Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
1. Description of Business
Unilife Corporation and subsidiaries (the “Company”) was incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in 2009 and is based in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Company began operations in Australia in 2002.
The Company is a designer, manufacturer, and supplier of innovative injectable drug delivery systems that can enhance and differentiate the injectable products of our pharmaceutical and biotechnology customers. While the Company has a broad portfolio of proprietary product platforms, the Company focused the business on the Company’s wearable injector products. The Company believes its products are differentiated from conventional products, with innovative features and functionality designed to optimize the safe, simple, and convenient administration of injectable therapies. The majority of the Company’s products are designed for sale directly to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies who are expected to supply them as drug-device combination products, pre-filled and ready for administration by end-users, such as patients or health-care providers. The Company customizes products within each of our platforms to address specific customer, therapy, patient and/or commercial requirements.
The Company is focusing primarily on active and new customer programs in its portfolio of wearable injector systems, which the Company expects will improve our operating efficiencies and better position the Company to take advantage of commercial opportunities within the fast-growing market for wearable injectors. The Company’s wearable injector customers include Amgen Inc., MedImmune LLC (“MedImmune”), and Sanofi S.A. (“Sanofi”).
In addition to the filling, assembly and/or packaging of the Company’s products with injectable therapies, the Company’s customers are also, with respect to most of our products, responsible for the regulatory approval, sale and marketing of their final drug-device combination products. While at this point the Company’s products have not been sold to end users with our customers’ injectable therapies, the Company can generate revenue from customization programs, upfront fees, device and development materials, and exclusivity fees.
The Company believes that continual investment in research and development is important to the development and sale of the Company’s innovative, proprietary products and related services. However, the Company continues to implement cost reduction measures as the Company focuses operations on the industrialization and development of programs with key strategic wearable injector customers. During fiscal year 2016, the Company implemented several cost reduction and business realignment initiatives pursuant to which the Company reduced its headcount by approximately 90 employees. Subsequent to that, the Company eliminated 10 additional positions in July 2016. The Company’s workforce was reduced to approximately 140 employees as of July 28, 2016, a reduction of more than 40% since January 2016 and a reduction of approximately 50% since July 1, 2015. A portion of this reduction is due to the Company’s determination not to backfill certain open positions. The Company has recorded a charge from severance and related costs from these cost reduction initiatives of approximately $0.7 million in the aggregate.
With the Company’s primary focus now on its wearable injector products, the Company performed an evaluation of its current contracts for its other products and determined that continued investment in those products is ultimately not beneficial to the Company at this time. The Company is currently in various stages of negotiation with the customers for such products to wind down Unilife’s activities under those customer contracts. The Company does not expect that these negotiations will impact its wearable injector products and the outcome of these negotiations is still uncertain. Regardless of the result of such negotiations, the Company intends to continue to prosecute and maintain the intellectual property related to the majority of its non-wearable injector products in the event it becomes financially attractive for the Company to further develop and customize those products in the future. As part of this evaluation, the Company has recorded in its third quarter operating results an impairment charge of $26.6 million primarily related to certain prefilled syringe capital equipment located in its York facility as well certain capital equipment that was under construction held at various suppliers.
2. Internal Investigation
The Company announced an investigation into violations of the Company’s policies and procedures and possible violations of laws and regulations by the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer, Alan Shortall, whose employment with the Company ceased on March 11, 2016, and its former Chairman, Jim Bosnjak, who resigned from the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) on August 24, 2015 (the “Investigation”). The Board established a Special Committee to oversee the Investigation. Independent counsel conducted the Investigation with the assistance of an advisory firm with forensic accounting expertise. The Investigation was completed on October 7, 2016 and no material financial loss was identified.
63
The filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the
Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016 were delayed as a result of the Investigation. In addition, the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 and the Company’s Form 10-Q’s for the first and second qu
arters of fiscal year 2016 were amended to correct immaterial misstatements to the financial statements and omissions of related party disclosures
and to disclose certain material weaknesses in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and di
sclosure controls and procedures
. As a result of such delay,
on May 17, 2016, the Company received a notice from the Listing Qualifications department of NASDAQ stating that, because the Company had not yet
filed the
March 2016 10-Q
, the Company was no
longer in compliance with NASDAQ Listing Rule 5250(c)(1), which requires listed companies to timely file all required periodic financial reports with the SEC. The notice received from NASDAQ stated that the Company had 60 calendar days from the date of th
e notice to submit a plan to regain compliance with NASDAQ’s continued listing requirements.
On July 18, 2016, the Company timely submitted a plan to NASDAQ as to how it planned to regain compliance with NASDAQ’s continued listing requirements. The staff at NASDAQ subsequently granted the Company an exception to file the March 2016 10-Q and any other delinquent SEC filings on or before November 7, 2016 in order to enable the Company to regain compliance with the listing rules.
On September 19, 2016, the Company received a notice from the Listing Qualifications department of NASDAQ stating that, because the Company had not yet filed this 2016 10-K, the Company is not in compliance with NASDAQ Listing Rule 5250(c)(1). The Company timely submitted to NASDAQ an updated compliance plan on October 4, 2016.
3. Liquidity
As of June 30, 2016, the Company’s cash and cash equivalents were $18.7 million, restricted cash was $2.4 million and the book value of our long-term debt was $105.1 million. Under the Company’s debt facilities, the Company was required to have a cash and restricted cash balance of $5.4 million at June 30, 2016.
The Company incurred recurring losses from operations as well as negative cash flows from operating activities during fiscal years 2016, 2015, and 2014, and anticipates incurring additional losses and negative cash flows until such time that it can generate sufficient revenue from the sale, customization, or exclusive use and licensing of its wearable injectors to pharmaceutical and biotechnology customers. These factors raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The Company has taken or intends to take the steps delineated below to address its cash requirements, the success of which are largely beyond the Company’s control.
The Company expects to generate cash receipts from wearable injector customers during fiscal 2017 and the Company continues to have business development discussions with current and prospective wearable injector customers. The Company is, however, unable to predict the amount, if any, or the timing of such receipts or any proceeds from these business development discussions.
The Company has engaged a financial advisory firm to assist with fundraising efforts. There is no assurance that the financial advisory firm will be successful in these efforts.
In February 2016, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with the Counterparty (“Counterparty SPA”), pursuant to which the Counterparty agreed to purchase from the Company a new series of 6% Senior Secured Convertible Notes Due 2023 in the aggregate original principal amount of up to $55.0 million (the “Notes”). The Company issued to the Counterparty the first Note in the aggregate original principal amount of $30.0 million in February 2016 and the Counterparty paid to the Company $30.0 million in exchange therefor. Pursuant to the Counterparty SPA, the Counterparty may purchase up to an additional $25.0 million in Notes over the next two years, $15.0 million of which may be purchased in January 2017 (the “2017 Convertible Note”) and $10.0 million of which may be purchased in January 2018 (the “2018 Convertible Note”).
There can be no assurance as to when or if the Counterparty will purchase all or any part of the 2017 Convertible Note and/or the 2018 Convertible Note.
The Company’s ability to raise capital will be limited and there can be no assurance that financing will be available when needed. The Company will not be able to obtain financing through offerings of its securities registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, for the near future and until the Company can prepare, file with the SEC, and cause to become effective a registration on Form S-1. Further, we are not currently eligible to register the offer and sale of our securities using a registration statement on Form S-3, cannot use our existing Form S-3 and will not become eligible to use Form S-3 until we have timely filed certain periodic reports required under the Exchange Act for 12 consecutive calendar months.
64
The Company believes that potential proceeds from business development discussions, the 2017 Convertible Note and fundraising efforts along with potential customer cash receipts, will provide the Compan
y with enough liquidity to fund its operations for the next twelve months. However, there can be no assurance that any cash from such business development discussions, issuance of the 2017 Convertible Note, fundraising efforts, or customer receipts will be
available when needed, as such sources of liquidity largely are beyond the Company’s control. If we are unable to obtain financing when needed, we may be in default under one or more of our debt obligations unless we are able to obtain waivers from our l
enders. A breach of any of the covenants related to our debt instruments could result in a higher rate of interest to be paid or the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the applicable agreements to be immediately due and payable. I
f the lenders were to make such a demand for repayment, we would be unable to pay the obligations as we do not have existing facilities or sufficient cash on hand to satisfy these obligations. Under the circumstances, we also would be unable to pay our oth
er obligations as they come due, which could prompt our creditors to pursue other remedies. These factors continue to raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been pre
pared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the ordinary course of business. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classif
ication of recorded asset amounts or the amounts and classification of liabilities that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
4. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Unilife Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
On January 27, 2010, Unilife became the parent company of UMSL upon completion of the redomiciliation under Australian law and UMSL’s stockholders and option holders exchanged their interests in UMSL for equivalent interests in Unilife.
References to the “Company” include Unilife Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries, including UMSL, unless the context otherwise requires. References to “Unilife” are references solely to Unilife Corporation.
References to A$ mean the lawful currency of the Commonwealth of Australia. References to € or euros are to the lawful currency of the European Union.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. The estimates are principally in the areas of revenue recognition, royalty liability valuation, warrant liability valuation, derivative liability valuation and share-based compensation expense. Management bases its estimates on historical experience and various assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents consist primarily of cash on hand, deposits at banks and other short-term highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less. Cash equivalents are stated at cost, which approximates fair value.
Accounts Receivable
Accounts receivable are stated at amounts due from customers, which also represents the net realizable amount. The Company evaluates the collectability of its accounts receivable on a periodic basis and has historically not recorded an allowance for doubtful accounts. In instances in which management becomes aware of circumstances that may impair a particular customer’s ability to meet its obligation, the related receivable would be written off.
Inventories
Inventories consist primarily of raw materials. Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost determined using the first in, first out method. The Company routinely reviews its inventory for obsolete, slow moving or otherwise impaired inventory and records estimated impairments in the periods in which they occur.
65
Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment, including significant improvements, are recorded at cost, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization. Repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred.
Depreciation and amortization expense is recorded on a straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the asset as listed below:
Asset Category
|
|
Useful Lives
|
Building
|
|
40 years
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
2 to 15 years
|
Computer software
|
|
3 to 7 years
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
3 to 7 years
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
Shorter of leasehold improvement life or remaining term of lease
|
Interest cost incurred in connection with the development and construction of significant new machinery and equipment, as well as facility related costs have been capitalized as one of the elements of cost and are being amortized over the asset’s respective useful life. Interest capitalized during the years ended June 30, 2016 and June 30, 2015 was $0.4 million and $2.2 million, respectively. There was no capitalized interest during the year ended June 30, 2014.
The Company evaluates the recoverability of the recorded value of long-lived assets periodically to determine if facts and circumstances exist that would indicate that the assets might be impaired or that the useful lives should be modified. As part of this valuation, the Company develops projections of undiscounted future cash flows of the asset or asset group. The projections of undiscounted cash flows include a combination of revenue from customization and development activities, capital expenses that may be necessary to support projected product sales and commercial product sales. As customization and development activities are completed, commercial product sales are expected to scale-up. Expectations of future commercial product sales included in the projections used for the impairment analysis are based on customer-specific information as well as market estimates relating to the anticipated drugs and therapies being targeted for use with the Company’s products. These projections also include assumptions of future sales growth and profitability based on contracts entered into with customers as well as future contracts to be entered into based on the current discussions and negotiations with existing and prospective customers.
Sales projections are based on assumptions including a transition in the market toward patient self-administration of injectable therapies as well as transitions in the market toward biological-based drugs in the pharmaceutical industry development pipeline. The Company’s future sales could also be impacted by factors such as its ability to obtain new and retain existing customers, the timing and extent of the customers’ drug development activities as well as the regulatory approval process, drug efficacy and industry acceptance of injectable therapies. If the Company’s future sales or its projections of future sales are impacted by any one or more of the preceding factors, it will reassess the recorded value of the long-lived assets. If impairment is indicated, an adjustment will be made to reduce the carrying amount of these assets to their fair value.
In connection with the Company’s focus on wearable injector products, the Company has been evaluating the prospects of its non-wearable injector customer and supplier programs. As a result of negotiations related to those supplier and customer programs and the Company’s evaluation of those programs and potential disposition of certain assets, the Company determined that certain of its long lived-assets are impaired. The Company incurred $26.6 million of non-cash asset impairments primarily related to machinery and equipment and construction in process in the third quarter of fiscal 2016.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Goodwill is the excess of purchase price over the fair value of net assets acquired in business acquisitions. Goodwill is subject to, at a minimum, an annual impairment assessment of its carrying value at the reporting unit level. Additional impairment assessments would be performed if events and circumstances warranted such additional assessments during the year. The Company has one reporting unit which includes its product lines, the base technology which it obtained as part of its November 2002 acquisition of Unitract Syringe Pty Limited, and the manufacturing capability which it obtained in its January 2007 acquisition of Integrated BioSciences, Inc.
As required under generally accepted accounting principles, the Company is required to evaluate goodwill for impairment at least annually and more frequently if certain trigger events occur. The Company determined that the culmination of the Strategic Process and the decision to focus primarily on the wearable injector business constitute trigger events that occurred in the quarter ended March 31, 2016 requiring an evaluation of the carrying value of the Company’s goodwill. Potential impairment of goodwill is identified by comparing the fair value with its carrying value.
66
The Company performed a goodwill valuation as of March 31, 2016 using a combination of the market approach and a disco
unted cash flow method under the income approach. The Company determined an overall business enterprise value (determined by the fair of equity plus the fair value of debt) by taking a weighted average
from
the results of the discounted cash flow under the
income approach (40%) and the market approach based on the Company’s market capitalization (60%). Under the income approach, the Company calculates the fair value of its reporting unit based on the present value of estimated future cash flows.
M
anagement
judgment is necessary to evaluate the impact of operating and external market changes and to estimate the future cash flows used to measure fair value. The Company’s estimate of cash flows considers past performance, current and anticipated market conditio
ns, and internal projections and operating plans which incorporate estimates for sales growth, profitability and capital spending. Additional assumptions include forecasted growth rates and estimated discount rates which are risk adjusted for current marke
t conditions. The Company believes such assumptions reflect current and anticipated market conditions and are consistent with those that would be used by other marketplace participants for similar purposes but are subject to change due to changing conditio
ns. The weighting of the results of each method to assess the overall business enterprise value was considered reasonable as greater weight was given to the market capitalization based on the quoted stock price as this is considered more reliable informat
ion as it is publicly available and not subject to management judgment or estimate, whereas, discounted cash flow under the income approach is subject to management estimates and judgments.
Although based on the results of the business enterprise value calculation there was no indication of impairment of goodwill, the Company determined as a result of the continuing losses incurred by the Company and its negative equity, and other indicators of impairment including, the significant long-lived asset impairment recorded as of March 31, 2016 and the drop in the Company’s stock price, that an additional step 2 analysis was warranted under generally accepted accounting principles.
The Company performed a Step 2 valuation of goodwill by valuing certain intangible assets (primarily patents, trademarks and tradenames). The Company considered the impact of all assets and liabilities in allocating the fair value of the Company to determine the implied fair value of goodwill and whether any impairment is indicated. The Company believes these intangible assets would generate the most significant difference between fair value and book value as part of completing a Step 2 purchase price allocation for the purpose of determining the value of goodwill for impairment. The valuation of intangible assets was performed using the relief from royalty method under the income approach. This method utilizes the Company’s revenue projections and assigns values based on determination of appropriate royalty rates considering relevant industry information. The Company then utilized the fair value of its intangible assets along with the implied fair value of its other assets and liabilities to determine the residual fair value compared to the carrying value of goodwill.
The residual fair value based on the results of the Step 2 valuation indicated there was no impairment of goodwill. The Company considered that the results of the valuation of goodwill indicated there was no impairment of goodwill and also indicated significant cushion between the estimated fair value of goodwill and its carrying value and, therefore, the Company has concluded that no goodwill impairment existed as of March 31, 2016.
The Company completed its annual goodwill valuation as of June 30, 2016. The Company performed a goodwill valuation as of June 30, 2016 using a combination of the market approach and a discounted cash flow method under the income approach to determine the overall business enterprise value and then performed a Step 2 valuation of the fair value of its assets and liabilities to determine the residual fair value of goodwill. The Step 2 valuation also valued the Company’s intangible assets using the relief from royalty method under the income approach. Based on the results of the goodwill valuation as of June 30, 2016, there was no impairment of goodwill. The Company considered that the results of the valuation of goodwill also indicated significant cushion between the implied fair value of goodwill and its carrying value and, therefore, the Company has concluded that no goodwill impairment existed as of June 30, 2016.
The Company did not record any goodwill impairments during fiscal years 2016, 2015 or 2014.
Definite-lived intangible assets include patents which are amortized on a straight-line method over their estimated useful lives of 15 years and are included in other assets. The Company reviews intangible assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. When factors indicate a possible impairment, if the sum of the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of an asset is less than the carrying amount of the asset, an impairment may be recognized. Measurement of an impairment loss is based on the excess of the carrying value of the asset over its fair value. Definite-lived intangible assets were less than $0.1 million as of June 30, 2016 and 2015 and are recorded in other assets on the consolidated balance sheet. There were no impairments recorded on intangible assets during the years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 or 2014.
67
Deferred Financing Costs
Deferred financing costs are included as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability on the consolidated balance sheets and consist of costs incurred in connection with debt financings. These costs are amortized and included in interest expense over the term of the related debt using the effective interest rate method.
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 and tax credit carryforwards. 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. Deferred tax assets are recorded to the extent the Company believes they will more likely than not be realized. In making such determinations, the Company considers all available positive and negative evidence, including future reversals of existing temporary differences, projected future taxable income, tax planning strategies and recent financial operations. Valuation allowances are established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected more likely than not to be realized.
The Company recognizes the effect of income tax positions only if those positions are more likely than not of being sustained. Recognized income tax positions are measured at the largest amount that is greater than 50% likely of being realized. Changes in recognition or measurement are reflected in the period in which the change in judgment occurs. The Company’s policy is to include interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions within the provision (benefit) for income taxes within the Company’s consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, the Company measures fair value based on a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that observable inputs be used when available. The fair value hierarchy is broken down into three levels based on the source of inputs.
The carrying value of financial instruments such as accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued expenses are reasonable estimates of their fair value because of the short maturity of these items. The Company believes that the current carrying amount of its long-term debt approximates fair value based on the adjustment of the carrying value of the term loan to its fair value as of June 30, 2016.
The Company has elected to measure its royalty liability at fair value in accordance with ASC 825, Financial Instruments. The fair value of the royalty liability is based on significant inputs not observable in the market, which require it to be reported as a Level 3 liability within the fair value hierarchy. The valuation uses a methodology and assumptions that the Company believes would be made by a market participant. In particular, the valuation analysis uses a discounted cash flow methodology under the income approach based on the present value sum of payments to be made in the future. The fair value of the royalty liability is estimated by applying a risk adjusted discount rate to the adjusted royalty revenue stream. These fair value estimates are most sensitive to changes in the payment stream.
The Company accounts for derivative financial instruments in accordance with ASC 815, Derivative and Hedging — Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity. Instruments which do not have fixed settlement provisions are deemed to be derivative instruments and are valued based on an average of a Monte Carlo and lattice model. The Preferred Stock Conversion valuation analysis used the estimated dividend rate based on the volume-weighted average price of the Company’s common stock at the date the Preferred Stock Conversion is measured. The warrant liability is valued using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model
Share-Based Compensation
The Company grants equity awards to its employees, directors, consultants and service providers. Certain employee and director awards vest over stated vesting periods and others also require achievement of specific performance or market conditions. The Company expenses the grant-date fair value of awards to employees and directors over their respective vesting periods. To the extent that employee and director awards vest only upon the achievement of a specific performance condition, expense is recognized over the period from the date management determines that the performance condition is probable of achievement through the date they are expected to be met. Awards granted to consultants and service providers are sometimes granted for past services, in which case their fair value is expensed on their grant date, while other awards require future service, or the achievement of performance or market conditions. Timing of expense recognition for consultant awards is similar to that of employee and director awards; however,
68
aggregate expense is re-measured each quarter-end based on the then fair value of the award through the vesting date of the award. The Company estimates the fair value of stock options using
the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, with the exception of market-based grants, which are valued based on the Monte Carlo option pricing model. Option pricing methods require the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the expected stock pric
e volatility.
Foreign Currency Translation
The Australian dollar is the functional currency for the Company’s Australian operations. Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated into U.S. dollars at the rate of exchange existing at the end of the period. Revenues and expenses are translated at the average exchange rates during the applicable period. Adjustments resulting from these translations are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income within the Company’s consolidated balance sheets and will be included in income upon sale or liquidation of the foreign investment. Gains and losses from foreign currency transactions, denominated in a currency other than the functional currency, are recorded in other income within the Company’s consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss and aggregated less than $0.1 million for each of the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014.
Comprehensive Loss
Comprehensive loss includes net loss and other comprehensive loss (income). The Company’s other comprehensive loss (income) consists only of foreign currency translation adjustments.
Revenue Recognition
The Company recognizes revenue from industrialization and development fees, licensing fees and product sales. The Company recognizes revenue from sales of products at the time of shipment when title passes to the customer. The Company recognizes up front, non-refundable fees ratably over the expected life of the related agreement. Revenue from industrialization and development fees is recognized as services are rendered, under the completed contract method, under the proportional performance method or upon achievement of the “at risk” substantive milestone events, which represent the culmination of the earnings process related to such events. Substantive milestones can include specific deliverables such as product design, prototype availability, user tests, manufacturing proof of principle and the various steps to complete the industrialization of the product. The terms of these contracts provide for customer payments to be made as services are rendered or substantive milestones are achieved. The Company considers whether a milestone is substantive at the inception of the agreement. The consideration earned from the achievement of a milestone must meet all of the following criteria to be considered substantive:
|
•
|
It is commensurate with either of the Company’s performance to achieve the milestone, or the enhancement of the value of the delivered item(s) as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the Company’s performance to achieve the milestone;
|
|
•
|
It relates solely to past performance; and
|
|
•
|
It is reasonable relative to all of the deliverables and payment terms (including other potential milestone consideration) within the arrangement.
|
Payment terms are considered to be standard commercial terms. Revenue is recognized when each substantive milestone has been achieved and the Company has no future performance obligations related to the substantive milestone. Fees for completed, substantive milestones, which are dependent upon customer acceptance for non-refundable payment or, if paid, are refundable pending customer acceptance are recognized upon customer acceptance or the termination of refund rights.
Advertising Costs
Advertising costs are expensed in the period incurred. The Company incurred total advertising costs of $0.2 million for each of the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014.
Research and Development Costs
Research and development expenses consist primarily of payroll and related personnel expenses (including share-based compensation expense), fees paid to external service providers, costs of materials, components and supplies, costs for facilities, tooling and equipment and costs related to developing prototype products and samples used for various evaluation, testing and related activities for existing and potential customers. Research and development expenses are included in operating expenses when incurred. Research and development expenses include costs related to the ongoing development and expansion of the Company’s broad portfolio of injectable drug delivery systems as well as costs incurred in relation to customization, industrialization and development
69
agreements with its customers. These costs are
not segregated from the overall research and development costs as they are not readily distinguishable from the rest of the Company’s ongoing research and development expenses.
Interest Expense
The Company recognizes interest expense in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for all debt instruments using the effective interest method. The effective interest method is a method of calculating the amortized cost of a financial liability and of allocating the interest expense over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts the estimated future cash payments through the expected life of the financial instrument to the net carrying amount of the financial liability. The application of the method has the effect of recognizing expense payable on the instrument evenly in proportion to the amount outstanding over the period to maturity or repayment. In calculating the effective interest rate, the Company estimates cash flows considering all contractual terms of the financial instrument, including fees for early redemption and all other premiums and discounts.
Net Loss Per Share
Basic net loss per share is computed as net loss divided by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net earnings per share reflect the potential dilution that could occur from common stock issued through common stock equivalents. The dilutive effect of potential common stock, consisting of non-participating restricted stock and outstanding options to purchase common stock, is calculated using the treasury stock method.
Unvested share-based payment awards that contain nonforfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents, whether paid or unpaid, are considered participating securities and are included in the computation of net loss per share according to the two class method if the impact is dilutive. Shares of the Company’s unvested restricted stock are considered participating securities. However, in the event of a net loss, participating securities are excluded from the calculation of both basic and diluted net loss per share.
Business Segments
The Company operates in one reportable segment, which includes the design, development and manufacture of injectable drug delivery systems. Revenues by geographic location based on location of customer are as follows:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Domestic
|
|
$
|
11,680
|
|
|
$
|
9,834
|
|
|
$
|
5,702
|
|
International
|
|
|
3,161
|
|
|
|
3,324
|
|
|
|
8,987
|
|
|
|
$
|
14,841
|
|
|
$
|
13,158
|
|
|
$
|
14,689
|
|
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts in the consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
On December 2, 2015, the Company received a written notice from the Listing Qualifications Department of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC indicating that, for the 30 consecutive business days ended December 1, 2015, the bid price for the Company’s common stock had closed below the $1.00 per share minimum bid price requirement for continued listing on The Nasdaq Global Market under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5450(a)(2). In response to the preceding notice, on May 13, 2016, pursuant to prior stockholder authorization, the Company effected a reverse split of the Company’s common stock, pursuant to which every ten (10) shares of common stock outstanding before the reverse split were converted into one (1) share of common stock after the reverse split. All share and per share amounts, and exercise and conversion prices for all periods presented herein have been adjusted to reflect the reverse split as if it had occurred at the beginning of the first period presented.
The retrospective adoption of ASU 2015-03 “Simplifying the Presentation for Debt Issuance Costs” decreased other assets and long-term debt by $1.0 million in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at June 30, 2015.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-09 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” and amended by ASU 2016-08 “Principle versus Agent Considerations”, ASU 2016-10 “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing”, and ASU 2016-12 “Narrow-
70
Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients”. The guidance requires an entity to recognize the amount of revenue
to which it expects to be entitled for the transfer of promised goods or services to a customer. The ASU will replace most existing revenue recognition guidance in U.S. GAAP when it becomes effective. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14 “Revenue f
rom Contracts with Customers” which deferred the effective date of ASU 2014-09 for all entities by one year to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. Early application i
s permitted only as of annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. With the deferral, the new standard is effective for the Company, on July 1, 2018, with early adoption permitted one
year prior. The standard permits the use of either the retrospective or cumulative effect transition method. The Company has not selected a transition method nor has it determined the effect of the standard on its ongoing financial reporting.
In June 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-12 “Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period” which is part of ASC 718: Compensation-Stock Compensation. The guidance requires that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition and not be reflected in the estimate of the grant-date fair value of the award. The guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The guidance can be applied prospectively for all awards granted or modified after the effective date or retrospectively to all awards with performance targets outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. The Company does not expect a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows from the adoption of this guidance.
In August 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-15 “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern”. The guidance requires an entity to perform a going concern assessment by evaluating its ability to meet its obligations for a look-forward period of one year from the financial statement issuance date. Disclosures are required if it is probable an entity will be unable to meet its obligations within the look-forward period. Incremental substantial doubt disclosure is required if the probability is not mitigated by management’s plans. The guidance is effective for all entities for the first annual period ending after December 15, 2016 and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on its financial disclosures; however, as the guidance only impacts disclosure, the adoption of this guidance is not expected to have any impact on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In April 2015, FASB issued ASU 2015-03 “Simplifying the Presentation for Debt Issuance Costs”. The guidance requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The existing recognition and measurement guidance for debt issue costs is not affected by the new guidance. In August 2015, the FASB issued a clarification that debt issue costs related to line-of-credit arrangements were not within the scope of the new guidance and therefore should continue to be accounted for as deferred assets in the balance sheet, consistent with existing GAAP. The guidance is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company has adopted this guidance and applied the provisions of this guidance retrospectively to all reporting periods. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position.
In November 2015, the FASB issued new guidance simplifying the balance sheet classification of deferred taxes. The new guidance requires that deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. The current requirement that deferred tax liabilities and assets of a tax-paying component of an entity be offset and presented as a single amount is not affected by the new guidance. The new guidance is effective for the Company on July 1, 2017, with early adoption permitted as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. The new guidance may be applied either prospectively to all deferred tax liabilities and assets or retrospectively to all periods presented. The Company is evaluating the impact that the new guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures; however, at the present time the Company has recorded a valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets based on the history of losses incurred.
In January 2016, the FASB issued new guidance related to the recognition and measurement of financial assets and liabilities. The new guidance makes targeted improvements to GAAP impacting equity investments (other than those accounted for under the equity method or consolidated), financial liabilities accounted for under the fair value election, and presentation and disclosure requirements for financial instruments, among other changes. The new guidance is effective for the Company on July 1, 2018, with early adoption prohibited other than for certain provisions. The Company is evaluating the impact that the new guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
In February 2016, the FASB issued guidance that will change the requirements for accounting for leases. The principal change under the new accounting guidance is that lessees under leases classified as operating leases will recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability. Current lease accounting does not require lessees to recognize assets and liabilities arising under operating leases on the balance sheet. Under the new guidance, lessees (including lessees under leases classified as finance leases and operating leases) will recognize a right-to-use asset and a lease liability on the balance sheet, initially measured as the present value of lease payments under the lease. Expense recognition and cash flow presentation guidance will be based upon whether the lease is classified as an operating
71
lease or a finance lease (the classification criteria for distinguishing between finance leases and operating leases is substantially similar to the classification criteria for distinguishing
between capital leases and operating leases under current guidance). The standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. The new standard must be adopted
using a modified retrospective transition approach for capital and operating leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements; the guidance provides certain practical expedie
nts. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance to determine its impact on the Company’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
In March 2016, the FASB issued new guidance designed to simplify several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment transactions, including guidance relating to accounting for income taxes with respect to share-based payment awards; providing generally that excess tax benefits related to share-based awards should be recorded as a reduction to income tax expense (currently, excess tax benefits generally are recorded to additional-paid-in-capital); providing generally that excess tax benefits related to share-based awards should be classified along with other income tax cash flows as an operating activity (currently, excess tax benefits generally are separated from other income tax cash flows and classified as a financing activity); providing that an entity may make an accounting policy election either to base compensation cost accruals on the number of awards expected to vest (as required by current guidance) or to account for forfeitures when they occur; modifying the current exception to liability classification such that partial cash settlement of an award for tax withholding purposes would not result, by itself, in liability classification of the award if the amount withheld does not exceed the maximum statutory tax rate in the employees' applicable jurisdictions (currently, an award cannot qualify for equity classification, rather than liability classification, if the amount withheld exceeds the minimum statutory withholding requirements); and providing that cash paid by an employer when directly withholding shares for tax withholding purposes should be classified as a financing activity on the statement of cash flows (currently there is no authoritative guidance addressing this classification issue). The guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted (if early adoption occurs in an interim period, any adjustments will be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes the interim period). Depending on the particular issue addressed by the guidance, application of the guidance will be made prospectively, retrospectively or subject to a retrospective transition method. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact of adopting this guidance on the Company's results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
5. Equity Transactions and Share-Based Compensation
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, the Company issued 446,097 shares of common stock for net proceeds of $9.6 million, net of issuance costs, pursuant to a securities purchase agreement. In connection with the securities purchase agreement, the Company issued two warrants to purchase an aggregate of 158,699 shares of common stock. The warrants are exercisable at $30.00 per share and will expire five years from the date of grant. The warrants contain exchange features whereby the warrant holders can exchange the warrants for cash or common stock equal to the value of the warrants at the time of exchange, which value is based upon a contractual formula. Based on the terms of the agreements, the Company has determined that the warrants should be classified as a liability. As of March 31, 2013, the Company recorded a liability of $3.0 million related to the negotiated value of the warrants. In April 2013, the exchange feature was exercised for one of the warrants and a total of 142,422 shares of common stock were issued in settlement of a warrant to purchase 148,699 shares of common stock and the related warrant liability of $2.8 million was reclassified to equity. As of June 30, 2013, one warrant to purchase 10,000 shares of common stock remained outstanding. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the warrant was exercised in exchange for 1,948 shares of common stock and the related warrant liability of $0.4 million was reclassified to equity.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the Company granted certain directors 22,750 shares of common stock which may not be sold or transferred until such time as the director leaves the board of directors for any reason, including a change in control, or other permitted circumstances. The weighted average grant date fair value of the shares was $39.50 per share.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Company granted certain directors 17,500 shares of common stock which may not be sold or transferred until such time as the director leaves the board of directors for any reason, including a change in control, or other permitted circumstances. The weighted average grant date fair value of the shares was $28.30 per share.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Company issued 1,265,000 shares of common stock and raised $44.7 million, net of issuance costs, through an underwritten registered public offering. The Company intends to use the proceeds from the public offering for investments in its plant, equipment, systems and personnel to further develop its manufacturing and operational capabilities to satisfy current and future customer orders and for working capital and other general corporate purposes.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, the Company granted certain directors 17,500 shares of common stock which may not be sold or transferred until such time as the director leaves the board of directors for any reason, including a change in control, or other permitted circumstances. The weighted average grant date fair value of the shares was $8.80 per share.
72
On July 29, 2015, the Company entered into a Controlled Equity Offering Sales Agreement (the “New Sa
les Agreement”) with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., pursuant to which the Company may, from time to time, issue and sell shares of common stock, having an aggregate offering price of up to $25.0 million. During fiscal year 2016, the Company has issued 380,011 sh
ares for net proceeds of $4.6 million under the New Sales Agreement. The Company used the proceeds for working capital needs and other general corporate purposes.
On July 29, 2015, the Company entered into an equity purchase agreement (the “LPC Purchase Agreement”) with Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC (“LPC”), pursuant to which the Company may sell, from time to time, to LPC up to $45.0 million in shares of the Company’s common stock through July 2017, subject to certain limitations and conditions set forth in the LPC Purchase Agreement. During fiscal year 2016, the Company issued 324,465 shares of common stock to LPC and received net proceeds of approximately $4.8 million after expenses. The Company used the proceeds for working capital needs and other general corporate purposes.
The Company recognized share-based compensation expense related to equity awards to employees, directors, consultants and service providers of $13.9 million, $11.8 million and $8.3 million during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
As of June 30, 2016, the total compensation cost related to all non-vested awards not yet recognized was $8.8 million. This amount is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted average period of 1.65 years.
Stock Options and Warrants
The Company has granted stock options to certain employees and directors under the Employee Share Option Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan is designed to assist in the motivation and retention of employees and directors and to recognize the importance of employees and directors to the long-term performance and success of the Company. The Company has also granted stock options to certain service providers outside of the Plan. The majority of the options to purchase common stock vest on the anniversary of the date of grant, which ranges from one to three years. Additionally, certain stock options vest upon the closing price of the Company’s common stock reaching certain minimum levels, as defined in the agreements. Share-based compensation expense related to options granted to employees and directors is recognized on a straight-line method over the related vesting term. Share-based compensation expense related to options granted to service providers is recognized ratably over each vesting tranche of the options.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, the Company adopted the 2009 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Stock Incentive Plan”). The Stock Incentive Plan initially provided for a maximum of 600,000 shares of common stock to be reserved for the issuance of stock options and other stock-based awards. Commencing on January 1, 2012, and on each January 1st thereafter, through January 1, 2014, the share reserve automatically adjusted so that it was equal to 17.5% of the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding reduced by the sum of any shares of common stock issued under the Stock Incentive Plan and any shares of common stock subject to outstanding awards under the Stock Incentive Plan.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Stock Incentive Plan was amended and restated (the “Amended and Restated 2009 Stock Incentive Plan” or “Amended Stock Plan”) to change how the number of shares of common stock that may be issued under the Amended Stock Plan is calculated, to increase the number of shares of common stock available for issuance under the Amended Stock Plan by 1.0 million and to reapprove the Amended Stock Plan for purposes of refreshing the stockholder approval requirement.
Under the terms of the LPC Purchase Agreement, the Company was required to obtain the consent of LPC prior to completing the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement. The Company obtained such consent on November 9, 2015 and contemporaneously issued a five-year warrant to purchase 90,000 shares of Common Stock to LPC at an exercise price of $10.00 per share. The Company performed a Black-Scholes valuation on the warrant and valued the warrant at $5.40 per share of Common Stock. Accordingly, the Company recorded $0.5 million during fiscal year 2016 associated with the issuance of the warrant as a component of redeemable convertible preferred stock issuance cost. LPC has not exercised any warrants as of June 30, 2016. On June 30, 2016,
t
he Company performed a Black-Scholes valuation on the warrant liability to revalue the warrant and valued the warrant at $1.15 per share of Common Stock. The warrant liability was revalued to $0.1 million at June 30, 2016.
On February 22, 2016, in connection with entering into the Eighth Amendment to the Credit Agreement and the Sixth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, the Company issued to ROS warrants to purchase 1,673,981 shares of Common Stock, with an exercise price of $12.50 per share, subject to adjustment for certain events, which may be exercised at any time and from time to time until February 22, 2026. Upon issuance, t
he Company performed a Black-Scholes valuation on the warrant and valued the warrant at $7.20 per share of Common Stock. Accordingly, the Company recorded a $12.1 million warrant liability during fiscal year 2016 associated with the issuance of the warrant. ROS has not exercised any warrants as of June 30, 2016
.
On June 30, 2016,
t
he Company performed a Black-Scholes valuation on the warrant liability to revalue the warrant and valued the warrant at $1.94 per share of Common Stock. The warrant liability was revalued to $3.2 million at June 30, 2016.
73
The following is a summary of activity related to stock options held by employees and directors during the fisca
l year ended June 30, 2016:
|
|
Number of
Options
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life
|
|
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in years)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Outstanding as of July 1, 2015
|
|
|
250,817
|
|
|
$
|
37.82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(140,265
|
)
|
|
|
34.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(8,000
|
)
|
|
|
61.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding as of June 30, 2016
|
|
|
102,552
|
|
|
|
40.10
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Exercisable as of June 30, 2016
|
|
|
85,552
|
|
|
$
|
40.60
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
The following is a summary of activity related to stock options and warrants held by persons other than employees and directors during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016:
|
|
Number of
Options &
Warrants
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life
|
|
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in years)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Outstanding as of July 1, 2015
|
|
|
105,000
|
|
|
$
|
42.01
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,763,981
|
|
|
|
12.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(75,000
|
)
|
|
|
46.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding as of June 30, 2016
|
|
|
1,793,981
|
|
|
$
|
12.68
|
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Exercisable as of June 30, 2016
|
|
|
1,793,981
|
|
|
$
|
12.68
|
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic value is defined as the difference between the market value of the Company’s common stock as of the end of the period and the exercise price of the in-the-money stock options. The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014 was $0.0 million, $0.1 million and $1.8 million, respectively.
The Company currently uses authorized and unissued shares to satisfy stock option exercises.
The weighted average fair value of stock options granted during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016 and 2014 was $12.37 and $16.48 per share, respectively. There were no stock options granted during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015.
The Company used the following weighted average assumptions in calculating the fair value of options and warrants granted during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 and 2014:
|
|
2016
|
|
2014
|
|
Number of warrants and stock options granted
|
|
|
1,763,981
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
1.96
|
%
|
|
1.52
|
%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
71.90
|
%
|
|
55.00
|
%
|
Expected life (in years)
|
|
|
9.74
|
|
|
5.50
|
|
The fair value of each stock option and warrant was estimated at the grant date using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The Company has not historically paid dividends to its stockholders and, as a result, assumed a dividend yield of 0%. The risk free interest rate is based upon the rates of U.S. Treasury bonds with a term equal to the expected term of the option. The expected volatility used to value options granted after January 27, 2010 is based upon a blended rate of the historical share price of the Company’s stock on the Australian Securities Exchange and the volatility of peer companies traded on U.S. exchanges operating in the same industry as the Company. The expected term of the options to purchase common stock issued to employees and directors is based upon the simplified method, which is the mid-point between the vesting date of the option and its contractual term unless a reasonable alternate term is estimated by management. The expected term of the options to purchase common stock issued to consultants and service providers is based on the contractual term of the awards.
74
Restricted Stock Awards and Units
The Company has granted shares of restricted stock to certain employees, directors and consultants under the Amended Stock Incentive Plan. During the period prior to vesting, the holder of the non-vested restricted stock will have the right to vote and the right to receive all dividends and other distributions declared. All non-vested shares of restricted stock are reflected as outstanding; however, they have been excluded from the calculation of basic earnings per share.
For employees, the fair value of restricted stock is measured on the date of grant using the price of the Company’s common stock on that date. Share-based compensation expense for restricted stock issued to employees is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period, which is generally the longest vesting period. For restricted stock granted to consultants, the fair value of the awards will be re-valued on a quarterly basis and marked to market until vested. Share-based compensation expense for restricted stock issued to consultants is recognized ratably over each vesting tranche.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the shareholders approved the issuance of 400,000 shares of restricted stock to the Company’s then Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Alan Shortall. In connection with Mr. Shortall’s separation from the Company, the Company and Mr. Shortall entered into a General Release effective as of March 14, 2016 (the “Shortall Agreement”). Under the Shortall Agreement, such 400,000 unvested restricted shares became fully vested. The Company recorded $3.5 million in share-based compensation expense relating to this vesting and reversed $3.3 million in expense which related to the original grant.
The following is a summary of activity related to restricted stock awards and units during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016:
|
|
Number of
Restricted
Stock Awards
|
|
|
Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value
|
|
Unvested as of July 1, 2015
|
|
|
1,073,185
|
|
|
$
|
28.83
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
623,973
|
|
|
|
4.48
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(712,687
|
)
|
|
|
23.17
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(101,523
|
)
|
|
|
35.66
|
|
Unvested as of June 30, 2016
|
|
|
882,948
|
|
|
$
|
15.41
|
|
The total fair value of shares vested during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014 was $16.5 million, $3.4 million and $6.0 million, respectively.
Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement
On November 9, 2015, the Company entered into and closed a Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement (the “Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement”) with a Cayman Islands exempted mutual fund (the “Fund”). Pursuant to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, the Company issued and sold to the Fund 790 shares of the Company’s newly designated Series A Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company, par value $0.01 per share (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), at a 5% original issue discount and at a purchase price of $10,000 per share for total gross proceeds to the Company of $7.5 million. Prior to the full conversion of the Series A Preferred stock (as more fully discussed below), the Series A Preferred Stock was convertible into shares of Common Stock at a fixed conversion price of $10.00 per share (the “Conversion Price”). The shares of Series A Preferred Stock were offered and sold in a registered direct offering (the “Offering”) pursuant to the Company’s shelf registration statement (File No. 333-197122), which was declared effective by the SEC on October 3, 2014.
From the date of issuance, each share of Series A Preferred Stock accrued dividends at a rate of 8.0% per annum (the “Dividend Rate”), subject to adjustment as discussed below, on its face value of $10,000 (the “Face Value”), payable upon conversion or redemption of such share and when, as and if otherwise declared by the Board. Dividends were paid either in cash or in shares of Common Stock at the Company’s sole discretion and were valued at (i) if there was no Trigger Event (as defined below), (A) 95.0% of the average of the 5 lowest individual daily volume weighted average prices of the Common Stock on the Trading Market during the applicable Measurement Period, which may be non-consecutive, less $0.50 per share of Common Stock, not to exceed (B) 100% of the lowest sales price on the last day of such Measurement Period less $0.50 per share of Common Stock or (ii) following any Trigger Event, (A) 80.0% of the lowest daily volume weighted average price during any Measurement Period for any conversion by Holder, less $1.00 per share of Common Stock, not to exceed (B) 80.0% of the lowest sales price on the last day of any Measurement Period, less $1.00 per share of Common Stock. “Trigger Event” is defined as including, among other events, our breach of the Certificate of Designations and any transaction documents, the occurrence of certain defaults under our material agreements, the suspension of our NASDAQ listing, bankruptcy, the appointment of a receiver, our failure to timely file any report under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the unenforceability of any material provision of the Certificate of Designations. “Trading Market” is defined as the principal trading exchange or market for the Common Stock. “Measurement Period” is defined as the period beginning on the date of issuance of any such shares of Series A Preferred Stock and ending, if no Trigger Event has
75
occurred 3 trading days, and if a Trigger Even
t has occurred 30 trading days, after the number of shares have been delivered with respect to a conversion notice.
The Dividend Rate was adjusted (i) downward by an amount equal to 100 basis points for each amount, if any, equal to $0.50 per share of Common Stock that the volume weighted average price of our Common Stock on any trading day rose above $15.00, down to a minimum of 0.0%; and (ii) upward by an amount equal to 150 basis points for each amount, if any, equal to $0.50 per share of Common Stock that volume weighted average price of our Common Stock on any trading day fell below $7.00, up to a maximum of 15.0%. In addition, the Dividend Rate was adjusted upward by 10.0% upon any Trigger Event.
Each share of Series A Preferred Stock was convertible into such number of shares of Common Stock equal to the Face Value divided by the Conversion Price. Upon any conversion, the Company issued Common Stock at the Conversion Price and paid the dividend and conversion premium (“Dividend”) (in one instance in cash and the remaining instances in stock at the Company’s discretion). The Company was prohibited from issuing shares of Common Stock upon conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock if, as a result of the conversion, the holder, together with its affiliates, would beneficially own more than 4.99% of the total number of shares of the Company’s Common Stock then issued and outstanding, subject to adjustment up to 9.99% upon 61 days’ notice from the investor, which is referred to herein as the “Beneficial Ownership Limitation”. The Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement also contains representations, warranties and covenants customary for transactions of this type.
In November 2015 and December 2015, the Fund delivered to the Company notices of conversion totaling an aggregate of 300 shares of Series A Preferred Stock (the “Initial Conversion Notices”) and the Company issued an aggregate of 1,025,499 shares of Common Stock and paid $0.3 million in cash to satisfy the Initial Conversion Notices. Calculations in the Initial Conversion Notices were based upon the occurrence of a Trigger Event.
As described above, the amount of any Dividend varied based on the Company’s share price during the applicable Measurement Period. If the Company’s share price declined during the Measurement Period with respect to a conversion notice, the number of shares owed to the Fund pursuant to such conversion notice would have changed and the Company was then required to issue the additional shares owed. During December 2015, the Company issued an additional 518,784 shares of Common Stock as additional Dividend with respect to the Conversion Notices as a result of a decline in the share price during the applicable Measurement Periods.
On January 4, 2016, the Fund delivered to the Company a notice of conversion for 40 shares of Series A Preferred Stock (the “January 4
th
Conversion Notice” and together with the Initial Conversion Notices, the “Conversion Notices”) and the Company issued the Fund 246,036 shares of Common Stock. During January 2016, the Company issued an additional 162,706 shares of Common Stock as additional Dividend with respect to the Conversion Notices as a result of a decline in the share price during the applicable Measurement Periods.
On February 3, 2016, Company entered into the First Amendment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement with the Fund. Pursuant to the First Amendment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, the Company acknowledged that the Fund had at all times fully and completely complied with all of its obligations under the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement. The Fund has converted all of the Preferred Shares, and the parties entered into the First Amendment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement to resolve the final and total of number shares of the Company’s Common Stock to be delivered by the Company to the Fund as a result of the conversion.
Pursuant to the First Amendment to the Purchase Agreement, in full accord and satisfaction of all obligations under the Purchase Agreement and the remaining transaction documents (as defined in the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement), the Company agreed to issue to the Fund an additional 831,668 shares (collectively, the “Shares”) of Common Stock, the approximate amount that may be issued under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5635(d) without shareholder approval which the Company did not obtain. On February 3, 2016, the Company issued and delivered to the Fund 725,000 of the Shares. On February 11, 2016, the Company issued and delivered to the Fund the remaining 106,668 Shares.
Pursuant to the First Amendment to the Purchase Agreement, the Company has no further obligations to the Fund with respect to any of the Series A Preferred Stock, Conversion Notices (as defined in the Company’s Certificate of Designations of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of Series A Preferred Stock) or any of the transaction documents. The Company issued 2,784,693 shares of Common Stock to the Fund in connection with the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement. The Fund is no longer the holder of any Series A Preferred Stock.
The First Amendment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement contained a mutual release of claims between the Company and the Fund and contained customary representations and warranties made by such parties. The Company also agreed to provide the Fund with indemnification for breaches of the First Amendment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement and for certain third-party claims, and the Fund agreed to continue the same activity restrictions provided for in the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement.
76
The Company accounted for the Series A Preferred Stock and the related Dividend as two separate units, i.e. Series A Preferred Stock and Preferred Stock Conver
sion. The Company determined that the Series A Preferred Stock should be classified as temporary equity based on the requirement to provide registered shares of the Company’s Common Stock upon conversion and the related Dividend should be classified as a l
iability at fair value. Accordingly, the proceeds recorded as temporary equity for the Series A Preferred Stock
represented
the proceeds from the issuance less initial fair value of Preferred Stock Conversion and related issuance costs. As a result, on Nov
ember 9, 2015, the Company recorded the net proceeds of $7.2 million between the Series A Preferred Stock ($2.8 million) and the initial Preferred Stock Conversion at its fair value ($4.4 million).
A
fter accounting for
all
Conversion Notice
s
and First Amen
dment to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, the Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock, Series A,
was reclassed from temporary equity to permanent equity and is valued at $0.0 million at June 30, 2016. The Preferred Stock Conversion was remeasured pe
riodically and the Company recorded a charge of $4.2 million during fiscal year 2016 through change in fair value of financial instruments
.
At June 30, 2016, the Preferred Stock Conversion was valued at $0.0.
6. Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment consist of the following:
|
|
June 30,
2016
|
|
|
June 30,
2015
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Building
|
|
$
|
32,362
|
|
|
$
|
32,359
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
19,537
|
|
|
|
27,530
|
|
Computer software
|
|
|
2,986
|
|
|
|
2,910
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
1,386
|
|
|
|
1,345
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
13,870
|
|
|
|
17,601
|
|
Land
|
|
|
2,036
|
|
|
|
2,036
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
437
|
|
|
|
270
|
|
|
|
|
72,614
|
|
|
|
84,051
|
|
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(17,841
|
)
|
|
|
(17,903
|
)
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
54,773
|
|
|
$
|
66,148
|
|
Under
ASC 360 Property, Plant, and Equipment
, the Company is required to evaluate the recoverability of the carrying amount of its long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable. In February 2016, the Company completed its review of strategic alternatives and announced the formation of a strategic collaboration centered upon the use of the Company’s portfolio of prefilled, customizable wearable injectors. In connection with this focus, the Company has been evaluating the prospects of its non-wearable injector customer and supplier programs. As a result of negotiations related to those supplier and customer programs through September 1, 2016 and the Company’s evaluation of those programs and potential disposition of certain assets, the Company determined that certain of its long lived-assets are impaired. The Company incurred $26.6 million of non-cash asset impairments to machinery and equipment and construction in progress during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016. The impairment was based on the future expected use of certain equipment in the production of its product. The equipment is customized for the production of medical devices and as a result of the decision not to continue to produce certain products the related equipment was written-off as any residual salvage value was determined to be nominal, if any.
Construction in progress as of June 30, 2016 and 2015 consisted of amounts incurred in connection with machinery and equipment and facility related costs, including capitalized interest. Interest capitalized during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 was $0.4 million and $2.2 million, respectively. There was no capitalized interest during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014.
7. Goodwill
The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 are as follows:
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Balance as of July 1, 2014
|
|
$
|
11,830
|
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(2,145
|
)
|
Balance as of June 30, 2015
|
|
|
9,685
|
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(262
|
)
|
Balance as of June 30, 2016
|
|
$
|
9,423
|
|
77
8. Accrued Expenses
Accrued expenses consist of the following:
|
|
June 30,
2016
|
|
|
June 30,
2015
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Accrued payroll and other employee related expenses
|
|
$
|
2,755
|
|
|
$
|
2,781
|
|
Accrued cost related to construction in process
|
|
|
2,623
|
|
|
|
314
|
|
Accrued transaction costs
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Accrued other
|
|
|
3,332
|
|
|
|
1,979
|
|
Total accrued expenses
|
|
$
|
13,710
|
|
|
$
|
5,074
|
|
The Company recorded $5.0 million in transaction costs during fiscal year 2016 relating to the Strategic Process.
9. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company leases certain facilities, office equipment and automobiles under non-cancellable operating leases that expire on various dates through June 2022. The future minimum lease payments related to the Company’s non-cancellable operating lease commitments net of subleased income related to our King of Prussia offices, that have initial or remaining non-cancellable lease terms in excess of one year as of June 30, 2016 were as follows:
For the Year Ending June 30,
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
2017
|
|
$
|
891
|
|
2018
|
|
|
716
|
|
2019
|
|
|
845
|
|
2020
|
|
|
1,283
|
|
2021
|
|
|
1,309
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1,330
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,374
|
|
In June 2016, we subleased a portion (the “Subleased Portion”) of our King of Prussia offices. During the term of the sublease, which commenced on October 1, 2016 and will end on March 31, 2019, the Company will receive an aggregate of approximately $1.3 million in rent with respect to the Subleased Portion. During the same time period, the Company will be obligated under the Company’s lease agreement relating to our King of Prussia offices to pay an aggregate of approximately $1.9 million in rent with respect to the Subleased Portion. Assuming the sublessor exercises its renewal option, the Company will receive approximately an additional $1.9 million over the renewal term of April 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022 and the Company will be obligated under the Company’s lease agreement relating to the King of Prussia Facility to pay an aggregate of approximately $2.5 million over the same time period. The Company ceased using the Subleased Portion as of July 20, 2016.
Rental expenses under operating leases during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014 were $1.2 million, $0.9 million and $0.6 million, respectively.
From time to time, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings, claims, suits and complaints arising out of the normal course of business. Based on the facts currently available to the Company, management believes that these claims, suits and complaints are adequately provided for, covered by insurance, without merit or that it is not probable that an unfavorable outcome will result.
In addition, the Company is or was involved in the following legal proceedings. A former employee, Talbot Smith, who was terminated for cause by Unilife, filed a civil complaint in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on August 30, 2013, and an amended complaint on March 5, 2014, alleging that he was wrongly terminated in retaliation for making allegations about the Company’s compliance practices. Following the discovery process, Mr. Smith dismissed his claims against the Company with prejudice. In connection with the resolution and dismissal of the action, Mr. Smith agreed to make a payment to the Company to settle counter claims the Company had brought against him. Mr. Smith received no payment as part of the resolution and dismissal of his claims against the Company, his attorney received a reduced portion of her fees from the Company’s insurer, and the matter is now concluded.
As previously disclosed, subsequent to the filing of an OSHA complaint by Mr. Smith, we received a subpoena from the staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Staff”) requesting the Company to provide certain information to the Staff, which
78
is generally consistent with the meritless allegations made by Mr. Smith in his OSHA complaint. In his complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Mr. Smith stated that he provided the Staf
f with information about his allegations in July and August 2012. The Company responded to that subpoena and has received additional subpoenas and requests for information from the Staff, requesting additional information consistent with the first subpoena
. The Staff has also requested information about
public statements made by the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer.
The Company has provided the requested information.
On May 8, 2016, the Company announced an investigation into violations of the Company’s policies and procedures and possible violations of laws and regulations by the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer, Alan Shortall, whose employment with the Company ceased on March 11, 2016, and its former Chairman, Jim Bosnjak, who
resigned from the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) on August 24, 2015
(the “Investigation”). The Investigation was completed on October 7, 2016, and
the Company has reported to the SEC on the Company’s findings from the Investigation, has responded to questions from the Staff regarding the findings, and is cooperating fully with the Staff.
To date, the SEC has not indicated whether any fines or penalties will be assessed against the Company in relation to these matters. The Company is unable to predict
what action the SEC or other regulatory authority may take, if any, in relation to these matters or the impact, if any, of any such action on the Company’s business, operations, cash flows and/or financial condition. If any fines or penalties are assessed against the Company they may be material.
As previously disclosed, on January 8, 2014, the Company was served with a derivative complaint filed in the Delaware Chancery Court (the “Court”) by Cambridge Retirement System (“Cambridge”), a purported stockholder of the Company, against its then-current Board of Directors to recover allegedly “excessive and wasteful” compensation paid to the non-executive directors since 2010. In June, 2014, pursuant to the Company’s motion to dismiss the complaint, the Court dismissed Cambridge’s complaint with respect to the directors’ equity grants, but denied the motion with respect to their cash compensation. The Company filed an answer to the remaining claims in July 2014 and, in June 2015, the Company and Cambridge entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) agreeing to the basic terms of a non-monetary settlement of the action.
On March 18, 2016, Cambridge agreed to voluntarily dismiss its derivative complaint. No compensation in any form was provided to either Cambridge or its counsel in exchange for its agreement to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit. Because Cambridge agreed to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit, the MOU has become null and void and of no further legal effect. On March 18, 2016, the Court entered a stipulated order regarding notice of the proposed dismissal of all claims in the derivative action (the “Proposed Dismissal Order”). On April 18, 2016, the Court entered that stipulation as an order, dismissing the case with prejudice.
On September 14, 2015, UMSI was served with a complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of Connecticut by Biodel, Inc. (“Biodel”) seeking (1) to temporarily enjoin UMSI from entering into a transaction that would jeopardize the Company’s ability to perform its obligations under the Customization and Commercial Supply Agreement effective April 8, 2013 (as amended, the “First Biodel Agreement”) between Biodel and UMSI; and (2) damages under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. Biodel alleged that UMSI had engaged in unfair and deceptive trade practices by purportedly misrepresenting its ability and willingness to satisfy its obligations under the First Biodel Agreement and requesting additional payments from Biodel to satisfy the Company’s obligations.Additionally, Biodel filed a demand for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association (AAA) asserting that UMSI had breached its obligations relating to the timing and scope of its performance under the First Biodel Agreement. The Company filed counterclaims in the arbitration for commercial disparagement and breach of the confidentiality provisions of the agreement.
On September 2, 2016, Biodel, the Company and UMSI entered into an Asset Purchase and License Agreement (the “Second Biodel Agreement”) which provides: (a) for the termination of the First Biodel Agreement; (b) for the grant of an exclusive license for a six-month term to the intellectual property rights related to the Unilife mixing device; (c) a six-month term during which Biodel can exercise an option (the “Option”) to purchase certain assets associated with the First Biodel Agreement for $1.5 million (the “Potential Asset Sale”) and extend Biodel’s license, for fees based on intellectual prosecution and maintenance costs determined on an annual basis; (c) dismissal, with prejudice, of all active proceedings in connection with the litigation and arbitration proceedings pending between Biodel and UMSI. Under the Second Biodel Agreement, each party also releases the other party of all liability, waives all claims with prejudice, and forever holds the other party harmless from any damages arising out of relating to the First Biodel Agreement. Biodel and UMSI each paid their respective attorneys’ fees and UMSI paid no monetary amount to Biodel in connection with this resolution.
On March 24, 2016, Edward Fine filed a complaint against the Company and Unilife Medical Solutions Limited (“UMSL”) in the Superior Court of New Jersey. The complaint alleges that the Company and UMSL are in breach of contract and have been unjustly enriched as a result of UMSL’s failure to pay certain required payments under a consultancy agreement between Mr. Fine and UMSL. Pursuant to the complaint, Mr. Fine is seeking monetary damages in the amount of $288,000 in the aggregate. The Company believes that Mr. Fine’s claims and demands for relief are wholly without merit and the Company is vigorously defending the action. On August 15, 2016, we filed an Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims, wherein we asserted counterclaims against Mr. Fine for fraud, civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair
79
d
ealing arising out of Mr. Fine’s role in certain previously disclosed transactions involving Mr. Fine and Jim Bosnjak, the Company’s former Chairman of the Board. This action is currently in a 450-day discovery period which commenced on July 29, 2016
.
On May 26 and 27, 2016, two putative class actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging that in violation of Rule 10b-5 and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Company and four individual defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) that the Company’s former CEO and former Chairman of the Board of Directors had violated the Company’s policies and procedures and had engaged in violations of law and regulations; (2) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls over accounting and financial reporting; (3) that, as a result, the Company would be unable to file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2016 by the prescribed filing deadline; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s financial statements, as well as its statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. The putative class actions were brought on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s securities between February 3, 2014 and May 23, 2016. On August 24, 2016, the Court consolidated the two actions, appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel, and set a deadline of October 24, 2016 for Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint. The Company intends to vigorously contest this lawsuit.
On July 11, July 28, and August 1, 2016, respectively, derivative complaints were filed in the Court of Common Pleas in York County, Pennsylvania against 11 current or former directors and/or officers, alleging (i) breach of their fiduciary duties, (ii) unjust enrichment, (iii) abuse of control, (iv) gross mismanagement, and (v) corporate waste. The complaints allege, among other things, that the individual defendants breached the fiduciary duties they owed to the Company by (1) grossly mismanaging the Company and perpetuating a variety of self-serving schemes to benefit themselves and other interested parties and (2) making and/or causing the Company to make false/misleading statements or omissions of fact in its public disclosures. The complaints further allege that as a result of this alleged conduct, the Company will lose and expend millions of dollars. The Company intends to vigorously contest these lawsuits.
On August 17, 2016, Kahle Automation, S.r.l. (“Kahle”) filed a complaint against Unilife Medical Solutions, Inc. (“UMS”) in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint alleges that UMS breached contracts with Kahle for Kahle’s supply of automation systems for UMS’s Nexus and Finesse product lines. Kahle seeks monetary damages of $4.2 million which includes alleged damages that we believe are not recoverable, such as $0.9 million for bank fees, and $0.8 million for lost profits. Kahle also seeks injunctive relief enjoining UMS from using the Nexus System and requiring UMS to take delivery of work in process related to the Finesse System. UMS disputes Kahle’s allegations that UMS terminated its agreement with Kahle for the Finesse System. We intend to defend ourselves vigorously against these claims.
The Company believes that depending on the outcome, certain of these matters may have a material impact to the Company or its business.
10. Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt consists of the following:
|
|
June 30,
2016
|
|
|
June 30,
2015
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
10.25% Term loan, due March 2020
|
|
$
|
57,227
|
|
|
$
|
55,518
|
|
Royalty agreement liability
|
|
|
5,120
|
|
|
|
9,930
|
|
6.00% Senior secured convertible note, due February 2023
|
|
|
29,066
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
6.00% Mortgage loan, due December 2031
|
|
|
12,370
|
|
|
|
12,812
|
|
5.00% Commonwealth of Pennsylvania financing
authority loan, due January 2021
|
|
|
1,977
|
|
|
|
2,033
|
|
Other
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
|
105,760
|
|
|
|
80,435
|
|
Less: unamortized debt issue costs
|
|
|
(646
|
)
|
|
|
(980
|
)
|
|
|
|
105,114
|
|
|
|
79,455
|
|
Less: current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
(669
|
)
|
|
|
(775
|
)
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
$
|
104,445
|
|
|
$
|
78,680
|
|
Term Loan
On March 12, 2014, (the “Closing Date”), Unilife Medical Solutions, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (the “Borrower”), entered into a Credit Agreement with ROS Acquisition Offshore LP (the “Lender”), an affiliate of OrbiMed Advisors
80
(“OrbiMed”) (the “Credit Agreement,” and, as amended the “Amended Credit Agreement” or the “OrbiMed Financing”). Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Credit Agreement, the Lender agreed to provide term loans to the Borrower in the aggregate principa
l amount of up to $60.0 million (the “Loans”). A first tranche loan of $40.0 million was drawn on the Closing Date and a further two tranches each of $10.0 million were committed by the Lender and were to be funded on each of December 15, 2014 and June 15,
2015, subject to and in accordance with the terms of the Credit Agreement. On September 30, 2014, the Borrower entered into a First Amendment to the Credit Agreement to accelerate the funding of the two additional tranches pursuant to which it received th
e proceeds from the first $10.0 million tranche on October 1, 2014 and the proceeds from the second $10.0 million tranche on November 10, 2014.
On October 13, 2015, the Company entered into the Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement, pursuant to which the Lender agreed to provide Borrower under the Amended Credit Agreement, up to an aggregate additional principal amount of $10.0 million, less fees and expenses incurred in connection with the Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement and the Second Amendment to the Royalty Agreement (as defined below). During the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2015, the Company received the full amount of additional proceeds under the Amended Credit Agreement in the amount of $10.0 million. The Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement also modified the Borrower’s liquidity covenant whereby, under the Amended Credit Agreement, the Borrower is now required to maintain a cash balance of $3.0 million as of October 13, 2015, rather than $5.0 million.
The Loan bears interest at 9.25% per annum plus the greater of three-month LIBOR or 1.0%, payable in cash quarterly and as otherwise described in the Amended Credit Agreement. A default interest rate of 14.25% per annum plus the greater of three-month LIBOR or 1.0% shall apply during the existence of a default under the Amended Credit Agreement. The Loans are interest-only until March 12, 2020 (the “Maturity Date”).
Unless the loan facility is otherwise terminated earlier pursuant to the terms of the Amended Credit Agreement, the Borrower is required to repay in full the unpaid principal amount of the Loans drawn down, together with all accrued and unpaid interest thereon plus a 10.0% repayment premium on the Maturity Date. The Borrower can make voluntary repayments at any time of any unpaid principal amount of the Loans, plus a 10.0% repayment premium. The Borrower must make mandatory prepayments in certain prescribed circumstances, including, without limitation, certain dispositions of assets and certain casualty events. In such events, the Borrower must prepay to Lender 100% of the net cash proceeds received.
The obligations of the Borrower under the Amended Credit Agreement are guaranteed by the Company and each of its subsidiaries and the Amended Credit Agreement is secured by the assets of the Company and its subsidiaries. The security interests granted by Borrower, the Company, Unilife Cross Farm LLC (“Cross Farm”), Unilife Medical Solutions Limited (“UMSL”) and Unitract Syringe Pty Limited (“Unitract Syringe”) are evidenced by, among other things, the Pledge and Security Agreement, dated as of March 14, 2014, by the Borrower, the Company, Cross Farm, UMSL, and Unitract Syringe in favor of Lender, for itself and as agent for Royalty Opportunities S.A.R.L. (“ROS”), the Mortgage and Security Agreement, dated March 12, 2014, by and between Cross Farm and Lender, for itself and as agent of ROS, and the General Security Deed, dated as of March 12, 2014, by Unitract Syringe, UMSL, and the Company in favor of the Lender, for itself and as agent of ROS.
The Amended Credit Agreement also contains certain customary covenants, as well as covenants relating to achieving minimum cash revenue targets at the end of each calendar year which has been eliminated as discussed below, maintaining a minimum liquidity target of $3.0 million, and the execution of certain customer and employment agreements in form and substance satisfactory to lender. In the event of default, Borrower must prepay to Lender any unpaid principal amount of the loans drawn down, together with all accrued and unpaid interest thereon plus a 10.0% repayment premium. An event of default could also result in the Lender enforcing its security over the assets of Borrower, the Company, Cross Farm, UMSL and Unitract Syringe in accordance with the terms of the Amended Credit Agreement and the related security agreements. On June 30, 2015, the Company entered into a Second Amendment to the Credit Agreement to remove the minimum cash revenue target for the six month period ended June 30, 2015. On November 6, 2015, the Borrower received a waiver from the Lender of the minimum cash revenue target for the calendar year ending December 31, 2015.
In connection with entering into the Credit Agreement, the Borrower entered into a Royalty Agreement with ROS which entitles ROS to receive royalty payments.
On October 13, 2015, the Borrower entered into the Second Amendment to the Royalty Agreement (the “Amended Royalty Agreement”) with ROS. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Second Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, Borrower has agreed to pay ROS 4.52% on the first $50.0 million of net sales in each fiscal year, plus 1.75% of net sales in excess of $50.0 million and up to and including $100.0 million in each fiscal year, plus 0.438% of net sales in excess of $100.0 million in each fiscal year, up from 3.875%, 1.50% and 0.375%, respectively. Borrower continues to have the right to buy out the Amended Royalty Agreement at any time on or before March 12, 2018 at a reduced amount; however, under the Amended Royalty Agreement, the buy-out amounts have increased. On March 13, 2017 and on March 13, 2018, the buy-out amount increases up to a maximum of approximately $37.2 million under the Second Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, as compared to approximately $26.3 million under the First
81
Amendment to the Credit Agreement. The buy-out amount varies based on when the buy-out option is exercised and would, in each case, be reduced by amounts previously paid by Borrower to ROS pursuant to the Amended Royal
ty Agreement. In the event of default under the Amended Credit Agreement, OrbiMed will have a put option that will make the royalty amounts due immediately. The Amended Royalty Agreement has a term commencing on March 12, 2014 and ending on the earlier of
(i) March 12, 2024 and (ii) the date of payment of the purchase price pursuant to the exercise of a put option by the Lender or the exercise of a buy-out option by the Borrower. As the Company has elected to value the Amended Royalty Agreement at fair valu
e, the put option feature does not meet the criterion of ASC 815-15-25-1b and thus is not separated from the host contract and accounted for as a derivative instrument
.
On December 31, 2015, the Borrower entered into a Fourth Amendment to the Credit Agreement with the Lender. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Fourth Amendment to the Credit Agreement, the Lender agreed to defer the due date for the December 31, 2015 interest payment (in the amount of $1.7 million) (the “Interest Payment) to February 5, 2016. Additionally, the Borrower agreed to pay interest on such deferred amount from December 31, 2015 at the rate set forth in the Amended Credit Agreement and to pay all fees and expenses incurred by the Lender in connection with the Fourth Amendment to the Credit Agreement.
On January 31, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Fifth Amendment to the Credit Agreement with the Lender. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Fifth Amendment to the Credit Agreement, the Lender agreed to further defer the due date for the Interest Payment to February 9, 2016. Additionally, the Borrower agreed to pay interest on such deferred amount from December 31, 2015 at the rate set forth in the Amended Credit Agreement and to pay all fees and expenses incurred by the Lender in connection with the Fifth Amendment to the Credit Agreement.
On January 31, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Third Amendment to the Royalty Agreement with ROS. The Third Amendment to the Royalty Agreement became effective as of January 29, 2016. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Third Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, ROS agreed to defer the due date for (i) $0.1 million of the January 30, 2016 royalty payment to February 1, 2016, and (ii) $0.7 million of the January 30, 2016 royalty payment to February 9, 2016.
On February 9, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Sixth Amendment to the Credit Agreement with the Lender. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Sixth Amendment to the Credit Agreement, the Lender agreed to further defer the due date for the Interest Payment to February 16, 2016. Additionally, the Borrower agreed to pay interest on such deferred amount from December 31, 2015 at the rate set forth in the Amended Credit Agreement and to pay all fees and expenses incurred by the Lender in connection with the Sixth Amendment to the Credit Agreement.
On February 9, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Fourth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement with ROS. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Fourth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, ROS agreed to defer the due date for $0.7 million of the January 30, 2016 royalty payment to February 16, 2016.
On February 16, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Seventh Amendment to the Credit Agreement with the Lender. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Seventh Amendment to the Credit Agreement, the Lender agreed to further defer the due date for the Interest Payment to February 26, 2016. Additionally, the Borrower agreed to pay interest on such deferred amount from December 31, 2015 at the rate set forth in the Amended Credit Agreement and to pay all fees and expenses incurred by the Lender in connection with the Seventh Amendment to the Credit Agreement.
On February 16, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Fifth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement with ROS. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Fifth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, ROS agreed to defer the due date for $0.7 million of the January 30, 2016 royalty payment to February 26, 2016.
On February 22, 2016, the Borrow entered into the Eighth Amendment to the Credit Agreement with the Lender. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Eighth Amendment to the Credit Agreement, the Lender agreed to, among others, (i) defer all obligations of the Borrower to pay interest to the Lender for the period from January 1, 2016 through the two year anniversary of the Counterparty Closing Date at the rate specified in the Amended Credit Agreement, which interest will be added to the outstanding principal amount of the loan on the last day of each interest period; (ii) enable the Counterparty to take a security interest in certain inventory and intellectual property assets related to a specific device licensed to the Counterparty (the “Collateral”); and (iii) remove the minimum cash receipts covenant for all future periods.
On February 22, 2016, the Borrower entered into the Sixth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement with ROS. Pursuant to and subject to the terms of the Sixth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement,
ROS agreed to waive any rights to royalty payments otherwise payable as a result of the License Fee and the proceeds of the Notes, and to defer royalty payments payable on revenues received by the Company from the Counterparty until after the end of the first fiscal quarter in which the Company sells a commercial quantity of devices developed for the Counterparty.
82
In connection with entering into the Eighth Amendment to the Credit Agreement and the Sixth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, the Company issued to ROS warrants t
o purchase 1,673,981 share of Common Stock, with an exercise price of $12.50 per share, subject to adjustment for certain events, which may be exercised at any time and from time to time until February 22, 2026. In respect to the consideration provided to
ROS in the form of warrants and the terms of the Eighth Amendment to the Credit Agreement and the Sixth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement, the Company evaluated whether the debt was modified or extinguished pursuant to ASC 470-50, Debt – Modifications and
Extinguishments. The Company determined that the previous debt was extinguished and recorded the modified debt at fair value ($51.3 million). The Company recorded a gain on debt extinguishment for the
fiscal year ended June 30
, 2016 of $2.9 million whic
h consisted of
the remeasurement of the debt at fair value offset by
the value of the warrants as of the Counterparty Effective Date and the deferred financing costs previously associated with the term loan.
Except for the requirement to timely file the March 2016 10-Q, the failure to maintain an effective registration statement, and the failure to timely file documents, which non-compliance was subsequently waived, the Company was in compliance with all the loan covenants set forth in the Amended Credit Agreement as of June 30, 2016.
On September 30, 2016, the Borrower entered into a letter agreement (the “OrbiMed Letter Agreement”) with the Lender pursuant to which the Lender agreed to waive (a) the requirements in Sections 7.1(c) and 7.1(d) of the Amended Credit Agreement for the Borrower to provide audited financial statements of the Company together with certain other information within 90 days after the end of the Company’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, provided that the Borrower furnishes such information by the earlier of (i) November 7, 2016, and (ii) five business days of when the Company files the 2016 10-K with the SEC, and (b) any “Event of Default” that has occurred or would occur under Section 9.1(c) of the Amended Credit Agreement, solely as a result of thereof.
Pursuant to the OrbiMed Letter Agreement, the Lender also agreed to waive any “Event of Default”, if any, through September 30, 2016 under Section 9.1(c) of the Amended Credit Agreement as a result of any failure to furnish the Lender notice of any new Material Agreement (as defined in the Amended Credit Agreement) or amendments or terminations of Material Agreements within the timeframe set forth in Section 7.1(m) of the Amended Credit Agreement, but only to the extent that that Borrower provided any such notices to the Lender prior to September 30, 2016.
The Borrower made certain representations and warranties to the Lender in the OrbiMed Letter Agreement with respect to the content of the Amgen Letter Agreement. In reliance on such representations and warranties, the Lender waived any Event of Default under Section 9.1(f) of the Amended Credit Agreement that may have occurred as a result of any breach of Section 6.3 of the Counterparty SPA, solely due to the Company’s delay in timely filing the Securities Filings with the SEC. There were no other changes to the terms of the Amended Credit Agreement in connection with the OrbiMed Letter Agreement.
The Borrower and ROS entered into a letter agreement dated October 20, 2016 (the “ROS Letter Agreement”), pursuant to which ROS agreed, until 11:59 p.m. New York City time on July 1, 2017, to waive all rights under the Amended Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents (as defined in the Amended Credit Agreement) to declare an “Event of Default” or other breach under such documents as a result of the Company’s or the Borrower’s failure to maintain an effective registration statement, as required by the warrant issued by the Company to ROS, dated February 22, 2016, to purchase 1,673,981 shares of Common Stock. Pursuant to the ROS Letter Agreement, ROS acknowledged and agreed that the Borrower’s receipt of notice of the effectiveness of a registration statement would cure any such breach.
In accordance with the ROS Letter Agreement, ROS also agreed to waive all rights under the Amended Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents to declare an “Event of Default” or other breach under such documents as a result of the Company’s or the Borrower’s failure to timely file documents (the “Delayed Filings”) with the SEC or ASX since February 22, 2016. Pursuant to the ROS Letter Agreement, ROS acknowledged and agreed that the filing by the Borrower of the Delayed Filings with the SEC and the ASX will cure any such breach so long as the Borrower files such Delayed Filings by November 7, 2016.
The Company determined that the Amended Credit Agreement and the Amended Royalty Agreement should be accounted for as two separate units. Accordingly, the Company allocated the proceeds from the Loans on a residual basis between the two units based on their relative fair values. As a result, the royalty liability was determined to have a fair value of $7.0 million and the initial $40.0 million provided under the Credit Agreement was allocated to the remaining proceeds of $33.0 million. The $20.0 million from the two additional tranches that were funded during fiscal year 2015 and the $10.0 million received during fiscal year 2016 were reflected as incremental debt. The carrying value of the debt will be accreted to the face value over the loan term based on the effective interest rate. The royalty liability will be adjusted to fair value on a quarterly basis. As of June 30, 2016, the fair value of the royalty liability was $5.1 million.
There are cross-default provisions in the Amended Credit Agreement, Metro Bank loan (as described below) and Keystone/CFA Loan (as described below), so that a default under one agreement could trigger a default under the others. Metro Bank, the Lender under the Amended Credit Agreement, Keystone Redevelopment Group, LLC and Commonwealth Financing Authority are parties to an intercreditor agreement.
83
Senior Secured Convertible Note
On February 22, 2016, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Counterparty SPA”) with Amgen Inc. (the “Counterparty”), pursuant to which Counterparty agreed to purchase from the Company a new series of 6% Senior Secured Convertible Notes Due 2023 in the aggregate original principal amount of up to $55.0 million (the “Notes”). The Notes may be issued in up to three separate closings. The Company issued to Counterparty the first Note in the aggregate original principal amount of $30.0 million on February 22, 2016 (the “2016 Convertible Note”) and Counterparty paid to the Company $30.0 million in exchange therefor. Counterparty may purchase up to an additional $25.0 million in Notes over the next two years, $15.0 million of which may be purchased in January 2017 (the “2017 Convertible Note”) and $10.0 million of which may be purchased in January 2018 (the “2018 Convertible Note”). There can be no assurance that Counterparty will elect to purchase the 2017 Convertible Note and/or the 2018 Convertible Note.
Interest under the 2016 Convertible Note accrues at a rate of 6% per year and will be paid quarterly in arrears through the addition of the amount of such interest to the then outstanding principal amount. All or part of the principal and accrued interest will be repaid through (i) discounted pricing on purchases by the Counterparty of the Company’s products, (ii) credits taken by the Counterparty against development and customization fees for devices, and (iii) credits against per-unit royalties otherwise payable to the Company for the manufacture and sale of the Company’s products. In addition, the Company has the right to prepay in cash all or part of the principal and accrued interest at any time upon 15 business days’ prior notice, subject to the Counterparty’s conversion right with respect to the contemplated prepayment amount. The Company is required to pay in cash any amounts of principal and accrued interest outstanding at the Counterparty Maturity Date.
The 2016 Convertible Note is convertible at the Counterparty’s election into shares of Common Stock at any time after February 22, 2016 and prior to the Counterparty Maturity Date, at a price per share that is 90% of the volume weighted average price of such shares during the twenty (20) trading days preceding the applicable conversion date (the “Discounted Sale Price”), subject to a floor price of $12.50 per share (the “Conversion Rate Floor Price”). The Conversion Rate Floor Price is subject to customary adjustments for certain capital events.
The Counterparty may cause the redemption of the 2016 Convertible Note upon any event of default by the Company. Events of default under the 2016 Convertible Note include, among others, a failure by the Company to convert the 2016 Convertible Note upon proper notice by the Counterparty or pay principal and interest on the 2016 Convertible Note when due; an acceleration of any other indebtedness under the Amended Credit Agreement or other indebtedness of the Company in excess of $1.0 million; a bankruptcy of the Company; a judgment against the Company in excess of $1.0 million; a representation or warranty made in the Transaction Documents is materially false or misleading when made; a material breach by the Company of a covenant or other term or condition in the Transaction Documents; the Transaction Documents cease to be effective; the termination or amendment of the Eighth Amendment to the Credit Agreement or the Sixth Amendment to the Royalty Agreement; and the incurrence of a lien on collateral that is not a permitted lien. The Company is required to redeem for cash the 2016 Convertible Note upon a change of control of the Company in an amount equal to 101% of the aggregate principal and accrued interest outstanding as of the change of control.
The 2016 Convertible Note also provides the Counterparty with certain rights to acquire additional shares of Common Stock or other securities or assets of the Company, as applicable, in the event: (i) the Company grants, issues or sells any options, convertible securities or rights to purchase stock, warrants, securities or other property pro rata to the holders of Common Stock; or (ii) the Company makes certain other distributions to Company stockholders such that, in the case of (i) or (ii), the Counterparty receives, in addition to the shares of Common Stock otherwise issuable upon conversion of the 2016 Convertible Note, the shares of Common Stock or other securities or assets, as applicable, that the Counterparty would have been entitled to receive if the Counterparty had converted the 2016 Convertible Note into Common Stock immediately prior to such event.
The 2016 Convertible Note is secured by the Collateral. The Counterparty has agreed to preserve license rights granted to other customers for any license rights granted prior to a foreclosure. The terms and conditions of the 2017 Convertible Note and the 2018 Convertible Note, if purchased by the Counterparty, are substantially the same as the terms and conditions of the 2016 Convertible Note, except that the “Conversion Rate Floor Price” will be the greater of (x) $12.50, (y) the closing sale price of the Common Stock on the trading day preceding the issuance date, and (z) the book value per share of Common Stock on the trading day immediately preceding the issuance date.
The Company determined that the conversion feature should be accounted for as a stock put option and would be bifurcated from the value of the 2016 Convertible Note and treated as a derivative liability. The initial fair value of the derivative liability was determined to be $1.7 million. The fair value of this liability will be adjusted to fair market value on a recurring basis. As of June 30, 2016, the fair market value was determined to be $0.3 million.
The Counterparty may purchase up to an additional $15.0 million in Notes in January 2017, and up to an additional $10.0 million in Notes in January 2018.
84
On September 29, 2016, the Company and
the Counterparty
entered into a letter agreement (the “
Counterparty
Letter Agreement”
). Pursuant to the
Counterparty
Letter Agreement, Amgen agreed (i) until 11:59 p.m. New York City time on July 1, 2017, to waive any and all rights whatsoever that
the Counterparty
has or may have under the
Securities Purchase Agreement that the Company en
tered into with Counterparty in February 2016 (the “
Counterparty
SPA”)
and certain related transaction documents to declare an “Event of Default” under the 2016 Convertible Note as a result of the Company’s failure to timely file the
March 2016 10-Q
or the
2016 10-K (together, the “Securities Filings”); and (ii) that the filing by the Company of the Securities Filings with the SEC will cure any breach of Section 6.3 of the
Counterparty
SPA as a result of the Company’s failure to timely file the Securities F
ilings with the SEC.
Under section 6.3 of the Counterparty SPA, the Company is required to, until the date on which the Counterparty has sold all the shares of the Company’s common stock into which the Notes are convertible (the “Conversion Shares”) and none of the Notes are outstanding, (i) timely file all reports required to be filed with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or the rules and regulations thereunder and (ii) not take any action or file any document (whether or not permitted by the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) or the rules promulgated thereunder) to terminate or suspend the Company’s reporting and filing obligations under the Exchange Act or Securities Act, (iii) take all actions necessary to maintain the Company’s eligibility to register the Conversion Shares for resale by the Counterparty on Form S-3, and (iv) use its commercially reasonable efforts to take all action as may be required as a condition to the availability of Rule 144 under the Securities Act with respect to the Company’s common stock.
Mortgage Loans
In October 2010, Cross Farm entered into the Loan Agreement with First National Bank (formerly known as Metro Bank), pursuant to which First National Bank provided Cross Farm with two mortgage loans in the amounts of $14.25 million (“First Mortgage”) and $3.75 million (“Second Mortgage”). The proceeds received were used to finance the purchase of land and construction of the Company’s corporate headquarters and manufacturing facility in York, Pennsylvania. In connection with the credit agreement, the Company entered into the Metro Bank Amendment pursuant to which the Second Mortgage due October 2020 was repaid. Cross Farm is paying principal and interest on the First Mortgage, with interest at a fixed rate of 6.00%.
The original First National Bank loan documents contain certain customary covenants, including the maintenance of a debt service reserve account in the amount of $2.4 million, classified as restricted cash on the consolidated balance sheets, which will remain in place until Cross Farm and First National Bank agree on the financial covenants. In addition the Company is required to maintain a cash balance of $5.0 million inclusive of the $2.4 million reserve account. The terms of the original First National Bank loan documents allow the Company to use the debt service reserve account to pay monthly debt service on the mortgage loans, so long as the balance in the account is at least $1.6 million and is replenished to $2.4 million every six months. The Company was in compliance with its debt covenants as of June 30, 2016. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to maintain the debt service reserve account balance for a period of 12 months from March 31, 2016. Cross Farm may prepay the loan without penalty. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has guaranteed $8.0 million of the mortgage loan due December 2031. In connection with the First Mortgage, the Company has given First National Bank a lien on the building and real estate and the debt service reserve account.
Secured Lending Facility
In August 2011, the Company entered into a Master Lease Agreement (the “Lease Agreement”) with Varilease Finance, Inc. (“Varilease”) for up to $10.0 million of secured financing for production equipment for its Unifill syringe. Based on the Company’s continuing involvement throughout the term of the agreement and the integral nature of the production equipment, the transaction was being accounted for as a financing. Over the term of the Lease Agreement, the Company made 27 monthly installments based upon the amount drawn. This facility had an effective interest rate of 14.00%. The secured lending facility contained covenants and provisions for events of default customarily found in lease agreements.
As previously disclosed on September 30, 2013, Varilease and CCA Financial LLC (collectively, the “Lessors”) filed an action in the State of Michigan in the Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, Case No. 2013-136458-CK seeking a judgment confirming the terms of the lease. The Company removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Case No. 2:13-CV-14238-SFC-LJM, on October 4, 2013. Under the Lease Agreement, Lessors and the Company were to negotiate a buyout rate at the end of the two-year lease term, which Lessors represented to the Company during the lease negotiations would be 15% of the amount financed. When the Company notified Lessors that it wanted to exercise the buyout of the equipment, Lessors claimed a buyout rate significantly higher than 15%. Under the terms of the lease, if the parties were unable to agree on a buyout rate by the end of the lease term, the lease would automatically renew for an additional 12-month period and the Company would be responsible for another year of lease payments. Lessor’s action in Michigan state court asked the court to confirm that the parties were unable to agree on a buyout rate and therefore under the terms of the lease the lease was automatically extended for one year.
85
As previously disclosed, the Company also filed suit on September 30, 2013 against Lessors in the U.S. D
istrict Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Case No. 2:13-cv-14174-SFC-LJM alleging, among other things, that Lessors fraudulently induced the Company into entering the lease by making misrepresentations about the buyout rate. The Company sought, a
mong other things, to have the federal court enforce a 15% buyout rate and to enjoin Lessors from declaring a default under the lease and taking possession of the equipment for which the Company would have to impair the carrying value of assets. On October
17, 2013, in a stipulated order, the U.S. District Court ordered that the Company continue to make the same monthly payments under the lease, which as long as the Company made timely payments, Lessors shall not declare a default, and that Lessors were req
uired to provide advance notice of a default.
As previously disclosed, the Company entered into a Confidential Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement (the “Definitive Settlement Agreement”), effective December 30, 2013, with the Lessors. The Definitive Settlement Agreement provided that it will obtain title to all equipment under the equipment lease upon the payment to the Lessors of approximately $4.8 million over the next twelve months. In addition, under the Definitive Settlement Agreement the Company and the Lessors released each other from any and all claims related to the companion lawsuits, as well as dismissed such lawsuits. In connection with the Definitive Settlement Agreement, during the year ended June 30, 2014, the Company recognized $3.6 million of interest expense representing the difference between the carrying value of the debt and the present value of the settlement amount.
During the year ended June 30, 2014, the Company paid $4.7 million (including $3.5 million with proceeds from the March 12, 2014 Credit Agreement) to the Lessors in satisfaction of the Company’s remaining obligations under the Definitive Settlement Agreement. Effective March 12, 2014 the Lessors released all liens and security interest in all of the Company’s assets subject to the Lease Agreement.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Financing Authority Loan
In December 2010, Cross Farm received a $2.25 million loan from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for land and the construction of its current manufacturing facility. The loan bears interest at a rate of 5.00% per annum, matures in January 2021 and is secured by a third mortgage on the facility. In connection with the loan agreement, Cross Farm entered into an intercreditor agreement by which the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania agreed that it would not exercise its rights in the event of a default by Cross Farm without the consent of Metro Bank, which holds the first mortgage on the facility.
Loan from our Former CEO
On September 30, 2015, the Company obtained a loan in the amount of $0.6
million from Alan Shortall, the Company’s former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. During February 2016, the loan was repaid in full including payment of interest to Mr. Shortall at the minimum applicable federal rate, which interest was less than $0.1 million.
As of June 30, 2016, aggregate maturities of long-term obligations are as follows:
For the Year Ending June 30,
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
2017
|
|
$
|
669
|
|
2018
|
|
|
780
|
|
2019
|
|
|
958
|
|
2020
|
|
|
58,679
|
|
2021
|
|
|
3,270
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
41,404
|
|
|
|
$
|
105,760
|
|
86
11
. Net Loss Per Share
The Company’s net loss per share is as follows:
|
|
Year Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
Numerator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(100,783
|
)
|
|
$
|
(90,849
|
)
|
|
$
|
(57,899
|
)
|
Deemed dividend on Series A Preferred Stock
|
|
|
(1,047
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Net loss attributable to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
(101,830
|
)
|
|
$
|
(90,849
|
)
|
|
$
|
(57,899
|
)
|
Denominator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares used to compute basic
net loss per share
|
|
|
14,467,510
|
|
|
|
11,219,490
|
|
|
|
9,806,267
|
|
Effect of dilutive options to purchase common stock
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Weighted average number of shares used to compute diluted
net loss per share
|
|
|
14,467,510
|
|
|
|
11,219,490
|
|
|
|
9,806,267
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$
|
(7.04
|
)
|
|
$
|
(8.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5.90
|
)
|
Due to the Company’s net losses, unvested shares of restricted stock (participating securities) totaling 850,989, 699,021 and 268,778 were excluded from the calculation of basic and diluted net loss per share during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
In addition, stock options (non-participating securities) totaling 900,566, 350,060, and 464,273 during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, were excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share as their effect would have been anti-dilutive. Certain of these stock options were excluded solely due to the Company’s net loss position. Had the Company reported net income during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, these shares would have had an effect of 0, 14,574, and 32,385 diluted shares, respectively, for purposes of calculating diluted net loss per share. The impact of the potential conversion of 2016 Convertible Note of 2,452,237 diluted shares was also excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 as their effect would have been anti-dilutive.
12. Income Taxes
For the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, income (loss) before income taxes consists of the following:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Domestic
|
|
$
|
(100,011
|
)
|
|
$
|
(89,617
|
)
|
|
$
|
(58,784
|
)
|
International
|
|
|
(772
|
)
|
|
|
(1,232
|
)
|
|
|
885
|
|
|
|
$
|
(100,783
|
)
|
|
$
|
(90,849
|
)
|
|
$
|
(57,899
|
)
|
Tax Rate Reconciliation
Income tax expense (benefit) is as follows:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
U.S. Federal
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(31,335
|
)
|
|
$
|
(31,335
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(27,385
|
)
|
|
$
|
(27,385
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(18,415
|
)
|
|
$
|
(18,415
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(9,936
|
)
|
|
|
(9,936
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(8,684
|
)
|
|
|
(8,684
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(5,839
|
)
|
|
|
(5,839
|
)
|
International
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(369
|
)
|
|
|
(369
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
266
|
|
Changes in valuation allowance
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
41,503
|
|
|
|
41,503
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
36,438
|
|
|
|
36,438
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
23,988
|
|
|
|
23,988
|
|
Income tax provision
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
87
Income tax expense (benefit) was $0
for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and differed from the amounts computed by applying the U.S. federal income tax rate to pretax income (loss) as a result of the following:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
Tax at U.S. statutory rate
|
|
|
(35
|
)%
|
|
|
(35
|
)%
|
|
|
(35
|
)%
|
State taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
(6
|
)%
|
|
|
(6
|
)%
|
|
|
(6
|
)%
|
Non-deductible and non-taxable items
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
—
|
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
|
|
40
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
Significant Components of Deferred Taxes
The tax effects of temporary differences and net operating losses that give rise to significant portions of deferred tax assets (liabilities) at June 30, 2016 and 2015 are presented below:
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
$
|
150,868
|
|
|
$
|
110,876
|
|
Share-based compensation expense
|
|
|
27,548
|
|
|
|
20,548
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
5,622
|
|
|
|
6,951
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
5,395
|
|
|
|
4,324
|
|
Debt extinguishment
|
|
|
(6,196
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Inventory reserves
|
|
|
3,596
|
|
|
|
3,416
|
|
Accruals/Reserves
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(186,987
|
)
|
|
|
(146,216
|
)
|
Net deferred taxes
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
The valuation allowance for deferred tax assets as of June 30, 2016 and 2015 was $187.0 million and $146.2 million, respectively. The net change in the total valuation allowance was an increase of $40.8 million. In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible or prior to the expiration of the net operating loss carryforwards. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities (including the impact of available carryback and carryforward periods), projected future taxable income, and tax-planning strategies in making the assessment as to the realizability of deferred tax assets. Based upon the level of historical taxable income and uncertainty regarding projections for future taxable income over the periods in which the deferred tax assets are deductible or can be utilized, management does not believe it is more likely than not that the Company will realize the benefits of these net operating losses and deductible temporary differences, as of June 30, 2016 and 2015. Therefore, a full valuation allowance has been provided as of June 30, 2016 and 2015. The amount of the net deferred tax assets considered realizable; however, could change if estimates of future taxable income during the carryforward period are increased.
As of June 30, 2016, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards for U.S federal, state and Australian income tax purposes of approximately $347.0 million, $347.0 million and $23.0 million, respectively, which are available to offset future taxable income. The U.S. federal and state net operating loss carryforwards begin to expire in 2023. The Australian net operating losses do not expire.
The Australian net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $23.0 million as of June 30, 2016 are subject to either the continuity of ownership or same business test (as defined under Australian tax law) that could limit or substantially eliminate the Company’s ability to use these carryforwards. If there have been or will be changes in the Company’s ownership or Australian business operations before these net operating loss carryforwards are utilized, they may be unavailable to reduce taxable income in the future. Further, under provision of the Internal Revenue Code, the utilization of a U.S corporation’s federal and state net operating loss carryforwards may be significantly limited following a change in ownership of greater than 50% within a three-year period. The Company’s federal and state net operating loss carryforwards may, therefore, be subject to an annual limitation. In addition, state net operating loss carryforwards may be further limited in Pennsylvania, which has a limitation equal to the greater of 20% of taxable income after modifications and apportionment, or $5.0 million on state net operating losses utilized in any one year.
Management has evaluated the tax positions taken and has concluded that no liability for unrecognized tax benefits was required to be recorded for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014.
88
The Company files Australian, U.S. federal and state income tax returns. The Company is not subject to examination in any jurisdiction at this time. As a result of the net operating losses in prior years, the statute of limitations will remain op
en for a period following any utilization of net operating loss carryforwards and as such these periods remain subject to examination.
13. Employee Benefit Plan
The Company has a retirement savings 401(k) plan covering all U.S. employees (the “Plan”). Participating employees may contribute up to 100% of their pre-tax earnings, subject to the statutory limits. Effective January 1, 2012, the Company began a discretionary match to participant contributions into the Plan. The Company contributes fifty cents for each dollar a participant contributes, with a maximum of 3% of a participant’s eligible earnings. The contributions made by the Company vest 50% upon two years of service and 100% upon three years of service. During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, the Company paid $0.4 million, $0.5 million and $0.3 million, respectively, to match employee contributions.
Additionally, during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Company made a discretionary contribution of 1% of compensation, as defined, to all eligible employees, which amounted to $0.1 million. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 and June 30, 2014, the Company did not make any discretionary contributions.
14. Revenue
The Company recognized $14.8 million, $13.2 million and $14.7 million of revenue during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, three customers accounted for 48%, 22% and 21% of consolidated revenue, respectively. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, three customers accounted for 35%, 32% and 24% of consolidated revenue, respectively. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, three customers accounted for 34%, 23% and 15% of consolidated revenue, respectively.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, revenue attributed to France accounted for 21% of consolidated revenue. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, revenue attributed to France accounted for 24% of consolidated revenue. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, revenue attributed to Jordan and France accounted for 34% and 15% of consolidated revenue, respectively. All other revenue is attributed to the United States.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, the Company recognized $4.5 million of revenue, respectively, related to substantive milestones, as follows:
The Company recognized $1.7 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 pursuant to a feasibility agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon substantive milestones. An initial up-front payment of $0.1 million was determined to be non-substantive and was recognized on a straight line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.5 million for development and delivery of additional human factor stimuli and a report on updated product requirements; and
|
|
•
|
$1.2 million for development and delivery of semi-functional prototypes and related feasibility, product requirement, and risk management reports.
|
There are no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
89
The Company recognized $2.1 million of revenue during the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 pursuant to a master services and supply agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug d
elivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon substantive milestones. An initial up-front payment of $1.1 million was determined to be non-substantive and is being recognized on a st
raight-line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 are as fo
llows:
|
•
|
$0.6 million for development and delivery of a complete system layout;
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for development and delivery of components for a human factor study;
|
|
•
|
$0.6 million for development and delivery of feasibility devices for testing; and
|
|
•
|
$0.6 million for development and delivery of a clinical production process.
|
The remaining substantive milestones as of June 30, 2016 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of components for a human factor study;
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for completion of testing of assembly equipment;
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for completion of filling process of clinical devices;
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for delivery of containers for the filling process; and
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for delivery of devices for clinical studies.
|
The Company recognized $0.3 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 pursuant to a feasibility agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. An initial up-front payment of $0.5 million was determined to be non-substantive and was recognized on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.3 million for development and delivery of a summary report related to testing and documentation activities.
|
There are no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
The Company recognized $0.4 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 pursuant to a master services and supply agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon substantive milestones. An initial up-front payment of $1.0 million was determined to be non-substantive and was recognized on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of feasibility devices for testing;
|
The remaining substantive milestones as of June 30, 2016 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.6 million for delivery of design transfer for the device and the related filling equipment and fixtures; and
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for commissioning of the pilot line.
|
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, the Company recognized $5.3 million in revenue related to services rendered on a time and materials basis, proportional performance method, the completed contract method and/or straight line basis over the requisite service period pursuant to customer agreements to provide various customization and development services. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, the Company recognized $5.0 million in revenue related to an agreement with a customer to provide exclusivity for a defined period of time to evaluate certain drug delivery alternatives as the requisite exclusivity period expired during the fiscal year.
On December 31, 2015, the Company entered into an exclusivity agreement (the “Exclusivity Agreement”) with Amgen Inc. (the “Counterparty”). Pursuant to the Agreement, the Counterparty paid to the Company a non-refundable $15.0 million license fee
90
(the “First License Fee”). Furthermore on February 22, 2016,
the Company gra
nted the Counterparty exclusive rights to the Company’s wearable injectors within select drug classes for use with certain assets, while preserving rights the Company previously granted to other customers. The Company has also granted to the Counterparty n
on-exclusive rights to all of the Company’s proprietary delivery systems within the therapeutic areas of oncology, inflammation, bone health, nephrology, cardiovascular and neuroscience. The Counterparty paid to the Company an additional non-refundable $20
.0 million fee (the “Second License Fee”) in consideration for such licenses.
Both the First License Fee and the Second License Fee were recorded in long-term deferred revenue as of June 30, 2016 and were paid as consideration for the following non-exclusive and exclusive rights and licenses:
|
•
|
The Company granted to the Counterparty a perpetual, worldwide non-exclusive license under the patents, know-how and technology of the Company for the Company to develop, manufacture and supply wearable injector devices existing as of the closing (including any improvements or modified versions) for use with certain large volume drug products of the Counterparty.
|
|
•
|
In addition, the Company granted to the Counterparty a perpetual, worldwide exclusive license under the patents, know-how and technology of the Company for the Company to develop, manufacture and supply the Company’s 1mL wearable injector existing as of the closing (including any improvements or modified version to the same) for use with certain small volume drug products. Except as discussed below, the wearable injector devices will be developed and manufactured by the Company. The Counterparty will be required to pay the Company an amount for each device manufactured by the Company, based on annual volumes and device features.
|
In addition to the Exclusivity Agreement, the Company also entered into a Master Development and Supply Agreement with the Counterparty on the Counterparty Closing Date that captures key terms for the development, production and supply of the Company’s delivery systems. The Company has a pre-existing Master Feasibility and Customization Agreement with the Counterparty entered into in the ordinary course of our business on December 2, 2015.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Company recognized $5.1 million of revenue related to substantive milestones, as follows:
The Company recognized $2.7 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 pursuant to a feasibility agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted during the year. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon substantive milestones. An initial up-front payment of $0.1 million was determined to be non-substantive and is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of a detailed project plan and a failure mode and effects analysis report;
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of a report on preliminary product requirements and a risk management plan;
|
|
•
|
$1.5 million for development and delivery of human factor stimuli and related supporting documents; and
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of additional human factor stimuli.
|
The remaining substantive milestones as of June 30, 2015 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.5 million for development and delivery of additional human factor stimuli and a report on updated product requirements; and
|
|
•
|
$1.2 million for development and delivery of semi-functional prototypes and related feasibility, product requirement, and risk management reports.
|
The Company recognized $0.9 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 pursuant to a feasibility agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted during the year. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. An initial up-front payment of $0.5 million was determined to be non-substantive and is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.5 million for development and delivery of a report on device design options as well as potential manufacturing and assembly processes; and
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of product samples and related supporting documents.
|
91
The remaining substantive milestone as of June 30, 2015 is as follows:
|
•
|
$0.2 million for development and delivery of a summary report related to testing and documentation activities.
|
The Company recognized $0.3 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 pursuant to a feasibility agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted during the year. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.1 million for development and delivery of a report related to human factor studies and quality requirements;
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for development and delivery of devices for compatibility and stability functional testing and related reporting; and
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for development and delivery of devices for human factor study and related reporting.
|
There are no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
The Company recognized $0.2 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 pursuant to a feasibility agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted during the year. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.1 million for development of customized devices for testing; and
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for development and delivery of testing activities and related reporting.
|
There are no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
The Company recognized $1.0 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 pursuant to a master services and supply agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted during the year. This agreement provides for certain customization and development activities for a drug delivery system to be performed for the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon substantive milestones. An initial up-front payment of $1.1 million was determined to be non-substantive and is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the agreement. The remaining milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.2 million for development and delivery of a report defining device requirements;
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for development and delivery of a report defining system requirements;
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for development and delivery of devices for testing;
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for development and delivery of a report defining production requirements; and
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for development and delivery of components for a human factor study.
|
The remaining substantive milestones as of June 30, 2015 are as follows:
|
•
|
$0.6 million for development and delivery of a complete system layout;
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for development and delivery of components for a human factor study;
|
|
•
|
$0.6 million for development and delivery of feasibility devices for testing;
|
|
•
|
$0.6 million for development and delivery of a clinical production process;
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of components for a human factor study;
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for completion of testing of assembly equipment;
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for completion of filling process of clinical devices;
|
|
•
|
$0.4 million for delivery of containers for the filling process; and
|
|
•
|
$0.3 million for delivery of devices for clinical studies.
|
92
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Company recogn
ized $8.1 million of revenue related to services rendered on a time and materials basis, proportional performance method and/or straight-line basis over the requisite service period pursuant to customer agreements to provide various customization and devel
opment services.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the Company recognized $8.1 million of revenue related to substantive milestones, as follows:
The Company recognized $1.3 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 pursuant to a clinical supply agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed and accepted during the year. This agreement provides for the customization and development activities for a drug delivery system for a customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. Substantive milestones that were achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.4 million for development and delivery of devices to be used by the customer for compatibility testing;
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for delivery of development and testing activities;
|
|
•
|
$0.6 million for delivery of development, testing and verification activities;
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for development and delivery of testing materials; and
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for certain support and testing activities.
|
There are no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
The Company recognized $0.8 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 pursuant to a customization and commercial supply agreement with a customer related to a substantive milestone that was completed during the year. This agreement provides for the development of customized component parts for the customer to use in a drug-device combination product and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. The substantive milestone achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.8 million for customization and delivery of devices for compatibility and initial evaluation testing.
|
The remaining substantive milestones were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.8 million for delivery of devices for regulatory filings; and
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for certain delivery of services supporting the customer’s regulatory approval process.
|
The Company recognized $0.7 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 pursuant to a materials transfer agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed during the year. This agreement provides for certain materials and related services to the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. The substantive milestones achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.4 million for delivery of testing materials;
|
|
•
|
$0.1 million for delivery of device design requirements report; and
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for delivery of customization activities.
|
There were no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
The Company recognized $0.3 million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 pursuant to a collaborative research agreement with a customer related to substantive milestones that were completed during the year. This agreement provides for certain materials and related services to the customer and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time the agreement was entered into. The substantive milestones achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 were as follows:
|
•
|
$0.1 million for customization and delivery of devices for evaluation and user study purposes; and
|
|
•
|
$0.2 million for customization and delivery of devices for evaluation activities.
|
There were no remaining substantive milestones under this agreement.
93
The Company recognized $5.0
million of revenue during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 pursuant to a binding license, development and supply agreement with a customer related to a substantive milestone that was completed during the year. This agreement provides for the developmen
t of customized devices and drug delivery systems for the customer to use in a drug-device combination product and provides for payments to be made upon the completion of agreed-upon milestones. The milestones were determined to be substantive at the time
the agreement was entered into. The substantive milestone achieved during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 was as follows:
|
•
|
$5.0 million for customization, design and production of a prototype device for incorporation into a drug delivery system.
|
The remaining substantive milestones were as follows:
|
•
|
$5.0 million for delivery and acceptance of application for regulatory approval; and
|
|
•
|
$1.0 million each upon regulatory approval for up to 20 drug-delivery device combination products.
|
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the Company recognized $4.3 million in revenue related to services rendered on a time and materials basis during the period pursuant to customer agreements to provide various customization and development services. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the Company recognized the final $2.3 million of revenue related to its licensing agreement with Sanofi.
15. Departure of Officers; Appointment of Officers
As of March 11, 2016, Alan D. Shortall’s employment as Chief Executive Officer of the Company ceased and Mr. Shortall resigned from his positions as Chairman of the Board and as a member of the Board. In addition, as of March 11, 2016 the employment of Ramin Mojdeh, Ph.D. as the Company’s President and Chief Operating Officer ceased.
Effective March 14, 2016, the Board appointed John Ryan as the Interim President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. On July 28, 2016, the Board appointed Mr. Ryan as the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer and also appointed Mr. Ryan to serve as a member of the Board.
The Company and Mr. Shortall entered into a General Release effective as of March 14, 2016 (the “Shortall Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay to Mr. Shortall the following lump sum cash payments: (i) $0.4 million, which amount represented twelve months of severance pay at Mr. Shortall’s base salary as of March 11, 2016; (ii) $0.4 million in full satisfaction of amounts otherwise owed pursuant to the Employment Agreement, effective as of October 1, 2011, between the Company and Mr. Shortall, as amended (the “Shortall Employment Agreement”); (iii) $0.4 million in full satisfaction of any bonus to which Mr. Shortall may have been entitled to for 2015; (iv) $57 thousand in respect of Mr. Shortall’s unused vacation time; (v) $20 thousand as reimbursement for the reasonable and appropriate relocation expenses that Mr. Shortall previously incurred in connection with his relocation to the King of Prussia, Pennsylvania area; and (vi) $0.1 million as reimbursement for all reasonable relocation expenses incurred by Mr. Shortall and his family for repatriation to Australia. In addition, the Company agreed to pay $20 thousand of the legal fees incurred by Mr. Shortall in connection with the Shortall Agreement and to pay for the cost of Mr. Shortall’s group health coverage under any Company benefit plan for twelve months in accordance with the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (“COBRA”). The cash payments set forth in (i)-(iv) and (vi) above were not paid to Mr. Shortall as they were offset in full by withholding obligations of the Company as a result of the vesting of restricted shares described below.
Under the Shortall Agreement, 400,000 unvested restricted shares that were granted to Mr. Shortall by the Company pursuant to the Restricted Stock Agreement, dated November 14, 2014, became fully vested. The Company recorded $3.5 million in share-based compensation expense relating to this vesting and reversed $3.3 million in expense which related to the original grant.
Pursuant to the Shortall Agreement, the Company and Mr. Shortall executed a mutual release of claims. In addition, Mr. Shortall agreed to assign all inventions and works created by Mr. Shortall during his employment with the Company, to the extent that any such inventions and works were not previously assigned to the Company. Mr. Shortall also agreed to continue to comply with the confidentiality, non-solicitation and non-compete obligations under the Shortall Employment Agreement and to certain trading restrictions with respect to the shares of Common Stock which he holds.
The Shortall Agreement contains customary representations and warranties on the part of Mr. Shortall.
On March 11, 2016, the Company and Mr. Shortall entered into a Consulting Agreement (the “Shortall Consulting Agreement”), pursuant to which Mr. Shortall agreed to provide to the Company consulting, organizational and strategic services until March 11, 2018, as directed or authorized from time to time by the Board or the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (collectively, the “Shortall Services”). On July 28, 2016, the Shortall Consulting Agreement was terminated as a result of Mr. Shortall’s failure to fulfill his duties under the Shortall Consulting Agreement pursuant to Paragraph 6 thereof.
94
Pursuant to the Shortall Consulting Agreement, Mr. Shortall agreed to provide the Shortall Services exclusively to the Company and to not render any type of services to a competitor of the Company’s business from March 11, 2016 unt
il March 11, 2018.
In consideration of the Shortall Services, the Company had agreed to (i) pay to Mr. Shortall an amount equal to twelve thousand five hundred dollars per calendar month from March 11, 2016 until March 11, 2018; (ii) issue to Mr. Shortall 1,000 shares of Common Stock per calendar month from March 11, 2016 until March 11, 2018; and (iii) if prior to March 11, 2021 the per share closing price of the Common Stock exceeded certain thresholds, issue to Mr. Shortall a number of shares of Common Stock (based on the stock price milestone that is achieved), up to a maximum of 100,000 shares of Common Stock. As Mr. Shortall was considered to be a “related party” of the Company under the Listing Rules of the Australian Securities Exchange (“ASX”), the Company determined that the above-described issuances of shares under the Consulting Agreement would be subject to shareholder approval under ASX Listing Rule 10.11. As a result of the findings from the Investigation, the Company has determined not to issue these shares and therefore will not seek shareholder approval for the issuance.
The Company and Dr. Mojdeh entered into a General Release effective as of March 14, 2016 (the “Mojdeh Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay to Dr. Mojdeh the following cash payments: (i) $0.4 million, which amount represents twelve months of severance pay at Dr. Mojdeh’s base salary as of March 11, 2016, to be paid in equal installments over a twelve-month period; and (ii) $32 thousand in respect of Dr. Mojdeh’s unused vacation time, to be
paid in a lump sum. The Company also agreed to pay to Dr. Mojdeh an amount equal to $0.3 million, to be paid in equal installments over a twelve-month period, which amount represents Dr. Mojdeh’s target bonus pursuant to the Employment Agreement, effective as of July 1, 2012, between the Company and Dr. Mojdeh, as amended (the “Mojdeh Employment Agreement”). In addition, the Company agreed to pay up to $20 thousand of the legal fees incurred by Dr. Mojdeh in connection with the Mojdeh Agreement and to pay for the cost of Dr. Mojdeh’s group health coverage under any Company benefit plan for twelve months in accordance with COBRA. The cash payments described in this paragraph were not paid to Dr. Mojdeh as such amounts (other than the $20 thousand payment for the legal fees incurred by Dr. Mojdeh in connection with the Mojdeh Agreement) were offset in full by withholding obligations of the Company as a result of such share issuance to Dr. Mojdeh and the vesting of restricted shares described below.
Pursuant to the Mojdeh Agreement, the Company granted to Dr. Mojdeh on March 14, 2016 380,000 fully vested and transferable shares of Common Stock. The Company recorded $3.3 million in share-based compensation expense related to this issuance. Under the Mojdeh Agreement, 16,750 unvested restricted shares that were granted to Dr. Mojdeh by the Company pursuant to the Restricted Stock Agreements, dated May 28, 2013 and May 15, 2014, became fully vested.
Pursuant to the Mojdeh Agreement, the Company and Dr. Mojdeh executed a mutual release of claims. In addition, Dr. Mojdeh agreed to assign all inventions and works created by Dr. Mojdeh during his employment with the Company. Dr. Mojdeh also agreed to continue to comply with the confidentiality, non-solicitation and non-compete obligations under the Mojdeh Employment Agreement and to certain trading restrictions with respect to the shares of Common Stock which he holds.
The Mojdeh Agreement contains customary representations and warranties on the part of Dr. Mojdeh.
On July 25, 2016, the Company’s employment of Mark Iampietro as the Company’s Vice President of Quality and Regulatory Affairs and Chief Compliance Officer was ended by the Company without cause. Pursuant to the Employment Agreement, dated November 6, 2014, by and between the Company and Mr. Iampietro, Mr. Iampietro is entitled to (i) receive $252,000 over a period of 12 months following the termination, which amount represents Mr. Iampietro’s base salary as of the termination, (ii) continue to receive group health benefits for a period of 12 months following the termination, and (iii) receive $88,200 over a period of 12 months following the termination, which amount represents the amount of the bonus earned by and paid to Mr. Iampietro in 2015 as well as the target bonus for which Mr. Iampietro was eligible to earn in 2016. In addition, all of Mr. Iampietro’s outstanding and unvested options and other stock-based awards immediately vested.
On July 28, 2016:
|
•
|
the Board appointed Michael E. Kamarck to serve as a member of the Board;
|
|
•
|
the Board appointed Ian Hanson as the Company’s Chief Operating Officer in addition to his roles as the Company’s Senior Vice President;
|
|
•
|
due to results of the Investigation, Dennis P. Pyers was removed from his position as the Company’s Senior Vice President, Controller, Treasurer and Chief Accounting Officer and was appointed as the Company’s Senior Advisor, Special Projects; and
|
|
•
|
the Board appointed David Hastings as the Company’s Chief Accounting Officer and Treasurer in addition to his roles as the Company’s Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer;
|
|
•
|
the Board appointed Stephanie Walters as Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary; and
|
95
|
•
|
the Board appointed Molly Weaver, Ph.D., as Vice President of Quality and Regulatory Affa
irs and Chief Compliance Officer.
|
16. Fair Value Measurements
The Company categorizes its assets and liabilities measured at fair value into a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used in pricing the asset or liability. The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:
Level 1
— Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2
— Observable inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1, such as quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data.
Level 3
— Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. This includes certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar techniques that use significant unobservable inputs.
The levels in the fair value hierarchy within which a fair value measurement in its entirety falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety.
The following table presents the Company’s liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basis of Fair Value Measurement
|
|
|
|
Total Fair
Value
Measurements
|
|
|
Quoted Market
Prices in Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
|
|
|
Significant
Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
|
|
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
June 30, 2016:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty agreement liability
|
|
$
|
5,120
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
5,120
|
|
Warrant liability
|
|
|
3,351
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,351
|
|
Derivative liability
|
|
|
347
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
347
|
|
June 30, 2015:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty agreement liability
|
|
$
|
9,930
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
9,930
|
|
The following table presents the changes in the fair value of the level 3 financial instruments for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015.
|
|
Royalty
Agreement
liability
|
|
|
Preferred
Stock
Conversion
Liability
|
|
|
Warrant
Liability
|
|
|
Derivative
Liability
|
|
June 30, 2014
|
|
$
|
6,400
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Royalty payments
|
|
|
(749
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Increase in royalty liability
|
|
|
4,279
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
June 30, 2015
|
|
$
|
9,930
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Initial measurement
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,424
|
|
|
|
12,539
|
|
|
|
1,672
|
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
(1,227
|
)
|
|
|
(280
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Non-cash conversions
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(8,341
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Increase (decrease) in liability
|
|
|
(3,583
|
)
|
|
|
4,197
|
|
|
|
(9,188
|
)
|
|
|
(1,325
|
)
|
June 30, 2016
|
|
$
|
5,120
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
3,351
|
|
|
$
|
347
|
|
Following is a description of the valuation methodologies used to measure the royalty agreement liability, the warrant liability, and the derivative liability. There have been no changes in the methodology used during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016.
The fair value of the royalty agreement liability is based on a discounted cash flow methodology under the income approach based on the present value sum of payments expected to be made in the future. The fair value is estimated by applying a risk adjusted discount rate to the expected royalty payment stream. These fair value estimates are most sensitive to changes in the payment stream and royalty rates.
96
The fair v
alue of the warrant liability is based on a Black-Scholes valuation. The fair value estimates are most sensitive to changes in the Company’s share price.
The fair value of the derivative liability is based on the average of a Monte Carlo model and a lattice model. The fair value estimates are most sensitive to changes in the Company’s share price.
Other Financial Instruments
The carrying amount of the Company’s cash equivalents, which includes certificates of deposit, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate fair value due to the short term maturities of these items. The estimated fair value of the Company’s debt approximates its carrying value based upon the rates that the Company would currently be able to receive for similar instruments of comparable maturity.
17. Related Party Transactions
Administrative and Consulting Fees
The Company has an agreement with a consulting firm, of which a member of the Company’s board of directors is the principal. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company pays a fee for finance, accounting and secretarial consulting services within Australia. Amounts paid to the consulting entity during the fiscal years ending June 30, 2016, 2015 and 2014 were $0.2 million, $0.2 million and $0.2 million, respectively.
Loan from Mr. Shortall
On September 30, 2015, the Company obtained a loan in the amount of $600,000 from Alan Shortall, the Company’s former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. During February 2016, the loan was repaid in full including payment of interest to Mr. Shortall at the minimum applicable federal rate, which interest was less than $2,000.
Bosnjak Mortgage Correspondence
In 2015, Mr. Shortall and Mr. Bosnjak, without authorization from or knowledge of the Company or its Board, caused to be transmitted to a mortgage broker for Mr. Shortall from Mr. Bosnjak correspondence that contained inaccurate statements about the Company’s financial support for Mr. Shortall’s purchase of and relocation to a new home.
The investigation into the matters described in this paragraph did not identify any financial loss to the Company and the Company has corrected the inaccurate statements to the mortgage broker.
Shortall Fund Transfers
Mr. Shortall deposited $2,264,475 (the “Shortall Funds”) of his own funds into the Company’s bank account on June 29, 2015 and then caused the Company to disburse from the Shortall Funds $1,351,553 to third parties to complete Mr. Shortall’s purchase of his new home on July 23, 2015, and the remainder back to himself on July 28, 2015.
In addition to the Shortall Funds, during fiscal years 2014 through 2016, under Mr. Shortall’s direction, the Company accepted checks and wires from Mr. Shortall in the aggregate amount of approximately $300,000 and disbursed the same amount of funds to Mr. Shortall or his designees but did not deposit such checks or receive such wires from Mr. Shortall until eight days to thirty-six days after the Company’s disbursement of the funds. The Company believes such transactions constituted loans from the Company to Mr. Shortall. The amount of such loans were approximately $6,000, $224,000, and $70,000 in fiscal years 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. In addition, Mr. Shortall wired funds and provided personal checks to the Company in the aggregate amount of approximately $91,000, not including the Shortall Funds, which wires and checks the Company received and deposited, as applicable, prior to or within a day of the Company disbursing the same amounts to Mr. Shortall. The amount of such transfers were approximately $0, $28,000 and $63,000 in fiscal years 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The investigation into the matters described in this section entitled “Shortall Fund Transfers” did not identify any financial loss to the Company.
Bosnjak Loan Payments and Unreimbursed Personal Expenses
Between July 2014 and July 2015, Mr. Shortall caused approximately $62,000 in Company funds to be transmitted to a third party, which fund transmittals the Company believes were made for the purpose of satisfying certain of Mr. Bosnjak’s commitments to pay interest to such third party on a loan secured by some of Mr. Bosnjak’s shares of Company stock (the “Bosnjak Loan
97
Payments”). The Company believes that the Bosnjak Loan Payments con
stituted loans from the Company to Mr. Bosnjak, and the Company is evaluating potential actions to recover these funds.
The collection of such amounts is uncertain and the Company has recorded approximately $12,000 and $50,000 as Selling, General and Admin
istrative Expense in fiscal year 2016 and 2015, respectively.
From fiscal 2014 through fiscal 2016, Mr. Shortall caused the Company to pay for personal expenses, approximately $88,000 of which was not repaid to the Company (the “Unreimbursed Personal Expenses”). The Company believes the Unreimbursed Personal Expenses constituted loans from the Company to Mr. Shortall, and the Company has demanded repayment of the Unreimbursed Personal Expenses. The collection of such amounts is uncertain and the Company has recorded approximately $0, $60,000 and $28,000 as Selling, General and Administrative Expense in fiscal year 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Advanced Withholding Payments
In March 2016, July 2015 and December 2014, in connection with the vesting of restricted shares of the Company’s common stock, the Company paid associated withholding taxes on behalf of three executive officers, its Vice President of Quality and Regulatory Affairs and Chief Compliance Officer, its Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, and its former President and Chief Operating Officer, in an aggregate amount of approximately $240,000 prior to being reimbursed by such executive officers. With the exception of one $400 underpayment, which the Company collected in July, 2016, such executive officers repaid the Company in full within a range of 18 to 120 days from the date of the withholding payment. The Company believes such advances constituted loans.
The amount of such advances were approximately $146,000, $94,000 and $0 in fiscal years 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The March 2016 delayed repayments are appropriately reflected as a receivable in the Company’s financial statements as of June 30, 2016 and were reimbursed to the Company during July 2016.
18. Quarterly Results (unaudited)
|
|
Quarter
Ended
September 30,
2015
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
December 31,
2015
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
March 31,
2016
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
June 30,
2016
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Year Ended June 30, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,187
|
|
|
$
|
4,499
|
|
|
$
|
822
|
|
|
$
|
6,333
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(25,864
|
)
|
|
|
(25,423
|
)
|
|
|
(41,779
|
)
|
|
|
(7,717
|
)
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
$
|
(2.08
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.98
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.68
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.47
|
)
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
September 30,
2014
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
December 31,
2014
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
March 31,
2015
|
|
|
Quarter
Ended
June 30,
2015
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Year Ended June 30, 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,380
|
|
|
$
|
5,403
|
|
|
$
|
2,921
|
|
|
$
|
3,454
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(22,262
|
)
|
|
|
(19,387
|
)
|
|
|
(23,105
|
)
|
|
|
(26,095
|
)
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
$
|
(2.12
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.99
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.16
|
)
|
Per share amounts for the quarters may not add to the annual amount due to differences in the weighted average common shares outstanding during the period.
19. Subsequent Events
On October 17, 2016, the Company received a notice from the Listing Qualifications department of NASDAQ stating that, because the Company did not maintain a minimum Market Value of Listed Securities (“MVLS”) of $50,000,000 for the last 30 consecutive business days, the Company
was no longer in compliance with NASDAQ Listing Rule 5450(b)(2)(A).
The Company has been provided a period of 180 calendar days, or until April 17, 2017, to regain compliance with the minimum MVLS listing requirement. If at any time on or before April 17, 2017, the MVLS of the Company’s common stock closes at $50,000,000 or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days, NASDAQ will provide the Company with written confirmation that the Company has achieved compliance with the minimum MVLS listing requirement and the matter will be closed.
98
In the event that the Compa
ny does not regain compliance with the minimum MVLS listing requirement on or before April 17, 2017, NASDAQ will provide the Company with written notification that its securities are subject to delisting. At that time, the Company would be permitted to ap
peal the delisting determination to a NASDAQ Hearings Panel or apply to transfer its common stock to The NASDAQ Capital Market (provided that it satisfied the requirement for continued listing on that market).
99