NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
NOTE 1. ORGANIZATION AND DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
Universal Detection Technology, a California corporation, primarily designs, manufactures and markets air pollution monitoring instruments. Beginning in 2002, the Company has focused its research and development efforts in developing a real time biological weapon detection device. To accelerate development of its initial biological weapon detection device, the Company has developed and is implementing a collaborative partnering strategy. Under this strategy, the Company identifies and partners with researchers and developers. The Company has expanded its services to include security related consulting, event security and counterterrorism training.
The Company is a reseller of a range of products, which include rapid anthrax detection test kits, training courses for first responders, event security, threat evaluation and consulting, radiation detection systems, anti-microbial products, and DVDs aimed at providing information and training regarding combating terrorism and managing emergency situations.
NOTE 2. ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Accounting Principles
In the opinion of management, the accompanying balance sheets and related interim statements of income, and cash flows include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring items, necessary for their fair presentation in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP). Interim results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full year. The information included in this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with information included in the Companys 2014 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated condensed financial statements include the accounts of Universal Detection Technology and its wholly-owned subsidiaries Nutek, Inc. (Nutek) and Logan Medical Devices, Inc. (Logan). The two subsidiaries are currently inactive. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of consolidated financial statements is in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America which requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period balances to conform to the current year presentation.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In July 2012, the FASB issued amended standards to simplify how entities test indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment which improve consistency in impairment testing requirements among long-lived asset categories. These amended standards permit an assessment of qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of an indefinite-lived intangible asset is less than its carrying value. For assets in which this assessment concludes it is more likely than not that the fair value is more than its carrying value, these amended standards eliminate the requirement to perform quantitative impairment testing as outlined in the previously issued standards. These amended standards are effective for us beginning in the fourth quarter of 2012; however, early adoption is permitted. We do not expect these new standards to significantly impact our consolidated condensed financial statements.
F-5
UNIVERSAL DETECTION TECHNOLOGY. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
In September 2011, the FASB issued guidance on testing goodwill for impairment. The new guidance provides an entity the option to first perform a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If an entity determines that this is the case, it is required to perform the currently prescribed two-step goodwill impairment test to identify potential goodwill impairment and measure the amount of goodwill impairment loss to be recognized for that reporting unit (if any). If an entity determines that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, the two-step goodwill impairment test is not required. The new guidance will be effective for us beginning July 1, 2012. We do not expect the adoption will have a significant impact on our consolidated condensed financial statements.
In June 2011, the FASB issued guidance on presentation of comprehensive income. The new guidance eliminates the current option to report other comprehensive income and its components in the statement of changes in equity. Instead, an entity will be required to present either a continuous statement of net income and other comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. The new guidance will be effective for us beginning July 1, 2012 and will have financial statement presentation changes only. We do not expect the adoption will have a significant impact on our consolidated condensed financial statements.
NOTE 3. GOING CONCERN
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, which contemplate continuation of the Company as a going concern. The Company has an accumulated deficit of $51,087,820 as of December 31, 2015, including a net loss of $175,284 during the year ended December 31, 2015.
These conditions raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Its ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon its ability to develop additional sources of capital and ultimately achieve profitable operations. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. The Company's financial statements have been presented on the basis that it is a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business.
Management has taken certain steps to provide the Company with necessary capital to continue its operations. These steps include: 1) actively seeking additional funding in the form of unsecured indebtedness and 2) seeking to increase revenues from product sales.
NOTE 4. NOTES PAYABLE
As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the Company had total notes payable amounting to $802,704 and $802,704 respectively.
The interest expense on these notes payable for the year ended December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 amounted to $100,008 and $100,008, respectively.
NOTE 5. EQUITY TRANSACTIONS
Issuance of Common Stock
During the years ended December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the Company did not issue any shares of its common stock.
Stock Options
On February 11, 2008, the Board of Directors adopted the 2008 Equity Incentive Plan (
the Plan
). The Plan provides for the granting of Nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to our employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital-raising transaction. The Company reserved 15,000 shares of common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 15,000 shares reserved under this plan have been issued.
F-6
UNIVERSAL DETECTION TECHNOLOGY. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
On April 29, 2008, the Board of Directors adopted the 2008-2 Equity Incentive Plan (
the Plan
). The Plan provides for the granting of Nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to our employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital-raising transaction. The Company reserved 16,500 shares of common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 16,342 of the shares reserved under this plan have been issued.
On July 1, 2008, the Board of Directors adopted the 2008-3 Equity Incentive Plan (
the Plan
). The Plan provides for the granting of Nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to our employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital-raising transaction. The Company reserved 125 shares of common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 125 of the shares reserved under this plan have been issued.
On September 2, 2008, the Board of Directors adopted the 2008-4 Equity Incentive Plan (
the Plan
). The Plan provides for the granting of Nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to our employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital-raising transaction. The Company reserved 190 shares of common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 190 of the shares reserved under this plan have been issued.
On February 15, 2009, the Board of Directors adopted the 2009 Equity Incentive Plan (the Plan.) The Plan provides for the granting of the nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to their employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are no it connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital raising transactions. The company initially reserved 500 shares of its common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 500 of the shares reserved under this plan have been issued.
On May 15, 2009, the Board of Directors adopted the 2009-2 Equity Incentive Plan (The Plan.) The Plan provides for the granting of the nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to their employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital raising transaction. The Company initially reserved 3,000 shares of its common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 2,980 of the shares under this plan have been issued.
On November 6, 2009, the Board of Directors adopted the 2009-3 Equity Incentive Plan (The Plan.) The Plan provides for the granting of the nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to their employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital raising transaction. The Company initially reserved 10,000 shares of its common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 10,000 of the shares under this plan have been issued.
On May 6, 2011, the Board of Directors adopted the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan (The Plan.) The Plan provides for the granting of the nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to their employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital raising transaction. The Company initially reserved 30,000 shares of its common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 30,000 of the shares under this plan have been issued.
On October 27, 2011, the Board of Directors adopted the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan (The
2011-II Plan
.) The Plan provides for the granting of the nonqualified Stock Options, Incentive Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights (or SARs), Restricted Stock, Performance Units, and Performance Shares, to their employees, officers, directors, consultants, independent contractors, advisors, or other service providers, provided that such services are not in connection with the offer and sale of securities in a capital raising transaction. The Company initially reserved 60,000 shares of its common stock for awards to be made under the Plan. 60,000 of the shares under this plan have been issued.
F-7
UNIVERSAL DETECTION TECHNOLOGY. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
NOTE 6. INCOME TAXES
Our effective tax rates were approximately (0.0)% and (0.0)% for the nine-months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Our effective tax rate was lower than the U.S. federal statutory rate due to, net operating loss carry-forwards available to offset current and future taxable income.
NOTE 7. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The Company was involved in the following litigations:
a)
On May 15, 2002, Walt Disney World Co. commenced action in the Los Angeles Superior Court against the Company and a former wholly-owned subsidiary (WALT DISNEY WORLD CO. V. POLLUTION RESEARCH AND CONTROL CORP. AND DASIBI ENVIRONMENTAL CORP. (Case No. BC 274013 Los Angeles Superior Court) for amounts due in connection with unpaid rent. A judgment was entered for $411,500. No amounts have been paid in connection with the judgment. As of June 30, 2012, $411,500 has been accrued.
b)
A. Sean Rose, Claire F. Rose and Mark Rose v. Universal Detection Technology, Pollution Research and Control Corporation (Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, North Central District, Case No. EC042040)
On or about April 16, 2004, Plaintiffs commenced an action against the Company (Case No. EC 038824) for amounts allegedly due pursuant to four unpaid promissory notes. On August 2, 2004, the parties executed a Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Releases (the Agreement). On December 30, 2005, Plaintiffs commenced the above-referenced action against the Company, alleging the Company breached the Agreement and seeking approximately $205,000 in damages. A judgment was entered on April 11, 2006. The Company has accrued for this settlement. The Company entered into a settlement agreement in the third quarter of 2004 with each of these three parties. Pursuant to this agreement, at June 30, 2005, the Company was required to pay an additional $80,000 as full payment of our obligations. The Company did not make this payment and are in default of these notes. As of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 the Company has $668,183 and $661,929, respectively, accrued for including interest relating to this matter which is part of notes payable and accrued interest in the accompanying balance sheet as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.
c)
On June 2, 2006, Plaintiff Trilogy Capital Partners instituted an action in the Los Angeles Superior Court (
Trilogy Capital Partners v. Universal Detection Technology, et. al.
, Case No. SC089929) against the Company. Plaintiffs Complaint alleged damages against UDT for breach of an engagement letter in the amount of $93,449. Also, Plaintiff alleged that UDT had failed to issue warrants to it pursuant to a written agreement. After completing the initial stages of litigation and conducting extensive mediation, Plaintiff and UDT reached a settlement wherein commencing December 15, 2006, UDT would make monthly payments to Plaintiff of $2,000 until a debt of $90,000 plus accrued interest at six percent per annum was fully paid. In exchange, Plaintiff would release all of its claims against UDT. As of September 30, 2011, $28,098 was due under the agreement and is included in the accounts payable in the accompanying balance sheet as of June 30, 2012.
d)
On November 15, 2006, Plaintiff NBGI, Inc. instituted an action in the Los Angeles Superior Court (NBGI, Inc. v. Universal Detection Technology, et. al., Case No. BC361979) against the Company. NBGI, Inc.s Complaint alleged breach of contract, and requested damages in the amount of $111,014 plus interest at the legal rate and for costs of suit. No payments have been made on this judgment and no actions to enforce the judgment have been taken against UDT.
e)
On June 24, 2010, Plaintiff Meyers Associates, L.P. commenced an action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, entitled Meyers Associates, L.P. v. Universal Detection Technology ("UDT"), case No. 108321/10. The complaint alleges breach of contract and damages related to performance by Meyers Associates, L.P. ("Meyers") of an investment banking services agreement dated December 22, 2005 and UDT's alleged failure to compensate Meyers for such services under the terms of the agreement. Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of approximately $116,000 plus an award of court costs and attorneys fees. In October 2010, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion for Default Judgment against UDT and filed a Request for Judicial Intervention in connection therewith. The Company has not received any further communication regarding this action and does not know if a default judgment was granted.
F-8
UNIVERSAL DETECTION TECHNOLOGY. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
f)
On November 1, 2010 the accounting firm of A.J. Robbins, P.C. filed a lawsuit in the District Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado, seeking recovery of fees allegedly owed for accounting services performed during 2004 to 2008. The claims have been asserted against the Company, a second corporate defendant, and our CEO, as a result of a personal guarantee. On December 15, 2010, Defendants filed an Answer which asserted several defenses. The parties have exchanged initial disclosures, and the matter has been set for trial commencing on December 5, 2011. On August 3, 2011 the parties entered into a settlement agreement whereby the Defendants in the case will jointly pay $85,000 to the plaintiffs and the Company will issue $45,000 of the Companys stock to the plaintiffs. The cash payments will be made in equal monthly payments over 7 months commencing on August 31, 2011. In consideration of the settlement, the parties have executed a mutual release and have agreed to withdraw the lawsuit. The releases and withdrawal are contingent upon the Company's full performance of the settlement agreement terms. The Company issued stock with a fair market value of $36,000 on the date of the agreement in full payment of the stock portion of the settlement agreement.
As of December 31, 2015, out of the cash payments that the Company was responsible for under the settlement agreement, $8,520.82 is still owed and unpaid. This balance due is for part of the February 28, 2012 payment. Plaintiff has the right to get a judgment for $175,000 minus the payments that were made, if we fail to perform under the terms of the settlement agreement and if they serve us with a notice of default, which they have not.
F-9