Cytosorbents Corp - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009
COMMISSION
FILE NUMBER 000-51038
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(Name of
Small Business Issuer in Its Charter)
Nevada
|
|
98-0373793
|
(State
or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or
Organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer identification
number)
|
7
Deer Park Drive, Suite K
Monmouth
Junction, New Jersey 08852
(732)
329-8885
(Address,
including zip code, and telephone number,
including
area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities registered pursuant to
Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock $0.001 par value
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. o Yes þ No
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. o Yes þ No
Indicate
by checkmark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 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.
þ
Yes o No
Indicate
by check 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. þ
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,”
“accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
Large
Accelerated Filer o
|
Accelerated
Filer o
|
Non-accelerated Filer o (do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller reporting company þ |
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange
Act.)
o
Yes þ No
The
issuer had no revenues for its fiscal
year ended December 31, 2009.
The
aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by
non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2009 was approximately
$2,730,000. The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock as
of April 5, 2010 was 82,574,856.
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
2009
FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
|
|||||
PART
I
|
|||||
Item
1. Business
|
3
|
||||
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
|
23
|
||||
Item
2. Properties
|
31
|
||||
Item
3. Legal Proceedings
|
32
|
||||
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
32
|
||||
PART
II
|
32
|
||||
Item
5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
32
|
||||
Item
6. Selected Financial Data
|
33
|
||||
Item
7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations
|
33
|
||||
Item
7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
|
36
|
||||
Item
8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
|
36
|
||||
Item
9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
36
|
||||
Item
9A(T). Controls and Procedures
|
36
|
||||
Item
9B. Other Information
|
37
|
||||
PART
III
|
37
|
||||
Item
10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
37
|
||||
Item
11. Executive Compensation
|
39
|
||||
Item
12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
45
|
||||
Item
13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director
Independence
|
46
|
||||
Item
14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
|
47
|
||||
Part
IV
|
|||||
Item
15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules
|
47
|
2
CAUTIONARY
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
document contains “forward-looking statements”. These statements are subject to
risks and uncertainties and are based on the beliefs and assumptions of
management and information currently available to management. The use of words
such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “estimates,”
“should,” “likely” or similar expressions, indicates a forward-looking
statement. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. They
involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Future results may differ
materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements. Many of the
factors that will determine these results are beyond the ability of MedaSorb to
control or predict. Stockholders are cautioned not to put undue reliance on any
forward-looking statements, which speak only to the date made. For a discussion
of some of the factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from
those suggested by the forward-looking statements, please read carefully the
information under “Risk Factors”. However, the identification in this document
of factors that may affect future performance and the accuracy of
forward-looking statements is meant to be illustrative and by no means
exhaustive. All forward-looking statements should be evaluated with the
understanding of their inherent uncertainty.
PART
I
Item
1. Business.
Overview
We are a
therapeutic medical device company that is currently in the development stage,
headquartered in Monmouth Junction, New Jersey (near Princeton). We have
developed and will seek to commercialize a blood purification technology that we
believe will be able to efficiently remove middle molecular weight toxins from
circulating blood and physiologic fluids. We will be required to obtain required
regulatory approvals from a Notified Body for the European Community (CE Mark)
and the United States Food and Drug Administration before we can sell our
products in Europe and the United States, respectively. The Company is currently
focusing our efforts on obtaining regulatory approval in Europe before
proceeding with the FDA.
We
estimate that the market potential in Europe for our products is substantially
equivalent to that in the U.S. Given the opportunity to conduct a much larger
clinical study in Europe, and management’s belief that the path to a CE Mark
should be faster than FDA approval, we have targeted Europe as the introductory
market for our CytoSorb™ product. In July 2007 we prepared and filed a request
for a clinical trial with a German Central Ethics Committee. We received
approval of the final study design in October of 2007.
We are
currently approved by the German Ethics Committee to conduct a clinical study of
up to 100 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury
in the setting of sepsis. The primary endpoint of our clinical trial
is cytokine reduction and is the basis of a planned CE Mark application to
approve our device for clinical use in Europe.
After
reviewing the initial cytokine data from the first 22 patients enrolled in our
original protocol, our medical advisors recommended revisions to our protocol to
minimize non-device related artifacts that may potentially arise if the samples
are not processed or handled appropriately. The revisions to the
protocol also include a provision for testing of our targeted endpoints in
plasma instead of serum, changes in cytokine processing and analysis, additional
options for anti-coagulation that the clinical sites may use, and an increase in
the number of patients we may enroll into the study from 80 to
100.
These
changes are intended to optimize the accuracy of our cytokine data for CE Mark
submission. The proposed protocol changes and rationale for change
were submitted to the German Ethics Committee and approved. Given
these changes, cytokine data will not be statistically comparable between these
first 22 patients and those enrolled subsequently in the
study. While the company will continue to review all patient
data in the aggregate, including secondary and exploratory endpoints, the
primary use of the data from the first 22 patients will be used to support the
planned CE Mark application from a safety perspective. Cytokine
data from all patients enrolled subsequent to these first 22 patients, as well
as safety data on all patients enrolled in the study, will be used for
submission to the CE Mark authority.
While we
are currently observing an improvement in our enrollment rate, to date patient
enrollment has been slower than originally anticipated. The
Company has taken a number of steps to improve recruitment, the most significant
of which is the increase in the number of our clinical trial
sites. With more sites actively seeking to enroll patients, we expect
the patient enrollment rate to continue to increase going forward. Concurrent
with the clinical study, we have commenced preparation for the CE Mark
submission process. Assuming availability of adequate and timely
funding, a successful outcome of the study, and CE Mark regulatory approval, the
Company intends to commercialize its product in Europe.
By
December 31, 2009 we had initiated and opened for enrollment a total of fourteen
(14) hospital units to participate in our clinical study. To date the
Company has enrolled sixty (60) patients in the clinical
study. We may enroll up to an additional forty (40)
patients. In conducting the German Clinical study we have utilized our
CytoSorb™ device in approximately 175 treatments to date with no Serious Adverse
Events attributable to the device.
The
clinical protocol for our European clinical study has been designed to allow us
to gather information to support future U.S. studies. In the event we receive
the CE Mark and are able to successfully commercialize our products in the
European market, we will review our plans for the United States to determine
whether to conduct clinical trials in support of 510K or PMA registration. No
assurance can be given that our proposed CytoSorb™ product will work as intended
or that we will be able to obtain CE Mark (or FDA) approval to sell CytoSorb™.
Even if we ultimately obtain CE Mark approval, because we cannot control the
timing of responses from regulators to our submissions, there can be no
assurance as to when such approval will be obtained.
We have
developed two products, CytoSorb™ and BetaSorb™ utilizing our adsorbent polymer
technology. These products are known medically as hemoperfusion devices. During
hemoperfusion, blood is removed from the body via a catheter or other blood
access device, perfused through a filter medium where toxic compounds are
removed, and returned to the body.
3
The
CytoSorb™ device consists of a cartridge containing adsorbent polymer beads that
are intended to remove toxins and other substances from blood and physiologic
fluids. The cartridge incorporates industry standard connectors at either end of
the device, which connect directly to an extra-corporeal circuit (bloodlines) on
a stand alone basis. The extra-corporeal circuit consists of plastic tubing
through which the blood flows, our CytoSorb™ cartridge containing adsorbent
polymer beads, pressure monitoring gauges, and a blood pump to maintain blood
flow. The patient’s blood is accessed through a catheter inserted into his or
her veins. The catheter is connected to the extra-corporeal circuit and the
blood pump draws blood from the patient, pumps it through the cartridge and
returns it back to the patient in a closed loop system. As blood passes over the
polymer beads in the cartridge, toxins (cytokines) are adsorbed from the
blood.
To date,
we have manufactured the CytoSorb™ device on a limited basis for testing
purposes, including for use in clinical studies. We believe that other current
state of the art blood purification technologies (such as dialysis) are
incapable of effectively clearing the various toxic compounds intended to be
adsorbed by our devices. We have demonstrated the ability of CytoSorb
to remove cytokines in vitro with whole blood. CytoSorb’s™ ability to
interact safely with blood (hemocompatibility) and general biocompatibility has
been demonstrated through ISO 10993 testing.
Prior to
the current European Sepsis Trial, the CytoSorb™ device design was tested on a
single patient with bacterial sepsis, producing results that our management
found encouraging and consistent with our belief that our device design was
appropriate for more extensive sepsis study.
In November 2009, we announced positive
clinical data on key secondary endpoints from 7 CytoSorb™ treated patients,
compared to 6 control patients, with severe sepsis in the setting of respiratory
failure. These data included all fully monitored, completed data sets
at that time from a 22 patient sepsis pilot.
We
are currently enrolling patients in our European Sepsis Trial using our
CytoSorb™ device. The study is a randomized, controlled clinical
study in fourteen hospital sites in Germany of up to 100 patients with acute
respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury in the setting of
sepsis. Patients are being treated with one new device per day for up
to seven (7) consecutive days. The study protocol was designed to
support an application for the European CE Mark (regulatory approval to sell
medical devices in Europe). This study is designed to be supportive
of, but not specifically for, FDA approval for the use of our CytoSorb™ device
in the U.S.
Following
the sepsis indication, we intend to continue our research in other acute
conditions where CytoSorb™ has indicated potential in preliminary studies to
prevent or reduce the accumulation of cytokines and other toxic compounds in the
bloodstream. These conditions include, but are not limited to, the prevention of
post-operative complications of cardiac surgery (cardiopulmonary bypass
surgery), damage to organs donated for transplant prior to organ harvest, and
removing drugs from blood.
Previous
studies using our BetaSorb™ device in patients with chronic kidney failure have
provided valuable data, which we will use in conducting clinical studies using
our CytoSorb™ device. However, limited studies have been conducted using our
CytoSorb™ device to date and no assurance can be given that our proposed
CytoSorb™ product will work as intended or that we will be able to obtain the
necessary regulatory body approvals to sell CytoSorb™. Even if we ultimately
obtain regulatory approval, because we cannot control the timing of responses to
our regulatory submissions, there can be no assurance as to when such approval
will be obtained.
Our
BetaSorb™ device is intended to remove beta2-microglobulin
from the blood of patients suffering from chronic kidney failure who rely on
long term dialysis therapy to sustain their life. BetaSorb™ utilizes an
adsorbent polymer packed into an identically shaped and constructed cartridge as
utilized for our CytoSorb™ product, although the polymers used in the two
devices are physically different. The BetaSorb™ device also incorporates
industry standard connectors at either end of the device, which connect directly
into the extra-corporeal circuit (bloodlines) in series with a dialyzer. To
date, we have manufactured the BetaSorb™ device on a limited basis for testing
purposes, including for use in clinical studies.
We had
initially identified end stage renal disease (ESRD) as the target market for our
polymer-based adsorbent technology. However, during the development of
BetaSorb™, we identified several applications for our adsorbent technology in
the treatment of critical care patients. As a result, we shifted our priorities
to pursue critical care applications (such as for the treatment of sepsis) for
our technology given that BetaSorb’s™ potential for usage in chronic conditions
such as end stage renal disease is anticipated to have a longer and more complex
regulatory pathway. We currently intend to pursue our BetaSorb™ product after
the commercialization of the CytoSorb™ product. At such time as we determine to
proceed with our proposed BetaSorb™ product, if ever, we will need to conduct
additional clinical studies using the BetaSorb™ device and obtain separate
regulatory approval in Europe and/or the United States.
We have
conducted clinical studies using our BetaSorb™ device in patients with chronic
kidney failure, which have provided valuable data that underpin the development
of the critical care applications for our technology. The BetaSorb™ device has
been used in a total of four human pilot studies, involving 20 patients, in the
U.S. and Europe. The studies included approximately 345 treatments, with some
patients using the device for up to 24 weeks (in multiple treatment sessions
lasting up to four hours, three times per week) in connection with the
application of our products to patients suffering from chronic kidney
failure.
4
We have
not generated any revenue to date. We have incurred losses in each of our fiscal
years and expect these losses to continue for the foreseeable future. We will
need to raise significant additional funds to conduct clinical studies and
obtain regulatory approvals to commercialize our products. No assurance can be
given that we will ever successfully commercialize any products.
Corporate
History
MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation was incorporated in Nevada on April 25, 2002 as Gilder
Enterprises, Inc. and was originally engaged in the business of installing and
operating computer networks that provided high-speed access to the Internet. On
June 30, 2006, we disposed of our original business, and pursuant to an
Agreement and Plan of Merger, acquired all of the stock of MedaSorb
Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation in a merger, and its business became
our business. Following the merger, in July 2006 we changed our name to MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation. In November 2008 we changed the name of our
operating subsidiary from MedaSorb Technologies, Inc. to CytoSorbents,
Inc. Our parent company, MedaSorb Technologies Corporation, is
currently in the process of a name change that will better reflect the
operations of our subsidiary. Unless otherwise indicated, all
references in this Annual Report to “MedaSorb,”, “CytoSorbents”, “us” or “we”
with respect to events prior to June 30, 2006 are references to CytoSorbents,
Inc. and its predecessors. Our executive offices are located at 7 Deer Park
Drive, Suite K, Monmouth Junction, New Jersey 08852. Our telephone number is
(732) 329-8885.
MedaSorb
was originally organized as a Delaware limited liability company in August 1997
as Advanced Renal Technologies, LLC. MedaSorb changed its name to RenalTech
International, LLC in November 1998, and to MedaSorb Technologies, LLC in
October 2003. In
December 2005, MedaSorb converted from a limited liability company to a
corporation.
MedaSorb
has been engaged in research and development since its inception, and prior to
the merger, had raised approximately $53 million from investors. These
proceeds have been used to fund the development of multiple product applications
and to conduct clinical studies. These funds have also been used to establish
in-house manufacturing capacity to meet clinical testing needs, expand our
intellectual property through additional patents and to develop extensive
proprietary know-how with regard to our products.
Immediately
prior to the merger, MedaSorb had 292 stockholders that held an aggregate of
20,340,929 shares of common stock. In connection with the merger, certain
stockholders of ours (i.e., persons who
were stockholders of Gilder Enterprises prior to the merger), including Joseph
Bowes, a former principal stockholder and the sole director and officer of
Gilder prior to the merger, sold an aggregate of 3,617,500 shares of our Common
Stock to several purchasers, and forfeited 4,105,000 shares of Common Stock,
which we cancelled. As a result, prior to giving effect to the merger, we had
outstanding 3,750,000 shares of Common Stock and, after giving effect to the
merger, we had outstanding 24,090,929 shares of Common Stock.
The
principal stockholders of MedaSorb immediately prior to the merger were Margie
Chassman, Guillermina Montiel, Al Kraus and Robert Shipley, who respectively
beneficially owned 10,000,000 shares (49.2%), 5,052,456 shares (24.6%),
1,393,631 shares (6.9%) and 1,248,372 shares (6%), of the outstanding common
stock of MedaSorb. Immediately following the merger and the closing of the
Series A Preferred Stock financing described below, Ms. Chassman beneficially
owned an additional 630,000 shares of Common Stock underlying the warrant we
issued to her in connection with her pledge of stock to the purchasers of the
Series A Preferred Stock, as described below. On July 5, 2006, Ms. Chassman
transferred 2,005,000 shares of Common Stock owned by her to her designees. In
addition, following the closing of the Series A Preferred Stock financing,
without giving effect to applicable restrictions that prohibit conversion of the
Series A Preferred Stock or exercise of warrants if as a result the holder would
hold in excess of 4.99% of our Common Stock, Longview Fund, LP beneficially
owned 3,600,000 shares (13%) of our Common Stock.
Principal Terms of the
Reverse Merger
In
connection with the merger, the stockholders of MedaSorb prior to the merger
were issued an aggregate of 20,340,929 shares of Common Stock in exchange for
the shares of MedaSorb common stock previously held by them. In addition,
pursuant to the terms of the merger, outstanding warrants and options to
purchase a total of 1,697,648 shares of the common stock of MedaSorb prior to
the merger were cancelled in exchange for warrants and options to purchase the
same number of shares of our Common Stock at the same exercise prices and
otherwise on the same general terms as the MedaSorb options and warrants that
were cancelled. Certain providers of legal services to MedaSorb who previously
had the right to be issued approximately 997,000 shares of MedaSorb
common stock as payment toward accrued legal fees, became entitled to instead be
issued the same number of shares of our Common Stock as payment toward such
services.
5
Concurrently
with the closing of the merger, Joseph G. Bowes, the sole director and officer
of MedaSorb Technologies Corporation (then Gilder Enterprises) prior to the
merger, appointed Al Kraus, Joseph Rubin, Esq., and Kurt Katz to the Board of
Directors, and then resigned from the Board and from his positions as an
officer. In addition, at such time, Al Kraus was appointed our President and
Chief Executive Officer, Vincent Capponi was appointed our Chief Operating
Officer, David Lamadrid was appointed our Chief Financial Officer and James
Winchester, MD was appointed our Chief Medical Officer.
For
accounting purposes, the merger has been accounted for as a reverse merger,
since MedaSorb Technologies Corporation (then Gilder Enterprises) was a shell
company prior to the merger, the stockholders of MedaSorb prior to the merger
own a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of our Common Stock after
the merger, and the directors and executive officers of MedaSorb prior to the
merger became our directors and executive officers. Accordingly, pre-merger
MedaSorb is treated as the acquiror in the merger, which is treated as a
recapitalization of pre-merger MedaSorb, and the pre-merger financial statements
of MedaSorb are now deemed to be our historical financial
statements.
Principal Terms of the
Series A Financing Consummated upon the Closing of the
Merger
On June
30, 2006, immediately following the merger, we sold to four institutional
investors, in a private offering generating gross proceeds of $5.25 million, an
aggregate of 5,250,000 shares of our Series A 10% Cumulative Convertible
Preferred Stock initially convertible into 4,200,000 shares of Common Stock, and
five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 2,100,000 shares of our Common
Stock.
The
Series A Preferred Stock has a stated value of $1.00 per share. The Series A
Preferred Stock is not redeemable at the holder’s option but may be redeemed by
us at our option following the third anniversary of the issuance of the Series A
Preferred Stock for 120% of the stated value thereof plus any accrued but unpaid
dividends upon 30 days' prior written notice (during which time the Series A
Preferred Stock may be converted), provided a registration statement is
effective under the Securities Act with respect to the shares of our Common
Stock into which such Series A Preferred Stock is then convertible, and an event
of default, as defined in the Certificate of Designations relating to the Series
A Preferred Stock is not then continuing.
The
Series A Preferred Stock has a dividend rate of 10% per annum, payable
quarterly. The dividend rate increases to 20% per annum upon the occurrence of
the events of default specified in the Certificate of Designations. Dividends
may be paid in cash or, provided no event of default is then continuing, with
additional shares of Series A Preferred Stock valued at the stated value
thereof. The Series A Preferred Stock is convertible into Common Stock at the
conversion rate of one share of Common Stock for each $1.25 of stated value or
accrued but unpaid dividends converted.
The
warrants issued in the private placement have an initial exercise price of $2.00
per share. The aggregate number of shares of Common Stock covered by the
Warrants equaled, at the date of issuance, one-half the number of shares of
Common Stock issuable upon the full conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock
issued to the investors on that date.
We agreed
to file a registration statement under the Securities Act covering the Common
Stock issuable upon conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock and exercise of
the warrants within 120 days following closing of the private placement and to
cause it to become effective within 240 days of that closing. We also granted
the investors demand and piggyback registration rights with respect to such
Common Stock.
Because
the registration statement we agreed to file was not declared effective within
the time required under our agreements with the June 30, 2006 purchasers of the
Series A Preferred Stock, dividends on the shares of Series A Preferred Stock
issued to those purchasers accrued at the rate of 20% per annum from February
26, 2007 until May 7, 2007, the date the registration statement was declared
effective. During this time period, we were obligated to pay those purchasers
cash dividends and an aggregate of $105,000 per 30-day period from February 26,
2007 through the date such registration statement was declared effective (May
7,2007) in cash. Pursuant to a settlement agreement with the June 30, 2006
purchasers of Series A Preferred Stock, all cash dividends and damages were paid
for in full with additional shares of Series A Preferred Stock.
6
Both the
conversion price for the June 30, 2006 purchasers of the Series A Preferred
Stock and the exercise price of the warrants were subject to “full-ratchet”
anti-dilution provisions, so that upon future issuances of our Common Stock or
equivalents thereof, subject to specified customary exceptions, at a price below
the conversion price of the Series A Preferred Stock and/or exercise price of
the warrants, the conversion price and/or exercise price will be reduced to the
lower price. As of the “Qualified Closing” of our Series B Preferred Stock
private placement in August of 2008, these investors’ agreed to a modification
of their rights and pricing and gave up their anti-dilution protection – see
Qualified Closing description in Series B Preferred Stock section)
In
connection with the sale of the Series A Preferred Stock and warrants to the
four institutional investors, to induce those investors to make the investment,
Margie Chassman pledged to those investors securities of other publicly traded
companies. The pledged securities consisted of a $400,000 promissory note of
Xechem International, Inc. convertible into Xechem common stock at $.005 per
share, and 250,000 shares of the common stock of Novelos Therapeutics, Inc.
Based on the market value of the Xechem common stock ($.07 per share) and the
Novelos common stock ($1.03) per share, on June 30, 2006, the aggregate fair
market value of the pledged securities at the date of pledge was approximately
$5,857,500.
The terms
of the pledge provided that in the event those investors suffered a loss on
their investment in our securities as of June 30, 2007 (as determined by actual
sales by those investors or the market price of our Common Stock on such date),
the investors would be entitled to sell all or a portion of the pledged
securities so that the investors receive proceeds from such sale in an amount
equal to their loss on their investment in our securities. In consideration of
her pledge to these investors, we paid Ms. Chassman (i) $525,000 in cash
(representing 10% of the cash amount raised from the institutional investors),
and (ii) five-year warrants to purchase
·
|
525,000
shares of Series A Preferred Stock (representing 10% of the Series A
Preferred Stock purchased by those investors),
and
|
·
|
warrants
to purchase 210,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $2.00
per share (representing 10% of the Series A Preferred Stock purchased by
those investors),
|
for an
aggregate exercise price of $525,000.
As of the
“Qualified Closing” of our Series B Preferred Stock private placement in August
of 2008, Ms. Chassman agreed to a modification of her rights and pricing and
gave up her anti-dilution protection – see Qualified Closing description in
Series B Preferred Stock section)
Principal Terms of the
Series B Financing Consummated in 2008
Each
share of Series B Preferred Stock has a stated value of $100.00, and is
convertible at the holder’s option into that number of shares of Common Stock
equal to the Series B stated value at a conversion price of $0.0362, subject to
certain adjustments. Additionally, upon the occurrence of a stock split, stock
dividend, combination of the Common Stock into a smaller number of shares,
issuance of any of shares of Common Stock or other securities by
reclassification of the Common Stock, merger or sale of substantially all of our
assets, the conversion rate will be adjusted so that the conversion rights of
the Series B Preferred Stock stockholders will remain equivalent to those prior
to such event.
Dividend
The
holders of Series B Preferred Stock are entitled to receive preferential
dividends payable in shares of additional Series B Preferred Stock . Any
dividends payable to both the Series A and Series B Preferred shareholders shall
be paid before any dividend or other distribution will be paid to any Common
Stock shareholder. The Series B Preferred Stock dividend is based payable at a
rate of 10% per annum on the Series B Stated Value payable on the last day of
each calendar quarter after June 30, 2008. However, upon the occurrence of any
“Event of Default” as defined in the Certificate of Designation of Series B
Preferred Stock, the dividend rate increases to 20% per annum, and revert back
to 10% after the “Event of Default” is cured. An Event of Default includes, but
is not limited to,
¨
|
the
occurrence of “Non-Registration
Events”
|
¨
|
an
uncured breach by us of any material covenant, term or condition in the
Certificate of Designation or any of the related transaction documents;
and
|
¨
|
any
money judgment or similar final process being filed against us for more
than $100,000.
|
7
Dividends
must be delivered to the holder of the Series B Preferred Stock no later than
five (5) business days after the end of each period for which dividends are
payable. Dividends on the Series B Preferred Stock will be made in additional
shares of Series B Preferred Stock, valued at the Series B Preferred Stock
stated value. Notwithstanding the foregoing, during the first three-years
following the initial closing, upon the approval of the holders of a majority of
the Series B Preferred Stock, including the lead investor, NJTC Venture Fund, if
it then owns 25% of the shares of Series B Preferred Stock initially purchased
by it, we may pay dividends in cash instead of additional shares of Series B
Preferred Stock, and after such three-year period, the holders of a majority of
the Series B Preferred Stock, including NJTC if it then owns the 25% of the
shares of the Series B Preferred Stock initially purchased by it, may require us
to make such payments in cash.
Liquidation
In the
event of the Company’s dissolution, liquidation or winding up, the holders of
the Series B Preferred Stock will receive, in priority over the holders of
Series A Preferred Stock and Common Stock, a liquidation preference equal to the
stated value of such shares plus accrued dividends on the shares.
Voting Rights; Board
Rights
Holders
of Series B Preferred Stock have the right to vote on matters submitted to the
holders of Common Stock on an as converted basis. However, the consent of the
holders of at least a majority of the shares of the Series B Preferred Stock as
a separate class, including NJTC if it is then a holders of at least 25% of the
shares of Series B Preferred Stock purchased by it on the Initial Closing Date,
shall be required on matters related to the rights of the Series B Preferred
Stock.
In
addition, so long as NJTC holds 25% of the Series B Preferred Stock it purchased
before the initial closing, NJTC is entitled to elect (i) two directors to our
Board of Directors, which shall consist of six members, and (ii) two members to
our compensation committee, which shall consist of no less than three
members. Within the first twelve (12) months following the Initial
Closing, the Company must reduce the Board of Directors to five (5)
members.
Moreover,
so long as Cahn Medical Technologies, LLC is the holder of at least 25% of the
shares of the Series B Preferred Stock purchased by it on the initial closing
date, it has the right to have its designee receive notices of, and attend as an
observer, all meetings of our Board of Directors.
Registration
Rights
We filed
a registration statement under the Securities Act covering the Common Stock
issuable upon conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock on December 12,
2008. We received initial comments from the Securities and Exchange
Commission related to this filing on January 7, 2009 and received additional
comments from the SEC on July 15, 2009. We are in the process of
addressing each comment raised. Pursuant to the terms of the
Registration Rights Agreement, we are required to cause the Registration
Statement to become effective within 240 days of such closing. We also granted
the investors demand and piggyback registration rights with respect to such
Common Stock. The investors in the Series B Financing are entitled to liquidated
damages in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the purchase price of the
Series B Preferred Stock if we fail to timely file that registration statement
with, or have it declared effective by, the SEC.
The
Company has received a waiver from a majority of the Series B holders for the
non-registration event and the timing of the Series B registration does not
create a cross-default of the Series A Preferred Series.
Redemption
Rights
Following
the fifth anniversary of the initial closing, the holders of a majority of the
Series B Preferred Stock, including NJTC if it then holds 25% of the shares of
Series B Preferred Stock initially purchased by it, may elect to require us to
redeem all, but not less than all, of their shares of Series B Preferred Stock
at the original purchase price for such shares plus all accrued and unpaid
dividends whether or not declared, if the market price of our Common Stock is
then below the conversion price of the Series B Preferred
Stock.
8
Dilution and
Subordination
As one of
the conditions to the closing of the Series B financing with an initial closing
on June 25, 2008, we entered into an Agreement and Consent as of the same date
with the holders of more than 80% of our Series A Preferred Stock, par value
0.001 per share and the holders of more than 80% of the outstanding common stock
purchase warrants issued to the purchasers of our Series A Preferred Stock (the
“Class A
Warrant”). Pursuant to the Agreement and Consent, our holders of the
Series A Preferred Stock consented to the permanent waiver of the anti-dilution
protection previously provided to the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock
and the holders of the Class A Warrant.
In
connection with such Agreement and Consent, the conversion price with respect to
the June 30, 2006 purchasers of Series A Preferred Stock held by the Holders was
reduced effective June 25, 2008, the initial closing of the Series B Financing
according to the Schedule A to the Agreement and Consent as set forth below. In
the event that within the 60-day period following the Initial Closing, at
additional closings, the Company issued additional shares of Series B Preferred
Stock so that the aggregate gross proceeds that were raised on the Initial
Closing and such additional closings (excluding the principal amount of our
outstanding debt converted into the Series B Preferred Stock) from the holders
of the Series A Preferred Stock or their affiliates, is $1,500,000 or more, the
conversion price with respect to the Series A Preferred Stock held by these
holders was agreed to be further reduced in accordance with Schedule A to the
Agreement and Consent as set forth below. Based on the total amount raised and
in accordance with our investor agreements, MedaSorb’s Series B Preferred Stock
private placement was considered a “Qualified” closing.
In
addition, June 30, 2006 purchasers of the Series A Preferred Stock also agreed
the conversion price with respect to the Class A Warrant shall be reduced
effectively on the initial closing. Pursuant to our agreement for a Qualified
closing, Conversion pricing and warrant exercise pricing was further reduced as
disclosed in the following chart.
06/30/06 Purchasers of
Series A Preferred Stock
|
Initial Closing (06/25/08)
|
Qualified Closing (08/25/08)
|
||||||||||||||
|
Preferred Stock
Conversion Price
|
Warrant
Exercise Price
|
Preferred Stock
Conversion Price
|
Warrant
Exercise Price
|
||||||||||||
Alpha
Capital Aktiengesellschaft
|
$
|
0.26
|
$
|
0.52
|
$
|
0.20
|
$
|
0.40
|
||||||||
Longview
Fund, LP
|
$
|
1.25
|
$
|
2.00
|
$
|
0.45
|
$
|
0.90
|
||||||||
Platinum
Partners Long Term Growth III LLC
|
$
|
1.25
|
$
|
2.00
|
$
|
0.10
|
$
|
0.40
|
||||||||
Ellis
International Ltd.
|
$
|
0.26
|
$
|
0.52
|
$
|
0.20
|
$
|
0.40
|
||||||||
Margie
Chassman
|
$
|
1.25
|
$
|
2.00
|
$
|
0.10
|
$
|
0.40
|
Research
and Development
We have
been engaged in research and development since inception. Our research and
development costs were approximately $1,962,000 and $1,983,000 for the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Technology,
Products and Applications
For
approximately the past half-century, the field of blood purification has been
focused on hemodialysis, a mature, well accepted medical technique primarily
used to sustain the lives of patients with permanent or temporary loss of kidney
function. It is widely understood by the medical community that dialysis has
inherent limitations in that its ability to remove toxic substances from blood
drops precipitously as the size of toxins increases. Our hemocompatible
adsorbent technology is expected to address this shortcoming by removing toxins
and toxic compounds largely untouched by dialysis technology.
Our
initial products, CytoSorb™ and BetaSorb™, are known in the medical field as
hemoperfusion devices. During hemoperfusion, blood is removed from the body via
a catheter or other blood access device, perfused through a filter medium where
toxic compounds are removed, and returned to the body.
We
believe that our polymer adsorbent technology may remove middle molecular weight
toxins and toxic compounds, such as cytokines, from blood and physiologic
fluids. We believe that our technology may have many applications in the
treatment of common, chronic and acute healthcare complications including the
adjunctive treatment and/or prevention of sepsis; the treatment of chronic
kidney failure; the treatment of liver failure; the prevention of post-operative
complications of cardiopulmonary bypass surgery; and the prevention of damage to
organs donated by brain-dead donors prior to organ harvest. These applications
vary by cause and complexity as well as by severity but share a common
characteristic i.e. high concentrations of toxins in the circulating
blood.
9
Both the
CytoSorb™ and BetaSorb™ devices consist of a cartridge containing adsorbent
polymer beads, although the polymers used in the two devices are physically
different. The cartridges in both devices incorporate industry standard
connectors at either end of the device, which connect directly to the
extra-corporeal circuit (bloodlines) in series with a dialyzer, in the case of
the BetaSorb™ device, or as a stand alone device in the case of the CytoSorb™
device. Both devices will require no additional expensive equipment, and will
require minimal training.
The
extra-corporeal circuit consists of plastic blood tubing, our CytoSorb™ or
BetaSorb™ cartridge, as applicable, containing adsorbent polymer beads, pressure
monitoring gauges, and a blood pump to maintain blood flow. The patient’s blood
is accessed through a catheter inserted into his or her veins. The catheter is
connected to the extra-corporeal circuit and the blood pump draws blood from the
patient, pumps it through the cartridge and returns it back to the patient in a
closed loop system.
Markets
Sepsis
Sepsis is
characterized by a systemic inflammatory response in response to severe
infection or trauma. There are generally three categories of sepsis,
including mild to moderate sepsis, severe sepsis and septic
shock. Mild to moderate sepsis typically occurs with an infection
that is responsive to antibiotics or antiviral medication. An example
is a patient with self-limiting influenza or a treatable community acquired
pneumonia. Mortality is generally very low. Severe sepsis
is sepsis with evidence of organ dysfunction. An example is a patient
who develops respiratory failure due to a severe pneumonia and requires
mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. Severe sepsis has a mortality
rate of approximately 30-35%. Septic shock, or severe sepsis with low
blood pressure that is not responsive to fluid resuscitation, is the most
serious form of sepsis with an expected mortality in excess of 50%.
In
sepsis, the body produces large amounts of inflammatory mediators called
cytokines in response to infection. In severe infection, many people
suffer from a massive, unregulated overproduction of cytokines, often termed
“cytokine storm” that can kill cells and damage organs, leading to multi-organ
failure and in many cases death. CytoSorb™ is an investigational
device designed to act as a broad spectrum cytokine filter. It is
intended to play a critical role in treating patients with severe sepsis or
septic shock by reducing cytokine storm, while antibiotics work to control the
actual infection. CytoSorb is currently being evaluated in patients
with acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury in the setting of
sepsis in a 100 patient randomized, controlled clinical trial in
Europe.
In the
United States alone, there are more than one million new cases of severe sepsis
and septic shock annually. Based on the reported incidence in a number of
developed countries, the worldwide incidence is estimated to be 18 million cases
per year. . The Company estimates that the market potential in Europe
for its products is substantially equivalent to that in the U.S.
Severe
sepsis and septic shock patients are amongst the most expensive patients to
treat in a hospital. Because of this, we believe that efficacy rather
than cost will be the determining factor in the adoption of CytoSorb™ in the
treatment of sepsis. Based on the limited number of available treatments for
this disease, and based on current pricing of charcoal hemoperfusion devices in
the market today, we estimate that our CytoSorb™ device will sell for at least
$500 per unit. Our current pricing model represents a fraction of what is
currently spent on the treatment of a sepsis patient.
Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Procedures
There are
approximately 400,000 cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cardiac surgery
procedures performed annually in the U.S. and more than 800,000 worldwide. Some
patients, nearly one-third, suffer from post-operative complications of
cardiopulmonary bypass surgery, including complications from infection,
pneumonia, pulmonary, and neurological dysfunction. A common characteristic of
these post operative complications is the presence of high amounts of cytokines
in the blood. Extended surgery time leads to longer ICU recovery time
and hospital stays, both leading to higher costs – approximately $32,000 per
coronary artery bypass graft procedure. We believe that the use of CytoSorb™
during and after the surgical procedure may prevent or mitigate post-operative
complications for many CPB patients.
We
anticipate that the CytoSorb™ device, incorporated into the extra-corporeal
circuit used with the by-pass equipment during surgery, and/or employed
post-operatively for a period of time, will mitigate inflammation and speed
recovery.
10
Chronic Kidney
Failure
The
National Kidney Foundation estimates that more than 20 million Americans have
chronic kidney disease. Left untreated, chronic kidney disease can ultimately
lead to chronic kidney failure, which requires a kidney transplant or chronic
dialysis (generally three times per week) to sustain life. There are more than
340,000 patients in the United States currently receiving chronic dialysis and
more than 1.5 million worldwide. Approximately 66% of patients with chronic
kidney disease are treated with hemodialysis.
One of
the problems with standard high-flux dialysis is the limited ability to remove
certain mid-molecular weight toxins such as B2-microglobulin. Over
time, B2-microglobulin
can accumulate and cause amyloidosis in joints and elsewhere in the
musculoskeletal system, leading to pain and disability.
Our
BetaSorb™ device has been designed to remove these mid-molecular weight toxins
when used in conjunction with standard dialysis. Standard dialysis care
typically involves three sessions per week, averaging approximately 150 sessions
per year. Assuming BetaSorb™ use in each session, every 100,000 patients would
require approximately 15 million devices annually.
Brain-Dead Organ
Donors
There are
in excess of 6,000 brain dead organ donors each year in the United States;
worldwide, the number of these organ donors is estimated to be at least double
the U.S. brain dead organ donor population. There is a severe shortage of donor
organs. Currently, there are more than 100,000 individuals on transplant waiting
lists in the United States. Cytokine storm is common in these organ
donors, resulting in reduced viability of potential donor organs. The
potential use of CytoSorb™ hemoperfusion to control cytokine storm in brain dead
organ donors could increase the number of viable organs harvested from the donor
pool and improve the survival of transplanted organs. A
proof-of-concept pilot study using the Company’s technology in human brain dead
donors has been published.
Products
We
believe that the polymer adsorbent technology used in our products has the
potential to remove middle molecular weight toxins, such as cytokines, from
blood and physiologic fluids. All of the potential applications described below
(i.e., the
adjunctive treatment and/or prevention of sepsis; the treatment of chronic
kidney failure; the treatment of liver failure; the prevention of post-operative
complications of cardiopulmonary bypass surgery; and the prevention of damage to
organs donated by brain-dead donors prior to organ harvest) share in common high
concentrations of toxins in the circulating blood. However, because of the
limited studies we have conducted to date, we are subject to substantial risk
that our technology will have little or no effect on the treatment of any of
these indications. We are currently enrolling patients in a European Sepsis
Trial to evaluate our CytoSorb™ device. The study is a randomized,
open label, controlled clinical study in fourteen (14) sites in Germany of up to
one hundred (100) patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute
lung injury in the setting of sepsis. If these studies are successful, we obtain
European regulatory approval, and given sufficient and timely financial
resources, we intend to commercialize in Europe. However, there can be no
assurance we will ever obtain regulatory approval for CytoSorb™ or any other
device.
The CytoSorb™ Device
(Critical Care)
APPLICATION:
Adjunctive Therapy in the Treatment of Sepsis
Sepsis is
a potentially life threatening disease defined as a systemic inflammatory
response in the presence of a known or suspected infection. Sepsis is
mediated by high levels of toxic compounds (“cytokines”), which are released
into the blood stream as part of the body’s auto-immune response to severe
infection or injury. These toxins cause severe inflammation and damage healthy
tissues, which can lead to organ dysfunction and failure. Sepsis is very
expensive to treat and has a high mortality rate.
Potential Benefits:
To the extent our adsorbent blood purification technology is able to prevent or
reduce the accumulation of cytokines in the circulating blood, we believe our
products may be able to prevent or mitigate severe inflammation, organ
dysfunction and failure in sepsis patients. Therapeutic goals as an adjunctive
therapy include reduced ICU and total hospitalization time.
Background and
Rationale: We believe that the effective treatment of sepsis is the most
valuable potential application for our technology. Severe sepsis (sepsis with
organ dysfunction) and septic shock (severe sepsis with persistent hypotension
despite fluid resuscitation) carries mortality rates of between 28% and 80%.
Death can occur within hours or days, depending on many variables, including
cause, severity, patient age and co-morbidities. Researchers estimate that there
are approximately one million new cases of sepsis in the U.S. each year; and
based on the reported incidence in a number of developed countries, the
worldwide incidence is estimated to be 18 million cases annually. The incidence
of sepsis is also rising due to:
1)
|
An
aging population
|
2)
|
Increased
incidence of antibiotic resistance
|
3)
|
Increase
in co-morbid conditions like cancer and
diabetes
|
4)
|
Increased
use of indwelling medical devices that are susceptible to
infection
|
In the
U.S. alone, treatment of sepsis costs nearly $18 billion annually. According to
the Centers for Disease Control, sepsis is a top ten cause of death in the
U.S. The incidence of sepsis is believed to be under-reported as the
primary infection (i.e. pneumonia, pyelonephritis, etc.) is often cited as the
cause of death.
An
effective treatment for sepsis has been elusive. Pharmaceutical companies have
been trying to develop drug therapies to treat the condition. With the exception
of a single biologic, Xigris® from Eli Lilly, which demonstrated a small
improvement in survival in a small segment of the patient population, to our
knowledge, all other efforts to date have failed to significantly improve
patient survival in the U.S.
11
We
believe that our technology presents a new therapeutic approach in the treatment
of sepsis. The potential benefits of blood purification in the treatment of
sepsis patients are widely acknowledged by medical professionals and have been
studied using dialysis and hemofiltration technology. These studies, while
encouraging, demonstrated that dialysis alone produced only limited benefit to
sepsis patients. The reason for this appears to be rooted in a primary
limitation of dialysis technology itself: the inability of standard dialysis to
effectively and efficiently remove significant quantities of larger toxins from
circulating blood. Limited studies of our CytoSorb™ device have provided us with
data consistent with our belief that CytoSorb™ has the ability to remove these
larger toxins. CytoSorb’s™ ability to interact safely with blood
(hemocompatibility) has been demonstrated through ISO 10993 testing. Data
collected during the “emergency and compassionate use” treatment of a single
sepsis patient has been encouraging to us.
CytoSorb™
has been designed to achieve broad-spectrum removal of both pro- and
anti-inflammatory cytokines, preventing or reducing the accumulation of high
concentrations in the bloodstream. This approach is intended to modulate the
immune response without blocking or suppressing the function of any of its
mediators. For this reason, researchers have referred to the approach reflected
in our technology as ‘immunomodulatory’ therapy.
Projected Timeline:
Previous clinical studies using our BetaSorb™ device in patients with chronic
kidney failure have provided valuable data, which underpin the development of
the critical care applications for our technology. The BetaSorb™ device has been
used in a total of four human pilot studies, involving 20 patients, in the U.S.
and Europe. The studies included approximately 345 treatments, with some
patients using the device for up to 24 weeks (in multiple treatment sessions
lasting up to four hours, three times per week) in connection with the
application of our products to patients suffering from chronic kidney failure.
The BetaSorb™ device design was also tested on a single patient with bacterial
sepsis, producing results that our management has found encouraging and
consistent with our belief that our device design is appropriate for more
extensive sepsis study.
We are
currently approved by the German Ethics Committee to conduct a clinical study of
up to 100 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury
in the setting of sepsis. By December 31, 2009 we had initiated and opened for
enrollment a total of fourteen (14) hospital units to participate in our
clinical study.
In April
2009, we submitted a protocol revision to expand the options for
anti-coagulation that the clinical sites may use, to include a provision for
testing of our targeted endpoints in plasma instead of serum, and to increase
the total number of patients that may be enrolled from 80 to 100 patients.
This revision has been approved by the German Ethics Committee. We believe that
the revised protocol will enable more potential sites to participate in the
study, and may help accelerate patient enrollment through greater access to
potential candidates.
Additionally,
we have updated blood sampling and handling procedures to minimize non-device
related artifacts that may potentially arise if the samples are not processed
appropriately.
To date
we have enrolled sixty (60) patients in the clinical study. We may enroll up to
an additional forty (40) patients. In conducting the German Clinical study
we have utilized our CytoSorb™ device in approximately 175 treatments to date
with no Serious Adverse Events attributable to the device.
Depending
on the pace of patient recruitment, we anticipate completion of our patient
enrollment in the second half of 2010 to the first quarter of
2011. Concurrent with the clinical study, we have commenced our
preparation for the CE Mark submission process. If these studies are successful,
we obtain CE Mark approval, and given sufficient and timely financial resources,
management intends to commercialize in Europe.
Because
our technology pertains to a medical device, the regulatory pathway and approval
process are faster and more straightforward than the process related to the
approval of a drug. However, even if we ultimately obtain the CE Mark, because
we cannot control the timing of the regulatory approval process, there can be no
assurance as to when such approval will be obtained.
APPLICATION: Prevention and treatment of organ
dysfunction in brain-dead organ donors to increase the number and quality of
viable organs harvested from donors
Potential Benefits:
If CytoSorb™ is able to prevent or reduce high-levels of cytokines from
accumulating in the bloodstream of brain-dead organ donors, we believe CytoSorb™
will be able to mitigate organ dysfunction and failure, which results from
severe inflammation following brain-death. The primary goals for this
application are:
·
|
improving
the viability of organs which can be harvested from brain-dead organ
donors, and
|
·
|
increasing
the likelihood of organ survival following
transplant.
|
Background and
Rationale: When brain death occurs, the body responds by generating large
quantities of inflammatory cytokines. This process is similar to sepsis. A high
percentage of donated organs are never transplanted due to this response, which
damages healthy organs and prevents transplant. In addition, inflammation in the
donor may damage organs that are harvested and reduce the probability of graft
survival following transplant.
12
There is
a shortage of donated organs worldwide, with approximately 100,000 people
currently on the waiting list for organ transplants in the United States alone.
Because there are an insufficient number of organs donated to satisfy demand, it
is vital to maximize the number of viable organs donated, and optimize the
probability of organ survival following transplant.
Projected Timeline:
Studies have been conducted under a $1 million grant from the Health Resources
and Services Administration (HRSA), an agency of the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services. Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Medical
Center and the University of Texas, Houston Medical Center have completed the
observational and dosing phases of the project. The results were published in
Critical Care Medicine, January 2008. The next phase of this study, the
treatment phase, would involve viable donors treated with the CytoSorb™ device.
In this phase of the project, viable donors will be treated and the survival and
function of organs in transplant recipients will be tracked and measured. We are
not currently focusing our efforts on the commercialization of CytoSorb™ for
application in organ donors. The treatment phase would be contingent
upon further discussion with the FDA and HRSA regarding study design, as well as
obtaining additional funding.
APPLICATION:
Prevention and treatment of post-operative complications of cardiopulmonary
bypass surgery
Potential Benefits:
If CytoSorb™ is able to prevent or reduce high-levels of cytokines from
accumulating in the blood system during and following cardiac surgery, we
anticipate that post-operative complications of cardiopulmonary bypass surgery
may be able to be prevented or mitigated. The primary goals for this application
are to:
·
|
reduce ventilator and oxygen
therapy requirements;
|
·
|
reduce length of stay in hospital
intensive care units; and
|
·
|
reduce the total cost of patient
care.
|
Background and
Rationale: Due to the highly invasive nature of cardiopulmonary bypass
surgery, high levels of cytokines are produced by the body, triggering severe
inflammation. If our products are able to prevent or reduce the accumulation of
cytokines in a patient’s blood stream, we expect to prevent or mitigate
post-operative complications caused by an excessive or protracted inflammatory
response to the surgery. While not all patients undergoing cardiac surgery
suffer these complications, it is impossible to predict before surgery which
patients will be affected.
Projected Timeline:
We commissioned the University of Pittsburgh to conduct a study to characterize
the production of cytokines as a function of the surgical timeline for
cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. An observational study of 32 patients was
completed, and information was obtained with respect to the onset and duration
of cytokine release. We expect that this information will aid us in defining the
appropriate time to apply the CytoSorb™ device to maximize therapeutic impact.
We are not currently focusing our efforts on the commercialization of CytoSorb™
for application to cardiac surgery. Upon successful commercialization of the
sepsis application, we will pursue the use of our polymer adsorbent technology
for other critical care uses, such as cardiopulmonary bypass
surgery.
The BetaSorb™ Device
(Chronic Care)
APPLICATION:
Prevention and treatment of health complications caused by the accumulation of
metabolic toxins in patients with chronic renal failure
Potential Benefits:
If BetaSorb™ is able to prevent or reduce high levels of metabolic waste
products from accumulating in the blood and tissues of long-term dialysis
patients, we anticipate that the health complications characteristic to these
patients can be prevented or mitigated. The primary goals for this application
are to
·
|
improve and maintain the general
health of dialysis patients;
|
·
|
improve the quality of life of
these patients
|
·
|
reduce the total cost of patient
care; and
|
·
|
increase life
expectancy.
|
13
Background and
Rationale: Our BetaSorb™ device is intended for use on patients suffering
from chronic kidney failure who rely on long-term dialysis therapy to sustain
life. Due to the widely recognized inability of dialysis to remove larger
proteins from blood, metabolic waste products, such as Beta-2 microglobulin,
accumulate to toxic levels and are deposited in the joints and tissues of
patients. Specific toxins known to accumulate in these patients have been linked
to their severe health complications, increased healthcare costs, and reduced
quality of life.
Researchers
also believe that the accumulation of toxins may play an important role in the
significantly reduced life expectancy experienced by dialysis patients. In the
U.S., the average life expectancy of a dialysis patient is five years. Industry
research has identified links between many of these toxins and poor patient
outcomes. If our BetaSorb™ device is able to routinely remove these toxins
during dialysis and prevent or reduce their accumulation, we expect our
BetaSorb™ device to maintain or improve patient health in the long-term. We
believe that by reducing the incidence of health complications, the annual cost
of patient care will be reduced and life expectancy increased.
The poor
health experienced by chronic dialysis patients is illustrated by the fact that
in the U.S. alone, more than $20 billion is spent annually caring for this
patient population. While the cost of providing dialysis therapy alone is
approximately $23,000 per patient per year, the total cost of caring for a
patient ranges from $60,000 to more than $120,000 annually due to various health
complications associated with dialysis.
Projected Timeline:
We have collected a significant amount of empirical data for the development of
this application. As the developer of this technology, we had to undertake
extensive research, as no comparable technology was available for reference
purposes. We have completed several pilot studies, including a clinical pilot of
six patients in California for up to 24 weeks in which our BetaSorb™ device
removed the targeted toxin, beta2-microglobulin,
as expected. In total, we have sponsored clinical studies utilizing our
BetaSorb™ device on 20 patients involving approximately 345 total treatments.
Each study was conducted by a clinic or hospital personnel with MedaSorb
providing technical assistance as requested.
As
discussed above, due to practical and economic considerations, we are focusing
our efforts and resources on commercializing our CytoSorb™ device for critical
care application. Following commercial introduction of the CytoSorb™ device, we
expect to conduct additional clinical studies using the BetaSorb™ device in the
treatment of end stage renal disease patients.
Commercial
and Research Partners
University of Pittsburgh
Medical Center
Two
government research grants by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Health
and Human Services (HHS) have been awarded to investigators at the University of
Pittsburgh to explore the use of adsorbent polymers in the treatment of sepsis
and organ transplant preservation. Under “SubAward Agreements” with the
University of Pittsburgh, we have been developing polymers for use in these
studies.
A grant
of $1 million was
awarded to the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center in 2003. The project
seeks to improve the quantity and viability of organs donated for transplant by
using CytoSorb™ to detoxify the donor’s blood. The observational and dosing
phases of the study, involving 30 viable donors and eight non-viable donors,
respectively, have been completed. The next phase of this study, the treatment
phase, will involve viable donors. We are not currently focusing our
efforts on the commercialization of CytoSorb™ for application in organ donors.
The treatment phase would be contingent upon further discussion with the FDA and
HRSA regarding study design, as well as obtaining additional
funding.
In
addition, in September 2005, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center was
awarded a grant of approximately $7 million from NIH entitled “Systems
Engineering of a Pheresis Intervention for Sepsis (SEPSIS)” to study the use of
adsorbent polymer technology in the treatment of severe sepsis. The study,
expected to last for a total of five years, commenced in September, 2005 and
remains in progress. Under a SubAward Agreement, we are working with researchers
at the University of Pittsburgh - Critical Care Medicine Department. Currently,
we believe that the only polymers being used in this study are polymers we have
developed specifically for use in the study, which are similar to the polymers
used in our devices. Under the SubAward Agreement, for each of 2006 and 2007, we
received approximately $102,000 for our efforts in support of the grant.
Additionally for 2008 and 2009 we received an approximate $59,000 and $80,000,
respectively for our supporting efforts. We continue to supply UPMC with new
samples based on our adsorbent polymer technology under the same terms as the
initial SubAward Agreement, and expect to do so for the duration of the study.
UPMC has indicated to us that the amount budgeted for our participation under
the study is approximately $65,000, for the final grant period ending September
2010. The amount is subject to change on an annual basis by the NIH,
and our continued participation in the study is subject to our performance and
an annual review by UPMC.
These
grants represent a substantial research cost savings to us and demonstrate the
strong interest of the medical and scientific communities in our
technology.
14
Researchers
at UPMC have participated in nearly every major clinical study of potential
sepsis intervention during the past twenty years. Drs. Derek Angus and John
Kellum were investigators for Eli Lilly’s sepsis drug, Xigris®. Dr. Kellum, a
member of the UPMC faculty since 1994, is the Chairman of our Severe Sepsis and
Inflammatory Disease Advisory Board. Dr. Kellum’s research interests span
various aspects of Critical Care Medicine, but center on critical care
nephrology (including acid-base, and renal replacement therapy), sepsis and
multi-organ failure, and clinical epidemiology. He is Chairman of the Fellow
Research Committee at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and has authored more than
70 publications and has received numerous research grants from foundations and
industry.
Fresenius Medical Care
AG
In 1999,
we entered into an exclusive, long-term agreement with Fresenius Medical Care
for the global marketing and distribution of our BetaSorb™ device and any
similar product we may develop for the treatment of renal disease. We currently
intend to pursue our BetaSorb™ product after the commercialization of the
CytoSorb™ product. At such time as we determine to proceed with our proposed
BetaSorb™ product, if ever, we will need to conduct additional clinical studies
using the BetaSorb™ device to obtain European or FDA approval.
Fresenius
Medical Care is the world's largest, integrated provider of products and
services for individuals with chronic kidney failure. Through its network of
more than 2,100 dialysis clinics in North America, Europe, Latin America and
Asia-Pacific, Fresenius Medical Care provides dialysis treatment to more than
163,000 patients around the globe. Fresenius Medical Care is also the world's
largest provider of dialysis products, such as hemodialysis machines, dialyzers
and related disposable products.
Advisory
Boards
From time
to time our management meets with scientific advisors who sit on our Scientific
Advisory Board, our Medical Advisory Board – Critical Care Medicine, and our
Medical Advisory Board – Chronic Kidney Failure / Dialysis.
Our
Scientific Advisory Board consists of three scientists with expertise in the
fields of fundamental chemical research, and polymer research and
development.
Our
Medical Advisory Board for Severe Sepsis / Inflammatory Disease consists of five
medical doctors, one of whom is affiliated with UPMC, with expertise in critical
care medicine, sepsis, multi-organ failure and related clinical study
design.
Our
Medical Advisory Board for Chronic Kidney Failure / Dialysis consists of four
medical doctors with expertise in kidney function, kidney diseases and their
treatment, and dialysis technology.
We
compensate members of our Advisory Boards at the rate of $2,000 for each
full-day meeting they attend in person; $1,200 if attendance is by telephone.
When we consult with members of our Advisory Board (whether in person or by
telephone) for a period of less than one day, we compensate them at the rate of
$200 per hour. We also reimburse members of our Advisory Boards for their travel
expenses for attending our meetings.
Royalty
Agreements
With Principal
Stockholder
In August
2003, in order to induce Guillermina Vega Montiel, a principal stockholder of
ours, to make a $4 million investment in MedaSorb, we granted Ms. Montiel a
perpetual royalty equal to three percent of all gross revenues received by us
from sales of CytoSorbTM in the
applications of sepsis, cardiopulmonary bypass surgery, organ donor,
chemotherapy and inflammation control. In addition, for her investment, Ms.
Montiel received 1,230,770 membership units of MedaSorb, which at the time was a
limited liability company. Those membership units ultimately became 185,477
shares of our Common Stock following our June 30, 2006 merger.
15
With
Purolite
In 2003,
Purolite filed a lawsuit against us asserting, among other things, co-ownership
and co-inventorship of certain of our patents. On September 1, 2006, the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania approved a
Stipulated Order and Settlement Agreement under which we and Purolite agreed to
the settlement of the action. The Settlement Agreement provides us with the
exclusive right to use our patented technology and proprietary know how relating
to adsorbent polymers for a period of 18 years. In particular, the Settlement
Agreement relates to several of our issued patents and several of our pending
patent applications covering our biocompatible polymeric resins, our methods of
producing these polymers, and the methods of using the polymers to remove
impurities from physiological fluids, such as blood.
Under the
terms of the Settlement Agreement, we have agreed to pay Purolite royalties of
2.5% to 5% on the sale of those of our products, if and when those products are
sold commercially, that are used in direct contact with blood. However, if the
first product we offer for commercial sale is a biocompatible polymer to be used
in direct contact with a physiological fluid other than blood, royalties will be
payable with respect to that product as well. The royalty payments provided for
under the Settlement Agreement would apply to our currently envisioned CytoSorb™
and BetaSorb™ products.
Following
the expiration of the eighteen year term of the Settlement Agreement, the
patents and patent applications that are the subject of the Settlement Agreement
should have expired under current patent laws, and the technology claimed in
them will be available to the public. However, following such time, we would
continue to exclusively own any confidential and proprietary know
how.
Product
Payment & Reimbursement
Critical Care
Applications
Europe
Payment
for our CytoSorb™ device for the removal of cytokines in patients with acute
respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury in the setting of sepsis and
other related acute care applications is country dependent in Europe. Once CE
Mark approval is obtained for the CytoSorb™ device, we plan to market the device
initially in Germany where CytoSorb reimbursement is anticipated to fall under
the “diagnosis related group” (DRG) acute care reimbursement. Under this system,
hospitals would purchase CytoSorb and subtract the cost from a pre-determined
lump-sum payment made by the payor to the hospital based on the patient’s
diagnosis. No specific reimbursement code would be required for the CytoSorb
device. If we are able to successfully introduce the CytoSorb™ device into the
German market we intend to apply for reimbursement in France, England, Italy and
Spain representing the five economic leaders in Europe and introduce our
products in those countries accordingly. Reimbursement is specific to each
country. There can be no assurances that reimbursement will be granted or that
additional clinical data may not be required to establish
reimbursement.
United
States
As in
Germany, payment for our CytoSorb™ device in the US for the treatment and
prevention of sepsis and other related acute care applications is anticipated to
fall under the DRG in-patient reimbursement system, which is currently the
predominant basis of hospital medical billing in the United States. Under this
system, predetermined payment amounts are assigned to categories of medical
patients with respect to their treatments at medical facilities based on the DRG
that they fall within (which is a function of such characteristics as medical
condition, age, sex, etc.) and the length of time spent by the patient at the
facility. Reimbursement is not determined by the actual procedures used in the
treatment of these patients, and a separate reimbursement decision would not be
required to be made by Medicare, the HMO or other provider of medical benefits
in connection with the actual method used to treat the patient.
16
Critical
care applications such as those targeted by our CytoSorb™ device involve a high
mortality rate and extended hospitalization, coupled with extremely expensive
ICU time. In view of these high costs and high mortality rates, we believe
acceptance of our proprietary technology by critical care practitioners and
hospital administrators will primarily depend on safety and efficacy factors
rather than cost.
Chronic Renal
Failure
In
Europe, chronic dialysis is predominately provided by government supported
clinics accounting for approximately 75% of dialysis treatments, with the
remainder being provided by private clinics. However, these figures vary widely
among countries within Europe. For example dialysis clinics in Denmark and
Finland are 100% publicly managed facilities while those in Portugal are 90%
privately managed facilities. Generally speaking, dialysis services are always
regulated and controlled by the healthcare authorities and not homogeneous
between the various European countries.
There are
three main types of reimbursement in Europe: budget transfer, fee for service
and flat rate. In some cases, the reimbursement method varies within the same
country depending on the type of provider (public or private). Europe is similar
to the U.S. in that a product such as BetaSorb™ may be part of a composite rate
or separate line item reimbursement. In either case, a country by country
application for reimbursement must be made.
It is
expected that in the U.S., Medicare will be the primary payer for the BetaSorb™
device, either through the current “fee for service” mechanism or managed care
programs. The large majority of costs not covered by federal programs are
covered by the private insurance sector.
While the
fee-for-service composite rate system is currently the dominant payment
mechanism, many industry participants believe that a managed care system will
become the dominant payment mechanism. We believe that movement to a full or
shared-risk managed care system would speed market acceptance of BetaSorb™
because, under such a system, providers will have a strong incentive to adopt
technologies that lower overall treatment costs. Fresenius is a leading
participant in the move to managed care and may play a leading role in the
demonstration and introduction of our product to Medicare.
Competition
General
We
believe that our products represent a unique approach to disease states and
health complications associated with the presence of larger toxins (often
referred to as middle molecular weight toxins) in the bloodstream, including
sepsis, post-operative complications of cardiac surgery (cardiopulmonary bypass
surgery), damage to organs donated for transplant prior to organ harvest, and
renal disease. Researchers have explored the potential of using existing
membrane-based dialysis technology to treat patients suffering from sepsis.
These techniques are unable to effectively remove the middle molecular weight
toxins. We believe that our devices may be able to remove middle molecular
weight toxins from circulating blood. This concept has been successfully tested
at the University of Pittsburgh using septic rat models with our CytoSorb™
polymer, which were based on lipopolysaccharide (a particular kind of toxin,
known as a bacterial endotoxin) and cecal ligation puncture.
Both the
CytoSorb™ and BetaSorb™ devices consist of a cartridge containing adsorbent
polymer beads. The cartridge incorporates industry standard connectors at either
end of the device which connect directly to an extra-corporeal circuit
(bloodlines) on a stand alone basis. The extra-corporeal circuit consists of
plastic tubing through which the blood flows, our cartridge (CytoSorb™ or
BetaSorb™ depending on the condition being treated) containing our adsorbent
polymer beads, pressure monitoring gauges, and a blood pump to maintain blood
flow. The patient’s blood is accessed through a catheter inserted into his or
her veins. The catheter is connected to the extra-corporeal circuit and the
blood pump draws blood from the patient, pumps it through the cartridge and
returns it back to the patient in a closed loop system. As blood passes over the
polymer beads in the cartridge, toxins are adsorbed from the blood, without
filtering any fluids from the blood or the need for replacement fluid or
dialysate.
17
Although
standard dialysis also uses extra-corporeal circuits and blood pumps, the
technology used in dialysis to remove toxins (osmosis and convection) drains
fluids out of the bloodstream in a process called ultrafiltration, and uses
semi-permeable membranes as a filter, allowing the passage of certain sized
molecules across the membrane, but preventing the passage of other, larger
molecules.
MedaSorb’s
technology uses the same extra-corporeal circuits as dialysis, however, our
devices do not rely on membrane technology but instead use an adsorbent of
specified pore size, which controls the size of the molecules which can pass
into the adsorbent. As blood flows over our polymer adsorbent, middle molecules
such as cytokines flow into the polymer adsorbent and are adsorbed. Our devices
do not use semipermeable membranes or dialysate. In addition, our devices do not
remove fluids from the blood like a dialyzer. Accordingly, we believe that our
technology has significant advantages as compared to traditional dialysis
techniques.
Sepsis
Researchers
have explored the potential of using existing membrane-based dialysis technology
to treat patients suffering from sepsis. These techniques are unable to
effectively remove middle molecular weight toxins, which leading researchers
have shown to cause and complicate sepsis. The same experts believe that a blood
purification technique that efficiently removes, or significantly reduces, the
circulating concentrations of such toxins might represent a successful
therapeutic option. We believe that the CytoSorb™ device may have the ability to
remove middle molecular weight toxins from circulating blood.
Medical
research during the past two decades has focused on drug interventions aimed at
chemically blocking or suppressing the function of one or two inflammatory
agents. In hindsight, some researchers now believe this approach has little
chance of significantly improving patient outcomes because of the complex
pathways and multiple chemical factors at play. Clinical studies of these drug
therapies have been largely unsuccessful. An Eli Lilly drug, Xigris®, cleared by
the FDA in November 2001, is the first and only drug to be approved for the
treatment of severe sepsis. Clinical studies demonstrated that use of Xigris®
resulted in an average absolute 6% reduction in 28-day mortality, and an
absolute 13% reduction in 28-day mortality in the most severe sepsis patients.
The drug remains controversial and is considered expensive when compared to the
percentage of patients who benefit.
Pharmaceutical
research for the treatment of sepsis continues with a number of clinical stage
drug trials being presently conducted including, but not limited to, drug and
biologic candidates from Eisai, AM-Pharma B.V., Agennix AG and BTG
plc. Using a medical device to treat sepsis remains a relatively
novel approach for the treatment of sepsis. There are a number of companies that
claim enabling blood purification technology for the treatment of
sepsis. Toray Industries currently markets an endotoxin removal
cartridge called Toraymyxin™ for the treatment of sepsis in Europe and
Japan. To date, it has been used to treat more than 70,000 patients
since 1994. However, the ability of Toraymyxin to remove cytokines,
the key mediators of sepsis, has not been well documented. Spectral
Diagnostics, Inc has obtained exclusive development and commercial rights in the
U.S. for Toraymyxin, with plans to combine the use of its endotoxin activity
assay to create a theranostic product. In March 2010, Spectral
announced plans to conduct a U.S. pivotal study to diagnose endotoxemia and
treat sepsis with this theranostic product. Toraymyxin has not yet been approved
for use in the U.S. Kaneka Corporation currently markets Lixelle™, a
modified porous cellulosic bead, for the removal of beta2–microglobulin
during hemodialysis in Japan. Lixelle has been used in several small
human pilot studies including a 5 patient pilot study in 2002 and a 4 patient
pilot study in 2009. Though these studies correlate Lixelle use with
cytokine reduction, they are not randomized, controlled studies and so do not
control for natural cytokine clearance. To our knowledge, no large,
randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with Lixelle as a treatment
for sepsis. Kaneka has since developed a modified cellulosic resin
called CTR that can also remove cytokines from experimental pre-clinical
systems. To our knowledge, Kaneka has not conducted or published any
study using CTR to treat human sepsis patients. Ube Industries, LTD
is currently developing an adsorbent resin called CF-X for the removal of
cytokines. To our knowledge, Ube has not published any study using
CF-X to treat human sepsis patients. Other potential competitors
include the now defunct Arbios Systems, Inc. Hemolife Medical, Inc. and
Hemocleanse Technologies, LLC. We believe our CytoSorb™ cartridge has
significant competitive, technological, and economic advantages over systems by
these other companies.
Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Surgery
We are
not aware of any practical competitive approaches for removing cytokines in CPB
patients. Alternative therapies such as “off-pump” surgeries are available but
“post-bypass” syndrome and cytokine production still remain a problem in this
less invasive, but more technically challenging procedure. . If
successful, CytoSorb™ is expected to be useful in both on-pump and off-pump
procedures.
Chronic
Dialysis
Although
standard dialysis treatment effectively removes urea and creatinine from the
blood stream (which are normally filtered by functioning kidneys), standard
dialysis has not been effective in removing beta2-microglobulin
toxins from the blood of patients suffering from chronic kidney
failure. High flux dialyzers by Gambro, Fresenius, Nephros and others
are capable of removing some beta2-microglobulin. However,
we believe our technology would significantly improve clearance of this and
other toxins. Kaneka markets Lixelle™ outside the US to remove
beta2-microglobulin
in dialysis patients. We know of no other device, medication or therapy
considered directly competitive with our technology. Research and development in
the field has focused primarily on improving existing dialysis technologies. The
introduction of the high-flux dialyzer in the mid-1980s and the approval of
Amgen’s Epogen™, a recombinant protein used to treat anemia, are the two most
significant developments in the field over the last two decades.
18
Efforts
to improve removal of middle molecular weight toxins with enhanced dialyzer
designs have achieved modest success. Many experts believe that dialyzer
technology has reached its limit in this respect. A variation of high-flux
hemodialysis, known as hemodiafiltration, has existed for many years. However,
due to the complexity, cost and increased risks, this dialysis technique is less
widely used. In addition, many larger toxins are not effectively filtered by
hemodiafiltration, despite its more open pore structure. As a result,
hemodiafiltration is expected to be less efficient in large toxin removal
compared with the BetaSorb™ device. In terms of resin technology, Kaneka
Corporation is the only company currently marketing a resin cartridge (Lixelle)
in Japan designed to address this need.
Treatment of Organ
Dysfunction in Brain-Dead Organ Donors
We are
not aware of any directly competitive products to address the application of our
technology for the mitigation of organ dysfunction and failure resulting from
severe inflammation following brain-death.
Clinical
Studies
Our first
clinical studies were conducted in patients with chronic renal failure. The
health of these patients are challenged by high levels of toxins circulating in
their blood but, unlike sepsis patients, they are not at imminent risk of death.
The toxins involved in chronic renal failure are generally different from those
involved in sepsis, eroding health gradually over time. The treatment of
patients with chronic renal failure is a significant target market for us,
although not the current focus of our efforts and resources. Our clinical
studies and product development work in this application functioned as a low
risk method of evaluating the safety of the technology in a clinical setting,
with direct benefit to the development of the critical care applications on
which we are now focusing our efforts.
The
Company is focusing its research efforts on critical care applications of it
technology. We are currently enrolling patients in a European Sepsis
clinical study.
We
received approval from the German Ethics Committee in October of 2007 to conduct
a clinical study of up to 80 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome
or acute lung injury in the setting of sepsis.
In April
2009, we submitted a protocol revision to expand the options for
anti-coagulation that the clinical sites may use, and to increase the total
number of patients that may be enrolled from 80 to 100 patients. This
revision has been approved by the German Ethics Committee. We believe that the
revised protocol will enable more potential sites to participate in the study,
and may help accelerate patient enrollment through greater access to potential
candidates.
Additionally,
we have updated blood sampling and handling procedures to minimize non-device
related artifacts that may potentially arise if the samples are not processed
appropriately.
By
December 31, 2009 we had initiated and opened for enrollment a total of fourteen
(14) hospital units to participate in our clinical study. To date we
have enrolled sixty (60) patients in the clinical study. We may enroll up to an
additional forty (40) additional patients. In conducting the German
Clinical study we have utilized our CytoSorb™ device in approximately 175
treatments to date with no Serious Adverse Events attributable to the
device.
Depending
on the rate of enrollment, we expect to complete the patient enrollment in the
second half of 2010 to the first quarter of 2011. Concurrent with the clinical
study, we have commenced our preparation for the CE Mark submission process.
Assuming availability of adequate and timely funding, a successful outcome of
the study, and CE Mark regulatory approval, the Company intends to commercialize
its product in Europe.
Because
of the limited studies we have conducted, we are subject to substantial risk
that our technology will have little or no effect on the treatment of any
indications that we have targeted.
Government
Research Grants
Two
government research grants by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Health
and Human Services (HHS) have been awarded to investigators at the University of
Pittsburgh to explore the use of adsorbent polymers in the treatment of sepsis
and organ transplant preservation. Under “SubAward Agreements” with the
University of Pittsburgh, we have been developing polymers for use in these
studies.
A grant
of $1 million was
awarded to the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center in 2003. The project
seeks to improve the quantity and viability of organs donated for transplant by
using CytoSorb™ to detoxify the donor’s blood. The observational and dosing
phases of the study, involving 30 viable donors and eight non-viable donors,
respectively, have been completed. The next phase of this study, the treatment
phase, will involve viable donors. We are not currently focusing our efforts on
the commercialization of CytoSorb™ for application in organ donors. The
treatment phase would be contingent upon further discussion with the FDA and
HRSA regarding study design, as well as obtaining additional
funding.
In
addition, in September 2005, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center was
awarded a grant of approximately $7 million from NIH entitled “Systems
Engineering of a Pheresis Intervention for Sepsis (SEPsIS)” to study the use of
adsorbent polymer technology in the treatment of severe sepsis. The study,
expected to last for a total of five years, commenced in September, 2005 and
remains in progress. Under a SubAward Agreement, we are working with researchers
at the University of Pittsburgh - Critical Care Medicine Department. Currently,
we believe that the only polymers being used in this study are polymers we have
developed specifically for use in the study, which are similar to the polymers
used in our devices. Under the SubAward Agreement, for each of 2006 and 2007, we
received approximately $102,000 for our efforts in support of the grant.
Additionally for 2008 and 2009 we received an approximate $59,000 and $80,000,
respectively for our supporting efforts. We continue to supply UPMC with new
samples based on our adsorbent polymer technology under the same terms as the
initial SubAward Agreement, and expect to do so for the duration of the study.
UPMC has indicated to us that the amount budgeted for our participation under
the study is approximately $65,000, for the final grant period ending September
2010. The amount is subject to change on an annual basis by the NIH,
and our continued participation in the study is subject to our performance and
an annual review by UPMC. These grants represent a substantial research cost
savings to us and demonstrate the strong interest of the medical and scientific
communities in our technology.
19
Regulation
The
medical devices that we manufacture are subject to regulation by numerous
regulatory bodies, including the FDA and comparable international regulatory
agencies. These agencies require manufacturers of medical devices to comply with
applicable laws and regulations governing the development, testing,
manufacturing, labeling, marketing and distribution of medical devices. Devices
are generally subject to varying levels of regulatory control, the most
comprehensive of which requires that a clinical evaluation program be conducted
before a device receives approval for commercial distribution.
In the
European Union, medical devices are required to comply with the Medical Devices
Directive and obtain CE Mark certification in order to market medical devices.
The CE Mark certification, granted following approval from an independent
Notified Body, is an international symbol of adherence to quality assurance
standards and compliance with applicable European Medical Devices Directives.
Distributors of medical devices may also be required to comply with other
foreign regulations such as Ministry of Health Labor and Welfare approval in
Japan. The time required to obtain these foreign approvals to market our
products may be longer or shorter than that required in the U.S., and
requirements for those approvals may differ from those required by the
FDA.
As
discussed above, we intend to initially pursue CE Mark certification for the
CytoSorb™ device in conjunction with German clinical studies before continuing
with the approval process in the United States.
In the
U.S., permission to distribute a new device generally can be met in one of two
ways. The first process requires that a pre-market notification (510(k)
Submission) be made to the FDA to demonstrate that the device is as safe and
effective as, or substantially equivalent to, a legally marketed device that is
not subject to pre-market approval (PMA). A legally marketed device is a device
that (i) was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976, (ii) has
been reclassified from Class III to Class II or I, or (iii) has been
found to be substantially equivalent to another legally marketed device
following a 510(k) Submission. The legally marketed device to which equivalence
is drawn is known as the “predicate” device. Applicants must submit descriptive
data and, when necessary, performance data to establish that the device is
substantially equivalent to a predicate device. In some instances, data from
human clinical studies must also be submitted in support of a 510(k) Submission.
If so, these data must be collected in a manner that conforms with specific
requirements in accordance with federal regulations. The FDA must issue an order
finding substantial equivalence before commercial distribution can occur.
Changes to existing devices covered by a 510(k) Submission which do not
significantly affect safety or effectiveness can generally be made by us without
additional 510(k) Submissions.
The
second process requires that an application for PMA be made to the FDA to
demonstrate that the device is safe and effective for its intended use as
manufactured. This approval process applies to certain Class III devices.
In this case, two steps of FDA approval are generally required before marketing
in the U.S. can begin. First, investigational device exemption (IDE) regulations
must be complied with in connection with any human clinical investigation of the
device in the U.S. Second, the FDA must review the PMA application that
contains, among other things, clinical information acquired under the IDE. The
FDA will approve the PMA application if it finds that there is a reasonable
assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended
purpose.
In the
United States, our CytoSorb™ and BetaSorb™ devices are classified as Class III
(CFR 876.5870—Sorbent Hemoperfusion System) 510(k) devices, but may require
pre-market approval (PMA) by the FDA. In Europe, our devices are
classified as Class IIb, and will conform to the ISO 13485 Quality Standard in
support of our planned applications to obtain CE Mark certification in
Europe.
20
The
process of obtaining clearance to market products is costly and time-consuming
in virtually all of the major markets in which we expect to sell products and
may delay the marketing and sale of our products. Countries around the world
have recently adopted more stringent regulatory requirements, which are expected
to add to the delays and uncertainties associated with new product releases, as
well as the clinical and regulatory costs of supporting those releases. No
assurance can be given that any of our medical devices will be approved on a
timely basis, if at all. In addition, regulations regarding the development,
manufacture and sale of medical devices are subject to future change. We cannot
predict what impact, if any, those changes might have on our business. Failure
to comply with regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Exported
devices are subject to the regulatory requirements of each country to which the
device is exported. Some countries do not have medical device regulations, but
in most foreign countries medical devices are regulated. Frequently, regulatory
approval may first be obtained in a foreign country prior to application in the
U.S. to take advantage of differing regulatory requirements.
Sales
and Marketing
We
currently estimate, provided that we receive adequate and timely funding to
support our planned activities, that our products perform as expected in
clinical studies, and that we obtain CE Mark approval of our CytoSorb™ device in
the treatment of sepsis, that we will commercialize in Europe. We plan to
initiate sales in several European countries, which are known as early adopters
of new medical device technology. These countries primarily include German,
Italy, France, and Spain. We plan to initially operate through local
distributors in each European country where we launch sales operations. Only
after establishment of a limited network of local distributors and actual
generation of sales, will we formulate a broader distribution strategy on a
global basis.
Intellectual
Property and Patent Litigation
The
medical device market in which we primarily participate is in large part
technology driven. As a result, intellectual property rights, particularly
patents and trade secrets, play a significant role in product development and
differentiation. However, intellectual property litigation to defend or create
market advantage is inherently complex, unpredictable and is expensive to
pursue. Litigation often is not ultimately resolved until an appeal process is
completed and appellate courts frequently overturn lower court patent
decisions.
Moreover,
competing parties frequently file multiple suits to leverage patent portfolios
across product lines, technologies and geographies and to balance risk and
exposure between the parties. In some cases, several competitors are parties in
the same proceeding, or in a series of related proceedings, or litigate multiple
features of a single class of devices. These forces frequently drive settlement
not only of individual cases, but also of a series of pending and potentially
related and unrelated cases. In addition, although monetary and injunctive
relief is typically sought, remedies are generally not determined until the
conclusion of the proceedings, and are frequently modified on appeal.
Accordingly, the outcomes of individual cases are difficult to time, predict or
quantify and are often dependent upon the outcomes of other cases in other
forums, both domestic and international.
We rely
on a combination of patents, trademarks, trade secrets and non-disclosure
agreements to protect our intellectual property. We hold 27 U.S. patents, some of
which have foreign counterparts, and additional patent applications pending
worldwide that cover various aspects of our technology. There can be no
assurance that pending patent applications will result in issued patents, that
patents issued to us will not be challenged or circumvented by competitors, or
that such patents will be found to be valid or sufficiently broad to protect our
technology or to provide us with a competitive advantage.
21
We also
rely on non-disclosure and non-competition agreements with employees,
consultants and other parties to protect, in part, trade secrets and other
proprietary technology. There can be no assurance that these agreements will not
be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach, that others
will not independently develop equivalent proprietary information or that third
parties will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets and proprietary
knowledge.
Several
years ago we engaged in discussions with the Dow Chemical Company, which had
indicated a strong interest in being our polymer manufacturer. After a Dow
representative on our Advisory Board resigned, Dow filed and received five
patents naming our former Advisory Board member as an inventor. These patents,
two of which subsequently lapsed for failure to pay maintenance fees, concern
the area of coating high divinylbenzene-content polymers to render them
hemocompatible, and using such coated polymers to treat blood or plasma. In
management’s view the Dow patents improperly incorporate our technology, are
based on our proprietary technology, and should not have been granted to Dow.
While we believe that our own patents would prevent Dow from producing our
products as they are currently envisioned, Dow could attempt to assert its
patents against us. To date, to our knowledge, Dow has not utilized their
patents for the commercial manufacture of products that would be competitive
with us, and we currently have no plans to challenge Dow’s patents. However, the
existence of these Dow patents could result in a potential dispute with Dow in
the future and additional expenses for us.
We may
find it necessary to initiate litigation to enforce our patent rights, to
protect our trade secrets or know-how and to determine the scope and validity of
the proprietary rights of others. Patent litigation can be costly and
time-consuming, and there can be no assurance that our litigation expenses will
not be significant in the future or that the outcome of litigation will be
favorable to us. Accordingly, we may seek to settle some or all of our pending
litigation described below. Settlement may include cross-licensing of the
patents which are the subject of the litigation as well as our other
intellectual property and may involve monetary payments to or from third
parties.
Employees
As of
December 31, 2009, we had seven employees. None of our employees are represented
by a labor union or are subject to collective-bargaining agreements. We believe
that we maintain good relationships with our employees.
22
Item
1A. Risk Factors
An
investment in our Common Stock involves a high degree of risk. You should
carefully consider the risks described below before deciding to purchase shares
of our Common Stock. If any of the events, contingencies, circumstances or
conditions described in the risks below actually occur, our business, financial
condition or results of operations could be seriously harmed. The trading price
of our Common Stock could, in turn, decline and you could lose all or part of
your investment.
RISKS
RELATED TO OUR INDUSTRY AND OUR BUSINESS
We
require additional capital to continue operations.
As of
December 31, 2009 we had cash on hand of $1,595,628, and current liabilities of
$970,765. We will need additional financing in the future in order to
complete our clinical studies and the commercialization of our proposed
products. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in our
capital raising efforts.
Our
long-term capital requirements are expected to depend on many factors,
including:
·
|
continued
progress and cost of our research and development
programs;
|
·
|
progress
with pre-clinical studies and clinical
studies;
|
·
|
the
time and costs involved in obtaining regulatory
clearance;
|
·
|
costs
involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and
enforcing patent claims;
|
·
|
costs
of developing sales, marketing and distribution
channels;
|
·
|
market
acceptance of our products; and
|
·
|
cost
for training physicians and other health care
personnel.
|
In
addition, in the event that additional funds are obtained through arrangements
with collaborative partners or other sources, we may have to relinquish economic
and/or proprietary rights to some of our technologies or products under
development that we would otherwise seek to develop or commercialize by
ourselves.
We currently have no commercial
operations and there can be no assurance that we will be successful in
developing commercial operations.
We are a
development stage company and have been engaged primarily in research and
development activities and have not generated any revenues to date. There can be
no assurance that we will be able to successfully manage the transition to a
commercial enterprise. Potential investors should be aware of the problems,
delays, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by an enterprise in the
early stage of development, which include unanticipated problems relating to
development of proposed products, testing, regulatory compliance, manufacturing,
competition, marketing problems and additional costs and expenses that may
exceed current estimates. Our proposed products will require significant
additional research and testing, and we will need to overcome significant
regulatory burdens prior to commercialization. We will also need to raise
significant additional funds to complete clinical studies and obtain regulatory
approvals before we can begin selling our products. There can be no assurance
that after the expenditure of substantial funds and efforts, we will
successfully develop and commercialize any products, generate any revenues or
ever achieve and maintain a substantial level of sales of our
products.
23
We have a history
of losses and expect to incur substantial future losses, and the report of our
auditor on our consolidated financial statements expresses substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern.
We have
experienced substantial operating losses since inception. As of December 31,
2009, we had an accumulated deficit of $78,902,521, which included net losses of
$2,736,715 for the year ended December 31, 2009 and $3,017,890 for the year
ended December 31, 2008. In part due to these losses, our audited consolidated
financial statements have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going
concern, and the auditors’ report on those financial statements express
substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our losses
have resulted principally from costs incurred in the research and development of
our polymer technology and general and administrative expenses. Because our
predecessor was a limited liability company until December 2005, substantially
all of these losses were allocated to that company’s members and will not be
available for tax purposes to us in future periods. We intend to conduct
significant additional research, development, and clinical study activities
which, together with expenses incurred for the establishment of manufacturing
arrangements and a marketing and distribution presence and other general and
administrative expenses, are expected to result in continuing operating losses
for the foreseeable future. The amount of future losses and when, if ever, we
will achieve profitability are uncertain. Our ability to achieve profitability
will depend, among other things, on successfully completing the development of
our technology and commercial products, obtaining the requisite regulatory
approvals, establishing manufacturing and sales and marketing arrangements with
third parties, and raising sufficient funds to finance our activities. No
assurance can be given that our product development efforts will be successful,
that required regulatory approvals will be obtained, that any of our products
will be manufactured at a competitive cost and will be of acceptable quality, or
that the we will be able to achieve profitability or that profitability, if
achieved, can be sustained.
We depend upon
key personnel who may terminate their employment with us at any
time.
We
currently have only seven employees. Our success will depend to a significant
degree upon the continued services of our key management and advisors,
including, Dr. Phillip Chan, our Chief Executive Officer; David Lamadrid, our
Chief Financial Officer; Vincent Capponi, our Chief Operating Officer and Dr.
Robert Bartlett our Chief Medical Officer, who works with us on a consulting
basis. These individuals do not have long-term employment agreements, and there
can be no assurance that they will continue to provide services to us. In
addition, our success will depend on our ability to attract and retain other
highly skilled personnel. We may be unable to recruit such personnel on a timely
basis, if at all. Management and other employees may voluntarily terminate their
employment with us at any time. The loss of services of key personnel, or the
inability to attract and retain additional qualified personnel, could result in
delays in development or approval of our products, loss of sales and diversion
of management resources.
Our
Chief Medical Officer works with us on a consulting basis.
Our Chief
Medical Officer, Dr. Robert Bartlett, works with us on a consulting
basis. Because of the part time nature of his consulting agreement,
Dr. Bartlett may not always be available to provide us with his services when
needed by us in a timely manner.
Acceptance
of our medical devices in the marketplace is uncertain, and failure to achieve
market acceptance will prevent or delay our ability to generate
revenues.
Our
future financial performance will depend, at least in part, upon the
introduction and customer acceptance of our polymer products. Even if approved
for marketing by the necessary regulatory authorities, our products may not
achieve market acceptance. The degree of market acceptance will depend upon a
number of factors, including:
·
|
the receipt of regulatory
clearance of marketing claims for the uses that we are
developing;
|
·
|
the establishment and
demonstration of the advantages, safety and efficacy of the our polymer
technology;
|
·
|
pricing and reimbursement
policies of government and third-party payers such as insurance companies,
health maintenance organizations and other health plan
administrators;
|
24
·
|
our ability to attract corporate
partners, including medical device companies, to assist in commercializing
our products; and
|
·
|
our ability to market our
products.
|
Physicians,
patients, payers or the medical community in general may be unwilling to accept,
utilize or recommend any of our products. If we are unable to obtain regulatory
approval or commercialize and market our products when planned, we may not
achieve any market acceptance or generate revenue.
Even if
we receive the CE Mark, there can be no assurance that the data from our
clinical studies will be viewed as sufficient by the medical community to
support the purchase of our products in substantial quantities or at
all.
We
may face litigation from third parties claiming that our products infringe on
their intellectual property rights, or seek to challenge the validity of our
patents.
Our
future success is also dependent on the strength of our intellectual property,
trade secrets and know-how, which have been developed from years of research and
development. In addition to the “Purolite” litigation discussed below, we may be
exposed to additional future litigation by third parties seeking to challenge
the validity of our rights based on claims that our technologies, products or
activities infringe the intellectual property rights of others or are invalid,
or that we have misappropriated the trade secrets of others.
Since our
inception, we have sought to contract with large, established manufacturers to
supply commercial quantities of our adsorbent polymers. As a result, we have
disclosed, under confidentiality agreements, various aspects of our technology
with potential manufacturers. We believe that these disclosures, while necessary
for our business, have resulted in the attempt by potential suppliers to assert
ownership claims to our technology in an attempt to gain an advantage in
negotiating manufacturing rights.
We have
previously engaged in discussions with the Brotech Corporation and its
affiliate, Purolite International, Inc. (collectively “Purolite”), which had
demonstrated a strong interest in being our polymer manufacturer. For a period
of time beginning in December 1998, Purolite engaged in efforts to develop and
optimize the manufacturing process needed to produce our polymer products on a
commercial scale. However, the parties eventually decided not to proceed. In
2003, Purolite filed a lawsuit against us asserting, among other things,
co-ownership and co-inventorship of certain of our patents. On September 1,
2006, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
approved a Stipulated Order and Settlement Agreement under which we and Purolite
agreed to the settlement of the action. The Settlement Agreement provides us
with the exclusive right to use our patented technology and proprietary know how
relating to adsorbent polymers for a period of 18 years. Under the terms of the
Settlement Agreement, we have agreed to pay Purolite royalties of 2.5% to 5% on
the sale of certain of our products if and when those products are sold
commercially.
Several
years ago we engaged in discussions with the Dow Chemical Company, which had
indicated a strong interest in being our polymer manufacturer. After a Dow
representative on our Advisory Board resigned, Dow filed and received several
patents naming our former Advisory Board member as an inventor. In management’s
view the Dow patents improperly incorporate our technology and should not have
been granted to Dow. The existence of these Dow patents could result in a
potential dispute with Dow in the future and additional expenses for
us.
We have commenced
the process of seeking regulatory approval of our products, but the approval
process will involve clinical studies and is lengthy and costly. The failure to
obtain government approvals, internationally or domestically, for our polymer
products, or to comply with ongoing governmental regulations could prevent,
delay or limit introduction or sale of our products and result in the failure to
achieve revenues or maintain our operations.
The
manufacturing and marketing of our products will be subject to extensive and
rigorous government regulation in the European market, the United States, in
various states and in other foreign countries. In the United States and other
countries, the process of obtaining and maintaining required regulatory
approvals is lengthy, expensive, and uncertain. There can be no assurance that
we will ever obtain the necessary approvals to sell our products. Even if we do
ultimately receive CE Mark and/or FDA approval for any of our products, we will
be subject to extensive ongoing regulation.
25
Our
products will be subject to international regulation as medical devices under
the Medical Device Directive. In Europe, which we expect to provide the initial
market for our products, the Notified Body and Competent Authority govern, where
applicable, development, clinical studies, labeling, manufacturing,
registration, notification, clearance or approval, marketing, distribution,
record keeping, and reporting requirements for medical devices. Different
regulatory requirements may apply to our products depending on how they are
categorized by the Notified Body under these laws. Current international
regulations classify our CytoSorb™ device (the first product we intend to seek
international approval for) as a Class IIb device. Concurrent with the clinical
trial in Germany, we plan to pursue CE Mark certification of the CytoSorb™
device. There can be no assurance that the clinical studies we conduct will
demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to obtain the required regulatory
approvals for marketing, or that we will be able to comply with international
regulatory requirements. In addition, there can be no assurance that government
regulations applicable to our products or the interpretation of those
regulations will not change. The extent of potentially adverse government
regulation that might arise from future legislation or administrative action
cannot be predicted. There can be no assurances that reimbursement will be
granted or that additional clinical data may be required to establish
reimbursement.
We
have conducted limited clinical studies of our CytoSorb™ and BetaSorb™ device.
Clinical and pre-clinical data is susceptible to varying interpretations, which
could delay, limit or prevent regulatory clearances.
To date,
we have conducted limited clinical studies on our products. Patient enrollment
in our current study has been slower than originally anticipated. The
Company has initiated additional hospital units, but there can be no assurance
that these sites will be able to enroll patients and meet the projected
enrollment. There can be no assurance that we will successfully
complete the clinical studies necessary to receive regulatory approvals. While
studies conducted by us and others have produced results we believe to be
encouraging and indicative of the potential efficacy of our products and
technology, data already obtained, or in the future obtained, from pre-clinical
studies and clinical studies do not necessarily predict the results that will be
obtained from later pre-clinical studies and clinical studies. Moreover,
pre-clinical and clinical data are susceptible to varying interpretations, which
could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. A number of companies in the
medical device and pharmaceutical industries have suffered significant setbacks
in advanced clinical studies, even after promising results in earlier studies.
The failure to adequately demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of an
intended product under development could delay or prevent regulatory clearance
of the device, resulting in delays to commercialization, and could materially
harm our business.
We
rely extensively on research and testing facilities at various universities and
institutions, which could adversely affect us should we lose access to those
facilities.
Although
we have our own research laboratories and clinical facilities, we collaborate
with numerous institutions, universities and commercial entities to conduct
research and studies of our products. We currently maintain a good working
relationship with these parties. However, should the situation change, the cost
and time to establish or locate alternative research and development could be
substantial and delay gaining CE Mark and/or FDA approval and commercializing
our products.
We
are and will be exposed to product liability risks, and clinical and preclinical
liability risks, which could place a substantial financial burden upon us should
we be sued.
Our
business exposes us to potential product liability and other liability risks
that are inherent in the testing, manufacturing and marketing of medical
devices. We cannot be sure that claims will not be asserted against us. A
successful liability claim or series of claims brought against us could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
We cannot
give assurances that we will be able to continue to obtain or maintain adequate
product liability insurance on acceptable terms, if at all, or that such
insurance will provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. Claims
or losses in excess of any product liability insurance coverage that we may
obtain could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
26
Certain
university and other relationships are important to our business and may
potentially result in conflicts of interests.
Dr. John
Kellum and others, are critical care advisors and consultants of ours and are
associated with institutions such as the University of Pittsburgh Medical
Center. Their association with these institutions may currently or in the future
involve conflicting interests in the event they or these institutions enter into
consulting or other arrangements with competitors of ours.
We
have limited manufacturing experience, and once our products are approved, we
may not be able to manufacture sufficient quantities at an acceptable cost, or
without shut-downs or delays.
We remain
in the research and development and clinical study phase of product
commercialization. Accordingly, once our products are approved for commercial
sale, we will need to establish the capability to commercially manufacture our
products in accordance with international regulatory requirements. We have
limited experience in establishing, supervising and conducting commercial
manufacturing. If we or the third-party manufacturers of our products fail to
adequately establish, supervise and conduct all aspects of the manufacturing
processes, we may not be able to commercialize our products.
Due
to our limited marketing, sales and distribution experience, we may be
unsuccessful in our efforts to sell our products.
We expect
to enter into agreements with third parties for the commercial manufacture and
distribution of our products. There can be no assurance that parties we may
engage to market and distribute our products will:
·
|
satisfy their financial or
contractual obligations to
us;
|
·
|
adequately market our products;
or
|
·
|
not offer, design, manufacture or
promote competing products.
|
If for
any reason any party we engage is unable or chooses not to perform its
obligations under our marketing and distribution agreement, we would experience
delays in product sales and incur increased costs, which would harm our business
and financial results.
If
we are unable to convince physicians and other health care providers as to the
benefits of our products, we may incur delays or additional expense in our
attempt to establish market acceptance.
Broad use
of our products may require physicians and other health care providers to be
informed about our products and their intended benefits. The time and cost of
such an educational process may be substantial. Inability to successfully carry
out this education process may adversely affect market acceptance of our
products. We may be unable to educate physicians regarding our products in
sufficient numbers or in a timely manner to achieve our marketing plans or to
achieve product acceptance. Any delay in physician education may materially
delay or reduce demand for our products. In addition, we may expend significant
funds towards physician education before any acceptance or demand for our
products is created, if at all.
The
market for our products is rapidly changing and competitive, and new devices and
drugs, which may be developed by others, could impair our ability to maintain
and grow our business and remain competitive.
The
medical device and pharmaceutical industries are subject to rapid and
substantial technological change. Developments by others may render our
technologies and products noncompetitive or obsolete. We also may be unable to
keep pace with technological developments and other market factors.
Technological competition from medical device, pharmaceutical and biotechnology
companies, universities, governmental entities and others diversifying into the
field is intense and is expected to increase. Many of these entities have
significantly greater research and development capabilities and budgets than we
do, as well as substantially more marketing, manufacturing, financial and
managerial resources. These entities represent significant competition for
us.
27
If
users of our products are unable to obtain adequate reimbursement from
third-party payers, or if new restrictive legislation is adopted, market
acceptance of our products may be limited and we may not achieve anticipated
revenues.
The
continuing efforts of government and insurance companies, health maintenance
organizations and other payers of healthcare costs to contain or reduce costs of
health care may affect our future revenues and profitability, and the future
revenues and profitability of our potential customers, suppliers and
collaborative partners and the availability of capital. For example, in certain
foreign markets, pricing or profitability of medical devices is subject to
government control. In the United States, given recent federal and state
government initiatives directed at lowering the total cost of health care, the
U.S. Congress and state legislatures will likely continue to focus on health
care reform, the cost of medical devices and on the reform of the Medicare and
Medicaid systems. While we cannot predict whether any such legislative or
regulatory proposals will be adopted, the announcement or adoption of these
proposals could materially harm our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
Our
ability to commercialize our products will depend in part on the extent to which
appropriate reimbursement levels for the cost of our products and related
treatment are obtained by governmental authorities, private health insurers and
other organizations, such as health maintenance organizations (“HMOs”).
Third-party payers are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical
care. Also, the trend toward managed health care in the United States and the
concurrent growth of organizations such as HMOs, which could control or
significantly influence the purchase of health care services and medical
devices, as well as legislative proposals to reform health care or reduce
government insurance programs, may all result in lower prices for our products.
The cost containment measures that health care payers and providers are
instituting and the effect of any health care reform could materially harm our
ability to operate profitably.
INVESTMENT
RISKS
Directors,
executive officers and principal stockholders own a significant percentage of
the shares of Common Stock, which will limit your ability to influence corporate
matters.
Our
directors, executive officers and principal stockholders together beneficially
own approximately 26.9% of our outstanding shares of Common Stock. Accordingly,
these stockholders could have a significant influence over the outcome of any
corporate transaction or other matter submitted to stockholders for approval,
including mergers, consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of
our assets and also could prevent or cause a change in control. The interests of
these stockholders may differ from the interests of our other stockholders.
Third parties may be discouraged from making a tender offer or bid to acquire us
because of this concentration of ownership.
Our
Series A Preferred Stock provides for the payment of penalties.
Immediately
following our June 30, 2006 merger, we issued 5,250,000 shares of Series A 10%
Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock with an aggregate stated value of
$5,250,000. We issued an additional 4,895,948 shares of Series A Preferred Stock
through December 31, 2009 to additional investors, as dividends and in
connection with the settlement of amounts owed to certain investors due to our
failure to timely register shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of
Series A Preferred Stock. We will likely issue additional shares of this series
of preferred stock in the future as dividends. The Certificate of Designation
designating the Series A Preferred Stock provides that upon the following
events, among others, the dividend rate with respect to the Series A Preferred
Stock increases to 20% per annum, which dividends would then be required to be
paid in cash:
·
|
the occurrence of
“Non-Registration Events”
|
·
|
an uncured breach by us of any
material covenant, term or condition in the Certificate of Designation or
any of the related transaction documents;
and
|
28
·
|
any money judgment or similar
final process being filed against us for more than
$100,000.
|
In
addition, the registration rights provided for in the subscription agreement we
entered into with the purchasers in this offering:
·
|
required us to file a
registration statement with the SEC on or before 120 days from the closing
to register the shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the
Series A Preferred Stock and exercise of the Warrants, and cause such
registration statement to be effective by February 25, 2007 (240 days
following the closing); and
|
·
|
entitles each of these investors
to liquidated damages in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the
purchase price of the Series A Preferred Stock if we fail to timely file
that registration statement with, or have it declared effective by, the
SEC.
|
Because
the registration statement we agreed to file was not declared effective within
the time required under our agreements with the June 30, 2006 purchasers of the
Series A Preferred Stock, dividends on the shares of Series A Preferred Stock
issued to those purchasers accrued at the rate of 20% per annum from February
26, 2007 until May 7, 2007, the date the registration statement was declared
effective. Additionally during this time period, we were obligated to pay those
purchasers cash dividends and an aggregate of $105,000 per 30-day period from
February 26, 2007 through the date such registration statement was declared
effective. Pursuant to a settlement agreement with the June 30, 2006 purchasers
of Series A Preferred Stock, all cash dividends and damages were paid for in
full with additional shares of Series A Preferred Stock.
The
Certificate of Designation, Subscription Agreement and related transaction
documents also provide for various penalties and fees for breaches or failures
to comply with provisions of those documents, such as the timely payment of
dividends, delivery of stock certificates, and obtaining and maintaining an
effective registration statement with respect to the shares of Common Stock
underlying the Series A Preferred Stock and Warrants sold in the offering. We
may in the future default in our contractual obligations to the holders of our
Series A Preferred Stock, and in such event we may be required to pay liquidated
damages in cash or additional shares of Preferred Stock.
Our
Series B Preferred Stock provides for the payment of penalties.
Immediately
following our June 2008 and August 2008 private placement, we issued a total of
52,931.47 shares of Series B 10% Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock with an
aggregate stated value of $5,293,147. We issued an additional 22,420.96 shares
of Series B Preferred Stock through December 31, 2009 to additional investors,
and as dividends. We will likely issue additional shares of this
series of preferred stock in the future as dividends. The Certificate of
Designation designating the Series B Preferred Stock provides that upon the
following events, among others, the dividend rate with respect to the Series A
Preferred Stock increases to 20% per annum:
·
|
the occurrence of
“Non-Registration Events”
|
·
|
an uncured breach by us of any
material covenant, term or condition in the Certificate of Designation or
any of the related transaction documents;
and
|
29
·
|
any money judgment or similar
final process being filed against us for more than
$100,000.
|
In
addition, the registration rights provided for in the subscription agreement we
entered into with the purchasers in this offering:
·
|
required us to file a
registration statement with the SEC on or before 180 days from the Initial
Closing to register the shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of
the Series B Preferred Stock, and cause such registration statement to be
effective by February 21, 2009 (240 days following the Initial Closing) or
March 23, 2009 if the reasons for delay are solely due to SEC delay;
and
|
·
|
entitles each of these investors
to liquidated damages in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the
purchase price of the Series A Preferred Stock if we fail to timely file
that registration statement with, or have it declared effective by, the
SEC.
|
The
Company has submitted an original S-1 registration statement to the SEC on
December 12, 2008. The SEC has replied with questions and a request
to reduce the number of shares to be registered, which the Company is currently
working on addressing. The Company has received a waiver from a
majority of the Series B holders for the non-registration event and the timing
of the Series B registration does not create a cross-default of the Series A
Preferred Series. There can be no assurance that the Company will
receive such waiver from investors for any future items and no assurance the
Company will still not incur penalties or prevent an Event of Default from
occurring.
The
Certificate of Designation, Subscription Agreement and related transaction
documents also provide for various penalties and fees for breaches or failures
to comply with provisions of those documents, such as the timely payment of
dividends, delivery of stock certificates, and obtaining and maintaining an
effective registration statement with respect to the shares of Common Stock
underlying the Series B Preferred Stock sold in the offering. We may in the
future default in our contractual obligations to the holders of our Series B
Preferred Stock, and in such event we may be required to pay liquidated damages
in cash or additional shares of Preferred Stock.
Anti-Dilution
Provisions Of The Series B Preferred Stock
The
conversion price of the Series B Preferred Stock issued to the June and August
2008 purchasers of our Series B Preferred Stock are subject to anti-dilution
provisions, so that upon future non-excepted issuances of our Common Stock or
equivalents thereof, subject to specified customary exceptions, at a price below
the conversion price of the Series B Preferred Stock, such conversion price will
be reduced on a weighted average basis, further diluting holders of our Common
Stock.
Holders
of the Series B Preferred Stock have priority in the event of our dissolution,
liquidation or winding up.
In the
event of our dissolution, liquidation or winding up, the holders of the Series B
Preferred Stock will receive, in priority over the holders of the Series A
Preferred Stock and Common Stock, a liquidation preference. Therefore, it is
possible that holders of Series A Preferred Stock and Common Stock will not
obtain any upon our dissolution, liquidation or winding up.
Penny Stock Regulations May Affect
Your Ability To Sell Our Common Stock.
To the
extent the price of our Common Stock remains below $5.00 per share, our Common
Stock will be subject to Rule 15g-9 under the Exchange Act, which imposes
additional sales practice requirements on broker dealers which sell these
securities to persons other than established customers and accredited investors.
Under these rules, broker-dealers who recommend penny stocks to persons other
than established customers and "accredited investors" must make a special
written suitability determination for the purchaser and receive the purchaser's
written agreement to a transaction prior to sale. Unless an exception is
available, the regulations require the delivery, prior to any transaction
involving a penny stock, of a disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock
market and the associated risks. The additional burdens imposed upon
broker-dealers by these requirements could discourage broker-dealers from
effecting transactions in our Common Stock and may make it more difficult for
holders of our Common Stock to sell shares to third parties or to otherwise
dispose of them.
30
Our
Board of Directors may, without stockholder approval, issue and fix the terms of
shares of preferred stock and issue additional shares of common stock adversely
affecting the rights of holders of our common stock.
Our
certificate of incorporation authorizes the issuance of up to 100,000,000 shares
of “blank check” preferred stock, with such designation rights and preferences
as may be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors. We have
designated 12,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 200,000 shares of
Series B Preferred Stock as described above. Subject to the rights of the
holders of the Series A and Series B Preferred Stock, our Board of
Directors is empowered, without stockholder approval, to issue up to 87,800,000
additional shares of preferred stock with dividend, liquidation, conversion,
voting or other rights, which could adversely affect the rights of the holders
of our common stock. In addition, our certificate of incorporation authorizes
the issuance of up to 500,000,000 shares of common stock, of which approximately
433,625,000 shares remain available for issuance and may be issued by us without
stockholder approval. Issuances of additional shares of common stock and/or
preferred stock may be utilized as a method of discouraging, delaying or
preventing a change in control of our company.
Our
Charter Documents and Nevada Law May Inhibit A Takeover That Stockholders May
Consider Favorable.
Provisions
in our articles of incorporation and bylaws, and Nevada law, could delay or
prevent a change of control or change in management that would provide
stockholders with a premium to the market price of their Common Stock. The
authorization of undesignated preferred stock, for example, gives our board the
ability to issue preferred stock with voting or other rights or preferences that
could impede the success of any attempt to effect a change in control of us, or
otherwise adversely affect holders of Common Stock in relation to holders of
preferred stock.
Compliance
with changing corporate governance and public disclosure regulations may result
in additional expense.
Keeping
abreast of, and in compliance with, changing laws, regulations and standards
relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, new SEC regulations will require an increased amount
of management attention and external resources. In addition, prior to the
merger, our current management team was not subject to these laws and
regulations, as MedaSorb was a private corporation. We intend to continue to
invest all reasonably necessary resources to comply with evolving standards,
which may result in increased general and administrative expense and a diversion
of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to
compliance activities.
Our
Common Stock is thinly traded on the OTC Bulletin Board, and we may be unable to
obtain listing of our common stock on a more liquid market.
Our
Common Stock is quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, which provides significantly
less liquidity than a securities exchange (such as the American or New York
Stock Exchange) or an automated quotation system (such as the Nasdaq Stock
Market). There is uncertainty that we will ever be accepted for a listing on an
automated quotation system or securities exchange.
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved Staff
Comments.
|
There is
no reporting requirement under this item for a smaller reporting
company.
Item 2.
|
Properties.
|
We
currently operate a facility near Princeton, New Jersey with approximately 7,375
sq. ft, housing research laboratories, clinical manufacturing operations and
administrative offices, under a lease agreement, which expires in February 2011.
In the opinion of management, the leased properties are adequately insured, are
in good condition and suitable for the conduct of our business. We also
collaborate with numerous institutions, universities and commercial entities who
conduct research and testing of our products at their facilities.
31
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings.
|
Except
for proceedings noted below, the Company is currently not involved, but may at
times be involved in various claims and legal actions. Management is currently
of the opinion that these claims and legal actions would have no merit, and
any ultimate outcome will not have a material adverse impact on the
consolidated financial position of the Company and/or the results of its
operations.
In
February 2008, Alkermes, Inc. commenced an action against us in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging that our use
of the name MedaSorb infringes on Alkermes’ registered trademark “MEDISORB.” In
the action, Alkermes sought an injunction against our further use of the name
MedaSorb. Pursuant to a Settlement Agreement dated June 18, 2008, to avoid
any potential confusion with Alkermes’ similarly named product, the Company has
ceased using the “MedaSorb” name in its wholly-owned subsidiary, through which
the Company conducts all of its operational activities, and renamed our
operating subsidiary CytoSorbents, Inc. as of November 2008. The Company
has also filed to change the name of the parent company from MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation to CytoSorbents Corporation.
Item 4.
|
Submission of Matters to a Vote
of Security Holders.
|
The
Company is seeking to change its corporate name from MedaSorb Technologies
Corporation to CytoSorbents Corporation. On February 17, 2009, the
Company received written consents in lieu of a meeting of Stockholders from
holders of approximately 160,630,327 shares, which include holders of Series B
Preferred Stock who vote on an as-converted basis. The holders of
these shares representing approximately 62.7% of the Company’s then total voting
stock equal to approximately 256,000,000 shares. The Company is in
the process of filing the required documents to finalize the name change and
will request a new ticker symbol.
PART
II
Item 5.
|
Market for Registrant’s Common
Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities.
|
Market
Information
Our
Common Stock trades in the over-the-counter-market on the OTC Bulletin Board
under the symbol “MSBT.” Our Common Stock began trading on such market on August
9, 2006. The quotations listed below reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail
mark-ups, mark-downs or commissions and may not necessarily represent actual
transactions.
Price
|
||||||||
High
|
Low
|
|||||||
2006
|
||||||||
Third
quarter (from August 9)
|
$
|
3.95
|
$
|
1.25
|
||||
Fourth
quarter
|
$
|
1.73
|
$
|
0.57
|
||||
2007
|
||||||||
First
quarter
|
$
|
2.85
|
$
|
1.04
|
||||
Second
quarter
|
$
|
1.45
|
$
|
0.40
|
||||
Third
quarter
|
$
|
0.63
|
$
|
0.16
|
||||
Fourth
quarter
|
$
|
0.44
|
$
|
0.14
|
||||
2008
|
||||||||
First
quarter
|
$
|
0.32
|
$
|
0.15
|
||||
Second
quarter
|
$
|
0.23
|
$
|
0.10
|
||||
Third
quarter
|
$
|
0.20
|
$
|
0.07
|
||||
Fourth
quarter
|
$
|
0.17
|
$
|
0.03
|
2009
|
||||||||
First
quarter
|
$
|
0.21
|
$
|
0.08
|
||||
Second
quarter
|
$
|
0.16
|
$
|
0.05
|
||||
Third
quarter
|
$
|
0.20
|
$
|
0.04
|
||||
Fourth
quarter
|
$
|
0.44
|
$
|
0.13
|
The
number of holders of record for our Common Stock as of December 31, 2009 was
approximately 330. This number excludes individual stockholders holding stock
under nominee security position listings.
Dividend
Policy
We have
not paid any cash dividends on our Common Stock and do not anticipate declaring
or paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. In addition, the terms
of our Series A Preferred Stock prohibit the payment of dividends on our Common
Stock. Nonetheless, the holders of our Common Stock are entitled to dividends
when and if declared by our board of directors from legally available
funds.
32
EQUITY
COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION
The
following table summarizes outstanding options as of December 31, 2009, after
giving effect to the merger and subsequent grants. The Registrant had no
options outstanding prior to the merger, and all of the options below were
issued either in connection with the merger to former option holders of MedaSorb
or subsequently as new grants to employees, directors, and
consultants.
|
Number of securities to be
issued upon exercise of
outstanding options
|
Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options
|
Number of securities remaining
available for future issuance under
equity compensation plans
(excluding securities reflected in
first column)
|
|||||||||
Equity
compensation
plans
approved
by stockholders
|
0 | n/a | 400,000 | (1) | ||||||||
Equity
compensation plans not approved by stockholders
|
23,577,704 | $ | 0.84 | 16,422,296 | (2) | |||||||
Total
|
23,577,704 | (3) | $ | 0.84 | (3) | 16,822,296 |
(1)
|
Represents options that may be
issued under our 2003 Stock Option
Plan.
|
(2)
|
Represents the unadjusted number
of options that may be issued under our 2006 Long-Term Incentive
Plan. The options available under the pool may be increased to
maintain 15% of the fully diluted share count as
needed.
|
(3)
|
Represents options to purchase
(i) 118,667 shares of Common Stock at a price of $41.47 per share, (ii)
232,051 shares of Common Stock at a price of $31.52 per share, (iii)
35,488 shares of Common Stock at a price of $21.57 per share, (iv)
15,944 shares of Common Stock at a price of $19.91 per share, (v) 439,740
shares of Common Stock at a price of $6.64 per share, (vi) 173,000 shares
of Common Stock at a price of $1.90 per share, (vii) 306,000 shares of
Common Stock at a price of $1.65 per share, (viii) 400,000 shares of
Common Stock at a price of $1.26 per share, (ix) 166,756 shares of Common
Stock at a price of $1.25 per share, (x) 3,014,000 shares of Common Stock
at a price of $0.25, (xi) 137,622 shares of Common Stock at a price of
$0.22, (xii) 2,365,000 shares of Common Stock at a price of $0.168, (xiii)
300,000 shares of Common Stock at a price of $0.166, (xiv) 2,753,858
shares of Common Stock at a price of $0.084, (xv) 115,000 shares of Common
Stock at a price of $0.08, and (xvi) 13,004,578 shares of Common Stock at
a price of $0.035.
|
Item 6.
|
Selected Financial
Data.
|
Not
required by smaller reporting companies.
Item 7.
|
Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
Reverse
Merger
On June
30, 2006, pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger, by and among us (formerly
known as Gilder Enterprises, Inc.), MedaSorb Technologies, Inc., a Delaware
corporation and MedaSorb Acquisition Inc., a newly formed wholly-owned Delaware
subsidiary of ours, MedaSorb Technologies, Inc. merged with MedaSorb Acquisition
Inc. (now known as CytoSorbents, Inc.), and the stockholders of MedaSorb
Technologies, Inc. became our stockholders. CytoSorbents, Inc. is now a wholly
owned subsidiary of ours, and its business is now our only
business.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. We believe
the following critical accounting policies have significant effect in the
preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Development
Stage Corporation
The
Company’s consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance
with the provisions of accounting and reporting by development stage
enterprises.
Patents
Legal
costs incurred to establish patents are capitalized. When patents are issued,
capitalized costs are amortized on the straight-line method over the related
patent term. In the event a patent is abandoned, the net book value of the
patent is written off.
Research
and Development
All
research and development costs, payments to laboratories and research
consultants are expensed when incurred.
33
Stock
Based-Compensation
The
Company accounts for its stock-based compensation under the recognition
requirements of accounting standards for accounting for stock-based
compensation, for employees and directors whereby each option granted is valued
at fair market value on the date of grant. Under these accounting standards, the
fair value of each option is estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model.
The
Company also follows the guidance of accounting standards for accounting for
equity instruments that are issued to other than employees for acquiring, or in
conjunction with selling, goods or services for equity instruments issued to
consultants.
Determination
of Fair Value for Stock Dividend and Stock Based Compensation
The
Company has estimated the fair value of any shares issued as stock dividends or
stock based compensation based upon the last completed financing transaction
involving the underlying common shares, which occurred in June
2008.
Effects
of Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In
December 2007, the FASB issued an amendment to an existing accounting standard,
which provides guidance related to business combinations. The amendment retains
its fundamental requirements that the acquisition method of accounting be used
for all business combinations and for an acquirer to be identified for each
business combination. This amendment also establishes principles and
requirements for how the acquirer: a) recognizes and measures in its financial
statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any
non-controlling interest in the acquiree; b) recognizes and measures the
goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase
and c) determines what information to disclose to enable users of the financial
statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business
combination. This amendment will apply prospectively to business combinations
for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. An entity may not
apply it before that date. The provisions of this amendment did not have a
significant impact on the Company's statements of operations or financial
position.
In March
2008, the FASB issued a new accounting standard which provides guidance related
to disclosures about derivative instruments and hedging activities and amends an
existing accounting standard to expand the disclosure requirements to provide
greater transparency about (i) how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments, (ii) how derivative instruments and related hedge items are
accounted for and its related interpretations, and (iii) how derivative
instruments and related hedged items affect an entity's financial position,
results of operations and cash flows. To meet those objectives, the new
accounting standard requires qualitative disclosures about objectives and
strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value
amounts of gains and losses on derivative instruments and disclosures about
credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative agreements. The new
accounting standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning
after November 15, 2008. The provisions of the new accounting standard did not
have a significant impact on the Company's statements of operations or financial
position.
In May
2009, the FASB issued a new accounting standard related to subsequent events,
which provides guidance on events that occur after the balance sheet date but
prior to the issuance of the financial statements. The new accounting standard
distinguishes events requiring recognition in the financial statements and those
that may require disclosure in the financial statements. Furthermore, the new
accounting standard requires disclosure of the date through which subsequent
events were evaluated. The new accounting standard is effective for interim and
annual periods after June 15, 2009. The Company adopted the new accounting
standard for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, and have evaluated subsequent
events through April 9, 2010.
In June
2009, the FASB issued a new accounting standard, which provides guidance related
to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles – a replacement of a previously issued standard.
The new accounting standard stipulates the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification is the source of authoritative U.S. GAAP recognized by the FASB to
be applied by nongovernmental entities. The new accounting standard is effective
for financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after
September 15, 2009. The implementation of this standard did not have a material
impact on the Company’s statements of operations or financial
position.
34
PLAN
OF OPERATIONS
We are a
development stage company and expect to remain so for at least the next several
quarters. We have not generated revenues to date and do not expect to do so
until we commercialize and receive the necessary regulatory approvals to sell
our proposed products. We will seek to commercialize a blood purification
technology that efficiently removes middle molecular weight toxins from
circulating blood and physiologic fluids.
We are
focusing our efforts on the commercialization of our CytoSorb™
product. The first indication for CytoSorb™ will be in the adjunctive
treatment of sepsis (bacterial infection of the blood), which causes systematic
inflammatory response syndrome. CytoSorb™ has been designed to prevent or reduce
the accumulation of high concentrations of cytokines in the bloodstream
associated with sepsis. It is intended for short term use as an adjunctive
device to the standard treatment of sepsis. To date, we have manufactured the
CytoSorb™ device on a limited basis for testing purposes, including for use in
clinical studies. We believe that current state of the art blood purification
technology (such as dialysis) is incapable of effectively clearing the toxins
intended to be adsorbed by our CytoSorb™ device.
Following
the sepsis indication, we intend to continue our research in other acute
conditions where CytoSorb™ has indicated potential in preliminary studies to
prevent or reduce the accumulation of cytokines in the bloodstream. These
conditions include the prevention of post-operative complications of cardiac
surgery (cardiopulmonary bypass surgery) and damage to organs donated for
transplant prior to organ harvest. We are also exploring the potential benefits
the CytoSorb™ device may have in removing drugs from blood.
In
December 2006, we submitted a proposed pilot study for approval to the FDA with
respect to our CytoSorb™ device. In the first quarter of 2007, we received
approval from the FDA to conduct a limited study of five patients in the
adjunctive treatment of sepsis. Based on management’s belief that proceeding
with the approved limited study would add at least one year to the approval
process for the United States, we made a determination to focus our efforts on
obtaining regulatory approval in Europe before proceeding with the
FDA.
We
estimate that the market potential in Europe for our products is substantially
equivalent to that in the U.S. Given the opportunity to conduct a much larger
clinical study in Europe, and management’s belief that the path to a CE Mark
should be faster than FDA approval, we have targeted Europe as the introductory
market for our CytoSorb™ product. In July 2007 we prepared and filed a request
for a clinical trial with a German Central Ethics Committee. We received
approval of the final study design in October of 2007.
We are
currently approved by the German Ethics Committee to conduct a clinical study of
up to 100 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury
in the setting of sepsis. The primary endpoint of our clinical trial
is cytokine reduction and is the basis of a planned CE Mark application to
approve our device for clinical use in Europe.
After
reviewing the initial cytokine data from the first 22 patients enrolled in our
original protocol, our medical advisors recommended revisions to our protocol to
minimize non-device related artifacts that may potentially arise if the samples
are not processed or handled appropriately. The revisions to the
protocol also include a provision for testing of our targeted endpoints in
plasma instead of serum, changes in cytokine processing and analysis, additional
options for anti-coagulation that the clinical sites may use, and an increase in
the number of patients we may enroll into the study from 80 to
100.
These
changes are intended to optimize the accuracy of our cytokine data for CE Mark
submission. The proposed protocol changes and rationale for change
were submitted to the German Ethics Committee and approved. Given
these changes, cytokine data will not be statistically comparable between these
first 22 patients and those enrolled subsequently in the
study. While the company will continue to review all patient
data in the aggregate, including secondary and exploratory endpoints, the
primary use of the data from the first 22 patients will be used to support the
planned CE Mark application from a safety perspective. Cytokine
data from all patients enrolled subsequent to these first 22 patients, as well
as safety data on all patients enrolled in the study, will be used for
submission to the CE Mark authority.
While we
are currently observing an improvement in our enrollment rate, to date patient
enrollment has been slower than originally anticipated. The
Company has taken a number of steps to improve recruitment, the most significant
of which is the increase in the number of our clinical trial
sites. With more sites actively seeking to enroll patients, we expect
the patient enrollment rate to continue to increase going forward.
By
December 31, 2009 we had initiated and opened for enrollment a total of fourteen
(14) hospital units to participate in our clinical study. To date the
Company has enrolled sixty (60) patients in the clinical
study. We may enroll up to an additional forty (40)
patients. In conducting the German Clinical study we have utilized our
CytoSorb™ device in approximately 175 treatments to date with no Serious Adverse
Events attributable to the device.
Depending
on the rate of enrollment, we expect to complete the patient enrollment between
the second half of 2010 to the first quarter of 2011. Concurrent with the
clinical study, we have commenced our preparation for the CE Mark submission
process. Assuming availability of adequate and timely funding, a successful
outcome of the study, and CE Mark regulatory approval, the Company intends to
commercialize its product in Europe.
The
clinical protocol for our European clinical study has been designed to allow us
to gather information to support future U.S. studies. In the event we receive
the CE Mark and are able to successfully commercialize our products in the
European market, we will review our plans for the United States to determine
whether to conduct clinical trials in support of 510(k) or PMA registration. No
assurance can be given that our proposed CytoSorb™ product will work as intended
or that we will be able to obtain CE Mark (or FDA) approval to sell CytoSorb™.
Even if we ultimately obtain CE Mark approval, because we cannot control the
timing of responses from regulators to our submissions, there can be no
assurance as to when such approval will be obtained.
35
Results
of Operations
Our
research and development costs were $1,961,960 and $1,983,483 for the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We have experienced substantial
operating losses since inception. As of December 31, 2009, we had an accumulated
deficit of $78,902,521, which included net losses of $2,736,715 and $3,017,890
for the years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 respectively.
Historically, our losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in the
research and development of our polymer technology, and general and
administrative expenses, which together were $2,719,410 and $2,892,855 for the
years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 respectively. Legal,
financial, and other consulting costs were $307,952 and $351,357 for the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Interest
(income) expense, net, in the amounts of $8,142 and $22,207 include interest and
dividend income in the amounts of $10,484 and $25,162 for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Since
inception, our operations have been financed through the private placement of
our debt and equity securities. At December 31, 2009, we had cash on hand of
$1,595,628 and current liabilities of $970,765. Our cash at December
31, 2009 includes proceeds of approximately $1.33 million from investors who
exercised their warrants for additional shares of Series B Preferred
Stock. In January 2010 we received approximately $299,000 as
proceeds from the sale during 2009 of our Net Operating Losses as part of a
State sponsored program. In January 2010 the Company issued a
12-month Promissory Note in the principal amount of $172,500, which bears
interest at the rate of 5% per annum, which is further described in Note 11 to
the consolidated financial statements.
We
believe that we have sufficient cash to fund our operations into the third
quarter of 2010, following which we will need additional funding before we can
complete our clinical studies and commercialize our products. We will
continue to seek funding for the long term needs of the Company. There can be no
assurance that financing will be available on acceptable terms or at all. If
adequate funds are unavailable, we may have to suspend, delay or eliminate one
or more of our research and development programs or product launches or
marketing efforts or cease operations.
This
Annual Report have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going concern,
and the auditors’ report on those financial statements expresses substantial
doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
Item
7A. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Not
required by smaller reporting companies.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary
Data.
The
Financial Statements and Notes thereto can be found beginning on page F-1,
"Index to Financial Statements," at the end of this Form 10-K.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with
Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
None.
Item
9A(T). Controls and Procedures.
An
evaluation was performed, under the supervision of, and with the participation
of, our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-(e) to the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934). Based on that evaluation, our management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, concluded
that our disclosure controls and procedures were adequate and effective, as of
December 31, 2009, to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in
the reports that we file or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods
specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated
and communicated to management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
36
There has
not been any changes in our internal controls over financial reporting that
occurred during our fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal
control over financial reporting.
In 2009,
management conducted tests of our internal controls over financial reporting in
accordance with the standards set forth by the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (“SEC”). In accordance with these standards, management
assessed and tested, on a sample basis, the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting according to a comprehensive risk analysis using the
Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). It is management’s opinion
that the testing methodology of the internal control framework is appropriate
and provides reasonable assurance as to the integrity and reliability of our
internal controls over financial reporting.
In
management’s opinion, based on the assessment completed as at December 31,
2009, our internal controls over financial reporting are operating
effectively.
This
annual report does not include an audit report of the Company’s registered
public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial
reporting. Management’s report was not subject to audit by the
Company’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the
SEC that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this annual
report.
Item
9B. Other Information.
Not
Applicable.
PART
III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and
Control Persons; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange
Act.
Directors
and Executive Officers
The
following table sets forth our directors and executive officers, their ages and
the positions they hold:
Name
|
Age
|
Position
|
||
Phillip
Chan, MD
|
39
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer, Director
|
||
Al
Kraus
|
65
|
Chairman
of the Board
|
||
Joseph
Rubin, Esq.
|
71
|
Director
|
||
Edward
R. Jones, MD, MBA
|
61
|
Director
|
||
James
Gunton
|
43
|
Director
|
||
Vincent
Capponi
|
52
|
Chief
Operating Officer
|
||
David
Lamadrid
|
39
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
||
Robert
Bartlett, MD
|
70
|
Chief
Medical Officer
|
Phillip Chan, MD, PhD. Dr.
Chan became a director of MedaSorb in 2008 and since January 2009 is also Chief
Executive Officer. Prior to MedaSorb, Dr. Chan led healthcare and life science
investments as Partner for the NJTC Venture Fund. Dr. Chan co-founded
Andrew Technologies, a medical device company developing novel surgical
instruments for plastic surgery and continues as a Board Director. He is a
Board-certified Internal Medicine physician with a strong background in clinical
medicine and research. Dr. Chan received his MD and PhD from the Yale University
School of Medicine and completed his Internal Medicine residency at Beth Israel
Deaconess Medical Center at Harvard. He also holds a BS in cell and molecular
biology from Cornell University.
37
Al Kraus.
Mr. Kraus has been a director of MedaSorb since 2003 and up until the end
of 2008 was the Company’s President and CEO. Mr. Kraus currently
serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors. Mr. Kraus has more than
twenty-five years’ experience managing companies in the dialysis, medical device
products, personal computer and custom software industries. Prior to joining us,
from 2001 to 2003, Mr. Kraus was President and CEO of NovoVascular Inc., an
early stage company developing coated stent technology. From 1996 to 1998, Mr.
Kraus was President and CEO of Althin Healthcare and from 1998 to 2000, of
Althin Medical Inc., a manufacturer of products for the treatment of end stage
renal disease. While CEO of Althin, he provided strategic direction and
management for operations throughout the Americas. From 1979 to 1985, Mr. Kraus
was U.S. Subsidiary Manager and Chief Operating Officer of Gambro Inc., a
leading medical technology and healthcare company. Mr. Kraus was the Chief
Operating Officer of Gambro when it went public in the United States in an
offering led by Morgan Stanley.
Joseph Rubin,
Esq. Mr.
Rubin became a director of MedaSorb in 1997. Mr. Rubin is a founder and Senior
Partner of, Rubin & Bailin, LLP an international and domestic corporate and
commercial law firm in New York City, where he has practiced law since 1986. Mr.
Rubin also teaches at the Columbia University School of International and Public
Affairs, where he is also Executive Director of the International Technical
Assistance Program for Public Affairs (ITAP). Mr. Rubin was Adjunct Professor at
the Columbia University Graduate School of Business from 1973 to 1994, and
taught at Columbia Law School in 1996. Mr. Rubin received his law degree from
Harvard Law School, and his B.A., MIA, and M.Phil degrees in political science
and international relations from Columbia University.
Edward R. Jones,
MD, MBA. Dr.
Jones has been a director of ours since April 2007. Dr. Jones is an attending
physician at the Albert Einstein Medical Center and Chestnut Hill Hospital as
well as Clinical Professor of Medicine at Temple University Hospital. Dr. Jones
has published or contributed to the publishing of 30 chapters, articles, and
abstracts on the subject of treating kidney-related illnesses. He is a
sixteen-year member of the Renal Physicians Association, the Philadelphia County
Medical Society and a past board member of the National Kidney Foundation of the
Delaware Valley. Dr. Jones is also the President of the Renal Physicians
Association.
James Gunton. Mr. Gunton
became a director of MedaSorb in 2008. He is a cofounder of the NJTC Venture
Fund. Mr. Gunton has been investing in privately-held growth technology
companies for fifteen years. Before co-founding in 2001 the $80 million NJTC
Venture Fund, Jim was a manager at Oracle Corporation in the Silicon Valley. He
represents NJTC Venture Fund at nine portfolio companies and is a former
Governor of the National Association of Small Business Investment Companies. Jim
earned a BS from Stanford University and an MBA with distinction from Duke
University.
Vincent
Capponi. Mr. Capponi joined MedaSorb as Vice President of Operations in
2002 and became its Chief Operating Officer in July 2005. He has more than 20
years of management experience in medical device, pharmaceutical and imaging
equipment at companies including Upjohn, Sims Deltec and Sabratek. Prior to
joining MedaSorb in 2002, Mr. Capponi held several senior management positions
at Sabratek and its diagnostics division GDS, and was interim president of GDS
diagnostics in 2001. From 1998 to 2000, Mr. Capponi was Senior Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer for Sabratek and Vice President Operations from 1996
to 1998. He received his MS in Chemistry and his BS in Chemistry and
Microbiology from Bowling Green State University.
David
Lamadrid. Mr. Lamadrid has been with MedaSorb since 2000 and has
served as its Chief Financial Officer since October 2002. He has over 17 years
of business experience in finance and operations. Prior to joining MedaSorb in
2000, Mr. Lamadrid was a financial analyst at Chase Manhattan Bank working in
the Middle Market Banking Group. Mr. Lamadrid received his MBA from New York
University, a BS in Finance from St. John’s University, and an AAS in Accounting
from S.U.N.Y. Rockland.
38
Robert Bartlett,
MD. Dr. Bartlett became our Chief Medical Officer in January
2009. He is Professor Emeritus of Surgery at the University of
Michigan Health System. Prior to becoming Professor Emeritus in 2005,
Dr. Bartlett was Director of the Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Chief of the
Trauma/Clinical Care Division and Director of the Extracorporeal Life Support
Program at the University of Michigan Medical Center. Dr. Bartlett
was the pioneer in the development of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
machine (ECMO), used to oxygenate blood in critically ill patients
worldwide. He received his MD from the University of Michigan Medical
School, cum laude. He completed his general surgery residency at
Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston, and was Chief resident in thoracic
surgery. Dr. Bartlett was also a NIH Trainee in Academic Surgery at
Harvard Medical School, and was previously faculty at the University of
California, Irvine. Dr. Bartlett is the recipient of 26 separate
research grants, 14 from the National Institute of Health, including an RO1
grant for the development of a totally artificial lung. He has also
received numerous national and international awards for his contributions to
critical care medicine.
Section
16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
The
members of our Board of Directors, our executive officers and persons who hold
more than 10% of our outstanding Common Stock are subject to the reporting
requirements of Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, which requires them to file
reports with respect to their ownership of our Common Stock and their
transactions in such Common Stock. Based solely upon a review of Forms 3 and 4
and amendments filed with the SEC by persons subject to the reporting
requirements of Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, we believe that, all
reporting requirements under Section 16(a) for the 2008 fiscal year were met in
a timely manner by our directors, executive officers and beneficial owners of
more than 10% of our Common Stock.
Code
of Conduct
We
maintain a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that is applicable to all of our
employees, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
and our directors. The Code of Conduct, which satisfies the requirements of a
“code of ethics” under applicable SEC rules, contains written standards that are
designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote honest and ethical conduct,
including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest;
full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable public disclosures and
communications, including financial reporting; compliance with applicable laws,
rules and regulations; prompt internal reporting of violations of the code; and
accountability for adherence to the code.
Audit
Committee Financial Expert
The Board
of Directors does not have an Audit Committee, and therefore does not have an
“audit committee financial expert,” as such term is defined in Item 401(h)(2) of
Regulation S-K.
Item 11. Executive
Compensation.
Summary
Compensation Table
The
following table shows for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, compensation
awarded to or paid to, or earned by, our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief
Operating Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and our Chief Medical Officer
(the “Named Executive Officers”).
39
Name and Principal
Position
|
Year
|
Salary
($)
|
Bonus
($)
|
Option
Awards (1)
($)
|
Total ($)
|
|||||||||||||
Phillip
Chan
|
||||||||||||||||||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
2009
|
216,351 | -0- | 12,971 | (2) | 229,322 | ||||||||||||
Vincent
Capponi,
|
||||||||||||||||||
Chief
Operating Officer
|
2009
|
205,303 | 200 | 510 | (3) | 206,013 | ||||||||||||
2008
|
195,527 | 150 | 155,795 | (4) | 351,472 | |||||||||||||
2007
|
195,527 | -0- | -0- | 195,527 | ||||||||||||||
David
Lamadrid,
|
||||||||||||||||||
Chief
Financial Officer
|
2009
|
189,992 | (9) | 200 | 510 | (5) | 190,702 | |||||||||||
2008
|
157,630 | 150 | 196,555 | (6) | 354,335 | |||||||||||||
2007
|
145,801 | -0- | 137,781 | (7) | 283,582 | |||||||||||||
Dr.
Robert Bartlett
|
||||||||||||||||||
Chief
Medical Officer
|
2009
|
50,000 | -0- | 73 | (8) | 50,073 |
(1)
|
The value of option awards
granted to the Named Executive Officers has been estimated pursuant to
recognition requirements of accounting standards for accounting for
stock-based compensation for the options described in the
footnotes below, except that for purposes of this table, we have assumed
that none of the options will be forfeited. The Named Executive Officers
will not realize the estimated value of these awards in cash until these
awards are vested and exercised or sold. For information regarding our
valuation of option awards, see “Stock-Based Compensation” in Note 2 of
our financial statements for the period ended December 31,
2009.
|
(2)
|
Reflects options to purchase
2,503,858 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.084 per share,
which were granted on January 8, 2009 and expire on January 8, 2019. This
option vested and became exercisable as to 1,251,929 shares on the date of
grant, and vested and became exercisable as to 1,251,929 shares on January
8, 2010.
|
(3)
|
Reflects options to purchase
400,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.168 per share,
which were granted on January 28, 2009 and expire on January 28, 2019.
This option vested and became exercisable as to 100,000 shares on the date
of grant, vested and became exercisable as to 100,000 shares on January
28, 2010, vests and becomes exercisable as to 100,000 shares on January
28, 2011, and vests and becomes exercisable as to 100,000 shares on
January 28, 2012.
|
(4)
|
Reflects options to purchase
1,100,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.25 per share,
which were granted on January 16, 2008 and expire on January 16, 2018.
This option vested and became exercisable as to 366,666 shares on the date
of grant, vested and became exercisable as to 366,667 shares on January
16, 2009; and vested and became exercisable as to 366,667 shares on
January 16, 2010. Reflects options to purchase 2,250,000 shares
of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.035 per share, which were
granted on June 25, 2008 and expire on June 25, 2018. This option vested
and became exercisable as to 562,500 shares on the date of grant, vested
and became exercisable as to 562,500 shares on June 25, 2009, vests
and becomes exercisable as to 562,500 shares on June 25, 2010, and vests
and becomes exercisable as to 562,500 shares on June 25,
2011.
|
(5)
|
Reflects options to purchase
400,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.168 per share,
which were granted on January 28, 2009 and expire on January 28, 2019.
This option vested and became exercisable as to 100,000 shares on the date
of grant, vested and became exercisable as to 100,000 shares on January
28, 2010, vests and becomes exercisable as to 100,000 shares on January
28, 2011, and vests and becomes exercisable as to 100,000 shares on
January 28, 2012.
|
(6)
|
Reflects options to purchase
1,400,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.25 per share,
which were granted on January 16, 2008 and expire on January 16, 2018.
This option vested and became exercisable as to 466,667 shares on the date
of grant, vested and became exercisable as to 466,667 shares on January
16, 2009; and vested and became exercisable as to 466,666 shares on
January 16, 2010. Reflects options to purchase 2,750,000 shares
of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.035 per share, which were
granted on June 25, 2008 and expire on June 25, 2018. This option vested
and became exercisable as to 687,500 shares on the date of grant, vested
and became exercisable as to 687,500 shares on June 25, 2009, vests and
becomes exercisable as to 687,500 shares on June 25, 2010, and vests and
becomes exercisable as to 687,500 shares on June 25,
2011.
|
(7)
|
Reflects options to purchase
150,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $1.90 per share,
which were granted on January 16, 2007 and expire on January 16, 2017.
This option vested and became exercisable as to 50,000 shares on the date
of grant, vested and became exercisable as to 50,000 shares on January 16,
2008; and vested and became exercisable as to 50,000 shares on January 16,
2009.
|
(8)
|
Reflects options to purchase
50,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.084 per share,
which were granted on January 8, 2009 and expire on January 8, 2014. This
option vested and became exercisable as to 12,500 shares on January 8,
2010, vests and becomes exercisable as to 12,500 shares on January 8,
2011; vests and becomes exercisable as to 12,500 shares on January 8,
2012, and vests and becomes exercisable as to 12,500 shares on January 8,
2013.
|
(9)
|
Amount includes payments in the
approximate amount of $14,992 for certain other expenses pursuant to an
employment agreement.
|
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End
The
following table shows for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, certain
information regarding outstanding equity awards at fiscal year end for the Named
Executive Officers.
40
Outstanding
Equity Awards At December 31, 2009
Option Awards
|
|||||||||||||
Name
|
Number of
Securities Underlying
Unexercised Options
(#)
Exercisable
|
Number of Securities
Underlying Unexercised
Options
(#)
Unexercisable
|
Option
Exercise
Price
($)
|
Option
Expiration Date
|
|||||||||
Phillip
Chan
|
15,000 | 0.08 | (1) |
12/31/18
|
|||||||||
1,251,929 | 1,251,929 | 0.084 | (2) |
1/8/19
|
|||||||||
Vincent
Capponi
|
50,000 | 1.65 | (1) |
12/31/16
|
|||||||||
733,333 | 366,667 | 0.25 | (3) |
01/16/18
|
|||||||||
1,125,000 | 1,125,000 | 0.035 | (4) |
06/25/18
|
|||||||||
100,000 | 300,000 | 0.168 | (5) |
01/28/19
|
|||||||||
David
Lamadrid
|
150,000 | 1.90 | (1) |
01/16/17
|
|||||||||
933,333 | 466,667 | 0.25 | (6) |
01/16/18
|
|||||||||
1,375,000 | 1,375,000 | 0.035 | (7) |
06/25/18
|
|||||||||
100,000 | 300,000 | 0.168 | (8) |
01/28/19
|
|||||||||
Robert
Bartlett
|
50,000 | 0.084 | (9) |
01/08/14
|
(1)
|
Fully
vested
|
(2)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 1,251,929 shares on January 8, 2009; and (ii) 1,251,929 shares on
January 8, 2010.
|
(3)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 366,666 shares on January 16, 2008; (ii) 366,667 shares on January
16, 2009; and (iii) 366,667 shares on January 16,
2010.
|
(4)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 562,500 shares on June 25, 2008; (ii) 562,500 shares on June 25,
2009; (iii) 562,500 shares on June 25, 2010; and (iv) 562,500 shares on
June 25, 2011.
|
(5)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 100,000 shares on January 28, 2009; (ii) 100,000 shares on January
28, 2010; (iii) 100,000 shares on January 28, 2011; and (iv) 100,000
shares on January 28, 2012.
|
(6)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 466,666 shares on January 16, 2008; (ii) 466,667 shares on January
16, 2009; and (iii) 466,667 shares on January 16,
2010.
|
(7)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 687,500 shares on June 25, 2008; (ii) 687,500 shares on June 25,
2009; (iii) 687,500 shares on June 25, 2010; and (iv) 687,500 shares on
June 25, 2011.
|
(8)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 100,000 shares on January 28, 2009; (ii) 100,000 shares on January
28, 2010; (iii) 100,000 shares on January 28, 2011; and (iv) 100,000
shares on January 28, 2012.
|
(9)
|
Vests and becomes exercisable as
to (i) 12,500 shares on January 8, 2010; (ii) 12,500 shares on January 8,
2011; (iii)12,500 shares on January 8, 2012 and (iv) 12,500 shares on
January 8, 2013.
|
Director
Compensation
The
following table shows for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 certain
information with respect to the compensation of all non-employee directors of
the Company.
Director
Compensation for Fiscal 2009
Name
|
Fees Earned or
Paid in
Cash
($)
|
Option
Awards
($) (1)
|
Total
($)
|
||||||||||
Joseph
Rubin
|
8,000 | 230 | (2)(3) | 8,230 | |||||||||
Edward
R. Jones
|
8,000 | 230 | (2)(4) | 8,230 | |||||||||
James
Gunton
|
— | — | (5) | — | |||||||||
Al
Kraus
|
20,000 | 1,840 | (6) | 21,840 | |||||||||
Phillip
Chan
|
(7)
|
— | — | — |
41
(1)
|
The value of option awards
granted to directors has been estimated pursuant to SFAS No. 123(R) for
the options described in the footnotes below, except that for purposes of
this table, we have assumed that none of the options will be forfeited.
The directors will not realize the estimated value of these awards in cash
until these awards are vested and exercised or sold. For information
regarding our valuation of option awards, see “Stock-Based Compensation”
in Note 2 of our financial statements for the period ended December 31,
2009.
|
(2)
|
Fully
vested
|
(3)
|
At December 31, 2009, in
connection with his service as a director we had issued Mr. Rubin the
following: options to purchase 21,098 shares of our Common Stock at an
exercise price of $31.52 per share, which were granted on June 30, 2006
and expire on December 13, 2010; options to purchase 5,274 shares of our
Common Stock at an exercise price of $21.57 per share, which were granted
on June 30, 2006 and expire on January 26, 2012; options to purchase 3,014
shares of our Common Stock at an exercise price of $21.57 per share, which
were granted on June 30, 2006 and expire on December 11, 2012; options to
purchase 753 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise price of $21.57 per
share, which were granted on June 30, 2006 and expire on December 28,
2013; options to purchase 1,507 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise
price of $6.64 per share, which were granted on June 30, 2006 and expire
on December 29, 2014; options to purchase 10,000 shares of our Common
Stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share, which were granted on June
30, 2006 and expire on January 30, 2016; options to purchase 15,069 shares
of our Common Stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share, which were
granted on June 30, 2006 and expire on June 12, 2016; options to purchase
5,000 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share,
which were granted on August 1, 2006 and expire on August 1, 2016; options
to purchase 10,000 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise price of
$0.22 per share, which were granted on December 31, 2007 and expire on
December 31, 2017; options to purchase 45,000 shares of our Common Stock
at an exercise price of $0.035 per share, which were granted on June 25,
2008 and expire on June 25, 2018; options to purchase 30,000 shares of our
Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.08 per share, which were granted
on December 31, 2008 and expire on December 31, 2018; and options to
purchase 100,000 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.166
per share, which were granted on December 31, 2009 and expire on December
31, 2019.
|
(4)
|
At December 31, 2009, in
connection with his service as a director we had issued Dr. Jones the
following: options to purchase 7,500 shares of our Common Stock at an
exercise price of $0.22 per share, which were granted on December 31, 2007
and expire on December 31, 2017; options to purchase 45,000 shares of our
Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.035 per share, which were granted
on June 25, 2008 and expire on June 25, 2018; and options to purchase
30,000 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.08 per share,
which were granted on December 31, 2008 and expire on December 31, 2018;
and options to purchase 100,000 shares of our Common Stock at an exercise
price of $0.166 per share, which were granted on December 31, 2009 and
expire on December 31, 2019.
|
(5)
|
As of December 31, 2009, in
connection with his service as a director we had issued Mr. Gunton the
following: options to purchase 15,000 shares of our Common Stock at an
exercise price of $0.08 per share, which were granted on December 31, 2008
and expire on December 31, 2018. In connection with Mr.
Gunton’s service as a director in 2009, the NJTC Venture Fund was entitled
to receive options to purchase 108,000 shares of our Common
Stock. These options were issued on January 1, 2010 with an
exercise price of $0.166 per share and expire on January 1,
2020.
|
(6)
|
At December 31, 2009, in
connection with his service as a director we had issued Mr. Kraus the
following: options to purchase 200,000 shares of our Common Stock at an
exercise price of $0.084 per share, which were granted on January 8, 2009
and expire on January 8, 2019; and options to purchase 100,000 shares of
our Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.166 per share, which were
granted on December 31, 2009 and expire on December 31,
2019.
|
(7)
|
Effective July 24, 2008, Dr. Chan
was appointed to the Company’s Board of Directors and Compensation
Committee. Effective January 1, 2009, Dr. Chan entered into an
employment agreement becoming interim Chief Executive Officer of the
Company. In January 2009, Dr. Chan resigned his position as a
member on the Compensation Committee. During 2009 Dr. Chan was
an employee Director and was not eligible to receive compensation for
Director services.
|
42
In 2007,
we approved arrangements under which each non-employee director receives a fee
of $2,000 for each quarterly Board meeting attended in person and a fee of
$1,000 for each quarterly Board meeting participated in by telephone. In
addition, our Board approved a policy under which each non-employee director
will be eligible to be issued options to purchase up to 10,000 shares of our
Common Stock on December 31, 2007 based on attendance at quarterly Board
meetings held during 2008. Such options will be exercisable in accordance with
the Company’s option pricing policy on the date of grant. Our directors are also
reimbursed for actual out-of-pocket expenses incurred by them in connection with
their attendance at meetings of the Board of Directors.
In 2008,
the Board approved the issuance to each non-employee director, with the
exception of the Chairman, options to purchase up to 30,000 shares of Common
Stock on December 31, 2008 based on attendance at quarterly Board meetings held
during 2008.
In 2009,
the Board approved the issuance to each non-employee director, with the
exception of the Chairman, options to purchase up to 100,000 shares of Common
Stock on December 31, 2009 based on attendance at quarterly Board meetings held
during 2009.
In
connection with his appointment as Chairman of the Board in January 2009, we
agreed to compensate Mr. Kraus at the rate of $20,000 per annum, and on January
8, 2009 we issued Mr. Kraus a ten year option to purchase 200,000 shares of our
Common Stock at a price of $0.084 per share. In December 2009 we
issued Mr. Kraus an additional option to purchase 100,000 shares of Common Stock
at an exercise price of $0.166 per share. Additionally for services
performed as Chief Executive Office of the company through December 31, 2008,
the Board approved a 10 year option to purchase 450,000 shares of our Common
Stock at a price of $0.168 per share on January 28, 2009.
In 2010,
the Board approved the issuance to each non-employee director, with the
exception of the Chairman, options to purchase up to 100,000 shares of Common
Stock to be issued on December 31, 2010 based on attendance at quarterly Board
meetings held during 2010. For the Chairman, the Board approved the
issuance of options to purchase up to 125,000 shares of Common Stock to be
issued on December 31, 2010 based on attendance at quarterly Board meeting held
during 2010.
Employment
Agreements with Named Executive Officers
Phillip
Chan
Effective
April 9, 2010, we renewed the employment agreement by and between Dr. Phillip
Chan and the Company as full-time Chief Executive Officer retroactive to January
1, 2010. Per the terms of the agreement, we agree to pay Phillip Chan
an initial annual base compensation of $216,351 payable in equal semimonthly
installments in accordance with our usual practice. This base compensation shall
be subject to semiannual review by our Compensation Committee, but his
compensation may not be reduced from then current level. He is eligible for
employee stock options, which will be adjusted on the same basis as all other
shareholders to account for any stock split, stock dividends, combination or
recapitalization.
43
Al Kraus
We
entered into an employment agreement with Al Kraus on June 18, 2008 as our Chief
Executive Officer. Pursuant to the employment agreement, we agreed to
pay Al Kraus an annual base compensation of $216,351 payable in equal
semimonthly installments in accordance with our usual practice.
On
October 22, 2008, Al Kraus provided notice that he would resign from his
position as President and Chief Executive Officer effective as of December 31,
2008.
Effective
January 7, 2009, we entered into a new agreement with Al Kraus, pursuant to
which he became Chairman of the Board of Directors for a two year term
terminating on January 7, 2011. Pursuant to this agreement, we agree to pay Al
Kraus compensation at a rate of $20,000 per year, payable in equal payments at
the end of each fiscal quarter. He is eligible for stock options,
which will be adjusted on the same basis as all other shareholders to account
for any stock split, stock dividends, combination or
recapitalization.
Vincent
Capponi
We
entered into an employment agreement with Vincent Capponi on June 18, 2008,
which expired on December 31, 2008. Pursuant to this employment agreement, we
agree to pay Vincent Capponi an initial annual base compensation of $195,767
payable in equal semimonthly installments in accordance with our usual practice.
This base compensation shall be subject to annual review by our Compensation
Committee, but his compensation may not be reduced from then current level. He
is eligible for employee stock options which will be adjusted on the same basis
as all other shareholders to account for any stock split, stock dividends,
combination or recapitalization.
Effective
April 9, 2010, we renewed the employment agreement by and between Vincent
Capponi and the Company as Chief Operating Officer retroactive to January 1,
2010. Per the terms of the agreement, we agree to pay Vincent Capponi an initial
annual base compensation of $205,303 payable in equal semimonthly installments
in accordance with our usual practice. This base compensation shall be subject
to semiannual review by our Compensation Committee, but his compensation may not
be reduced from then current level. He is eligible for employee stock options,
which will be adjusted on the same basis as all other shareholders to account
for any stock split, stock dividends, combination or
recapitalization.
David
Lamadrid
We
entered into an employment agreement with David Lamadrid on June 18, 2008, which
expired on December 31, 2008. Pursuant to this employment agreement, we agree to
pay David Lamadrid an initial annual base compensation of $145,801 payable in
equal semimonthly installments in accordance with our usual practice. This base
compensation shall be subject to annual review by our Compensation Committee,
but his compensation may not be reduced from then current level. He is eligible
for employee stock options, which will be adjusted on the same basis as all
other shareholders to account for any stock split, stock dividends, combination
or recapitalization.
Effective
April 9, 2010, we renewed the employment agreement by and between David Lamadrid
and the Company as Chief Financial Officer retroactive to January 1,
2010. Per the terms of the agreement,, we agree to pay David Lamadrid
an initial annual base compensation of $175,000 payable in equal semimonthly
installments in accordance with our usual practice. This base compensation shall
be subject to semiannual review by our Compensation Committee. He is eligible
for employee stock options, which will be adjusted on the same basis as all
other shareholders to account for any stock split, stock dividends, combination
or recapitalization.
Robert
Bartlett
Effective
January 1, 2009, we entered into a new consulting agreement with Dr. Robert
Bartlett, pursuant to which his consulting will terminate on December 31, 2009.
Pursuant to this consulting agreement, we agree to pay Dr. Robert Bartlett
consulting fees at an annualized rate of $50,000 payable in equal monthly
installments of $4,166.67 per month. He is eligible for stock options, which
will be adjusted on the same basis as all other shareholders to account for any
stock split, stock dividends, combination or recapitalization.
Effective April 9, 2010,
we renewed the consulting agreement with Dr. Bartlett retroactive to January 1,
2010. Pursuant to this consulting agreement, we agree to pay Dr.
Robert Bartlett consulting fees at an annualized rate of $50,000 payable in
equal monthly installments of $4,166.67 per month. He is eligible for stock
options, which will be adjusted on the same basis as all other shareholders to
account for any stock split, stock dividends, combination or
recapitalization.
44
Item 12.
|
Security Ownership of Certain
Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder
Matters.
|
The
following table sets forth information known to us with respect to the
beneficial ownership of Common Stock held of record as of April 5, 2010, by (1)
all persons who are owners of 5% or more of our Common Stock, (2) each of our
named executive officers (see “Summary Compensation Table”), (3) each director,
and (4) all of our executive officers and directors as a group. Each of the
stockholders can be reached at our principal executive offices located at 7 Deer
Park Drive, Suite K, Monmouth Junction, New Jersey 08852.
SHARES
BENEFICIALLY
OWNED1
|
||||||||
Number
|
Percent (%)
|
|||||||
Beneficial
Owners of more than 5% of Common Stock (other than directors and executive
officers)
|
||||||||
Guillermina
Montiel(2)
|
5,052,456 | 6.1 | % | |||||
Directors
and Executive Officers
|
||||||||
Al
Kraus(3)
|
9,932,001 | 10.9 | % | |||||
Phillip
Chan (4)
|
3,222,422 | 3.8 | % | |||||
David
Lamadrid (5)
|
3,208,734 | 3.7 | % | |||||
Vince
Capponi (6)
|
2,993,086 | 3.5 | % | |||||
Joseph
Rubin (7)
|
1,016,688 | 1.2 | % | |||||
Robert
Bartlett (8)
|
47,500 | * | ||||||
James
Gunton (9)
|
15,000 | * | ||||||
Edward
R. Jones (10)
|
182,500 | * | ||||||
All directors and executive
officers as a group (eight persons)(11)
|
20,626,003 | 20.4 | % |
45
*
|
Less than
1%.
|
1
|
Gives effect to the shares of
Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of all options exercisable within
60 days of March 18, 2010 and other rights beneficially owned by the
indicated stockholders on that date. Beneficial ownership is determined in
accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and
includes voting and investment power with respect to shares. Unless
otherwise indicated, the persons named in the table have sole voting and
sole investment control with respect to all shares beneficially owned.
Percentage ownership is calculated based on 82,574,856 shares of Common
Stock outstanding as of April 5,
2010.
|
2
|
Includes 58,472 shares of Common
Stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
3
|
Includes 8,538,370 shares of
Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
4
|
Includes 603,564 shares of Common
Stock issuable upon conversion of Series B Preferred Stock, and 2,618,858
shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
5
|
Includes 3,205,000 shares of
Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
6
|
Includes 2,575,000 shares of
Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
7
|
Includes 2,758 shares of Common
Stock issuable upon conversion of Series A Preferred Stock, 418,066 shares
of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of Series B Preferred Stock, and
521,672 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of warrants and
stock options. Does not include shares of Common Stock beneficially owned
by Mr. Rubin’s spouse, as to which he disclaims beneficial
ownership.
|
8
|
Includes 47,500 shares of Common
Stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
9
|
These shares are issuable upon
exercise of stock options.
|
10
|
These
shares are issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
11
|
Includes an aggregate of 2,758
shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of Series A Preferred
Stock, 1,021,630 shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of Series
B Preferred Stock, and 17,703,900 shares of Common Stock issuable upon
exercise of warrants and stock
options.
|
Item
13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director
Independence.
Joseph
Rubin is a director of ours and performs legal services for us from time to
time. At December 31, 2009, we owed Mr. Rubin’s firm approximately $7,000 in
respect of legal services provided by his firm to us.
Director
Independence
All
members of our Board of Directors, other than Joseph Rubin, who performs legal
services for us as disclosed above, Al Kraus, formerly an employee, and Phillip
Chan, our Chief Executive Officer, are independent under the standards set forth
in Nasdaq Marketplace Rule 4200(a)(15).
46
Item
14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
The
following table presents fees for professional audit services rendered by
WithumSmith+Brown, A Professional Corporation, for the audit of our annual
financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and fees
billed for other services rendered by WithumSmith+Brown during those
years.
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Audit
fees
(1)
|
$ | 116,930 | $ | 105,010 | ||||
Audit
related fees
|
— | — | ||||||
Tax
fees
|
5,460 | 10,700 | ||||||
All
other fees
|
$ | — | $ | — | ||||
Total
fees
|
$ | 122,390 | $ | 115,710 |
(1)
|
Includes fees paid for
professional services rendered in connection with the audit of annual
financial statements and the review of quarterly financial statements, and
the review of such financial statements in the Company’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Registration Statement on Form
SB-2, S-1 and S-8, and Current Reports on Form
8-K.
|
Pre-Approval
Policies And Procedures
We do not
have an audit committee or a formal pre-approval process for the performance for
us by our independent auditor of non-audit services. For the year ended December
31, 2009 our independent auditor performed non-attest tax services. We
anticipate that any non-audit services to be performed for us by our independent
auditor, subject to the de minimis exceptions for non-audit services described
in Section 10A(i)(1)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, will
be approved prior to our auditor’s engagement for such services by our Board of
Directors, acting in the capacity of an audit committee.
PART
IV
Item
15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.
(a) The
following documents are filed as part of this report:
Exhibit
No.
|
|
Description
|
31.1
|
Certification
of Philip Chan pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
of David Lamadrid pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
of Philip Chan pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
of David Lamadrid pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
47
SIGNATURES
In
accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, MedaSorb Technologies
Corporation has caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on this 9th day of April
2010.
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
|
||
By:
|
/s/ Phillip Chan
|
|
Phillip
Chan
|
||
Chief
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
|
Date
|
||
/s/ Phillip Chan
|
Chief
Executive Officer (Principal
|
April
9, 2010
|
||
Phillip
Chan
|
Executive
Officer) and Director
|
|||
/s/ David Lamadrid
|
Chief
Financial Officer (Principal
|
April
9, 2010
|
||
David
Lamadrid
|
Accounting
and Financial Officer)
|
|||
/s/ Al Kraus
|
Chairman
of the Board
|
April
9, 2010
|
||
Al
Kraus
|
||||
/s/ Joseph Rubin
|
Director
|
April
9, 2010
|
||
Joseph
Rubin, Esq.
|
||||
/s/ Edward R. Jones
|
Director
|
April
9, 2010
|
||
Edward
R. Jones
|
||||
/s/ James Gunton
|
Director
|
April
9, 2010
|
||
James
Gunton
|
||||
48
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
Page
|
||
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
F-2
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008
|
F-4
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008,
and from inception to December 31, 2009
|
F-5
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity (Deficiency) period from
inception to December 31, 2009
|
F-6
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the for the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008, and from inception to December 31, 2009
|
F-11
|
|
Notes
to Financial Statements
|
F-13
|
F-1
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders,
MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation:
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of MedaSorb Technologies
Corporation (a development stage company), as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity
(deficiency) and cash flows for the years then ended and the cumulative period
from January 22, 1997 (date of inception) to December 31, 2009. These
consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We did not
audit the consolidated financial statements of MedaSorb Technologies Corporation
for the period from January 22, 1997 (date of inception) to December 31,
2000. Such statements are included in the cumulative inception to
December 31, 2009 totals on the consolidated statements of operations and cash
flows and reflect a net loss of 27.7% of the related cumulative
total. Those statements were audited by other auditors whose report
has been furnished to us and our opinion, insofar as it relates to the amounts
for the period from January 22, 1997 (date of inception) to December 31, 2000
included in the cumulative totals, is based solely upon the report of the other
auditors.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. An audit also includes
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, based on our audits and the report of other auditors, the consolidated
financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects,
the consolidated financial position of MedaSorb Technologies Corporation as of
December 31, 2009 and 2008 and the consolidated results of their operations
and their cash flows for the years then ended and the cumulative period
from January 22, 1997 (date of inception) to December 31, 2009 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 discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated
financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring net losses and negative
cash flows from operations. These matters 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 1. The consolidated financial statements do
not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty.
/s/
WithumSmith+Brown, PC
New
Brunswick, New Jersey
April 9,
2010
F-2
**********
This report is a copy of a previously issued report and has not been reissued by
Arthur
Andersen
pursuant to rule 2-02(e) of Regulation SX **********
Report
of Independent Public Accountants
To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders,
Medasorb
Corporation:
We have
audited the accompanying balance sheets of MedaSorb Technologies Corporation (a
development stage company), as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related
statements of operations, changes in members’ equity and cash flows for the
period from inception (January 22, 1997) through December 31, 2000. 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 auditing standards generally accepted in
the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
In our
opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of MedaSorb Technologies Corporation
as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the results of its operations and its cash
flows for the period from inception (January 22, 1997) to December 31, 2000, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States.
Arthur
Andersen, LLP
New York,
New York
December
27, 2001
F-3
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(a
development stage company)
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
December
31,
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Current
Assets:
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 1,595,628 | $ | 2,749,208 | ||||
Short-term
investments
|
— | 199,607 | ||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
369,091 | 117,003 | ||||||
Total
current assets
|
1,964,719 | 3,065,818 | ||||||
Property
and equipment - net
|
18,853 | 52,057 | ||||||
Other
assets
|
254,908 | 269,310 | ||||||
Total
long-term assets
|
273,761 | 321,367 | ||||||
Total
Assets
|
$ | 2,238,480 | $ | 3,387,185 | ||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIENCY)
|
||||||||
Current
Liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 852,167 | $ | 885,465 | ||||
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
118,598 | 92,239 | ||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
970,765 | 977,704 | ||||||
Notes
Payable:
|
||||||||
Notes
payable
|
— | 50,000 | ||||||
Total
Long Term Liabilities
|
— | 50,000 | ||||||
Total
liabilities
|
970,765 | 1,027,704 | ||||||
Stockholders
Equity/(Deficiency):
|
||||||||
10%
Series B Preferred Stock, Par Value $0.001, 200,000 shares authorized at
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively; 68,723.88 and 55,558.64 issued
and outstanding , respectively
|
69 | 55 | ||||||
10%
Series A Preferred Stock, Par Value $0.001, 12,000,000 shares authorized
at December 31, 2009 and 2008, 6,255,813 and 8,793,060 shares issued and
outstanding, respectively
|
6,256 | 8,793 | ||||||
Common
Stock, Par Value $0.001, 500,000,000 shares authorized at December 31,
2009 and 2008, 66,374,856 and 25,263,517 shares issued and outstanding,
respectively
|
66,375 | 25,264 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
80,097,536 | 77,786,850 | ||||||
Deficit
accumulated during the development stage
|
(78,902,521 | ) | (75,461,481 | ) | ||||
Total
stockholders’ equity/(deficiency)
|
1,267,715 | 2,359,481 | ||||||
Total
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity (Deficiency)
|
$ | 2,238,480 | $ | 3,387,185 |
The Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.
F-4
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(a
development stage company)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
Period from
|
||||||||||||
January 22,1997
|
||||||||||||
(date of inception) to
|
Year ended
|
Year ended
|
||||||||||
December 31,
|
December 31,
|
December 31,
|
||||||||||
2009
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Revenue
|
$ | — | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
46,253,723 | 1,961,960 | 1,983,483 | |||||||||
Legal,
financial and other consulting
|
7,307,977 | 307,952 | 351,357 | |||||||||
General
and administrative
|
23,066,897 | 757,450 | 909,372 | |||||||||
Change
in fair value of management and incentive units
|
(6,055,483 | ) | — | — | ||||||||
Total
expenses
|
70,573,114 | 3,027,362 | 3,244,212 | |||||||||
Other
(income) expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Gain
on disposal of property and equipment
|
(21,663 | ) | — | — | ||||||||
Gain
on extinguishment of debt
|
(216,617 | ) | — | — | ||||||||
Interest
(income) expense, net
|
5,607,395 | 8,142 | 22,207 | |||||||||
Penalties
associated with non-registration of Series A Preferred
Stock
|
361,495 | — | — | |||||||||
Total
other (income) expense, net
|
5,730,610 | 8,142 | 22,207 | |||||||||
Loss
before benefit from income taxes
|
76,303,724 | 3,035,504 | 3,266,419 | |||||||||
Benefit
from income taxes
|
(547,318 | ) | (298,789 | ) | (248,529 | ) | ||||||
Net
loss
|
(75,756,406 | ) | (2,736,715 | ) | (3,017,890 | ) | ||||||
Preferred
stock dividend
|
3,146,115 | 704,325 | 905,382 | |||||||||
Net
loss available to common shareholders
|
$ | (78,902,521 | ) | $ | (3,441,040 | ) | $ | (3,923,272 | ) | |||
Basic
and diluted net loss per common share
|
$ | (0.08 | ) | $ | (0.16 | ) | ||||||
Weighted
average number of common stock outstanding
|
41,593,607 | 25,121,377 |
The Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.
F-5
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(a
development stage company)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
(DEFICIENCY)
Period
from January 22, 1997 (date of inception) to December 31, 2009
Members
Equity
|
Deferred
|
Common
Stock
|
Preferred
Stock B
|
Preferred
Stock A
|
Additional
Paid-In
|
Deficit
Accumulated
During
the
Development
|
Total
Stockholders'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Deficiency)
|
Compensation
|
Shares
|
Par
value
|
Shares
|
Par
Value
|
Shares
|
Par
Value
|
Cap
ital
|
Stage
|
Equity
(Deficit)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at January 22, 1997 (date of inception)
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
1,143,487
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,143,487
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscriptions
receivable
|
440,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
440,000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Technology
contribution
|
4,550,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
4,550,000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(5,256,012
|
)
|
(5,256,012
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 1997
|
6,133,487
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(5,256,012
|
)
|
877,475
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
2,518,236
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
2,518,236
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
issued to consultants
|
1,671
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,671
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscriptions
receivable
|
50,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
50,000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(1,867,348
|
)
|
(1,867,348
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 1998
|
8,703,394
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(7,123,360
|
)
|
1,580,034
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
1,382,872
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,382,872
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
issued to consultants
|
88,363
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
88,363
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Recognition
of deferred compensation
|
47,001
|
(47,001
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of deferred compensation
|
—
|
15,667
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
15,667
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscriptions
receivable
|
100,000
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
100,000
|
F-6
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(3,066,388
|
)
|
(3,066,388
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 1999
|
10,321,630
|
(31,334
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(10,189,748
|
)
|
100,548
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
14,407,916
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
14,407,916
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
issued to consultants
|
1,070,740
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,070,740
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Warrants
issued to consultants
|
468,526
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
468,526
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Recognition
of deferred compensation
|
27,937
|
(27,937
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of deferred compensation
|
—
|
46,772
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
46,772
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(10,753,871
|
)
|
(10,753,871
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2000
|
26,296,749
|
(12,499
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(20,943,619
|
)
|
5,340,631
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
13,411,506
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
13,411,506
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
issued to consultants
|
161,073
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
161,073
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
options issued to employee
|
2,847
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
2,847
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fees
incurred in raising capital
|
(1,206,730
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(1,206,730
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of deferred compensation
|
—
|
12,499
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
12,499
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(15,392,618
|
)
|
(15,392,618
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2001
|
38,665,445
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(36,336,237
|
)
|
2,329,208
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
6,739,189
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
6,739,189
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
issued to consultants
|
156,073
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
156,073
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
issued to consultant
|
176,250
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
176,250
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
issued to employee
|
2,847
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
2,847
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fees
incurred in raising capital
|
(556,047
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(556,047
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Forgiveness
of loan receivable in exchange for equity
|
(1,350,828
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(1,350,828
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(11,871,668
|
)
|
(11,871,668
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2002
|
43,832,929
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(48,207,905
|
)
|
(4,374,976
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
4,067,250
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
4,067,250
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
issued to consultants
|
16,624
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
16,624
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change
in fair value of management units
|
2,952,474
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
2,952,474
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
issued to consultant
|
65,681
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
65,681
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fees
incurred in raising capital
|
(343,737
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(343,737
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Forgiveness
of loan receivable in exchange for equity
|
(281,340
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(281,340
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(6,009,283
|
)
|
(6,009,283
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2003
|
50,309,881
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(54,217,188
|
)
|
(3,907,307
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
512,555
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
512,555
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change
in fair value of management units
|
(2,396,291
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(2,396,291
|
)
|
F-7
Fees
incurred in raising capital
|
(80,218
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(80,218
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
Loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(1,096,683
|
)
|
(1,096,683
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2004
|
48,345,927
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(55,313,871
|
)
|
(6,967,944
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity
contributions
|
92,287
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
92,287
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Settlement
of accounts payable in exchange for equity
|
836,319
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
836,319
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of convertible notes payable and accrued interest for
equity
|
51,565
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
51,565
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change
in fair value of management units
|
(14,551
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(14,551
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fees
incurred in raising capital
|
(92,287
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(92,287
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reorganization
from LLC to "C" Corporation
|
(49,219,260
|
)
|
—
|
4,829,120
|
4,829
|
49,214,431
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(3,665,596
|
)
|
(3,665,596
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2005
|
—
|
—
|
4,829,120
|
4,829
|
49,214,431
|
(58,979,467
|
)
|
(9,760,207
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock for stock subscribed
|
—
|
—
|
240,929
|
241
|
—
|
—
|
799,644
|
—
|
799,885
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock to investor group for price protection
|
—
|
—
|
100,000
|
100
|
—
|
—
|
(100
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of stock options to employees, consultants and directors
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
143,352
|
—
|
143,352
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of 10% Series A Preferred Stock for cash
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
5,300,000
|
5,300
|
5,530,143
|
(235,443
|
)
|
5,300,000
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost
of raising capital associated with issuance of preferred
stock
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(620,563
|
)
|
—
|
(620,563
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares
held by original stockholders of Parent immediately prior to
merger
|
—
|
—
|
3,750,000
|
3,750
|
—
|
—
|
(3,750
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of convertible debt, related accrued interest and shares to induce
conversion into common stock
|
—
|
—
|
5,170,880
|
5,171
|
—
|
—
|
11,376,939
|
—
|
11,382,110
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock in consideration for funding $1,000,000 convertible
note payable per terms of merger transaction
|
—
|
—
|
10,000,000
|
10,000
|
—
|
—
|
990,000
|
—
|
1,000,000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock in exchange for accounts payable and services
rendered
|
—
|
—
|
778,274
|
779
|
—
|
—
|
587,035
|
—
|
587,814
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of common stock issued prior to reverse merger for 10% Series A
Preferred Stock
|
—
|
—
|
(240,929
|
)
|
(241
|
)
|
799,885
|
800
|
30,194
|
(30,753
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash
stock dividends on 10% Series A Preferred Stock
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
303,700
|
303
|
303,397
|
(303,700
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of preferred stock for redemption of convertible note
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,000,000
|
1,000
|
1,204,640
|
(205,640
|
)
|
1,000,000
|
F-8
Issuance
of warrants to consultants for services
|
— | — | — | — | — | — |
9,883
|
— |
9,883
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of warrants in exchange for accounts payable
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
192,311
|
—
|
192,311
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(7,671,580
|
)
|
(7,671,580
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
—
|
—
|
24,628,274
|
24,629
|
7,403,585
|
7,403
|
69,757,556
|
(67,426,583
|
)
|
2,363,005
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of stock options to employees, consultants and directors
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
498,955
|
—
|
498,955
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock in settlement of accounts payable
|
—
|
—
|
11,501
|
11
|
—
|
—
|
22,991
|
—
|
23,002
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of preferred stock into common stock
|
—
|
—
|
405,157
|
405
|
(506,446
|
)
|
(506
|
)
|
101
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series A Preferred Stock as dividends and settlement of
dividends/penalties payable in connection with non-registration
event
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,122,369
|
1,122
|
1,121,246
|
(760,872
|
)
|
361,496
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(3,350,754
|
)
|
(3,350,754
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
—
|
—
|
25,044,932
|
25,045
|
8,019,508
|
8,019
|
71,400,849
|
(71,538,209
|
)
|
(104,296
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation - employees, consultants and directors
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
363,563
|
—
|
363,563
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series A Preferred Stock as dividends
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
830,384
|
831
|
277,087
|
(277,918
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series B Preferred Stock for
cash
and conversion of $175,000 of
convertible
debt
|
52,931.47
|
53
|
5,657,842
|
(364,747
|
)
|
5,293,148
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost
of raising capital associated with issuance of Series B Preferred
Stock
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(215,398
|
)
|
—
|
(215,398
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series B Preferred Stock as dividends
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
2,627.17
|
2
|
—
|
—
|
262,715
|
(262,717
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of warrants upon conversion of convertible notes payable into Series B
Preferred Stock
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
40,354
|
40,354
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of Series A Preferred stock into common
|
—
|
—
|
218,585
|
219
|
—
|
—
|
(56,832
|
)
|
(57
|
)
|
(162
|
)
|
—
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
(3,017,890
|
)
|
(3,017,890
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
—
|
—
|
25,263,517
|
25,264
|
55,558.64
|
55
|
8,793,060
|
8,793
|
77,786,850
|
(75,461,481
|
)
|
2,359,481
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation - employees, consultants and directors
|
236,705
|
236,705
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series A Preferred Stock as dividends
|
789,610
|
789
|
110,809
|
(111,598
|
)
|
—
|
F-9
Issuance
of Series B Preferred Stock as
dividends
|
5,860.22
|
6
|
586,017
|
(586,023
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise
of warrants
|
13,357.52
|
13
|
1,335,741
|
1,335,754
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Warrant
modification as inducement to exercise
|
14,885
|
14,885
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of notes payable and accrued interest to Series B Preferred
Shares
|
576.05
|
1
|
64,308
|
(6,704
|
)
|
57,605
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion
of Series A and B Preferred stock into common
|
41,111,339
|
41,111
|
(6,628.55
|
)
|
(6
|
)
|
(3,326,857
|
)
|
(3,326
|
)
|
(37,779
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(2,736,715
|
)
|
(2,736,715
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2009
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
66,374,856
|
$
|
66,375
|
68,723.88
|
$
|
69
|
6,255,813
|
$
|
6,256
|
$
|
80,097,536
|
$
|
(78,902,521
|
)
|
$
|
1,267,715
|
The Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these financial
statements.
F-10
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(a
development stage company)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Period from
|
||||||||||||
January 22, 1997
|
||||||||||||
(date of inception) to
|
Year ended
|
Year ended
|
||||||||||
December 31,
|
December 31,
|
December 31,
|
||||||||||
2009
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(75,756,406
|
)
|
$
|
(2,736,715
|
)
|
$
|
(3,017,890
|
)
|
|||
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used by operating
activities:
|
||||||||||||
Common
stock issued as inducement to convert convertible notes payable and
accrued interest
|
3,351,961
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Issuance
of common stock to consultants for services
|
30,000
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
2,392,461
|
51,695
|
103,701
|
|||||||||
Amortization
of debt discount
|
1,000,000
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Gain
on disposal of property and equipment
|
(21,663
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||
Gain
on extinguishment of debt
|
(216,617
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||
Interest
expense paid with Series B Preferred Stock in connection with conversion
of notes payable
|
3,147
|
—
|
3,147
|
|||||||||
Abandoned
patents
|
183,556
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Bad
debts - employee advances
|
255,882
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Contributed
technology expense
|
4,550,000
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Consulting
expense
|
237,836
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Management
unit expense
|
1,334,285
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Expense
for issuance of warrants
|
533,648
|
14,885
|
40,354
|
|||||||||
Expense
for issuance of options
|
1,490,200
|
236,705
|
363,563
|
|||||||||
Amortization
of deferred compensation
|
74,938
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Penalties
in connection with non-registration event
|
361,496
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
(640,639
|
)
|
(252,088
|
)
|
83,679
|
|||||||
Other
assets
|
(56,394
|
)
|
10,239
|
(12,740
|
)
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
2,797,582
|
666
|
70,837
|
|||||||||
Accrued
interest
|
1,823,103
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Net
cash used by operating activities
|
(56,271,624
|
)
|
(2,674,613
|
)
|
(2,365,349
|
)
|
||||||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
||||||||||||
Proceeds
from sale of property and equipment
|
32,491
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
(2,226,932
|
)
|
(6,411
|
)
|
—
|
|||||||
Patent
costs
|
(435,647
|
)
|
(7,917
|
)
|
(22,052
|
)
|
||||||
Purchases
of short-term investments
|
(393,607
|
)
|
(393,607
|
)
|
||||||||
Proceeds
from sale of short-term investments
|
393,607
|
199,607
|
194,000
|
|||||||||
Loan
receivable
|
(1,632,168
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
||||||||
Net
cash (used) provided by investing activities
|
(4,262,256
|
)
|
185,279
|
(221,659
|
)
|
|||||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
||||||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of common stock
|
400,490
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of preferred stock, net of related issuance
costs
|
9,579,040
|
—
|
4,899,603
|
|||||||||
Equity
contributions - net of fees incurred
|
43,046,952
|
1,335,754
|
—
|
|||||||||
Proceeds
from borrowing
|
8,603,631
|
—
|
225,000
|
|||||||||
Proceeds
from subscription receivables
|
499,395
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
62,129,508
|
1,335,754
|
5,124,603
|
The Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.
F-11
MEDASORB
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(a
development stage company)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Period from
|
||||||||||||
January 22, 1997
|
||||||||||||
(date of inception) to
|
Year ended
|
Year ended
|
||||||||||
December 31,
|
December 31,
|
December 31,
|
||||||||||
2009
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
1,595,628
|
(1,153,580
|
)
|
2,537,595
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
—
|
2,749,208
|
211,613
|
|||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$
|
1,595,628
|
$
|
1,595,628
|
$
|
2,749,208
|
||||||
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
||||||||||||
Cash
paid during the period for interest
|
$
|
590,189
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Supplemental
schedule of noncash financing activities:
|
||||||||||||
Note
payable principal and interest conversion to equity
|
$
|
10,434,319
|
$
|
57,605
|
$
|
175,000
|
||||||
Issuance
of member units for leasehold improvements
|
$
|
141,635
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Issuance
of management units in settlement of cost of raising
capital
|
$
|
437,206
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Change
in fair value of management units for cost of raising
capital
|
$
|
278,087
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Exchange
of loan receivable for member units
|
$
|
1,632,168
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Issuance
of equity in settlement of accounts payable
|
$
|
1,609,446
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Issuance
of common stock in exchange for stock subscribed
|
$
|
399,395
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Costs
paid from proceeds in conjunction with issuance of preferred
stock
|
$
|
768,063
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
147,500
|
||||||
Preferred
stock dividends
|
$
|
3,146,115
|
$
|
704,325
|
$
|
905,382
|
||||||
Net
effect of conversion of common stock to preferred stock prior to
merger
|
$
|
559
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
During
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, 6,628.55 and -0- Series B Preferred
Shares were converted into 18,310,911 and -0- Common Shares, respectively.
During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, 3,326,857 and 56,832 Series A
Preferred Shares were converted into 22,800,428 and 218,585 Common Shares,
respectively. For the period from January 22, 1997 (date of inception) to
December 31, 2009, 6,628.55 Series B Preferred Shares and 3,890,135 Series A
Preferred Shares were converted into 18,310,911 and 23,424,170 Common Shares,
respectively.
During
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, -0- and -0- Series A Preferred
Shares and -0- and -0- Series B Preferred Shares respectively were
issued in connection with the non-registration events as settlement of
dividends/penalties payable, respectively. For the period from January 22, 1997
(date of inception) to December 31, 2009, 553,629 Series A Preferred Shares and
-0- Series B Preferred Shares were issued in connection with non-registration
events as settlement of dividends/penalties payable.
The Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.
F-12
1.
|
BASIS OF
PRESENTATION
|
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements include the results of MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation (the “Parent”), formerly known as Gilder Enterprises,
Inc., and CytoSorbents, Inc. its wholly-owned operating subsidiary (the
“Subsidiary”), collectively referred to as “the Company.”
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going
concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of
liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company has experienced
negative cash flows from operations since inception and has a deficit
accumulated during the development stage at December 31, 2009 of $78,902,521.
The Company is not currently generating revenue and is dependent on the proceeds
of present and future financings to fund its research, development and
commercialization program. The Company is continuing its fund-raising efforts.
Although the Company has historically been successful in raising additional
capital through equity and debt financings, there can be no assurance that the
Company will be successful in raising additional capital in the future or that
it will be on favorable terms. Furthermore, if the Company is successful in
raising the additional financing, there can be no assurance that the amount will
be sufficient to complete the Company's plans. These matters raise substantial
doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. These
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments related to the
outcome of this uncertainty.
The
Company is a development stage company and has not yet generated any revenues.
Since inception, the Company's expenses relate primarily to research and
development, organizational activities, clinical manufacturing, regulatory
compliance and operational strategic planning. Although the Company has made
advances on these matters, there can be no assurance that the Company will
continue to be successful regarding these issues, nor can there be any assurance
that the Company will successfully implement its long-term strategic
plans.
F-13
The
Company has developed an intellectual property portfolio, including 27 issued
and multiple pending patents, covering materials, methods of
production, systems incorporating the technology and multiple medical
uses.
2.
|
PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING
POLICIES:
|
Nature
of Business
The
Company, through its subsidiary, is engaged in the research, development and
commercialization of medical devices with its platform blood purification
technology incorporating a proprietary adsorbent polymer technology. The Company
is focused on developing this technology for multiple applications in the
medical field, specifically to provide improved blood purification for the
treatment of acute and chronic health complications associated with blood
toxicity. As of December 31, 2009, the Company has not commenced commercial
operations and, accordingly, is in the development stage. The Company has yet to
generate any revenue and has no assurance of future revenue.
Principles
of Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Parent, MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation, and its wholly-owned subsidiary, CytoSorbents, Inc.
All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in
consolidation.
Development
Stage Corporation
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance
with the provisions of accounting and reporting by development state
enterprises.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
The
Company considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with an original
maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
Short
Term Investments
Short-term
investments include short-term bank certificates of deposit with original
maturities of between three and twelve months. These
short-term notes are classified as held to maturity and are valued at cost,
which approximates fair value. These investments are considered Level 2
investments under accounting standards for fair value measurements.
Property
and Equipment
Property
and equipment are recorded at cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation
of property and equipment is provided for by the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the related assets. Leasehold improvements are
amortized over the lesser of their economic useful lives or the term of the
related leases. Gains and losses on depreciable assets retired or sold are
recognized in the statements of operations in the year of disposal. Repairs and
maintenance expenditures are expensed as incurred.
Patents
Legal
costs incurred to establish patents are capitalized. When patents are issued,
capitalized costs are amortized on the straight-line method over the related
patent term. In the event a patent is abandoned, the net book value of the
patent is written off.
Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets
The
Company assesses the impairment of patents and other long-lived assets under
accounting standards for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may
not be recoverable. For long-lived assets to be held and used, the Company
recognizes an impairment loss only if its carrying amount is not recoverable
through its undiscounted cash flows and measures the impairment loss based on
the difference between the carrying amount and fair value.
F-14
Research
and Development
All
research and development costs, payments to laboratories and research
consultants are expensed when incurred.
Income
Taxes
Income
taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method prescribed by
accounting standards for accounting for income taxes. Deferred income
taxes are recorded for temporary differences between financial statement
carrying amounts and the tax basis of assets and liabilities. Deferred tax
assets and liabilities reflect the tax rates expected to be in effect for the
years in which the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is
provided if it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax
asset will not be realized. Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code the
net operating losses generated prior to the reverse merger may be limited due to
the change in ownership. Additionally, net operating losses generated subsequent
to the reverse merger may be limited in the event of changes in
ownership.
The
Company adopted the accounting standards associated with uncertain tax positions
as of January 1, 2007. The adoption of this standard did not have a material
impact on the Company's consolidated statements of operations or financial
position. Upon adoption of this accounting standard, the Company had no
unrecognized tax benefits. Furthermore, the Company had no unrecognized tax
benefits at December 31, 2009. The Company files tax returns in the U.S. federal
and state jurisdictions. The Company has no open years prior to December 31,
2006.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results
could differ from these estimates. Significant estimates in these financials are
the valuation of options granted and the valuation of preferred shares issued as
stock dividends.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
The
Company maintains cash balances, at times, with financial institutions in excess
of amounts insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Management
monitors the soundness of these institutions in an effort to minimize its
collection risk of these balances.
Financial
Instruments
The
carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts
payable and other debt obligations approximate their fair values due to their
short-term nature.
Net
Loss per Common Share
Basic EPS
is computed by dividing income (loss) available to common stockholders by the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted
EPS gives effect to all dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the
period. The computation of diluted EPS does not assume conversion, exercise or
contingent exercise of securities that would have an anti-dilutive effect on
earnings. (See Note 10).
Stock-Based
Compensation
The
Company accounts for its stock-based compensation under the recognition
requirements of accounting standards for accounting for stock-based
compensation, for employees and directors whereby each option granted is valued
at fair market value on the date of grant. Under these accounting standards, the
fair value of each option is estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model.
The
Company also follows the guidance of accounting standards for accounting for
equity instruments that are issued to other than employees for acquiring, or in
conjunction with selling, goods or services for equity instruments issued
to consultants.
F-15
Effects
of Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In
December 2007, the FASB issued an amendment to an existing accounting standard,
which provides guidance related to business combinations. The amendment retains
its fundamental requirements that the acquisition method of accounting be used
for all business combinations and for an acquirer to be identified for each
business combination. This amendment also establishes principles and
requirements for how the acquirer: a) recognizes and measures in its financial
statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any
non-controlling interest in the acquiree; b) recognizes and measures the
goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase
and c) determines what information to disclose to enable users of the financial
statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business
combination. This amendment will apply prospectively to business combinations
for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. An entity may not
apply it before that date. The provisions of this amendment did not have a
significant impact on the Company's statements of operations or financial
position.
In March
2008, the FASB issued a new accounting standard which provides guidance related
to disclosures about derivative instruments and hedging activities and amends an
existing accounting standard to expand the disclosure requirements to provide
greater transparency about (i) how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments, (ii) how derivative instruments and related hedge items are
accounted for and its related interpretations, and (iii) how derivative
instruments and related hedged items affect an entity's financial position,
results of operations and cash flows. To meet those objectives, the new
accounting standard requires qualitative disclosures about objectives and
strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value
amounts of gains and losses on derivative instruments and disclosures about
credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative agreements. The new
accounting standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning
after November 15, 2008. The provisions of the new accounting standard did not
have a significant impact on the Company's statements of operations or financial
position.
In May
2009, the FASB issued a new accounting standard related to subsequent events,
which provides guidance on events that occur after the balance sheet date but
prior to the issuance of the financial statements. The new accounting standard
distinguishes events requiring recognition in the financial statements and those
that may require disclosure in the financial statements. Furthermore, the new
accounting standard requires disclosure of the date through which subsequent
events were evaluated. The new accounting standard is effective for interim and
annual periods after June 15, 2009. The Company adopted the new accounting
standard for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, and have evaluated subsequent
events through April 9, 2010.
In June
2009, the FASB issued a new accounting standard, which provides guidance related
to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles – a replacement of a previously issued standard.
The new accounting standard stipulates the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification is the source of authoritative U.S. GAAP recognized by the FASB to
be applied by nongovernmental entities. The new accounting standard is effective
for financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after
September 15, 2009. The implementation of this standard did not have a material
impact on the Company’s statements of operations or financial
position.
3.
|
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT,
NET:
|
Property
and equipment - net, consists of the following:
December 31,
|
2009
|
2008
|
Depreciation/
Amortization
Period
|
|||||||
Furniture
and fixtures
|
$ | 130,015 | $ | 130,015 |
7
years
|
|||||
Equipment
and computers
|
1,737,652 | 1,731,242 |
3
to 7 years
|
|||||||
Leasehold
improvements
|
462,980 | 462,980 |
Term
of
lease
|
|||||||
2,330,647 | 2,324,237 | |||||||||
Less
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
2,311,794 | 2,272,180 | ||||||||
Property
and Equipment, Net
|
$ | 18,853 | $ | 52,057 |
F-16
Depreciation
expense for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 amounted to $39,615 and
$92,400, respectively. Depreciation expense from inception to December 31, 2009
amounted to $2,338,883.
4.
|
OTHER
ASSETS:
|
Other
assets consist of the following:
December 31,
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Intangible
assets, net
|
$
|
198,514
|
$
|
202,676
|
|||||
Security
deposits
|
56,394
|
66,634
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
254,908
|
$
|
269,310
|
Intangible
assets consist of the following:
December 31,
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||||||
Gross
|
Accumulated
|
Gross
|
Accumulated
|
|||||||||||||
Amount
|
Amortization
|
Amount
|
Amortization
|
|||||||||||||
Patents
|
$
|
252,090
|
$
|
53,576
|
$
|
244,172
|
$
|
41,496
|
The
issued patents that are capitalized are being amortized over the patents
remaining legal life. Pending patents are not amortized. Amortization expense
amounted to $12,080 and $11,301 for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Amortization expense from inception to December 31, 2009 amounted
to $53,576.
Amortization
expense is anticipated to be approximately $13,000 for the next five years ended
December 31, 2014.
5.
|
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED
EXPENSES:
|
Accounts
Payable and accrued expenses consist of the following:
December 31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Other
payable
|
$
|
195,527
|
$
|
316,556
|
||||
Legal,
financial and consulting
|
184,663
|
367,379
|
||||||
Research
and development
|
590,575
|
293,769
|
||||||
$
|
970,765
|
$
|
977,704
|
F-17
6.
|
CONVERTIBLE
NOTES:
|
The
Company had outstanding Promissory Notes in the aggregate principal amount of
$50,000, that were due in September 2009, which bore interest at the rate of 10%
per annum. The holder of the Promissory note had the option to
convert, on an all-or-none basis, the entire principal and outstanding interest
of their Notes into the Series B Preferred Stock issued in June
2008. In addition, pursuant to the terms of such Promissory Notes,
upon such conversion, each Note holder will receive five-year warrants to
purchase the number of shares of Common Stock equal to the quotient obtained by
dividing (x) 25% of the principal amount of the Promissory Notes being
converted, by (y) $0.0362, the purchase price per share of Common Stock issuable
upon conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock.
In
September 2009 the holder of these Promissory Notes elected to convert in full
principal and accrued interest totaling $57,605 into equity per the terms of
these notes. Accordingly, the Company issued this investor 576.05
shares of Series B Preferred stock and a five-year warrant to purchase 397,825
shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of $0.0362 per
share. In addition, Promissory Notes in the aggregate principal
amount of $175,000 plus accrued interest were converted into the Series B
Preferred Stock in June 2008 (See Note 9).
In
accordance with accounting standards for convertible securities with beneficial
conversion features, the Company allocates the proceeds associated with the
issuance of preferred stock based on the relative fair value of the preferred
stock and warrants. Additionally, the Company evaluates if the embedded
conversion option results in a beneficial conversion feature by comparing the
relative fair value allocated to the preferred stock to the market value of the
underlying common stock subject to conversion. In connection with the preferred
stock issuance per the Note conversion during June 2008, the Company recorded
total proceeds of $178,147. The Company allocated the total proceeds based on
the related fair value as follows: $171,500 was allocated to the preferred stock
and $6,647 to the warrants. Additionally, the embedded conversion option
resulted in a beneficial conversion feature in the amount of
$6,647. In connection with the preferred stock issuance per the Note
conversion during September 2009, the Company recorded total proceeds of
$57,605. The Company allocated the total proceeds based on the related fair
value as follows: $54,253 was allocated to the preferred stock and $3,352 to the
warrants. Additionally, the embedded conversion option resulted in a beneficial
conversion feature in the amount of $3,352. The value assigned to the warrants
resulting from the relative fair value calculation as well as the value of the
beneficial conversion feature is recorded as a preferred stock dividend and is
presented in the consolidated statements of operations. In addition, the Company
considers the guidance of accounting standards for accounting for derivative
financial instruments indexed to, and potentially settled in, a company’s own
common stock and derivative instruments and hedging activities and concluded
that the conversion feature embedded in the preferred stock only provides for
physical settlement and there are no net settlement features. Accordingly, the
Company has concluded that the conversion feature is not considered a
derivative.
7.
|
INCOME
TAXES:
|
From
inception through December 31, 2005, the Company incurred losses which, as a
limited liability company, were passed through to its members. Tax losses
amounted to approximately $2,500,000 and $2,600,000 for the years ended December
31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. The Company’s Federal net
operating loss carryforward amounts to approximately $10,690,000 and expires
through 2029. These loss carryforwards are subject to limitation in future years
should certain ownership changes occur. A full valuation allowance equal to the
deferred tax asset has been recorded due to the uncertainty that the Company
will have the ability to utilize such asset.
During
the years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the Company sold a
portion of its New Jersey Net Operating Loss tax carryforwards to an industrial
company under provisions in the New Jersey tax code. For the 2009
sale, the Company is entitled to proceeds of approximately
$299,000. The Company received approximately $249,000 for the 2008
sale. The Company has recorded a receivable for the 2009 sale and
included the receivable in the consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2009
under the caption prepaid expenses and other current assets (See Note
11). The Company’s remaining New Jersey net operating loss
carryforward amounts to approximately $3,798,000 and expires through
2016. There can be no assurance that the Company will be eligible to
participate or be successful in future sales of its New Jersey Net Operating
Loss tax carryforwards.
F-18
For the
years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively, the Company’s
effective tax rate differs from the federal statutory rate principally due to
net operating losses offset by certain non-deductible expenses for which no
benefit has been recorded.
A
reconciliation of the Federal statutory rate to the Company’s effective tax rate
for the years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 is as
follows:
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Federal
statutory rate
|
(34.0 | )% | (34.0 | )% | ||||
Decrease
resulting from:
|
||||||||
Non-deductible
expenses
|
2.5 | 4.6 | ||||||
Operating
losses
|
31.5 | 29.4 | ||||||
Effective
tax rate
|
— | % | — | % |
8.
|
COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES:
|
The
Company is obligated under non-cancelable operating leases for office space
expiring at various dates through February 2011. The aggregate minimum future
payments under these leases are approximately as follows:
Year
ending December 31,
2010
|
$
|
136,000
|
|||
2011
|
22,000
|
||||
Total
|
$
|
158,000
|
The
preceding data reflects existing leases through the date of this report and does
not include replacements upon their expiration. In the normal course of
business, operating leases are normally renewed or replaced by other
leases.
Rent
expense for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 amounted to approximately
$258,000 and $251,000, respectively.
Employment
Agreements
The
Company has employment agreements with certain key executives through December
2009. The agreements provide for annual base salaries of varying
amounts.
Litigation
The
Company is currently not involved, but may at times be involved in various
claims and legal actions. Management is currently of the opinion that these
claims and legal actions would have no merit, and any ultimate outcome will
not have a material adverse impact on the consolidated financial position
of the Company and/or the results of its operations.
In
February 2008, Alkermes, Inc. commenced an action against us in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging that our use
of the name MedaSorb infringes on Alkermes’ registered trademark “MEDISORB.” In
the action, Alkermes sought an injunction against our further use of the name
MedaSorb. Pursuant to a Settlement Agreement dated June 18, 2008, to avoid
any potential confusion with Alkermes’ similarly named product, the Company has
ceased using the “MedaSorb” name in its wholly-owned subsidiary, through which
the Company conducts all of its operational activities, and renamed our
operating subsidiary CytoSorbents, Inc. as of November 2008. The Company
has also filed to change the name of the parent company from MedaSorb
Technologies Corporation to CytoSorbents Corporation.
F-19
Royalty
Agreements
Pursuant
to an agreement dated August 11, 2003 an existing investor agreed to make a $4
million equity investment in the Company. These amounts were received by the
Company in 2003. In connection with this agreement the Company granted the
investor a future royalty of 3% on all gross revenues received by the Company
from the sale of its CytoSorb device. The Company has not generated any revenue
from this product and has not incurred any royalty costs through December 31,
2009. The amount of future revenue subject to the royalty agreement could not be
reasonably estimated nor has a liability been incurred, therefore, an accrual
for royalty payments has not been included in the consolidated financial
statements.
License
Agreements
In an
agreement dated September 1, 2006, the Company entered into a license agreement
which provides the Company the exclusive right to use its patented technology
and proprietary know how relating to adsorbent polymers for a period of 18
years. Under the terms of the agreement, MedaSorb has agreed to pay royalties of
2.5% to 5% on the sale of certain of its products if and when those products are
sold commercially for a term not greater than 18 years commencing with the first
sale of such product. The Company has not generated any revenue from its
products and has not incurred any royalty costs through December 31, 2009. The
amount of future revenue subject to the Settlement Agreement could not be
reasonably estimated nor has a liability been incurred, therefore, an accrual
for royalty payments has not been included in the consolidated financial
statements.
Warrant
Agreement
As
inducement to invest additional funds in the private placement of Series B
Preferred Stock, additional consideration was granted to the participants of the
Series B Preferred Stock offering in the event that litigation is commenced
against MedaSorb prior to June 30, 2018, claiming patent infringement on certain
of the Company’s issued patents. In the event this litigation arises
the Company may be required to issue warrants to purchase in the aggregate up to
a maximum of ten million shares of Common Stock subject to certain
adjustments. Through December 31, 2009 no such litigation has arisen
and due to the deemed low probability of this potential outcome, the Company has
not booked a contingent liability for this agreement.
9.
|
STOCKHOLDERS'
EQUITY
|
Preferred
Stock
Our
certificate of incorporation authorizes the issuance of up to 100,000,000 shares
of “blank check” preferred stock, with such designation rights and preferences
as may be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors. We have
designated 12,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 200,000 shares of
Series B Preferred Stock as described above. Subject to the rights of the
holders of the Series A and Series B Preferred Stock, our Board of
Directors is empowered, without stockholder approval, to issue up to 87,800,000
additional shares of preferred stock with dividend, liquidation, conversion,
voting or other rights.
F-20
10%
Series A Preferred Stock
Each
share of Series A Preferred Stock has a stated value of $1.00, and is
convertible at the holder’s option into that number of shares of Common Stock
equal to the stated value of such share of Series A Preferred Stock divided by
an initial conversion price of $1.25. Upon the occurrence of a stock split,
stock dividend, combination of the Common Stock into a smaller number of shares,
issuance of any of shares of Common Stock or other securities by
reclassification of the Common Stock, merger or sale of substantially all of the
Company’s assets, the conversion rate will be adjusted so that the conversion
rights of the Series A Preferred Stock stockholders will be equivalent to the
conversion rights of the Series A Preferred Stock stockholders prior to such
event. In addition, in the event the Company sells shares of Common Stock (or
the equivalent thereof) at a price of less than $1.25 per share, the conversion
price of the shares of Series A Preferred Stock will be reduced to such lower
price. In addition, in the event the Company sells shares of Common Stock (or
the equivalent thereof) at a price of less than $2.00 per share, the exercise
price of the warrants issued to the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock will
be reduced to such lower price. As of the “Qualified Closing” of our Series B
Preferred Stock private placement in August of 2008, these investors’ agreed to
a modification of their rights and pricing and gave up their anti-dilution
protection – see Qualified Closing description in Series B Preferred Stock
section.
Pursuant
to agreements with the June 30, 2006 purchasers of Series A Preferred Stock that
waived rights to anti-dilution price protection upon the completion of the
Series B offering, the Company reduced the conversion price for these holders of
Series A Preferred Stock from $1.25 per share of Common to prices ranging from
$0.10 to $0.45 per share of Common. The June 30, 2006 purchasers of Series A
Preferred Stock also received reductions in their corresponding warrant exercise
prices from $2.00 per share of Common Stock to exercise prices ranging from
$0.40 to $0.90 per share of Common Stock.
The
Series A Preferred Stock bears a dividend of 10% per annum payable quarterly, at
the Company’s election in cash or additional shares of Series A Preferred Stock
valued at the stated value thereof; provided, however, that the Company must pay
the dividend in cash if an “Event of Default” as defined in the Certificate of
Designation designating the Series A Preferred Stock has occurred and is then
continuing. In addition, upon an Event of Default, the dividend rate increases
to 20% per annum. An Event of Default includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
|
·
|
the occurrence of
“Non-Registration Events”
|
|
·
|
an uncured breach by the Company
of any material covenant, term or condition in the Certificate of
Designation or any of the related transaction documents;
and
|
|
·
|
any money judgment or similar
final process being filed against the Company for more than
$100,000.
|
In the
event of the Company’s dissolution, liquidation or winding up, the holders of
the Series A Preferred Stock will receive, in priority over the holders of
Common Stock, a liquidation preference equal to the stated value of such shares
plus accrued dividends thereon.
F-21
The
Series A Preferred Stock is not redeemable at the option of the holder but may
be redeemed by the Company at its option following the third anniversary of the
issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock for 120% of the stated value thereof
plus any accrued but unpaid dividends upon 30 days' prior written notice, during
which time the Series A Preferred Stock may be converted, provided a
registration statement is effective under the Securities Act with respect to the
Common Stock into which such Preferred is convertible and an Event of Default is
not then continuing.
Holders
of Series A Preferred Stock do not have the right to vote on matters submitted
to the holders of Common Stock.
The
registration rights provided for in the subscription agreements entered into
with the purchasers of the Series A Preferred Stock: 1) required that the
Company file a registration statement with the SEC on or before 120 days from
the closing to register the shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of
the Series A Preferred Stock and exercise of the warrants, and cause such
registration statement to be effective within 240 days following the closing;
and 2) entitles each of these investors to liquidated damages in an amount equal
to two percent (2%) of the purchase price of the Series A Preferred Stock if the
Company fails to timely file that registration statement with, or have it
declared effective by, the SEC.
The
transaction documents entered into with the purchasers of the Series A Preferred
Stock also provide for various penalties and fees for breaches or failures to
comply with provisions of those documents, such as the timely payment of
dividends, delivery of stock certificates upon conversion of the Series A
Preferred Stock or exercise of the warrants, and obtaining and maintaining an
effective registration statement with respect to the shares of Common Stock
underlying the Series A Preferred Stock and warrants sold in the
offering.
The
Company has recorded non-cash stock dividends in connection with the issuance of
Series A Preferred Stock as a stock dividend to its preferred shareholders as of
December 31, 2009. Prior to February 26, 2007 and after May 7, 2007, the
dividend rate was 10% per annum. Effective February 26, 2007 due to the
Company’s failure to have the registration statement it filed declared effective
by the Commission within the time required under agreements with the June 30,
2006 purchasers of the Series A Preferred Stock (i) dividends on the shares of
Series A Preferred Stock issued to those purchasers were required to be paid in
cash, (ii) the dividend rate increased from 10% per annum to 20% per annum, and
(iii) such purchasers were entitled to liquidated damages of 2% of their
principal investment payable in cash per 30 day period until the registration
statement was declared effective. In connection with such cash dividend and
penalty obligations, as modified by the Settlement Agreement described below,
the Company’s financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2007 also
reflect an aggregate charge of $361,495. On May 7, 2007 the Company’s
registration statement filed in connection with the Company’s obligations to the
June 30, 2006 purchasers of its Series A Preferred Stock was declared effective
by the Commission.
Pursuant
to a settlement agreement entered into in August 2007 with the June 30, 2006
purchasers of the Series A Preferred Stock, cash dividends stopped accruing on
the Series A Preferred Stock effective on the date the Company’s registration
statement was declared effective (May 7, 2007) and all cash dividends and
penalties due through that date were paid with additional shares of Series A
Preferred Stock at its stated value of $1.00 per share in lieu of cash. The
settlement, did not result in a gain or loss on extinguishment of debt
for the year ended December 31, 2007. Additionally, as part of the settlement,
the dividend rate on the Series A Preferred Stock issued to these purchasers was
reset to 10% effective as of May 7, 2007.
During
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company issued 789,610 and
830,384 shares of Series A Preferred Stock respectively as payment of stock
dividends at the stated value of $1.00 per share.
During
the twelve months ended December 31, 2009 the Company recorded non-cash stock
dividends totaling $111,599 in connection with the issuance of 789,610 shares of
Series A Preferred Stock to its preferred shareholders as of December 31,
2009.
F-22
10
% Series B Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
Each
share of Series B Preferred Stock has a stated value of $100.00, and is
convertible at the holder’s option into that number of shares of Common Stock
equal to the stated value of such share of Series B Preferred Stock divided by
an initial conversion price of $0.035, subject to certain adjustments.
Additionally, upon the occurrence of a stock split, stock dividend, combination
of the Common Stock into a smaller number of shares, issuance of any of shares
of Common Stock or other securities by reclassification of the Common Stock,
merger or sale of substantially all of the Company’s assets, the conversion rate
will be adjusted so that the conversion rights of the Series B Preferred Stock
stockholders will be equivalent to the conversion rights of the Series B
Preferred Stock stockholders prior to such event.
The
Series B Preferred Stock bears a dividend of 10% per annum payable quarterly;
provided, that if an “Event of Default” as defined in the Certificate of
Designation designating the Series B Preferred Stock has occurred and is then
continuing, the dividend rate increases to 20% per annum. An Event of Default
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
|
·
|
the occurrence of
“Non-Registration Events”
|
|
·
|
an uncured breach by the Company
of any material covenant, term or condition in the Certificate of
Designation or any of the related transaction documents;
and
|
|
·
|
any money judgment or similar
final process being filed against the Company for more than
$100,000.
|
Dividends
on the Series B Preferred Stock will be made in additional shares of Series B
Preferred Stock, valued at the stated value thereof. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, during the first three-years following the initial closing, upon the
approval of the holders of a majority of the Series B Preferred Stock, including
the lead investor, NJTC, if it then owns 25% of the shares of Series B Preferred
Stock initially purchased by it (the “Required Amount”), the Company may pay
dividends in cash instead of additional shares of Series B Preferred Stock, and
after such three-year period, the holders of a majority of the Series B
Preferred Stock, including NJTC if it then owns the Required Amount, may require
that such payments be made in cash.
In the
event of the Company’s dissolution, liquidation or winding up, the holders of
the Series B Preferred Stock will receive, in priority over the holders of
Series A Preferred Stock and Common Stock, a liquidation preference equal to the
stated value of such shares plus accrued dividends thereon.
Holders
of Series B Preferred Stock have the right to vote on matters submitted to the
holders of Common Stock on an as converted basis.
The
Company has agreed to file a registration statement under the Securities Act
covering the Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Series B Preferred
Stock within 180 days following the initial closing and to cause it to become
effective within 240 days of such closing. The Company also granted the
investors demand and piggyback registration rights with respect to such Common
Stock. The investors in the private placement are entitled to liquidated damages
in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the purchase price of the Series B
Preferred Stock if the Company fails to timely file that registration statement
with, or have it declared effective by, the SEC. The Company has
received a waiver from a majority of the Series B holders for the
non-registration event and the timing of the Series B registration does not
create a cross-default of the Series A Preferred Series.
Following
the fifth anniversary of the initial closing, the holders of a majority of the
Series B Preferred Stock, including NJTC (if it then holds 25% of the shares of
Series B Preferred Stock initially purchased by it) may elect to require the
Company to redeem all (but not less than all) of their shares of Series B
Preferred Stock at the original purchase price for such shares plus all accrued
and unpaid dividends whether or not declared, provided the market price of the
Company’s Common Stock is then below the conversion price of the Series B
Preferred Stock.
Pursuant
to the Certificate of Designation designating the Series B Preferred Stock, for
so long as NJTC holds the Required Amount, NJTC is entitled to elect (i) two
directors to the Company’s Board of Directors, which shall initially consist of
six members, and (ii) two members to the Company’s compensation committee, which
shall consist of at least three members. Within twelve months following the
initial closing, the Company agreed to reduce the number of Directors on the
Company’s Board of Directors to five members. Following the initial
closing, two affiliates of NJTC joined the Company’s Board of Directors and
compensation committee pursuant to the foregoing provision.
F-23
The
transaction documents entered into with the purchasers of the Series B Preferred
Stock also provide for various penalties and fees for breaches or failures to
comply with provisions of those documents, such as the timely payment of
dividends, delivery of stock certificates upon conversion of the Series B
Preferred Stock or exercise of the warrants, and obtaining and maintaining an
effective registration statement with respect to the shares of Common Stock
underlying the Series B Preferred Stock and warrants sold in the
offering.
In
accordance with accounting standards governing debt with conversion and other
options, the Company allocates the proceeds associated with the issuance of
preferred stock based on the relative fair value of the preferred stock and
warrants. Additionally, the Company evaluates if the embedded conversion option
results in a beneficial conversion feature by comparing the relative fair value
allocated to the preferred stock to the market value of the underlying common
stock subject to conversion. In connection with the preferred stock issuances
during the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company received total proceeds of
$5,293,147. The Company allocated the total proceeds based on the related fair
value as follows: $5,110,773 was allocated to the preferred stock and $182,374
to the warrants. Additionally, the embedded conversion option resulted in a
beneficial conversion feature in the amount of $182,374. The value assigned to
the warrants resulting from the relative fair value calculation as well as the
value of the beneficial conversion feature is recorded as a preferred stock
dividend and is presented in the consolidated statements of operations. In
addition, the Company considers the guidance of accounting for derivative
financial instruments indexed to, and potentially settled in, a company’s own
common stock, and accounting for derivative instruments and hedging activities
and concluded that the conversion feature embedded in the preferred stock only
provides for physical settlement and there are no net settlement features.
Accordingly, the Company has concluded that the conversion feature is not
considered a derivative.
During
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company issued 5,860.22 and
2,627.17 shares of Series B Preferred Stock respectively as payment of stock
dividends at the stated value of $100.00 per share.
During
the twelve months ended December 31, 2009 the Company recorded non-cash stock
dividends totaling $586,022 in connection with the issuance of 5,860.22 shares
of Series B Preferred Stock to its preferred shareholders as of December 31,
2009.
Determination
of Stock Dividend Fair Value
The
Company has estimated the fair value of the shares issued as stock dividends
based upon the last completed financing transaction involving the underlying
common shares, which occurred in June 2008.
Stock
Option Plans
As of
December 31, 2009, the Company had a Long Term Incentive Plan (“2006 Plan”) to
attract, retain, and provide incentives to employees, officers, directors, and
consultants. The Plan generally provides for the granting of stock, stock
options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, or any combination of the
foregoing to eligible participants.
A total
of 40,000,000 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance under the 2006
Plan. As of December 31, 2009 there were outstanding options to purchase
22,687,225 shares of common stock reserved under the plan. Additionally, as of
December 31, 2009 there were options to purchase 890,479 shares of Common Stock
that were issued outside of the 2006 Plan. The Company may increase the shares
in the 2006 Plan as needed to maintain the pool with 15% of the shares
outstanding on a fully diluted basis.
The 2006
Plan as well as grants issued outside of the Plan are administered by the Board
of Directors. The Board is authorized to select from among eligible
employees, directors, advisors and consultants those individuals to whom
incentives are to be granted and to determine the number of shares to be subject
to, and the terms and conditions of the options. The Board is also
authorized to prescribe, amend and rescind terms relating to options granted
under the Plans. Generally, the interpretation and construction of any
provision of the Plans or any options granted hereunder is within the discretion
of the Board.
The Plan
provides that options may or may not be Incentive Stock Options (ISOs) within
the meaning of Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code. Only employees of
the Company are eligible to receive ISOs, while employees and non-employee
directors, advisors and consultants are eligible to receive options, which are
not ISOs, i.e. “Non-Qualified Options.” Because the Company has not yet
obtained shareholder approval of the 2006 Plan, all options granted thereunder
to date are “Non-Qualified Options” and until such shareholder approval is
obtained, all future options issued under the 2006 Plan will also be
“Non-Qualified Options.”
Stock-based
Compensation
Share-based
employee, director, and consultant compensation in the amounts of approximately
$109,000 and $109,000 for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 and
approximately $128,000 and $254,000 for the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008, are included in the net loss of $2,736,715 and $3,017,890, respectively
under the captions research and development and general and
administrative.
F-24
The
summary of the stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2009 is as
follows:
Weighted
|
||||||||||||
Weighted
|
Average
|
|||||||||||
Average
|
Remaining
|
|||||||||||
Exercise
|
Contractual
|
|||||||||||
Shares
|
per Share
|
Life (Years)
|
||||||||||
Outstanding
January 1, 2008
|
2,098,502 | 9.41 | 7.7 | |||||||||
Granted
|
16,133,578 | 0.075 | 9.4 | |||||||||
Cancelled
|
(73,234 | ) | 26.42 | 0.0 | ||||||||
Exercised
|
— | — | — | |||||||||
Outstanding,
December 31, 2008
|
18,158,846 | 1.05 | 9.1 | |||||||||
Granted
|
5,418,858 | 0.125 | 9.0 | |||||||||
Cancelled
|
— | — | — | |||||||||
Exercised
|
0 | — | — | |||||||||
Outstanding,
December 31, 2009
|
23,577,704 | $ | 0.84 | 8.3 |
The
weighted-average grant date fair value for options granted during the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 amounted to approximately $0.003 and $0.03 per
share, respectively.
At
December 31, 2009, the aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding and
options currently exercisable amounted to $15,605. As of December 31, 2009, the
Company had options currently exerciseable into an aggregate total of 16,776,651
shares of common stock.
The
summary of the status of the Company’s non-vested options for the year ended
December 31, 2009 is as follows:
|
Weighted
|
|||||||
|
Average
|
|||||||
|
Grant Date
|
|||||||
Shares
|
Fair Value
|
|||||||
Non-vested,
January 1, 2009
|
6,280,604
|
$
|
0.05
|
|||||
Granted
|
5,418,858
|
$
|
0.003
|
|||||
Cancelled
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
|||||
Vested
|
(4,898,409
|
)
|
$
|
0.039
|
||||
Exercised
|
—
|
—
|
||||||
Non-vested,
December 31, 2009
|
6,801,053
|
$
|
0.024
|
As of
December 31, 2009, approximately $87,772 of total unrecognized compensation cost
related to stock options is expected to be recognized over a weighted average
period of 0.64 years.
As of
December 31, 2009, the Company has the following warrants to purchase common
stock outstanding:
Number of Shares
|
Warrant Exercise
|
Warrant
|
||||||
To be Purchased
|
Price per Share
|
Expiration Date
|
||||||
15,569 | $ | 6.64 |
March
31, 2010
|
|||||
816,691 | $ | 4.98 |
June
30, 2011
|
|||||
1,200,000 | $ | 0.90 |
June
30, 2011
|
|||||
900,000 | $ | 0.40 |
June
30, 2011
|
|||||
339,954 | $ | 2.00 |
September 30, 2011
|
|||||
52,080 | $ | 2.00 |
July
31, 2011
|
|||||
400,000 | $ | 0.40 |
October
31, 2011
|
|||||
240,125 | $ | 1.25 |
October
24, 2016
|
|||||
3,986,429 | $ | 0.035 |
June
25, 2013
|
|||||
397,825 | $ | 0.0362 |
September
30, 2014
|
|||||
12,483,665 | $ | 0.107 |
October
5, 2010
|
|||||
20,832,338 |
F-25
As of
December 31, 2009, the Company has the following warrant to purchase Series A
Preferred Stock outstanding:
Number of
|
Warrant Exercise
|
Warrant
|
||||
Shares to be
|
Price per
|
Expiration
|
||||
Purchased
|
Preferred Share
|
Date
|
||||
525,000
|
$
|
1.00
|
June 30, 2011
|
If the
holder of warrants for preferred stock exercises in full, the holder will
receive additional 5 year warrants to purchase a total of 210,000 shares of
common stock at $0.40 per share.
Equity
Instruments Issued for Services Rendered
During
the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 the Company issued stock options,
warrants and shares of common stock in exchange for services rendered to the
Company. The fair value of each stock option and warrant was valued using the
Black Scholes pricing model which takes into account as of the grant date the
exercise price (ranging from $0.035 to $0.25 per share) and expected life of the
stock option or warrant (5-10 years), the current price of the underlying stock
and its expected volatility (approximately 23-27 percent based on the historical
volatility of the Company’s industry sector), expected dividends (-0- percent)
on the stock and the risk free interest rate (ranging from 2.25 to 4.04 percent)
for the term of the stock option or warrant. Shares of common stock are valued
at the quoted market price on the date of grant. The fair value of each grant
was charged to the related expense in the statement of operations for the
services received.
10.
|
NET LOSS PER
SHARE
|
Basic
earnings per share and diluted earnings per share for the years ended December
31, 2009 and 2008 have been computed by dividing the net loss for each
respective period by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during
that period. All outstanding warrants and options representing approximately
44,410,042 and 26,109,694 incremental shares, respectively, as well as shares
issuable upon conversion of Series A & B Convertible Preferred Stock and
Preferred Stock Warrants representing approximately 214,993,901 incremental
shares have been excluded from the computation of diluted EPS as they are
anti-dilutive.
11.
|
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS
|
The
Company has evaluated subsequent events occurring after the balance sheet
through the date of April 9, 2010, which is the date the financial statements
were issued.
In
January 2010, the Company issued options to purchase 2,530,000 shares of Common
Stock to employees and a consultant exercisable at $0.173 per share and options
to purchase 108,000 shares of Common Stock to a consultant exercisable at $0.166
per share.
During
2010 a total of 500,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock were converted into
5,000,000 shares of Common Stock, and a total of 4,054.4 shares of Series B
Preferred Stock were converted into 11,200,000 shares of Common
Stock.
In
January 2010 we received approximately $299,000 as proceeds from the sale during
2009 of our Net Operating Losses as part of a State sponsored
program.
In
January 2010 the Company issued a 12-month Promissory Note in the principal
amount of $172,500, which bears interest at the rate of 5% per annum. Should the
Company complete any financing, debt or equity, which includes any equity
component or the right to convert into equity, the entire principal and
outstanding interest of the Note shall automatically be converted into the
creditor’s choice of either 1) the securities issued in such financing under the
same terms, conditions, and pricing (the “Conversion Price”) or 2) applied
toward the exercise of the creditor’s existing warrant for Series A Preferred
Stock. In addition pursuant to the terms of the Promissory Note, upon
conversion, the note holder will receive a five year warrant to purchase that
number of shares of Common Stock equal to the quotient obtained by dividing (x)
50% of the principal plus accrued interest of the Note being converted, by (y)
the Conversion Price, with the resulting number of shares having an exercise
price equal to the Conversion Price. If in the event there is not a new
financing prior to the maturity of the Note or the creditor elects to convert
the outstanding principal and interest toward the exercise of creditor’s
existing Series A warrant, then upon conversion, the note holder will receive a
five year warrant to purchase that number of shares of Common Stock equal to the
quotient obtained by dividing (x) 50% of the principal plus accrued interest of
the Note being converted, by (y) $0.10, with the resulting number of shares
having an exercise price equal to $0.10 per share of common stock.
In March
2010, the Company filed to change its corporate name from MedaSorb Technologies
Corporation to CytoSorbents Corporation.
F-26