ACURA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC - Annual Report: 2006 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
FOR
ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS PURSUANT TO
SECTION
13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
(Mark
One)
|
|
x
|
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF
1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
2006
|
or
|
|
o
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF
1934
For
the transition period from _____ to
_____
|
Commission
file number 1-10113
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
New
York
|
11-0853640
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of Incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
616
N. North Court, Suite 120, Palatine, Illinois
|
60067
|
(Address
of principal executive office)
|
(Zip
code)
|
Registrant's
telephone number, including area code: 847
705 7709
Securities
registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:
None
Securities
registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act:
(Title
of
Class)
Common
Stock, par value $0.01 per share
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined
in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o
No x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to
be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during
the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements
for
the past 90 days. Yes x No o
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer.
o
Large Accelerated Filer, o Accelerated Filer, x
Non-Accelerated Filer.
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No
x
As
of
March 1, 2007, the registrant had 331,163,803 shares of Common Stock, par value
$0.01, outstanding. Based on the average closing bid and asked prices of the
Common Stock on June 30, 2006 ($0.595) (the last business day of the
registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter), the aggregate
market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was
approximately $39,975,000.
Documents
incorporated by reference: None
Acura
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Form
10-K
For
the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2006
Tablet
of Contents
PAGE
|
|||
PART
I
|
|||
Item
1.
|
Business
|
3
|
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
16
|
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
24
|
|
Item
2.
|
Properties
|
24
|
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
24
|
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
24
|
|
PART
II
|
|||
Item
5.
|
Market
for Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters and
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
25
|
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
26
|
|
Item
7.
|
Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
27
|
|
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
35
|
|
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
36
|
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreement with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
|
36
|
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
36
|
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
36
|
|
PART
III
|
|||
Item
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
36
|
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
38
|
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
|
52
|
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
53
|
|
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
56
|
|
PART
IV
|
|||
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
56
|
|
Signatures
|
57
|
||
Index
to Financial Statements
|
F-1
|
2
Forward-Looking
Statements
Certain
statements in this Report constitute "forward-looking statements" within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such
forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and
other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements
of
Acura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”), to be materially different from any
future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such
forward-looking statements. The most significant of such factors include, but
are not limited to, the Company’s ability to secure additional financing to fund
continued product development and operations, the Company’s ability to enter
into contractual arrangements with qualified pharmaceutical partners to license,
develop and commercialize the Company’s Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology
and related product candidates, and the Company’s ability to fulfill the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”) requirements for approving the Company’s
product candidates for commercial distribution in the United States, including,
without limitation, the adequacy of the results of the laboratory and clinical
studies completed to date and the results of other laboratory and clinical
studies, to support FDA approval of the Company’s product candidates, the
adequacy of the development program for the Company’s product candidates,
changes in regulatory requirements, adverse safety findings relating to the
Company’s product candidates, the risk that the FDA may not agree with the
Company’s analysis of its clinical studies and may evaluate the results of these
studies by different methods or conclude that the results of the studies are
not
statistically significant, clinically meaningful or that there were human errors
in the conduct or otherwise of the studies , the risk that further studies
of
the Company’s product candidates
do not
support FDA approval or commercially viable product labeling, and the
uncertainties inherent in scientific research, drug development, clinical trials
and the regulatory approval process. Other
important factors that may also affect future results include, but are not
limited to: the Company’s ability to attract and retain highly skilled
personnel; its ability to secure and protect its patents, trademarks and
proprietary rights; its ability to avoid infringement of patents, trademarks
and
other proprietary rights or trade secrets of third parties; litigation or
regulatory action that could require the Company to pay significant damages
or
change the way it conducts its business; the Company’s ability to compete
successfully against current and future competitors; its dependence on
third-party suppliers of raw materials; its ability to secure U.S. Drug
Enforcement Administration ("DEA") quotas and source controlled substances
that
constitute the active ingredients of the Company’s products in development;
difficulties or delays in clinical trials for Company products or in the
manufacture of Company products; and other risks and uncertainties detailed
in
this Report. The Company is at development stage and may not ever have any
products or technologies that generate revenue. When used in this Report, the
words "estimate," "project," "anticipate," "expect," "intend," "believe," and
similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking
statements.
PART
I
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
General
Acura
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is a specialty pharmaceutical company engaged in research,
development and manufacture of innovative Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology
and related product candidates. Product candidates developed with Aversion®
Technology and containing opioid analgesic active ingredients are intended
to
effectively treat pain and also discourage the three most common methods of
pharmaceutical product misuse and abuse including; (i) intravenous injection
of
dissolved tablets or capsules, (ii) nasal snorting of crushed tablets or
capsules and (iii) intentional swallowing of excessive numbers of tablets or
capsules. OxyADF Tablets, the Company’s lead product candidate utilizing
Aversion® Technology, is being developed pursuant to an active investigational
new drug application (“IND”) on file with the FDA. The development and
intellectual property status of Aversion® Technology
and OxyADF Tablets is described below.
The
Company conducts internal research, development, laboratory, manufacturing
and
warehousing activities for Aversion® Technology at its Culver, Indiana facility.
The 28,000 square foot facility is registered by the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration (“DEA”) to perform research, development and manufacture of
certain Schedule II - V finished dosage form products. In
addition to internal capabilities and activities, the Company engages a number
of pharmaceutical product contract research organizations (“CROs”) with
expertise in regulatory affairs, clinical trial design and monitoring, clinical
data management, biostatistics, medical writing, laboratory testing and related
services. Such CROs perform development services for OxyADF Tablets and other
product candidates under the direction of the Company.
The
Company was historically engaged in development of novel manufacturing processes
(the "Opioid Synthesis Technologies") intended for use in the commercial
manufacture of certain bulk opioid active pharmaceutical ingredients. In early
2005, the Company announced the suspension of activities relating to the Opioid
Synthesis Technologies pending the deputy DEA Administrator's determination
relating to the Company’s pending application for registration to import
narcotic raw materials (the "Narcotic Raw Materials Import Application") filed
with the DEA in early 2001. In late 2006, the Company notified the DEA that
it
was withdrawing the Narcotic Raw Materials Import Application and subsequently
the Company has discontinued all activities relating to the Opioid Synthesis
Technologies. The withdrawal of the Narcotic Raw Materials Import Application
and the discontinuation of all activities relating to the Opioid Synthesis
Technologies allow the Company to focus all of its resources on developing
and
commercializing its Aversion® Technology and related product
candidates.
3
The
Company is a publicly traded New York corporation. As such, the Company files
annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). These filings are
available to the public over the internet at the SEC's web site at
http://www.sec.gov. You may also read and copy any document we file at the
SEC's
public reference room at 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please
call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the public reference
room.
The
Company's internet address is www.acurapharm.com. We make available free of
charge, with a link from our web site to the SEC’s website, our annual,
quarterly and current reports and amendments to those reports, as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with the
SEC.
In addition, you may request a copy of these filings (excluding exhibits) at no
cost by contacting us at Acura Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 616 N. North Court, Suite
120, Palatine, Illinois 60067, Attention: Investor Relations.
Patents
As
of the
date of this Report, the Company has one U.S.
patent
Notice of Allowance relating to its Aversion® Technology. In addition, as of the
date of this Report, the Company has two U.S. non-provisional patent
publications, one U.S. non-provisional patent application, one U.S. provisional
patent application,
and two
international patent publications pending relating to its Aversion®
Technology. The Company also has seven U.S. issued patents and has one U.S.
patent publication pending relating to its Opioid Synthesis Technologies. As
of
the date of this Report, the Company has retained all of the intellectual
property and commercial rights to its Aversion® Technology and related product
candidates and its Opioid Synthesis Technologies.
Commercialization
Strategy
To
generate revenue the Company plans to enter into development and
commercialization agreements with strategically focused pharmaceutical company
partners (the "Partners") providing that such Partners license product
candidates utilizing Aversion® Technology and further develop, register and
commercialize multiple strengths and packaging sizes of such product candidates.
The Company expects to receive revenue in the form of milestone payments and
a
share of profits and/or royalty payments derived from the Partners' future
sale
of products incorporating Aversion® Technology. As of the date of this Report,
the Company did not have any executed collaborative agreements with Partners,
nor can there be any assurance that the Company will successfully enter into
such collaborative agreements in the future.
Aversion®
(abuse deterrent) Technology
Aversion®
(abuse deterrent) Technology is applicable to immediate release and extended
release, orally administered tablets and capsules. Aversion® Technology can be
formulated into orally administered tablets or capsules containing commonly
utilized opioid active pharmaceutical ingredients (such as oxycodone,
hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxymorphone, morphine, codeine, tramadol,
propoxyphene, etc.), or other potentially abuseable drugs. In addition to the
opioid active ingredient, Aversion® Technology utilizes certain combinations of
pharmaceutical product inactive excipients and active ingredients intended
to
discourage or deter pharmaceutical product abuse. Aversion® Technology does
not
utilize
opioid antagonists such as naltrexone and naloxone. Provided product candidates
pursued
in
development prove successful in laboratory testing and clinical trials, of
which
no assurance can be given, the Company believes that its Aversion® Technology
will discourage the three most common methods of opioid pharmaceutical product
abuse, including (i) intravenous injection of dissolved tablets or capsules,
(ii) nasal snorting of crushed tablets or capsules and (iii) intentional
swallowing of excessive numbers of tablets or capsules.
OxyADF
Tablets, the Company’s lead product candidate, incorporates Aversion® Technology
with oxycodone HCl as the active analgesic ingredient in an immediate release
tablet intended for oral administration. The Company has clearance from the
FDA
for testing OxyADF Tablets in a clinical trial program under an active IND.
The
clinical development program is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety
of
OxyADF Tablets in opioid naïve patients and patients with a history of opioid
abuse. Our goal is to demonstrate that, when prescribed and used appropriately
by patients, OxyADF Tablets will provide effective analgesia and a safety
profile similar to currently marketed immediate release products containing
oxycodone HCl but without our unique Aversion® Technology. The status of the
OxyADF Tablet development program is described below.
4
In
addition to OxyADF Tablets, as of the date of this Report we are engaged in
the
formulation development of additional immediate release product
candidates
intended
for oral administration
incorporating Aversion® Technology,
including hydrocodone bitartrate with acetaminophen tablets (marketed
generically and by others under the brand names Vicodin®, Lortab®, and Lorcet®),
hydromorphone
HCl tablets (marketed generically and by Abbott Laboratories under the brand
name Dilaudid®) and Oxycodone HCl with acetaminophen (marketed
generically and by others under the brand names of Percocet®, Tylox®,
Endocet®,
and
Roxicet®).
Each of
these additional product candidates is in the formulation stage of development.
No assurance can be provided that such development efforts will lead to product
candidates for which an IND or NDA submission to the FDA will result or that
we
will have sufficient cash reserves or sources of financing to fund the continued
development of such product candidates. As of the date of this Report, we
believe that OxyADF Tablets and the other product candidates targeted for
development
with
Aversion® Technology can be produced economically
using a dry blend, direct compression tablet manufacturing
process.
To
receive approval from the FDA for distribution and sale in the U. S., the
Company’s product candidates will require the development, compilation,
submission, filing and final approval by the FDA of a new drug application
(“NDA”). The FDA has provided written guidance to the Company stating that
OxyADF Tablets are an appropriate product candidate for submission as a
505(b)(2) NDA. At this stage there can be no assurance that any of the Company’s
research and development efforts, including those for OxyADF Tablets, will
lead
to a 505(b)(2) NDA submission or that if NDA submissions are made with the
FDA,
that any such submissions will be accepted for filing or, if accepted for
filing, approved by the FDA for commercial distribution in the
U.S..
U.S.
Market for Opioid Analgesic Products Incorporating Aversion®
Technology
Primary
market research conducted by the Company indicates that U.S. based physicians
perceive that nearly one out of six prescriptions for oxycodone and hydrocodone
containing opioid analgesics may be abused. Such
market
research
also revealed that nearly all physicians questioned reported being the victim
of
opioid prescription forgeries in the previous year. Physicians believe that
drug
abusers seeking opioid based prescriptions present a legal and professional
risk
to their practices. In addition, the results of a survey of over 1,500 adults
conducted by the market research firm of Schulman, Ronca and Bucuvalas, Inc.
and
published in 2006, revealed that 37% of those surveyed know someone personally
who has abused opioid painkillers. Of those reporting knowing someone who has
abused opioid painkillers, 10% percent indicated that they personally had abused
these products. Nearly 20% percent of the abusers were identified as coworkers,
with the balance identified as family members or acquaintances. The Company
believes that healthcare providers are generally unable to determine which,
if
any, of their prescriptions for opioid analgesics will ultimately be abused
by
their patients or diverted for abuse by others. The uncertainty about which,
if
any, prescriptions for opioid analgesic products will be abused or diverted
implies that certain segments of the U.S. market represent a major opportunity
for products incorporating our Aversion® Technology. The table below lists
several commonly prescribed opioid analgesics in the U.S that are subject to
potential misuse or abuse.
Opioid
Active Ingredients
(Generic
Names)
|
Frequently
Prescribed Opioid Analgesics
(Common
Brand Names)
|
|
Oxycodone
|
Percocet®,
OxyContin®, Roxicet®, Tylox®, Endocet®
|
|
Hydrocodone
|
Vicodin®,
Lortab®, Lorcet®
|
|
Morphine
|
Avinza®,
Kadian®, MSContin®
|
|
Hydromorphone
|
Dilaudid®
|
|
Codeine
|
Tylenol®
with Codeine
|
|
Tramadol
|
Ultram®,
Ultram® ER, Ultracet®
|
|
Propoxyphene
|
Darvon®,
Darvocet®
|
Based
on
market research data purchased by the Company from IMS Health, for the 12 months
ended September 30, 2006, approximately 227 million total prescriptions (brands
and generics combined) were dispensed in the U.S. for immediate release and
extended release tablet and capsule forms of the opioid analgesics listed above.
Of these total dispensed prescriptions, approximately 13 million were for
extended release products (usually administered every 8 to 24 hours) and 214
million were for immediate release products (usually administered every 4 to
6
hours). Extended release products are more commonly prescribed for relief of
pain for durations ranging from a few weeks to several months or longer.
Immediate release products are more commonly prescribed for relief of pain
for
durations of generally less than 30 days. According to data published in
The
National Survey of on Drug Use and Health Report, Issue 22, 2006,
immediate release opioid containing pain relievers are used non-medically
approximately ten-fold more often than extended release products. The Company’s
primary market research suggests that OxyADF Tablets will be considered by
healthcare providers for use in both the immediate release and extended release
market segments.
5
Recreational
drug users, drug abusers and/or drug addicts typically obtain the opioid
analgesics products (listed above) in tablet or capsule dosage forms and then
crush, shear, grind, chew, dissolve and/or heat, extract or otherwise manipulate
the product so that a significant amount, or even the entire amount, of the
abuseable drug becomes available for rapid absorption by injection, and/or
snorting, and/or oral swallowing excess numbers of tablets to achieve a
"high".
Abuse of
pharmaceutical products is a large and growing issue in American society and
there is an urgent need for a new technology to discourage and deter misuse
and
abuse of opioid analgesic tablets and capsules. To address this need, the
Company is developing Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology and related product
candidates.
OxyADF
Tablets Development Status
OxyADF
(oxycodone HCl/niacin) Tablets, the Company’s lead product candidate with
Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology, is an orally administered immediate
release tablet containing oxycodone HCl as its sole active analgesic ingredient
and a sub therapeutic amount of niacin. The Company intends to file a 505(b)(2)
NDA for OxyADF Tablets with an anticipated indication for treating moderate
to
moderately severe pain. OxyADF Tablets are intended to effectively treat
moderate to moderately severe pain while also discouraging or deterring the
three most common methods of misuse and abuse including (i) intravenous
injection of dissolved tablets or capsules, (ii) nasal snorting of crushed
tablets or capsules and (iii) intentional swallowing of excessive numbers of
tablets or capsules. OxyADF Tablets are being developed pursuant to an active
investigational new drug application (“IND”) on file with the FDA. The FDA has
provided written guidance to the Company stating that OxyADF Tablets are an
appropriate product candidate for submission as a 505(b)(2) NDA and has
confirmed in writing to the Company that no additional toxicology studies are
required prior to submission of such NDA.
OxyADF
Tablets: Technical and Pre-Clinical Development and Regulatory Affairs
Program
The
technical and pre-clinical development program and regulatory strategy and
status for OxyADF Tablets are summarized below. At this stage, we can not
provide any assurance
that FDA will not require additional pre-clinical studies not listed below,
or
revise the OxyADF Tablets regulatory requirements prior to their acceptance
for
filing of a 505(b)(2) NDA submission for OxyADF Tablets.
Technical
and Pre-Clinical Development
|
Status
|
|
Formulation
development
|
Complete
|
|
Pilot
bioequivalence study
|
Complete
|
|
Pivotal
oxycodone extraction study
|
Complete
(results summarized below)
|
|
Tablet
stability for NDA submission
|
Testing
in process. 18 month real time data demonstrates stability acceptable
for
NDA submission
|
|
Toxicology
studies
|
Not
required per FDA written guidance to the
Company
|
Regulatory
Affairs
|
Status
|
|
Investigational
New Drug Application (IND)
|
Active
|
|
End
of Phase II meeting with FDA
|
Completed
Q1-06
|
|
Factorial
design clinical studies
|
Not
required per FDA written guidance to Company
|
|
Product
labeling
|
Strategy
and concepts discussed with FDA. Written guidance provided by FDA
to the
Company
|
|
Regulatory
submission for commercial distribution in the U.S.
|
OxyADF
Tablets are eligible for submission as a 505(b)(2) NDA per FDA written
guidance to Company
|
|
Phase
III pivotal clinical trial
|
A
single phase III efficacy and safety trial is required per FDA written
guidance to Company
|
6
Aversion®
Technology: Intended to Deter I.V. Injection of Opioids Extracted from Dissolved
Tablets
Prospective
drug abusers or recreational drug users may attempt to dissolve currently
marketed oxycodone-containing tablets in water, alcohol, or other common
solvents, filter the dissolved solution, and then inject the resulting fluid
intravenously to obtain euphoric effects. In addition to its two active
ingredients, OxyADF Tablets also contains a unique combination of inactive
ingredients. These "functional" inactive ingredients are commonly used
pharmaceutical excipients which elicit no therapeutic effect but which have
specific non-therapeutic functions. If a person attempts to extract oxycodone
from OxyADF Tablets using any generally available solvent, including water
or
alcohol, into a volume and form suitable for I.V. injection, the tablet converts
into a viscous gel matrix and effectively traps the oxycodone HCl in the gel.
Based on controlled in-vitro experiments, the Company believes it is not
possible, without extraordinary difficulty, to draw this viscous gel through
a
needle into a syringe for I.V. injection. We believe that this gel forming
feature will substantially discourage prospective
I.V. drug abusers or recreational drug users from extracting oxycodone from
an
OxyADF Tablet. As
described below, the Company
has compared the
relative difficulty of extracting oxycodone from OxyADF Tablets to several
currently marketed oxycodone-containing products.
Pivotal
Oxycodone Extraction Study:
The
Company, in concert with a leading pharmaceutical laboratory CRO (the
“Laboratory CRO”), completed a pivotal study to assess certain properties of
OxyADF using tablets from batches manufactured by the Company at its Culver
Facility at a scale of sufficient size to fulfill the FDA’s requirements for a
505(b)(2) NDA submission. The
Laboratory CRO was contracted to quantitatively and qualitatively measure the
relative difficulty of extracting oxycodone HCl for purposes of intravenous
(I.V.) injection from various opioid tablet products. The Laboratory CRO was
provided with a list of ingredients (active and inactive) contained in each
product, allotted up to 80 hours total time to complete the evaluations and
allowed to use any methodology desired to attempt to extract oxycodone HCl
from
the tablets in a form suitable for I.V. injection. Products tested were OxyADF
Tablets, OxyContin® Tablets, 40mg, generic oxycodone HCl Tablets, 5mg and
Percocet® Tablets (oxycodone HCl/acetaminophen, 5mg/325mg). As
set
forth in the table below, results were reported as (i) percent of drug
extracted, (ii) time to extract drug and (iii) difficulty to extract drug on
a
scale of 1-10, 1 being easy and 10 being extremely difficult. OxyContin® and
generic oxycodone HCl tablets resulted in 71-92% drug extracted in 3- 6 minutes
and were rated 1-2 in relative difficulty. Percocet® Tablets resulted in 75%
oxycodone HCl extracted in 10 minutes (with vacuum assisted filtration) and
was
rated 3-4 in relative difficulty. OxyADF Tablets resulted in a “trace” of
oxycodone HCl extracted in 355 minutes and was rated 10 in relative difficulty.
The Company intends to utilize the data and results from this pivotal laboratory
study in its 505(b)(2) NDA submission for OxyADF Tablets to the
FDA.
Summary
Results of OxyADF Tablets Pivotal Laboratory
Oxycodone
Extraction Study (described above)
Product
Tested,
Oxycodone
HCl Strength
and
Product Supplier
|
Approximate
laboratory time required to produce a form suitable for intravenous
injection
|
Extraction
Scheme
and
Yield
|
Difficulty
Rating
1
=
Easy to
10
= Difficult
|
|||
OxyContin®
Tablets
1x
40mg tablet
Purdue
Pharma
|
3
minutes
|
3
steps
~92%
Yield
|
1
|
|||
Oxycodone
HCl Tablets
8
x
5mg tablets,
Mallinckrodt
|
6
minutes
|
3
Steps
~71%
Yield
|
2
|
|||
Percocet
Tablets
8
x
5mg tablets
Endo
Labs
|
<10
minutes
with
vacuum assisted filtration
|
3
Steps
~75%
Yield
|
3-4
|
|||
OxyADF
Tablets
8
x
5mg tablets
Acura
Pharmaceuticals
|
355
minutes
with
no success
|
23
Steps
~0%
Yield
|
10
|
Aversion®
Technology: Intended to Deter Nasal Snorting
In
addition to potential intravenous or oral abuse, prospective drug abusers may
easily crush or grind currently marketed oxycodone-containing tablet or capsule
products. The crushed powder may then be nasally snorted and the oxycodone
in
the powder is absorbed through the lining of the nasal passages often resulting
in a rapid onset of euphoric effects. OxyADF Tablets have three mechanisms
intended to discourage nasal snorting. First, OxyADF Tablets are formulated
with
a functional excipient intended to induce mild burning and irritation of the
nasal passages if the tablets are crushed and the prospective drug abuser
attempts to snort the crushed tablets. Second, when OxyADF Tablets are crushed
and snorted, the Company expects the moisture in the nasal passages will form
a
viscous gel with the crushed tablet powder, trapping the oxycodone in the gel
and therefore reducing the amount of oxycodone available to be absorbed through
the lining of the nasal passages. Third, the Company expects that the viscous
gel formed in the nasal passages will result in a sticky mass producing an
unpleasant sensation in the nasal passages of the prospective abuser. Therefore,
the Company expects potential nasal abusers of OxyADF Tablets to experience
burning and irritation of the nasal passages, a lower level of oxycodone
available for nasal absorption and a physically unpleasant gelatinous mass
to
form in the nasal passages. The Company has evaluated the potential for reducing
nasal absorption using a standard in-vitro experimental process. As discussed
below, the Company intends to further evaluate OxyADF Tablet nasal abuse
characteristics in laboratory, animal, and phase I clinical
studies.
7
Aversion®
Technology: Intended to Deter Swallowing Excess Quantities of
Tablets
OxyADF
Tablets contain two active ingredients. In
each
tablet, oxycodone
HCl is included to provide analgesic effects and niacin is included as a second
active ingredient in a sub-therapeutic amount. We believe that Healthcare
providers, (including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists) generally understand
and recognize that niacin, when administered orally in immediate release tablets
in amounts exceeding by several fold the amount in each OxyADF Tablet, may
cause
a combination of unpleasant symptoms, including warmth or flushing, itching,
sweating and/or chills, headache and a general feeling of discomfort. In
addition, it is generally recognized that niacin has a well established safety
profile in long term administration at doses far exceeding the amounts in each
OxyADF Tablet. When OxyADF Tablets are administered at the anticipated
recommended maximum dose of 2 tablets every 6 hours it is intended that
legitimate pain patients will receive effective analgesic effects and not be
aware of the potential effects of niacin. However, when a person swallows excess
quantities of OxyADF Tablets, it is intended that they will experience an
unpleasant combination of symptoms, including warmth or flushing, itching,
sweating and/or chills, headache and a general feeling of discomfort. It is
expected that these dysphoric symptoms will begin approximately 15 minutes
after
the excess dose is swallowed and self-resolve approximately 90 minutes later.
The Company does not expect that the undesirable niacin effects will be
“fool-proof” in discouraging
swallowing excessive
numbers of
OxyADF
Tablets. However, we anticipate
that
inclusion of niacin in OxyADF Tablets and other Aversion® Technology product
candidates will deter, to a certain degree, legitimate pain patients or
potential drug abusers from swallowing excess quantities of OxyADF
Tablets.
We
anticipate
that
most potential drug abusers or recreational drug users will seek alternative
opioid analgesic products that are generally much easier to abuse than OxyADF
Tablets, and do not have the potential to cause these undesirable niacin
effects. As described below, the Company has evaluated the effects of niacin
in
three phase II clinical studies in subjects with and without a history of opioid
abuse.
Expectations
for OxyADF Tablets Product Labeling
In
the
U.S., every product approved for commercialization pursuant to an NDA must
be
marketed in accordance with its FDA approved indications and associated product
labeling. The FDA has provided written guidance to the Company stating that
an
indication for abuse deterrence must be supported by data from two adequate
and
well-controlled clinical trials. The Company does not intend to seek an
indication for abuse deterrence for OxyADF Tablets. Instead, the Company is
seeking an indication for OxyADF Tablets for treatment of moderate to moderately
severe pain. The FDA has also provided written guidance to the Company stating
that language regarding abuse deterrence, which is supported by rigorous,
scientific data, may be placed into appropriate sections of the OxyADF Tablet
product label. In this regard, the Company intends to seek FDA approval of
language in the OxyADF Tablet product label describing the physical
characteristics of the product and likely results if attempts are made to
dissolve tablets in solvents for intravenous injection, and/or snort crushed
tablets, and/or swallow excessive numbers of tablets. The Company believes
this
product labeling strategy will provide a viable promotional platform for the
commercialization of OxyADF Tablets and other product candidates utilizing
Aversion® Technology. At this stage there can be no assurances that the
Company's product labeling strategy for OxyADF Tablets will be successful or
that FDA approved product labeling, if any, will provide a viable
commercialization platform.
8
OxyADF
Tablets Clinical Development Program: Completed and Planned Clinical
Studies
The
clinical development program for OxyADF Tablets is summarized below. At this
stage, the Company cannot provide any assurance
that FDA will not require additional clinical studies prior to their acceptance
for filing of a 505(b)(2) NDA submission for OxyADF Tablets.
OxyADF
Tablets Clinical Development Program
Clinical
Study Number
|
Clinical
Study Description
|
Status
|
||
Phase
I
|
||||
AP-ADF-101
|
Evaluate
optimal amount per tablet of niacin
|
Final
study report complete
|
||
AP-ADF-104
|
Phase
I:
Bioequivalence to non
Aversion® Technology Reference Listed Drug
|
Final
study report complete. OxyADF tablets are bioequivalent to reference
listed drug
|
||
AP-ADF-106
|
Evaluate
effects of nasal snorting
|
Received
FDA written guidance for protocol design
|
||
AP-ADF-108
|
Single
dose pharmacokinetics
(dose
linearity
and food effect)
|
Received
FDA written guidance for protocol design
|
||
AP-ADF-109
|
Multi-dose
pharmacokinetics (dose linearity)
|
Received
FDA written guidance for protocol design
|
||
AP-ADF-110
|
Single
dose pharmacokinetics and bioavailability. Required if there is not
dose
linearity
|
Received
initial FDA written guidance for protocol design
|
||
Phase
II
|
||||
AP-ADF-102
|
Relative
likeability in subjects with a history of opioid abuse
|
Subject
enrollment complete. Principal Investigator's report and data analysis
complete. Final study report in progress
|
||
AP-ADF-103
|
Repeat
dose safety and tolerability study in normal subjects
|
Final
study report complete
|
||
AP-ADF-107
|
Niacin
dose-response for safety and tolerability in normal
subjects
|
Subject
enrollment complete. Summary study report and preliminary data analysis
complete. Final study report in progress
|
||
Phase
III
|
||||
AP-ADF-105
|
Pivotal
efficacy and safety
|
Received
FDA written guidance for protocol design. Special Protocol Assessment
requested.
|
Summary
of OxyADF Tablets Phase II Study Designs, Status and
Results
Study
AP-ADF-102:
This
study is titled, "A Phase II Single-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind Study
in
Subjects with a History of Opioid Abuse to Evaluate the Dose-Response for
Flushing and Safety and Tolerability of Varying Doses of Niacin in Combination
with 40mg of an Opioid vs. 40mg of an Opioid Alone."
The
study objectives were 1) to determine the dose response for niacin-induced
flushing in male and female healthy, adult volunteers with a history of opioid
abuse when niacin is administered in combination with 40 mg oxycodone HCl;
2) to
evaluate the safety and tolerability of niacin-induced flushing following
varying niacin doses in combination with 40 mg oxycodone HCl in subjects with
a
history of opioid abuse; 3) to confirm the appropriate strength of niacin to
use
in an Aversion® Technology formulation of oxycodone HCl; 4) to determine whether
the flushing induced by niacin is of sufficient intensity to deter abuse in
a
population of subjects with a history of opioid abuse; and 5) to evaluate the
effect of food on niacin-induced flushing when niacin is administered in
combination with 40 mg oxycodone HCl.
This
study was a single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled,
five-period crossover study conducted on an inpatient basis with 5 cohorts
of 5
subjects each. Twenty-five subjects (three female and twenty-two male) were
admitted for the study. One male subject completed the first drug condition
but
thereafter withdrew from the study stating personal reasons unrelated to the
study. Twenty-four subjects received a single dose of study drug every 48 hours
for 9 days. Each subject was randomized to a dosing sequence that included
doses
of niacin (0, 240, 480, and 600 mg) administered in combination with 40 mg
oxycodone HCl while the subjects were fasted on Days 1, 3, 5, and 7. On Day
9, a
dose of 600 mg niacin in combination with 40 mg oxycodone HCl was administered
following a standardized high-fat breakfast. Each dosing day, vital sign
measures and subjective and behavioral effects were assessed before dosing
and
at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 hours after dosing. Vital signs included
systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, oral temperature and
respiratory rate. Subjective changes were measured by subject response to a
Drug
Rating Questionnaire (DRQS).
As an additional measure of subjective effects, subjects completed a 40 item
short form of an Addiction Research Inventory (ARCI) that yielded three scale
scores - the Morphine Benzedrine Group Scale (MBG), the LSD Specific Scale
(LSD)
and the Pentobarbital Chlorpromazine Alcohol Group Scale (PCAG). After
completion of the study, subjects responded to a Treatment Enjoyment Assessment
Questionnaire to select which of the treatments they would take again. Prior
to
initiating the study, the hypothesis was that the addition of niacin to
oxycodone would produce effects that are disliked by subjects with a history
of
opioid abuse. The maximum scale response to the question “How much do you
dislike the drug effect you are feeling now?” (i.e. the "Disliking Score"), was
designated as the primary efficacy variable. Statistical analysis (maximum
dislike response in comparison to 0 mg niacin) was conducted for DRQS, ARCI
scales and vital signs. Study results were as follows:
9
(1)
|
In
the fasting state, all three doses of niacin [240mg, 480mg and
600mg] in
combination with oxycodone 40mg produced significant (p ≤ .05) disliking
scores compared to oxycodone 40mg alone. The linear regression
across
niacin dose was not significant. No other subjective measure was
significantly affected by the niacin addition to
oxycodone.
|
(2)
|
The
high fat meal eliminated the niacin effect on oxycodone 40 mg. The
high
fat meal also delayed the time to oxycodone peak blood
levels.
|
(3)
|
The
addition of niacin to oxycodone alters the subjective response
to
oxycodone as indicated by the significant responses on the disliking
scale. This observation in conjunction with the results from the
Treatment
Enjoyment Questionnaire indicates that the addition of niacin reduces
the
attractiveness of oxycodone to opiate
abusers.
|
(4)
|
There
were no serious adverse events. Niacin produced a dose related
attenuation
of pupillary constriction, diastolic blood pressure increase and
probably
systolic blood pressure increase produced by oxycodone. The alterations
by
niacin on the vital sign responses to oxycodone 40 mg were minimal,
were
seen primarily with the 600 mg niacin dose and were not clinically
significant.
|
The
principal study investigator’s overall conclusion was that the results of this
pharmacodynamic study [Study AP-ADF-102] support the hypothesis that the
addition of niacin to oxycodone in a minimal ratio of 30 mg niacin to 5 mg
oxycodone is aversive when compared to oxycodone alone. The addition of niacin
does not alter the safety profile of oxycodone alone. The Company intends to
include the data and results from StudyAP-ADF-102 in its 505(b)(2) NDA
submission for OxyADF Tablets to the FDA.
Study
AP-ADF-103:
This
study is titled, "A Phase II Single-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind,
Multiple-Dose Study in Healthy Volunteers to Evaluate the Safety and
Tolerability of Niacin in Combination with 5 mg of an Opioid vs. 5 mg of an
Opioid Alone." To assess the safety and tolerability of OxyADF Tablets in
comparison to oxycodone HCl tablets without Aversion® (abuse deterrent)
Technology, the Company conducted this Phase II single-center, randomized,
double-blind, multiple dose study in 66 healthy adult male and female
volunteers. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups
(22
subjects per treatment group). A run-in phase was conducted on an outpatient
basis for five days and included at-home dosing four times daily and adverse
event and tolerability assessments. The treatment phase followed the run-in
phase and was conducted on an inpatient basis for five days. The treatment
phase
included dosing with OxyADF
Tablets (with or without niacin) as well as post-treatment safety and
tolerability assessments. Efficacy (the tolerability of OxyADF) was evaluated
with a Side Effects and Symptoms Questionnaire (SESQ) and an OxyADF Tolerability
Rating Scale. Safety was evaluated by adverse events and clinical laboratory
and
vital signs assessments were conducted periodically during the study. During
the
run-in phase, comparable tolerability was demonstrated in subjects who took
OxyADF Tablets with and without niacin. The mean post-dose SESQ total score
during the run-in phase was very low in all groups (highest possible score
= 33;
Group results = 0.84 - 1.6) indicating that OxyADF was generally well-tolerated
when taken at recommended doses. During the treatment phase, 64% of subjects
in
Groups 2 and 3 (oxycodone HCl + niacin) reported side effects and symptoms
and
50% of subjects in Group 1 (oxycodone alone) reported side effects and symptoms.
Most of the side effects and symptoms observed during the treatment phase were
mild or moderate in severity. Irrespective of treatment group, approximately
three quarters of subjects reported either “no effect” or “easy to tolerate” on
the OxyADF Tolerability Rating Scale. Oxycodone HCl administered four times
a
day, with or without niacin, was determined to be
well
tolerated. Adverse events were reported by 77% of subjects throughout both
phases of the study. The majority of subjects (55%) reported adverse events
during the treatment phase that were considered mild in severity. No severe
adverse events were reported in any treatment group and no clinically important
trends over time were observed in any treatment group for vital signs
measurements (blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate). The Company
intends to include the data and results from Study AP-ADF-103 in its 505(b)(2)
NDA submission for OxyADF Tablets to the FDA.
10
Study
AP-ADF-107: This
study is titled "A Phase II Single-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind Study in
Fasted and Non-Fasted Healthy Volunteers to Evaluate the Dose-Response for
Flushing and Safety and Tolerability of Escalating Doses of Niacin." The study
objective was to evaluate the dose-response for niacin-induced flushing, safety,
and tolerability of niacin in the OxyADF Tablet matrix (excluding oxycodone
HCl)
at various dose levels in both fasted and fed subjects. This trial was a Phase
II single-center, randomized, double-blind study in healthy, adult male and
female subjects. A total of 50 subjects were enrolled. The Treatment Phase
was
conducted on an inpatient basis and included study drug dosing, as well as
safety and tolerability assessments. Each subject received eight doses of niacin
(30, 60, 90, 120, 240, 360, 480, and 600 mg) and three doses of placebo taken
orally in tablet form on eleven separate days in a random sequence. Half of
the
subjects (n=25) took each dose of study drug following a standardized high-fat
breakfast consisting of two fried eggs, hash browns, two fried bacon strips,
toast, butter, and whole milk, and half (n=25) remained fasted for at least
2
hours after study drug administration. Subjects were discharged from the
Clinical Research Unit on Day 11, approximately 6 hours after the last dose
of
study drug administration.
Tolerability
was rated by subjects during the Treatment Phase using a Tolerability Rating
Scale (TRS) completed 3 hours after each dose of study drug. Each subject’s
overall reaction to the study drug was recorded using the following 5-point
scale: 0 = No effect; 1 = Easy to tolerate; 2 = Mildly unpleasant, but
tolerable; 3 = Unpleasant and difficult to tolerate; 4 = Intolerable and would
never take again. The results showed a clear niacin dose-response relationship
in both Fasted and Fed subjects as assessed by the 5-point TRS. The response
ranged from little or no effect at low niacin doses (30 to 90 mg) to more
difficult and unpleasant symptoms at higher doses of niacin (>120 mg). With
Fasted subjects, there was minimal or no effect of niacin at doses of 30 to
60
mg, with ³96%
of
subjects reporting either “no effect” or “easy to tolerate”. Niacin was also
well tolerated at doses of 90 mg, with 86% of Fasted subjects reporting
either “no effect” or “easy to tolerate” and 14% reporting “mildly unpleasant,
but tolerable”. The absence of any notable effects at low doses suggests that
niacin will be well tolerated up to 60 mg per dose and will likely be well
tolerated at 90 mg per dose. As niacin doses escalated from 120 to 360 mg,
a
transition occurred resulting in a larger proportion of Fasted subjects (22%
to
73%) reporting mildly unpleasant, unpleasant, or intolerable effects. At doses
of 480 and 600 mg, most Fasted subjects (³86%)
reported mildly unpleasant, unpleasant, or intolerable effects. At least 40%
of
subjects dosed at 480 and 600 mg reported either “unpleasant and difficult
to tolerate” or “intolerable and would never take again”. The higher doses of
niacin clearly produced undesirable side effects. As anticipated, niacin effects
were mitigated by food. All Fed subjects (100%) receiving 30 to 240 mg niacin
reported “no effect” or “easy to tolerate”. Niacin was also generally well
tolerated at doses of 360 to 600 mg with most Fed subjects (³68%)
reporting “no effect” or “easy to tolerate”.
In
this
study there were no significant adverse events or discontinuations due to
treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). None of the TEAEs reported were
severe in intensity. A clear niacin dose-response relationship was observed
in
the incidence of AEs. As expected, the most frequently reported TEAE in both
Fasted and Fed subjects was flushing. Flushing occurred more frequently in
Fasted subjects than in Fed subjects with higher incidence as the niacin dose
increased. The majority of Fasted subjects (54% to 88%) reported flushing at
doses of 240 to 600 mg; while the majority of Fed subjects (64%) reported
flushing only at a dose of 600 mg. Most of the events of flushing were moderate
in intensity. No other safety issues were apparent. The Company intends to
include the data and results from Study AP-ADF-107 in its 505(b)(2) NDA
submission for OxyADF Tablets to the FDA.
Additional
OxyADF Tablets Clinical
Studies
Planned
The
FDA
has requested that the Company complete certain additional clinical studies
for
OxyADF Tablets prior to accepting our 505(b)(2) NDA submission including, as
of
the date of this Report, the following:
Study
AP-ADF-105.
This
study is titled “A Phase III, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled,
Multicenter, Repeat-dose Study of the Safety and Efficacy of OxyADF (oxycodone
HCl and niacin) Tablets versus Placebo for the Treatment of Acute, Moderate
to
Severe Postoperative Pain Following Bunionectomy Surgery in Adult Patients.”
This short term phase III study is planned to enroll approximately 400 patients
with moderate to severe pain following bunionectomy surgery. The
Company has submitted the study protocol to the FDA and requested a Special
Protocol Assessment (SPA). Clinical protocols for Phase III trials whose data
will form the primary basis for an efficacy claim are eligible for a SPA. A
SPA
from the FDA is an agreement that the Phase III trial protocol design, clinical
endpoints, and statistical analyses plan are acceptable to support regulatory
approval. A SPA is binding upon the FDA unless a substantial scientific issue
essential to determining safety or efficacy is identified after the testing
is
begun. The Company believes the completion of Study AP-ADF-105 is the critical
time and events path to 505(b)(2) NDA submission for OxyADF Tablets.
Study
AP-ADF-106.
This
will be a phase I clinical study, for use in product labeling, evaluating the
nasal irritating characteristics of crushed OxyADF Tablets (with and/or without
oxycodone HCl) anticipated to enroll 12-24 normal subjects.
11
Studies
AP-ADF-108, AP-ADF-109, and if necessary AP-ADF-110. These
will be phase I single dose or multi-dose pharmacokinetic studies anticipated
to
enroll approximately 25-50 normal subjects per study.
Estimated
Timing for submission of a 505(b)(2) NDA for OxyADF
Tablets
Estimating
the dates of initiation and completion of clinical studies and the costs to
complete development of the Company's product candidates, including OxyADF
Tablets, would be speculative and potentially misleading. The Company expects
to
reassess its future research and development plans pending review of data
received from development activities currently in progress and the availability
of cash resources to fund such development activities. The cost and pace of
future research and development activities are linked and subject to change.
At
this stage there can be no assurance that any of the Company’s research and
development efforts, including those for OxyADF Tablets, will lead to a
505(b)(2) NDA submission or that if NDA submissions are made with the FDA,
that
any such submission will be accepted for filing or approved by the
FDA.
Competition
The
Company competes to varying degrees with numerous companies in the
pharmaceutical research, development, manufacturing and commercialization
fields. Most of the Company's competitors have substantially greater financial
and other resources and are able to expend more funds and effort than the
Company in research and development of their competitive technologies and
products. Although a larger company with greater resources than the Company
will
not necessarily have a higher likelihood of receiving regulatory approval for
a
particular product or technology as compared to a smaller competitor, the
company with a larger research and development expenditure will be in a position
to support more development projects simultaneously, thereby improving the
likelihood of obtaining regulatory approval of a commercially viable product
or
technology than its smaller rivals.
The
Company believes potential competitors may be developing opioid abuse deterrent
technologies and products. Such competitors may include Alpharma Inc. of Fort
Lee, NJ, Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of Northvale, NJ, New River
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of Radford, VA, Pain Therapeutics of South San Francisco,
CA, (in collaboration with King Pharmaceuticals of Bristol, TN), Purdue Pharma
of Stamford, CT and Endo Pharmaceuticals of Chadds Ford, PA.
Segment
Reporting
The
Company operates in only one business segment, the research, development and
manufacture of innovative abuse deterrent, abuse resistant and tamper resistant
formulations ("Aversion® Technology") intended for use in orally administered
pharmaceutical products.
Prior
to
2005, the Company manufactured and sold generic finished dosage pharmaceutical
products. The Company discontinued the manufacture and sale of such products
in
the first quarter of 2004.
Prior
to
2005, the Company was engaged in research, development and manufacture of
proprietary, high-yield, short cycle time, environmentally sensitive opioid
synthesis processes (the "Opioid Synthesis Technologies") intended for use
in
the commercial production of certain bulk opioid active pharmaceutical
ingredients. In early 2005, the Company suspended development and
commercialization efforts relating to the Opioid Synthesis Technologies pending
the deputy DEA Administrator's determination relating to the Company’s pending
application for registration to import narcotic raw materials (the "Narcotic
Raw
Materials Import Application") filed with the DEA in early 2001. In late 2006
the Company notified the DEA that it was withdrawing, without prejudice to
possible future resubmission, the Narcotic Raw Materials Import Application
and
the Company has discontinued all activities relating to the Opioid Synthesis
Technologies. The withdrawal of the Narcotic Raw Material Import Application
and
the discontinuation of all activities relating to the Opioid Synthesis
Technologies allow the Company to focus its resources on developing and
commercializing its propriety Aversion® Technology and related product
candidates.
Government
Regulation
All
pharmaceutical firms, including the Company, are subject to extensive regulation
by the federal government, principally by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
("FDA"), and, to a lesser extent, by state and local governments. Additionally,
the Company is subject to extensive regulation by the Drug Enforcement
Administration ("DEA") for research, development and manufacturing of controlled
substances. The Company is also subject to regulation under federal, state
and
local laws, including requirements regarding occupational safety, laboratory
practices, environmental protection and hazardous substance control, and may
be
subject to other present and future local, state, federal and foreign
regulations, including possible future regulations of the pharmaceutical
industry. The Company cannot predict the extent to which it may be affected
by
legislative and other regulatory developments concerning its products and the
healthcare industry in general.
12
The
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the "FD&C Act"), the Controlled
Substances Act and other federal statutes and regulations govern or influence
the testing, manufacture, labeling, storage, record keeping, approval, pricing,
advertising, promotion, sale and distribution of pharmaceutical products.
Noncompliance with applicable requirements can result in fines, recall or
seizure of products, criminal proceedings, total or partial suspension of
production, and refusal of the government to enter into supply contracts or
to
approve new drug applications. The FDA also has the authority to revoke or
withhold approvals of new drug applications.
The
Federal Controlled Substances Act imposes various registration, record-keeping
and reporting requirements, procurement and manufacturing quotas, labeling
and
packaging requirements, security controls and a restriction on prescription
refills on certain pharmaceutical products. A principal factor in determining
the particular requirements, if any, applicable to a product is its actual
or
potential abuse profile. A pharmaceutical product may be “scheduled” as a C-I,
C-II, C-III, C-IV or C-V controlled substance, with C-I substances considered
to
present the highest risk of substance abuse and C-V substances the lowest.
Because of the potential for abuse, opioid containing drugs, including OxyADF
Tablets, are regulated, or scheduled, under the Controlled Substances Act.
Any
of our product candidates containing an opioid analgesic will be subject to
such
regulation. At this stage, because it contains oxycodone HCl, at launch, the
Company believes that OxyADF Tablets will be a DEA C-II product.
FDA
approval is required before any "new drug," can be marketed. A "new drug" is
one
not generally recognized by the FDA as safe and effective for its intended
use.
Such approval must be based on adequate and well controlled laboratory and
clinical investigations. In addition to providing required safety and
effectiveness data for FDA approval, a drug manufacturer's practices and
procedures must conform to current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations
("cGMPs"), which apply to the manufacture, receiving, holding and shipping
of
all drugs, whether or not approved by the FDA. To ensure full compliance with
relevant standards, some of which are set forth in regulations, the Company
must
continue to expend time, money and effort in all applicable areas relating
to
quality assurance. Failure to so comply risks delays in approval of drugs and
possible FDA enforcement actions, such as an injunction against shipment of
products, the seizure of non-complying products, and/or, in serious cases,
criminal prosecution. The Company is subject to periodic inspection by the
FDA
and DEA.
The
FDA Pharmaceutical Product Approval Process
The
process of drug development is complex and lengthy and the activities undertaken
before a new pharmaceutical product may be marketed in the U.S. include but
are
not limited to; preclinical studies, submission to the FDA of an Investigational
New Drug Application ("IND"), which must become effective before human clinical
trials commence, followed by adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials
to establish the safety and efficacy of the product, submission to the FDA
of a
NDA, and FDA approval of the NDA prior to any commercial sale of the product
in
the U.S. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry
and formulation, and in some cases, animal studies and other studies to assess
the potential safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The results of
preclinical studies are then submitted to the FDA as a part of an IND and are
reviewed by the FDA prior to the commencement of human clinical trials. Unless
the FDA objects to, or otherwise responds to, an IND submission, the IND becomes
effective 30 days following its receipt by the FDA.
Human
clinical trials are typically conducted in three phases that often
overlap:
Phase
I:
The drug
is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients and tested
for
safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and excretion.
In
addition, it is sometimes possible to conduct a preliminary evaluation of
efficacy in Phase I trials for analgesia.
Phase
II:
This
phase involves studies in a limited patient or normal subject population to
identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to evaluate the efficacy
of
the product for specific targeted diseases and to determine optimal dosage
and
tolerance.
Phase
III:
When
Phase II evaluations demonstrate that a dosage range of the product is effective
and has an acceptable safety profile, Phase III trials are undertaken to further
evaluate dosage, clinical efficacy and to further test for safety in an expanded
patient population at geographically dispersed clinical study
sites.
13
After
clinical trials have been completed, the sponsor must submit to the FDA the
results of the preclinical and clinical testing, together with, among other
things, detailed information on the manufacture and composition of the product,
in a New Drug Application ("NDA"). There are two primary types of NDAs; a
505(b)(1) and a 505(b)(2), A 505(b)(1) NDA is also known as a "full NDA" and
is
described by section 505(b)(1) of the FD&C Act as an application containing
full reports of investigations of safety and effectiveness, in addition to
other
information. The data in a full NDA is either owned by the applicant or is
data
for which the applicant has obtained a right of reference. A 505(b)(2)
application is one described under section 505(b)(2) of the act as an
application for which one or more of the investigations relied upon by the
applicant for approval "were not conducted by or for the applicant and for
which
the applicant has not obtained a right of reference or use from the person
by or
for whom the investigations were conducted" (21 U.S.C. 355(b)(2)). This
provision expressly permits FDA to rely for approval of an NDA on data not
developed by the applicant, such as published literature or the FDA's finding
of
safety and effectiveness of a previously approved drug. 505(b)(2) applications
are submitted under section 505(b)(1) of the act and are therefore subject
to
the same statutory provisions that govern 505(b)(1) applications that require
among other things, "full reports" of safety and effectiveness.
The FDA
has provided written guidance to the Company stating that OxyADF Tablets is
a
suitable product candidate for submission as a 505(b)(2) NDA.
After
an
NDA is submitted by an applicant and accepted for filing by the FDA, the FDA
will then review the NDA and, if and when it determines that the data submitted
are adequate to show that the product is safe and effective for its intended
use, the FDA will approve the NDA for commercial distribution in the U.S. There
can be no assurance that any of our product candidates will receive FDA
approval.
Whether
or not FDA approval has been obtained, approvals from comparable governmental
regulatory authorities in foreign countries must be obtained prior to the
commencement of clinical trials and subsequent sales and marketing efforts
in
those countries. The approval procedure varies in complexity from country to
country, and the time required may be longer or shorter than that required
for
FDA approval.
Environmental
Compliance
In
addition to regulation by the FDA and DEA, the Company is subject to regulation
under federal, state and local environmental laws. The Company believes it
is in
material compliance with applicable environmental laws. The Company incurred
$61,650
and
$180,000 in the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively,
on environmental compliance relating to
disposal of hazardous and controlled substances waste primarily associated
with
the manufacture of finished dosage pharmaceuticals and active pharmaceutical
ingredients. These operations were discontinued in 2004. Since 2005 the Company
has only incurred the normal waste disposal cost associated with test batch
manufacturing for finished dosage forms and research and development laboratory
operations.
Raw
Materials
To
purchase certain active ingredients required for the Company’s development and
manufacture of product candidates utilizing its Aversion® Technology, the
Company is required to file for and obtain quotas from the DEA. No assurance
can
be given that the Company will be successful in obtaining adequate DEA quotas
in
a timely manner. Even assuming adequate and timely DEA quotas, there can be
no
assurances that the approved manufacturers of raw materials for the Company’s
product candidates will supply the Company with its requirements for the active
ingredients required for the development and manufacture of its product
candidates.
Subsidiaries
The
Company's Culver, Indiana research, development, and manufacturing operations
are conducted by Acura Pharmaceutical Technologies, Inc., an Indiana corporation
and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Directors,
Executive Officers,
and Employees
The
directors and executive officers of the Company are as
follows:
NAME
|
AGE
|
POSITION
|
||
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
54
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
||
Ron
J. Spivey
|
60
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer
|
||
Peter
A. Clemens
|
54
|
Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
|
||
James
F. Emigh
|
51
|
Vice
President of Marketing and Administration
|
||
Robert
A. Seiser
|
43
|
Vice
President, Corporate Controller and Treasurer
|
||
Bruce
F. Wesson
|
64
|
Director
|
||
William
A. Sumner
|
69
|
Director
|
||
Richard
J. Markham
|
56
|
Director
|
||
William
G. Skelly
|
55
|
Director
|
||
Immanuel
Thangaraj
|
36
|
Director
|
14
Andrew
D.
Reddick has been President and Chief Executive Officer since August, 2003 and
a
Director of the Company since August, 2004. From April, 2000 to September,
2002
Mr. Reddick was Chief Operating Officer and Sr. Vice President Commercial
Operations for Adolor Corporation and from June, 1999 to March, 2000 he served
as President of Faulding Laboratories, Inc. Mr. Reddick holds a Bachelor of
Arts
degree in Biology from the University of California and a Masters of Business
Administration degree from Duke University.
Ron
J.
Spivey, Ph.D., has been Senior Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer
since
April, 2004. From June, 2002 to March, 2004 Dr. Spivey was President of
Gibraltar Associates, a private consulting services company for the
pharmaceutical industry. From March, 1998 to May, 2002 he served as Vice
President, Scientific Affairs for Alpharma/Purepac Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Spivey
holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Indiana University and a Ph.D. degree
in
pharmaceutics from the University of Iowa.
Peter
A.
Clemens has been Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
since April 2004. Mr. Clemens was Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Secretary of the Company from February 1998 to March 2004 and a Director of
the
Company from June, 1998 to August, 2004. Mr. Clemens is a Certified Public
Accountant and earned a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from the
University of Notre Dame and a Masters of Business Administration from Indiana
University.
James
F.
Emigh has been Vice President of Marketing and Administration since April 2004.
Prior to such time, Mr. Emigh was Vice President of Sales and Marketing. Mr.
Emigh joined the Company in May, 1998, serving first as Executive Director
of
Customer Relations and then as Vice President of Operations until November,
2002. Mr. Emigh holds a Bachelor of Pharmacy degree from Washington State
University and a Masters of Business Administration from George Mason
University.
Robert
A.
Seiser has been a Vice President, Corporate Controller and Treasurer since
April
2004. Mr. Seiser joined the Company in March 1998 as the Corporate Controller
and Treasurer. Mr. Seiser is a Certified Public Accountant and earned a Bachelor
of Business Administration degree from Loyola University of
Chicago.
Bruce
F.
Wesson has been a Director of the Company since March, 1998. Mr. Wesson has
been
a Partner of Galen Associates, a health care venture firm, and a General Partner
of Galen Partners III, L.P. since January 1991. Prior to January, 1991, he
was
Senior Vice President and Managing Director of Smith Barney, Harris Upham &
Co. Inc., an investment banking firm. He
currently serves on the Boards of QMed, Inc., Derma Sciences, Inc., and Chemtura
Corporation, each a publicly traded company.
Mr.
Wesson earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Colgate University and a Masters
of
Business Administration from Columbia University.
William
A. Sumner has been a Director of the Company since August, 1997. From 1974
until
his retirement in 1995, Mr. Sumner held various positions within Hoechst-Roussel
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., including Vice President and General Manager, Dermatology
Division from 1991 through 1995, Vice President, Strategic Business Development,
from 1989 to 1991 and Vice President, Marketing from 1985 to 1989. Since his
retirement from Hoechst-Roussel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in 1995, Mr. Sumner has
acted as a consultant in the pharmaceutical field. Mr. Sumner earned a Bachelor
of Arts degree from Montclair State University and a Master of Arts degree
from
the University of Virginia.
Richard
J. Markham has been a Director of the Company since May, 2006. Since November,
2004 Mr. Markham has served as a partner at Care Capital, LLC, a venture capital
firm that primarily invests in life sciences companies. From May 2002 until
August 2004, Mr. Markham was the Vice Chairman of the Management Board and
Chief
Operating Officer of Aventis SA. From December, 1999 until May, 2002 he was
the
Chief Executive Officer of Aventis Pharma AG. Previously he was the Chief
Executive Officer of Hoechst Marion Roussel, the President and Chief Operating
Officer of Marion Merrell Dow, Inc. and a member of its board of directors.
From
1973 to 1993 Mr. Markham was associated with Merck & Co. Inc., culminating
in his position as President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Markham received
a
B.S. in Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences from Purdue University.
William
G. Skelly has been a Director of the Company since May, 1996 and served as
Chairman of the Company from October, 1996 through June, 2000. Since 1990,
Mr.
Skelly has served as Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Central
Biomedia, Inc. and its subsidiary SERA, Inc. From 1985 to 1990, Mr. Skelly
served as President of Martec Pharmaceutical, Inc. Mr. Skelly earned a Bachelor
of Arts degree from Michigan State University and a Masters of Business
Administration from the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
15
Immanuel
Thangaraj has been a Director of the Company since December, 2002. Mr. Thangaraj
has been a Managing Director of Essex Woodlands Health Ventures, a venture
capital firm specializing in the healthcare industry, since 1997. He serves
as a
director of private companies. Prior to joining Essex Woodlands Health
Ventures, he helped establish a telecommunication services company, for which
he
served as its CEO. Mr. Thangaraj holds a Bachelor of Arts and a Masters in
Business Administration from the University of Chicago.
As
of the
date of this Report, the Company had 13 full-time
employees, eight of whom are engaged in the research, development and
manufacture of product candidates utilizing the Aversion® Technology.
The remaining employees are engaged in administrative, legal, accounting,
finance, market research, business development and licensing activities. Most
of
our
senior management and our professional employees have had prior experience
in
pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies. None of our employees is covered
by
collective bargaining agreements. We believe that our relations with our
employees are good.
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
The
Company Received a "Going Concern" Opinion from Its Registered Independent
Public Accounting Firm, Has a History of Operating Losses and May Not Achieve
Profitability Sufficient to Generate a Positive Return on Shareholders'
Investment
We
have
incurred net losses of $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, $12.1
million for the year ended December 31, 2005 and $70.0 million and $48.5 million
for 2004 and 2003, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, our accumulated
deficit was approximately $317.5 million. The Company's consolidated financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 were prepared
on
a “going concern” basis; however, in its report dated March 13, 2007 regarding
those financial statements, our registered independent public accounting firm
expressed substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going
concern as a result of recurring losses, net capital deficiency and negative
cash flows. Our future profitability will depend on many factors, including:
(i)
the Company’s ability to secure additional financing to fund continued
operations, (ii) the successful completion of the formulation development,
clinical testing and acceptable regulatory review of product candidates
utilizing the Aversion® Technology; (iii) the continued receipt of issued
patents from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for the material
claims in the Company's patent applications relating to the
Aversion® Technology;
(iv) the Company's ability to negotiate and execute appropriate licensing,
development and commercialization agreements with qualified third parties
relating to the Company’s product candidates; and (v) the successful
commercialization by licensees of products incorporating the Aversion®
Technology without infringing the patents and other intellectual property rights
of third parties. We cannot assure you that we will ever have a product approved
by the FDA, that we will bring any product to market or, if we are successful
in
doing so, that we will ever become profitable.
We
Require Additional Funding
Our
requirements for additional new funding will depend on many factors, including:
(i) the time required and expenses incurred in the development and
commercialization of products incorporating our Aversion® Technology; (ii) the
structure of any future collaborative or development agreements relating to
the
Aversion® Technology, including the timing and amount of payments, if any, that
may be received under possible future collaborative agreements; (iii) our
ability to develop additional product candidates utilizing the Aversion®
Technology; (iv) our ability to negotiate agreements with qualified third
parties for development, manufacture, marketing, sale and distribution of
products utilizing our Aversion® Technology; (v) the prosecution, defense and
enforcement of patent claims and other intellectual property rights relating
to
the Aversion® Technology; and (vi) the successful commercialization by licensees
of products incorporating our Aversion® Technology without infringing
third-party patents or other intellectual property rights.
To
continue funding operations the Company must raise additional financing, or
enter into alliances or collaborative agreements with third parties providing
for net cash proceeds to the Company. The
Company is seeking to secure working capital providing gross proceeds to the
Company in the range of approximately $10 million to $15 million through the
private offering of the Company’s securities. The terms of any such securities
offering, including, without limitation, the type of equity securities (or
securities convertible into equity securities) and the price per share, have
not
been determined and will, in large part, be determined based upon negotiations
between the Company and prospective investors in such private offering. No
assurance can be given that the Company will be successful in obtaining any
such
financing or in securing collaborative agreements with third parties on
acceptable terms, if at all, or if secured, that such financing or collaborative
agreements will provide for payments to the Company sufficient to continue
to
fund operations. In the absence of such financing or third-party collaborative
agreements, the Company will be required to scale back or terminate operations
and/or seek protection under applicable bankruptcy laws. Even assuming the
Company is successful in securing additional sources of financing to fund the
continued development of the Aversion® Technology, or enters into alliances or
collaborative agreements relating to the Aversion® Technology, there can be no
assurance that the Company's development efforts will result in commercially
viable products.
16
We
Have No Near Term Sources of Revenue and Must Rely on Current Cash Reserves,
Third-Party Financing, and Technology Licensing Fees to Fund Operations
Pending
the negotiation of appropriate licensing agreements with pharmaceutical company
partners, of which no assurance can be given, the Company must rely on its
current cash reserves, third-party financing and technology licensing fees
to
fund the Company's operations. No assurance can be given that current cash
resources will be sufficient to fund the continued development of our product
candidates until such time as we generate revenue from the license of products
incorporating the Aversion® Technology to third parties. Moreover, no assurance
can be given that we will be successful in raising additional financing to
fund
operations or, if funding is obtained, that such funding will be sufficient
to
fund operations until the Company's product candidates incorporating our
Aversion® Technology, may be commercialized.
We
Are Subject to Restrictions on the Incurrence of Additional Indebtedness, Which
May Adversely Impact the Company's Ability to Fund Operations and Clinical
Trials
Pursuant
to the terms of the Company's outstanding secured loan agreements the Company
is
limited as to the type and amount of future indebtedness it may incur. The
restriction on the Company's ability to incur additional indebtedness in the
future may adversely impact the Company's ability to fund the development of
its
product candidates and commercialization of its products.
Our
Product Candidates Are Based on Technology That Could Ultimately Prove
Ineffective
The
Company is committing substantially all of its resources and available capital
to the development of OxyADF Tablets. Additional clinical and non-clinical
testing will be required to continue development of OxyADF Tablets and for
the
preparation and submission of a 505(b)(2) NDA with the FDA. There can be no
assurance that OxyADF Tablets or any other product candidate developed using
Aversion® Technology
will achieve the primary end points in the required clinical studies or perform
as intended in other pre-clinical and clinical studies leading to commercially
viable product candidates or leading to a NDA submission. If a NDA is submitted
to the FDA for OxyADF Tablets or any other product candidates, there can be
no
assurances that the FDA will accept such submission for filing and subsequently
approve such regulatory application with commercially viable product labeling
or
to ultimately approve such product candidates for commercial distribution.
The
failure of the Company to successfully develop and achieve final FDA approval
of
a product candidate utilizing Aversion® Technology
will have a material adverse effect on the Company's operations and financial
condition.
If
Pre-Clinical or Clinical Testing For Our Product Candidates Are Unsuccessful
or
Delayed, We Will Be Unable to Meet Our Anticipated Development and
Commercialization Timelines
To
obtain
FDA approval to commercially market any of our product candidates, we must
submit to the FDA a NDA demonstrating, among other things, that the product
candidate is safe and effective for its intended use. This demonstration
requires significant pre-clinical and clinical testing. As we do not possess
the
resources or employ all the personnel necessary to conduct such testing we
rely
on contract research organizations for the majority of this testing with our
product candidates. As a result, we have less control over the timing and other
aspects of our development program than if we performed the testing entirely
on
our own. Third parties may not perform their responsibilities on our anticipated
schedule. Delays in our development programs could significantly increase our
product development costs and delay product commercialization. In addition,
many
of the factors that may cause, or lead to a delay in the development program,
may also ultimately lead to denial of regulatory approval of a product
candidate.
The
commencement of clinical trials with our product candidates may be delayed
for
several reasons, including but not limited to delays in demonstrating sufficient
pre-clinical safety required to obtain regulatory approval to commence a
clinical trial, reaching agreements on acceptable terms with prospective
collaborative partners, manufacturing and quality assurance release of a
sufficient supply of a product candidate for use in our clinical trials and/or
obtaining institutional review board approval to conduct a clinical trial at
a
prospective site. Once a clinical trial has begun, it may be delayed, suspended
or terminated by us or the FDA or other regulatory authorities due to several
factors, including ongoing discussions with the FDA or other regulatory
authorities regarding the scope or design of our clinical trials, failure to
conduct clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements, lower than
anticipated recruitment or retention rate of patients in clinical trials,
inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial sites by the FDA or other
regulatory authorities, the imposition of a clinical hold by FDA, lack of
adequate funding to continue clinical trials; and/or negative or unanticipated
results of clinical trials.
17
Clinical
trials, where required by the FDA for commercial approval, may not demonstrate
safety or efficacy of our product candidates. Success in pre-clinical testing
and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be
successful. Results of later clinical trials may not replicate the results
of
prior clinical trials and pre-clinical testing. Even if the results of our
pivotal clinical trials are positive, we and our collaborative partners may
have
to commit substantial time and additional resources to conduct further
pre-clinical and clinical studies before we can submit NDAs or obtain regulatory
approval for our product candidates.
Clinical
trials may be expensive and difficult to design and implement, in part because
they are subject to rigorous regulatory requirements. Further, if participating
subjects or patients in clinical studies suffer drug-related adverse reactions
during the course of such trials, or if we, our collaborative partner(s) or
the
FDA believes that participating patients are being exposed to unacceptable
health risks, we or our collaborative partner(s) may have to suspend the
clinical trials. Failure can occur at any stage of the trials, and our
collaborative partner(s) could encounter problems causing the abandonment of
clinical trials or the need to conduct additional clinical studies, relating
to
a product candidate.
Even
if
our clinical trials are completed as planned, their results may not support
our
targeted product label claims. The clinical trial process may fail to
demonstrate that our product candidates are safe and effective for their
intended use. Such failure would cause us or our collaborative partner to
abandon a product candidate and may delay the development of other product
candidates.
We
May Not Obtain Required FDA Approval; the FDA Approval Process Is Time-Consuming
and Expensive
The
development, testing, manufacturing, marketing and sale of pharmaceutical
products are subject to extensive federal, state and local regulation in the
United States and other countries. Satisfaction of all regulatory requirements
typically takes many years, is dependent upon the type, complexity and novelty
of the product candidate, and requires the expenditure of substantial resources
for research, development and testing. Substantially all of our operations
are
subject to compliance with FDA regulations. Failure to adhere to applicable
FDA
regulations by us or our licensees, if any, would have a material adverse effect
on our operations and financial condition. In addition, in the event we are
successful in developing product candidates for sale in other countries, we
would become subject to regulation in such countries. Such foreign regulations
and product approval requirements are expected to be time consuming and
expensive.
We
may
encounter delays or rejections during any stage of the regulatory approval
process based upon the failure of clinical or laboratory data to demonstrate
compliance with, or upon the failure of the products to meet, the FDA's
requirements for safety, efficacy and quality; and those requirements may become
more stringent due to changes in regulatory agency policy or the adoption of
new
regulations. After submission of a marketing application, in the form of an
NDA,
or a 505(b)(2) NDA the FDA may deny the application, may require additional
testing or data and/or may require post-marketing testing and surveillance
to
monitor the safety or efficacy of a product. The FDA commonly takes one to
two
years to grant final approval for a NDA, or 505(b)(2) NDA. Further, the terms
of
approval of any marketing application, including the labeling content, may
be
more restrictive than we desire and could affect the marketability of the
products incorporating the Aversion® Technology.
Even
if
we comply with all FDA regulatory requirements, we may never obtain regulatory
approval for any of our product candidates. If we fail to obtain regulatory
approval for any of our product candidates, we will have fewer saleable products
and corresponding lower revenues. Even if we receive regulatory approval of
our
products, such approval may involve limitations on the indicated uses or
marketing claims we may make for our products.
The
FDA
also has the authority to revoke or suspend approvals of previously approved
products for cause, to debar companies and individuals from participating in
the
drug-approval process, to request recalls of allegedly violative products,
to
seize allegedly violative products, to obtain injunctions to close manufacturing
plants allegedly not operating in conformity with current Good Manufacturing
Practices (cGMP) and to stop shipments of allegedly violative products. As
any
future source of Company revenue will be derived from the sale of FDA approved
products, the taking of any such action by the FDA would have a material adverse
effect on the Company.
18
We
Must Maintain FDA Approval to Manufacture Our Product Candidates at Our
Facility; Failure to Maintain Compliance with FDA Requirements May Prevent
or
Delay the Manufacture of Our Product Candidates and Costs of Manufacture May
Be
Higher Than Expected
We
have
constructed and installed the equipment necessary to manufacture clinical trial
supplies of our Aversion® Technology
product candidates in tablet formulations at our Culver, Indiana facility.
To be
used in clinical trials, all of our product candidates must be manufactured
in
conformity with current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) regulations as
interpreted and enforced by the FDA. All such product candidates must be
manufactured, packaged, and labeled and stored in accordance with cGMPs.
Modifications, enhancements or changes in manufacturing sites of marketed
products are, in many circumstances, subject to FDA approval, which may be
subject to a lengthy application process or which we may be unable to obtain.
Our Culver, Indiana facility, as well as those of any third-party manufacturers
that we may use, are periodically subject to inspection by the FDA and other
governmental agencies, and operations at these facilities could be interrupted
or halted if such inspections are unsatisfactory. Failure to comply with FDA
or
other governmental regulations can result in fines, unanticipated compliance
expenditures, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of
production or distribution, suspension of FDA review of our products,
termination of ongoing research, disqualification of data for submission to
regulatory authorities, enforcement actions, injunctions and criminal
prosecution. We do not have the facilities, equipment or personnel to
manufacture commercial quantities of our product candidates and must rely on
pharmaceutical company partners to manufacture and commercialize products
utilizing our Aversion Technology.
If
We Retain Collaborative Partners and Our Partners Do Not Satisfy Their
Obligations, We Will Be Unable to Develop Our Partnered Product Candidates
To
complete the development and regulatory approval of our products and
commercialize our product candidates, if any are approved by the FDA, we plan
to
enter into development and commercialization agreements with strategically
focused pharmaceutical company partners providing that such partners license
our
Aversion® Technologies and further develop, register, manufacture and
commercialize multiple formulations and strengths of each product candidate
utilizing our Aversion® Technology. We expect to receive a share of profits
and/or royalty payments derived from such collaborative partners' sale of
products incorporating our Aversion® Technology. Currently, we do not have any
such collaborative agreements, nor can there be any assurance that we will
actually enter into collaborative agreements in the future. Our inability to
enter into collaborative agreements, or our failure to maintain such agreements,
would limit the number of product candidates that we can develop and ultimately,
decrease our potential sources of any future revenues. In the event we enter
into any collaborative agreements, we may not have day-to-day control over
the
activities of our collaborative partners with respect to any product candidate.
Any collaborative partner may not fulfill its obligations under such agreements.
If a collaborative partner fails to fulfill its obligations under an agreement
with us, we may be unable to assume the development of the product covered
by
that agreement or to enter into alternative arrangements with a third-party.
In
addition, we may encounter delays in the commercialization of the product
candidate that is the subject of a collaboration agreement. Accordingly, our
ability to receive any revenue from the product candidates covered by
collaboration agreements will be dependent on the efforts of our collaborative
partner. We could be involved in disputes with a collaborative partner, which
could lead to delays in or termination of, our development and commercialization
programs and result in time consuming and expensive litigation or arbitration.
In addition, any such dispute could diminish our collaborative partners’
commitment to us and reduce the resources they devote to developing and
commercializing our products. If any collaborative partner terminates or
breaches its agreement, or otherwise fails to complete its obligations in a
timely manner, our chances of successfully developing or commercializing our
product candidates would be materially and adversely effected. Additionally,
due
to the nature of the market for our product candidates, it may be necessary
for
us to license all or a significant portion of our product candidates to a single
collaborator, thereby eliminating our opportunity to commercialize other product
candidates with other collaborative partners.
The
Market May Not Be Receptive to Products Incorporating Our Aversion®
Technology
The
commercial success of products incorporating our Aversion® Technology that are
approved for marketing by the FDA and other regulatory authorities will depend
on acceptance by health care providers and others that such products are
clinically useful, cost-effective and safe. There can be no assurance given,
even if we succeed in the development of products incorporating our Aversion®
Technology and receive FDA approval for such products, that products
incorporating the Aversion® Technology would be accepted by health care
providers and others. Factors that may materially affect market acceptance
of
products incorporating our Aversion® Technology include: (i) the relative
advantages and disadvantages of our Aversion® Technology compared to competitive
abuse deterrent technologies; (ii) the relative timing to commercial launch
of
products utilizing our Aversion® Technology compared to products incorporating
competitive abuse deterrent technologies; (iii) the relative timing of the
receipt of marketing approvals and the countries in which such approvals are
obtained; (iv) the relative safety and efficacy of products incorporating our
Aversion® Technology compared to competitive products; and/or (v) the
willingness of third party payors to reimburse for or otherwise pay for products
incorporating our Aversion® Technology.
19
Our
product candidates, if successfully developed and commercially launched, will
compete with both currently marketed and new products marketed by other
companies. Health care providers may not accept or utilize any of our product
candidates. Physicians and other prescribers may not be inclined to prescribe
the products utilizing our Aversion® Technology
unless our products bring clear and demonstrable advantages over other products
currently marketed for the same indications. If our products licensed to
partners do not achieve market acceptance, we may not be able to generate
significant revenues or become profitable.
In
the Event That We Are Successful in Bringing Any Products to Market, Our
Revenues May Be Adversely Affected If We Fail to Obtain Acceptable Prices or
Adequate Reimbursement For Our Products From Third-Party Payors
Our
ability to commercialize pharmaceutical products successfully may depend in
part
on the availability of reimbursement for our products from government health
administration authorities, private health insurers, and other third-party
payors and administrators, including Medicaid and Medicare. We cannot predict
the availability of reimbursement for newly-approved products incorporating
our
Aversion® Technology. Third-party payors and administrators, including state
Medicaid programs and Medicare, are challenging the prices charged for
pharmaceutical products. Government and other third-party payors increasingly
are limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for new drugs.
Third-party insurance coverage may not be available to patients for any of
our
products. The continuing efforts of government and third-party payors to contain
or reduce the costs of health care may limit our commercial opportunity. If
government and other third-party payors do not provide adequate coverage and
reimbursement for any product incorporating our Aversion® Technology, health
care providers may not prescribe them or patients may ask to have their health
care providers to prescribe competing products with more favorable
reimbursement. In some foreign markets, pricing and profitability of
pharmaceutical products are subject to government control. In the United States,
we expect that there will continue to be federal and state proposals for similar
controls. In addition, we expect that increasing emphasis on managed care in
the
United States will continue to put pressure on the pricing of pharmaceutical
products. Cost control initiatives could decrease the price that we receive
for
any products in the future. Further, cost control initiatives could impair
our
ability or the ability of our partners to commercialize our products and our
ability to earn revenues from this commercialization.
Our
Success Depends on Our Ability to Protect Our Intellectual
Property
Our
success depends in significant part on our ability to obtain patent protection
for our Aversion® Technology,
in the United States and in other countries, and to enforce these patents.
The
patent positions of pharmaceutical firms, including us, are generally uncertain
and involve complex legal and factual questions. Notwithstanding the Company’s
recent receipt of a Notice of Allowance from the USPTO relating to a
non-provisional patent application relating to the Aversion® Technology, there
is no assurance that any of our patent application claims contained in the
Company’s other non-provisional and provisional patent applications for our
Aversion® Technology will issue or, that any such patent claims will be valid
and enforceable against third-party infringement or that our products will
not
infringe any third-party patent or intellectual property. Moreover, any patent
claims relating to the Aversion® Technology
may not be sufficiently broad to protect the products incorporating the
Aversion® Technology.
In addition, issued patent claims may be challenged, invalidated or
circumvented. Our patent claims may not afford us protection against competitors
with similar technology or permit the commercialization of our products without
infringing third-party patents or other intellectual property
rights.
Our
success also depends on our not infringing patents issued to competitors or
others. We may become aware of patents and patent applications belonging to
competitors and others that could require us to alter our technologies. Such
alterations could be time consuming and costly. We may not be able to obtain
a
license to any technology owned by or licensed to a third party that we require
to manufacture or market one or more products incorporating our Aversion®
Technology. Even if we can obtain a license, the financial and other terms
may
be disadvantageous.
Our
success also depends on our maintaining the confidentiality of our trade secrets
and know-how. We seek to protect such information by entering into
confidentiality agreements with employees, potential collaborative partners,
raw
material suppliers, potential investors and consultants. These agreements may
be
breached by such parties. We may not be able to obtain an adequate, or perhaps,
any remedy to such a breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become
known or be independently developed by our competitors. Our inability to protect
our intellectual property or to commercialize our products without infringing
third-party patents or other intellectual property rights would have a material
adverse effect on our operations and financial condition.
20
We
May Become Involved in Patent Litigation or Other Intellectual Property
Proceedings Relating to Our Aversion® Technology or Product Candidates Which
Could Result in Liability for Damages or Delay or Stop Our Development and
Commercialization Efforts
The
pharmaceutical industry has been characterized by significant litigation and
other proceedings regarding patents, patent applications and other intellectual
property rights. The types of situations in which we may become parties to
such
litigation or proceedings include: (i) we may initiate litigation or other
proceedings against third parties to enforce our patent rights or other
intellectual property rights; (ii) we may initiate litigation or other
proceedings against third parties to seek to invalidate the patents held by
such
third parties or to obtain a judgment that our product candidates do not
infringe such third parties' patents; (iii) if our competitors file patent
applications that claim technology also claimed by us, we may participate in
interference or opposition proceedings to determine the priority of invention;
and (iv) if third parties initiate litigation claiming that our product
candidates infringe their patent or other intellectual property rights, we
will
need to defend against such proceedings. The failure of the Company to avoid
infringing third-party patents and intellectual property rights in the
commercialization of products utilizing the Aversion® Technology
will have a material adverse effect on the Company's operations and financial
condition.
The
costs
of resolving any patent litigation or other intellectual property proceeding,
even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Many of our competitors
will be able to sustain the cost of such litigation and proceedings more
effectively than we can because of their substantially greater resources.
Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent
litigation or other intellectual property proceedings could have a material
adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace. Patent litigation
and other intellectual property proceedings may also consume significant
management time.
Our
Aversion® Technology may be found to infringe upon claims of patents owned by
others. If we determine or if we are found to be infringing on a patent held
by
another, we might have to seek a license to make, use, and sell the patented
technologies. In that case, we might not be able to obtain such license on
terms
acceptable to us, or at all. If a legal action is brought against us, we could
incur substantial defense costs, and any such action might not be resolved
in
our favor. If such a dispute is resolved against us, we may have to pay the
other party large sums of money and our use of our Aversion® Technology and the
testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale of one or more of our products could
be restricted or prohibited. Even prior to resolution of such a dispute, use
of
our Aversion® Technology and the testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale of
one or more of our products could be restricted or prohibited.
Moreover,
other parties could have blocking patent rights to products made using the
Aversion® Technology.
The Company is aware of certain United States and international pending patent
applications owned by third parties claiming abuse deterrent technologies,
including at least one pending patent application which, if issued in its
present form, may encompass our lead product candidate. If such patent
applications result in issued patents, with claims encompassing our
Aversion® Technology
or products, the Company may need to obtain a license to such patents, should
one be available, or alternatively, alter the Aversion® Technology
so as to avoid infringing such third-party patents. If the Company is unable
to
obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms, the Company could be
restricted or prevented from commercializing products utilizing the
Aversion® Technology.
Additionally, any alterations to the Aversion® Technology
in view of pending third-party patent applications could be time consuming
and
costly and may not result in technologies or products that are non-infringing
or
commercially viable.
The
Company expects to seek and obtain licenses to such patents or patent
applications when, in the Company's judgment, such licenses are needed. If
any
such licenses are required, there can be no assurances that the Company would
be
able to obtain any such license on commercially favorable terms, or at all,
and
if these licenses are not obtained, the Company might be prevented from making,
using and selling the Aversion® Technology
and products. The Company's failure to obtain a license to any technology that
it may require would materially harm the Company's business, financial condition
and results of operations. We cannot assure that the Company's products and/or
actions in developing products incorporating our Aversion® Technology
will not infringe third-party patents.
21
We
May Be Exposed to Product Liability Claims and May Not Be Able to Obtain
Adequate Product Liability Insurance
Our
business exposes us to potential product liability risks, which are inherent
in
the testing, manufacturing, marketing and sale of pharmaceutical products.
Product liability claims might be made by consumers, health care providers
or
pharmaceutical companies or others that sell our products. These claims may
be
made even with respect to those products that are manufactured in licensed
and
regulated facilities or that otherwise possess regulatory approval for
commercial sale.
We
are
currently covered by clinical trial product liability insurance on a claims-made
basis. This coverage may not be adequate to cover any product liability claims.
Product liability coverage is expensive. In the future, we may not be able
to
maintain or obtain such product liability insurance at a reasonable cost or
in
sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability claims. Any
claims that are not covered by product liability insurance could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
The
pharmaceutical industry is characterized by frequent litigation. Those companies
with significant financial resources will be better able to bring and defend
any
such litigation. No assurance can be given that we would not become involved
in
such litigation. Such litigation may have material adverse consequences to
the
Company's financial conditions and operations.
We
Face Significant Competition Which May Result in Others Developing or
Commercializing Products Before or More Successfully Than We
Do
The
pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive and is affected by new
technologies, governmental regulations, health care legislation, availability
of
financing, litigation and other factors. If our product candidates receive
FDA
approval, they will compete with a number of existing and future drugs and
therapies developed, manufactured and marketed by others. Existing or future
competing products may provide greater therapeutic convenience, clinical or
other benefits for a specific indication than our products, or may offer
comparable performance at lower costs. If our products are unable to capture
and
maintain market share, we will not achieve significant product revenues and
our
financial condition will be materially adversely affected.
We
will
compete for market share against fully integrated pharmaceutical companies
or
other companies that collaborate with larger pharmaceutical companies, academic
institutions, government agencies and other public and private research
organizations. Many of these competitors have products already approved,
marketed or in development. In addition, many of these competitors, either
alone
or together with their collaborative partners, operate larger research and
development programs, have substantially greater financial resources, experience
in developing products, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals,
formulating and manufacturing drugs, and commercializing drugs than we
do.
We
are
concentrating substantially all of our efforts on developing product candidates
incorporating our Aversion® Technology. The commercial success of products using
our Aversion® Technology will depend, in large part, on the intensity of
competition and the relative timing and sequence of new product approvals from
other companies developing, marketing, selling and distributing opioid analgesic
products and other drugs and technologies that compete with the products
incorporating our Aversion® Technology. Alternative technologies and products
are being developed to improve or replace the use of opioid analgesics. In
the
event that such alternatives to opioid analgesics are widely adopted, then
the
market for products incorporating our Aversion® Technology may be substantially
decreased subsequently reducing the Company’s opportunity to generate future
revenues and profits.
Key
Personnel Are Critical to Our Business, and Our Future Success Depends on Our
Ability to Retain Them
We
are
highly dependent on our management and scientific team, including Andrew D.
Reddick, our President and Chief Executive Officer, and Ron J. Spivey, Ph.D.
our
Senior Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer. We may not be able to
attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the intense competition
for such personnel among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and healthcare companies,
universities and non-profit research institutions. While we have employment
agreements with certain employees, all of our employees are at-will employees
who may terminate their employment with the Company at any time. We do not
have
key personnel insurance on any of our officers or employees. The loss of any
of
our key personnel, or the inability to attract and retain such personnel, may
significantly delay or prevent the achievement of our product and technology
development and business objectives and could materially adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of such operations.
22
The
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA") Limits the Availability of the
Active Ingredients Used in Our Product Candidates and, as a Result, Our Quota
May Not Be Sufficient to Complete Clinical Trials or May Result in Development
Delays
The
DEA
regulates certain finished products and bulk active pharmaceutical ingredients.
Certain opioid active pharmaceutical ingredients in our current product
candidates are classified by the DEA as Schedule II substances under the
Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Consequently, their manufacture, research,
shipment, storage, sale and use are subject to a high degree of regulation.
Furthermore, the amount of Schedule II substances we can obtain for clinical
trials and commercial distribution is limited by the DEA and our quota may
not
be sufficient to complete clinical trials. There is a risk that DEA regulations
may interfere with the supply of the products used in our clinical
trials.
The
Market Price of Our Common Stock May Be Volatile
The
market price of our common stock, like the market price for securities of
pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, has historically
been highly volatile. The market from time to time experiences significant
price
and volume fluctuations that are unrelated to the operating performance of
particular companies. Factors, such as fluctuations in our operating results,
future sales of our common stock, announcements of technological innovations
or
new therapeutic products by us or our competitors, announcements regarding
collaborative agreements, clinical trial results, government regulation,
developments in patent or other proprietary rights, public concern as to the
safety of drugs developed by us or others, changes in reimbursement policies,
comments made by securities analysts and general market conditions may have
a
significant effect on the market price of our common stock. In the past,
following periods of volatility in the market price of a company's securities,
securities class action litigation has often been instituted. A securities
class
action suit against us could result in substantial costs, potential liabilities
and the diversion of management's attention and resources.
The
Company's common stock trades on the OTC Bulletin Board, a NASD-sponsored
inter-dealer quotation system. As the Company's common stock is not quoted
on a
stock exchange and is not qualified for inclusion on the NASD Small-Cap Market,
our common stock could be subject to a rule by the Securities and Exchange
Commission that imposes additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers
who sell such securities to persons other than established customers and
accredited investors. For transactions covered by this rule, the broker-dealer
must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and have
received the purchaser's written consent for a transaction prior to sale.
Consequently, the rule may affect the ability of broker-dealers to sell the
Company's common stock. There is no guarantee that an active trading market
for
our common stock will be maintained on the OTC Bulletin Board. Shareholders
may
be not able to sell their shares of common stock quickly or at the latest market
price if trading in our common stock is not active.
Our
Quarterly Results of Operations Will Fluctuate, and These Fluctuations Could
Cause Our Stock Price to Decline
Our
quarterly operating results are likely to fluctuate in the future. These
fluctuations could cause our stock price to decline. The nature of our business
involves variable factors, such as the timing of the research, development
and
regulatory pathways of our product candidates that could cause our operating
results to fluctuate.
No
Dividends
The
Company has not declared and paid cash dividends on its common stock in the
past, and the Company does not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the
foreseeable future. The Company's senior term loan indebtedness prohibits the
payment of cash dividends.
Control
of the Company
GCE
Holdings LLC beneficially owns approximately 77% of
the
Company's outstanding common stock. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the
Amended and Restated Voting Agreement dated February 6, 2004, as amended,
between the Company and the former holders of the Company's outstanding
convertible preferred stock, all such shareholders have agreed that the Board
of
Directors shall be comprised of not more than seven members, four of whom shall
be the designees of GCE Holdings LLC (the assignee of all the Company’s
preferred stock prior to its conversion into common stock formerly held by
each
of Care Capital Investments II, LP, Care Capital Offshore Investments II, LP,
Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P., Galen Partners International III,
L.P.,
Galen Partners III, L.P. and Galen Employee Fund III, L.P.). As a result, GCE
Holdings LLC, in view of its ownership percentage of the Company and by virtue
of its controlling position on the Company's Board of Directors, will be able
to
control or significantly influence all matters requiring approval by our
shareholders, including the approval of mergers or other business combination
transactions. The interests of GCE Holdings LLC may not always coincide with
the
interests of other shareholders and such entity may take action in advance
of
its interests to the detriment of our other shareholders.
23
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
Not
applicable.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
The
Company leases from an unaffiliated Lessor, approximately 1,600 square feet
of
administrative office space at 616 N. North Court, Suite 120, Palatine, Illinois
60067. The lease agreement has a term expiring August 31, 2007. The lease
agreement provides for rent, property taxes, common area maintenance and
janitorial services on an annualized basis of approximately $29,200 per year.
This leased office space is utilized for the Company's administrative, marketing
and business development functions.
The
Company conducts research, development, laboratory, development scale and NDA
submission batch scale manufacturing and warehousing activities relating to
the
Aversion® Technology
at its facility located at 16235 State Road 17, Culver, Indiana (the “Culver
Facility”). At this location the Company's Acura Pharmaceutical Technologies,
Inc. subsidiary owns a ~28,000 square foot facility
with approximately 7,000 square feet of warehouse, 10,000 square feet of
manufacturing space, 6,000 square feet of research and development labs and
5,000 square feet of administrative and storage space. The facility is located
on approximately 30 acres of land. The Culver Facility is subject to a mortgage
lien granted in favor of the holders of the Company’s 2004 Note.
See
“Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations
-
Liquidity and Capital Resources - Amendment to Watson Term Loan
Agreement.”
ITEM
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
None.
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
The
Company's 2006 Annual Meeting of Shareholders was held on December 14, 2006
(the
“Annual Meeting”). In connection with the Annual Meeting proxies were solicited
by management pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Securities Exchange Act
of
1934, as amended. On the record date for the Annual Meeting, the Company's
outstanding voting securities consisted of 330,564,049 shares of common stock,
of which 317,755,577 shares were represented in person or by proxy at the Annual
Meeting. At
the
Annual Meeting, the following matters were submitted to a vote of the Company's
voting security holders, with the results indicated below:
1. Election
of Directors: The following six (6) incumbent directors were elected to serve
until the next Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The tabulation of votes was
as
follows:
Nominee
|
For
|
Withheld
|
|||||
Richard
J. Markham
|
317,584,811
|
170,766
|
|||||
Immanuel
Thangaraj
|
317,541,211
|
214,366
|
|||||
Bruce
F. Wesson
|
317,542,881
|
212,696
|
|||||
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
317,526,227
|
229,350
|
|||||
William
A. Sumner
|
317,573,225
|
182,352
|
|||||
William
G. Skelly
|
317,614,509
|
141,068
|
2.
|
Proposal
to grant the Board of Directors authority to amend the Company’s Restated
Certificate of Incorporation to effect a reverse stock split at one
of six
ratios. The tabulation of votes was as
follows:
|
For
|
Against
|
|
Abstained
|
|
Not
Voted
|
|||||
315,212,251
|
2,293,924
|
249,402
|
0
|
3. Proposal
to ratify an amendment to the Company’s 1998 Stock Option Plan to make such Plan
compliant with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
The
tabulation of votes was as follows:
For
|
Against
|
|
Abstained
|
|
Not
Voted
|
|||||
276,689,351
|
685,198
|
207,693
|
40,173,335
|
24
4.
|
Proposal
to ratify the adoption of the Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award
Plan. The tabulation of votes was as
follows:
|
For
|
Against
|
|
Abstained
|
|
Not
Voted
|
|||||
270,037,814
|
7,327,834
|
216,594
|
40,173,335
|
5. Proposal
to Ratify the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the
current fiscal year.
The
tabulation of votes was as follows:
For
|
Against
|
|
Abstained
|
|
Not
Voted
|
|||||
165,579
|
197,904
|
0
|
PART
II
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED SECURITY HOLDER MATTERS
Market
and Market Prices of Common Stock
Set
forth
below for the periods indicated are the high and low bid prices for the
Company's Common Stock for trading in the Common Stock on the OTC Bulletin
Board
as reported by the OTC Bulletin Board. Such over-the-counter market quotations
reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission
and
may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
BID
PRICE
|
|||||||
PERIOD
|
HIGH
$
|
LOW
$
|
|||||
2005
Fiscal Year
|
|||||||
First
Quarter
|
|
0.70
|
0.33
|
||||
Second
Quarter
|
0.81
|
0.41
|
|||||
Third
Quarter
|
0.73
|
0.40
|
|||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
1.36
|
0.27
|
|||||
2006
Fiscal Year
|
|||||||
First
Quarter
|
0.91
|
0.25
|
|||||
Second
Quarter
|
0.79
|
0.50
|
|||||
Third
Quarter
|
1.09
|
0.59
|
|||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
0.92
|
0.56
|
|||||
2007
Fiscal Year
|
|||||||
First
Quarter (through February 1, 2007)
|
0.79
|
0.69
|
Holders
There
were approximately 639
holders
of record of the Company's common stock on February 1, 2007. This number,
however, does not reflect the ultimate number of beneficial holders of the
Company's Common Stock.
Dividend
Policy
The
payment of cash dividends from current earnings is subject to the discretion
of
the Board of Directors and is dependent upon many factors, including the
Company's earnings, its capital needs and its general financial condition.
The
terms of the Term Loan Agreement assigned by Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to
Care Capital Investments II, LP, Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P., Galen
Partners III, L.P. and certain other stockholders of the Company as well as
the
Bridge Loan Agreements between the Company and the bridge lenders a party
thereto (see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Bridge
Loan Financing”, and “Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions,
and Director Independence”) prohibit the Company from paying cash dividends. The
Company does not intend to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future.
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities
During
the quarter ended December 31, 2006, the Company issued 201,365 shares of the
Company’s Common Stock in satisfaction of the payment of $161,000 in accrued
interest due December 31, 2006 under the Company’s senior secured term note and
233,054 shares of the Company’s Common Stock in satisfaction of the payment of
$176,000 in accrued interest due December 31, 2006 under the Company’s Bridge
Loan agreements. Each of the recipients of such Common Stock is an Accredited
Investor as defined in Rule 501(a) of Regulation D promulgated under the
Securities Act. Such Common Stock was issued without registration under the
Securities Act in reliance upon Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and
Regulation D promulgated thereunder.
25
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans
Reference
is made to “Item 11 - Executive Compensation - Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan;
and Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans”.
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The
selected consolidated financial data presented below for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003 and 2002 are derived from the Company's
audited Consolidated Financial Statements. The Consolidated Financial Statements
as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 and for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2006, and the reports thereon, are included elsewhere
herein. The selected financial information as of and for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002 are derived from the audited Consolidated Financial
Statements of the Company not presented herein.
The
information set forth below is qualified by reference to, and should be read
in
conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes
thereto included elsewhere in this Report and "Item 7. Management's Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations".
OPERATING
DATA (in thousands):
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
(1)
|
2003
|
2002
|
|||||||||||
Net
revenues
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
838
|
$
|
5,750
|
$
|
8,205
|
||||||
Operating
Costs;
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost
of manufacturing
|
—
|
—
|
1,435
|
11,705
|
12,535
|
|||||||||||
Research
and development
|
5,172
|
6,265
|
4,130
|
1,460
|
1,517
|
|||||||||||
Selling,
marketing, general and administrative expenses
|
5,654
|
5,296
|
5,238
|
7,903
|
7,216
|
|||||||||||
Plant
shutdown costs
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,926
|
(126
|
)
|
||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(1,140
|
)
|
(636
|
)
|
(2,962
|
)
|
(6,001
|
)
|
(4,728
|
)
|
||||||
Interest
income
|
18
|
36
|
59
|
25
|
15
|
|||||||||||
Write-off
of debt discount and deferred private debt offering costs
|
—
|
—
|
(41,807
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||
Amortization
of debt discount and deferred
private debt offering costs
|
(183
|
)
|
—
|
(30,684
|
)
|
(24,771
|
)
|
(12,558
|
)
|
|||||||
Gain
on debt restructuring
|
—
|
—
|
12,401
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Gain
on fair value change of conversion features
|
4,235
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Gain
on fair value change of common stock warrants
|
2,164
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
(Loss)
gain on asset disposals
|
(22
|
)
|
81
|
2,359
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||
Other
(expense) income
|
(213
|
)
|
5
|
603
|
464
|
966
|
||||||||||
Loss
before income tax benefit
|
(5,967
|
)
|
(12,075
|
)
|
(69,996
|
)
|
(48,455
|
)
|
(59,589
|
)
|
||||||
Income
tax benefit
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(5,967
|
)
|
$
|
(12,075
|
)
|
$
|
(69,996
|
)
|
$
|
(48,455
|
)
|
$
|
(59,589
|
)
|
|
Basic
and diluted loss per common share applicable
to common stockholders
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
$
|
(3.20
|
)
|
$
|
(2.28
|
)
|
$
|
(3.90
|
)
|
|
Weighted
average number of outstanding common shares
|
344,959
|
66,799
|
21,861
|
21,227
|
15,262
|
DECEMBER
31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
|||||||
BALANCE
SHEET DATA (in thousands):
|
||||||||||||||||
Working
capital (deficiency)
|
$
|
(28,641
|
)
|
$
|
(2,478
|
)
|
$
|
2,423
|
$
|
(3,770
|
)
|
$
|
5,933
|
|||
Total
assets
|
1,619
|
1,792
|
4,967
|
6,622
|
19,364
|
|||||||||||
Total
debt, net (2)
|
28,787
|
7,613
|
5,093
|
53,142
|
25,398
|
|||||||||||
Total
liabilities
|
39,899
|
7,954
|
6,052
|
58,689
|
31,632
|
|||||||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(317,543
|
)
|
(291,616
|
)
|
(279,541
|
)
|
(209,546
|
)
|
(161,090
|
)
|
||||||
Stockholders'
deficit
|
$
|
(38,280
|
)
|
$
|
(6,162
|
)
|
$
|
(1,085
|
)
|
$
|
(52,067
|
)
|
$
|
(12,268
|
)
|
(1)
Reflects the impact of significant corporate and financing restructuring
in 2004 as described in Notes C and F to the consolidated financial
statements.
|
||||||||||||||||
(2)
Includes the estimated fair value of conversion features of convertible
debt outstanding as of December 31,
2006.
|
26
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS
OF
OPERATIONS
This
discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Company’s
financial statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere in this Report.
Operating results are not necessarily indicative of results that may occur
in
the future periods. Certain statements in this Report under this Item 7, Item
1,
"Business", Item 1A, “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Report constitute
"forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements involve known
and
unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual
results, performance or achievements of the Company, or industry results, to
be
materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements
expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. See
page
1 of this Report for a description of the
most
significant of such factors.
Company
Overview
Acura
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is a specialty pharmaceutical company engaged in research,
development and manufacture of innovative Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology
and related product candidates. Product candidates developed with Aversion®
Technology and containing opioid analgesic active ingredients are intended
to
effectively treat pain and also discourage the three most common methods of
pharmaceutical product misuse and abuse including; (i) intravenous injection
of
dissolved tablets or capsules, (ii) nasal snorting of crushed tablets or
capsules and (iii) intentional swallowing of excessive numbers of tablets or
capsules. OxyADF Tablets, the Company’s lead product candidate utilizing
Aversion® Technology, is being developed pursuant to an active investigational
new drug application (“IND”) on file with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(“FDA”). The Company conducts internal research, development, laboratory,
manufacturing and warehousing activities for Aversion® Technology at its Culver,
Indiana facility. The 28,000 square foot facility is registered by the U.S.
Drug
Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) to perform research, development and
manufacture of certain Schedule II - V finished dosage form products. In
addition to internal capabilities and activities, the Company engages numerous
of pharmaceutical product contract research organizations (“CROs”) with
expertise in regulatory affairs, clinical trial design and monitoring, clinical
data management, biostatistics, medical writing, laboratory testing and related
services. Such CROs perform development services for OxyADF Tablets and other
product candidates under the direction of the Company. As of the date of this
Report, the Company has one U.S. patent Notice of Allowance relating to its
Aversion® Technology, In addition, as of the date of this Report, the Company
has two U.S. non-provisional patent publications, one U.S. non-provisional
patent application, one U.S. provisional patent application, and two
international patent publications pending relating to its Aversion® Technology.
The Company also has seven U.S. issued patents and has one U.S. patent
publication pending related to its Opioid Synthesis Technologies. As of the
date
of this Report, the Company has retained all of the intellectual property and
commercial rights to Aversion® Technology and related product candidates, and
the Opioid Synthesis Technologies. To generate revenue the Company plans to
enter into development and commercialization agreements with strategically
focused pharmaceutical company partners (the "Partners") providing that such
Partners license product candidates utilizing Aversion® Technology and further
develop, register and commercialize multiple strengths and package sizes of
such
product candidates. The Company expects to receive revenue in the form of
milestone payments and a share of profits and/or royalty payments derived from
the Partners' future sale of products incorporating Aversion® Technology. As of
the date of this Report, the Company did not have any executed collaborative
agreements with Partners, nor can there be any assurance that the Company will
successfully enter into such collaborative agreements in the
future.
The
Company was historically engaged in development of novel manufacturing processes
(the "Opioid Synthesis Technologies") intended for use in the commercial
manufacture of certain bulk opioid active pharmaceutical ingredients. In early
2005, the Company announced the suspension of activities relating to the Opioid
Synthesis Technologies pending the deputy DEA Administrator's determination
relating to the Company’s pending application for registration to import
narcotic raw materials (the "Narcotic Raw Materials Import Application") filed
with the DEA in early 2001. In late 2006 the Company notified the DEA that
it
was withdrawing the Narcotic Raw Materials Import Application and subsequently
the Company has discontinued all activities relating to the Opioid Synthesis
Technologies. The withdrawal of the Narcotic Raw Material Import Application
and
the discontinuation of all activities relating to the Opioid Synthesis
Technologies allows the Company to focus all of its resources on developing
and
commercializing its Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology and related product
candidates.
27
The
Company has incurred net losses since 1992 and the Company's consolidated
financial statements for each of the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and
2004 have been prepared on a going-concern basis; however, in its report dated
March 13, 2007 regarding those financial statements, our registered independent
public accounting firm referred to substantial doubt about the Company's ability
to continue as a going-concern as a result of recurring losses, net capital
deficiency and negative cash flows. The Company's future profitability will
depend on several factors, including:
(a)
the
Company’s ability to secure additional financing to fund continued
operations;
(b)
the
successful completion of the formulation development, clinical testing and
acceptable regulatory review of product candidates utilizing the Aversion®
Technology; (c) the Company's ability to negotiate and execute appropriate
licensing, development and commercialization agreements with interested third
parties relating to the Company’s product candidates; and (d) the successful
commercialization by licensees of products incorporating the Aversion®
Technology without infringing the patents and other intellectual property rights
of third parties.
Company’s
Present Financial Condition
At
December 31, 2006, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$228,000 compared to approximately $260,000 at December 31, 2005. The Company
had a working capital deficit of $28.6 million at December 31, 2006 and $2.5
million at December 31, 2005. The Company had an accumulated deficit of
approximately $317.5 million and $291.6 million at December 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005, respectively. The Company incurred a loss from operations
of
approximately $10.8 million and a net loss of approximately $6.0 million during
the year ended December 31, 2006, as compared to a loss from operations of
$11.6
million and a net loss of $12.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.
As
of
March 1, 2007, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$492,000. The Company estimates that its current cash reserves will be
sufficient to fund the development of the Aversion® Technology and related
operating expenses through late March, 2007. See “Liquidity and Capital
Resources - Cash Reserves and Funding Requirements.”
Results
of Operations for the Year Ended December 31, 2006 and 2005
Research
and Development Expenses:
The
Company’s research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2006
and 2005 were as follows (in thousands):
12/31/06
R&D
EXPENSES
|
12/31/05
R&D
EXPENSES
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
R&D
EXPENSES
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
R&D
EXPENSES
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
5,172
|
$
|
6,265
|
$
|
(1,093
|
)
|
(17.4
|
)%
|
Research
and development expenses related primarily to development of our
Aversion®
Technology, including costs of preclinical studies, clinical trials, clinical
supplies and related formulation and design costs, salaries and other personnel
related expenses, and facility costs. Included in the 2006 and 2005 results
are
non-cash stock-based compensation charges of $2,067 and $3,325, respectively,
and included in the 2005 result is a $284 benefit from the reversal of an
incentive compensation accrual. Excluding the stock-based compensation expense
and the accrued incentive compensation benefit, there was a $119 decrease in
overall research and development expenses. This decrease was primarily the
net
result of an increase in clinical study and related consulting expenses of
$197
offset by lower wage and benefit costs of $222 reflecting fewer Company
employees, lower facility operating costs of $50, and reduced outside testing
expenses on discontinued products of $44 in 2006. The decrease in stock-based
compensation expense of $1,258 occurred because the number of stock options
and
restricted stock units that vested in 2006 was less than 2005.
Selling,
Marketing, General and Administrative Expenses:
The
Company’s selling, marketing, general and administrative expenses for the year
ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 were as follows (in thousands):
12/31/06
SELLING,
MARKETING,
G&A
EXPENSES
|
12/31/05
SELLING,
MARKETING, G&A EXPENSES
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
SELLING,
MARKETING, G&A EXPENSES
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
SELLING,
MARKETING, G&A EXPENSES
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
5,654
|
$
|
5,296
|
$
|
358
|
6.7
|
%
|
During
the year ended December 31, 2006, the marketing expenses consisted of Aversion®
Technology market research studies and payroll costs. The Company’s general and
administrative expenses consisted of legal, audit and other professional fees,
corporate insurance, and payroll costs. Included in the 2006 and 2005 results is
$3,517 and $3,133, respectively, of stock-based compensation expense. Also
included in the 2005 result is a $175 benefit from the reversal of an incentive
compensation accrual. Excluding the stock-based compensation expense and
incentive compensation benefit, the marketing, general and administrative
expenses decreased by $201 primarily attributable to a reduction in legal costs
as a result of less corporate and financial restructuring efforts. Of the
increase in stock-based compensation expense, $680 was from the February 2006
grant of two million restricted stock units to the Company's independent
directors. The stock-based compensation expense attributable to employees
decreased by $295 because the number of stock options and restricted stock
units
that vested in 2006 were less than 2005.
28
Interest
Expense, net of Interest Income:
The
Company’s interest expense, net of interest income for the year ended December
31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows (in thousands):
12/31/06
INTEREST
EXPENSE,
NET OF
INTEREST
INCOME
|
12/31/05
INTEREST
EXPENSE, NET OF INTEREST INCOME
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
INTEREST
EXPENSE, NET OF INTEREST INCOME
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
INTEREST
EXPENSE, NET OF INTEREST INCOME
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
1,122
|
$
|
600
|
$
|
522
|
87.1
|
%
|
The
Company incurs interest at the prime interest rate plus 4.5%, payable quarterly
in common stock, on its $5.0 million secured term note payable. The Company
incurs 10% annual interest, payable quarterly, on its $7.8 million Bridge Loans.
Interest on such Bridge Loans through June 30, 2006 was paid in cash. Commencing
with interest due under such Bridge Loans at September 30, 2006, all such
interest was paid in the Company’s Common Stock. The increase in net interest
expense in 2006 resulted from the addition of $5.3 million of Bridge Loans
during 2006 and increases in the prime interest rate.
Net
Loss:
The
Company’s net loss for the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows
(in thousands):
12/31/06
NET
LOSS
|
12/31/05
NET
LOSS
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
NET
LOSS
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/06-12/31/05
NET
LOSS
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
5,967
|
$
|
12,075
|
($6,108
|
)
|
(50.6
|
%)
|
Included
in the net loss for 2006 is a non cash compensation charge of $5,726 arising
from the issuance of stock options and restricted stock units as compared to
$6,459 for such charges in 2005.
The
November 2006 amendment of the conversion feature on all of the then outstanding
Bridge Loans, coupled with the requirements to separate the value of the
conversion feature from the debt, required the Company to record the value
of
the amended conversion feature on that outstanding debt as a liability and
a
loss on the modification of debt. The Company assigned a value of $19,951 to
these conversion features and reflected the modification loss as a non-cash
deemed dividend. While the aggregate non-cash deemed dividend of $19,960 did
not
impact reported net loss, it does have an impact on loss per common share.
Upon
revaluing the aggregate conversion features on all outstanding Bridge Loans
as
of December 31, 2006, the Company recorded the resulting decrease in value
as a
$4,235 gain. The decrease in the Company’s common stock trading price from
November 2006 to year end resulted in the decrease in the value of the
conversion liability.
As
a
result of the November 2006 amendment to the Bridge Loans, a $12,948 liability
and corresponding reduction in additional paid-in capital, for the common stock
purchase warrants was recorded. The mark to market fair value adjustments to
the
warrant liability resulted in a $2,164 gain recorded in the 4th
quarter
2006. Future period fair value adjustments to the warrant liability could result
in further gains or losses.
The
Company’s loss per share in 2006 versus 2005 ($0.08 versus $0.18, respectively)
was favorably impacted by the conversion on November 10, 2005 of approximately
218.0 million preferred shares into approximately 305.8 million common shares.
On a weighted average basis, this increased the number of common shares in
the
loss per share calculation to approximately 345 million shares in 2006 as
compared to 66.6 million shares in 2005. For periods prior to November 10,
2005,
the Company’s convertible preferred shares were anti-dilutive and therefore
excluded from the loss per share calculation. Additionally, the 2006 loss per
share was impacted by the non-cash deemed dividend described above.
Results
of Operations for the Year Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004
In
comparing results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 with those
for 2004 it is important to consider that in 2005 the Company focused all of
its
efforts and resources on research and development activities and, subsequent
to
March, 2004, no longer maintained any generic product manufacturing facilities
or conducted any finished dosage generic product manufacturing activities.
As
such, the Company had no product revenues or manufacturing expenses in
2005.
29
Research
and Development Expenses:
The
Company’s research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2005
and 2004 were as follows (in thousands):
12/31/05
R&D
EXPENSES
|
12/31/04
R&D
EXPENSES
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
R&D
EXPENSES
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
R&D
EXPENSES
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
6,265
|
$
|
4,130
|
$
|
2,135
|
51.7
|
%
|
During
2005 and 2004, research and development expenses consisted primarily of
development of our
Aversion®
Technology, including costs of preclinical, clinical trials, clinical supplies
and related formulation and design costs, salaries and other personnel related
expenses, and facility costs. The increase in R&D expenses in 2005 versus
2004 is primarily due to the recording of a non cash compensation charge of
$3,325 arising from the issuance of stock options and restricted stock units
to
R&D personnel as compared to $553 for such items in 2004. Except for this
non cash compensation charge, R&D expenses declined in 2005 versus 2004 by
approximately $637 primarily as a result of elimination in 2004 of the
development of generic pharmaceutical products and the suspension in 2005 of
further development of the Opioid Synthesis Technologies.
Selling,
Marketing, General and Administrative Expenses:
The
Company’s selling, marketing, general and administrative expenses for the year
ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 were as follows (in thousands):
12/31/05
SELLING, MARKETING,
G&A
EXPENSES
|
12/31/04
SELLING,
MARKETING, G&A EXPENSES
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
SELLING,
MARKETING, G&A EXPENSES
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
SELLING,
MARKETING, G&A EXPENSES
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
5,296
|
$
|
5,238
|
$
|
58
|
1.1
|
%
|
Included
in 2005 selling, marketing, general and administrative expenses is a non cash
compensation charge of $3,133 arising from the issuance of stock options and
restricted stock units to SG&A personnel as compared to only $1,453 for such
items in 2004. Except for this charge, SG&A expenses in 2005 decreased
approximately $1,622 as compared to 2004 due primarily to the Company’s 2004
discontinuation of the manufacture and sale of generic pharmaceutical products
and the related reduction of its administrative and manufacturing support staff.
Interest
Expense, net of Interest Income:
The
Company’s interest expense, net of interest income for the year ended December
31, 2005 and 2004 was as follows (in thousands):
12/31/05
INTEREST
EXPENSE,
NET OF
INTEREST
INCOME
|
12/31/04
INTEREST
EXPENSE, NET OF INTEREST INCOME
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
INTEREST
EXPENSE, NET OF INTEREST INCOME
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
INTEREST
EXPENSE, NET OF INTEREST INCOME
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
600
|
$
|
2,903
|
($
2,303
|
)
|
(79.3
|
%)
|
The
change in the interest expense, net of interest income reflects the interest
savings from the restructuring of the Company's term note indebtedness to Watson
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in February, 2004 as well as the conversion of the
Company’s 5% convertible debentures into convertible preferred stock on August
13, 2004.
The
Company incurred no amortization of debt discount or deferred private debt
offering costs for the year ended December 31, 2005 as all such costs were
fully
amortized to expense in 2004 (an aggregate charge of $72.5 million) when all
convertible debentures were converted into preferred stock. Similarly, the
extinguishment of approximately $16.4 million of the Watson debt gave rise
in
2004 to a gain of $12,401.
30
Net
Loss:
The
Company’s net loss for the year ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 was as follows
(in thousands):
12/31/05
NET
LOSS
|
12/31/04
NET
LOSS
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
NET
LOSS
$
CHANGE
|
12/31/05-12/31/04
NET
LOSS
%
CHANGE
|
||||||||
$ |
12,075
|
$
|
69,996
|
($
57,921
|
)
|
(82.7
|
%)
|
Included
in the net loss for 2005 is a non cash compensation charge of $6,458 arising
from the issuance of stock options and restricted stock units as compared to
$2,006 for such charges in 2004. Certain significant net expenses occurred
in
2004 as a result of restructuring operations and conversion of debt to preferred
shares. These net expenses included the full amortization of the remaining
debt
discount and deferred private debt offering costs of $72,491, gains on debt
restructuring of the Watson note of $12,401 and asset sales of $2,359, net
interest expense of $2,903 and other income of $603 relating to settlements
of a
liabilities at discount.
The
Company’s loss per share in 2005 versus 2004 ($0.18 versus $3.20, respectively)
was favorably impacted by the conversion on November 10, 2005 of approximately
218.0 million preferred shares into approximately 305.8 million common shares.
On a weighted average basis, this increased the number of common shares in
the
loss per share calculation to approximately 66.5 million shares in 2005 as
compared to 21.9 million shares in 2004. For periods prior to November 10,
2005,
the Company’s convertible preferred shares were anti-dilutive and therefore
excluded from the loss per share calculation.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
At
December 31, 2006, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of $228,000
compared to $260,000 at December 31, 2005. The Company had a working capital
deficit of $28.6 million at December 31, 2006 compared to a working capital
deficit of $2.5 million at December 31, 2005. This large increase is primarily
due to pending 2007 debt maturities and related value of embedded conversion
features. Cash used in operating activities was $5,383,000, $5,527,000 and
$9,493,000 for years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively,
due
principally to cash expenditures related to selling, general and administrative
expenses and research and development expenses.
Amendment
to Watson Term Loan Agreement
The
Company was a party to a certain loan agreement with Watson Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. ("Watson") pursuant to which Watson made term loans to the Company (the
"Watson Term Loan Agreement") in the aggregate principal amount of $21.4 million
as evidenced by two promissory notes (the "Watson Notes"). As part of the
Company’s 2004 debenture offering, the Company paid Watson the sum of
approximately $4.3 million (which amount was funded from the proceeds of the
2004 debenture offering) and conveyed to Watson certain Company assets in
consideration for Watson's forgiveness of approximately $16.4 million of
indebtedness under the Watson Notes. As part of such transaction, the Watson
Notes were amended to extend the maturity date of such notes from March 31,
2006
to June 30, 2007, to provide for satisfaction of future interest payments under
the Watson Notes in the form of the Company's Common Stock, to reduce the
principal amount of the Watson Notes from $21.4 million to $5.0 million, and
to
provide for the forbearance from the exercise of rights and remedies upon the
occurrence of certain events of default under the Watson Notes (the Watson
Notes
as so amended, the "2004 Note"). Simultaneous with the issuance of the 2004
Note, each of Care Capital, Essex Woodlands Health Ventures, Galen Partners
and
the other investors in the Company’s 2004 debentures as of February 10, 2004
(collectively, the "Watson Note Purchasers") purchased the 2004 Note from Watson
in consideration for a payment to Watson of $1.0 million.
The
2004
Note in the principal amount of $5.0 million as purchased by the Watson Note
Purchasers is secured by a lien on all of the Company's and its subsidiaries'
assets, including a mortgage lien on the Culver Facility, carries a floating
rate of interest equal to the prime rate plus 4.5% (paid quarterly in the
Company’s common stock) and matures on June 30, 2007. To the extent cash is not
available to the Company to pay of its near-term debt obligations upon maturity,
management expects to negotiate with its lenders to arrange for alternative
means to settle the obligations, including the extension of maturity or
conversion into equity. The lenders have extended the Bridge Loan maturity
dates
and have added conversion features to those Bridge Loans on multiple occasions
during 2005 and 2006. The majority holders of the Bridge Loans also are the
majority holders of the 2004 Note maturing June 30, 2007.
Bridge
Loan Financing
As
of the
date of this Report, the Company was a party to four (4) loan agreements
completed in January 2006, November, 2005, September, 2005 and June, 2005,
each
as amended to date, pursuant to which the Company has received bridge financing
installments in the aggregate principal amount of $8,744,000
(the
“Bridge Loans”) from Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P., Care Capital
Investments II, LP, Care Capital Offshore Investments II, LP, Galen Partners
International III, L.P., Galen Partners III, L.P., Galen Employee Fund III,
L.P.
(collectively, the “VC Lenders”) and certain other shareholders of the Company
listed on the signature page to such Bridge Loan agreements. See
“Item
13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence”
for a description of the Bridge Loan Financing.
31
GCE
Holdings LLC, which is controlled by the VC Lenders, beneficially owns
approximately 77% of the Company’s outstanding common stock and has the right to
designate four directors (of which it has exercised the right with respect
to
three directors) to the Company’s Board of Directors. See “Item 13 - Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.”
Cash
Reserves and Funding Requirements
As
of
March
1,
2007,
the Company had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $492,000.
The majority of such cash reserves will be dedicated to the development of
the
Company's Aversion® Technology, the prosecution of the Company's patent
applications relating to the Aversion® Technology and for administrative and
related operating expenses.
The
Company must rely on its current cash reserves to fund the development of its
Aversion® Technology and related ongoing administrative and operating expenses.
The Company's future sources of revenue, if any, will be derived from contract
signing fees, milestone payments and royalties and/or profit sharing payments
from licensees for the Company's Aversion® Technology. The Company estimates
that its current cash reserves
will be
sufficient to fund the development of the Aversion®
Technology and related operating expenses through late March, 2007. To fund
further operations and product development activities, the Company must raise
additional financing, or enter into alliances or collaboration agreements with
third parties resulting in cash payments to the Company. The Company is seeking
to secure working capital providing gross proceeds to the Company in the range
of approximately $10 million to $15 million through the private offering of
the
Company’s securities. The terms of any such securities offering, including,
without limitation, the type of equity securities (or securities convertible
into equity securities) and the price per share, have not been determined and
will, in large part, be determined based upon negotiations between the Company
and prospective investors in such private offering. No assurance can be given
that the Company will be successful in obtaining any such financing or in
securing collaborative agreements with third parties on acceptable terms, if
at
all, or if secured, that such financing or collaborative agreements will provide
for payments to the Company sufficient to continue to fund operations. In the
absence of such financing or third-party collaborative agreements, the Company
will be required to scale back or terminate operations and/or seek protection
under applicable bankruptcy laws.
Even
assuming the Company is successful in securing additional sources of financing
to fund the continued development of the Aversion® Technology, or otherwise
enters into alliances or collaborative agreements relating to the Aversion®
Technology, there can be no assurance that the Company's development efforts
will result in commercially viable products. The Company's failure to
successfully develop the Aversion® Technology in a timely manner, to continue to
obtain issued U.S. patents relating to the Aversion® Technology and to avoid
infringing third-party patents and other intellectual property rights will
have
a material adverse impact on its financial condition and results of
operations.
In
view
of the matters described above, recoverability of a major portion of the
recorded asset amounts shown in the Company's accompanying consolidated balance
sheets is dependent upon continued operations of the Company, which in turn
are
dependent upon the Company's ability to meet its financing requirements on
a
continuing basis, to maintain present financing, and to succeed in its future
operations. The Company's financial statements do not include any adjustment
relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts
or
amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should the
Company be unable to continue in existence.
32
The
following table presents the Company's expected cash payments on contractual
obligations outstanding as of December 31, 2006 (in thousands):
TOTAL
|
DUE
IN
2007
|
DUE
IN
2008
|
DUE
THEREAFTER
|
||||||||||
Notes
payable, gross
|
$
|
12,848
|
$
|
12,848
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
|||||
Capital
leases
|
32
|
25
|
7
|
—
|
|||||||||
Operating
leases
|
19
|
19
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Clinical
studies
|
162
|
162
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Annual
interest on fixed rate debt (1)
|
194
|
194
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Employment
agreements
|
740
|
740
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Total
contractual obligations
|
$
|
13,995
|
$
|
13,988
|
$
|
7
|
$
|
—
|
Expected
cash payments on contractual obligations entered into subsequent
to
December
31, 2006
|
TOTAL
|
DUE
IN
2007
|
DUE
THEREAFTER
|
|||||||
Notes
payable and related interest
|
$
|
910
|
$
|
910
|
$
|
—
|
(1)
|
At
the Company’s option, interest on fixed rate debt is payable in either
cash or common shares.
|
Critical
Accounting Policies
Note
A of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included as a part of this
Report, includes a summary of the Company's significant accounting policies
and
methods used in the preparation of the financial statements. In preparing these
financial statements, the Company has made its best estimates and judgments
of
certain amounts included in the financial statements, giving due consideration
to materiality. The application of these accounting policies involves the
exercise of judgment and use of assumptions as to future uncertainties and,
as a
result, actual results could differ from these estimates. The Company does
not
believe there is a consequential likelihood that materially different amounts
would be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions.
The
Company's critical accounting policies are as follows:
Income
Taxes
Deferred
income taxes are recognized for temporary differences between financial
statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities and loss carry-forwards
for which income tax benefits are expected to be realized in future years.
A
valuation allowance is established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax
assets to the amount expected to be realized. In estimating future tax
consequences, the Company generally considers all expected future events other
than an enactment of changes in the tax laws or rates. The Company has recorded
a full valuation allowance to reduce its net deferred income tax assets to
the
amount that is more likely than not to be realized. In the event the Company
were to determine that it would be able to realize its deferred income tax
assets in the future, an adjustment to reduce the valuation allowance would
increase income in the period such determination was made.
Stock
Compensation
On
December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) released
FASB Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment, (“FASB 123R”)”.
These changes in accounting replaced existing requirements under FASB Statement
No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation” (“FASB 123”), and eliminated
the ability to account for share-based compensation transaction using APB
Opinion No.25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” (“APB 25”). The
compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions will be measured
based on the fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. This
Statement did not change the accounting for similar transactions involving
parties other than employees.
The
Company adopted FASB 123R effective January 1, 2006 under the modified
prospective method, which recognizes compensation cost beginning with the
effective date (a) based on the requirements of FASB 123R for all share-based
payments granted after the effective date and to awards modified, repurchased,
or cancelled after that date and (b) based on the requirements of FASB Statement
No. 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of
FAS
123R that remain unvested on the effective date. The compensation cost relating
to share-based payment transactions is now measured based on the fair value
of
the equity or liability instruments issued. For purposes of estimating the
fair
value of each stock option unit on the date of grant, the Company utilized
the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The Black-Scholes option valuation model
was
developed for use in estimating the fair value of traded options, which have
no
vesting restrictions and are fully transferable. The valuation models require
the input of highly subjective assumptions including the expected volatility
factor of the market price of the Company’s common stock (as determined by
reviewing its historical public market closing prices). Black-Scholes
utilizes other assumptions related to the risk-free interest rate, the dividend
yield (which is assumed to be zero, as the Company has not paid any cash
dividends) and employee exercise behavior. The risk-free interest rate is
derived from the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The
expected life of the grants is derived from historical factors. Because
the Company's employee stock options have characteristics significantly
different from those of traded options and because changes in the subjective
input assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate, in management's
opinion, the existing models do not necessarily provide a reliable measure
of
the fair value of its employee stock options.
33
Debt
Discount
Debt
discount resulting from the issuance of common stock warrants in connection
with
the issuance of subordinated debt and other notes payable in 2004 as well as
from beneficial conversion features contained in convertible debt instruments
issued in 2004 and prior years, was recorded as a reduction of the related
obligations and was amortized over the remaining life of the related
obligations. Debt discount related to the common stock warrants issued was
determined by a calculation based on the relative fair values ascribed to such
warrants determined by management's use of the Black-Scholes valuation model.
Inherent in the Black-Scholes valuation model are assumptions made by management
regarding the estimated life of the warrant, the estimated volatility of the
Company's common stock (as determined by reviewing its historical public market
closing prices) and the expected dividend yield. In August 2004, all related
debt was converted into various series of preferred stock and the entire
remaining unamortized debt discount of $41,090,000 was charged to expense.
Subsequently, all outstanding series of preferred stock was converted into
common stock in 2005. As described more fully in the notes to the consolidated
financial statement, additional debt discount of $1,025,000 was recorded in
2006
and is being amortized through the March 31, 2007 maturity of the related debt.
Conversion
Features and Common Stock Warrants
Certain
provisions of the amended conversion features contained in the Company’s
outstanding Bridge Loans in November 2006, required the Company to separate
the
value of the conversion feature from this debt and record such value as a
separate liability which must be marked-to-market each balance sheet date.
Future period fair value adjustments to the conversion feature could result
in
further gains or losses. To compute the estimated value of the conversion
features, the Company used the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. As a result
of the November 2006 amendment to the Bridge Loans, all outstanding common
stock
purchase warrants were fair valued using the Black - Scholes option-pricing
model and recorded as a liability with corresponding reduction in additional
paid-in capital. The liability must be marked-to-market each balance sheet.
Future period fair value adjustments to the warrant liability could result
in
further gains or losses.
New
Accounting Pronouncements
Changes
and Error Corrections
In
May
2005, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 154,
“Accounting Changes and Error Corrections - A Replacement of APB Opinion No.
20
and FASB Statement No. 3”, (“SFAS 154”). SFAS 154 primarily requires
retrospective application to prior periods’ financial statements for the direct
effects of changes in accounting principle, unless it is impracticable to
determine either the period-specific effects or the cumulative effect of the
change. SFAS 154 is effective for accounting changes and corrections of errors
made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005.
Share-Based
Payment
The
Company adopted FASB 123R effective January 1, 2006 under the modified
prospective method, which recognizes compensation cost beginning with the
effective date (a) based on the requirements of FASB 123R for all share-based
payments granted after the effective date and to awards modified, repurchased,
or cancelled after that date and (b) based on the requirements of FASB Statement
No. 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of
FAS
123R that remain unvested on the effective date. The only cumulative effect
of
initially applying this Statement for the Company was to reclassify $5,724,000
of previously recorded unearned compensation into paid-in capital. The Company
has estimated that an additional $5,827,000 will be expensed over the applicable
remaining vesting periods for all share-based payments granted to employees
on
or before December 31, 2005 which remained unvested on January 1, 2006. The
Company anticipates that more compensation costs will be recorded in the future
if the use of options and restricted stock units for employees and director
compensation continues as in the past.
34
Certain
Hybrid Financial Instruments
In
February 2006, FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 155,
"Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments - an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 133 and 140" (“SFAS 155”). SFAS 155 resolves issues addressed in
Statement 133 Implementation Issue No. D1, “Application of Statement 133 to
Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets.” SFAS 155 is effective for
all financial instruments acquired or issued after the beginning of the first
fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. As such, the Company is
required to adopt these provisions at January 1, 2007. The Company is evaluating
the impact of SFAS 155, but currently does not anticipate any material impact
to
its consolidated financial statements.
Uncertainty
in Income Taxes
In
July
2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48 ("FIN 48") regarding "Accounting
for
Uncertainties in Income Taxes," which defines the threshold for recognizing
the
benefits of tax-return positions in the financial statements as
"more-likely-than-not" to be sustained by the taxing authorities. FIN 48 also
requires explicit disclosure requirements about a Company's uncertainties
related to their income tax position, including a detailed rollforward of tax
benefits taken that do not qualify for financial statement recognition. This
Interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2006.
The cumulative effect of applying the provisions of FIN 48 will be reported
as
an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings for that fiscal year.
The Company is evaluating the possible impact of FIN 48, but currently does
not
anticipate any material impact to its consolidated financial statements.
Fair
Value Measurements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, “Fair Value Measurements.” SFAS 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value under
generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective for financial statements issued for
fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within
those
fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of
this statement could have on is financial condition, results of operations
or
cash flows.
Capital
Expenditures
The
Company’s capital expenditures during 2006, 2005 and 2004 were $85,000, $35,000
and $444,000, respectively. Capital expenditures in 2006 and 2005 were
attributable to the purchase of scientific equipment and improvements to the
Culver, Indiana facility. The capital expenditures during 2004 were attributable
to capital improvements to the Company's Culver, Indiana facility and its former
Congers, NY facilities.
Impact
of Inflation
The
Company believes that inflation did not have a material impact on its operations
for the periods reported.
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
None
of
the securities that we invest in are subject to market risk. To minimize this
risk in the future, we intend to maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents
in a
variety of securities, including commercial paper, governmental and
non-government debt securities and/or money market funds that invest in such
securities. We have no holdings of derivative financial and commodity
instruments. As of December 31, 2006, our investments consisted primarily of
short-term bank commercial paper and checking funds with variable, market rates
of interest.
The
Company has indebtedness, some of which incurs interest on a floating basis
in
relation to the Prime Rate. To the extent that inflation is reflected in higher
interest rates, the Company would expect to incur greater interest costs on
this
debt. A one-percentage point increase in interest rates would result in a
$50,000 increase in interest expense on an annualized basis. The Company’s
floating rate debt currently matures in June 2007.
35
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
This
item
is submitted as a separate section of this Report commencing on page
F-1.
ITEM
9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
Not
Applicable.
ITEM
9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The
Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of the Company's management, including the Company’s Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the effectiveness of the design
and operation of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures pursuant
to
Exchange Act Rule 13a-14. Based upon that evaluation, the Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Company's disclosure
controls and procedures are effective in timely alerting them to material
information relating to the Company (including its subsidiaries) required to
be
included in the Company's periodic Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
No significant changes were made in the Company's internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to the date
of
their evaluation.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
There
was no change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the period covered by this Report that has materially affected,
or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control
over-financial reporting.
Item
9B. OTHER
INFORMATION
Not
Applicable.
PART
III
ITEM
10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Directors
and Executive Officers
The
directors and executive officers of the Company are identified in
“Item
1. Business” herein.
Corporate
Governance
Audit
Committee
The
Audit
Committee of the Board of Directors is composed of Messrs. William A. Sumner,
Chairman, Immanuel Thangaraj and Bruce F. Wesson. The Audit Committee is
responsible for selecting the Company's registered independent public accounting
firm, approving the audit fee payable to the auditors, working with independent
auditors and other corporate officials, reviewing the scope and results of
the
audit by, and the recommendations of, the Company's independent auditors,
approving the services provided by the auditors, reviewing the financial
statements of the Company and reporting on the results of the audits to the
Board, reviewing the Company's insurance coverage, financial controls and
filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission"),
including, meeting quarterly prior to the filing of the Company's quarterly
and
annual reports containing financial statements filed with the Commission, and
submitting to the Board its recommendations relating to the Company's financial
reporting, accounting practices and policies and financial, accounting and
operational controls.
In
assessing the independence of the Audit Committee members during 2006, the
Company has reviewed and analyzed the standards for independence provided in
Section 121A of the American Stock Exchange Listing Standards. Based on this
analysis, the Company has determined that Mr. Sumner is deemed an independent
member of the Audit Committee. Messrs. Wesson and Thangaraj do not satisfy
the
standards for independence set forth in the American Stock Exchange Listing
Standards as a result of their positions in entities having a controlling
interest in GCE Holdings, LLC, the Company’s 77% shareholder. GCE Holdings, LLC
was the assignee of all the Company’s preferred shares previously held by each
of Care
Capital Investments II, LP, Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P. and Galen
Partners III, L.P. In view of the controlling interests in GCE Holdings, LLC
held by each of Galen Partners III, L.P., of which Mr. Wesson is a general
partner, and Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P., of which Mr. Thangaraj
is
a general partner, each of Messrs. Wesson and Thangaraj fail to satisfy the
standards for independence set forth in the American Stock Exchange Listing
Standards. Nevertheless, the
Board
values the experience of Messrs. Wesson and Thangaraj in the review of the
Company's financial statements and believes that each is able to exercise
independent judgment in the performance of his duties on the Audit
Committee.
36
The
Audit
Committee does not have a financial expert (as defined under applicable
regulations of the Commission) serving on the Committee. The Board has
determined that while none of the Audit Committee members meet all of the
criteria established by the Commission to be classified as a "financial expert",
the Company believes that in general, the members of the Audit Committee have
a
sufficient understanding of audit committee functions, internal control over
financial reporting and financial statement evaluation so as to capably perform
the tasks required of the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee’s Charter is
available on the Company's website, www.acurapharm.com, under the link “Audit
Charter”.
Compensation
Committee
The
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors is composed of Messrs. Andrew
D. Reddick, Richard J. Markham and William G. Skelly. This committee is
responsible for consulting with and making recommendations to the Board of
Directors about executive compensation and compensation of employees. See
“Item
11.
Executive Compensation
-
Compensation Discussion
and Analysis”
below.
Nominating
Committee
Currently
the entire Board of Directors functions as the Company's nominating committee.
As needed, the Board will perform the functions typical of a nominating
committee, including the identification, recruitment and selection of nominees
for election as directors of the Company. Two of the six members of the Board
(Messrs. Sumner and Skelly) are "independent" as that term is defined by Section
121(A) of the American Stock Exchange Listing Standards and will participate
with the entire Board in the consideration of director nominees. The Board
believes that a nominating committee separate from itself is not necessary
at
this time, given the relative size of the Company and the Board. The Board
also
believes that, given the Company's relative size and the size of its Board,
an
additional committee of the Board would not add to the effectiveness of the
evaluation and nomination process. The Board's process for recruiting and
selecting nominees for Board members, if required, would be to identify
individuals who are thought to have the business background and experience,
industry specific knowledge and general reputation and expertise allowing them
to contribute as effective directors to the Company's governance, and who would
be willing to serve as directors of a public company. To date, the Company
has
not engaged any third party to assist in identifying or evaluating potential
nominees. If a possible candidate is identified, the individual will meet with
various members of the Board and be sounded out concerning his/her possible
interest and willingness to serve, and Board members would discuss amongst
themselves the individual's potential to be an effective Board member. If the
discussions and evaluation are positive, the individual would be invited to
serve on the Board. To date, no shareholder has presented any candidate for
Board membership to the Company for consideration, and the Company does not
have
a specific policy on shareholder-recommended director candidates. The Board
believes its process for evaluation of nominees proposed by shareholders would
be no different than the process of evaluating any other candidate. In
evaluating candidates, the Board will require that candidates possess, at a
minimum, a desire to serve on the Company's Board, an ability to contribute
to
the effectiveness of the Board, an understanding of the function of the Board
of
a public company and relevant industry knowledge and experience. In addition,
while not required of any one candidate, the Board would consider favorably
experience, education, training or other expertise in business or financial
matters and prior experience serving on boards of public companies.
Shareholder
Communications to the Board
Shareholders
who wish to send communications to the Company's Board of Directors may do
so by
sending them in care of the Secretary of the Company at the address on the
cover
page of this Report. The envelope containing such communication must contain
a
clear notation indicating that the enclosed letter is a "Shareholder-Board
Communication" or "Shareholder-Director Communication" or similar statement
that
clearly and unmistakably indicates the communication is intended for the Board.
All such communications must clearly indicate the author as a shareholder and
state whether the intended recipients are all members of the Board or just
certain specified directors. The Secretary of the Company will have the
discretion to screen and not forward to directors communications which the
Secretary determines in his or her discretion are communications unrelated
to
the business or governance of the Company and its subsidiaries, commercial
solicitations, or communications that are offensive, obscene, or otherwise
inappropriate. The Secretary will, however, compile all shareholder
communications which are not forwarded and such communications will be available
to any director.
37
Code
of Ethics
The
Company has a Code of Ethics applicable to the Company's principal executive
officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer. The
Code
of Ethics and any amendments to or waivers there from, is available on the
Company's website, www.acurapharm.com, under the link “Code of
Ethics”.
Section
16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section
16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires the Company's
Directors and executive officers, and persons who own beneficially more than
ten
percent (10%) of the Common Stock of the Company, to file reports of ownership
and changes of ownership with the Commission. Copies of all filed reports are
required to be furnished to the Company pursuant to Section 16(a). Based solely
on the reports received by the Company and on written representations from
reporting persons, the Company believes that the Directors, executive officers
and greater than ten percent (10%) beneficial owners of the Company's Common
Stock complied with all Section 16(a) filing requirements during the year ended
December 31, 2006, except as
noted
below. To the extent, and only to the extent,
Galen
Partners III, L.P., Galen
Partners International,
III,
L.P., Galen
Employee Fund III, L.P.,
Care
Capital Offshore Investments II, LP and
Care
Capital Investments II, LP are
deemed to own beneficially the shares of the Company’s Common Stock held by GCE
Holdings, LLC or are members of a group which in the aggregate are deemed to
own
beneficially ten percent of the Company’s Common Stock, they should have each
filed Form 4s with respect to six separate stock issuances in 2006. Essex
Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P. did
file
in 2007 late Form 4s with respect to such stock issuances.
ITEM
11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
Our
executive compensation program consists of (i) an annual salary, bonus,
non-equity incentive compensation and (ii) equity incentives represented by
the
issuance of stock options and restricted stock units (“RSUs”). The bonuses,
non-equity incentives and equity incentives serve to link executive pay to
corporate performance.
Policies
for Allocating Between Various Forms of Compensation
Because
we have insufficient cash reserves, our ability to pay cash bonuses, non-equity
incentive compensation and increase salaries is limited and is dependent on
the
willingness of our bridge lenders to provide such financing or upon our ability
to complete equity or licensing funding transactions. As a result, until our
cash reserve situation improves, we anticipate that most incentive compensation
will be paid in the form of equity-based compensation. However, our goal, if
allowed by our liquidity, is to provide greater cash bonuses and non-equity
incentives. Our equity-based compensation is targeted to allow senior management
to own between 5% and 10% of the outstanding common stock, so as to align their
interests with shareholders’ interests.
In
the
past, we issued stock options as our form of equity compensation. In 2003,
2004
and 2005 we issued stock options with an exercise price at a discount to the
then current trading price for our common stock. Because our stock price is
based on relatively low trading volume and a small public float, it can
fluctuate widely at times. As a result, we feel the issuance of RSUs presents
a
few advantages. First, it allows us to reduce the dilutive effect of this
equity-based compensation, as there are fewer shares underlying a restricted
stock award than an equivalent stock option award. Second, our management has
communicated that the vesting schedule of the RSUs avoids the potential excise
tax under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code upon a change of control.
Third, we believe that stock options issued at a discount have generally fallen
into disfavor. Fourth, it is difficult to set an exercise price for discounted
options due to the low trading volume and small public float for our common
stock.
As
a
result, in 2005 we established a restricted stock unit plan (the “2005 RSU
Plan”) and issued RSUs aggregating 27,500,000 shares to employees. Of such RSU
awards, 30%, 24%, 16%, 6% and 5% were issued to Messrs. Reddick, Spivey,
Clemens, Seiser and Emigh, respectively. It is likely we will maintain a similar
ratio of distribution of equity awards in the future, to those persons and/or
persons in similar positions. In addition, RSUs with respect to 2,000,000 shares
were issued to our two independent directors in 2006. The number of RSUs we
issued was influenced by the closing price of the stock underlying the RSUs
on
the date of grant. There are very few shares remaining available under our
2005
RSU Plan. As such, any significant further awards of RSUs would require an
amendment to the 2005 RSU Plan.
Salary,
Bonus, and Non-Equity Incentive Compensation
Each
of
Andrew Reddick, Ron Spivey and Peter Clemens are parties to employment
agreements, described under the caption “Employment Agreements” below, which
provide the minimum annual base salary to be payable to such officers. In
addition, the employment agreements provide for additional payments, in the
discretion of the Compensation Committee or the Board, subject to the
satisfaction of such targets, conditions or parameters as may be agreed upon
from time to time by the employee and the Compensation Committee. Such
executive’s performance targets for 2007 consist of advancing our OxyADF product
candidate through clinical development, assisting in the raising of funds to
solidify the Company’s liquidity and consummating a collaboration agreement with
a pharmaceutical partner for our OxyADF product candidate.
38
No
compensation will be earned with respect to a performance measure unless a
performance "floor" for that measure is exceeded; the incentive opportunity
with
respect to a measure will be earned if the target is achieved; achievement
between the floor and the target results in a lower amount of award with respect
to that performance measure. An amount larger than the incentive opportunity
for
each performance measure can be earned, up to a specified limit, for exceeding
the target for that measure. In setting compensation levels, the Compensation
Committee compares the Company to companies of comparable business focus, market
capitalization, technological capabilities and market in which we compete for
executives.
In
ascertaining the achieved level of performance against the targets, the effects
of certain extraordinary events, as determined by the Compensation Committee,
such as (i) major acquisitions and divestitures, (ii) significant one-time
charges, and (iii) changes in accounting principles required by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board, are "compensation neutral" for the year in which
they occurred; that is, they are not taken into account in determining the
degree to which the targets are met in that year.
Specifically,
each of our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief
Scientific Officer has a provision in his employment contract providing for
various levels of incentive cash payments depending on the gross amount of
funds
raised by us prior to March 31, 2007, from a funding transaction. If a funding
transaction of at least $11 million occurs by March 31, 2007, these officers
will be entitled to non-equity incentive compensation of up to between 73.3%
and
100% of their base salary based on the gross amount of the funding
transaction.
Since
such a funding transaction did not occur in 2006, there was no non-equity
incentive compensation component of compensation paid to these named executive
officers in 2006. These named executive officers received no bonus compensation
in 2006.
For
those
named executive officers not subject to an employment contract (Messrs. Emigh
and Seiser), the Compensation Committee will set the annual salary for such
named executive officers on or about March of each year and establish potential
bonus compensation that such executives may earn based upon quantitative and,
if
applicable, qualitative performance goals established by the Compensation
Committee. During 2006, these executives received no bonuses or non-equity
incentive compensation.
In
addition, the Compensation Committee may, after a review of an executive’s
performance, recommend to
the
Board that a bonus award be made to such executives based upon other
non-enumerated performance targets (whether or not they are parties to
employment agreements). No such bonuses were paid to any of the named executive
officers listed in the Summary Compensation Table.
Stock
Options
One
long-term component of our executive compensation program consists of stock
option grants. The options generally permit the option holder to buy the number
of shares of our Common Stock covered by the option (an "option exercise")
at a
price fixed at the time of grant. While we have historically granted stock
options having an exercise price equal to the fair market value of our Common
Stock on the date of grant, during 2003, 2004 and 2005, we issued stock options
to our employees at a discount to the trading price of our common stock. The
vesting of these options during 2006 is reflected in the “Option Awards” options
column of the Summary Compensation Table below. It is our expectation that
discounted stock option grants will occur only on an isolated basis in the
future where circumstances warrant. With respect to stock options grants having
an exercise price equal to the market price of our Common Stock on the date
of
grant, such options generally gain value only to the extent our stock price
exceeds the option exercise price during the life of the option. Generally,
a
portion of the options vest over a period of time and expire no later than
ten
years, and in some cases five years after grant. Executives will generally
be
subject to limitations in selling the option stock immediately due to securities
law considerations, and therefore will have an incentive to increase shareholder
value.
Timing
Policies with Respect to Options
We
have
no plan or practice to time option grants in coordination with the release
of
non-public information and we do not time the release of non-public information
to affect the value of executive compensation. Option grant dates for options
issued to new executive officers will likely be the date of their employment
or
execution of their agreements. Any such options may be issued at a discount
to
take into account the limited public float and the wide ranges in our stock
price.
39
Restricted
Stock Units
Another
component of our executive compensation program is the grant of RSUs under
our
2005 RSU Plan. A RSU represents a contingent obligation to deliver a share
of
our common stock to the holder of the RSU on a distribution date. Each RSU
award
made to our executives in 2005 vests one-third (1/3) upon grant and the balance
in equal monthly increments on the first day of each month beginning January
1,
2006 and ending December 1, 2007. We will issue the vested shares underlying
the
RSU awards on the earlier of (i) a Change of Control (as defined in our 2005
RSU
Plan), or (ii) in four annual installments starting on January 1, 2011. In
the
event of a Change of Control, our issuance of the vested shares shall be made
in
a lump sum distribution. In the absence of a Change of Control, the issuance
of
the vested shares shall be made in four (4) equal installments on each of
January 1, 2011, January 1, 2012, January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014. Upon
our
distribution of the vested shares underlying the RSU awards, the recipients
must
submit to us the par value of $0.01 per share. In 2005, we granted Messrs.
Reddick, Spivey, Clemens, Seiser and Emigh RSU awards with respect to 8,250,000,
6,660,000, 4,400,000, 1,650,000 and 1,375,000 underlying shares, respectively.
In the case of Messrs. Reddick, Spivey and Clemens, such awards are reflected
in
their employment agreements. The vesting during 2006 of the RSUs granted in
2005
is reflected in the “Stock Awards” column of the Summary Compensation Table,
below.
Termination/Severance
Benefits
The
employment agreement of each of Messrs. Reddick, Clemens and Spivey provides
severance benefits under certain circumstances. The severance benefits provided
to each such executive differs, but includes payments of a pro rata bonus or
non
equity incentive compensation, one to two years of salary and one to two years
of benefits. See “Employment Agreements” and “Quantifying Termination/Change of
Control Payments” in this Item 11. We believe severance arrangements for the
highest level officers help them to focus on their respective job functions
even
while we are experiencing some financial difficulties and gives them comfort
that we will not lightly terminate their employment. We believe these severance
benefits were necessary to be able to initially hire and to retain these
executives. In turn Messrs. Reddick, Spivey and Clemens have agreed after their
employment with us ends under certain circumstances not to compete or solicit
our employees for hire for a limited period of time. We believe that such
non-compete and non-solicit provisions are important to protect our business.
The severance benefits are standard in employment contracts and were the results
of negotiations between us and our executives.
The
other
executive officers named in the Summary Compensation Table (the “named executive
officers”) have no contractual severance benefits if terminated by the Company
other than acceleration of shares underlying RSUs.
Retirement
Plans
Beginning
in 1998, we have maintained a 401(k) plan that allows us to make both
discretionary and matching contributions, but we have not done so since
inception. We have no pension plans or non-qualified deferred compensation
plans
and, as a result, the columns relating to such plans in the Summary Compensation
Table are blank.
Change
in Control
Currently
unexercisable options vest with respect to all underlying shares upon a change
of control (as defined in employment agreements, in the case of Messrs. Reddick,
Spivey and Clemens and in stock option agreements, in the case of Messrs. Emigh
and Seiser) for all named executive officers. In addition, RSUs vest with
respect to all underlying shares upon a change of control and are distributed
upon a change of control (provided the requirements of Section 409 of the
Internal Revenue Code are met). In addition, Messrs. Reddick, Spivey and Clemens
receive severance and bonuses if they terminate their employment after a change
of control (as defined in their employment agreements - in the case of Mr.
Spivey, such termination must be for Good Reason), or we terminate their
employment after a change of control. We feel our change of control provisions
incentivise our executives to seek opportunities for us and realize benefits
from a change of control even though such change of control may lead to the
termination of their positions.
Tax
Reimbursements
Because
of the so-called "parachute" tax imposed by Internal Revenue Code Section 280G,
our named executive officers may be subject to such tax upon the exercise of
options and distributions under RSUs upon a change of control. We currently
have
no agreements to reimburse our named executive officers for any taxes imposed
as
a result of these additional excise taxes. We will pay taxes incurred by Messrs.
Reddick and Spivey on a lump sum distribution of the value of twelve months
of
benefits, which they may elect in lieu of continued benefits, in the event
their
employment terminates under certain circumstances.
40
Perquisites
and Other Benefits.
Our
named
executive officers receive no perquisites. We have not made either discretionary
or matching contributions to their 401(k) plans, although our plan provides
that
we may be able to do so. Our named executive officers are not provided auto
allowances and they receive no country club or golf club memberships. We may,
however, consider such perquisites in the future.
Board
Process
The
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors approves all compensation
and
awards to the named executive officers and thereafter submits such issues to
the
full Board for approval. All such decisions are made with the consultation
of
the Chief Executive Officer. With respect to equity compensation awarded to
other employees, the Compensation Committee either makes recommendations of
grants of options and restricted stock to the Board, with the Board approving
such awards or makes the grant itself. These grants are generally based upon
the
recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer. For example, in awarding RSUs
in
2005, the Chief Executive Officer made a recommendation as to the amount of
RSUs
to be allocated to all employees, and the recommendation was considered by
the
Compensation Committee and the Board in making such awards.
Summary
Compensation Table and Discussion of Employment and Incentive
Arrangements
The
following table sets forth a summary of the compensation paid by us for services
rendered in all capacities to us during the fiscal year ended December 31,
2006
to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and our next three
most
highly compensated executive officers (collectively, the "named executive
officers") whose total annual compensation for 2006 exceeded
$100,000:
Fiscal
Year 2006 Summary Compensation Table
Name
and Principal Position
|
Salary
($)
|
Bonus
($)
|
Stock
Awards1
($)
|
Option
Awards2
($)
|
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan Compen-
sation
($)
|
Change
in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compen-sation Earnings
($)
|
All
Other Compen-sation
($)
|
Total
($)
|
|||||||||||||||||
Andrew
D. Reddick
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
300,000
|
—
|
1,375,000
|
$
|
77,000
|
—
|
—-
|
—-
|
1,752,000
|
||||||||||||||||
Peter
A. Clemens
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
180,000
|
—
|
733,000
|
23,000
|
—
|
—-
|
—-
|
936,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
Ron
J. Spivey
Senior
Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer
|
260,000
|
—
|
1,110,000
|
166,000
|
—
|
—-
|
—-
|
1,536,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
James
F. Emigh
Vice
President, Marketing and Administration
|
140,000
|
—
|
229,000
|
16,000
|
—
|
—-
|
—-
|
385,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
Robert
A. Seiser
Vice
President, Corporate Controller and Treasurer
|
133,000
|
—
|
275,000
|
16,000
|
—
|
—-
|
—-
|
424,000
|
1.
Reflects the vesting in 2006 of outstanding RSUs with respect to 2,750,000,
1,466,000, 2,200,000, 458,333 and 550,000 underlying shares for Messrs. Reddick,
Clemens, Spivey, Emigh and Seiser, respectively. The dollar amount provided
is
the compensation cost for such awards recognized in 2006 in accordance with
FAS
123R, as reflected in our financial statements.
2.
Reflects the vesting in 2006 of outstanding options with respect to 1,500,000,
93,750, 4,333,333, 62,250 and 62,250 underlying shares for Messrs. Reddick,
Clemens, Spivey, Emigh and Seiser, respectively. The dollar amount reported
is
the compensation cost for such awards recognized in 2006 in accordance with
FAS
123R, as reflected in our financial statements.
41
Other
Compensatory Arrangements
The
named
executive officers participate in medical, dental, life and disability insurance
plans provided to all of our employees.
Employment
Agreements
Andrew
D.
Reddick is employed pursuant to an Employment Agreement effective as of August
26, 2003, as amended, which provides that Mr. Reddick will serve as our Chief
Executive Officer and President for a term expiring December 31, 2007. The
term
of the Employment Agreement provides for automatic one (1) year renewals in
the
absence of written notice to the contrary from us or Mr. Reddick at least ninety
(90) days prior to the expiration of the initial term or any subsequent renewal
period. The Employment Agreement provides for an annual base salary of $300,000,
plus the payment of annual bonus of up to one hundred percent (100%) of Mr.
Reddick's base salary based on the achievement of such targets, conditions,
or
parameters as may be set from time to time by the Board of Directors or the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. For our 2006 fiscal year,
the
Employment Agreement provides for a cash bonus equal to 100% of Mr. Reddick’s
then current base salary (the “2006 Cash Bonus”) upon our receipt of aggregate
proceeds of at least $15.0 million on or before March 31, 2007 from an offering
of our equity securities and/or from license fees or milestone payments from
third-party licensing or similar transactions (subject to the payment of a
pro-rata portion of the 2006 Cash Bonus provided we receive aggregate gross
proceeds from such transactions of at least $11.0 million on or before March
31,
2007). The Employment Agreement also provides for our grant to Mr. Reddick
of
stock options exercisable for up to 8,750,000 shares of Common Stock at an
exercise price of $0.13 per share. The stock options provide for vesting of
3,000,000 shares on the date of grant of the option, with the balance vesting
in
monthly increments of 250,000 shares at the expiration of each monthly period
thereafter commencing with the month ending August 31, 2004. The exercise price
of $0.13 per share represents a discount to the fair market value of our common
stock on the date of grant. On August 12, 2004, the date of grant of the stock
options, the average of the closing bid and asked prices for our Common Stock
was $0.435. The Employment Agreement also acknowledges the grant to Mr. Reddick
of a Restricted Stock Unit Award providing for our issuance of up to 8,250,000
shares of our Common Stock. The Restricted Stock Unit vests one-third (1/3)
upon
grant and the balance in equal monthly increments on the first day of each
month
beginning January 1, 2006 and ending December 1, 2007. The vested shares
underlying the Restricted Stock Unit Award will be issued by us on the earlier
of (i) a Change in Control (as defined in our 2005 RSU Plan), or (ii) January
1,
2011. In the event of a Change in Control, we will issue the vested shares
in a
lump sum distribution. In the absence of a Change of Control, the issuance
of
the vested shares shall be made in four (4) equal installments on each of
January 1, 2011, January 1, 2012, January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014. Upon
issuance of the shares underlying the Restricted Stock Unit Award, Mr. Reddick
must remit to us the par value of $0.01 per share. On December 22, 2005, the
date of grant of the Restricted Stock Unit Award, the average of the closing
bid
and asked prices of our common stock was $0.3325, as reported by the OTCBB.
Mr.
Reddick has no rights as a stockholder, including no dividend or voting rights,
with respect to the shares underlying the Restricted Stock Unit Award until
we
issue the shares. The Employment Agreement contains standard termination
provisions, including upon death, disability, for Cause, for Good Reason and
without Cause. In the event the Employment Agreement is terminated due to death
or disability, we are required to pay Mr. Reddick, or his designee, a pro rata
portion of the annual bonus that would have been payable to Mr. Reddick during
such year assuming full achievement of the bonus criteria established for such
bonus. Additionally, Mr. Reddick or his designees shall have a period of twelve
(12) months following such termination (except for “Cause,” in which case it is
40 days) to exercise Mr. Reddick's vested stock options (or, for those vested
stock options subject to Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as
amended (“Section 409A”) the lesser of (a) twelve (12) months following the date
of termination, or (b) the maximum exercise period permitted under Section
409A). In the event that the Employment Agreement is terminated by us without
Cause or by Mr. Reddick for Good Reason, we are required to pay Mr. Reddick
an
amount equal to the bonus for such year, calculated on a pro rata basis assuming
full achievement of the bonus criteria for such year, as well as Mr. Reddick's
base salary for one year (the "Severance Pay"), payable in equal monthly
installments over a period of twelve (12) months. In addition, Mr. Reddick
is at
his option entitled to continued coverage under our then existing benefit plans,
including medical and life insurance, for twelve (12) months from the date
of
termination or the value of such benefits payable in a lump sum within thirty
days of termination together with amount needed to pay income tax on such lump
sum. The Employment Agreement permits Mr. Reddick to terminate the Employment
Agreement in the event of a Change in Control (as defined in the Employment
Agreement), in which case such termination is considered to be made without
Cause, entitling Mr. Reddick to the benefits described above, except that (i)
the Severance Pay is payable in a lump sum within thirty (30) days of the date
of termination, and (ii) all outstanding stock options granted to Mr. Reddick
shall fully vest and be immediately exercisable. The Employment Agreement
restricts Mr. Reddick from disclosing, disseminating or using for his personal
benefit or for the benefit of others, confidential or proprietary information
(as defined in the Employment Agreement) and, provided we have not breached
the
terms of the Employment Agreement, from competing with us at any time prior
to
one year after the termination of his employment with us. In addition he has
agreed not to (and not to cause or direct any person to) hire or solicit for
employment any of our employee or those of our subsidiaries or affiliates(i)
for
six (6) months following the termination of his employment by us without Cause
or by him for Good Reason, prior to a Change of Control, (ii) for twelve (12)
months following the termination of his employment for Cause, prior to a Change
of Control, or (iii) twenty-four (24) months following a Change of
Control.
42
Ron
J.
Spivey, Ph.D., is employed pursuant to an Employment Agreement effective as
of
April 5, 2004, as amended, which provides that Dr. Spivey will serve as our
Senior Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer for term expiring December
31, 2007. The term of the Employment Agreement provides for automatic one (1)
year renewals in the absence of written notice to the contrary from us or Dr.
Spivey at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the initial term
or
any subsequent renewal period. The Employment Agreement provides for an annual
base salary of $260,000, plus the payment of annual bonus of up to one hundred
percent (100%) of Dr. Spivey's base salary based on the achievement of such
targets, conditions, or parameters as may be set from time to time by the Board
of Directors or the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. For our
2006 fiscal year, the Employment Agreement provides for a cash bonus equal
to
one hundred percent (100%) of Mr. Spivey’s then current base salary (the “2006
Cash Bonus”) upon our receipt of aggregate proceeds of at least $15.0 million on
or before March 31, 2007 from an offering of our equity securities and/or from
license fees or milestone payments from third-party licensing or similar
transactions (subject to the payment of a pro-rata portion of the 2006 Cash
Bonus provided we receive aggregate gross proceeds from such transactions of
at
least $11.0 million on or before March 31, 2007. The Employment Agreement also
provides for our grant to Mr. Spivey of stock options exercisable for up to
7,000,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.13 per share. The
stock option provides for vesting of 1,000,000 shares on October 1, 2004,
333,333 shares on each January 1, 2005, April 1, 2005, July 1, 2005 and October
1, 2005, 3,888,667 shares on January 1, 2006 and 778,001 on April 1, 2006.
The
exercise price of $0.13 per share represents a discount to the fair market
value
of our common stock on the date of grant. The Employment Agreement also
acknowledges the grant to Dr. Spivey of a Restricted Stock Unit Award providing
for our issuance of up to 6,600,000 shares of our Common Stock. The Restricted
Stock Unit vests one-third (1/3) upon grant and the balance in equal monthly
increments on the first day of each month beginning January 1, 2006 and ending
December 1, 2007. The vested shares underlying the Restricted Stock Unit Award
will be issued by us on the earlier of (i) a Change in Control (as defined
in
our 2005 RSU Plan), or (ii) January 1, 2011. In the event of a Change in
Control, we will issue the vested shares in a lump sum distribution. In the
absence of a Change in Control, the issuance of the vested shares shall be
made
in four (4) equal installments on each of January 1, 2011, January 1, 2012,
January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014. Upon issuance of the shares underlying
the
Restricted Stock Unit Award, Dr. Spivey must remit to us the par value of $0.01
per share. On December 22, 2005, the date of grant of the Restricted Stock
Unit
Award, the average of the closing bid and asked prices of our common stock
was
$0.3325, as reported by the OTCBB. Dr. Spivey has no rights as a stockholder,
including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying
the Restricted Stock Unit Award until we issue the shares. The Employment
Agreement contains standard termination provisions, including upon death,
disability, for Cause, for Good Reason and without Cause. Additionally, Dr.
Spivey or his designees have a period of twelve (12) months following such
termination (except for “Cause,” in which case it is 40 days) to exercise Dr.
Spivey's vested stock options, (or, for those vested stock options subject
to
Section 409A, the lesser of (a) twelve (12) months following the date of
termination, or (b) the maximum exercise period permitted under Section 409A).
In the event that we terminate the Employment Agreement without Cause or Dr.
Spivey terminates the Employment Agreement for Good Reason, we are required
to
pay Dr. Spivey an amount equal to the bonus for such year, calculated on a
pro
rata basis assuming full achievement of the bonus criteria for such year, as
well as Dr. Spivey's base salary for one year (the "Severance Pay"), payable
in
equal monthly installments over a period of twelve (12) months. In addition,
Dr.
Spivey is entitled to continued coverage under our then existing benefit plans,
including medical and life insurance, for twelve (12) months from the date
of
termination. The Employment Agreement permits Dr. Spivey to terminate the
Employment Agreement in the event of a Change in Control for Good Reason (as
defined in the Employment Agreement),, entitling Dr. Spivey to the benefits
described above, except that (i) the Severance Pay is payable in a lump sum
within thirty (30) days of the date of termination, and (ii) all outstanding
stock options granted to Dr. Spivey shall fully vest and be immediately
exercisable. The Employment Agreement restricts Dr. Spivey from disclosing,
disseminating or using for his personal benefit or for the benefit of others,
confidential or proprietary information (as defined in the Employment Agreement)
and, provided we have not breached the terms of the Employment Agreement, from
competing with us at any time prior to one year after the termination of his
employment with us. In addition, Dr.
Spivey has agreed not to (and not to cause or direct any person to) hire or
solicit for employment any of our employees or those of our subsidiaries or
affiliates (i) for six (6) months following the termination of his employment
by
us without Cause or by him for Good Reason, prior to a Change of Control, (ii)
for twelve (12) months following the termination of his employment for Cause,
prior to a Change of Control, or (iii) twenty-four (24) months following a
Change of Control.
43
Peter
A. Clemens is employed pursuant to an Employment Agreement effective as of
March
10, 1998, as amended, which provides that Mr. Clemens will serve as our Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for a term expiring December 31,
2007. The term of the Employment Agreement provides for automatic one (1) year
renewals in the absence of written notice to the contrary from the Company
or
Mr. Clemens at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of any renewal
period The Employment Agreement provides for an annual base salary of $180,000
plus the payment of an annual bonus to be determined based on the satisfaction
of such targets, conditions or parameters as may be determined from time to
time
by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. For our 2006 fiscal
year, the Employment Agreement provides for a cash bonus equal to 100% of Mr.
Clemens’ then current base salary (the “2006 Cash Bonus”) upon our receipt of
aggregate proceeds of at least $15.0 million on or before March 31, 2007 from
an
offering of our equity securities and/or from license fees or milestone payments
from third-party licensing or similar transactions (subject to the payment
of a
pro-rata portion of the 2006 Cash Bonus provided the Company receives aggregate
gross proceeds from such transactions of at least $11.0 million on or before
March 31, 2007). The Employment Agreement also provides for the grant of stock
options on March 10, 1998 to purchase 300,000 shares of our common stock at
an
exercise price of $2.375 per share, which options vest in equal increments
of
25,000 option shares at the end of each quarterly period during the term of
the
Employment Agreement (as such vesting schedule may be amended by mutual
agreement of Mr. Clemens and the Board of Directors) In addition, in August
2004, the Company granted stock options to Mr. Clemens to purchase 375,000
shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.13 per share, which exercise
price represents a discount to the fair market value of our common stock on
the
date of grant. Such stock options vest in four equal portions at the end of
each
annual period commencing March 9, 2005. The Employment Agreement also
acknowledges the grant to Mr. Clemens of a Restricted Stock Unit Award providing
for our issuance of up to 4,400,000 shares of our Common Stock. The Restricted
Stock Unit vests one-third (1/3) upon grant and the balance in equal monthly
increments on the first day of each month beginning January 1, 2006 and ending
December 1, 2007. We will issue the vested shares underlying the Restricted
Stock Unit Award on the earlier of (i) a Change in Control (as defined in our
2005 RSU Plan), or (ii) January 1, 2011. In the event of a Change in Control,
we
will issue the vested shares in a lump sum distribution. In the absence of
a
Change in Control, our issuance of the vested shares shall be made in four
(4)
equal installments on each of January 1, 2011, January 1, 2012, January 1,
2013
and January 1, 2014. Upon issuance of the shares underlying the Restricted
Stock
Unit Award, Mr. Clemens must remit to us the par value of $0.01 per share.
On
December 22, 2005, the date of grant of the Restricted Stock Unit Award, the
average of the closing bid and asked prices of our common stock was $0.3325,
as
reported by the OTCBB. Mr. Clemens has no rights as a stockholder, including
no
dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying the Restricted
Stock Unit Award until we issue the shares. The Employment Agreement contains
standard termination provisions, including upon death, disability, for Cause,
for Good Reason and without Cause. In the event the Employment Agreement is
terminated by us without Cause or by Mr. Clemens for Good Reason, we are
required to pay Mr. Clemens an amount equal to $310,000 or twice his then base
salary, whichever is greater, payable in a lump sum within 30 days of
termination and to continue to provide Mr. Clemens coverage under our then
existing benefit plans, including medical and life insurance, for a term of
24
months. Additionally, Mr. Clemens or his designees shall have a period of twelve
(12) months following termination (except for “Cause,” in which case it is 40
days) to exercise Mr. Clemens’ vested stock options (or, for those vested stock
options subject to Section 409A, the lesser of (a) twelve (12) months following
the date of termination, or (b) the maximum exercise period permitted under
Section 409A). The Employment Agreement permits Mr. Clemens to terminate the
Employment Agreement in the event of a Change in Control (as defined in the
Employment Agreement). The Employment Agreement also restricts Mr. Clemens
from
disclosing, disseminating or using for his personal benefit or for the benefit
of others confidential or proprietary information (as defined in the Employment
Agreement) and, provided we have not breached the terms of the Employment
Agreement, from competing with us at any time prior to two years after the
earlier to occur of the expiration of the term and the termination of his
employment. In addition, for a period of two (2) years from and after the
effective date of the termination of his employment with us (for any reason
whatsoever), (i) induce or attempt to influence any employee of the Corporation
or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates to leave its employ, or (ii) aid any
person, business, or firm, including a supplier, a competitor, licensor or
customer of or our manufacturer for the Corporation, in any attempt to hire
any
person who shall have been employed by us or any of our subsidiaries or
affiliates within the period of one (1) year of the date of any such requested
aid.
Messrs.
Seiser and Emigh are not parties to employment agreements.
Stock
Option Plans
We
currently maintain two stock option plans adopted in 1995 and 1998,
respectively. In the past we used, and may continue to use, stock options to
attract and retain key employees in the belief that employee stock ownership
and
stock-related compensation devices encourage a community of interest between
employees and shareholders.
The
1995 Stock Option Plan
The
1995 Stock Option Plan was approved by our shareholders in September, 1995.
As
of December 31, 2006 incentive stock options (“ISO's”) to purchase 262,510
shares and non-qualified options to purchase 116,390 shares were outstanding
under the 1995 Stock Option Plan. In May, 2005 the 1995 Stock Option Plan
expired and the remaining unissued shares allocated to the Plan were terminated.
The average per share exercise price for all outstanding options under the
1995
Stock Option Plan is approximately $1.57.
45
The
1998 Stock Option Plan.
The
1998 Stock Option Plan was adopted by the Board of Directors in April, 1998
and
approved by our shareholders in June, 1998. The 1998 Stock Option Plan permits
the grant of ISO's and non-qualified stock options to purchase shares of our
Common Stock. The 1998 Stock Option Plan was amended by the Board of Directors
in April, 1999 to increase the number of shares available for the grant of
options under the Plan from 2,600,000 to 3,600,000 shares. Our shareholders
ratified the Plan amendment on August 19, 1999. The 1998 Stock Option Plan
was
further amended by Board of Directors in April, 2001 to increase the number
of
shares available for grant of options under the Plan from 3,600,000 to 8,100,000
shares. Our shareholders ratified the Plan amendment on June 14, 2001. The
1998
Stock Option Plan was further amended by the Board of Directors on May 5, 2004
to increase the number of shares available for grant of options under the Plan
from 8,100,000 to 20,000,000 shares. Our shareholders ratified the Plan
amendment on August 12, 2004. The 1998 Stock Option Plan was further amended
on
February 8, 2006 to make such plan compliant with Section 409A of the Internal
Revenue Code, as amended. Our shareholders ratified the amendment on December
14, 2006. As of December 31, 2006, stock options to purchase 18,616,095 shares
of Common Stock had been granted under the 1998 Stock Option Plan. Of such
option grants, 869,826 are ISOs and 17,746,269 are non-qualified options. The
average per share exercise price for all outstanding options under the 1998
Stock Option Plan is approximately $0.23. No exercise price of an ISO was set
at
less than 100% of the fair market value of the underlying Common Stock. The
exercise price of non-qualified options exercisable for 16,994,145 shares of
common stock has been set at less than the fair market value on the date of
grant of the underlying Common Stock. Subject to the terms of the 1998 Stock
Option Plan, the Board of Directors, or a Committee appointed by the Board
determines the persons to whom grants are made and the vesting, timing, amounts
and other terms of such grant. An employee may not receive ISO's exercisable
in
any one calendar year for shares with a fair market value on the date of grant
in excess of $100,000. No quantity limitations apply to the grant of
non-qualified stock options.
Restricted
Stock Unit Award Plan
On
December 22, 2005, the Board of Directors approved
our 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan (the “2005 RSU Plan”) for our
employees and non-employee directors. The RSU Plan was amended by the Board
of
Directors on October 26, 2006 to allow transfer of RSUs under limited
circumstances. A RSU represents the contingent obligation of the Company to
deliver a share of our common stock to the holder of the RSU on a distribution
date. RSUs for up to 30 million shares of common stock are authorized for
issuance under the 2005 RSU Plan. We believe that the 2005 RSU Plan does not
require shareholder approval. Nevertheless, on December 14, 2006, our
shareholders ratified the 2005 RSU Plan, as amended, at our 2006 Annual
Shareholders’ Meeting.
The
purpose of the 2005 RSU Plan is to attract, motivate and retain experienced
and
knowledgeable employees by offering additional stock based compensation and
incentives to defer and potentially enhance their compensation and to encourage
stock ownership in the Company and to attract and retain qualified non-employee
directors. The 2005 RSU Plan is intended to comply with Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and is designed to confirm that
compensation deferred under the Plan which is subject to Code Section 409A
is
not included in the gross income of 2005 RSU Plan participants until such time
as the shares of common stock underlying RSUs are distributed as set forth
in
the Plan and Code Section 409A.
The
RSU Plan is administered by our Board of Directors or a Committee appointed
by
the Board of Directors. However, with respect to non-employee directors, the
Board administers the Plan, and the Committee has no discretion with respect
to
any grants to non-employee directors. RSUs granted under the RSU plan vest
on a
schedule determined by the Board of Directors or such Committee as set forth
in
a restricted stock unit award agreement. Unless otherwise set forth in such
award agreement, the RSUs fully vest upon a change in control (as defined in
the
2005 RSU Plan) of the Company or upon termination of an employee’s employment us
without cause or due to death or disability, and in the case of a non-employee
director, such person’s death or disability or if such person is not renominated
as a director (other than for “cause” or refusal to stand for re-election) or is
not elected by our stockholders, if nominated. Vesting of an RSU entitles the
holder thereof to receive a share of common stock of the Company on a
distribution date (after payment of the $0.01 par value per share).
Absent
a change of control, one-fourth of vested shares of common stock underlying
an
RSU award will be distributed (after payment of $0.01 par value per share)
on
January 1 of each of 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. If a change in control occurs
(whether prior to or after 2011), the vested shares underlying the RSU award
will be distributed at or about the time of the change in control. No dividends
accrue on the shares underlying the RSUs prior to issuance. The recipients
of
RSU awards need not be employees or directors of the Company on a distribution
date.
46
RSUs
may not be sold, pledged, assigned, hypothecated, transferred, or disposed
of in
any manner by the recipients other than by
will or by the laws of descent or distribution and to (i) the spouse, children
or grandchildren of the awardee (the "Immediate Family Members"), (ii) a trust
or trusts for the exclusive benefit of such Immediate Family Members, or (iii)
a
partnership in which such Immediate Family Members are the only partners,
provided that (x) there may be no consideration for any such transfer, (y)
subsequent transfers of transferred RSUs shall be prohibited except those made
by will or by the laws of descent or distribution, and (z) such transfer is
approved in advance by the Committee (or Board in absence of a Committee).
A
married recipient may generally designate only a spouse as a beneficiary unless
spousal consent is obtained.
Recipients
of RSUs generally will not recognize income when they are awarded RSUs (unless
they elect to recognize income by making a Section 83(b) election). RSU
recipients will recognize ordinary income in an amount equal to the fair market
value of the shares of our common stock issued pursuant to a distribution under
the RSU. We will generally be entitled to a tax deduction in the same amount.
As
of the December 31, 2006 we had granted RSUs providing for our issuance of
up to
an aggregate of 29,500,000 shares of our common stock. 27,500,000 of such RSU
Awards vest one-third (1/3) on grant and the balance vest in equal monthly
increments on the first day of each month beginning January 1, 2006 and ending
December 1, 2007. The remaining 2 million RSU Awards vest 777,778 shares on
grant and the balance vest in equal monthly increments on the first day of
March
1, 2006 and ending December 1, 2007.
Quantifying
Termination/Change of Control Payments
Messrs.
Emigh and Seiser
If
we terminate Robert Seiser’s or James Emigh’s employment other than for cause
(as defined in the 2005 RSU Plan) all unvested RSUs granted to such executive
vest in full. As of December 31, 2006, RSUs for 550,000 and 458,333 shares
for
Messrs. Seiser and Emigh, respectively, remained unvested. As a result, had
Messrs. Seiser and Emigh been terminated other than for cause at December 31,
2006, they would have realized a benefit of $53,000 and $44,000, respectively.
If
a change of control occurs (which constitutes a change of control under the
2005
RSU Plan) then Messrs. Seiser’s and Emigh’s previously unvested RSUs vest with
respect to all underlying shares. In addition, previously unvested options
vest
(if the change of control qualifies under their stock option agreements) with
respect to all underlying shares (options underlying 124,500 and 124,500 shares,
in the case of Messrs. Seiser and Emigh, respectively, as of December 31, 2006).
Messrs. Seiser and Emigh would realize a benefit of $124,000 and $124,000,
respectively, from such option vesting if such change of control occurred on
December 31, 2006. The combined benefit to Messrs. Seiser and Emigh from RSU
vesting and option vesting on a change of control occurring on December 31,
2006
is $177,500 and $168,500, respectively. If such a change of control occurs
and
also meets the requirements of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, the
RSUs are fully distributable for shares upon payment of the $.01 par value
per
share, instead of under their normal exercisability schedule.
The
dollar benefits described above are the compensation cost for such awards that
would have been recognized in 2006 in our financial statements in accordance
with FAS 123R, had such accelerated vesting/distribution occurred.
Messrs.
Reddick, Spivey and Clemens
Based
upon a hypothetical triggering date of December 31, 2006, the quantifiable
benefits for Messrs. Andrew Reddick, Peter Clemens and Ron Spivey upon a
termination/change of control would have been as set
forth the table below
47
Qualifying
Termination Benefit ($)
|
|||||||
Triggering
Event
|
Executive
|
Severance
|
Value
of RSUs Vesting (2)
|
Bonus
|
Value
of Options Vesting
(4)
|
Medical,
Dental,
Health, Disability and Life Insurance Benefits |
Total
(7)
|
Termination
by Company without Cause or by Employee for Good Reason
|
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
300,000
(1)(8)
|
264,000
|
300,000
(3)
|
(5)
|
26,270 (6)
|
890,270
|
Ron
J. Spivey
|
260,000
(1)(9)
|
213,000
|
260,000
(3)
|
(5)
|
7,875 (6)
|
740,875
|
|
Peter
A. Clemens
|
360,000
(3)(11)
|
141,000
|
180,000
|
—
|
52,540 (12)
|
733,540
|
|
Termination
by Employee for Good Reason (or any reason in case of Reddick or
Clemens)
after a Change of Control or by Company (other than for Cause) after
a
Change of Control
|
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
300,000
(1)(8)
|
264,000
|
300,000
(3)
|
(5)
|
26,270(6)
|
890,270
|
Ron
J. Spivey
|
260,000
(1)(9)
|
213,000
|
260,000
(3)
|
(5)
|
7,875(6)
|
740,875
|
|
Peter
A. Clemens
|
360,000
(3)(11)
|
141,000
|
180,000
(3)
|
12,728
|
52,540(12)
|
746,268
|
|
Termination
for Death
|
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
—
|
264,000
|
300,000
(3)
|
—
|
—
|
564,000
|
Ron
J. Spivey
|
—
|
213,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
213,000
|
|
Peter
A. Clemens
|
—
|
141,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
141,000
|
|
Termination
for Disability
|
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
—
|
264,000
|
300,000
(3)
|
—
|
—
|
564,000
|
Ron
J. Spivey
|
—
|
213,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
213,000
|
|
Peter
A. Clemens
|
—
|
141,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
141,000
|
|
Termination
with Cause
|
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
Ron
J. Spivey
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|
Peter
A. Clemens
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|
Change
of Control Without Termination
|
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
—
|
264,000
|
—
|
(5)
|
—
|
264,000
|
Ron
J. Spivey
|
—
|
213,000
|
—
|
(5)
|
—
|
213,000
|
|
Peter
A. Clemens
|
—
|
141,000
|
—
|
12,728
|
—
|
153,728
|
The
terms "Change of Control", "Cause", and "Good Reason" have the meanings in
the
listed executive’s employment agreements.
(1)
Payable in 12 monthly installments, except on termination after a Change of
Control, in which case such amount is payable in a lump sum within 30 days
after
termination.
(2)
The dollar amount reported is the compensation cost for such awards that would
have been recognized in 2006 in our financial statements in accordance with
FAS
123R, had the unvested RSUs at December 31, 2006 vested at such date,
(2,750,000, 2,200,000 and 1,466,667, in the case of Reddick, Spivey and Clemens,
respectively).
(3)
Payable in a lump sum within 30 days after termination.
(4)
The dollar amount reported is the compensation cost for such awards that would
have been recognized in 2006 in our financial statements in accordance with
FAS
123R had the unvested stock options at December 31, 2006 vested at such date.
See Employment Agreements for a description of the exercise periods following
termination.
(5)
Messrs. Reddick and Spivey have no outstanding unvested options. See Employment
Agreements for discussion of option vesting and exercisability upon
termination.
(6)
Represents the value of medical, dental, disability and life insurance for
the
twelve months following termination and a tax gross up for such amounts. Payable
in lump sum within thirty days after termination. Assumes executive has selected
lump sum payment option, in lieu of continued benefits. This amount is
estimated.
(7)
Excludes accrued vacation.
(8)
Represents one year of salary. Mr. Reddick is entitled to the greater of the
salary remaining on the term of his employment agreement and 12 months of
salary.
(9)
Represents one year of salary.
(10)
Assumes the change of control also constitutes a change of control for the
vesting provisions of the 2005 RSU Plan. If such a change of control occurs
and
also meets the requirements of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, the
shares underlying the RSUs are issued (upon payment of the $.01 par value per
share).
(11)
Represents two years of base salary.
(12)
Represents the estimated value of medical, dental, disability and life insurance
for the twenty-four months following termination. Payable in lump sum within
thirty days after termination.
48
Outstanding
Equity Awards at 2006 Year End and Option Exercises in
2006
The
following table presents information regarding outstanding stock options and
RSU
awards at December 31, 2006 for each of the named executive
officers:
OUTSTANDING
EQUITY AWARDS AT 2006 YEAR-END
Option
Awards
|
Stock
Awards
|
||||||||||||||||||
Name
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Exercisable
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Unexercisable
|
Option
Exercise Price
($)
|
Option
Expiration Date
|
Number
of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested
(#)
|
Market
Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested
($)(1)
|
|||||||||||||
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
8,750,000
|
—
|
$
|
0.13
|
08/12/2014
|
2,750,000
|
$
|
2,035,000
|
|||||||||||
Peter
A. Clemens
|
300,000
100,000
125,000
100,000
187,500
|
—
—
—
—
187,500
|
$
$
$
$
$
|
2.375
1.125
1.875
1.1125
0.13
|
02/19/2008
03/08/2009
02/17/2010
06/29/2010
03/09/2014
|
1,466,667
|
$
|
1,085,334
|
|||||||||||
Ron
J. Spivey
|
3,000,000
4,000,000
|
—
|
$
$
|
0.13
0.13
|
04/15/2014
12/09/2015
|
2,200,000
|
$
|
1,628,000
|
|||||||||||
Robert
A. Seiser
|
40,000
16,000
30,000
40,000
25,000
249,000
|
—
—
—
—
—
124,750
|
$
$
$
$
$
$
|
2.50
1.125
1.875
1.1125
2.46
0.13
|
05/29/2008
03/08/2009
02/17/2010
06/29/2010
11/15/2011
03/09/2014
|
550,000
|
$
|
407,000
|
|||||||||||
James
F. Emigh
|
10,000
10,000
16,000
50,000
40,000
25,000
249,000
|
—
—
—
—
—
—
124,750
|
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
|
2.50
1.50
1.125
1.875
1.1125
2.46
0.13
|
05/29/2008
10/13/2008
03/08/2009
02/17/2010
06/29/2010
11/15/2011
03/09/2014
|
458,333
|
$
|
339,166
|
(1)
Based on the Closing Price of $0.74
reported on the OTCBB on December 30, 2006. Does not take into account the
$.01
par value per share that must be paid on the distribution of shares underlying
the RSUs.
49
The
following table presents information regarding the value realized on the vesting
during 2006 of RSU awards to the named executive officers. No stock options
were
exercised by the named executive officers during 2006.
OPTION
EXERCISE AND STOCK VESTED IN FISCAL YEAR 2006
Stock
Awards
|
|||||||
Name
|
Number
of Shares Vested (#)(1)
|
Value
Realized on Vesting
($)(2)
|
|||||
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
2,750,000
|
$
|
1,860,833
|
||||
Peter
A. Clemens
|
1,466,667
|
992,444
|
|||||
Ron
J. Spivey
|
2,200,000
|
1,488,667
|
|||||
James
F. Emigh
|
458,333
|
310,139
|
|||||
Robert
A. Seiser
|
550,000
|
372,167
|
(1)
The vested shares underlying the RSUs will be issued by us on the earlier (i)
a
Change of Control (as defined in our 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan),
or
(ii) ) in four annual installments starting on January 1, 2011. In the event
of
a Change of Control, our issuance of the vested shares shall be made in a lump
sum distribution. In the absence of a Change of Control, the issuance of the
vested shares shall be issued in four (4) equal installments on each of January
1, 2011, January 1, 2012, January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014. Upon our
distribution of the vested shares underlying the RSUs, the recipients must
submit to us the par value of $0.01 per share. The recipients of the RSUs have
no rights as a stockholder, including no dividend or voting rights, with respect
to the shares underlying such awards until the shares are issued by us.
(2)
Value is determined by subtracting the $.01 par value required to be paid on
exchange of each share for RSUs from the closing price of our Common Stock
on
the OTCBB on each vesting date and multiplying the result by the number of
shares underlying the RSUs that vested on such date and then aggregating those
results.
Securities
Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
The
following table includes information as of December 31, 2006 relating to our
1995 and 1998 Stock Option Plans and our 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan,
which comprise all of our equity compensation plans. The table provides the
number of securities to be issued upon the exercise of outstanding options
and
distributions under outstanding Restricted Stock Unit Awards under such plans,
the weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options and the number of
securities remaining available for future issuance under such equity
compensation plans:
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
Plan
Category
|
Number
Of Securities
to
Be Issued Upon
Exercise
of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants
and Rights
(a)
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise
Price of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants
and Rights
(b)
|
Number
of Securities
Remaining
Available for
Future
Issuance Under Equity
Compensation
Plans
(Excluding
Securities
Reflected
in Column(a)
(c)
|
|||||||
Stock
Option Equity Compensation Plans Approved by Security
Holders
|
18,994,995
|
$
|
0.26
|
926,655
|
||||||
Stock
Option Equity Compensation Plans Not Approved by Security
Holders
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|||||||
Restricted
Stock Unit Equity Compensation Plans Approved by Security
Holders
|
29,500,000
|
0.01
|
500,000
|
|||||||
Restricted
Stock Unit Equity Compensation Plans Not Approved by Security
Holders
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|||||||
TOTAL
|
48,494,995
|
$
|
0.11
|
1,426,655
|
50
Director
Compensation
The
following table sets forth a summary of the compensation paid by us to our
Directors (other than Andrew Reddick, whose compensation, is reflected in the
Summary Compensation Table) for services rendered in all capacities to us during
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006:
YEAR
2006 DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
Director
|
Fees
Earned or Paid in Cash ($)
|
Stock
Awards
($)(1)
|
Option
Awards
($)(2)
|
Total
($)
|
|||||||||
William
G. Skelly
|
8,500
|
340,000
|
—
|
348,500
|
|||||||||
William
A. Sumner
|
9,500
|
340,000
|
—
|
349,500
|
|||||||||
Bruce
F. Wesson
|
4,750
|
—
|
—
|
4,750
|
|||||||||
Richard
J. Markham
|
2,500
|
—
|
—
|
2,500
|
|||||||||
Immanuel
Thangaraj
|
(4
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||
Jerry
Karabelas(3)
|
750
|
—
|
—
|
750
|
(1)
Messrs. Skelly and Sumner each held RSUs with respect to 1,000,000 underlying
shares, as of December 31, 2006, Messrs. Wesson, Markham, Tharangaj and
Karabelas held no RSUs. The dollar amount provided is the compensation cost
for
such awards recognized in 2006 as reported in our financial statements in
accordance with FAS 123R.
(2)
Messrs. Skelly, Sumner, Wesson, Markham, Tharangaj, and Karabelas held options
with respect to 390,000, 250,000, 150,000, 0, 100,000 and 100,000 underlying
shares, respectively, as of December 31, 2006. The dollar amount provided is
the
compensation cost for such awards recognized in 2006 as reported in our
financial statements in accordance with FAS 123R.
(3)
Dr. Karabelas resigned as our director effective May 11, 2006.
(4)
Fee waived.
Directors
who are also our employees receive no additional or special remuneration for
their services as Directors. Directors who are not our employees are eligible
to
receive, at the discretion of the Company, an annual grant of options to
purchase 50,000 shares of our common stock. No such option grants were made
to
any director in 2005 or 2006. Additionally, Directors who are not our employees
receive $500 for each meeting attended ($250 in the case of telephonic
meetings). We also reimburse Directors for travel and lodging expenses, if
any,
incurred in connection with attendance at Board meetings. Directors who serve
on
any of the Committees established by the Board of Directors receive $250 for
each Committee meeting attended unless held on the day of a full Board meeting.
In addition, on February 11, 2006, we granted to each of Messrs. William Sumner
and William Skelly Restricted Stock Unit Awards providing for our issuance
of up
to 1 million shares of our common stock. The Restricted Stock Unit Awards are
made pursuant to our 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan and are in
consideration of the services provided to us by Messrs. Sumner and Skelly as
independent members of the Board and as representatives of the Independent
Committee of the Board of Directors for various material transactions undertaken
by us during the period 2002 through 2005, including, without limitation, our
debenture offerings in 2002 and 2004, the conversion of our preferred stock
into
common stock and various bridge loans financing transactions, as well as for
their continued service as directors of the Company. The Restricted Stock Unit
Awards to each of Messrs. Sumner and Skelly vest 388,889 shares on grant and
the
balance in equal monthly installments on the first day of each month beginning
March 1, 2006 and ending December 1, 2007. The vested shares underlying the
Restricted Stock Unit Awards will be issued by us on the earlier of (i) a Change
in Control (as defined in our 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan), or (ii)
)
in four annual installments starting on January 1, 2011. In the event of a
Change in Control, we will issue the vested shares underlying the Restricted
Stock Unit Award in a lump sum distribution. In the absence of a Change in
Control, the issuance of the vested shares shall be made in four (4) equal
installments on each of January 1, 2011, January 1, 2012, January 1, 2013 and
January 1, 2014. Upon the issuance of the vested shares underlying the
Restricted Stock Unit Awards, Messrs. Sumner and Skelly must pay us the $0.01
par value per share.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
Our
Compensation Committee consists of Messrs. Markham, Skelly and Reddick. Except
for Mr. Reddick, who is our President and Chief Executive Officer, there were
no
Compensation Committee interlocks or insider participation in compensation
decisions. See Employment Agreements” for a discussion of Mr. Reddick’s
employment agreement.
51
Compensation
Committee Report
The
following report of the Compensation Committee is not deemed to be “soliciting
material” or to be “filed” with the Commission or subject to Regulation 14A or
14C [17 CFR 240.14a-1 et seq.
or 240.14c-1 et seq.],
other than as specified, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Exchange
Act
[15 U.S.C. 78r]. The
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company (the
"Compensation Committee") was composed of three directors during 2006. In May
2006, Mr. Markham replaced Dr. Karabelas (who resigned as director) as a member
of the Compensation Committee.
The
Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion
and Analysis in this Report with Company management. Based on such review and
discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors
that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Report.
Richard
J. Markham, William G. Skelly, and Andrew D. Reddick
ITEM
12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
The
following table sets forth information regarding the beneficial ownership of
the
Common Stock, as of February 1, 2007, for individuals or entities in the
following categories: (i) each of the Company's Directors and nominees for
Directors; (ii) the Company’s principal executive officer, the Company’s
principal financial officer and the next three highest paid executive officers
of the Company whose total annual compensation for 2006 exceeded $100,000 (the
"named executive officers"); (iii) all Directors and executive officers as
a
group; and (iv) each person known by the Company to be a beneficial owner of
more than 5% of the Common Stock. Unless indicated otherwise, each of the
shareholders has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares
beneficially owned.
NAME
OF BENEFICIAL OWNER
|
AMOUNT
OWNED
|
PERCENT
OF
CLASS
(1)
|
|||||
GCE
Holdings LLC, c/o
Galen Partners III, L.P. 680
Washington Boulevard, Stamford, CT 06901
|
256,325,501
|
(2)
|
77.5
|
%
|
|||
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
8,750,000
|
(3)
|
2.6
|
%
|
|||
Ron
J. Spivey
|
7,000,000
|
(4)
|
2.1
|
%
|
|||
William
G. Skelly
|
401,000
|
(5)
|
*
|
||||
Bruce
F. Wesson
|
—
|
(2)
|
*
|
||||
William
A. Sumner
|
250,000
|
(6)
|
*
|
||||
Peter
A. Clemens
|
1,221,573
|
(7)
|
*
|
||||
Richard
J. Markham
|
—
|
(2)
|
*
|
||||
Immanuel
Thangaraj
|
—
|
(2)
|
*
|
||||
Robert
A. Seiser
|
337,625
|
(8)
|
*
|
||||
James
F. Emigh
|
382,625
|
(9)
|
*
|
||||
All
Directors and Officers as a Group (10 persons)
|
18,342,823
|
(10)
|
5.3
|
%
|
*
Represents less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the Company's Common
Stock.
(1) Shows
percentage ownership assuming (i) such party converts all of its currently
convertible securities or securities convertible within 60 days of February
1,
2006 into the Company's common stock, and (ii) no other Company securityholder
converts any of its convertible securities. No shares held by any Director
or
named executive officer has been pledged as collateral security.
(2) GCE
Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, is the assignee of all
of
the Company’s preferred stock (prior to its conversion into common stock)
formerly held by each of Galen Partners III, L.P., Galen Partners International
III, L.P., Galen Employee Fund III, L.P. (collectively, “Galen”), Care Capital
Investments II, LP, Care Capital Offshore Investments II, LP (collectively,
“Care Capital”) and Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P. (“Essex”). Galen,
Care Capital and Essex own 43%, 27% and 30%, respectively, of the membership
interests in GCE Holdings LLC. The following natural persons exercise voting,
investment and dispositive rights over the Company’s securities held of record
by GCE Holdings LLC: (i) Galen Partners III, L.P., Galen Partners International
III, L.P. and Galen Employee Fund III, L.P., William Grant, Bruce F. Wesson,
L.
John Wilkenson, David W. Jahns, and Zubeen Shroff; and (ii) Care Capital
Investments II, LP and Care Capital Offshore Investments II, LP, Jan Leschly,
Jerry Karabelas, David Ramsay and Richard Markham; and (iii) Essex Woodlands
Health Ventures V, L.P., Immanuel Thangaraj.
52
(3) Includes
8,750,000 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
8,250,000 restricted stock unit awards (“RSUs”) granted to Mr. Reddick. Mr.
Reddick has no rights as a stockholder, including no dividend or voting rights,
with respect to the shares underlying the RSUs until the shares are issued
by
the Company pursuant to the terms of Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit
Plan.
(4) Includes
7,000,000 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
6,600,000 RSUs granted to Dr. Spivey. Dr. Spivey has no rights as a stockholder,
including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying
the RSUs until the shares are issued by the Company pursuant to the terms of
Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan.
(5) Includes
390,000 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
1,000,000 RSUs granted to Mr. Skelly. Mr. Skelly has no rights as a stockholder,
including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying
the RSUs until the shares are issued by the Company pursuant to the terms of
the
Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan.
(6) Includes
250,000 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
1,000,000 RSUs granted to Mr. Sumner. Mr. Sumner has no rights as a stockholder,
including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying
the RSUs until the shares are issued by the Company pursuant to the terms of
the
Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan.
(7) Includes
906,250 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
4,400,000 RSUs granted to Mr. Clemens. Mr. Clemens has no rights as a
stockholder, including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares
underlying the RSUs until the shares are issued by the Company pursuant to
the
terms of Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan.
(8) Includes
337,625 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
1,650,000 RSUs granted to Mr. Seiser. Mr. Seiser has no rights as a stockholder,
including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying
the RSUs until the shares are issued by the Company pursuant to the terms of
Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan.
(9) Includes
337,625 shares subject to currently exercisable stock options. Excludes
1,375,000 RSUs granted to Mr. Emigh. Mr. Emigh has no rights as a stockholder,
including no dividend or voting rights, with respect to the shares underlying
the RSUs until the shares are issued by the Company pursuant to the terms of
Company’s 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan.
(10) Includes
17,971,500 shares which Directors and executive officers have the right to
acquire within 60 days of February 1, 2007 through exercise of outstanding
stock
options.
ITEM
13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
GCE
Holdings LLC, our 77%
stockholder (“GCE”) is the assignee of all of the shares of the Company’s
preferred stock (prior to its conversion into common stock) formerly held by
each of Galen Partners III, L.P., Galen Partners International III, L.P., Galen
Employee Fund III, L.P. (collectively, “Galen”), Care Capital Investments II,
LP, Care Capital Offshore Investments II, LP (collectively, “Care Capital”) and
Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P., (“Essex”). Galen, Care and Essex own
43%, 27% and 30%, respectively, of the membership interest in GCE. Messrs.
Wesson, Markham and Thangaraj, each a Director of the Company, exercise
investment control over the membership interests in GCE held by Galen, Care
and
Essex, respectively, and correspondingly exercise investment control over the
Company’s securities held by GCE.
As
a condition to the completion of the Company’s 2004 debenture offering, we, the
investors in the 2004 debentures and the holders of our outstanding 5%
convertible senior secured debentures due March 31, 2006 issued by us during
the
period from 1998 through 2003 executed a certain Voting Agreement dated as
of
February 6, 2004 (the "Voting Agreement"). The Voting Agreement provided that
each of Galen, Care and Essex (collectively, the "Lead 2004 Debenture
Investors") had the right to designate for nomination one member of our Board
of
Directors, and that the Lead Debenture 2004 Investors collectively may designate
one additional member of the Board (collectively, the "Designees"). In
connection with the conversion of our preferred shares into common stock
completed in November 2005, the Voting Agreement was amended to reflect the
conveyance by each of Galen, Care and Essex of their holdings in our preferred
shares (prior to its conversion into common stock) to GCE. As amended, the
Voting Agreement provides that our Board of Directors shall be comprised of
not
more than seven (7) members, four (4) of whom shall be designees of GCE. The
designees of GCE are Messrs. Wesson, Markham and Thangaraj. As of the date
of
this Report, the fourth designee of GCE had not been determined.
53
It
was a condition to the completion of our 2004 debenture offering that our senior
term loan agreement (the “Watson Loan Agreement”) with Watson Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. (“Watson”) be restructured to provide for a reduction in the principal
amount of the Watson term loan and for the assignment of the Watson term loan
as
restructured to Galen, Care and Essex and the other investors in our 2004
debentures as of February 10, 2004 (collectively, the "Watson Note Purchasers").
Accordingly, simultaneous with the initial closing of our 2004 debenture
offering, we, Watson and the Watson Note Purchasers executed an Umbrella
Agreement dated as of February 10, 2004 (the "Umbrella Agreement"). The Umbrella
Agreement provided for (i) our payment to Watson of approximately $4.3 million
in consideration of amendments to the Watson term notes in the aggregate
principal amount of approximately $21.4 million evidencing the Watson term
loan
(the "Watson Notes") (A) to forgive approximately $16.4 million of indebtedness
under that Watson Notes, leaving a $5.0 million principal balance, (B) to extend
the maturity date of the Watson Notes from March 31, 2006 to June 30, 2007,
(C)
to provide for the satisfaction of future interest payments under the Watson
Notes in the form of our common stock, and (D) to provide for the forbearance
from the exercise of rights and remedies upon the occurrence of certain events
of default under the Watson Notes (the Watson Notes as so amended, the "2004
Note"), and (ii) Watson's sale and conveyance of the 2004 Note to the Watson
Note Purchasers for cash consideration of $1.0 million.
The
2004 Note in the principal amount of $5.0 million is secured by a lien on all
of
our and our subsidiary’s assets, carries a floating rate of interest equal to
the prime rate plus 4.5% and matures on June 30, 2007. The allocation of
ownership of the $5.0 million 2004 Note among each of the Watson Note Purchasers
was based on the quotient of the principal amount of our 2004 debentures
purchased by such Watson Note Purchaser, divided by approximately $12.3 million,
representing the aggregate principal amount of the 2004 debentures issued by
us
on February 10, 2004. As such, of the $5.0 million principal amount of the
2004
Note, approximately $1,352,000, $1,754,000, and $1,754,000, is owed by us to
Care, Essex and Galen, respectively (representing approximately 27%, 35% and
35%, respectively, of the 2004 Note). During 2006, we paid interest under the
2004 Note in the aggregate amount of $623,942, which was satisfied by the
issuance of an aggregate of 854,659 shares of our common stock (of which 231,108
shares, 299,895 shares and 299,900 shares were issued to Care, Essex and Galen,
respectively).
We
are a party to four (4) loan agreements completed in January 2006, November,
2005, September, 2005 and June, 2005, each as amended to date, pursuant to
which
we have received bridge financing installments in the aggregate principal amount
of $8,744,000
(the “Bridge Loans”) from Galen, Care and Essex (collectively, the “VC Lenders”)
and certain of our other shareholders listed on the signature page to such
Bridge Loan agreements. The
net proceeds from the Bridge Loans, after the satisfaction of related legal
expenses, have been used by us to continue development of our Aversion®
Technology and to fund related operating expenses. The Bridge Loans are secured
by a lien on all of our assets, senior in right of payment and lien priority
to
all of our other indebtedness. The Bridge Loans bear interest at the rate of
ten
percent (10%) per annum, payable quarterly, and mature on March 31, 2007.
Interest was paid in cash through the June 30, 2006 interest payment date.
Commencing with the September 30, 2006 interest payment date, interest is
payable, at our option, in our common stock based upon the average of the
closing bid and asked prices of the common stock for the five (5) trading days
immediately preceding an interest payment date. The Bridge Loans are subject
to
mandatory pre-payment upon our completion of equity or debt financing or any
sale, transfer, license or similar arrangement pursuant to which we sell,
license or otherwise grant rights in any material portion of our intellectual
property to any third party, provided that the consummation of any such
transaction results in certain minimum amounts of cash proceeds to us, net
of
all costs and expenses. The Bridge Loans restrict our ability to issue any
shares of our currently authorized Series A, B or C convertible preferred stock
without the prior consent of the bridge lenders, and grants the bridge lenders
preemptive rights relating to the issuance of our Series A, B and C convertible
preferred stock. The Bridge Loans contain cross default provisions with the
2004
Note and each of the outstanding Bridge Loans. The Bridge Loans also contain
normal and customary affirmative and negative covenants, including restrictions
on our ability to incur additional debt or grant any lien on our assets or
the
assets of its subsidiary, subject to certain permitted exclusions.
In
August 2006, the Bridge Loans were amended to allow the bridge lenders to
convert all or a portion of the Bridge Loans into our common stock upon our
completion of an equity financing. The Bridge Loans and the August 2006
amendment were further amended in November 2006 to permit the bridge lenders
to
convert the Bridge Loans into
our common stock upon the completion of a third-party equity financing providing
gross proceeds to us in the aggregate amount of at least $8 million (a “Third
Party Equity Financing”), a Change of Control Transaction or upon the maturity
date of the Bridge Loans
(each a
“Triggering Event”). Upon the occurrence of a Triggering Event, the VC Lenders
may convert $2.0
million in Bridge
Loans
into the
common stock at a conversion price equal to (A) in the case of the completion
of
a Third Party Equity Financing, the lesser of (i) 80% of the average closing
bid
and asked prices of our common stock for the twenty trading days immediately
preceding the public announcement of the Third Party Investor Financing, (ii)
the average price of the securities sold by us in such Third Party Equity
Financing, and (iii) $0.44 per share, and (B) in the case of a Change of Control
Transaction or upon the maturity date of the Bridge Loans,
the
lesser
of (i) 80% of the average closing bid and asked prices of our common stock
for
the twenty trading days immediately preceding the public announcement of the
Change of Control Transaction or the maturity date, as applicable, and (ii)
$0.44 per share. In addition, upon a Triggering Event, the bridge lenders may
convert $2.55 million of Bridge Loans
into our
common stock at a conversion price of $0.20 per share, $2.3 million of
the Bridge
Loans
at a
conversion price of $0.225 per share and $1.894 million of the
Bridge Loans at
a
conversion price of $0.25 per share. Under current accounting guidance, certain
provisions of the amended conversion feature required the Company to separate
the value of the conversion feature from the debt and record such value as
a
separate liability which must be marked-to-market each balance sheet date.
54
The
November and December 2006 issuances of Bridge Loans for an aggregate face
value
of $1,104,000 included this amended conversion feature which the Company valued
at an aggregate of $1,034,000. This value was recorded as a liability with
an
offsetting $1,025,000 debt discount (which will be amortized over the term
of
the Bridge Loans) and $9,000 of issuance loss. However, as the debt was issued
to shareholders who control the Company, this loss was recorded as a non-cash
deemed dividend rather than effecting net loss.
The
November 2006 amendment of the conversion feature on all of the then outstanding
Bridge Loans, coupled with the requirements to separate the value of the
conversion feature from the debt, required the Company to record the value
of
the amended conversion feature on that outstanding debt as a liability and
a
loss on the modification of debt. The Company assigned a value of $19,951,000
to
these conversion features and reflected the modification loss as a non-cash
deemed dividend. While the aggregate non-cash deemed dividend of $19,960,000
did
not impact reported net loss, it does have an impact on loss per common share.
Upon
revaluing the aggregate conversion features on all outstanding Bridge Loans
as
of December 31, 2006, the Company recorded the resulting decrease in value
as a
$4,235,000 gain. The decrease in the Company’s common stock trading price from
November 2006 to year end resulted in the decrease in the value of the
conversion liability.
During
2006, we paid an aggregate of $193,739 in cash interest under the Bridge Loans
(of which $58,289, $58,289 and $58,289 was paid to Galen, Care and Essex,
respectively) and issued an aggregate of 426,501 shares of our common stock
in
satisfaction of interest payments under the Bridge Loans (of which 139,342
shares, 139,342 shares and 139,342 shares were issued to Galen, Care and Essex,
respectively).
The
Board has not adopted formalized written policies and procedures for the review
or approval of related party transactions. As a matter of practice, however,
the
Board has required that all related party transactions, including, without
limitation, each of the transactions described above in this Item 13, be subject
to review and approval by a committee of independent directors established
by
the Board. The Board’s practice is to evaluate whether a related party
(including a director, officer, employee, GCE, Galen, Care, Essex or other
significant shareholder) will have a direct or indirect interest in a
transaction in which the Company may be a party. Where the Board determined
that
such proposed transaction involves a related party, the Board formally
establishes a committee comprised solely of independent directors to review
and
evaluate such proposed transaction (the “Independent Committee”). The
Independent Committee is authorized to review any and all information it deems
necessary and appropriate to evaluate the fairness of the transaction to the
Company and its shareholders (other than the interested related party to such
transaction), including meeting with management, retaining third party experts
(including counsel and financial advisors if determined necessary and
appropriate by the Independent Committee) and evaluating alternative
transactions, if any. The Independent Committee is also empowered to negotiate
the terms of such proposed related party transaction on behalf of the Company.
The proposed related party transaction may proceed only following the approval
and recommendation of the Independent Committee. Following the Independent
Committee’s approval, the related party transaction is subject to final review
and approval of the Board as a whole, with any interested director abstaining
from such action.
Each
of the transactions described above in this Item 13 were subject to the review,
evaluation, negotiation and approval of an Independent Committee of the Board.
In each of such case, the Independent Committee was comprised of Messrs. Sumner
and Skelly.
Director
Independence
In
assessing Director independence as it relates to the Board as a whole and
committees of the Board, our Board has reviewed and analyzed the standards
for
independence provided in Sections 121A, 803 and 805 of the American Stock
Exchange Company Guide and Listing Requirements (the “American Stock Exchange
Director Independence Requirements”). While we are not subject to the American
Stock Exchange Director Independence Requirements, such standards allow our
Board to evaluate the independence of the directors on our Board. Based on
an
analysis of these standards, our Board has determined that each of Messrs.
Sumner and Skelly are independent directors. With respect to our Board
committees, our Board has determined that Messrs. Wesson and Thangaraj, each
a
member of our Audit Committee, and Messrs. Reddick and Markham, each a member
of
our Compensation Committee, do not meet the American Stock Exchange Director
Independence Requirements.
55
ITEM
14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
The
Company’s registered independent public accounting firm is BDO Seidman, LLP. The
fees billed by this firm in 2006 and 2005 were as follows:
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
Audit
Fees
|
$
|
85,825
|
$
|
67,867
|
|||
Audit-Related
Fees
|
-
|
7,480
|
|||||
Total
Audit and Audit-Related Fees
|
85,825
|
75,347
|
|||||
Tax
Fees
|
30,168
|
28,000
|
|||||
All
Other Fees
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Total
for BDO Seidman, LLP
|
$
|
115,993
|
$
|
103,347
|
Audit
Fees include professional services rendered in connection with the annual audits
of our financial statements, and the review of the financial statements included
in our Forms 10-Q for the related annual periods. Additionally, Audit Fees
include other services that only an independent registered public
accounting
firm can reasonably provide, such as services associated with Securities and
Exchange Commission registration statements or other documents filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission or used in connection with financing
activities.
Audit-Related
Fees include the audits of employee benefit plans and accounting consultations
related to accounting, financial reporting or disclosure matters not classified
as "Audit Fees." Tax
Fees include tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning services. These
services related to the preparation of various state and federal tax returns
and
review of Section 409 compliance.
Audit
Committee's Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures
Consistent
with policies of the Commission regarding auditor independence and the Audit
Committee Charter, the Audit Committee has the responsibility for appointing,
setting compensation and overseeing the work of the registered independent
public accounting firm (the “Firm”). The Audit Committee's policy is to
pre-approve all audit and permissible non-audit services provided by the Firm.
Pre-approval is detailed as to the particular service or category of services
and is generally subject to a specific budget. The Audit Committee may also
pre-approve particular services on a case-by-case basis. In assessing requests
for services by the Firm, the Audit Committee considers whether such services
are consistent with the Firm’s independence, whether the Firm is likely to
provide the most effective and efficient service based upon their familiarity
with the Company, and whether the service could enhance the Company's ability
to
manage or control risk or improve audit quality.
All
of the audit-related, tax and other services provided by BDO Seidman in 2006
and
2005 and related fees (as described in the captions above) were approved in
advance by the Audit Committee.
PART
IV
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a)
The following documents are filed as part of this report:
1.
All Financial Statements: See Index to Financial Statements
2.
Financial Statement Schedules: None
3.
Exhibits: See Index to Exhibits
56
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf
by
the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: March 14, 2007 | ACURA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. | |
|
|
|
By: | /s/ ANDREW D. REDDICK | |
Andrew D. Reddick |
||
President
and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has
been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
|
Title(s)
|
Date
|
||
/s/
Andrew D. Reddick
Andrew
D. Reddick
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
March
14, 2007
|
||
/s/
Peter A. Clemens
Peter
A. Clemens
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and
Accounting Officer)
|
March
14, 2007
|
||
/s/
William G. Skelly
William
G. Skelly
|
Director
|
March
14, 2007
|
||
/s/
Bruce F. Wesson
Bruce
F. Wesson
|
Director
|
March
14, 2007
|
||
/s/
William A. Sumner
William
A. Sumner
|
Director
|
March
14, 2007
|
||
/s/Richard
J. Markham
Richard
J. Markham
|
Director
|
March
14, 2007
|
||
/s/
Immanuel Thangaraj
Immanuel
Thangaraj
|
Director
|
March
14, 2007
|
57
INDEX
TO
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
Page
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
F-2
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
|
F-3
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
|
F-4
|
Consolidated
Statements of Stockholders' Deficit
|
F-5
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
|
F-6
- F-7
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-8
- F-24
|
F-1
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Board
of Directors and Stockholders
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
Palatine,
Illinois
We
have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Acura
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiary as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 and
the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2006.
These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
on
our audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan
and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not
required to have, nor were we required to perform, an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal
control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures
that
are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing
an
opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures
in
the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In
our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Acura
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiary at December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the
results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years
in
the period ended December 31, 2006, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
The
accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company
will continue as a going concern. As described in Note B to the financial
statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and
has a
net capital deficiency that raise substantial doubt about its ability to
continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are
also described in Note B. The financial statements do not include any
adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
As
described in Note A.14 to the consolidated financial statements, effective
January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the fair value method of accounting
provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 123 (revised
2004),
“Share Based Payment”.
/s/
BDO Seidman, LLP
Chicago,
Illinois
March
13, 2007
F-2
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER
31, 2006 and 2005
(in
thousands)
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
CURRENT
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
228
|
$
|
260
|
|||
Prepaid
insurance
|
179
|
179
|
|||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
60
|
5
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
467
|
444
|
|||||
PROPERTY,
PLANT & EQUIPMENT, NET
|
1,145
|
1,341
|
|||||
DEPOSITS
|
7
|
7
|
|||||
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
$
|
1,619
|
$
|
1,792
|
|||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT
|
|||||||
CURRENT
LIABILITIES
|
|||||||
Senior
secured convertible term notes payable, net
|
$
|
7,005
|
$
|
2,550
|
|||
Conversion
features on notes payable
|
16,750
|
-
|
|||||
Secured
term note payable
|
5,000
|
-
|
|||||
Current
maturities of capital lease obligations
|
25
|
31
|
|||||
Accrued
expenses
|
328
|
341
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
29,108
|
2,922
|
|||||
SECURED
TERM NOTE PAYABLE
|
-
|
5,000
|
|||||
COMMON
STOCK WARRANTS
|
10,784
|
-
|
|||||
CAPITAL
LEASE OBLIGATIONS, less current maturities
|
7
|
32
|
|||||
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES
|
|||||||
TOTAL
LIABILITIES
|
$
|
39,899
|
$
|
7,954
|
|||
STOCKHOLDERS'
DEFICIT
|
|||||||
Common
stock - $.01 par value; 650,000,000 shares authorized; 330,998,468
and
329,293,530 shares
issued and outstanding in 2006 and 2005, respectively
|
3,310
|
3,293
|
|||||
Convertible
preferred stock - $.01 par value; 72,027,014
shares
authorized
and available for issuance
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
275,953
|
287,885
|
|||||
Unearned
compensation
|
-
|
(5,724
|
)
|
||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(317,543
|
)
|
(291,616
|
)
|
|||
STOCKHOLDERS’
DEFICIT
|
(38,280
|
)
|
(6,162
|
)
|
|||
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
|
$
|
1,619
|
$
|
1,792
|
See
accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
F-3
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
YEARS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004
(in
thousands, except per share data)
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||
Net
product revenues
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
838
|
||||
Cost
of manufacturing
|
-
|
-
|
1,435
|
|||||||
Research
and development
|
5,172
|
6,265
|
4,130
|
|||||||
Selling,
marketing, general and administrative
|
5,654
|
5,296
|
5,238
|
|||||||
LOSS
FROM OPERATIONS
|
(10,826
|
)
|
(11,561
|
)
|
(9,965
|
)
|
||||
OTHER
INCOME (EXPENSE)
|
||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(1,140
|
)
|
(636
|
)
|
(2,962
|
)
|
||||
Interest
income
|
18
|
36
|
59
|
|||||||
Write-off
of debt discount and deferred private debt offering costs
|
-
|
-
|
(41,807
|
)
|
||||||
Amortization
of debt discount and deferred private debt offering costs
|
(183
|
)
|
-
|
(30,684
|
)
|
|||||
Gain
on debt restructuring
|
-
|
-
|
12,401
|
|||||||
Gain
on fair value change of conversion features
|
4,235
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Gain
on fair value change of common stock warrants
|
2,164
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
(Loss)
gain on asset disposals
|
(22
|
)
|
81
|
2,359
|
||||||
Other
|
(213
|
)
|
5
|
603
|
||||||
TOTAL
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE)
|
4,859
|
(514
|
)
|
(60,031
|
)
|
|||||
NET
LOSS
|
$
|
(5,967
|
)
|
$
|
(12,075
|
)
|
$
|
(69,996
|
)
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per common share | ||||||||||
applicable
to common stockholders (Note
A)
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
$
|
(3.20
|
)
|
|
Weighted
average number of outstanding common shares
|
344,959
|
66,799
|
21,861
|
See
accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
F-4
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT
YEARS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006, 2005 AND 2004
(in
thousands, except par values)
Common
Stock
$0.01
Par Value
|
Preferred
Stock
$0.01
Par Value
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
|
Shares
|
|
Amount
|
|
Additional
Paid-in
Capital
|
|
Unearned
Compensation
|
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
|
Total
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at January 1, 2004
|
21,602
|
$
|
216
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
157,262
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(209,545
|
)
|
$
|
(52,067
|
)
|
|||||||||
Net
loss for the year ended
December
31, 2004
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(69,996
|
)
|
(69,996
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Intrinsic
value of issued options
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
3,030
|
(3,030
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of unearned
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
55
|
1,952
|
-
|
2,007
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares
for
payment of interest
|
865
|
9
|
-
|
-
|
391
|
-
|
-
|
400
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Preferred Shares
for
convertible debentures:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Series
A Convertible
|
-
|
-
|
21,964
|
220
|
13,892
|
-
|
-
|
14,112
|
|||||||||||||||||
Series
B Junior Convertible
|
-
|
-
|
20,246
|
203
|
6,722
|
-
|
-
|
6,925
|
|||||||||||||||||
Series
C-1 Junior Convertible
|
-
|
-
|
56,423
|
564
|
32,025
|
-
|
-
|
32,589
|
|||||||||||||||||
Series
C-2 Junior Convertible
|
-
|
-
|
37,433
|
374
|
22,059
|
-
|
-
|
22,433
|
|||||||||||||||||
Series
C-3 Junior Convertible
|
-
|
-
|
81,907
|
819
|
27,693
|
-
|
-
|
28,512
|
|||||||||||||||||
Beneficial
conversion features in
conjunction
with issuance
of
convertible debentures
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
14,000
|
-
|
-
|
14,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2004
|
22,467
|
225
|
217,973
|
2,180
|
277,129
|
(1,078
|
)
|
(279,541
|
)
|
(1,085
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Net
loss for the year ended
December
31, 2005
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(12,075
|
)
|
(12,075
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Intrinsic
value of issued options
and
restricted stock units
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
11,105
|
(11,105
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of unearned
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
6,459
|
-
|
6,459
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares
for
exercise of options
|
35
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
5
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares
for
interest
|
963
|
10
|
-
|
-
|
525
|
-
|
-
|
535
|
|||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of Preferred Shares:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Series
A Convertible Preferred
|
109,819
|
1,098
|
(21,964
|
)
|
(220
|
)
|
(878
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||
Series
B Junior Convertible
|
20,246
|
203
|
(20,246
|
)
|
(203
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||
Series
C-1 Junior Convertible
|
56,423
|
564
|
(56,423
|
)
|
(564
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||
Series
C-2 Junior Convertible
|
37,433
|
374
|
(37,433
|
)
|
(374
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||
Series
C-3 Junior Convertible
|
81,907
|
819
|
(81,907
|
)
|
(819
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2005
|
329,293
|
3,293
|
-
|
-
|
287,885
|
(5,724
|
)
|
(291,616
|
)
|
(6,162
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Net
loss for the year ended
December
31, 2006
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(5,967
|
)
|
(5,967
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Deemed
dividend related
to
debt modification
|
(19,960
|
)
|
(19,960
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Adoption
of FAS 123R
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(5,724
|
)
|
5,724
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of restricted stock units
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
680
|
-
|
-
|
680
|
|||||||||||||||||
Other
stock based compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
5,046
|
-
|
-
|
5,046
|
|||||||||||||||||
Reclassification
of value
of
common stock warrants
to
liabilities
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(12,948
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(12,948
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares
for
exercise of options
|
400
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
94
|
-
|
-
|
98
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares
for
interest
|
1,281
|
13
|
-
|
-
|
920
|
-
|
-
|
933
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares
for
cashless exercise of warrant
|
24
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
330,998
|
$
|
3,310
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
275,953
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(317,543
|
)
|
$
|
(38,280
|
)
|
See
accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
F-5
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
YEARS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004
(in
thousands, except supplemental data)
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
|||||||
Cash
flows from Operating Activities:
|
||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(5,967
|
)
|
$
|
(12,075
|
)
|
$
|
(69,996
|
)
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities
|
||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
118
|
137
|
291
|
|||||||
Amortization
of debt discount and deferred private debt offering costs
|
183
|
-
|
30,684
|
|||||||
Write
off unamortized debt discount and deferred private debt offering
costs
|
-
|
-
|
41,807
|
|||||||
Gain
on the fair value change of conversion features
|
(4,235
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Gain
on the fair value change of common stock warrants
|
(2,164
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Gain
on debt restructuring
|
-
|
-
|
(12,401
|
)
|
||||||
Non-cash
stock compensation expense
|
5,724
|
6,459
|
2,007
|
|||||||
Gain
on Department of Justice settlement
|
-
|
-
|
(402
|
)
|
||||||
Amortization
of deferred product acquisition costs
|
-
|
-
|
6
|
|||||||
Provision
for losses on accounts receivable
|
-
|
-
|
(428
|
)
|
||||||
Loss
(gain) on asset disposals
|
22
|
(81
|
)
|
(2,359
|
)
|
|||||
Stock
issued for interest expense
|
933
|
535
|
401
|
|||||||
Impairment
charge against fixed assets
|
71
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Changes
in assets and liabilities
|
||||||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
-
|
-
|
729
|
|||||||
Inventories
|
-
|
-
|
312
|
|||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
(55
|
)
|
121
|
94
|
||||||
Other
assets and deposits
|
-
|
(5
|
)
|
184
|
||||||
Accounts
payable
|
-
|
-
|
(1,882
|
)
|
||||||
Accrued
expenses
|
(13
|
)
|
(618
|
)
|
1,460
|
|||||
Total
adjustments
|
584
|
6,548
|
60,503
|
|||||||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(5,383
|
)
|
(5,527
|
)
|
(9,493
|
)
|
||||
Cash
flows from Investing Activities:
|
||||||||||
Capital
expenditures
|
(85
|
)
|
(35
|
)
|
(444
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from asset disposals
|
70
|
193
|
4,538
|
|||||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
(15
|
)
|
158
|
4,094
|
||||||
Cash
flows from Financing Activities:
|
||||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of senior secured bridge loan notes payable
|
5,298
|
2,550
|
-
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from the exercise of stock options
|
98
|
5
|
-
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of subordinated convertible debentures
|
-
|
-
|
11,951
|
|||||||
Payments
on senior secured term notes payable
|
-
|
-
|
(4,000
|
)
|
||||||
Payments
to Department of Justice
|
-
|
-
|
(31
|
)
|
||||||
Payments
on capital lease obligations
|
(31
|
)
|
(29
|
)
|
(45
|
)
|
||||
Payments
of private offering costs
|
-
|
-
|
(315
|
)
|
||||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
5,365
|
2,526
|
7,560
|
|||||||
(Decrease)
increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
(33
|
)
|
(2,843
|
)
|
2,161
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of year
|
260
|
3,103
|
942
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of year
|
$
|
228
|
$
|
260
|
$
|
3,103
|
See
accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
F-6
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (CONTINUED)
YEAR
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004
Supplemental
disclosures of noncash investing and financing activities:
Year
ended December 31, 2006
1.
|
The
Company issued 854,649 shares of Common Stock as payment of $624,000
of
Secured Term Note Payable accrued
interest.
|
2.
|
The
Company issued 426,501 shares of Common Stock as payment of $309,000
of
Bridge Loan Notes Payable accrued
interest.
|
3.
|
Warrants
to purchase 165,934 shares of Common Stock were exercised in
March 2006 at
an exercise price of $0.48 per share in a cashless exercise transaction
resulting in the issuance of 19,065 shares of Common
Stock.
|
4.
|
Warrants
to purchase 30,698 shares of Common Stock were exercised in May
2006 at an
exercise price of $0.47 per share in a cashless exercise transaction
resulting in the issuance of 4,729 shares of Common
Stock.
|
5.
|
A
warrant to purchase 150,000 shares of Common Stock was modified
due to its
anti-dilution clause resulting in a $142,000 stock compensation
expense.
|
6.
|
The
modification of conversion features embedded within Bridge Loan
Notes
Payable was valued at $19,950,000 and the issuance of $1,104,000
of Bridge
Loan Notes Payable contained conversion features valued at $1,035,000.
The
change in the conversion feature’s fair value through December 31, 2006
resulted in a gain of $4,235,000.
|
7.
|
Due
to certain debt conversion feature modifications, the then current
fair
value of all 16,331,000 outstanding common stock warrants of
$12,948,000
was reclassified from equity to liabilities. The change in the
common
stock warrants fair value through December 31, 2006 resulted
in a gain of
$2,164,000.
|
8. |
Bridge
Loan Notes Payable of $1,104,000 contained $1,025,000 of debt
discount.
|
Year
ended December 31, 2005
1. |
The
Company issued 963,000 shares of common stock as payment of $535,000
of
Secured Term Note Payable accrued
interest.
|
2. |
217,973,000
shares of Convertible Preferred Stock were converted into 305,828,000
shares of Common Stock.
|
Year
ended December 31, 2004
1.
|
The
Company's Convertible Subordinated Debentures contained beneficial
conversation features which were valued at
$14,000,000.
|
2.
|
The
Company repaid $166,000 of indebtedness in the form of product
deliveries.
|
3.
|
Bridge
Loans of $2,000,000 and accrued interest of $49,000 were converted
into
like amounts of Convertible Subordinated
Debentures.
|
4.
|
The
Company issued 865,000 shares of common stock as payment of $400,000
of
Senior Secured Term Note Payable accrued
interest.
|
5.
|
Convertible
Subordinated Debentures of $100,632,000 and accrued interest of
$3,939,000
were converted into 217,973,000 shares of Convertible Preferred
Stock.
|
See
accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
F-7
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES
TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER
31, 2006, 2005 and 2004
NOTE
A - DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS AND SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Acura
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a New York corporation, and its subsidiary (the
“Company”) is
a
specialty pharmaceutical company engaged in research, development and
manufacture of innovative Aversion® (abuse deterrent) Technology and related
product candidates. OxyADF
Tablets, the Company’s lead product candidate utilizing Aversion® Technology, is
being developed pursuant to an active investigational new drug application
(“IND”) on file with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”).
Prior
to
the restructuring of its operations (as described below), the Company was
engaged in the development, manufacture, sale and distribution of generic
finished dosage pharmaceutical products (“Generic Products”) and active
pharmaceutical ingredients ("APIs"). On November 6, 2003, the Company
announced
a restructuring plan to focus on research and development related to its
Aversion® Technology and Opioid Synthesis Technologies (as described below).
During the first quarter of 2004, the Company ceased its Generic Products
operations and during the nine months ended September 20, 2004, the Company
sold
to third parties substantially all of its assets used in the manufacture
and
sale of its Generic Products for $4.5 million. During
2004
and early 2005, the Company was also engaged in development of novel opioid
manufacturing processes (the "Opioid Synthesis Technologies") intended for
use
in the commercial manufacture of certain bulk opioid active pharmaceutical
ingredients. In early 2005, the Company announced suspension of activities
relating to the Opioid Synthesis Technologies pending the deputy DEA
Administrator's determination relating to the Company’s pending application for
registration to import narcotic raw materials (the "Narcotic Raw Materials
Import Application") filed with the DEA in early 2001. In late 2006, the
Company
notified the DEA that it was withdrawing the Narcotic Raw Materials Import
Application and subsequently the Company has discontinued all activities
relating to the Opioid Synthesis Technologies. The withdrawal of the Narcotic
Raw Material Import Application and the discontinuation of all activities
relating to the Opioid Synthesis Technologies allow the Company to focus
all of
its resources on developing and commercializing its Aversion® Technology and
related product candidates.
The
Company conducts internal research, development, laboratory, manufacturing
and
warehousing activities for Aversion® Technology at its Culver, Indiana facility.
The 28,000 square foot facility is registered by the DEA to perform research,
development and manufacture for certain Schedule II - V finished dosage form
products. In
addition to internal capabilities and activities the Company engages a number
of
pharmaceutical product contract research organizations (“CROs”) with expertise
in regulatory affairs, clinical trial design and monitoring, and clinical
data
management, biostatistics, medical writing, laboratory testing and related
services. Such CROs perform development services for OxyADF Tablets and other
product candidates under the direction of the Company.
To
generate revenue the
Company plans to enter into development and commercialization agreements
with
strategically focused pharmaceutical company partners (the "Partners") providing
that such Partners license product candidates utilizing the Company’s
Aversion®
Technology and further develop, register and commercialize multiple strengths
and packing sizes of such product candidates. The Company expects to receive
revenue in the form of milestone payments and a share of profits and/or royalty
payments derived from the Partners' future sale of products incorporating
Aversion®
Technology. As
of the
date of this Report, the Company did not have any executed collaborative
agreements with Partners, nor can there be any assurance that the Company
will
successfully enter into such collaborative agreements in the
future.
Summary
of Accounting Policies
A
summary
of the significant accounting policies consistently applied in the preparation
of the accompanying consolidated financial statements follows.
1. Principles
of Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and
its
wholly-owned subsidiary, Acura Pharmaceutical Technologies, Inc. All material
intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated. In 2006, the
Company dissolved Axiom Pharmaceutical Corporation. During 2003, the Company
dissolved all of its inactive subsidiaries with the exception of Acura
Pharmaceutical Technologies, Inc. and Axiom Pharmaceutical Corporation. The
dissolution of these subsidiaries had no impact on the consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows of the Company.
F-8
2. Statements
of Cash Flows
For
purposes of the statements of cash flows, the Company considers all highly
liquid debt instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months
or
less to be cash equivalents. The Company paid no income taxes for the years
ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004. In addition, the Company paid cash
interest of approximately $207,000, $101,000
and $47,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively.
3. Accounts
Receivable - Trade and Allowance Accounts
Consistent
with the cessation of the manufacture and sale of Generic
Products in the first quarter of 2004, the Company had no accounts receivable
from customers at each of December 31, 2006 and 2005. For prior periods,
the
Company's accounts receivable - trade were due from customers for the purchase
of Generic Products. Credit was extended based on evaluation of a customer's
financial condition and, generally, collateral was not required. Estimates
that
were used in determining allowances were based on the Company's historical
experience, current trends, credit policy and a percentage of its accounts
receivable by aging category.
Changes
in the Company's trade allowance accounts are as follows (in thousands):
2004
|
||||
Beginning
balance
|
$
|
428
|
||
Provision
for losses on accounts receivable
|
-
|
|||
Provision
for all other allowances
|
-
|
|||
Write-offs
|
(428
|
)
|
||
Ending
balance
|
$
|
-
|
4.
Inventories
The
Company had no inventories at each of December 31, 2006 and 2005. Purchases
of
active ingredients required for the Company’s development and manufacture of
product candidates utilizing its Aversion® Technology, are expensed as incurred.
5. Property,
Plant and Equipment
Property,
plant and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation is recorded on a
straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the related assets.
Amortization of capital lease assets is included in depreciation expense.
Leasehold improvements are amortized on a straight-line basis over the shorter
of their useful lives or the terms of their respective leases. Betterments
are
capitalized and maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred.
The estimated lives of the major classification of depreciable assets
are:
Building
and building improvements
|
10
- 40 years
|
|
Land
improvements
|
20
- 40 years
|
|
Machinery
and equipment
|
7
-
10 years
|
|
Scientific
equipment
|
5
-
10 years
|
|
Computer
hardware and software
|
3
-
10 years
|
|
Office
equipment
|
5
-
10 years
|
|
Furniture
and fixtures
|
10
years
|
6. Asset
Impairment
Long-lived
assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. Impairment is measured
by
comparing the carrying value of the long-lived assets to the estimated
undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from use of the assets
and
their ultimate disposition. To the extent impairment has occurred, the carrying
amount of the asset would be written down to an amount to reflect the fair
value
of the asset. During the fourth quarter of 2006, the Company provided a $71,000
reserve against assets assigned to the Company’s Opioid Synthesis Technologies.
The Company has discontinued all activities relating to its Opioid Synthesis
Technologies.
F-9
7.
Deferred Private Debt Offering Costs
Private
debt offering costs represented costs incurred by the Company in conjunction
with securing debt financing in February 2004. In August 2004, all outstanding
debentures were converted into various series of preferred stock and
approximately $717,000 of unamortized deferred private debt offering costs
were
charged to expense. All outstanding series of preferred stock was subsequently
converted into common stock in 2005.
8.
Debt Discount
Debt
discount resulting from the issuance of common stock warrants in connection
with
the issuance of subordinated debt and other notes payable in 2004 as well
as
from beneficial conversion features contained in convertible debt instruments
issued in 2004 and prior years, was recorded as a reduction of the related
obligations and was amortized over the remaining life of the related
obligations. Debt discount related to the common stock warrants issued was
determined by a calculation based on the relative fair values ascribed to
such
warrants determined by management's use of the Black-Scholes valuation model.
Inherent in the Black-Scholes valuation model are assumptions made by management
regarding the estimated life of the warrant, the estimated volatility of
the
Company's common stock (as determined by reviewing its historical public
market
closing prices) and the expected dividend yield. In August 2004, all related
debt was converted into various series of preferred stock and the entire
remaining unamortized debt discount of $41,090,000 was charged to expense.
Subsequently, all outstanding series of preferred stock was converted into
common stock in 2005.
As
described more fully in Note F, additional debt discount of $1,025,000 was
recorded in 2006 and is being amortized through the March 31, 2007 maturity
of
the related debt.
9. Conversion
Features and Common Stock Warrants
Certain
provisions of the amended conversion features contained in the Company’s
outstanding Bridge Loans, required the Company to separate the value of the
conversion feature from this debt and record such value as a separate liability
which must be marked-to-market each balance sheet date. Future period fair
value
adjustments to the conversion feature could result in further gains or losses.
To compute the estimated value of the conversion features, the Company used
the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
As
a
result of the November 2006 amendment to the Bridge Loans, all outstanding
common stock purchase warrants were fair valued using the Black - Scholes
option-pricing model and recorded as a liability with corresponding reduction
in
additional paid-in capital. The liability must be marked-to-market each balance
sheet. Future period fair value adjustments to the warrant liability could
result in further gains or losses.
10.
Revenue Recognition
The
Company recorded no Generic Product sales revenues after the second quarter
of
2004. Prior to that, the
Company
recognized revenue, net of sales discounts and allowances, when title to
the
Generic Products passed to the customer, which occurred upon shipment. The
Company established sales provisions for estimated chargebacks, discounts,
rebates, returns, pricing adjustments and other sales allowances concurrently
with the recognition of revenue. The sales provisions were established based
upon consideration of a variety of factors, including, but not limited to,
actual return and historical experience by product type, the number and timing
of competitive products approved for sale, the expected market for the product,
estimated customer inventory levels by product, price declines and current
and
projected economic conditions and levels of competition. Actual product return,
chargebacks and other sales allowances incurred were, however, dependent
upon
future events.
11.
Shipping and Handling Costs
Prior
to
cessation
of the manufacture and sale of Generic
Products in the second quarter of 2004, the
Company
included all shipping and handling expenses incurred as a component of cost
of
manufacturing.
F-10
12.
Research and Development
Prior
to
the cessation of development, manufacture and sale of Generic Products, research
and development (“R&D”) expenses consisted primarily of activities
associated with development of Generic Products and the Company’s Opioid
Synthesis Technologies. Since the first quarter of 2004, R&D expenses
were primarily associated with the Company’s Aversion® Technology and, to a much
lessor extent, the Company’s Opioid Synthesis Technologies. R&D
expenses include internal R&D activities and external CROs. Internal
R&D expenses include facility overhead, maintenance, repair and
depreciation, laboratory supplies, pre-clinical laboratory experiments,
equipment maintenance, repairs and depreciation, salaries, benefits, incentive
compensation and other administrative expenses. CRO expenses
include preclinical laboratory experiments, clinical trials, clinical trial
and
regulatory consulting, regulatory counsel and patent counsel. R&D
expenses are charged to operations as incurred. The Company reviews and
accrues clinical trial expenses based on work performed and relies on an
estimate of the costs applicable to the stage of completion of a clinical
trial
as provided by the CRO. Accrued clinical costs are subject to revisions as
such trials progress to completion. Revisions are charged to expense in
the period in which the facts that give rise to the revision become known.
The
Company has binding research and development commitments, of which $162,000
has
yet to be incurred and recorded, at December 31, 2006. This amount is expected
to be spent by March 31, 2007. The Company had no binding research and
development commitments with third parties at December 31, 2005.
13.
Income Taxes
The
Company accounts for income taxes under the liability method in accordance
with
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109 ("SFAS No. 109"),
"Accounting for Income Taxes." Under this method, deferred income tax assets
and
liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting
and
tax basis of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax
rates
and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse.
Additionally, income tax credit carryforwards are reported as deferred income
tax assets. SFAS 109 requires a valuation allowance against deferred tax
assets
if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not
that
some or all of the deferred tax assets may not be realized. At both December
31,
2006 and 2005, a valuation allowance equal to 100% of the net deferred income
tax assets was used and primarily pertains to uncertainties with respect
to
future utilization of net operating loss carryforwards. In the event the
Company
were to determine that it would be able to realize some or all its deferred
income tax assets in the future, an adjustment to the deferred income tax
asset
would increase income in the period such determination was made.
14.
Earnings (Loss) Per Share
The
computation of basic earnings (loss) per share of common stock is based upon
the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period,
including shares related to vested restricted stock units (See Note I). Diluted
earnings (loss) per share is based on the same number of common shares adjusted
for the effect of other potentially dilutive securities. No such adjustments
were made for 2006, 2005 or 2004 as their effects would be antidilutive.
Net
loss
used in the Company’s earnings (loss) per share computations includes the impact
in 2006 of dividends deemed to have been issued to certain common shareholders
as a result of modifications to debt agreements with those shareholders as
further described in Note F.
Year
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
|||||||
Numerator:
|
||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(5,967
|
)
|
$
|
(12,075
|
)
|
$
|
(69,996
|
)
|
|
Deemed
dividend from modification of debt
|
(19,960
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Net
loss applicable to common stock holders
|
$
|
(25,927
|
)
|
$
|
(12,075
|
)
|
$
|
(69,996
|
)
|
|
Denominator:
|
||||||||||
Weighted
average number of outstanding -
|
||||||||||
Common
shares
|
329,858
|
66,573
|
21,861
|
|||||||
Vested
restricted stock units
|
15,101
|
226
|
-
|
|||||||
|
344,959
|
66,799
|
21,861
|
|||||||
Basic
and diluted loss per common share
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
$
|
(3.20
|
)
|
|
Potentially
dilutive securities:
|
||||||||||
Common
stock issuable (1) -
|
||||||||||
Employee
and director stock options
|
18,995
|
19,755
|
17,499
|
|||||||
Common
stock warrants
|
16,331
|
16,242
|
32,877
|
|||||||
Non-vested
restricted stock units
|
9,833
|
18,333
|
-
|
|||||||
Convertible
debt
|
33,057
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Convertible
preferred stock
|
-
|
-
|
305,828
|
|||||||
78,216
|
54,330
|
356,204
|
(1)
Number of shares issuable is based on maximum number of shares
issuable on
exercise or conversion of the related securities as of year end.
Such
amounts have not been adjusted for the treasury stock method or
weighted
average outstanding calculations required if the securities were
dilutive.
|
F-11
15.
Stock-Based Compensation
The
Company has three stock-based compensation plans covering stock options and
restricted stock units for its employees and directors, which are described
more
fully in Note I.
On
January 1, 2006, the Company adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board
Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment”, (“FASB 123R”). This
change in accounting replaces existing requirements under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (“SFAS
123”) and eliminates the ability to account for share-based compensation
transaction using Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, "Accounting
for
Stock Issued to Employees," and related Interpretations ("APB No. 25"). The
compensation cost related to share-based payment transactions is now measured
based on fair value of the equity or liability instrument issued. For purposes
of estimating the fair value of each stock option unit on the date of grant,
the
Company utilized the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The Black-Scholes
option valuation model was developed for use in estimating the fair value
of
traded options, which have no vesting restrictions and are fully transferable.
In addition, option valuation models require the input of highly subjective
assumptions including the expected volatility factor of the market price
of the
Company’s common stock (as determined by reviewing its historical public market
closing prices). Because the Company’s employee stock options have
characteristics significantly different form those of trade options and because
changes in the subjective input assumptions can materially affect the fair
value
estimate, in management’s opinion, the existing models do not necessarily
provide a reliable measure of the fair value of its employee stock options.
The
Company had previously accounted for stock-based compensation using the
intrinsic value method in accordance with APB No. 25 and had adopted the
disclosure provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
148,
"Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation - Transition and Disclosure, ("SFAS
No.
148"), an amendment of SFAS 123. Under APB No. 25, when the exercise price
of
the Company's employee stock options equaled the market price of the underlying
common stock on the date of grant, no compensation expense was recognized.
Accordingly, no compensation expense had been recognized in the consolidated
financial statements in connection with these types of grants for 2005 and
earlier. When the exercise price of the Company's employee stock options
was
less than the market price of the underlying common stock on the date of
grant,
compensation expense was recognized. Equity instruments issued to nonemployees
in exchange for goods, fees and services are accounted for under the fair
value-based method of SFAS No. 123(R).
The
Company’s accounting for stock-based compensation for restricted stock units
(“RSUs”) has been based on the fair-value method. The fair value of the RSUs is
the market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant, less its
exercise cost.
The
following table illustrates the effect on net loss and loss per share had
the
Company applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS 123 to stock-based
employee compensation for its’ stock option grant awards. Pro forma compensation
expense may not be indicative of future expense.
F-12
|
Year
ended December 31,
|
||||||
(in
thousands,
except
per share data)
|
|||||||
|
2005
|
2004
|
|||||
Net
loss, as reported
|
$
|
(12,075
|
)
|
$
|
(69,996
|
)
|
|
Add:
total stock-based employee compensation expense included in reported
net
loss
|
6,459
|
2,007
|
|||||
Deduct:
total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under
fair
value-based method for all awards
|
(7,242
|
)
|
(3,058
|
)
|
|||
Net
loss, pro forma
|
$
|
(12,858
|
)
|
$
|
(71,047
|
)
|
|
Loss
per share:
|
|||||||
Basic
and Diluted EPS - as reported
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
$
|
(3.20
|
)
|
|
Basic
and Diluted EPS - as pro forma
|
$
|
(0.19
|
)
|
$
|
(3.25
|
)
|
16.
Use of Estimates in Consolidated Financial Statements
The
preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires
management to make estimates and use assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent liabilities
at
the date of the consolidated financial statements, as well as the reported
amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from those estimates.
Management
periodically evaluates estimates used in the preparation of the consolidated
financial statements for continued reasonableness. Appropriate adjustments,
if
any, to the estimates used are made prospectively based on such periodic
evaluations.
17.
Carrying Amount and Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The
carrying amount of cash and cash equivalents approximates fair value due
to the
short-term maturities of the instruments. The carrying value of the Company’s
debt approximates fair value because the debt bears terms that are reflective
of
those terms should the Company secure additional financing.
18.
Reclassifications
Certain
reclassifications have been made to the prior years' amounts to conform to
the
current year's presentation.
19.
New Accounting Pronouncements
Changes
and Error Corrections
In
May
2005, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 154, “Accounting Changes and Error
Corrections - A Replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No.
3”,
(“SFAS 154”). SFAS 154 primarily requires retrospective application to prior
periods’ financial statements for the direct effects of changes in accounting
principle, unless it is impracticable to determine either the period-specific
effects or the cumulative effect of the change. SFAS 154 was effective for
accounting changes and corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2005.
Share-Based
Payment
The
Company adopted FASB 123R effective January 1, 2006 under the modified
prospective method, which recognizes compensation cost beginning with the
effective date (a) based on the requirements of FASB 123R for all share-based
payments granted after the effective date and to awards modified, repurchased,
or cancelled after that date and (b) based on the requirements of FASB Statement
No. 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of
FAS
123R that remain unvested on the effective date. The only cumulative effect
of
initially applying this Statement for the Company was to reclassify $5,724,000
of previously recorded unearned compensation into paid-in capital. The Company
has estimated that an additional $5,827,000 will be expensed over the applicable
remaining vesting periods for all share-based payments granted to employees
on
or before December 31, 2005 which remained unvested on January 1, 2006. The
Company anticipates that more compensation costs will be recorded in the
future
if the use of options and restricted stock units for employees and director
compensation continues as in the past.
F-13
Certain
Hybrid Financial Instruments
In
February 2006, FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No.
155,
"Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments - an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 133 and 140" (“SFAS 155”). SFAS 155 resolves issues addressed in
Statement 133 Implementation Issue No. D1, “Application of Statement 133 to
Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets.” SFAS 155 is effective for
all financial instruments acquired or issued after the beginning of the first
fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. As such, the Company is
required to adopt these provisions at January 1, 2007. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact of SFAS 155, but currently does not anticipate any
material impact to its consolidated financial statements.
Uncertainty
in Income Taxes
In
July
2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48 ("FIN 48") regarding "Accounting
for
Uncertainties in Income Taxes," which defines the threshold for recognizing
the
benefits of tax-return positions in the financial statements as
"more-likely-than-not" to be sustained by the taxing authorities. FIN 48
also
requires explicit disclosure requirements about a Company's uncertainties
related to their income tax position, including a detailed rollforward of
tax
benefits taken that do not qualify for financial statement recognition. This
Interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 31,
2006.
The cumulative effect of applying the provisions of FIN 48 will be reported
as
an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings for that fiscal
year.
The Company is evaluating the possible impact of FIN 48, but currently does
not
anticipate any material impact to its consolidated financial statements.
Fair
Value Measurements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, “Fair Value Measurements.” SFAS 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value under
generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective for financial statements issued
for
fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within
those
fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption
of
this statement could have on is financial condition, results of operations
or
cash flows.
NOTE
B - BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The
accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming the Company
will
continue as a going concern. At
December 31, 2006, the Company had unrestricted cash and cash equivalents
of
$0.2 million, a working
capital deficit of $28.6 million, and an accumulated deficit of $317.5 million.
The
Company incurred a loss from operations of $10.8 million and a net loss of
$6.0
million during the year ended December 31, 2006 and a loss from operations
of
$11.6 million
and a net loss of $12.1 million
during the year ended December 31, 2005. Historically,
the Company has incurred significant losses and until such time as its product
candidates are commercialized, of which no assurance can be given, the Company
will continue incurring losses. These
factors, among others, raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability
to
continue as a going concern.
The
Company estimates that its current cash reserves, including the net proceeds
from the Bridge Loan Agreements described in Note F, will be sufficient to
fund
the development of the Aversion®
Technology and related operating expenses through late March 2007. To fund
further operations and product development activities, the Company must raise
additional financing, or enter into alliances or collaboration agreements
with
third parties resulting in cash payments to the Company relating to its
Aversion® Technology.
The
Company
is seeking to secure working capital providing gross proceeds to the Company
in
the range of approximately $10 million to $15 million through the private
offering of the Company’s securities. The terms of any such securities offering,
including, without limitation, the type of equity securities (or securities
convertible into equity securities) and the price per share, have not been
determined and will, in large part, be determined based upon negotiations
between the Company and prospective investors in such private offering. No
assurance can be given that the Company will be successful in obtaining any
such
financing or in securing collaborative agreements with third parties on
acceptable terms, if at all, or if secured, that such financing or collaborative
agreements will provide for cash payments to the Company sufficient to continue
to fund operations. In the absence of such financing or third-party
collaborative agreements, the Company will be required to scale back or
terminate operations and/or seek protection under applicable bankruptcy
laws.
Even
assuming the Company is successful in securing additional sources of financing
to fund the continued development of the Aversion®
Technology, or otherwise enters into alliances or collaborative agreements
relating to the Aversion®
Technology, there can be no assurance that the Company's development efforts
will result in commercially viable products. The Company's failure to
successfully develop the Aversion®
Technology in a timely manner and to avoid infringing third-party patents
and
other intellectual property rights will have a material adverse impact on
its
financial condition and results of operations.
F-14
In
view
of the matters described above, recoverability of a major portion of the
recorded asset amounts shown in the Company's accompanying consolidated balance
sheets is dependent upon continued operations of the Company, which in turn
are
dependent upon the Company's ability to meet its financing requirements on
a
continuing basis, to maintain present financing, and to succeed in its future
operations. The Company's financial statements do not include any adjustment
relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts
or
amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should
the
Company be unable to continue in existence.
NOTE
C - FINANCING TRANSACTIONS
2004
Debenture Offering
In
2004,
the Company consummated private offerings of convertible senior secured
debentures (the "2004 Debentures") in the aggregate principal amount of
approximately $14 million (the "2004 Debenture Offering"). The 2004 Debentures
carried an interest rate of 1.62% per annum and were secured by a lien on
all
assets of the Company and the assets of Acura Pharmaceutical Technologies,
Inc.
and Axiom Pharmaceutical Corporation, each a wholly-owned subsidiary of the
Company.
In
accordance with the terms of the documents executed in connection with the
2004
Debenture Offering, effective August 13, 2004, the business day following
the
Company's receipt of shareholder approval to restate the Company's Certificate
of Incorporation to authorize the Series A Preferred and the Junior Preferred
Shares (as described below) as provided in the 2004 Purchase Agreement, the
aggregate principal amount of the 2004 Debentures converted into an aggregate
of
21,963,757 shares of the Company’s Series A Preferred shares. In addition,
effective August 13, 2004, the Company’s 5% convertible debentures issued during
the period from 1998 through 2003 in the aggregate principal amount of
approximately $86.6 million were converted into the Company’s Series B Preferred
shares, Series C-1 Preferred shares, Series C-2 Preferred shares and Series
C-3
Preferred shares (the “Junior Preferred Shares”). As the result, on August 13,
2004, the Company issued an aggregate of approximately 20.2 million Series
B
Preferred shares, 56.4 million Series C-1 Preferred shares, 37.4 million
Series
C-2 Preferred shares and 81.9 million Series C-3 Preferred shares. As a result
of the conversion, the Company wrote off $41.8 million of unamortized debt
discount and deferred private debt offering costs.
Conversion
of Preferred Shares into Common Stock
Effective
November 10, 2005, all of the issued and outstanding preferred shares of
the
Company were automatically and mandatorily converted into the Company’s common
stock, $.01 par value per share (the “Common Stock”) in accordance with the
terms of the Company’s Restated Certification of Incorporation (the “Preferred
Stock Conversion”). In accordance with the conversion provisions contained in
the Restated Certificate of Incorporation, all issued and outstanding shares
of
the Company’s Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock, Series C-1
Preferred Stock, Series C-2 Preferred Stock and Series C-3 Preferred Stock
(collectively, the “Preferred Stock”) are converted automatically into the
Company’s Common Stock upon the Company’s receipt of the written consent to the
Preferred Stock Conversion from the holders of at least 51% of the shares
of the
Company’s Series A Preferred Stock. On November 10, 2005, the Company received
the consent to the Preferred Stock Conversion from GCE Holdings LLC (the
assignee of all of the Company’s Preferred Stock (prior to its conversion into
Common Stock) formerly held by each of Care Capital Investments II, LP, Care
Capital Offshore Investments II, LP, Essex Woodlands Health Ventures V, L.P.,
Galen Partners International III, L.P., Galen Partners III, L.P. and Galen
Employee Fund III, L.P.), collectively, the “VC Investors”, such entity holding
in the aggregate in excess of 51% of the issued and outstanding shares of
the
Company’s Series A Preferred Stock. In accordance with the terms of the
Company’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation, all shares of the Company’s
Preferred Stock were automatically converted into an aggregate of approximately
305.4 million shares of the Company’s Common Stock. After giving effect to the
Preferred Stock Conversion, effective November 10, 2005 the Company had an
aggregate of approximately 329.0 million shares of Common Stock issued and
outstanding.
F-15
At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, convertible preferred stock consists of the
following (in thousands):
Convertible
Preferred
Stock
|
Authorized
Preferred Shares at 12/31/04
|
Number
of Preferred Shares
Converted in
2005
|
Number
of Common Shares Issued Upon Preferred Shares Conversion
in 2005
|
Authorized
Preferred
Shares Available for Issuance at
12/31/05
and 12/31/06
|
|||||||||
Series
A
|
45,000
|
21,964
|
109,819
|
23,036
|
|||||||||
Series
B Junior
|
25,000
|
20,246
|
20,246
|
4,754
|
|||||||||
Series
C-1 Junior
|
70,000
|
56,423
|
56,423
|
13,577
|
|||||||||
Series
C-2 Junior
|
50,000
|
37,433
|
37,433
|
12,567
|
|||||||||
Series
C-3 Junior
|
100,000
|
81,907
|
81,907
|
18,093
|
|||||||||
Total
|
290,000
|
217,973
|
305,828
|
72,027
|
At
December 31, 2006, no Preferred Shares were issued and outstanding.
NOTE
D - PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
Property,
plant and equipment are summarized as follows (in thousands):
|
December
31,
|
||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||
Building
and building improvements
|
$
|
1,391
|
$
|
1,485
|
|||
Land
and land improvements
|
161
|
161
|
|||||
Machinery
and equipment
|
2,183
|
2,325
|
|||||
Scientific
equipment
|
481
|
473
|
|||||
Computer
hardware and software
|
203
|
196
|
|||||
Office
equipment
|
42
|
42
|
|||||
Other
personal property
|
50
|
50
|
|||||
4,511
|
4,732
|
||||||
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization | |||||||
(including
$36 in 2006 and $53 in 2005 on capital leased assets)
|
(3,200
|
)
|
(3,271
|
)
|
|||
1,311
|
1,461
|
||||||
Less
impairment reserve
|
(166
|
)
|
(120
|
)
|
|||
Total
property, plant and equipment, net
|
$
|
1,145
|
$
|
1,341
|
Equipment
with a net book value of $111,000 and $146,000 is recorded under capitalized
leases in categories of scientific equipment and office equipment at December
31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Depreciation
and amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and
2004
was approximately $118,000, $137,000 and $291,000, respectively.
NOTE
E - ACCRUED EXPENSES
Accrued
expenses are summarized as follows (in thousands):
|
December
31,
|
||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||
Bonus,
payroll, payroll taxes and benefits
|
$
|
62
|
$
|
50
|
|||
Legal
fees
|
19
|
74
|
|||||
Audit
examination and tax preparation fees
|
70
|
65
|
|||||
Franchise
taxes
|
15
|
20
|
|||||
Property
taxes
|
52
|
52
|
|||||
Clinical,
regulatory, trademarks, and patent consulting fees
|
60
|
78
|
|||||
Directors
fees
|
-
|
2
|
|||||
Other
fees and services
|
50
|
-
|
|||||
$
|
328
|
$
|
341
|
F-16
NOTE
F - NOTES PAYABLE
At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, notes payable consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
December
31,
|
||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||
Senior
secured convertible notes payable (a):
|
|||||||
Face
value
|
$
|
7,848
|
$
|
2,550
|
|||
Debt
discount
|
(843
|
)
|
-
|
||||
|
7,005
|
2,550
|
|||||
Conversion
feature value
|
16,750
|
-
|
|||||
$
|
23,755
|
$
|
2,550
|
||||
Secured
term note payable (b)
|
$
|
5,000
|
$
|
5,000
|
|||
Capital
lease obligations
|
$
|
32
|
$
|
63
|
(a)
Convertible Notes Payable
Pursuant
to a series of loan agreements between the Company, the VC Investors and
certain
other shareholders of the Company dating from June 2005 to January 2006 -
all as
amended through November 2006, the Company has borrowed $7,848,000 as of
December 31, 2006 and an additional $896,000 in January and February, 2007
(the
“Bridge Loans”). The proceeds from the Bridge Loans have been and continue to be
used by the Company to develop its Aversion® Technology and fund related
operating expenses. The Bridge Loans carry an interest rate of 10%, payable
quarterly which, pursuant to the November 2006 amendment, is payable, at
the
Company’s option, with shares of its Common Stock. The Bridge Loans, as amended,
mature on March 31, 2007.
The
Bridge Loans are secured by a lien on all of the Company’s assets, senior in
right to all other Company indebtedness and restrict its ability to issue
any
shares of the Company’s currently authorized Series A, B or C convertible
preferred stock without the prior consent of the bridge lenders, and grants
the
bridge lenders preemptive rights relating to the issuance of the Company’s
Series A, B and C convertible preferred stock. The Bridge Loans contain cross
default provisions with the 2004 Note (described below) and each of the
outstanding Bridge Loans. The Bridge Loans also contain normal and customary
affirmative and negative covenants, including restrictions on the Company’s
ability to incur additional debt or grant any lien on the Company’s assets or
the assets of its subsidiary, subject to certain permitted exclusions.
Additionally, the Bridge Notes require immediate prepayment upon a qualifying
common stock equity or debt financing or any sale, transfer license or similar
arrangement pursuant to which the Company sells, licenses or otherwise grant
rights in any material portion of the Company’s intellectual property to any
third party, provided that the consummation of any such transaction results
in
certain minimum amounts of cash proceeds to the Company, net of all costs
and
expenses.
Through
August 2006, the terms of the Bridge Loans did not include any conversion
provisions. An August 2006 amendment added a conversion feature which allowed,
at the lenders’ option, the Bridge Loans to be converted into the Company’s
Common Stock upon a qualifying equity financing at a conversion price equal
to
the per share price implicit in such equity financing. The Company did not
assign any value to the new conversion feature as it did not provide the
lenders
with an opportunity to receive value in a conversion in excess of the face
value
of the debt regardless of the per share price of that equity financing.
In
November 2006, the conversion feature of the Bridge Loans was further amended
to
allow the bridge loan lenders to convert the Bridge Loans into the Company’s
common stock upon the completion of a third-party equity financing providing
gross proceeds to the Company in the aggregate amount of at least $8 million
(a
“Third Party Equity Financing”), a Change of Control Transaction or upon the
maturity date of the Bridge Loans (each a “Triggering Event”). Upon the
occurrence of a Triggering Event, the bridge lenders may convert $2,000,000
(as
of February 2007) of Bridge Loans into the Company’s common stock at a
conversion price equal to (A) in the case of the completion of a Third Party
Equity Financing, the lesser of (i) 80% of the average closing bid and asked
prices of the Company’s common stock for the twenty trading days immediately
preceding the public announcement of the Third Party Investor Financing,
(ii)
the average price of the securities sold by the Company in such Third Party
Equity Financing, and (iii) $0.44 per share, and (B) in the case of a Change
of
Control Transaction or upon the maturity date of the Bridge Loans, the lesser
of
(i) 80% of the average closing bid and asked prices of the Registrant’s common
stock for the twenty trading days immediately preceding the public announcement
of the Change of Control Transaction or the maturity date, as applicable,
and
(ii) $0.44 per share. In addition, upon a Triggering Event, the bridge lenders
may convert $2.55 million of Bridge Loans into the Company's common stock
at a
conversion price of $0.20 per share, $2.3 million of Bridge Loans at a
conversion price of $0.225 per share and $1.894 million of Bridge Loans at
a
conversion price of $0.25 per share. Under current accounting guidance, certain
provisions of the amended conversion feature required the Company to separate
the value of the conversion feature from the debt and record such value as
a
separate liability which must be marked-to-market each balance sheet date.
F-17
The
November and December 2006 issuances of Bridge Loans for an aggregate face
value
of $1,104,000 included this amended conversion feature which the Company
valued
at an aggregate of $1,034,000. This value was recorded as a liability with
an
offsetting $1,025,000 debt discount (which will be amortized over the term
of
the Bridge Loans) and $9,000 of issuance loss. However, as the debt was issued
to shareholders who control the Company, this loss was recorded as a non-cash
deemed dividend rather than effecting net loss.
The
November 2006 amendment of the conversion feature on all of the then outstanding
Bridge Loans, coupled with the requirements to separate the value of the
conversion feature from the debt, required the Company to record the value
of
the amended conversion feature on that outstanding debt as a liability and
a
loss on the modification of debt. The Company assigned a value of $19,951,000
to
these conversion features and reflected the modification loss as a non-cash
deemed dividend. While the aggregate non-cash deemed dividend of $19,960,000
did
not impact reported net loss, it does have an impact on loss per common share.
Upon
revaluing the aggregate conversion features on all outstanding Bridge Loans
as
of December 31, 2006, the Company recorded the resulting decrease in value
as a
$4,235,000 gain. The decrease in the Company’s common stock trading price from
November 2006 to year end resulted in the decrease in the value of the
conversion liability.
To
compute the estimated value of the conversion features, the Company used
the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions:
|
November
Amendment Date
|
December
31, 2006
|
|||||
Company
stock price
|
$
|
0.87
|
$
|
0.74
|
|||
Exercise
price
|
(1
|
)
|
(1
|
)
|
|||
Expected
dividend
|
0.0
|
%
|
0.0
|
%
|
|||
Risk
-free interest rate
|
5.0
|
%
|
5.0
|
%
|
|||
Expected
volatility
|
85.0
|
%
|
88.8
|
%
|
|||
Contracted
term
|
4
months
|
3
months
|
(1)
The
exercise price used to estimate fair value was set to equal the fixed conversion
price for each of the respective traunches of Bridge Loans. While the conversion
terms do provide for other than fixed conversion rates under certain
circumstances, management has determined that the stated fixed rates (i.e.,
$0.20, $0.225, $0.25 and $0.44) will most likely be the lowest rate under
any of
the circumstances and the lender would therefore select that fixed
rate.
(b)
|
Secured
Term Note Payable
|
The
Company was a party to a certain loan agreement with Watson Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. ("Watson") pursuant to which Watson made term loans to the Company (the
"Watson Term Loan Agreement") in the aggregate principal amount of $21.4
million
as evidenced by two promissory notes (the "Watson Notes"). It was a condition
to
the completion of the 2004 Debenture Offering that simultaneous with the
closing
of the 2004 Purchase Agreement, the Company shall have paid Watson the sum
of
approximately $4.3 million (which amount was funded from the proceeds of
the
2004 Debenture Offering) and conveyed to Watson certain Company assets in
consideration for Watson's forgiveness of approximately $16.4 million of
indebtedness under the Watson Notes, resulting in a $12.4 million gain for
the
Company. As part of such transaction, the Watson Notes were amended to extend
the maturity date of such notes from March 31, 2006 to June 30, 2007, to
provide
for satisfaction of future interest payments under the Watson Notes in the
form
of the Company's Common Stock, to reduce the principal amount of the Watson
Notes from $21.4 million to $5.0 million, and to provide for the forbearance
from the exercise of rights and remedies upon the occurrence of certain events
of default under the Watson Notes (the Watson Notes as so amended, the "2004
Note"). Simultaneous with the issuance of the 2004 Note, each of Care Capital,
Essex Woodland Health Ventures, Galen Partners and the other investors in
the
2004 Debentures as of February 10, 2004 (collectively, the "Watson Note
Purchasers") purchased the 2004 Note from Watson in consideration for a payment
to Watson of $1.0 million.
The
2004
Note in the principal amount of $5.0 million, as purchased by the Watson
Note
Purchasers, is secured by a lien on all of the Company's and its subsidiaries'
assets, carries a floating rate of interest equal to the prime rate plus
4.5%
and matures on June 30, 2007. The carrying interest rate at December 31,
2006
was 12.75%. The
2004
Note contains cross default provisions with each of the outstanding Bridge
Loans.
F-18
NOTE
G - COMMON STOCK WARRANTS
At
December 31, 2006, the Company had outstanding common stock purchase warrants
exercisable for an aggregate of 16,331,000 shares of common stock. Of such
warrants, 5,194,000 were
issued in connection with the issuance of bridge loans and financing commitments
from 2000 through 2003, 10,701,000 were issued to Watson Pharmaceuticals
in
connection with their agreement to amend the Watson Loan at December 20,
2002,
and 436,000 (after giving effect to the dilution adjustment described below)
were issued in 2003 as part of the settlement terms with a former executive
officer of the Company. In March 2006, warrants to purchase 166,000 shares
of
common stock were exercised at an exercise price of $0.48 per share in a
cashless exercise transaction resulting in the issuance of 19,000 shares
of
common stock. In May 2006, warrants to purchase 31,000 shares of common stock
were exercised at an exercise price of $0.47 per share in a cashless exercise
transaction resulting in the issuance of 5,000 shares of common stock. In
August
2006, the warrant issued in 2003 as part of the settlement with a former
Company
employee was increased by 286,000 warrants as result of anti-dilution provision
of such warrant resulting in a $142,000 stock compensation charge classified
as
other expense in the statement of operations. At December 31, 2006, outstanding
common stock purchase warrants of 310,000, 154,000 and 15,867,000 will expire
if
unexercised during the years 2007, 2008 and years thereafter, respectively,
with
a weighted average remaining term of 5.4 years. The exercise prices of the
warrants range from $0.12 to $0.66 per share, with a weighted average price
of
$0.33.
As
a
result of the November 2006 amendment to the Bridge Loans, a $12,948,000
liability and corresponding reduction in additional paid-in capital, for
the
common stock purchase warrants was recorded. The mark to market fair value
adjustments to the warrant liability resulted in a $2,164,000 gain recorded
in
the 4th
quarter
2006. Future period fair value adjustments to the warrant liability could
result
in further gains or losses. The Company estimated the warrants’ fair value using
the Black - Scholes option-pricing model with the following significant expected
assumptions:
November
Amendment
Date
|
December
31, 2006
|
||
Company
stock price
|
$
0.87
|
$
0.74
|
|
Exercise
price
|
$
0.12 - $ 0.66
|
$
0.12 - $ 0.66
|
|
Expected
dividend
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
4.5%
- 5.0%
|
4.7%
- 5.0%
|
|
Expected
volatility
|
79.8%
- 145.9%
|
48.4%
- 143.5%
|
|
Weighted
-average volatility
|
127.4%
|
127.7%
|
|
Contractual
term
|
38
days - 5.4 years
|
38
days - 5.4 years
|
NOTE
H - INCOME TAXES
Reconciliations
between the statutory federal income tax rate and the Company's effective
income
tax rate were as follows (in thousands):
Years
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
|||||||||||||||||
Amount
|
%
|
Amount
|
%
|
Amount
|
%
|
||||||||||||||
Federal
statutory rate
|
$
|
(2,029
|
)
|
(34.0
|
)
|
$
|
(4,105
|
)
|
(34.0
|
)
|
$
|
(23,798
|
)
|
(34.0
|
)
|
||||
State
taxes, net of Federal effect
|
(535
|
)
|
(9.0
|
)
|
(609
|
)
|
(5.0
|
)
|
(179
|
)
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|||||||
Research
and experimental tax credit
|
(126
|
)
|
(2.1
|
)
|
(125
|
)
|
(1.0
|
)
|
(131
|
)
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|||||||
Other
|
26
|
0.5
|
39
|
0.3
|
(82
|
)
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Impact
of non-taxable items
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Non-deductible
financing costs
|
320
|
5.4
|
-
|
-
|
24,647
|
35.2
|
|||||||||||||
Conversion
feature fair value change
|
(1,440
|
)
|
(24.1
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Debt
discount amortization
|
62
|
1.0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||||
Warrant
fair value change
|
(736
|
)
|
(12.4
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Debt
forgiveness
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(4,307
|
)
|
(6.1
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Federal
tax carryback refund
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(122
|
)
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Department
of Justice settlement
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(137
|
)
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|||||||||||
(4,460
|
)
|
(74.7
|
)
|
(4,800
|
)
|
(39.7
|
)
|
(4,109
|
)
|
(5.9
|
)
|
||||||||
Change
in valuation allowance
|
4,460
|
74.7
|
4,800
|
39.7
|
4,109
|
5.9
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Recorded
tax benefit
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
F-19
The
Company has gross Federal, state, and city operating loss carryforwards
aggregating $141.2 million, $101.0 million, and $46.3 million, expiring during
the years 2009 through 2026. The tax loss carryforwards of the Company and
its
subsidiaries may be subject to limitation by Section 382 of the Internal
Revenue
Code with respect to the amount utilizable each year. This limitation reduces
the Company's ability to utilize net operating loss carryforwards included
above
each year. The amount of the limitation has not been quantified by the Company.
The
temporary differences that give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities
as
of December 31 are as follows (in thousands):
December
31,
|
|||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||
Deferred
tax assets:
|
|||||||
Net
operating loss - federal
|
$
|
48,026
|
$
|
46,128
|
|||
Net
operating loss - state/city
|
7,837
|
7,595
|
|||||
Research
and experimental tax credit
|
382
|
256
|
|||||
Charitable
contributions
|
2
|
62
|
|||||
Stock
compensation
|
5,497
|
3,325
|
|||||
Warrant
compensation
|
56
|
-
|
|||||
Accrued
expenses
|
15
|
15
|
|||||
Accrued
shutdown costs
|
38
|
47
|
|||||
Debt
issue costs
|
7
|
11
|
|||||
Asset
reserves
|
28
|
-
|
|||||
Gross
deferred tax assets
|
61,888
|
57,439
|
|||||
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
|||||||
Depreciation
|
(25
|
)
|
(36
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred tax assets before valuation allowance
|
61,863
|
57,403
|
|||||
Valuation
allowance
|
(61,863
|
)
|
(57,403
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred tax assets
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
NOTE
I - EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS
1.
|
401(k)
and Profit-sharing Plan
|
Effective
October 1, 1998, the Company established a 401(k) and Profit-Sharing Plan
(the
“Plan”) for all employees other than those covered under collective bargaining
agreements. Eligible employees may elect to make a basic contribution of
up to
15% of their annual earnings. The Plan provides that the Company can make
discretionary matching contributions equal to 25% of the first 6% of employee
contributions for an aggregate employee contribution of 1.5%, along with
a
discretionary profit-sharing contribution. The Company incurred neither matching
nor profit -sharing contribution expense under the Plan in 2006, 2005 or
2004.
2.
|
Stock
Option Plans
|
1995
Stock Option Plan
In
September 1995, the stockholders of the Company approved the adoption of
a stock
option and restricted stock purchase plan for its employees and non-employee
directors (the "1995 Option Plan"). In May 2005, the 1995 Stock Option Plan
expired and the remaining unissued shares allocated to the plan were terminated.
At December 31, 2006, incentive stock options to purchase 262,510 shares
and
non-qualified options to purchase 116,390 shares, previously granted under
the
1995 Stock Option Plan, remain outstanding. The average per share exercise
price
for these 378,900 outstanding options under the 1995 Stock Option Plan at
December 31, 2006 is $1.57.
F-20
1998
Stock Option Plan
In
June
1998, the stockholders of the Company approved the adoption of a stock option
plan for its employees and non-employee directors (as amended to date, the
"1998
Option Plan"). The 1998 Option Plan provides for the granting of (i)
nonqualified options to purchase the Company's common stock at a price
determined by the Company’s Stock Option Committee (effective second quarter
2004, the duties of the Company’s Stock Option Committee was assigned to the
Company’s Compensation Committee), and (ii) incentive stock options to purchase
the Company's common stock at not less than the fair market value on the
date of
the option grant. In June 2002, the shareholders of the Company approved
a
resolution to increase the total number of shares which may be sold pursuant
to
options and rights granted under the 1998 Option Plan to 8,100,000. In August
2004, the shareholders of the Company approved a resolution to increase this
amount to 20,000,000. No option can be granted under the 1998 Option Plan
after
April 2008 and no option can be outstanding for more than ten years after
its
grant. At December 31, 2006, incentive stock options to purchase 869,826
shares
and non-qualified options to purchase 17,746,269 shares remain outstanding
and
926,655 options were available for grant under the 1998 Option Plan. The
average
per share exercise price for these 18,616,095 outstanding options under the
1998
Stock Option Plan at December 31, 2006 is $0.23, with vesting requirements
generally of 4 years.
A
summary
of the Company's stock option plans as of December 31, 2006, 2005, and
2004, and for the years then ended consisted of the following:
Years
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Number
of Shares (000’s)
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Number
of Shares (000’s)
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Number
of Shares (000’s)
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|||||||||||||
Outstanding,
beginning
|
19,755
|
$
|
0.27
|
17,499
|
$
|
0.44
|
3,525
|
$
|
1.83
|
||||||||||
Granted
|
-
|
-
|
4,000
|
0.13
|
14,475
|
0.13
|
|||||||||||||
Exercised
|
(400
|
)
|
0.25
|
(35
|
)
|
0.13
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Forfeited
or expired
|
(360
|
)
|
1.04
|
(1,709
|
)
|
1.65
|
(501
|
)
|
1.85
|
||||||||||
Outstanding,
ending
|
18,995
|
$
|
0.26
|
19,755
|
$
|
0.27
|
17,499
|
$
|
0.44
|
||||||||||
Options
exercisable, end of year
|
18,373
|
$
|
0.26
|
15,698
|
$
|
0.31
|
9,558
|
$
|
0.66
|
The
following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding at
December 31, 2006:
|
Options
Outstanding
|
Options
Exercisable
|
||||||||||||||
Range
of Exercise Prices
|
Number
of Shares (000’s)
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life
(Years)
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Number
of Shares (000’s)
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
|||||||||||
$0.12
to $1.00
|
17,694
|
7.62
|
$
|
0.14
|
17,072
|
$
|
0.14
|
|||||||||
$1.01
to $2.00
|
710
|
3.06
|
1.41 |
710
|
1.41 | |||||||||||
$2.01
to $2.50
|
591
|
1.84
|
2.38 |
591
|
2.38 | |||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Total
|
18,995
|
7.27
|
$
|
0.26
|
18,373
|
$
|
0.26
|
The
following table summarizes information about nonvested stock options
outstanding:
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||
|
2006
|
|||||
Number
of
Shares
Not
Exercisable
(000’s)
|
Weighted
Average
Fair
Value
|
|||||
Outstanding,
beginning
|
4,057
|
$
|
0.31
|
|||
Granted
|
-
|
-
|
||||
Vested
|
(3,435
|
)
|
0.31
|
|||
Forfeited
or expired
|
-
|
-
|
||||
|
||||||
Outstanding,
ending
|
622
|
$
|
0.31
|
F-21
The
Company estimated the option’s fair value on the date of grant using the Black -
Scholes option-pricing model. Black-Scholes utilizes assumptions related
to
volatility, the risk-free interest rate, the dividend yield (which is assumed
to
be zero, as the Company has not paid any cash dividends) and employee exercise
behavior. Expected volatilities utilized in the Black-Scholes model are based
on
the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock price. The risk-free
interest rate is derived from the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at
the
time of grant. The expected life of the grants is derived from historical
factors. The fair value of the 2004 and 2005 option grants are being amortized
using a graded vesting method. This method treats the award as if the grant
was
a series of awards rather than a single award and attributes a higher percentage
of the reported fair value to the earlier years than to the later years of
the
service period because the early years of service are part of the vesting
period
for later awards in the series.
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Expected
dividend
|
0.0
|
%
|
0.0
|
%
|
|||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
4.5
|
%
|
2.4%
- 4.6
|
%
|
|||
Expected
volatility
|
120
|
%
|
73%
- 87
|
%
|
|||
Weighted
-average volatility
|
120
|
%
|
87
|
%
|
|||
Expected
term
|
4
years
|
2
- 5 years
|
|||||
Weighted
-average grant date fair value
|
$
|
0.45
|
$
|
0.25
|
As
of
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, the aggregate intrinsic value of the option
awards outstanding and exercisable was $10,253,000, $1,971,000 and $1,330,000,
respectively. In addition, the aggregate intrinsic value of option awards
exercised during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was $178,000
and
$13,000, respectively. The total remaining unrecognized compensation cost
related to the unvested option awards amounted to $42,000 at December 31,
2006
and is expected to be recognized over the sixteen month weighted average
remaining requisite service period of the unvested option awards. The total
fair
value of the option awards that vested during the years ended December 31,
2006,
2005 and 2004 were $2,800,000, $1,067,000 and $578,000, respectively. The
Company recognized stock-based compensation from the option awards of $462,000,
$2,198,000 and $2,007,000, during the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005
and
2004, respectively. As discussed in Note H, a 100% valuation reserve has
been
recorded against the Company’s deferred tax assets, which includes the related
gross tax benefits of $178,000 and $13,000 recorded in calendar years of
2006
and 2005, respectively, for allowable deductions arising from the exercise
of
non qualified stock options.
3. Restricted
Stock Unit Award Plan
On
December 22, 2005, the Board of Directors approved the Company’s 2005 Restricted
Stock Unit Award Plan (the “2005 RSU Plan”) for its employees and non-employee
directors. A Restricted Stock Unit (“RSU”) represents the contingent obligation
of the Company to deliver a share of its common stock to the holder of the
RSU
on a distribution date. RSUs for up to 30 million shares of common stock
are
authorized for issuance under the 2005 RSU Plan. The Company believed that
the
2005 RSU Plan did not require shareholder approval. Nevertheless, the Company’s
shareholders ratified the 2005 RSU Plan at its December, 2006 Annual
Shareholders’ Meeting.
The
RSU
Plan is administered by the Company’s Board of Directors or a Committee
appointed by the Board of Directors. RSUs granted under the 2005 RSU Plan
vest
on a schedule determined by the Board of Directors or such Committee as set
forth in a restricted stock unit award agreement. Unless otherwise set forth
in
such award agreement, the RSUs fully vest upon a change in control (as defined
in the 2005 RSU Plan) of the Company or upon termination of an employee’s
employment with the Company without cause or due to death or disability,
and in
the case of a non-employee director, such person’s death or disability or if
such person is not renominated as a director (other than for “cause” or refusal
to stand for re-election) or is not elected by the Company’s stockholders, if
nominated. Vesting of an RSU entitles the holder thereof to receive a share
of
common stock of the Company on a distribution date (after payment of the
$0.01
par value per share).
Absent
a
change of control, one-fourth of vested shares of common stock underlying
an RSU
award will be distributed (after payment of $0.01 par value per share) on
January 1 of each of 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. If a change in control occurs
(whether prior to or after 2011), the vested shares underlying the RSU award
will be distributed at or about the time of the change in control. No dividends
accrue on the shares underlying the RSUs prior to issuance by the Company.
The
recipients of RSU awards need not be employees or directors of the Company
on a
distribution date. RSUs may generally not be transferred, except recipients
of
RSUs may designate beneficiaries to inherit their RSU’s upon their death.
F-22
In
December 2005, 27,500,000 RSUs were granted to the Company’s employees. In
February 2006, an aggregate of 2,000,000 RSUs were granted to the Company’s two
independent directors. Of the RSUs granted to date, approximately one third
vested upon grant and the other two thirds will vest on a straight-line monthly
basis through December 2007. During 2006, 10,500,000 RSU's became
vested. As such, of the RSU awards granted, 19,667,000 and 9,167,000 were
vested as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively and 9,833,000 and
18,333,000 were nonvested as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The
weighted average fair value of both RSU grants is $0.35 per share.
The
stock-based compensation cost to be incurred on the RSUs is the RSU’s fair
value, the market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant, less
its exercise cost. The fair value of the RSU grants in 2006 and 2005 was
$680,000 and $9,724,000, respectively. The fair value of the 2006 RSU grant
was
entirely expensed on the grant date as the grant was made for performance
of
past service. The fair value of the 2005 RSU grant is being amortized using
a
graded vesting method. This method treats the award as if the grant was a
series
of awards rather than a single award and attributes a higher percentage of
the
reported fair value to the earlier years than to the later years of the service
period because the early years of service are part of the vesting period
for
later awards in the series. The total remaining unrecognized compensation
cost
related to the unvested RSU awards amounted to $879,000 at December 31, 2006
and
is expected to be recognized over the next 12 months, the weighted average
remaining requisite service period of the unvested RSU award. The Company
recognized compensation cost from the RSU awards of $5,264,000 and $4,261,000,
during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. No related
tax
benefits were recorded in calendar year 2006 and 2005. As of December 31,
2006
and 2005, the aggregate intrinsic value of the RSU awards outstanding and
vested
was $14,357,000 and $2,610,000, respectively. As discussed above, the RSU
awards
are distributable only upon the occurrence of certain events or beginning
January 1, 2011.
NOTE
J - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Employment
Contracts
Andrew
D.
Reddick is employed pursuant to an Employment Agreement effective as of August
26, 2003, as amended, which provides that Mr. Reddick will serve as the
Company's Chief Executive Officer and President for a term expiring December
31,
2007. The term of the Employment Agreement provides for automatic one (1)
year
renewals in the absence of written notice to the contrary from the Company
or
Mr. Reddick at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the initial
term or any subsequent renewal period. The Employment Agreement provides
for an
annual base salary of $300,000 plus the payment of annual bonus of up to
one
hundred percent (100%) of Mr. Reddick's base salary based on the achievement
of
such targets, conditions, or parameters as may be set from time to time by
the
Board of Directors or the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.
For
the Company’s 2006 fiscal year, the Employment Agreement provides for a cash
bonus equal to 100% of Mr. Reddick’s then current base salary (the “2006 Cash
Bonus”) upon the Company’s receipt of aggregate proceeds of at least $15.0
million on or before March 31, 2007 from an offering of the Company’s equity
securities and/or from license fees or milestone payments from third-party
licensing or similar transactions (subject to the payment of a pro-rata portion
of the 2006 Cash Bonus provided the Company receives aggregate gross proceeds
from such transactions of at least $11.0 million on or before March 31, 2007).
The Employment Agreement also provides for the Company’s grant of stock options
and restricted stock units to Mr. Reddick. The Employment Agreement contains
standard termination provisions, including upon death, disability, for Cause,
for Good Reason and without Cause, which in certain cases provides for severance
payments equal to one year’s salary and other termination benefits
Ron
J.
Spivey, Ph.D., is employed pursuant to an Employment Agreement effective
as of
April 5, 2004, as amended, which provides that Dr. Spivey will serve as the
Company's Senior Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer for term expiring
December 31, 2007 at an annual base salary of $260,000 plus the payment of
an
annual bonus of up to one hundred percent (100%) of Dr. Spivey's base salary.
Peter
A.
Clemens is employed pursuant to an Employment Agreement effective as of March
10, 1998, as amended, which provides that Mr. Clemens will serve as the
Company's Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for a term expiring
December 31, 2007 at an annual base salary of $180,000 plus the payment of
an
annual bonus of up to one hundred percent (100%) of Mr. Clemens base
salary.
The
terms
of the Employment Agreements with Dr. Spivey and Mr. Clemens are similar
to
those of Mr. Reddick.
The
term
of the Employment Agreements with each of Messrs. Reddick, Spivey and Clemens
provides for automatic one (1) year renewals in the absence of written notice
to
the contrary from the Company or such executive at least ninety (90) days
prior
to the expiration.
F-23
NOTE
K - QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)
Selected
quarterly consolidated financial data is shown below (in thousands, except
per
share data):
Three
Month Period Ended
|
|||||||||||||
Mar.
31
|
June
30
|
Sept.
30
|
Dec.
31
|
||||||||||
Calendar
Year 2006:
|
|||||||||||||
Net
product revenues
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
|||||
Loss
from operations
|
(3,927
|
)
|
(2,341
|
)
|
(2,661
|
)
|
(1,897
|
)
|
|||||
Net
(loss) income
|
(4,155
|
)
|
(2,615
|
)
|
(3,097
|
)
|
3,900
|
||||||
Loss
per common share (after deemed dividend) -
basic
and diluted (Note A. 14)
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
$
|
(0.04
|
)
|
Mar.
31
|
June
30
|
Sept.
30
|
Dec.
31
|
||||||||||
Calendar
Year 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
Net
product revenues
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
|||||
Loss
from operations
|
(1,908
|
)
|
(1,266
|
)
|
(1,473
|
)
|
(
6,914
|
)
|
|||||
Net
loss
|
(1,948
|
)
|
(1,382
|
)
|
(1,635
|
)
|
(7,110
|
)
|
|||||
Loss
per common share - basic and diluted
|
$
|
(0.09
|
)
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(0.07
|
)
|
$
|
(0.04
|
)
|
Effective
November 10, 2005, all of the issued and outstanding preferred shares of
the
Company were automatically and mandatorily converted into an aggregate of
approximately 305.4 million shares of the Company’s Common Stock, $.01 par value
per share in accordance with the terms of the Company’s Restated Certification
of Incorporation (see Note C). After giving effect to the conversion, the
Company had an aggregate of approximately 329.0 million shares of Common
Stock
issued and outstanding. The 4th
Quarter
2005 loss per common share amount of ($.04) reflects the increased weighted
average common shares outstanding due to the preferred stock conversion during
the 4th
Quarter
2005. The impact of the conversion causes the 2005 quarterly loss per share
amounts not to add up to and equal the 2005 annual loss per share amount.
F-24
ACURA
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
EXHIBIT
INDEX
The
following exhibits are included as a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K
or
incorporated herein by reference.
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit
Description
|
|
3.1
|
Restated
Certificate of Incorporation (incorporated by reference to Appendix
C to
the Registrant's Proxy Statement filed on July 6,
2004).
|
|
3.2
|
Restated
By-Laws (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to the Registrant's
Annual Report Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 (the
"1998
Form 10-K")).
|
|
10.1
|
Registrant’s
1995 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Purchase Plan (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Registration Statement
on
Form S-8, File No. 33-98396).
|
|
10.2
|
Registrant’s
1998 Stock Option Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Appendix
C to the Registrant’s Proxy Statement filed on November 16,
2006).
|
|
10.3
|
Registrant’s
2005 Restricted Stock Unit Award Plan, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Appendix D to the Registrant’s Proxy Statement filed on
November 16, 2006).
|
|
10.4
|
Loan
Agreement dated March 29, 2000 between the Registrant and Watson
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“WPI”) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.57
to the Registrant's Form 8-K dated March 29, 2000 (the "March 2000
8-K")).+
|
|
10.5
|
Amendment
to Loan Agreement dated March 31, 2000 between the Registrant and
WPI
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.58 to the March 2000
8-K).
|
|
10.6
|
Secured
Promissory Note in the principal amount of $17,500,000 issued by
the
Registrant, as the maker, in favor of WPI dated March 31, 2000
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.59 to the March 2000
8-K).
|
|
10.7
|
Watson
Security Agreement dated March 29, 2000 between the Registrant and
WPI
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.60 to the March 2000
8-K).
|
|
10.8
|
Stock
Pledge Agreement dated March 29, 2000 between the Registrant and
WPI
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.61 to the March 2000
8-K).
|
|
10.9
|
Watson
Guarantee dated March 29, 2000 between Houba, Inc. and Halsey
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., as the guarantors, in favor of WPI (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.62 to the March 2000 8-K).
|
|
10.10
|
Watson's
Guarantors Security Agreement dated March 29, 2000 between Halsey
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Houba, Inc. and WPI (incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.63 to the March 2000 8-K).
|
|
10.11
|
Subordination
Agreement dated March 29, 2000 among the Registrant, WPI and the
holders
of the Registrant's outstanding 5% convertible debentures due March
10,
2003. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.64 to the March 2000
8-K).+
|
|
10.12
|
Real
Estate Mortgage dated March 29, 2000 between Houba, Inc. and WPI
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.65 to the March 2000
8-K).
|
|
10.13
|
Subordination
Agreement among Houba, Inc., Galen Partners, III, L.P. (“GPIII”), Oracle
Strategic Partners, L.P. and WPI (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.66 to the March 2000 8-K).
|
|
10.14
|
Second
Amendment to Loan Agreement dated December 20, 2002, between the
Registrant and WPI, amending the Loan Agreement dated March 29, 2000
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the Form 8-K filed
December
27, 2002 (the December 2002 Form 8-K”))
|
|
10.15
|
Amended
and Restated Secured Promissory Note dated December 20, 2002, issued
by
the Registrant in favor of WPI in the principal amount $17,500,000
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the December 2002
Form
8-K).
|
|
10.16
|
Watson
Common Stock Purchase Warrant dated December 20, 2002 (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the December 2002 Form
8-K).
|
|
10.17
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated December 20, 2002 (incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.15 to the December 2002 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.18
|
Warrant
Recapitalization Agreement dated December 20, 2002 (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the December 2002 Form
8-K).
|
|
10.19
|
Debenture
Conversion Agreement dated as of February 6, 2004 among the Registrant,
Care Capital Investments II, L.P. (“Care”), Essex Woodlands Health Venture
V, L.P. (“Essex”), GPIII and others (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.2 of the Form 8-K filed February 10, 2004 (the “February 2004 Form
8-K”)).
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit
Description
|
|
10.20
|
Amended
and Restated Voting Agreement dated as of February 6, 2004 among
the
Registrant, Care, Essex, GPIII and others (incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.5 of the February 2004 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.21
|
Amended
and Restated Registration Rights Agreement dated as of February 6,
2004
among the Registrant, WPI, Care, Essex, GPIII and others (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.6 of the February 2004 Form
8-K).
|
|
10.22
|
Umbrella
Agreement dated as of February 6, 2004 among the Registrant, WPI,
Care,
Essex, GPIII and the other signatories thereto (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.12 of the February 2004 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.23
|
Third
Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of February 6, 2004 among the
Registrant and WPI (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of
the
February 2004 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.24
|
Amended
and Restated Promissory Note in the principal amount of $5,000,000
issued
by the Registrant in favor of Watson Pharmaceuticals (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.14 of the February 2004 Form
8-K).
|
|
10.25
|
Noteholders
Agreement dated as of February 6, 2004 among the Registrant, Care,
Essex,
GPIII and others (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 of the
February 2004 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.26
|
Executive
Employment Agreement dated as of August 26, 2003 between the Registrant
and Andrew D. Reddick (“Reddick”) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.2 to the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 (the “June 2004
10-Q”)).
|
|
10.27
|
Amendment
to Executive Employment Agreement between the Registrant and Reddick,
dated May 27, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to
the June
2004 10-Q).
|
|
10.28
|
Second
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement between the Registrant
and
Reddick, dated May 24, 2005.
|
|
10.29
|
Third
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement between the Registrant
and
Reddick, dated December 22, 2005 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.1 to the Form 8-K filed December 23, 2005 (the “December 2005 Form
8-K”)).
|
|
10.30
|
Executive
Employment Agreement dated as of April 5, 2004 between the Registrant
and
Ron J. Spivey (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the June
2004
10-Q).
|
|
10.31
|
Amendment
to Executive Employment Agreement dated December 22, 2005 between
Registrant and Ron J. Spivey (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.2 to
the December 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.32
|
Employment
Agreement dated as of March 10, 1998 between the Registrant and Peter
Clemens (“Clemens”) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.44 to the
1997 Form 10-K).
|
|
10.33
|
First
Amendment to Employment Agreement made as of June 28, 2000 between
the
Registrant and Clemens
|
|
10.34
|
Second
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Clemens, dated as of January 5, 2005 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit
10.1 to the Registrant's Form 8-K dated January 28,
2005).
|
|
10.35
|
Third
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement dated December 22, 2005
between Registrant and Clemens (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.3
to the December 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.36
|
Loan
Agreement dated June 22, 2005 (the “June 2005 Loan Agreement”) between the
Registrant, Essex, Care, GPIII, and others (incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Form 8-K dated June 22, 2005 (the “June 2005 Form
8-K”)).
|
|
10.37
|
Subordination
Agreement dated June 22, 2005 between the Registrant, Essex, Care,
GPIII
and the other signatories thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.3 of the June 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.38
|
Form
of Company General Security Agreement with respect to the June 2005
Loan
Agreement, the September 2005 Loan Agreement, the November 2005 Loan
Agreement and the January 2006 Loan Agreement (the “Loan Agreements”)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the June 2005 Form
8-K).
|
|
10.39
|
Form
of Guaranty of Axiom Pharmaceutical Corporation (“Axiom”) related to the
Loan Agreements (other than the January 2006 Loan Agreement) (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.5 of the June 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.40
|
Form
of Guaranty of Acura Pharmaceutical Technologies, Inc. (“APT”) related to
the Loan Agreements (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 of
the June
2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.41
|
Form
of Guarantors Security Agreement among Axiom, the Registrant, and
GPIII,
as Agent, with respect to the Loan Agreements (other than the January
2006
Loan Agreement) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 of the
June
2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.42
|
Form
of Stock Pledge Agreement by and between Registrant and GPIII, as
Agent,
with respect to the Loan Agreements (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit
10.8 of the June 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.43
|
Loan
Agreement dated September 16, 2005 (the “September 2005 Loan Agreement”)
between the Registrant, Essex, Care, GPIII, and others (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Form 8-K dated September 16, 2005
(the
“September 2005 Form 8-K”)).
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit
Description
|
|
10.44
|
Subordination
Agreement dated September 16, 2005 between the Registrant, Essex
Health
Venture V, L.P., Care, GPIII, and the other signatories thereto
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the September 2005
Form
8-K).
|
|
10.45
|
Joinder
and Amendment to Amended and Restated Voting Agreement dated November
9,
2005 between the Registrant, GCE Holdings, Essex, Care, GPIII and
others
(the “November 2005 Loan Agreement”) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.1 to the Registrant's Form 8-K dated November 9, 2005 (the “November
2005 Form 8-K”)).
|
|
10.46
|
Loan
Agreement dated November 9, 2005 between the Registrant, Essex, Care,
GPIII, Galen Partners International III, L.P., and others (incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the November 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.47
|
Subordination
Agreement dated November 9, 2005 between the Registrant, Essex, Care,
GPIII, and the other signatories thereto (incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.4 of the November 2005 Form 8-K).
|
|
10.48
|
Loan
Agreement among the Registrant Essex, Care, GPIII and others dated
January
31, 2006 (the “January 2006 Loan Agreement”) (incorporated by reference to
the Form 8-K filed on January 31, 2006).
|
|
10.49
|
Form
of Secured Promissory Note of the Registrant relating to January
31, 2006
Loan Agreement
|
|
10.50
|
Subordination
Agreement among Essex, Care, GPIII, and others dated January 31,
2006
(incorporated by reference to the Form 8-K filed on January 31,
2006)..
|
|
10.51
|
Guarantor
Security Agreement among APT and GPIII, as Agent, dated January 31,
2006
(incorporated by reference to the Form 8-K filed on January 31,
2006).
|
|
10.52
|
Omnibus
Amendment effective as of May 24, 2006 among the Registrant and APT
and
certain lenders amending the Loan Agreements (incorporated by reference
to
the Form 8-K filed on May 24, 2006)
|
|
10.53
|
Omnibus
Amendment effective as of August 16, 2006 among the Registrant, APT
and
certain lenders, amending among other things, the Loan Agreements
(incorporated by reference to the Form 8-K filed on August 16,
2006).
|
|
10.54
|
Omnibus
Amendment effective as of September 22, 2006 among the Registrant,
APT and
certain lenders, amending among other things, the Loan Agreements
(incorporated by reference to the Form 8-K filed on September 25,
2006).
|
|
10.55
|
Omnibus
Amendment effective as of October 20, 2006 among the Registrant,
APT and
certain lenders, amending among other things, the Loan Agreements
(incorporated by reference to the Form 8-K filed on October 20,
2006).
|
|
10.56
|
Omnibus
Amendment effective as of November 30, 2006 among the Registrant
and APT
and certain lenders, amending among other things, the Loan Agreements
(incorporated by reference to the Form 8-K filed on December 4,
2006).
|
|
10.57
|
Voting
Agreement by and between Registrant and GCE Holdings, LLC dated as
of
December 22, 2005
|
|
10.58
|
Code
of Ethics (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 14 of the Registrant’s
Form 10-K filed April 22, 2004).
|
|
*21
|
Subsidiaries
of the Registrant
|
|
*23.1
|
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
*31.1
|
Certification
of Periodic Report by Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14
and
15d-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
*31.2
|
Certification
of Periodic Report by Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14
and
15d-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
*32
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
*
Filed
or furnished herewith.