AKER Akers Biosciences Inc

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

You should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all of the other information included in this report, in considering our business and prospects. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Overview

We have been focused on the development, production and sales of rapid screening and testing products designed to deliver quick and cost-effective medical devices to healthcare providers and consumers. On November 7, 2018, we announced that our board of directors had initiated a process to evaluate strategic alternatives to maximize shareholder value. This process will consider a range of potential strategic alternatives including, but not limited to, business combinations, while simultaneously supporting the Company’s management and employees in the execution of the Company’s current business activities. On November 19, 2018, the Company further announced that the process to evaluate strategic alternatives will consider a range of potential strategic alternatives including, but not limited to, business combinations in alternative sectors including cannabis related industries. There can be no assurances that the Company will be successful in such process.

Risks Related to Our Medical Device Business

We have a history of operating losses and we cannot guarantee that we can ever achieve sustained profitability.

We have recorded a net loss attributable to common shareholders in most reporting periods since our inception. Our net loss for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $10,849,034 and $7,366,310, respectively. Our accumulated deficit at December 31, 2018 was $115,694,881. Our strategy for the medical device business is to leverage where possible its distributor relationships, while exploring strategies for further reducing its costs. Overall, we are working to reduce our cash burn in order to have sufficient cash funds available to execute on a transaction which would result from our pursuit of strategic alternatives. There can be no assurance of success in reducing our loss or becoming profitable.

Due to our dependence on a limited number of customers and the loss of any such customer would have a material adverse effect on our operating results and prospects.

As of December 31, 2018, we had two principal U.S. customers; Cardinal Health, Inc. (“Cardinal Health”) and Fisher Healthcare (“Fisher”) each has the non-exclusive right to distribute PIFA Heparin/PF4 Rapid Assays within the U.S. For the year ended December 31, 2018, Cardinal Health and Fisher accounted for approximately 69% of the Company’s product revenue.

Because of our dependence on a limited number of key customers, the loss of a major customer (or loss of a key program with a major customer), or any significant reduction in orders by a major customer or termination of the any of their distribution agreements would materially affect our business, our results of operations and our financial condition. We expect that sales to relatively few customers will continue to account for a significant percentage of our net sales for the foreseeable future, however there can be no assurance that any of these customers or any of our other customers will continue to utilize our products or our services at current levels.

Due to our dependence on a limited number of customers, we are subject to a concentration of credit risk.

As of December 31, 2018, two customers accounted for 73% of our trade receivables as compared to the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 where 59% of trade receivables are attributed to these customers. In the case of insolvency by one of our significant customers, a trade receivable with respect to that customer might not be collectible, might not be fully collectible, or might be collectible over longer than normal terms, each of which could adversely affect our financial position.

The Company’s business would suffer if the Company were unable to acquire adequate sources of supply.

We use a diverse and broad range of raw materials in the manufacturing of our products. We purchase all of our raw materials and select items, such as packaging, from external suppliers. In addition, we purchase some supplies from single sources for reasons of proprietary know-how, quality assurance, sole source availability, or due to regulatory qualification requirements and disruption of these sources could have, at a minimum, a temporary adverse effect on shipments and the financial results of the Company. We work closely with our suppliers to ensure continuity of supply while maintaining high quality and reliability. Any prolonged inability to obtain certain materials or components could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations and could result in damage to its relationships with its customers and, accordingly, adversely affect the Company’s business.

During the first half of 2018, we experienced lower yields in the process of extracting antigen from the supplier provided platelets used to produce our PIFA Heparin product. At these yield levels, our production of this product was under target levels, which had resulted in backorders. Our engineers and representatives from our supplier have been working together to adjust our processes in order to restore the yield to appropriate levels. Furthermore, we are evaluating and testing a solution that may involve one or more alternative antigen suppliers and processes.

We may require additional capital in the future to support our operations. If we do not obtain any such additional financing, if required, our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations will be adversely affected.

We expect cash flows from our current operations to be inadequate to cover our anticipated expenses. We may need to obtain significant additional financing, both in the short and long-term to cover operating expenses and to fund potential acquisitions. We may not be able to secure adequate additional financing when needed on acceptable terms, or at all. To execute our business strategy, we may issue additional equity securities in public or private offerings. If we cannot secure sufficient additional funding we may be forced to forego strategic opportunities and/or delay, scale back or eliminate future product development which would harm our business and our ability to generate positive cash flows in the future.

Because we may not be able to maintain necessary regulatory clearances for some of our products, we may not generate revenue in the amounts we expect, or in the amounts necessary to continue our business.

All of our existing products are subject to regulation in the U.S. by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and/or other domestic and international governmental, public health agencies, regulatory bodies or non-governmental organizations. In particular, we are subject to strict governmental controls on the development, manufacture, labeling, distribution and marketing of our products. The process of obtaining required approvals or clearances for a potential new product varies according to the nature of and uses for a specific product. These processes can involve lengthy and detailed laboratory testing, human clinical trials, sampling activities, and other costly, time-consuming procedures. The submission of an application to a regulatory authority does not guarantee that the authority will grant an approval or clearance for the product. Each authority may impose its own requirements and can delay or refuse to grant approval or clearance, even though a product has been approved in another country.

The time taken to obtain approval or clearance varies depending on the nature of the application and may result in the passage of a significant period of time from the date of submission of the application. Delays in the approval or clearance processes increase the risk that we will not succeed in introducing or selling the subject products, and we may be required to abandon a proposed product after devoting substantial time and resources to its development.

Changes in domestic and foreign government regulations could increase our costs and could require us to undergo additional trials or procedures, or could make it impractical or impossible for us to market our products for certain uses, in certain markets, or at all.

Changes in government regulations may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations because we may have to incur additional expenses if we are required to change or implement new testing, manufacturing and control procedures. If we are required to devote resources to develop such new procedures, we may not have sufficient resources to devote to research and development, marketing, or other activities that are critical to our business.

We are subject to regulations of various government agencies and if we are unable to comply with such regulations it would materially affect our business .

We can manufacture and sell our products only if we comply with certain regulations of government agencies. As a U.S. manufacturer, we must operate our production facility in accordance with the requirements established by the FDA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). As such, we have implemented a quality system that is intended to comply with applicable regulations. Our manufacturing plant is subject to periodic inspections by the FDA, and at last inspection, the facility was found to be in substantial compliance with current good manufacturing practice (cGMP) requirements. Although the Company is dedicated to remaining in compliance with such practices, the cGMP requirements could change and negatively impact our ability to manufacture our products without modifications to our operating procedures or changes to our equipment or human resource allocations which may materially affect our business.

If we fail to obtain regulatory approval in foreign jurisdictions, then we cannot market our products in those jurisdictions.

We plan to market some of our products in foreign jurisdictions, initially in China and the European Union (“EU”). Many foreign countries in which we market or may market our products have regulatory bodies and restrictions similar to those of the FDA. International sales are subject to foreign government regulation, the requirements of which vary substantially from country to country. The time required to obtain approval by a foreign country may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval and the requirements may differ. Companies are now required to obtain a CE Mark, which shows conformance with the requirements of applicable European Conformity directives, prior to the sale of some medical devices within the European Union. Some of our current products that require CE Markings have them. We may be required to conduct additional testing or to provide additional information, resulting in additional expenses, to obtain necessary approvals. If we fail to obtain approval in such foreign jurisdictions, we would not be able to sell our products in such jurisdictions, thereby reducing the potential revenue from the sale of our products.

We may be unable to market our products outside the United States if our products cannot meet certain requirements of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act requirements for exporting medical devices.

Any medical device that is legally marketed in the U.S. may be exported anywhere in the world without prior FDA notification or approval. Medical devices that are not FDA-cleared for marketing legally in the U.S. may be exported under section 801(e)(1) of the FD&C Act, provided that they are intended for export only, they are class I or class II devices, and they are:

We cannot guarantee that certain current and future products will meet all of the aforementioned specifications for export which could adversely impact our ability to market our products outside the U.S.

We may be unable to market our products outside the United States if our products cannot meet regulatory requirements of certain countries.

In the European Union, a product that meets the definition of an In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (“IVD”) in accordance with the European Directive (98/79/EC) must receive a regulatory approval known as a CE mark. The letters “CE” are the abbreviation of the French phrase “Conforme Européene,” which means “European conformity.” As such, export of these products to the European Union, and possibly other jurisdictions, without the CE mark is not possible. Although obtaining a CE Mark is often a self-certification process, preparation and submission of the technical file to an Authorized Representative in the EU, and their verification of a company’s compliance with the Directive, can be a lengthy process. Some of the Company’s current and future products may fall within the IVD categorization. As of the date of this filing, the Company has received CE marks for eight of its commercialized products and product components: PIFA Heparin/PF4 Rapid Assay; Heparin/PF4 Serum Panels; Tri-Cholesterol “Check”.

Modifications to our devices may require additional FDA approval which could force us to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until we obtain new approvals.

After a device receives a 510(k) clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, requires a new 510(k) clearance or could require a Premarket approval (“PMA”). PMA is the FDA process of scientific and regulatory review to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Class III medical devices. Class III devices are those that support or sustain human life, are of substantial importance in preventing impairment of human health, or which present a potential, unreasonable risk of illness or injury. Currently the Company does not market devices within this Class III category nor does it intend to in the foreseeable future. However, the FDA requires each manufacturer to make this determination in the first instance, but the FDA can review any decision. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s decision not to seek a new 510(k) clearance, the agency may retroactively require the manufacturer to seek 510(k) clearance or PMA approval. The FDA also can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or recall the modified devices until 510(k) clearance or PMA approval is obtained. We have modified one of our prescription use, 510(k)-cleared devices, specifically the PIFA Heparin/PF4 Rapid Assay to include our seraSTAT device. However, we determined that, in our view, based on FDA guidance as to when to submit a 510(k) notification for changes to a cleared device, new 510(k) clearances or PMA approvals were not required. We cannot assure you that the FDA would agree with any of our decisions not to seek 510(k) clearance or PMA approval. If the FDA requires us to seek 510(k) clearance or PMA approval for any modification, we also may be required to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until we obtain a new 510(k) clearance or PMA approval.

We are subject to inspection and market surveillance by the FDA to determine compliance with regulatory requirements. If the FDA finds that we have failed to comply, the agency can institute a wide variety of enforcement actions which may materially affect our business operations.

We are subject to inspection and market surveillance by the FDA to determine compliance with regulatory requirements. If the FDA finds that we have failed to comply, the agency can institute a wide variety of enforcement actions, ranging from a public warning letter to more severe sanctions such as:

The FDA also has the authority to request repair, replacement or refund of the cost of any medical device manufactured or distributed by us. Our failure to comply with applicable requirements could lead to an enforcement action that may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We may not have the resources to conduct clinical protocols sufficient to yield data suitable for publication in peer-reviewed journals and our inability to do so in the future could have an adverse effect on marketing our products effectively.

In order for our products targeted for use by hospital laboratory professionals and healthcare providers to be widely adopted, clinical protocols that are designed to yield data suitable for publication in peer-reviewed journals should be carried out. These studies are often time-consuming, labor-intensive and expensive to execute. The Company has not had the resources to effectively implement such clinical programs within its clinical development activities and may not be able to do so in the future. In addition, if a protocol is initiated, the results of which may ultimately not support the anticipated positioning and benefit proposition for the product. Either of these scenarios could hinder our ability to market our products and revenue may decline.

If we fail to establish, maintain and expand relationships with distributors, sales of our products would decline.

The Company does not control the efforts of its distributors and its distributors are not prohibited from selling competing products. Our ability to sell our products depends largely on the Company’s relationships with such distributors. Accordingly, we are subject to the risk that they may not commit the financial and other resources to market and sell our products to our level of expectation, they may experience financial hardship or they may otherwise terminate our relationship on short notice. In the U.S. clinical laboratory marketplace, many of our existing and potential customers purchase our products through our two national distributors, Cardinal Health and Fisher Health. In addition, the Company relies on its distribution network to negotiate pricing arrangements and contracts with Group Purchasing Organizations and their affiliated hospitals and other members. For the year ended December 31, 2018, two customers generated 57% and 14%, or 71% in the aggregate, of the Company’s revenue. For the year ended December 31, 2017, three customers generated 32%, 26% and 15%, or 73% in the aggregate, of the Company’s revenue. In the future, if we are unable to maintain existing relationships, our competitive position would likely suffer and our business would be harmed.

Our business is vulnerable to the availability of raw materials, our ability to forecast customer demand and our ability to manage production capacity.

Our ability to meet customer demand depends, in part, on our production capacity and on obtaining supplies, a number of which can only be obtained from a single supplier or a limited number of suppliers. A reduction or disruption in our production capacity or our supplies could delay products and fulfillment of orders and otherwise negatively impact our business.

We must accurately predict both the demand for our products and the lead times required to obtain the necessary components and materials. If we overestimate demand, we may experience underutilized capacity and excess inventory levels. If we underestimate demand, we may miss delivery deadlines and sales opportunities and incur additional costs for labor overtime, equipment overuse and logistical complexities. Additionally, our production capacity could be affected by manufacturing problems. Difficulties in the production process could reduce yields or interrupt production, and, as a result, we may not be able to deliver products on time or in a cost-effective, competitive manner. Our failure to adequately manage our capacity could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our ability to meet customer demand also depends on our ability to obtain timely and adequate delivery of materials, parts and components from our suppliers. We generally do not maintain contracts with any of our key suppliers. From time to time, suppliers may extend lead times, limit the amounts supplied to us or increase prices due to capacity constraints or other factors. Supply disruptions may also occur due to shortages in critical materials. In addition, a number of our raw materials are obtained from a single supplier. Many of our suppliers must undertake a time-consuming qualification process before we can incorporate their raw materials into our production process. If we are unable to obtain materials from a qualified supplier, it can take up to a year to qualify a new supplier, assuming an alternative source of supply is available. A reduction or interruption in supplies or a significant increase in the price of one or more supplies could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Some of our finished goods, including our PIFA products and control materials related to PIFA Heparin/PF4 assays, are temperature-sensitive.

Proper packaging and time in transit are critical to the stability of some of our clinical laboratory products when they are en route to our distributors or end users. If certain specialized packaging materials cannot be obtained, and/or if our contracted common carriers, or those of our distributors, cannot meet product-specific delivery requirements, our products may not perform as intended and may lead to requests for product replacement. If such issues become widespread it could hurt our reputation and we could potentially lose customers which would adversely affect our business.

Also, given the issue of temperature sensitivity, time in transit may limit our ability to service potential markets outside of the U.S. for those products, especially those with geographies that do not allow for shipment and customs clearance within four business days. This could adversely affect our potential to generate revenue for some products on an international level.

Demands of third-party payors, cost reduction pressures among our customers and restrictive reimbursement practices may adversely affect our revenue.

Our ability to negotiate favorable contracts with non-governmental payors, including managed-care plans or Group Purchasing Organizations (“GPOs”), even if facilitated by our distributors, may significantly affect revenue and operating results. Our customers continue to face cost reduction pressures that may cause them to curtail their use of, or reimbursement for some of our products, to negotiate reduced fees or other concessions or to delay payment. Furthermore, the increasing leverage of organized buying groups among non-governmental payors may reduce market prices for our products and services, thereby reducing our profitability. Reductions in price increases or the amounts received from current customers or lower pricing for our products to new customers could have a material adverse effect on the financial position, cash flows and results of operations.

Failure to obtain medical reimbursement for our products, as well as a changing regulatory and reimbursement environment, may impact our business.

The U.S. healthcare regulatory environment may change in a way that restricts our ability to market our products due to medical coverage or reimbursement limits. Sales of our diagnostic tests will depend in part on the extent to which the costs of such tests are covered by health maintenance, managed care, and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by government health payor administration authorities, private health coverage insurers and other third-party payors. These healthcare payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services. The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal and state governments. Accordingly, our products may not be considered to be cost effective, and reimbursement may not be available or sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive basis. Legislation and regulations affecting reimbursement for our products may change at any time and in ways that are difficult to predict and these changes may have an adverse effect to us.

CMS, the federal agency responsible for administering the Medicare program, along with its contractors establishes coverage and reimbursement policies for the Medicare program. In addition, private payors often follow the coverage and reimbursement policies of Medicare. We cannot assure you that government or private third-party payors will cover and reimburse the procedures using our products in whole or in part in the future or that payment rates will be adequate.

For some of our products, our success in non-U.S. markets may depend upon the availability of coverage and reimbursement from the third-party payors through which health care providers are paid in those markets. Health care payment systems in non-U.S. markets vary significantly by country, and include single-payor, government managed systems as well as systems in which private payors and government-managed systems exist, side-by-side. For some of our products, our ability to achieve market acceptance or significant sales volume in international markets may be dependent on the availability of reimbursement for our products under health care payment systems in such markets. There can be no assurance that reimbursement for our products will be obtained or that such reimbursement will be adequate.

We may fail to retain qualified personnel.

We have substantially reduced the number of our employees in order to reduce our costs. Accordingly, retaining such personnel in the future will be critical to our success. If we fail to retain and motivate these highly skilled personnel, we may be unable to continue our operating activities, and this could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

We rely on the key executive officer of the management team.

We are dependent on the management team of Akers Bio to execute against its business plan. Failure could result in delays in product development, loss of customers and sales and diversion of management resources, which could adversely affect our operating results.

Expenses incurred with respect to monitoring, protecting, and defending our intellectual property rights could adversely affect our business.

Competitors and others may infringe on our intellectual property rights, or may allege that we have infringed on theirs. Monitoring infringement and misappropriation of intellectual property can be difficult and expensive, and we may not be able to detect infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary rights.

We may incur substantial costs as a result of litigation or other proceedings relating to patent and other intellectual property rights and we may be unable to protect our rights to, or use of, our technology.

Some or all of our patent applications may not result in the issue of patents, or the claims of any issued patents may not afford meaningful protection for our technologies or products. In addition, patents issued to us or our licensors, if any, may be challenged and subsequently narrowed, invalidated, found unenforceable or circumvented. Patent litigation is widespread in the biotechnology industry and could harm our business. Litigation might be necessary to protect our patent position. Patentability, invalidity, freedom-to-operate or other opinions may be required to determine the scope and validity of third-party proprietary rights. If we choose to go to court to stop a third party from using the inventions protected by our patent, that third party would have the right to ask the court to rule that such patents are invalid and/or should not be enforced against that third party. These lawsuits are expensive and we may not have the required resources to pursue such litigation or to protect our patent rights. In addition, there is a risk that the court will decide that our patents are not valid or that we cannot stop the other party from using their inventions. There is also the risk that, even if the validity of these patents is upheld, the court will find that the third party’s activities do not infringe our rights in these patents.

Furthermore, a third party may claim that we are infringing the third party’s patent rights and may go to court to stop us from engaging in our normal operations and activities, including making or selling our product candidates. These lawsuits are costly and could affect our results of operations and divert the attention of managerial and technical personnel. There is a risk that a court would decide that we are infringing the third party’s patents and would order us to stop the activities covered by the patents. In addition, there is a risk that a court will order us to pay the other party’s treble damages or attorneys’ fees for having violated the other party’s patents. The biotechnology industry has produced a proliferation of patents, and it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our products or methods of use either do not infringe the claims of the relevant patent and/or that the third-party patent claims are invalid, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity in the United Sates is difficult since it requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents.

In addition, changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may materially diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection. In September 2011, the U.S. Congress passed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) which became effective in March 2013. The AIA reforms United States patent law in part by changing the standard for patent approval for certain patents from a “first to invent” standard to a “first to file” standard and developing a post-grant review system. It is too early to determine what the effect or impact the AIA will have on the operation of our business and the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. However, the AIA and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. Because some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until eighteen months after filing, and publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries. We cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our issued patents or our pending applications or that we were the first to invent the technology (pre-AIA) or first to file (post-AIA). Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering technology similar or the same as ours. Any such patent application may have priority over our patent application and could further require us to obtain rights to such technologies in order to carry on our business. If another party has filed a U.S. patent application on inventions similar to or the same as ours, we may have to participate in an interference or other proceeding in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or the USPTO, or a court to determine priority of invention in the United States, for pre-AIA applications and patents. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial, and it is possible that such efforts would be unsuccessful, resulting in a loss of our U.S. patent position with respect to such inventions. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources.

We may be subject to claims that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.

As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry, we employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although the Company has no knowledge of any claims against us, we may be subject to claims that these employees or the Company have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. To date, none of our employees have been subject to such claims.

We may be at risk that our former employees may wrongfully use or disclose our trade secrets.

In addition to patent protection, we rely heavily upon know-how and trade secret protection, as well as non-disclosure agreements and invention assignment agreements with our employees, consultants, and third parties, to protect our confidential and proprietary information, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. In addition to contractual measures, we try to protect the confidential nature of our proprietary information using physical and technological security measures. Such measures may not, for example, in the case of misappropriation of a trade secret by an employee, former employee, consultant, former consultant or third party with authorized access, provide adequate protection for our proprietary information. Our security measures may not prevent an employee or consultant from misappropriating our trade secrets and providing them to a competitor, and recourse we take against such misconduct may not provide an adequate remedy to protect our interests fully. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret can be difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, trade secrets may be independently developed by others in a manner that could prevent legal recourse by us. If any of our confidential or proprietary information, such as our trade secrets, were to be disclosed or misappropriated, or if any such information was independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position could be harmed.

If we deliver products with defects, we may be subject to product recalls or negative publicity, our credibility may be harmed, market acceptance of our products may decrease and we may be exposed to liability.

The manufacturing and marketing of professional and consumer diagnostics involve an inherent risk of product liability claims. For example, a defect in one of our diagnostic products could lead to a false positive or false negative result, affecting the eventual diagnosis. Our product development and production are extremely complex and could expose our products to defects. Manufacturing and design defects could lead to recalls, either voluntary or required by the FDA or other government authorities, and could result in the removal of a product from the market. Defects in our products could also harm our reputation, lead to product liability claims, claims that inaccurate test results lead to death or injury, negative publicity and decrease sales of our products. We have obtained $10,000,000 of product liability insurance and we have never received a product liability claim, and have generally not seen product liability claims for screening tests that are accompanied by appropriate disclaimers. However, in the event there is a claim, this insurance may not fully cover our potential liabilities. In addition, as we attempt to bring new products to market, we may need to increase our product liability coverage which would be a significant additional expense that we may not be able to afford. If we are unable to obtain sufficient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost to protect us, we may be forced to abandon efforts to commercialize our products or those of our strategic partners, which would reduce our revenue.

Regulatory restrictions in the People’s Republic of China for foreign exchange could adversely affect our ability to transact business with our trade partners.

China maintains a ‘closed’ capital account, meaning companies, banks and individuals cannot move money in or out of the country except in accordance with strict rules. Difficulty making payments to key vendors or in receiving payment from trade partners could have material adverse effects on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to our Pursuit of Strategic Alternatives

We may face risks in connection with potential acquisitions.

We may look to acquire businesses that complement or expand our operations as part of our business strategy going forward. We may not be able to successfully identify attractive acquisition candidates or negotiate favorable terms in the future. Furthermore, our ability to effectively integrate any future acquisitions will depend on, among other things, the adequacy of our implementation plans, the ability of our management to oversee and operate effectively the combined operations and our ability to achieve desired operational efficiencies. If we are unable to successfully integrate the operations of any businesses that we may acquire in the future, our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows could be adversely affected.

If we are unable to make acquisitions and investments, or successfully integrate them into our business, our business could be harmed.

As part of our business strategy, we may acquire other companies or businesses. However, we may not be able to find suitable acquisition candidates, and we may not be able to complete acquisitions on favorable terms, if at all. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, any of which could harm our business and negatively affect our operating results, including:

The Company, if it acquires a new business, will have a limited operating history in such new industry, specifically the Cannabis industry, and may not succeed.

The Company will have a limited operating history within the Cannabis industry and may not succeed. The Company will be subject to all risks inherent in a developing business enterprise. The Company’s likelihood of continued success must be considered in light of the problems, expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays frequently encountered in connection with manufacturing specialty products and the competitive and regulatory environment in which the Company operates. For example, the Cannabis is a new industry that, as a whole, may not succeed, particularly if the Federal government changes course and decides to prosecute those dealing in Cannabis under Federal law. If that happens, there may not be an adequate market for the Company’s products. As a new industry, there are not established players on whose business models the Company can follow or build upon. Similarly, there is limited information about comparable companies available for potential investors to review in making a decision about whether to invest in the Company. Furthermore, as the industrial hemp industry is a new market, it is ripe for technological advancements that could limit or eliminate the need for the Company’s products. Furthermore, unanticipated expenses, problems, and technical difficulties may occur and they may result in material delays in the operation of the Company’s business, in particular with respect to the Company’s new products. The Company may not be able to successfully address these risks and uncertainties or successfully implement the Company’s operating strategies. If the Company fails to do so, such failure could materially harm the Company’s business to the point of having to cease operations and could impair the value of the Company’s common stock to the point investors may lose their entire investment.

Risks Relating to our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock is likely to be volatile and could subject us to litigation.

The market price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of factors that are beyond our control, including, but not limited to:

In addition, if the market for biotech stocks or the stock market in general experiences loss of investor confidence, the trading price of our common stock could decline for reasons unrelated to our business, financial condition or operating results. The trading price of our shares might also decline in reaction to events that affect other companies in our industry, even if these events do not directly affect us. Each of these factors, among others, could harm the value of your investment in our common stock. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market, securities class-action litigation has often been instituted against companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Specifically, on or about June 15, 2018, certain parties have brought certain class action lawsuits against the Company, and a former executive has threatened to sue the Company, Board members, and executives under the New Jersey CEPA, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 34-19.1 over the termination of his employment. Both, the class action lawsuits brought against the Company and CEPA action threatened by a former executive could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm the value of your investment in our common stock and materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

The restatement of our previously issued financial statements contained in our Forms 10-Q for the periods ended June 30, 2017 and September 30, 2017 and the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 may lead to additional risks and uncertainties, including regulatory, stockholder or other actions, loss of investor confidence and negative impacts on our stock price.

Our Audit Committee, after consultation with management and discussing with outside counsel, external auditors and third-party consultants, concluded that our previously issued consolidated financial statements for the quarterly periods ended June 30, 2017 and September 30, 2017 and for the year ended December 31, 2017 should be restated. The Company determined that certain revenue transactions did not qualify for revenue recognition under generally accepted accounting principles, that certain obligations were not recorded as expenses on a timely basis and that the Company did not properly value its inventory. The Company concluded that the impact of applying corrections for these errors was materially different from its previously reported results under its historical practice. As a result, the Company restated its consolidated financial statements for the periods impacted, as more fully described within each of the respective amended reports, as filed on July 13, 2018. Financial information included in our previously filed Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 and our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the periods ended June 30, 2017 and September 30, 2017 and all earnings press releases and similar communications issued by us, for such periods, should not be relied upon and are superseded in their entirety by the above described amended Quarterly and Annual reports.

Accordingly, the Form 10-K, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017 included: (1) changes to our Consolidated Balance Sheet, our Consolidated Statement of Operations and our Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity as of December 31, 2018; (2) expanded risk factor disclosures within Part I, Item 1A, and (3) additional disclosures and conclusions regarding Controls and Procedures in Part II, Item 9A.

As a result of the 2017 restatements and associated non-reliance on previously issued financial information, we have become subject to a number of additional costs and risks, including unanticipated costs for accounting and legal fees in connection with or related to the restatement and the remediation of our ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and material weakness in internal control over financial reporting. Likewise, the attention of our management team has been diverted by these efforts. In addition, we could also be subject to additional shareholder, governmental, regulatory or other actions or demands in connection with the restatement or other matters. Any such proceedings will, regardless of the outcome, consume a significant amount of management’s time and attention and may result in additional legal, accounting, insurance and other costs. If we do not prevail in any such proceedings, we could be required to pay damages or settlement costs. In addition, the restatement and related matters could impair our reputation or could cause our customers, shareholders, or other counterparties to lose confidence in us. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and stock price.

In connection with the restatement of our financial statements for the quarterly periods ended June 30, 2017 and September 30, 2017 and for the year ended December 31, 2017, our management identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, as described in Item 9A, “Control and Procedures” of this Form 10-K. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies in internal controls over financial reporting that results in a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Further, management determined that control deficiencies existed with respect to certain aspects of our historical financial reporting and, accordingly, management has concluded that management’s reports related to the effectiveness of internal and disclosure controls may not have been correct.

Efforts to comply with the applicable provisions of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act will involve significant expenditures, and non-compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act may adversely affect us and the market price of our common stock.

Under current SEC rules, beginning with our fiscal year ending December 31, 2014, we will be required to report on our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and related rules and regulations of the SEC; although, as an emerging growth company, we are exempt from the requirement to provide an auditor attestation to management’s assessment of its internal controls as required by Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We will be required to review on an annual basis our internal control over financial reporting, and on a quarterly and annual basis to evaluate and disclose changes in our internal control over financial reporting. As a result, we expect to incur additional expenses in the near term that may negatively impact our financial performance and our ability to make distributions. This process also will result in a diversion of management’s time and attention. We cannot be certain as to the timing of completion of our evaluation, testing and remediation actions or the impact of the same on our operations, and we may not be able to ensure that the process is effective or that our internal control over financial reporting is or will be effective in a timely manner. In the event that we are unable to maintain or achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules, we and the market price of our common stock may be adversely affected.

If our estimates relating to our critical accounting policies are based on assumptions or judgments that change or prove to be incorrect, our operating results could fall below expectations of financial analysts and investors, resulting in a decline in our stock price.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires our management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses that are not readily apparent from other sources. Our operating results may be adversely affected if our assumptions change or if actual circumstances differ from those in our assumptions, which could cause our operating results to fall below the expectations of financial analysts and investors, resulting in a decline in our stock price. Significant assumptions and estimates used in preparing our financial statements include those related to revenue recognition, inventory, product warranties, allowances for doubtful accounts, stock-based compensation expense and income taxes.

Our ability to grow and compete in the future will be adversely affected if adequate capital is not available to us or not available on terms favorable to us.

Historically, our cash generated from operations has not been sufficient to meet our expenses. We have financed our operations principally through the raising of equity capital, debt and through trade credit with our vendors. Our ability to continue our operations and to pay our obligations when they become due is contingent upon obtaining additional financing. If we are unable to obtain sufficient amounts of additional capital, we may be required to reduce the scope of our planned market development activities, and/or consider reductions in personnel costs or other operating costs. These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

Obligations associated with being a public company require significant company resources and management attention, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the “Exchange Act,” and the other rules and regulations of the SEC, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Exchange Act requires, among other things, that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. These reporting and other obligations place significant demands on our management, administrative, operational and accounting resources, make certain activities more time-consuming and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses. In order to comply with these obligations, we may need to upgrade our systems or create new systems, implement additional financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures, expand or outsource our internal audit function, and hire additional accounting and finance staff. Because our resources are limited compared to many public companies, these requirements may impose a disproportionate financial burden on us. Furthermore, our limited management resources may exacerbate the difficulties in complying with these reporting and other requirements and prevent us from focusing on executing our business strategy. In addition, if we are unable to comply with the financial reporting requirements and other rules that apply to reporting companies, the market price of our common stock could be adversely affected.

As an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” we intend to continue to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” or “smaller reporting companies,” including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and other scaled disclosure requirements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In general, we will remain an “emerging growth company” until December 31, 2019, although a variety of circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, and will remain a “smaller reporting company” for each fiscal year where our public float remains below $75 million as of the last day of the second fiscal quarter of the prior fiscal year. We intend to take advantage of some or all of these exemptions and reduced reporting requirements until we are no longer an “emerging growth company” and/or a “smaller reporting company,” at which time, we expect to incur significant additional expenses and devote substantial management effort toward ensuring compliance with these additional requirements.

Exercise of options or warrants may have a dilutive effect on percentage ownership and may result in a dilution of voting power and an increase in the number of shares of common stock eligible for future resale in the public market, which may negatively impact the trading price of our shares of common stock.

The exercise or conversion of some or all of our outstanding options or warrants could result in significant dilution in the percentage ownership interest of a shareholders’ percentage ownership interest and in a significant dilution of voting rights and earnings per share.

As of March 28, 2019, we had outstanding warrants to purchase up to 2,110,737 shares of our common stock at a weighted exercise price of $3.10 per share.

Additionally, the issuance of up to 10,502 shares of our common stock upon exercise of stock options outstanding under our stock incentive plans will further dilute our shareholders’ voting interests. To the extent options and/or warrants are exercised (including with respect to the warrants), additional shares of common stock will be issued, and such issuance will dilute shareholders.

Our stock price could fall and we could be delisted from the NASDAQ in which case U.S. broker-dealers may be discouraged from effecting transactions in shares of our common stock because they may be considered penny stocks and thus be subject to the penny stock rules.

The SEC has adopted a number of rules to regulate “penny stock” that restricts transactions involving stock which is deemed to be penny stock. Such rules include Rules 3a51-1, 15g-1, 15g-2, 15g-3, 15g-4, 15g-5, 15g-6, 15g-7, and 15g-9 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These rules may have the effect of reducing the liquidity of penny stocks. “Penny stocks” generally are equity securities with a price of less than $5.00 per share (other than securities registered on certain national securities exchanges or quoted on the NASDAQ Stock Market if current price and volume information with respect to transactions in such securities is provided by the exchange or system). Our securities have in the past constituted, and may again in the future constitute, “penny stock” within the meaning of the rules. The additional sales practice and disclosure requirements imposed upon U.S. broker-dealers may discourage such broker-dealers from effecting transactions in shares of our common stock, which could severely limit the market liquidity of such shares and impede their sale in the secondary market.

A U.S. broker-dealer selling penny stock to anyone other than an established customer or “accredited investor” (generally, an individual with net worth in excess of $1,000,000 or an annual income exceeding $200,000, or $300,000 together with his or her spouse) must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and must receive the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to sale, unless the broker-dealer or the transaction is otherwise exempt. In addition, the “penny stock” regulations require the U.S. broker-dealer to deliver, prior to any transaction involving a “penny stock”, a disclosure schedule prepared in accordance with SEC standards relating to the “penny stock” market, unless the broker-dealer or the transaction is otherwise exempt. A U.S. broker-dealer is also required to disclose commissions payable to the U.S. broker-dealer and the registered representative and current quotations for the securities. Finally, a U.S. broker-dealer is required to submit monthly statements disclosing recent price information with respect to the “penny stock” held in a customer’s account and information with respect to the limited market in “penny stocks”.

Shareholders should be aware that, according to SEC, the market for “penny stocks” has suffered in recent years from patterns of fraud and abuse. Such patterns include (i) control of the market for the security by one or a few broker-dealers that are often related to the promoter or issuer; (ii) manipulation of prices through prearranged matching of purchases and sales and false and misleading press releases; (iii) “boiler room” practices involving high-pressure sales tactics and unrealistic price projections by inexperienced sales persons; (iv) excessive and undisclosed bid-ask differentials and markups by selling broker-dealers; and (v) the wholesale dumping of the same securities by promoters and broker-dealers after prices have been manipulated to a desired level, resulting in investor losses. Our management is aware of the abuses that have occurred historically in the penny stock market. Although we do not expect to be in a position to dictate the behavior of the market or of broker-dealers who participate in the market, management will strive within the confines of practical limitations to prevent the described patterns from being established with respect to our securities.