| 1,930,841 | |
| Derivative liabilities | |
| 741,271 | | |
| 403,811 | |
| Total current liabilities | |
| 11,098,781 | | |
| 13,833,215 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Commitments and contingencies | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Stockholders’ deficit: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Preferred stock, par value $0.001; 20,000,000 shares authorized, 20,000,000 issued and outstanding | |
| 20,000 | | |
| 20,000 | |
| Common stock, par value $0.001; 2,000,000,000 and 950,000,000 shares authorized, respectively, 581,433,153 and 379,787,745 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively | |
| 581,433 | | |
| 379,788 | |
| Additional paid in capital | |
| 108,939,061 | | |
| 103,819,119 | |
| Common stock subscription | |
| — | | |
| 215,000 | |
| Accumulated deficit | |
| (120,434,494 | ) | |
| (118,180,983 | ) |
| Total stockholders’ deficit | |
| (10,894,000 | ) | |
| (13,747,076 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ deficit | |
$ | 204,781 | | |
$ | 86,139 | |
See the accompanying notes to
these financial statements
BIOHEART, INC.
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
| | |
Year ended December 31, | |
| | |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| Revenue: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Products | |
$ | 1,155,543 | | |
$ | 70,396 | |
| Services | |
| 900,288 | | |
| 25,689 | |
| Total revenue | |
| 2,055,831 | | |
| 96,085 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Cost and operating expenses: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Cost of sales | |
| 844,941 | | |
| 30,831 | |
| Research and development | |
| 66,420 | | |
| 626,983 | |
| Marketing, general and administrative | |
| 4,669,432 | | |
| 2,267,831 | |
| Depreciation and amortization | |
| 4,490 | | |
| 2,190 | |
| Total operating expenses | |
| 5,585,283 | | |
| 2,927,835 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Net loss from operations | |
| (3,529,452 | ) | |
| (2,831,750 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Other income (expenses): | |
| | | |
| | |
| Gain on settlement of debt | |
| 2,498,676 | | |
| 1,023,439 | |
| Gain on change of fair value of derivative liability | |
| 425,953 | | |
| 29,179 | |
| Loss from equity investment | |
| (9,117 | ) | |
| — | |
| Other income | |
| — | | |
| 73,756 | |
| Interest expense | |
| (1,639,571 | ) | |
| (1,437,883 | ) |
| Total other income (expenses) | |
| 1,275,941 | | |
| (311,509 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Net loss before income taxes | |
| (2,253,511 | ) | |
| (3,143,259 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Income taxes (benefit) | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| NET LOSS | |
$ | (2,253,511 | ) | |
$ | (3,143,259 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Net loss per common share, basic and diluted | |
$ | (0.005 | ) | |
$ | (0.012 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Weighted average number of common shares outstanding, basic and diluted | |
| 488,667,063 | | |
| 251,828,970 | |
See the accompanying notes to
these financial statements
BIOHEART, INC.
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
TWO YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
Additional | | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| | |
Preferred stock | | |
Common stock | | |
Paid in | | |
Subscription | | |
Accumulated | | |
| |
| | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Capital | | |
Receivable | | |
Deficit | | |
Total | |
| Balance, December 31, 2012 | |
| — | | |
$ | — | | |
| 182,062,802 | | |
| 182,063 | | |
| 100,260,094 | | |
| — | | |
| (115,037,724 | ) | |
| (14,595,267 | ) |
| Reclassify the fair value of excess committed
shares liability to equity upon common share authorization increase | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 474,954 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 474,954 | |
| Issuance of common stock | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 50,029,227 | | |
| 50,029 | | |
| 814,971 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 865,000 | |
| Common stock issued under put agreement | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 31,052,141 | | |
| 31,053 | | |
| 315,861 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 346,914 | |
| Common stock issued in connection with issuance of convertible
debt | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 2,500,000 | | |
| 2,500 | | |
| 33,750 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 36,250 | |
| Common stock issued in connection with settlement of
debt | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 47,967,906 | | |
| 47,968 | | |
| 605,167 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 653,135 | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of interest and penalty
in connection with convertible debt | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 9,408,718 | | |
| 9,409 | | |
| 141,406 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 150,815 | |
| Common stock issued for services | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 6,220,263 | | |
| 6,220 | | |
| 78,931 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 85,151 | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of related party notes
payable | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 44,890,348 | | |
| 44,890 | | |
| 492,860 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 537,750 | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of accounts payable | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 5,656,340 | | |
| 5,656 | | |
| 151,560 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 157,216 | |
| Preferred stock issued in settlement of debt | |
| 5,000,000 | | |
| 5,000 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 65,000 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 70,000 | |
| Preferred stock issued in settlement of forbearance agreement | |
| 15,000,000 | | |
| 15,000 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 259,050 | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| 274,050 | |
| Proceeds from common stock subscription | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 215,000 | | |
| — | | |
| 215,000 | |
| Stock based compensation | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 125,515 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 125,515 | |
| Net loss | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| (3,143,259 | ) | |
| (3,143,259 | ) |
| Balance, December 31, 2013 | |
| 20,000,000 | | |
$ | 20,000 | | |
| 379,787,745 | | |
$ | 379,788 | | |
$ | 103,819,119 | | |
$ | 215,000 | | |
$ | (118,180,983 | ) | |
$ | (13,746,776 | ) |
BIOHEART, INC.
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
TWO YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
Additional | | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| | |
Preferred stock | |
Common stock | |
Paid in | | |
Subscription |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
| |
| | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Capital | | |
Receivable | | |
Deficit | | |
Total | |
| Balance, December 31, 2013 | |
| 20,000,000 | | |
$ | 20,000 | | |
| 379,787,745 | | |
$ | 379,788 | | |
$ | 103,819,119 | | |
$ | 215,000 | | |
$ | (118,180,983 | ) | |
$ | (13,747,076 | ) |
| Common stock issued in settlement of accounts payable | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 48,584,542 | | |
| 48,585 | | |
| 1,022,570 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 1,071,155 | |
| Common stock issued in connection with settlement of other debt | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 83,236,247 | | |
| 83,236 | | |
| 2,147,571 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 2,230,807 | |
| Common stock issued for services | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 3,839,832 | | |
| 3,840 | | |
| 180,151 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 183,991 | |
| Common stock issued upon exercise of warrants | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 11,918,181 | | |
| 11,918 | | |
| 124,082 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 136,000 | |
| Common stock issued as commitment shares in connection with equity purchase agreement | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 12,000,000 | | |
| 12,000 | | |
| (12,000 | ) | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| Proceeds from issuance of common stock | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 42,066,606 | | |
| 42,066 | | |
| 652,559 | | |
| (215,000 | ) | |
| — | | |
| 479,625 | |
| Reclassify fair value of derivative liability to equity upon debt extinguishment | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 128,624 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 128,624 | |
| Fair value of vesting warrants issued in connection with revenue sharing arrangement | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 190,262 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 190,262 | |
| Stock based compensation | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 686,123 | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 686,123 | |
| Net income | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| (2,253,511 | ) | |
| (2,253,511 | ) |
| Balance, December 31, 2014 | |
| 20,000,000 | | |
$ | 20,000 | | |
| 581,433,153 | | |
$ | 581,433 | | |
$ | 108,939,061 | | |
$ | — | | |
$ | (120,434,494 | ) | |
$ | (10,894,000 | ) |
See the accompanying notes to these financial
statements
BIOHEART, INC.
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
| | |
Year ended December 31, | |
| | |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Net loss | |
$ | (2,253,511 | ) | |
$ | (3,143,259 | ) |
| Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Depreciation and amortization | |
| 4,490 | | |
| 2,190 | |
| Bad debt expense | |
| 28,732 | | |
| — | |
| Discount on convertible debt | |
| 546,970 | | |
| 368,682 | |
| Gain on change in fair value of derivative liability | |
| (425,953 | ) | |
| (29,179 | ) |
| Gain on settlement of debt | |
| (2,498,676 | ) | |
| (1,023,439 | ) |
| Non-cash payment of interest | |
| 705,710 | | |
| 228,657 | |
| Change in fair value of warrant modifications | |
| 148,517 | | |
| — | |
| Warrants issued in connection with revenue share arrangement | |
| 190,262 | | |
| — | |
| Related party notes payable issued for services rendered | |
| 800,000 | | |
| 500,000 | |
| Loss on equity investments | |
| 9,117 | | |
| — | |
| Common stock issued in connection with accounts payable | |
| — | | |
| 2,500 | |
| Common stock issued in exchange for services | |
| 38,750 | | |
| 85,151 | |
| Preferred stock issued in settlement of debt and forbearance agreement | |
| — | | |
| 274,050 | |
| Stock based compensation | |
| 537,606 | | |
| 125,515 | |
| (Increase) decrease in: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Receivables | |
| (104,228 | ) | |
| (18,571 | ) |
| Inventory | |
| — | | |
| 62,953 | |
| Prepaid and other current assets | |
| (8,471 | ) | |
| 85,251 | |
| Increase (decrease) in: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Accounts payable | |
| 858,437 | | |
| (59,059 | ) |
| Accrued expenses | |
| 313,601 | | |
| 625,232 | |
| Net cash used in operating activities | |
| (1,108,647 | ) | |
| (1,913,326 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Payments for investments | |
| (49,714 | ) | |
| — | |
| Acquisitions of property and equipment | |
| (8,121 | ) | |
| (9,425 | ) |
| Net cash used by investing activities | |
| (57,835 | ) | |
| (9,425 | ) |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Bank overdraft | |
| — | | |
| (89 | ) |
| Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net | |
| 479,625 | | |
| 1,426,914 | |
| Proceeds from related party advances | |
| 33,760 | | |
| 215,500 | |
| Proceeds from exercise of stock options and warrants | |
| 136,000 | | |
| — | |
| Proceeds from notes payable | |
| 740,500 | | |
| 415,500 | |
| Repayments of notes payable | |
| (232,956 | ) | |
| (88,847 | ) |
| Net cash provided in financing activities | |
| 1,156,929 | | |
| 1,968,978 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents | |
| (9,553 | ) | |
| 46,227 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | |
| 46,227 | | |
| — | |
| Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | |
$ | 36,674 | | |
$ | 46,227 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION | |
| | |
| Interest paid | |
$ | 429,569 | | |
$ | 521,742 | |
| Income taxes paid | |
$ | — | | |
$ | — | |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| Non cash financing activities: | |
| | | |
| | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of notes payable | |
$ | 1,367,927 | | |
$ | 793,135 | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of accounts payable | |
$ | 1,071,155 | | |
$ | 157,216 | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of related party notes and advances payable | |
$ | 862,880 | | |
$ | 397,750 | |
| Common stock issued in settlement of interest and penalties in connection with convertible debt | |
$ | — | | |
$ | 150,815 | |
| Preferred stock issued in settlement of notes payable | |
$ | — | | |
$ | 70,000 | |
| Reclassification of fair value of excess committed share liability to equity upon common share authorization increase | |
$ | — | | |
$ | 474,954 | |
See the accompanying notes to these financial
statements
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
NOTE 1 — SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
A summary of the significant accounting policies
applied in the presentation of the accompanying financial statements follows:
Basis and business presentation
Bioheart, Inc.
(the “Company”) was incorporated under the laws of the State of Florida in August, 1999. The Company is in
the cardiovascular sector of the cell technology industry delivering cell therapies and biologics that help address
congestive heart failure, lower limb ischemia, chronic heart ischemia, acute myocardial infarctions and other issues. Our
business includes the development of proprietary cell therapy products as well as revenue generating physician and patient
based regenerative medicine / cell therapy training services, cell collection and cell storage services, the sale of
cell collection and treatment kits for humans and animals, and the operation of a cell therapy clinic. To date, the Company
has not generated significant sales revenues to cover costs, incurred expenses, and as a result has sustained losses.
Consequently, its operations are subject to all the risks inherent in the establishment of a research and development
business enterprise.
Estimates
The preparation of the financial statements
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain
reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses and certain disclosures. The most significant estimates are those
used in determination of derivative liabilities and stock compensation. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.
Revenue Recognition
The Company recognizes revenue in accordance
with Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 605-10, Revenue Recognition (“ASC 605-10”) which requires that four
basic criteria must be met before revenue can be recognized: (1) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (2) delivery has
occurred; (3) the selling price is fixed and determinable; and (4) collectability is reasonably assured. Determination of criteria
(3) and (4) are based on management’s judgments regarding the fixed nature of the selling prices of the products delivered
and the collectability of those amounts. Provisions for discounts and rebates to customers, estimated returns and allowances, and
other adjustments are provided for in the same period the related sales are recorded.
At the time of each transaction, management
assesses whether the fee associated with the transaction is fixed or determinable and whether or not collection is reasonably assured.
The assessment of whether the fee is fixed or determinable is based upon the payment terms of the transaction. Collectability is assessed based on a number of factors, including past transaction history with the client and the creditworthiness
of the client.
Revenues for test kits and equipment sold are
not recorded until test kits are delivered. The Company has revenue sharing arrangements for the sale of goods whereby the Company
is the primary obligor, sets pricing with the customers and bears all associated credit risks with the customers. Sales under revenue
share arrangements are recorded as gross sales and any portion shared with third parties under such arrangements are classified
as selling expense due to the nature of the marketing activities performed by the third party. Revenues from trainings are not
recorded until the completion of the training. Any cash received as a deposit for trainings are recorded by the company as a liability.
Patent treatments and laboratory services
revenue are recognized when those services have been completed or satisfied.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
Revenues for bank sales are accounted for as
Multiple-Element Arrangements under ASC 605-10 which incorporates Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 605-25, Multiple-Element
Arrangements (“ASC 605-25”). ASC 605-25 addresses accounting for arrangements that may involve the delivery or performance
of multiple products, services and/or rights to use assets.
Cash
The Company considers cash to consist of cash
on hand and temporary investments having an original maturity of 90 days or less that are readily convertible into cash.
Accounts Receivable
Trade receivables are carried at their estimated
collectible amounts. Trade credit is generally extended on a short-term basis; thus trade receivables do not bear interest. Trade
accounts receivable are periodically evaluated for collectability based on past credit history with customers and their current
financial condition.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Any changes to the allowance for doubtful accounts
on accounts receivable are charged to operations in amounts sufficient to maintain the allowance for uncollectible accounts at
a level management believes is adequate to cover any probable losses. Management determines the adequacy of the allowance based
on historical write-off percentages and the current status of accounts receivable. Accounts receivable are charged off against
the allowance when collectability is determined to be permanently impaired. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, allowance for doubtful
accounts was $-0-.
Long-Lived Assets
The Company follows FASB ASC 360-10-15-3, “Impairment
or Disposal of Long-lived Assets,” which established a “primary asset” approach to determine the cash flow estimation
period for a group of assets and liabilities that represents the unit of accounting for a long-lived asset to be held and used.
Long-lived assets to be held and used are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable if it exceeds
the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. Long-lived assets
to be disposed of are reported at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. The Company determined that there
was no impairment on its long-lived assets during 2014 and 2013.
Property and Equipment
Property and equipment are stated at cost.
When retired or otherwise disposed, the related carrying value and accumulated depreciation are removed from the respective accounts
and the net difference less any amount realized from disposition, is reflected in earnings. For financial statement purposes, property
and equipment are recorded at cost and depreciated using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives of 3 to 15
years.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
Income Taxes
The Company has adopted Accounting Standards
Codification subtopic 740-10, Income Taxes (“ASC 740-10”) which requires the recognition of deferred tax liabilities
and assets for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statement or tax returns.
Under this method, deferred tax liabilities and assets are determined based on the difference between financial statements and
tax basis of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse.
Temporary differences between taxable income reported for financial reporting purposes and income tax purposes consist primarily
of derivative liability and stock compensation accounting versus tax differences.
Investments
The Company has adopted Accounting Standards
Codification subtopic 323-10, Investments-Equity Methods and Joint Ventures (“ASC 323-10) which requires the accounting for
investments where the Company can exert significant influence, but not control of a joint venture or equity investment. The Company
accounted for its 33 percent ownership of U.S. Stem Cell Clinic, LLC utilizing the equity method of accounting.
Comprehensive Income
The Company does not have any items of comprehensive income in any
of the periods presented.
Net Loss per Common Share, basic and diluted
The Company has adopted Accounting Standards
Codification subtopic 260-10, Earnings Per Share (“ASC 260-10”) specifying the computation, presentation and disclosure
requirements of earnings per share information. Basic loss per share has been calculated based upon the weighted average number
of common shares outstanding. Stock options and warrants have been excluded as common stock equivalents in the diluted loss per
share because their effect is anti-dilutive on the computation. Fully diluted shares outstanding were 668,063,786 and 344,241,761
for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Stock based compensation
The Company measures the cost of services received
in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the fair value of the award. For employees and directors, the fair value
of the award is measured on the grant date and for non-employees, the fair value of the award is generally re-measured on vesting
dates and interim financial reporting dates until the service period is complete. The fair value amount is then recognized over
the period during which services are required to be provided in exchange for the award, usually the vesting period. Stock-based
compensation expense is recorded by the Company in the same expense classifications in the statements of operations, as if such
amounts were paid in cash. As of December 31, 2014, there were outstanding stock options to purchase 66,925,209 shares of common
stock, 24,814,222 shares of which were vested.
Concentrations of Credit Risk
The Company’s financial instruments that
are exposed to a concentration of credit risk are cash and accounts receivable. Generally, the Company’s cash and cash equivalents
in interest-bearing accounts does not exceed FDIC insurance limits. The financial stability of these institutions is periodically
reviewed by senior management.
As of December 31, 2014, two customers represented
38% and 17%, aggregate of 55% of the Company’s accounts receivable. As of December 31, 2013, three customers represented
36%, 20% and 20%, aggregate of 76%, of the Company’s accounts receivable.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The Company’s revenues earned from sale
of products and services for the year ended December 31, 2014 included 10% of the Company’s total revenues from one customer.
For the year ended December 31, 2013, Company’s revenues earned from sale of products and services included 20% of the Company’s
total revenues from one customer.
Reliance on Key Personnel and Consultants
The Company has three full-time employees and
no part-time employees. The Company is heavily dependent on the continued active participation of its two current executive officers,
one employee and key consultants. The loss of any of the senior management or key consultants could significantly and negatively
impact the business until adequate replacements can be identified and put in place.
Research and Development
The Company accounts for research and development
costs in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 730-10, Research and Development (“ASC 730-10”).
Under ASC 730-10, all research and development costs must be charged to expense as incurred. Accordingly, internal research and
development costs are expensed as incurred. Third-party research and development costs are expensed when the contracted work has
been performed or as milestone results have been achieved as defined under the applicable agreement. Company-sponsored research
and development costs related to both present and future products are expensed in the period incurred. The Company incurred research
and development expenses of $66,420 and $626,983 for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Derivative Instrument Liability
The Company accounts for derivative instruments in accordance with
ASC 815, which establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities, including certain
derivative instruments embedded in other financial instruments or contracts and requires recognition of all derivatives on the
balance sheet at fair value, regardless of hedging relationship designation. Accounting for changes in fair value of the derivative
instruments depends on whether the derivatives qualify as hedge relationships and the types of relationships designated are based
on the exposures hedged. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company did not have any derivative instruments that were designated
as hedges.
At December 31, 2014, the Company had outstanding
convertible notes that contained embedded derivatives. These embedded derivatives include certain conversion features and reset
provisions. (See Note 10)
Fair Value
Accounting Standards Codification subtopic
825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”) requires disclosure of the fair value of certain financial instruments.
The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, and short-term borrowings, as reflected
in the balance sheets, approximate fair value because of the short-term maturity of these instruments. All other significant financial
assets, financial liabilities and equity instruments of the Company are either recognized or disclosed in the financial statements
together with other information relevant for making a reasonable assessment of future cash flows, interest rate risk and credit
risk. Where practicable the fair values of financial assets and financial liabilities have been determined and disclosed; otherwise
only available information pertinent to fair value has been disclosed.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The company follows Accounting Standards Codification
subtopic 820-10, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820-10”) and Accounting Standards Codification subtopic
825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”), which permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments
and certain other items at fair value.
Reclassification
Certain reclassifications have been made to
prior periods’ data to conform with the current year’s presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on reported
income or losses.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In August, 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15,
Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties About an Entities Ability
to Continue as a Going Concern. The standard is intended to define management’s responsibility to decide whether there is
substantial doubt about an organization’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures.
The standard requires management to decide whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s
ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued. The standard provides
guidance to an organization’s management, with principles and definitions that are intended to reduce diversity in the timing
and content of disclosures that are commonly provided by organizations in the footnotes. The standard becomes effective in the
annual period ending after December 15, 2016, with early application permitted. The adoption of this pronouncement is not expected
to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements. Management’s evaluations regarding the events
and conditions that raise substantial doubt regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern have been disclosed
in Note 2.
There were various updates recently issued,
most of which represented technical corrections to the accounting literature or application to specific industries and are not
expected to a have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
NOTE 2 — GOING CONCERN MATTERS
The accompanying consolidated financial statements
have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in
the normal course of business. As shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements during year ended December 31, 2014,
the Company incurred net losses of $2,253,511 and used $1,108,647 in cash for operating activities. These factors among others
may indicate that the Company will be unable to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time.
The Company’s existence is dependent
upon management’s ability to develop profitable operations and to obtain additional funding sources. There can be no assurance
that the Company’s financing efforts will result in profitable operations or the resolution of the Company’s liquidity
problems. The accompanying statements do not include any adjustments that might result should the Company be unable to continue
as a going concern.
The Company’s ability to obtain additional
debt financing and/or alternative arrangements, with the Guarantors or otherwise, may be limited by the amount of, terms and restrictions
of our then current debt. Accordingly, until such time, we will generally be restricted from, among other things, incurring additional
indebtedness or liens, with limited exceptions. Additional debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants that
limit or further limit our operating and financial flexibility and prohibit us from making distributions to shareholders.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
NOTE 3 — INVESTMENTS
Investment is comprised of a 33% ownership
of U.S. Stem Cell Clinic, LLC, accounted for using the equity method of accounting. The initial investment in 2014 of cash and expenses
paid on U.S. Stem Cell Clinic, LLC’s behalf was in aggregate of $49,714. The Company’s 33% loss incurred by U.S. Stem Cell Clinic, LLC of $9,117 was recorded as other income/expense in the Company’s Statement of Operations for the year ended December
31, 2014 and reduced the carrying value of the investment to $40,597.
NOTE 4 — PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
Property and equipment as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 is summarized
as follows:
| |
|
2014 |
|
2013 |
| Laboratory and medical equipment |
|
$ |
352,358 |
|
|
$ |
352,358 |
|
| Furniture, fixtures and equipment |
|
|
125,634 |
|
|
|
125,634 |
|
| Computer equipment |
|
|
47,647 |
|
|
|
39,525 |
|
| Leasehold improvements |
|
|
362,046 |
|
|
|
362,046 |
|
| |
|
|
887,685 |
|
|
|
879,563 |
|
| Less accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(874,999 |
) |
|
|
(870,508 |
) |
| |
|
$ |
12,686 |
|
|
$ |
9,055 |
|
Property and equipment are recorded on the
basis of cost. For financial statement purposes, property, plant and equipment are depreciated using the straight-line method over
their estimated useful lives.
Expenditures for repair and maintenance which
do not materially extend the useful lives of property and equipment are charged to operations. When property or equipment is sold
or otherwise disposed of, the cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the respective accounts with the resulting
gain or loss reflected in operations. Management periodically reviews the carrying value of its property and equipment for impairment
in accordance with the guidance for impairment of long lived assets.
NOTE 5 — ACCRUED EXPENSES
Accrued expenses consisted of the following as of December 31, 2014
and 2013:
| |
|
2014 |
|
2013 |
| License and royalty fees |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
2,122,130 |
|
| Amounts payable to the Guarantors of the Company’s loan agreement with Bank of America and Seaside Bank, including fees and interest |
|
|
1,533,217 |
|
|
|
1,373,775 |
|
| Interest payable on notes payable |
|
|
685,575 |
|
|
|
714,180 |
|
| Vendor accruals and other |
|
|
120,836 |
|
|
|
120,692 |
|
| Employee commissions, compensation, etc. |
|
|
33,987 |
|
|
|
149,558 |
|
| |
|
$ |
2,373,615 |
|
|
$ |
4,480,335 |
|
During the year ended December 31, 2013, 1,000,000
shares of common stock at a common market price of $0.0195 were issued to one debt holder in exchange for $500,000 in principal
and $598,125 of accrued interest relating to a previously issued note. As a result of the settlement, the Company recognized a
gain of $1,078,625 during the year ended December 31, 2013.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
In June 2000, the Company had entered into
an agreement with William Beaumont Hospital, or WBH, pursuant to which WBH granted the Company a worldwide, exclusive, non-sublicenseable
license to two U.S. method patents covering the inducement of human adult myocardial cell proliferation in vitro, or the WBH IP.
The term of the agreement was for the life of the patents, which expire in 2015. The Company did not use this license in any of
their technologies or made any payments to WBH other than the initial payment to acquire the license. On April 2, 2014, the Company
received confirmation from WBH that it has no obligation under the patent license agreement and WBH agreed to terminate the patent
license agreement pursuant to a termination letter dated March 3, 2014. Accordingly, the Company recognized approximately $2,122,130
in settlement of debt which represents the accumulative accrual and related interest from past years under the 2000 patent license
agreement.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company issued an aggregate of 48,584,542 shares of its common stock in settlement of outstanding accounts payable and accrued
expenses. In connection with the issuance, the Company incurred $120,656 net gain in settlement of debt.
NOTE 6 – STANDBY EQUITY DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
Greystone Capital Partners
On November 2, 2011, the Company and Greystone
Capital Partners (“Greystone”) entered into a Standby Equity Distribution Agreement (the “Agreement”). Pursuant
to the Agreement, Greystone has agreed to provide the Company with up to $1,000,000 of funding for the 24-month period following
the date February 10, 2012, the registration statement of the Company’s common stock was declared effective by the SEC (the
“Equity Line”).
During this 24-month period, commencing on
the date on which the SEC first declared the registration statement effective, the Company may request a draw down under the Equity
Line by which the Company would sell shares of its common stock to Greystone, which is obligated to purchase the shares under the
Agreement.
For each share of the Company common stock
purchased under the Agreement, Greystone will pay eighty percent (80%) of the average of the lowest daily volume weighted average
price for five consecutive trading days immediately preceding Advance Notice (the “Valuation Period”) commencing the
date an Advance Notice (the “Advance Notice”) is delivered to Greystone in a manner provided by the Agreement. Subject
to certain limitations and floor price reductions, the Company may, at its sole discretion, issue a Put Notice to Greystone and
Greystone will then be irrevocably bound to acquire such shares. The registration statement of the Company’s common stock pursuant
to the Agreement was declared effective on February 10, 2012 and a Post-Effective Amendment was declared effective on May 7, 2013.
On December 1, 2012, the parties to the Equity Line agreed that the Purchase Price be adjusted to seventy-five percent (75%) of
the lowest daily volume weighted average price of the Common Stock as quoted by Bloomberg, LP, during the five (5) consecutive
Trading Days (as such term is defined in the Equity Line) immediately subsequent to the date of the relevant Advance Notice.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued an aggregate of 31,052,141 shares of its common stock in exchange for $346,914 draw down on the equity line.
The Agreement automatically terminated on the
first of April, 2014 (the first day of the month next following the second (2nd) anniversary of the Effective Date).
NOTE 7 – STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
On October 23, 2014, the Company, entered into
a common stock purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Magna Equities II, LLC, a New York limited liability
company (the “Investor”). The Purchase Agreement provides that, upon the terms and subject to the conditions
set forth therein, the Investor is committed to purchase up to $3,000,000 (the “Total Commitment”) worth of the Company’s
common stock, $0.001 par value (the “Shares”), over the 24-month term of the Purchase Agreement.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
From time to time over the term of the Purchase
Agreement, commencing on the trading day immediately following the date on which the initial registration statement is declared
effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”), the Company may provide the Investor with a
draw down notice to purchase a specified dollar amount of Shares, with each draw down subject to certain limitations. The Company
may not deliver any Draw Down Notice to the Investor if the Initial Purchase Price with respect to the Shares subject to such Draw
Down Notice is less than $0.0025 as of the date the applicable Draw Down Notice is received by the Investor (the “Draw Down
Exercise Date”).
The applicable Initial Purchase Price. The
“Initial Purchase Price” is defined as a price equal to 93% of the lowest of (i) the arithmetic average of the three
lowest daily volume weighted average prices for the Company’s common stock (the “VWAP”) during the 10
consecutive trading days ending on the trading day immediately preceding the applicable Draw Down Exercise Date, (ii) the arithmetic
average of the three lowest closing sale prices for the Company’s common stock during the 10 consecutive trading days ending
on the trading day immediately preceding the applicable Draw Down Exercise Date and (iii) the closing sale price for the Company’s
common stock on the trading day immediately preceding the applicable Draw Down Exercise Date.
The Company paid to the Investor as a commitment
fee for entering into the Purchase Agreement equal an aggregate of to 12,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock.
NOTE 8 — NOTES PAYABLE
Notes payable were comprised of the following as of December 31,
2014 and 2013:
| |
|
2014 |
|
2013 |
| Seaside Bank note payable. |
|
$ |
980,000 |
|
|
$ |
980,000 |
|
| August 2008 Unsecured Promissory Note |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
| Hunton & Williams notes payable |
|
|
384,972 |
|
|
|
384,972 |
|
| Asher notes payable |
|
|
151,000 |
|
|
|
143,000 |
|
| Daniel James Management note payable |
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
| Fourth Man, LLC note payable |
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
35,000 |
|
| Magna Group |
|
|
205,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
| Total notes payable |
|
|
1,870,972 |
|
|
|
2,042,972 |
|
| Less unamortized debt discount |
|
|
(339,160 |
) |
|
|
(112,131 |
) |
| Total notes payable net of unamortized debt discount |
|
$ |
1,531,812 |
|
|
$ |
1,930,841 |
|
Seaside Bank
On October 25, 2010, the Company entered into
a Loan Agreement with Seaside National Bank and Trust for a $980,000 loan at 4.25% per annum interest that was used to refinance
the Company’s loan with Bank of America. The obligation is guaranteed by certain shareholders of the Company. The Company
renewed the loan with Seaside National Bank and Trust during the first quarter of 2014 to extend the maturity date to December
23, 2015.
August 2008 Unsecured Promissory Note
On August 20, 2008, the Company borrowed $1.0
million from a third party pursuant to the terms of an unsecured Promissory Note and Agreement. Outstanding principal and interest
on the loan, which accrues at the rate of 13.5% per annum, would be payable in one balloon payment upon the Company’s repayment
of the BlueCrest Loan, which was scheduled to mature in May 2010, however the Company was not obligated to make payments until
BlueCrest Loan is paid off.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
In the event the Company completes a private
placement of its common stock and/or securities exercisable for or convertible into its common stock which generates at least $19.0
million of gross proceeds, the Company may prepay, without penalty, all outstanding principal and interest due under the loan using
the same type of securities issued in the subject private placement. Because repayment of the loan could occur within 12 months
from the date of the balance sheet, the Company has classified this loan as short term.
Subject to certain conditions, at the end of
each calendar quarter during the time the loan is outstanding, the Company may, but is not required to, pay all or any portion
of the interest accrued but unpaid as of such date with shares of its common stock. In April 2009, as consideration for the authorization
to amend certain documents related to the Note, the Company issued to the Note holder a warrant to purchase 451,053 shares of common
stock at an exercise price of $0.5321 per share. The warrant, which became exercisable immediately upon issuance, has a ten year
term. This warrant had a fair value of $195,694, which was accounted for as additional paid in capital and reflected as a component
of debt discount and has been fully amortized as interest expense ratably over the term of the loan.
In 2013, 1,000,000 shares of common stock were
issued to the debt holder, in exchange for $500,000 in principal and $598,125 of accrued interest relating to a previously issued
note resulting in a gain of $1,078,625. A gain of $1,078,625 was included in the net gain on settlement of debt and trade payables
on the statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.
On June 16, 2014, 14,539,191 shares of common
stock were issued to the debt holder, in exchange for the remaining $500,000 principal and $81,568 of accrued interest resulting
in a gain of $255,890. A gain of $255,890 was included in the net gain on settlement of debt and trade payable on the statement
of operations for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Hunton & Williams Notes
At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company
has two outstanding notes payable with interest at 8% per annum due at maturity. The two notes, $61,150 and $323,822, are payable
in one balloon payment upon the date the Noteholder provides written demand, however the Company is not obligated to make payments
until the Northstar (or successor) Loan is paid off.
Asher Notes
2013 Notes
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Asher Enterprises, Inc. (“Asher”), for the sale of 8% convertible
notes in aggregate principal amount of $255,500 (the “Asher Notes”).
The Asher Notes bear interest at the rate of
8% per annum. As of the December 31, 2013 all interest and principal must be repaid nine months from the issuance date, the last
note due August 7, 2014. The Notes are convertible into common stock, at Asher’s option, at a 42% to 45% discount to the
average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. The Company
has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Asher Notes. These embedded derivatives included certain conversion features
and reset provision.
The accounting treatment of derivative financial
instruments requires that the Company record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception date of Asher Notes and to fair
value as of each subsequent reporting date. At the inception of the Asher Notes, the Company determined the aggregate fair value
of $335,089 of the embedded derivatives.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The fair value of the embedded derivatives
was determined using the Binomial Option Pricing Model based on the following assumptions: (1) dividend yield of 0%; (2) expected
volatility of 154.80% to 164.29%, (3) weighted average risk-free interest rate of 0.09% to 0.17%, (4) expected lives of 0.67 to
.77 years, and (5) estimated fair value of the Company’s common stock from $0.01 to $0.0373 per share. The initial fair value
of the embedded debt derivative of $335,089 was allocated as a debt discount up to the proceeds of the note ($255,500) with the
remainder ($79,589) charged to current period operations as interest expense. For the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the
Company amortized $92,794 and $162,706 of debt discount to current period operations as interest expense, respectively. As of December
31, 2014 the gross balance of the 2013 Asher Notes was $-0-.
2014 Notes
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Asher Enterprises, Inc. (“Asher”) or affiliates, for the
sale of 8% convertible notes in aggregate principal amount of $334,000 (the “Asher Notes”).
The Asher Notes bear interest at the rate of
8% per annum. As of December 31, 2014, all interest and principal must be repaid nine months from the issuance date, with the last
note being due August 12, 2015. The Notes are convertible into common stock, at Asher’s option, at a 45% discount to the
average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. The Company
has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Asher Notes.
These embedded derivatives included certain
conversion features and reset provision. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments requires that the Company
record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception date of Asher Notes and to fair value as of each subsequent reporting
date, which at December 31, 2014 was $149,770. At the inception of the Asher Notes, the Company determined the aggregate fair value
of $566,294 of the embedded derivatives.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company
amortized $248,153 of debt discount to current period operations as interest expense.
The remaining principle balance as of December 31, 2014 was $151,000.
Fourth Man, LLC
2013 Notes
On October 11, 2013, the Company entered into
a Securities Purchase Agreement with Fourth Man, LLC. (“Fourth Man”), for the sale of an 8% convertible note in the
principal amount of $35,000 (the “Note”).
The Note bears interest at the rate of 8% per
annum. All interest and principal must be repaid on April 10, 2014. The Note is convertible into common stock, at Fourth Man’s
option, at a 47% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period
prior to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Fourth Man Note. These embedded derivatives
included certain conversion features and reset provision. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments requires
that the Company record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception date of Fourth Man Note and to fair value as of each
subsequent reporting date. At the inception of the Fourth Man Note, the Company determined the aggregate fair value of $52,894
of the embedded derivatives.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The fair value of the embedded derivatives
was determined using the Binomial Option Pricing Model based on the following assumptions: (1) dividend yield of 0%; (2) expected
volatility of 164.29%, (3) weighted average risk-free interest rate of 0.07%, (4) expected life of 0.50 year, and (5) estimated
fair value of the Company’s common stock of $0.0121 per share. The initial fair value of the embedded debt derivative of
$52,894 was allocated as a debt discount up to the proceeds of the note ($35,000) with the remainder ($17,894) charged to current
period operations as interest expense. For the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company amortized $19,337 and $15,663
of debt discount to current period operations as interest expense, respectively.
2014 Notes
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company entered into Securities Purchase Agreements with Fourth Man, LLC. (“Fourth Man”), for the sale of an 8% to
9.5% convertible notes in the aggregate principal amount of $100,000 (the “Note”).
The Notes bears interest at the rate of 8%
to 9.5% per annum. As of the year ended December 31, 2014, all interest and principal must be repaid one year from the issuance
date, with the last note being due August 28, 2015. The Notes are convertible into common stock, at Fourth Man’s option,
at a 47% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior
to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Fourth Man Notes. These embedded derivatives
included certain conversion features and reset provision.
The accounting treatment of derivative financial
instruments requires that the Company record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception date of Fourth Man Notes and to
fair value as of each subsequent reporting date which at December 31, 2014 was $93,505. At the inception of the Fourth Man Notes,
the Company determined the aggregate fair value of $168,501 of the embedded derivatives.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company
amortized $50,549 of debt discount to current period operations as interest expense.
The remaining principle balance as of December 31, 2014 was $75,000.
Daniel James Management
2014 Notes
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company entered into Securities Purchase Agreements with Daniel James Management (“Daniel”) for the sale of 8% to 9.5%
convertible notes in aggregate principal amount of $135,000 (the “Daniel Notes”).
The Daniel Notes bear interest at the rate
of 8% to 9.5% per annum. As of the year ended December 31, 2014, all interest and principal must be repaid one year from the issuance
date, with the last note being due November 30, 2015. The Daniel Notes are convertible into common stock, at holder’s option,
at a 47% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior
to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Daniel Note. These embedded derivatives included
certain conversion features and reset provision.
The accounting treatment of derivative financial
instruments requires that the Company record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception date of Daniel Notes and to fair
value as of each subsequent reporting date which at December 31, 2014 was $95,866. At the inception of the Daniel Notes, the Company
determined the aggregate fair value of $236,211 of the embedded derivatives.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company
amortized $76,758 of debt discount to current period operations as interest expense.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The remaining principle balance as of December 31, 2014 was $75,000.
Magna Capital Group
2014 Notes
During the year
ended December 31, 2014, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with Magna Capital Group
(“Magna”) for the sale of a convertible note in aggregate principal amount of $307,500 (the “Magna
Note”) and an original interest discount (“OID”) of $102,500. $40,000 of the outstanding principal amount
of the Convertible Note (together with any accrued and unpaid interest with respect to such portion of the principal amount)
will be automatically extinguished upon the filing of the registration statement, following the closing of the Securities
Purchase Agreement. In addition, $62,500 of the outstanding principal amount of the Convertible Note (together with any
accrued and unpaid interest with respect to such portion of the principal amount) will be automatically extinguished if (i)
the registration statement is declared effective by the SEC on or prior to the earlier of (A) the
120th calendar day after October 7, 2014 and (B) the fifth business day after the date we are notified by the
Securities and Exchange Commission, or the Commission, that the registration statement will not be reviewed or will not be
subject to further review, and this prospectus is available for use by Magna for the resale by Magna of all of the shares of
our common stock issued or issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Note and (ii) no event of default under the
Convertible Note or an event that with the passage of time or giving of notice would constitute an event of default under the
Convertible Note has occurred on or prior to such date. On November 21, 2014, the Company filed its registration statement
and on December 22, 2014, was declared effective. As such, the principle amount of the note was reduced by an aggregate
of $102,500.
The
Convertible Note matures on August 7, 2015 and, in addition to the approximately 33.33% original issue discount, accrues
interest at the rate of 12% per year. The Convertible Note is convertible at any time, in whole or in part, at Magna’s
option into shares of Company common stock at a fixed conversion price of $0.01035 per share, subject to adjustment pursuant
to the “full ratchet” and standard anti-dilution provisions contained in the Convertible Note. This resulted in
an embedded derivatives liability as a result of these anti-dilution provision. This conversion price represents a discount
of approximately 45% from the lowest trading price the Company common stock during the five trading days prior to October
7, 2014, the date the Company issued the Convertible Note to Magna.
The accounting treatment of derivative financial
instruments requires that the Company record fair value of the derivative as of the inception date of Magna Note and to fair value
as of each subsequent reporting date which at December 31, 2014 was $252,211. At the inception of the Magna Note, the Company determined
the aggregate fair value of $472,702 of the embedded derivative. At the dates of debt reductions, as described above, the Company
reclassified the fair value of the related derivative liability of $128,624 to additional paid in capital.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company
amortized $57,319 of debt discount to current period operations as interest expense.
The remaining principle balance as of December 31, 2014 was $205,000.
For 2013, the fair value of the embedded
derivatives was determined using the Binomial Option Pricing Model based on the following assumptions: (1) dividend yield of 0%;
(2) expected volatility of 154.80% to 164.29%, (3) weighted average risk-free interest rate of 0.07% to 0.17%, (4) expected lives
of 0.50 to .77 years, and (5) estimated fair value of the Company’s common stock from $0.01 to $0.0373 per share. The initial
fair value of the embedded debt derivative of $387,983 was allocated as a debt discount up to the proceeds of the note ($290,500)
with the remainder ($97,483) charged to current period operations as interest expense.
For 2014, the fair value of the embedded
derivatives were determined using the Binomial Option Pricing Model based on the following assumptions at December 31, 2014:
(1) dividend yield of 0%, (2) expected volatility of 146.33% to 171.91%, (3) weighted average risk-free interest rate of
0.10% to 0.25%, (4) expected lives of 0.76 to 1.00 years, and (5) estimated fair value of the Company’s common stock
from $0.0105 to $0.0486 per share. The initial fair value of the embedded debt derivative of $1,443,708 was allocated as a
debt discount up to the proceeds of the notes ($768,000) with the remainder ($675,708) charged to current period operations
as interest expense. For the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company amortized an aggregate of $575,629 and
$368,682 of debt discounts to current period operations as interest expense, respectively.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
NOTE 9 — RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Advances
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company
officers and directors have provided advances in the aggregate of $148,759 and $416,198 respectively, for working capital purposes.
The advances are unsecured, due on demand and non-interest bearing.
On August 1, 2013, advances in aggregate of
$22,750 were converted into a demand promissory note with 5% interest per annum. On September 30, 2013, the Company issued
1,995,614 shares of common stock in settlement of the $22,750 promissory note.
On September 30, 2013, the Company issued 8,771,929
shares of its common stock as payment of $100,000 towards cash advances.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company issued an aggregate
of 10,232,286 shares of common stock in settlement of $298,759 of related party advances and outstanding accounts payable.
Notes payable-related party
Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC
On February 29, 2012, a note issued to BlueCrest
Master Fund Limited was assigned to Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC (“Northstar”), owned partly by certain directors
and existing shareholders of the Company, including Dr. William P. Murphy Jr., Dr. Samuel Ahn and Charles Hart. At the date of
the assignment, the principal amount of the BlueCrest note was $544,267.
On March 30, 2012, the Company and Northstar
agreed to extend until May 1, 2012 the initial payment date for any and all required monthly under the Note, such that the first
of the four monthly payments required under the Note will be due and payable on May, 2012 and all subsequent payments will be due
on a monthly basis thereafter commencing on June 1, 2012, and to waive any and all defaults and/or events of default under the
Note with respect to such payments. The Company did not make the required payment, and as a result, was in default of the revised agreement The
Company renegotiated the terms of the Note and Northstar agreed to suspend the requirement of principal payments by the Company
and allow payment of interest-only in common stock.
On September 21, 2012, the Company issued 5,000,000
common stock purchase warrants to Northstar that was treated as additional interest expense upon issuance.
On October 1, 2012, the Company and Northstar
entered into a limited waiver and forbearance agreement providing a recapitalized new note balance comprised of all sums due Northstar
with a maturity date extended perpetually. The Company agreed to issue 5,000,000 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
and 10,000,000 of common stock in exchange for $210,000 as payment towards outstanding debt, default interest, penalties, professional
fees outstanding and due Northstar. In addition, the Company executed a security agreement granting Northstar a lien on all patents,
patent applications, trademarks, service marks, copyrights and intellectual property rights of any nature, as well as the results
of all clinical trials, know-how for preparing Myoblasts, old and new clinical data, existing approved trials, all right and title
to Myoblasts, clinical trial protocols and other property rights.
In addition, the Company granted Northstar
a perpetual license on products as described for resale, relicensing and commercialization outside the United States. In connection
with the granted license, Northstar shall pay the Company a royalty of up to 8% on revenues generated.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
Effective October 1, 2012, the effective interest
rate was 12.85% per annum. The parties agreed, as of February 28, 2013, to reduce the interest rate to 7% per annum.
In connection with the consideration paid,
Northstar waived, from the effective date through the earlier of termination or expiration of the agreement, satisfaction of the
obligations as described in the forbearance agreement.
In 2012, 5,000,000 shares of Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock were approved to be issued, which was subsequently increased to 20,000,000 shares of preferred stock as Series
A Convertible Preferred Stock. In addition, the Company is obligated to issue additional preferred stock equal in lieu of payment
of cash of accrued and unpaid interest on each six month anniversary of the effective date (October 1, 2012). In lieu of the initial
two payments in preferred stock, the parties have determined to modify the voting rights of the Series A Convertible Preferred
Stock from 20 votes per share on matters to be voted on by the common stock holders to 25 votes per share on matters to be voted
on by the common stock holders and all prior and subsequent payments of interest will be in common stock. The Company is required
to issue additional shares of its common stock (as amended), in lieu of cash, each six month anniversary of the effective date
for any accrued and unpaid interest.
As described above, during the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued the 5,000,000 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and the 10,000,000 of common stock described above
in exchange for the $210,000 as payment towards outstanding principle of the debt. In addition, the Company issued 15,000,000 shares
of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock as a penalty in settlement of the terms of the forbearance agreement. The fair value of
the Preferred Stock of $274,050 was included in interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2013.
On September 30, 2013, the Company issued 8,771,929
shares of its common stock as payment of $100,000 towards cash advances.
On December 24, 2013, the Company issued 3,915,662
shares of its common stock as payment of accrued interest through June 30, 2013 of $85,447.
On April 2, 2014, the Company issued 274,681
shares of its common stock in lieu of payment in cash of accrued and unpaid interest of $12,635 due April 1, 2014 per the forbearance
agreement.
On September 17, 2014, limited waiver and forbearance
agreement entered into on October 1, 2012 to provide that the perpetual license on products as described for resale, relicensing
and commercialization outside the United States was amended as such to condition upon NorthStar providing certain financing, which
financing the Company, in its sole discretion, could decline and retain the license.
On October 3, 2014, the Company issued 514,886
shares of its common stock in lieu of payment in cash of accrued and unpaid interest of $12,705 due October 1, 2014 per the forbearance
agreement.
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the principle of this note was
$362,000.
Officer and Director Notes
|
|
2014
|
|
2013
|
| Notes payable, Dr Murphy |
$ |
465,240 |
|
|
$ |
763,626 |
|
| Note payable, Dr. Ahn |
|
- |
|
|
|
125,000 |
|
| Note payable, Mr. Tomas |
|
331,354 |
|
|
|
518,133 |
|
| Note payable, Mr. Tomas |
|
375,000 |
|
|
|
375,000 |
|
| Note payable, Mr. Tomas |
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
- |
|
| Note payable, Ms. Comella |
|
- |
|
|
|
97,718 |
|
| Note payable, Ms. Comella |
|
299,465 |
|
|
|
- |
|
| Total |
$ |
1,971,059 |
|
|
$ |
1,879,477 |
|
Notes payable, Dr. Murphy
At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company
has outstanding notes payable to Dr. Murphy with interest at 8% per annum due at maturity in aggregate $465,240 and $763,626, respectively.
Of the outstanding balance, certain subordinated notes $100,000 and $140,000 were previously due on November 30, 2012 and June
4, 2011 respectively, and are unsecured. The Company is not obligated to make payment until Northstar loan is paid off.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
On June 20, 2014, the Company issued 10,333,475 shares of its common
stock in settlement of $298,386 of related party note payable, $2,000 advances and accrued interest of $112,954.
Note payable, Dr. Ahn
At December 31, 2013, the Company has outstanding note payable for
$125,000 to Dr. Ahn with interest at 8% per annum due at maturity.
On June 20, 2014, the Company issued 4,045,796
shares of its common stock in settlement of $125,000 of related party note payable and accrued interest of $36,832.
Notes payable, Mr. Tomas
In 2013, the Company issued a promissory note
payable for previous advances and accrued compensation. The promissory note bear interest of 5% per annum and due on demand. During
the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company paid off $186,779 of the outstanding promissory note. The principle outstanding balance
of these notes as of December 31, 2014 is $331,354.
On August 1, 2013, the Company issued a $375,000
promissory notes due on demand in settlement of accrued compensation. The promissory note bear interest of 5% per annum and due
on demand. The principle outstanding balance of these notes as of December 31, 2014 is $375,000.
On July 1, 2014, the Company issued a $500,000
promissory note in settlement of accrued compensation. The promissory notes bear interest of 5% per annum and due on January 1,
2015. The principle outstanding balance of these notes as of December 31, 2014 is $375,000.
Notes payable, Ms. Comella
On August 1, 2013, the Company issued a $125,000
promissory notes due on demand in settlement of accrued compensation. The promissory note bear interest of 5% per annum and due
on demand. During the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company paid off $97,718 and $27,282 of the outstanding promissory
note. The principle outstanding balance of these notes as of December 31, 2014 is $-0-.
On July 1, 2014, the Company issued a $300,000
promissory note in settlement of accrued compensation. The promissory notes bear interest of 5% per annum and due on January 1,
2015. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company paid off $535 of the outstanding promissory note. The principle outstanding
balance of these notes as of December 31, 2014 is $299,465.
Subordinated debt, related party
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company
officers and directors have provided notes in aggregate of $1,500,000. The notes range from 4.75% to 8% per annum and are due
upon payoff of the Northstar note payable described above.
NOTE 10 — DERIVATIVE LIABILITIES
Excessive committed shares
On December 31, 2012, in connection with the
previously issued stock options and warrants, the Company had the possibility of exceeding their common shares authorized when
considering the number of possible shares that may be issuable to satisfy settlement provisions of these agreements after consideration
of all existing instruments that could be settled in shares. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments required
that the Company reclassify the derivative from equity to a liability at their fair values as of the date possible issuable shares
exceeded the authorized level and at fair value as of each subsequent balance sheet date. Any change in fair value was recorded
as non-operating, non-cash income or expense at each reporting date. If the fair value of the derivatives was higher at the subsequent
balance sheet date, the Company recorded a non-operating, non-cash charge. If the fair value of the derivatives was lower at the
subsequent balance sheet date, the Company recorded non-operating, non-cash income.
On February 4, 2013, in conjunction with the
increase in authorized number of shares to 970,000,000, the Company determined it had adequate authorized shares to settle all
of these agreements. As such, the Company adjusted the derivative liability to fair value on February 4, 2013 and reclassified
the derivative liability to equity. The fair value of the derivative liability of $474,954 (a non-cash item) as of February 4,
2013 was determined using the Binomial Option Pricing model with the following assumptions: dividend yield: 0%; volatility: 156.52%;
risk free rate: 0.38%; and expected life: 3.5 years. The Company recorded a loss on change in derivative liabilities of $84,907
during the year ended December 31, 2013.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
Reset warrants
On October 1, 2012, in connection with the
forbearance agreement with Northstar as discussed in Note 8 above, the Company issued an aggregate of 15,000,000 common stock purchase
warrants to purchase the Company’s common stock with an exercise price of $0.014 per share for ten years with anti-dilutive
(reset) provisions.
The Company has identified embedded derivatives
related to the issued warrants. These embedded derivatives included certain and anti-dilutive (reset) provisions. The accounting
treatment of derivative financial instruments requires that the Company record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception
date and to fair value as of each subsequent reporting date.
At December 31, 2014, the fair value
of the reset provision related to the embedded derivative liability of $149,920 was determined using the Binomial Option
Pricing model with the following assumptions: dividend yield: 0%; volatility: 146.33%; risk free rate: 1.97%; and expected
life: 7.75 years. The Company recorded a loss on change in derivative liabilities of $3,064 during the year ended December
31, 2014.
Convertible notes
During the year ended December 31, 2014 and
2013, the Company issued convertible notes (see Note 7 above).
These notes are convertible into common stock,
at holders’ option, at a discount to the market price of the Company’s common stock. The Company has identified the
embedded derivatives related to these notes relating to certain anti-dilutive (reset) provisions. These embedded derivatives included
certain conversion features. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments requires that the Company record fair
value of the derivatives as of the inception date of these notes and to fair value as of each subsequent reporting date.
The fair value of the embedded derivatives
at December 31, 2014, in the amount of $591,351, was determined using the Binomial Option Pricing Model based on the following
assumptions: (1) dividend yield of 0%; (2) expected volatility of 146.33%, (3) weighted average risk-free interest rate of 0.04
to 0.25%, (4) expected lives of 0.24 to 0.92 years, and (5) estimated fair value of the Company’s common stock of $0.01 per
share. The Company recorded a gain on change in derivative liabilities of $429,018 during the year ended December 31, 2014.
Based upon ASC 840-15-25 (EITF Issue 00-19,
paragraph 11) the Company has adopted a sequencing approach regarding the application of ASC 815-40 to its outstanding convertible
notes. Pursuant to the sequencing approach, the Company evaluates its contracts based upon earliest issuance date.
NOTE 11 — STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Preferred stock
On August 17, 2012, the Board of Directors
designated 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock as Series A Convertible Preferred Stock which was increased to 20,000,000 shares
of preferred stock as Series A Convertible Preferred Stock (currently held by Northstar Biotechnology Group, LLC). Each share of
preferred stock is convertible into equal number of common shares at the option of the holder; entitled to 20 votes on all matters
presented to be voted by the holders of common stock; upon event of liquidation, entitled to amount equal to stated value plus
any accrued and unpaid dividends or other fees before distribution to junior securities. In lieu of the initial two payments due
to Northstar on April 1, 2013 and October 1, 2013, the parties have determined to modify the voting rights of the Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock from 20 votes per share on matters to be voted on by the common stock holders to 25 votes per share on matters
to be voted on by the common stock holders (see Note 8 above).
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued an aggregate of 20,000,000 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock for principle payment and settlement of
forbearance (see note 9 above).
Common stock
Effective May 19, 2014, the Company amended
its articles of incorporation to increase the authorized shares of capital stock of the Company from nine hundred and fifty million
(950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively,
to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both
$.001 par value respectively.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company issued 42,066,606
shares of common stock for proceeds of $479,625.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company issued an aggregate of 48,584,542 shares of its common stock in settlement of outstanding accounts payable and accrued
expenses. In connection with the issuance, the Company incurred $57,025 loss in settlement of debt.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company issued an aggregate of 83,236,247 shares of its common stock for the conversion of $2,057,280 of notes payable and related
accrued interest. In connection with the issuance, the Company incurred $255,890 gain in settlement of debt.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company issued an aggregate of 3,839,832 shares of its common stock for services provided to the Company valued at $183,991.
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company issued an aggregate
of 11,918,181 shares of its common stock in connection with the exercise of warrants.
During the year ended December 31, 2014 the
Company issued Magna Group 12,000,000 shares of its common stock as a commitment fee for entering into the Purchase Agreement (See
Note 7).
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company issued 50,029,227
shares of common stock for proceeds of $865,000.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued 31,052,141 shares of common stock issued under its standby equity distribution agreement with Greystone Capital
Partners.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued an aggregate of 5,656,340 shares of its common stock for settlement of $82,339 of accounts payable. In connection
with the settlement, the Company recorded a loss on settlement of debt of $74,877.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued 2,500,000 shares of its common stock in connection with the issuance of a note payable.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued 57,967,906 shares of its common stock in connection with the settlement and/or conversion of various notes payable.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the
Company issued 34,890,348 shares of its common stock in connection with the settlement of related party notes payable and advances.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
During the year ended December 31, 2013,
the Company issued 9,408,718 shares of its common stock in settlement of interest and penalty in connection with convertible debt.
During the year ended December 31, 2013,
the Company issued 6,220,263 shares of its common stock services rendered valued at $85,151.
NOTE 12 — STOCK OPTIONS AND WARRANTS
Stock Options
In December 1999, the Board of Directors
and shareholders adopted the 1999 Officers and Employees Stock Option Plan, or the Employee Plan, and the 1999 Directors and Consultants
Stock Option Plan, or the Director Plan. The Employee Plan and the Director Plan are collectively referred to herein as the Plans.
The Plans are administered by the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee. The objectives of the Plans include attracting
and retaining key personnel by encouraging stock ownership in the Company by such persons. In February 2010, the Directors &
Consultants Plan was amended to extend the termination date of the Plan to December 1, 2011.
On April 1, 2013, the Board of Directors
approved, subject to shareholder approval, the establishment of the Bioheart 2013 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan, or the “2013
Omnibus Plan”. The 2013 Omnibus Plan reserves up to fifty million shares of common stock for issuance. On August 4, 2014,
the Board of Directors approved to set the reserve to one hundred million shares of common stock for issuance and to close the
1999 Officers and Employees Stock Option Plan.
A summary of options at December 31, 2014
and activity during the nine months then ended is presented below:
| |
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise Price |
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term (in years) |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Options outstanding at January 1, 2013 |
|
|
7,853,376 |
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
8.2 |
|
|
| Granted |
|
|
17,400,000 |
|
|
$ |
0.016 |
|
9.9 |
|
|
| Exercised |
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
| Forfeited/Expired |
|
|
(1,340,433 |
) |
|
$ |
1.08 |
|
|
|
|
| Options outstanding at December 31, 2013 |
|
|
23,912,943 |
|
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
9.0 |
|
|
| Granted |
|
|
43,148,487 |
|
|
$ |
0.023 |
|
10.0 |
|
|
| Exercised |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Forfeited/Expired |
|
|
(136,221 |
) |
|
$ |
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
| Options outstanding at December 31, 2014 |
|
|
66,925,209 |
|
|
$ |
0.056 |
|
8.9 |
|
|
| Options exercisable at December 31, 2014 |
|
|
24,814,222 |
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
8.7 |
|
|
| Available for grant at December 31, 2014 |
|
|
96,500,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following information applies to options outstanding and
exercisable at December 31, 2014:
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
| |
|
Options Outstanding |
|
Options Exercisable |
| |
|
Shares |
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term |
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| $0.00 – $0.70 |
|
66,438,487 |
|
9.0 |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
24,327,500 |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
| $0.71 – $1.28 |
|
149,930 |
|
3.8 |
|
$ |
0.81 |
|
149,930 |
|
$ |
0.81 |
|
| $5.25 – $5.67 |
|
312,080 |
|
1.6 |
|
$ |
5.53 |
|
312,080 |
|
$ |
5.53 |
|
| $7.69 |
|
24,712 |
|
1.6 |
|
$ |
7.69 |
|
24,712 |
|
$ |
7.69 |
|
| |
|
66,925,209 |
|
8.9 |
|
$ |
0.056 |
|
24,814,222 |
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
On August 5, 2013, the Company re-priced
options previously issued from 2011 through 2012 for current employees and officers in aggregate of 4,890,000 options with previous
exercise prices from $0.03 to $0.21 per share to $0.01694 per share, all other terms remaining unchanged. The gross change
in fair value, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model, of $1,630 was charged to operations.
On August 1, 2013, the Company issued an
aggregate 15,000,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01576 per share to employees, exercisable over
4 years. The fair value of $245,749, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions:
Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 153.27% and Risk free rate: 2.74%, of which $25,599 was charged to operations.
On September 1, 2013, the Company issued
an aggregate 2,400,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01654 per share, respectively; to officers and
employees, exercisable immediately. The fair value of $37,823, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the
following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 150.98% and Risk free rate: 2.78%, was charged to operations.
On February 24, 2014, the Company issued
an aggregate 15,000,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.019 per share to officers, vesting at 25% immediately
and the remainder over approximately 42 months, exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $282,597, determined using
the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 163.63% and Risk free rate:
2.75%.
On February 24, 2014, the Company issued
an aggregate 4,800,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.019 per share to officers, vesting immediately
and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $90,431, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with
the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 163.63% and Risk free rate: 2.75%.
On May 12, 2014, the Company issued an
aggregate 4,848,487 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.0272 per share to officers and employees, vesting
over four years at anniversary and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $130,135, determined using the Black
Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 161.36% and Risk free rate: 2.66%.
On August 1, 2014, the Company issued an
aggregate 15,000,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.02694 per share to officers and employees, vesting
at 25% immediately and 75% over three years at anniversary and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $391,798,
determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 168.62%
and Risk free rate: 2.52%.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
On November 3, 2014, the Company issued
an aggregate 700,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01932 per share to officers and employees, vesting
at 25% each year over four years at anniversary and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $12,739, determined
using the Black Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 152.87% and Risk free
rate: 2.36%.
On November 3, 2014, the Company issued
an aggregate 2,800,000 options to purchase the Company’s common stock at $0.01932 per share to board of directors, vesting
immediately and exercisable over 10 years. The aggregate fair value of $54,957, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing
model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 152.87% and Risk free rate: 2.36%.
The fair value of all options vesting during
the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 of $537,606 and $125,515, respectively, was charged to current period operations.
Warrants
A summary of common stock purchase warrants
at December 31, 2014 and activity during the year then ended is presented below:
| | |
Shares | | |
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | | |
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term (in years) | |
| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| Outstanding at January 1, 2013 | |
| 74,073,322 | | |
$ | 0.37 | | |
| 4.5 | |
| Issued | |
| 50,350,536 | | |
$ | 0.16 | | |
| 9.2 | |
| Exercised | |
| — | | |
$ | 0.00 | | |
| | |
| Forfeited | |
| (6,345,002 | ) | |
$ | 0.38 | | |
| | |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2013 | |
| 118,078,856 | | |
$ | 0.22 | | |
| 6.3 | |
| Issued | |
| 57,582,469 | | |
$ | 0.02 | | |
| 8.2 | |
| Exercised | |
| (11,918,181 | ) | |
$ | 0.01 | | |
| | |
| Expired | |
| (13,178,145 | ) | |
$ | 0.08 | | |
| | |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2014 | |
| 150,564,999 | | |
$ | 0.17 | | |
| 6.6 | |
| Exercisable at December 31, 2014 | |
| 131,822,688 | | |
$ | 0.10 | | |
| 6.7 | |
The following information applies to common
stock purchase warrants outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2014:
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
| | |
Warrants Outstanding | | |
Warrants Exercisable | |
| | |
| Shares | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | | |
| Shares | | |
| Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price | |
| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| $0.01 – $0.50 | |
| 144,315,866 | | |
| 6.7 | | |
$ | 0.02 | | |
| 127,118,005 | | |
$ | 0.02 | |
| $0.52 – $0.68 | |
| 2,699,675 | | |
| 4.3 | | |
$ | 0.58 | | |
| 2,699,675 | | |
$ | 0.58 | |
| $0.70 – $1.62 | |
| 848,176 | | |
| 5.0 | | |
$ | 0.71 | | |
| 848,176 | | |
$ | 0.71 | |
| $5.67 – $7.69 | |
| 2,701,282 | | |
| 7.9 | | |
$ | 7.55 | | |
| 1,156,832 | | |
$ | 7.35 | |
| | |
| 150,564,999 | | |
| 6.6 | | |
$ | 0.17 | | |
| 131,822,688 | | |
$ | 0.10 | |
In conjunction with the authorized issuance
of common stock, the Company granted approximately 50 million common stock purchase warrants during the year ended December 31,
2013.
In conjunction with the authorized issuance
of common stock, the Company granted 41,582,469 common stock purchase warrants during the year ended December 31, 2014.
During the year ended December 31, 2014,
the Company issued an aggregate of 8,000,000 warrants in connection with a revenue share venture agreement dated March 10, 2014.
The warrants are exercisable at $0.0217 for four years vesting from June 8, 2014 through March 10, 2016 (term of agreement). During
the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company charged $103,238 to current period operations.
During the year ended December 31, 2014,
the Company issued an aggregate of 4,000,000 warrants in connection with use of certain intellectual property. The warrants are
exercisable at $0.0481 for four years vesting from July 6, 2014 through April 6, 2017. During the year ended December 31, 2014,
the Company charged $32,878 to current period operations for the vesting portion.
During the year ended December 31, 2014,
the Company issued an aggregate of 4,000,000 warrants in connection with the termination of a revenue share agreement. The warrants
are exercisable at $0.0157 for four years vesting May 27, 2015. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company charged $54,146
to current period operations.
On November
3, 2014, the Company extended an aggregate of 13,063,530 expiring warrants previously issued to the Company’s board of directors
for additional three years. The aggregate change in fair value of $148,517, determined using the Black Scholes option pricing
model with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 152.87% and Risk free rate: 0.96% was charged to current
period operations.
NOTE 13 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Leases
The Company entered into several operating
lease agreements for facilities and equipment. Terms of certain lease arrangements include renewal options, escalation clauses,
payment of executory costs such as real estate taxes, insurance and common area maintenance. The landlord has filed a security
interest against the assets of the Company.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
In July 2013, the Company amended its facility
lease to extend the term of the lease until July 31, 2016. Approximate annual future minimum lease obligations under non-cancelable
operating lease agreements as of December 31, 2014 are as follows:
| Year ending December 31, | |
| |
| 2015 | |
$ | 86,382 | |
| 2016 | |
| 43,830 | |
| Total | |
$ | 130,212 | |
Rent expense was $128,136 and $123,216 for the years ended December
31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Revenue Share Agreement
On March 10, 2014, the Company entered
into a revenue sharing agreement (the Agreement) with Global Stem Cells, Group, LLC and its subsidiaries whereby both parties will
participate in marketing for obtaining patients and provide physician training for stem cell treatments under the names of “Regenestem”
and “Stem Cell Training”, respectively. In addition, each party will be responsible for selling equipment and kit to
existing and previous customers. Profits are divided on a fifty/fifty basis with distribution within 10 days of the accounting
for patients and physician training and 30 day with sales of equipment and kits. In November 2014, the Company terminated the joint
venture.
In consideration of Global Stem Cell
Group, LLC’s participation, the Company issued an aggregate of 8,000,000 warrants to purchase the Company’s
common stock for four years at $0.0217 per share with 2,000,000 warrants vesting 90 days from the effective date, 2,000,000
vesting on each anniversary date for three years. At termination of the revenue share agreement, the Company issued an
aggregate of 4,000,000 warrants to purchase the Company’s common stock. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company charged $54,146 to current period operations. Because of the termination of the agreement during 2014, all services were considered final and rendered and the fair value of all 12,000,000 warrants issued under this agreement were recognized during 2014.
William Beaumont Hospital
In
June 2000, the Company entered into an agreement with William Beaumont Hospital, or WBH, pursuant to which WBH granted to the Company
worldwide, exclusive, non-sublicenseable license to two U.S. method patents covering the inducement of human adult myocardial cell
proliferation in vitro, or the WBH IP. The term of the agreement is for the life of the patents, which expire in 2015. The Company
did not use this license in any of our technologies. The Company had not made any payments to WBH other than the initial payment
to acquire the license. The Company has received confirmation from WBH that it has no obligation under the patent license agreement
and WBH agreed to terminate the patent license agreement. (See Note 5)
Accordingly,
the Company has recognized approximately $2,122,130 in settlement of debt which represents the accumulative accrual and related
interest from past years under the 2000 patent license agreement.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
Employment agreements
On July 28, 2014, the Company’s Board
of Directors approved the 2014/2015 salary for Mike Tomas, Chief Executive Officer, at $525,000 per year, beginning July 1, 2014
with an incentive bonus ranging from $150,000 to $500,000. In addition, the Board of Directors will grant Mr. Tomas options to
be determined on or before June 30, 2015. The Company’s Board of Directors approved a bonus of $500,000 and options to acquire
10,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock for ten years with four year vesting and a cashless exercise provision at
an exercise price equal to the five day average closing price of the Company’s common stock as of August 1, 2014. The cash
bonus may be paid in the form a six month promissory note.
On July 28, 2014, the Company’s Board
of Directors approved the 2014/2015 salary for Kristin Comella, Chief Scientific Officer, at $250,000 per year, beginning July
1, 2014 with an incentive bonus ranging from $100,000 to $300,000. In addition, the Board of Directors will grant Ms. Comella options
to be determined on or before June 30, 2015. The Company’s Board of Directors approved a bonus of $300,000 and options to
acquire 5,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock for ten years with four year vesting and a cashless exercise provision
at an exercise price equal to the five day average closing price of the Company’s common stock as of August 1, 2014. The
cash bonus may be paid in the form a six month promissory note.
Consulting agreements
On
November 20, 2013, the Company entered into an investment banking agreement with Cassel Salpeter & Co. (“CSC”),
who will act as exclusive third party financial advisor in connection with investment banking matters. The term of the Investment
Banking Agreement shall be for a period of twenty four months unless terminated or extended in accordance with its terms. For these
services, CSC will receive a one-time $25,000 fee, $5,000 monthly
fees and 5,207,630 ten year common stock purchase warrants, exercisable
at $.0113 and applicable consideration in the event the closing of a Mezzanine Financing consisting of non-convertible subordinated
debt and/or sale of equity securities. The Company will also reimburse CSC for its reasonable out-of-pocket expenses associated
with the services provided pursuant to the Investment Banking Agreement. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company accrued
$71,504 and $32,424 under the agreement, respectively.
Litigation
The Company is subject to other legal proceedings
that arise in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, as of December 31, 2014, the amount of ultimate liability
with respect to such matters, if any, in excess of applicable insurance coverage, is not likely to have a material impact on the
Company’s business, financial position, results of operations or liquidity. However, as the outcome of litigation and other
claims is difficult to predict significant changes in the estimated exposures could exist.
NOTE 14 — INCOME TAXES
The Company follows Accounting
Standards Codification subtopic 740, Income Taxes (“ASC 740”) which requires the
recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax
consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or
tax returns. Under such method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are
recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between
the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and
their respective tax bases using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in
which the differences are expected to reverse.
The difference between income
tax expense computed by applying the federal statutory corporate tax rate and
actual income tax expense is as follows:
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
|
|
2014 |
|
2013 |
| Income taxes using U.S. federal statutory
rate |
|
$ |
(766,194 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,068,708 |
) |
| State income taxes, net of federal
benefit |
|
|
(90,051 |
) |
|
|
(108,788 |
) |
| Stock Option Expirations |
|
|
66,043 |
|
|
|
78,864 |
|
| Net
Operating Loss adjustments |
|
|
(144,824 |
) |
|
|
(20,008 |
) |
| Nontaxable Gain on Derivative
Instrument |
|
|
933,477 |
|
|
|
(9,921 |
) |
| Change in Valuation Allowance |
|
|
1,549 |
|
|
|
1,127,875 |
|
| Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
686 |
|
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
At December 31, 2014, the
significant components of the deferred tax assets (liabilities) are summarized
below:
|
|
2014 |
|
2013 |
| Deferred tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Stock Based Compensation |
|
$ |
4,794,777 |
|
$ |
4,465,854 |
| Net
Operating Losses |
|
|
36,117,831 |
|
|
35,429,429 |
| Other |
|
|
41,469 |
|
|
125,317 |
| Total deferred tax assets |
|
|
40,954,077 |
|
|
40,020,600 |
| |
| Deferred tax
liabilities: |
|
|
- |
|
|
— |
| Total deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
- |
|
|
— |
| Valuation allowance |
|
|
40,954,077 |
|
|
40,020,600 |
| Net
deferred tax assets |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
— |
As of December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013, the Company had U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards
of approximately $95.8 million and $94.2 million, respectively, which expire at
various dates from 2019 through 2034. These net operating loss carryforwards may
be used to offset future taxable income and thereby reduce the Company’s U.S.
federal income taxes. Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the
“Code”) imposes an annual limit on the ability of a corporation that undergoes a
greater than 50% ownership change to use its net operating loss carry forwards
to reduce its tax liability. If in the future the Company issues common stock or
additional equity instruments convertible in common shares which result in an
ownership change exceeding the 50% limitation threshold imposed by section 382
of the Code, the Company’s net operating loss carryforwards may be significantly
limited as to the amount of use in a particular years. In addition, all or a
portion of the Company’s net operating loss carryforwards may expire unutilized.
As of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the Company had net operating loss
carryforwards for state income tax purposes of approximately $95.8 million and
$94.2 million, respectively, which expire at various dates from 2019 through
2034.
The Company has provided a
full valuation allowance against its net deferred tax assets, since in the
opinion of management based upon the earnings history of the Company; it is more
likely than not that the benefits of these assets will not be
realized.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The Company complies with the
provisions of FASB ASC 740-10 in accounting for its uncertain tax positions. ASC
740-10 addresses the determination of whether tax benefits claimed or expected
to be claimed on a tax return should be recorded in the financial statements.
Under ASC 740-10, the Company may recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain
tax position only if it is more likely that not that the tax position will be
sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical
merits of the position. Management has determined that the Company has no
significant uncertain tax positions requiring recognition under ASC 740-10.
The Company is subject to
income tax in the U.S., and certain state jurisdictions. The Company has not
been audited by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or any states in connection
with income taxes. The Company’s tax years generally remain open to examination
for all federal and state tax matters until its net operating loss carryforwards
are utilized and the applicable statutes of limitation have expired. The federal
and state tax authorities can generally reduce a net operating loss (but not
create taxable income) for a period outside the statute of limitations in order
to determine the correct amount of net operating loss which may be allowed as a
deduction against income for a period within the statute of limitations.
The Company recognizes
interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits, if incurred, as a
component of income tax expense.
NOTE 15 — FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENT
The Company adopted the provisions of Accounting
Standards Codification subtopic 825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”) on January 1, 2008. ASC 825-10 defines
fair value as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction
between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required
or permitted to be recorded at fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact
and considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability, such as inherent risk, transfer
restrictions, and risk of nonperformance. ASC 825-10 establishes a fair value hierarchy that requires an entity to maximize the
use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. ASC 825-10 establishes three levels
of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:
Level 1 – Quoted prices in active
markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 – Observable inputs other
than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets with insufficient volume
or infrequent transactions (less active markets); or model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable or
can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
Level 3 – Unobservable inputs to
the valuation methodology that are significant to the measurement of fair value of assets or liabilities.
All items required to be recorded or measured
on a recurring basis are based upon level 3 inputs.
To the extent that valuation is based on
models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment.
In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases,
for disclosure purposes, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement is disclosed and is determined
based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
Upon adoption of ASC 825-10, there was
no cumulative effect adjustment to beginning retained earnings and no impact on the financial statements.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
The carrying value of the Company’s
cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, short-term borrowings (including convertible notes payable),
and other current assets and liabilities approximate fair value because of their short-term maturity.
As of December 31, 2014 or 2013, the Company
did not have any items that would be classified as level 1 or 2 disclosures.
The Company recognizes its derivative liabilities
as level 3 and values its derivatives using the methods discussed in notes 7 and 9. While the Company believes that its valuation
methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, it recognizes that the use of different methodologies or
assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at
the reporting date. The primary assumptions that would significantly affect the fair values using the methods discussed in Notes
8 and 10 are that of volatility and market price of the underlying common stock of the Company.
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company
did not have any derivative instruments that were designated as hedges.
The derivative liability as of December
31, 2014, in the amount of $741,271 has a level 3 classification.
The following table provides a summary
of changes in fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial liabilities as of December 31, 2014:
| | |
Excess
Share
Derivative | | |
Warrant
Liability | | |
Debt
Derivative | |
| Balance, December 31, 2012 | |
$ | 390,048 | | |
| 221,179 | | |
$ | — | |
| Total (gains) losses | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| Initial fair value of debt derivative at note issuance | |
| | | |
| — | | |
| 673,219 | |
| Initial fair value of derivative relating to reset warrants | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| Mark-to-market at December 31, 2013: | |
| 84.906 | | |
| (74,324 | ) | |
| (39,761 | ) |
| Transfers out of Level 3 upon increase in authorized shares | |
| (474,954 | ) | |
| — | | |
| — | |
| Transfers out of Level 3 upon conversion and settlement of notes | |
| | | |
| | | |
| (376,502 | ) |
| Balance, December 31, 2013 | |
$ | — | | |
$ | 146,855 | | |
$ | 256,956 | |
| Total (gains) losses | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| Initial fair value of debt derivative at note issuance | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| 1,443,708 | |
| Mark-to-market at December 31, 2014: | |
| — | | |
| 3,065 | | |
| (429,018 | ) |
| Transfers out of Level 3 upon conversion or payoff of notes payable | |
| — | | |
| — | | |
| (680,295 | ) |
| Balance, December 31, 2014 | |
$ | — | | |
$ | 149,920 | | |
$ | 591,351 | |
| Net (Loss) Gain for the period included in earnings relating to the liabilities held at December 31, 2014 | |
$ | — | | |
$ | (3,065 | ) | |
$ | 429,018 | |
Fluctuations in the Company’s
stock price are a primary driver for the changes in the derivative valuations during each reporting period. The
Company’s stock price increased approximately 5% from December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2014. As the stock price
increases for each of the related derivative instruments, the value to the holder of the instrument generally increases,
therefore increasing the liability on the Company’s balance sheet. Additionally, stock price volatility is one of the
significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of each of the Company’s derivative instruments. The
simulated fair value of these liabilities is sensitive to changes in the Company’s expected volatility.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
Decreases in expected volatility would
generally result in a lower fair value measurement. A 10 percent change in pricing inputs and changes in volatilities and correlation
factors would result in less than a $129,253 change in our Level 3 fair value.
NOTE 15 — SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Subsequent stock issuances
In January 2015, the Company issued 4,783,568
shares of its common stock in settlement for services, provided 14,299,567 shares of its common stock in settlement of $49,500
of outstanding convertible notes payable, and $2,981 accrued interest and 2,096,450 shares of its common stock for net proceeds
of $16,118 from equity drawdown under the Magna Purchase Agreement.
In February 2015, the Company sold an
aggregate of 1,443,656 shares of its common stock for net proceeds of $16,270. In connection with the stock sale, the Company
issued an aggregate of 1,443,656 warrants to purchase the Company’s common stock for five years at $0.01127 per share.
In addition, the Company issued 20,219,367 shares of its common stock in settlement of $132,500 of outstanding convertible
notes payable and $2,520 accrued interest and 16,556,976 shares of its common stock for net proceeds of $135,645 from equity
drawdown under the Magna Purchase Agreement.
In March 2015, the Company issued
6,185,432 shares of its common stock in settlement of $25,000 of outstanding convertible notes payable and $1,226 accrued
interest. In addition, the Company issued 635,357 shares of its common stock as true up shares relating to the February 2015
equity drawdown under the Magna Purchase Agreement.
Options granted
On February 2, 2015, the Company granted an aggregate of 7,000,000
options to purchase the Company’s common stock to Board of Directors members at an exercise price of $0.01116 for ten years,
vesting immediately.
Subsequent financing
On January 7, 2015, the Company entered
into a Securities Purchase Agreement with KBM Worldwide, Inc. (“KBM”), for the sale of an 8% convertible note in the
principal amount of $38,000 (the “Note”).
The Note bears interest at the rate of
8% per annum. All interest and principal must be repaid on October 9, 2015. The Note is convertible into common stock, at KBM’s
option, at a 45% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period
prior to conversion. In the event the Company prepays the Note in full, the Company is required to pay off all principal, interest
and any other amounts owing multiplied by (i) 140% if prepaid during the period commencing on the closing date through 179 days
thereafter. After the expiration of 180 days following the date of the Note, the Company has no right of prepayment.
On January 28, 2015, the Company entered
into a Securities Purchase Agreement with Fourth Man, LLC., for the sale of an 9.5% convertible note in the principal amount of
$25,000 (the “Note”).
The Note bears interest at the rate of 9.5% per annum. All interest
and principal must be repaid on January 27, 2016. The Note is convertible into common stock, at Asher’s option, at a 47%
discount to the lowest daily closing trading price of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. In
the event the Company prepays the Note in full, the Company is required to pay off all principal at 150%, interest and any other
amounts.
BIOHEART, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013
On February 19, 2015, the Company entered into a Securities
Purchase Agreement with Vis Vires Group, Inc. (“VIS”), for the sale of an 8% convertible note in the principal amount
of $38,000 (the “Note”).
The Note bears interest at the rate of
8% per annum. All interest and principal must be repaid on November 23, 2015. The Note is convertible into common stock, at VIS’s
option, at a 45% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period
prior to conversion. In the event the Company prepays the Note in full, the Company is required to pay off all principal, interest
and any other amounts owing multiplied by (i) 140% if prepaid during the period commencing on the closing date through 179 days
thereafter. After the expiration of 180 days following the date of the Note, the Company has no right of prepayment.
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Mike Tomas, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form
10-K of Bioheart, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does
not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,
and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results
of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The Registrant’s other certifying
officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure
controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the Issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed such internal
control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness
of the Issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report
any change in the Issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s fiscal quarter
ending December 31, 2014 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Issuer’s internal
control over financial reporting.
5. The Registrant’s other certifying
officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s
auditor and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or
not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control
over financial reporting.
| /s/ Mike Tomas |
|
| Mike Tomas |
|
| Chief Executive Officer and President and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer |
| Date: March 16, 2015 |
|
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of Bioheart, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I, Mike Tomas, Chief Executive Officer and President And Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:
(1) The Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
(2) The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.
A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany
the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the
date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
| |
/s/ Mike Tomas |
| |
Mike Tomas |
| |
Chief Executive Officer and President |
| |
And Principal Financial and Accounting Officer |
| |
March 16, 2015 |
US Stem Cell (CE) (USOTC:USRM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2024 to Apr 2024
US Stem Cell (CE) (USOTC:USRM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2023 to Apr 2024
