Grapefruit USA, Inc - Quarter Report: 2016 March (Form 10-Q)

---

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

---

 

FORM 10-Q

 

---

(Mark One)

☒ QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2016

or

☐ TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Transition period from _______________ to ______________

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

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 definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One).

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

 

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock as of the latest practicable date.

 

As of April 25, 2016, the number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s class of common stock was 192,572,393.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

PART I.          FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.            Financial Statements (Unaudited)

 

IMAGING3, INC.

CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS

AT MARCH 31, 2016 AND DECEMBER 31, 2015

 

 

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these unaudited financial statements

 

 

IMAGING3, INC.

CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

March 31, 2016 and 2015

(UNAUDITED)

 

 

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these unaudited financial statements

 

 

IMAGING3, INC.

CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED

MARCH 31, 2016 AND 2015

(UNAUDITED)

 

 

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these unaudited financial statements

 

 

IMAGING3, INC.

Notes to Condensed Financial Statements

(Unaudited)

Imaging3, Inc. (the “Company”, “us”, “we”, “Imaging3”) is a California corporation incorporated on October 29, 1993 as Imaging Services, Inc.  The Company filed a certificate of amendment of articles of incorporation to change its name to Imaging3, Inc. on August 20, 2002.

The Company’s primary business is refurbishment and sale of medical equipment, parts and services to hospitals, surgery centers, research labs, physician offices and veterinarians.  Equipment sales include new c-arms, c-arms tables, remanufactured c-arms, used c-arm and surgical tables.  Part sales comprise new or renewed replacement parts for c-arms.

The Company has developed a proprietary medical technology designed to produce 3d medical diagnostic images in real time. We believe Imaging3 technology has the potential to contribute to the improvement of healthcare.  Our technology is designed to cause 3D images to be instantly constructed using high-resolution fluoroscopy.  These images can be used as real time references for any current or new medical procedures in which multiple frames of reference are required to perform medical procedures on or in the human body. Management believes that Imaging3 technology has extraordinary market potential in an almost unlimited number of medical applications. This technology is still in development and the Company intends to seek approval from the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), which will allow us to offer our product to healthcare providers.

Basis of Presentation

On September 13, 2012 (the “Petition Date”), the Company filed a voluntary petition with the federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles, California, to enter bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code.  On or about July 15, 2013, our Plan of Reorganization was approved by the United States Bankruptcy Court.  On July 30, 2013, we emerged from bankruptcy and continued operations under the terms and conditions of our Bankruptcy Reorganization Plan as it applies to post bankruptcy operations. For accounting purposes, management deemed the effective date of the Chapter 11 Plan (the “Plan”) to be June 30, 2013. The Company’s operations between July 1, 2013 and July 30, 2013 were not significant. The Plan adopted by Imaging3, Inc. is a reorganizing plan.  Payments under the Plan were made by utilizing existing cash on hand, borrowings on a secured and unsecured basis, future cash flow, if any, capital raised through the sale of our common stock in private placements, and by conversion of debt to equity.

Upon emergence from bankruptcy, Imaging3 adopted fresh-start accounting which resulted in Imaging3 becoming a new entity for financial reporting purposes. Imaging3 applied fresh start accounting as of July 1, 2013. As a result of the application of fresh start accounting and the effects of the implementation of the plan of reorganization, the financial statements on or after July 1, 2013 are not comparable with the financial statements prior to that date.

Subsequent to the Petition Date, all expenses, gains and losses directly associated with the reorganization proceedings are reported as Reorganization items, net in the accompanying Consolidated Statement of Operations. In addition, Liabilities subject to compromise during the chapter 11 proceedings were distinguished from liabilities that were not expected to be compromised and from post-petition liabilities in the accompanying Balance Sheets. As of January 8, 2016, the Company is in default on certain of its covenants under the Plan.  

The accompanying unaudited interim financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission for the presentation of interim financial information, but do not include all the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.  In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included.  It is suggested that these condensed financial statements be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.  The company follows the same accounting policies in preparation of interim reports.  Results of operations for the interim periods are not indicative of annual results.

 

Going Concern

The Company’s financial statements are prepared using the generally accepted accounting principles applicable to a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company has historically incurred net losses. The continuing losses have adversely affected the liquidity of the Company.

In view of the matters described in the preceding paragraph, recoverability of a major portion of the recorded asset amounts shown in the accompanying balance sheet is dependent upon continued operations of the Company, which in turn is dependent upon the Company’s ability to raise additional capital, obtain financing and to succeed in its future operations.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary as a result of the Company’s going concern uncertainty.

Management's plan regarding this matter is to, amongst other things, seek additional equity financing by selling our equity securities, increase our sales volume, and continue seeking approval from the FDA to bring to market our smart scan technology imaging platform. We cannot assure you that funds from these sources will be available when needed or, if available, will be on terms favorable to us or to our stockholders. If we raise additional funds or settle liabilities by issuing equity securities, the percentage ownership of our stockholders will be reduced, stockholders may experience additional dilution or such equity securities may provide for rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of the holders of our common stock. Our ability to execute our business plan and continue as a going concern may be adversely affected if we are unable to raise additional capital or operate profitably.

The Company anticipates that further equity/debt financings will be necessary to continue to fund operations in the future and there is no guarantee that such financings will be available or, if available, on acceptable terms.

A summary of the Company’s significant accounting policies consistently applied in the preparation of the accompanying financial statements follows:

Use of Estimates

In preparing financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less from the date of purchase that are readily convertible into cash to be cash equivalents.  The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts that may exceed federally insured limits.  The Company has not experienced any losses in such accounts. The Company had no cash equivalents at March 31, 2016.

 

Revenue Recognition

Revenue is recognized upon shipment, provided that evidence of an arrangement exists, title and risk of loss have passed to the customer, fees are fixed or determinable and collection of the related receivable is reasonably assured.  Revenue is recorded net of estimated product returns, which is based upon the Company’s return policy, sales agreements, management estimates of potential future product returns related to current period revenue, current economic trends, changes in customer composition and historical experience. The Company accrues for warranty costs, sales returns, and other allowances based on its experience. Generally, the Company extends credit to its customers and does not require collateral.  The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers and historic credit losses have been within management’s expectations and has a revenue receivables policy for service and warranty contracts.   Equipment sales usually have a one-year warranty of parts and service.  After a one-year period, the Company contacts the buyer to initiate the sale of a new warranty contract for one year.  Warranty revenues are deferred and recognized on a straight line basis over the term of the contract or as services are performed. 

Deferred Revenue

Deferred revenue consists substantially of amounts received from customers in advance of the Company's performance service period. Deferred revenue is recognized as revenue on a systematic basis that is proportionate to the period that the underlying services are rendered, which in certain arrangements is straight-line over the remaining contractual term or estimated customer life of an agreement.

 

Accounts Receivable

The Company’s customer base is geographically dispersed.  The Company maintains reserves for potential credit losses on accounts receivable.  Management reviews the composition of accounts receivable and analyzes historical bad debts, customer concentrations, customer credit worthiness, current economic trends and changes in customer payment patterns to evaluate the adequacy of these reserves.  Reserves are recorded primarily on a specific identification basis.

Property & Equipment

Property and equipment are stated at cost.  Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are charged to expenses as incurred and additions, renewals and betterments are capitalized.  When property and equipment are retired or otherwise disposed of, the related cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the respective accounts, and any gain or loss is included in operations.  Depreciation of property and equipment is provided using the straight-line method for all assets with estimated lives of three to eight years. 

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable through the estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the assets. Whenever any such impairment exists, an impairment loss will be recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value.

The Company tests long-lived assets, including property, plant, equipment and intangible assets subject to periodic amortization, for recoverability at least annually or more frequently upon the occurrence of an event or when circumstances indicate that the net carrying amount is greater than its fair value.  Assets are grouped and evaluated at the lowest level for their identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of the cash flows of other groups of assets.  The Company considers historical performance and future estimated results in its evaluation of potential impairment, and then compares the carrying amount of the asset to the future estimated cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset.  If the carrying amount of the asset exceeds estimated expected undiscounted future cash flows, the Company measures the amount of impairment by comparing the carrying amount of the asset to its fair value.  The estimation of fair value is generally measured by discounting expected future cash flows at the rate the Company utilizes to evaluate potential investments.  The Company estimates fair value based on the information available in making whatever estimates, judgments and projections are considered necessary.

Basic and Diluted Net Loss Per Share

Basic net loss per share is based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding.  Diluted net loss per share is based on the assumption that all dilutive convertible shares and stock options were converted or exercised.  Dilution is computed by applying the treasury stock method.  Under this method, options and warrants are assumed to be exercised at the beginning of the period (or at the time of issuance, if later), and as if funds obtained thereby were used to purchase common stock at the average market price during the period.  During 2015 and 2016, potentially dilutive securities were excluded from the computation of weighted average shares outstanding-diluted because their effect was anti-dilutive.

 Derivative Financial Instruments

The Company generally does not use derivative financial instruments to hedge exposures to cash-flow risks or market-risks that may affect the fair values of its financial instruments.  The Company utilizes various types of financing to fund its business needs, including convertible notes and warrants and other instruments not indexed to our stock.  The Company is required to record its derivative instruments at their fair value.  Changes in the fair value of derivatives are recognized in earnings in accordance with ASC 815.  The Company’s only asset or liability measured at fair value on a recurring basis is its derivative liability associated with warrants to purchase common stock and convertible notes.  

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The fair value accounting standard creates a three-level hierarchy to prioritize the inputs used in the valuation techniques to derive fair values.  The basis for fair value measurements for each level within the hierarchy is described below with Level 1 having the highest priority and Level 3 having the lowest.

 

Level 1: Observable prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

 

Level 2: Observable prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in the market.

 

Level 3: Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are unobservable. These unobservable assumptions reflect estimates of assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Valuation techniques include use of option pricing models, discounted cash flow models, and similar techniques.

The Company had the following assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at March 31, 2016.

The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with ASC 740-10, “Income Taxes” which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns.

 

Under this method, deferred income taxes are recognized for the tax consequences in future years of differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their financial reporting amounts at each year-end based on enacted tax laws and statutory tax rates applicable to the periods in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. The provision for income taxes represents the tax payable for the period and the change during the period in deferred tax assets and liabilities.

Inventory

Inventory is stated at the lower of cost or market with cost determined using the first-in, first-out method.

Research and Development

Costs and expenses that can be clearly identified as research and development are charged to expense as incurred in accordance with FASB ASC 730-10. Included in research and development costs are operating costs, facilities, supplies, external services, clinical trial and manufacturing costs, and overhead directly related to the Company’s research and development operations, as well as costs to acquire technology licenses.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

In May 2014, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The standard will eliminate the transaction- and industry-specific revenue recognition guidance under current U.S. GAAP and replace it with a principle-based approach for determining revenue recognition. ASU 2014-09 is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is not permitted. The revenue recognition standard is required to be applied retrospectively, including any combination of practical expedients as allowed in the standard. We are evaluating the impact, if any, of the adoption of ASU 2014-09 to our financial statements and related disclosures. The Company has not yet selected a transition method nor has it determined the effect of the standard on its ongoing financial reporting.

 

 

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements—Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. ASU 2014-15 changes to the disclosure of uncertainties about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. These changes require an entity’s management to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that financial statements are issued. Substantial doubt is defined as an indication that it is probable that an entity will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the date that financial statements are issued. If management has concluded that substantial doubt exists, then the following disclosures should be made in the financial statements: (i) principal conditions or events that raised the substantial doubt, (ii) management’s evaluation of the significance of those conditions or events in relation to the entity’s ability to meet its obligations, (iii) management’s plans that alleviated the initial substantial doubt or, if substantial doubt was not alleviated, management’s plans that are intended to at least mitigate the conditions or events that raise substantial doubt, and (iv) if the latter in (iii) is disclosed, an explicit statement that there is substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. These changes become effective for the Company for the 2017 annual period. Management is evaluating the impact of the adoption of these changes will have on the consolidated financial statements. Subsequent to adoption, this guidance will need to be applied by management at the end of each annual period and interim period therein to determine what, if any, impact there will be on the consolidated financial statements in a given reporting period.

 

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No 2015-3, Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. This update changes the presentation of debt issuance costs in the balance sheet. ASU 2015-03 requires debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt obligation to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability rather than being presented as an asset. Amortization of debt issuance costs will continue to be reported as interest expense. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-15, “Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements”. This ASU clarified guidance in ASC 2015-03 stating that the SEC staff would not object to a company presenting debt issuance costs related to a line-of-credit arrangement on the balance sheet as a deferred asset, regardless of whether there were any outstanding borrowings at period-end. This update is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2015, which will require us to adopt these provisions in the first quarter of 2016. We do not expect this guidance to have a material impact to our financial position or results of operations.

 

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which supersedes existing guidance on accounting for leases in "Leases (Topic 840)" and generally requires all leases to be recognized in the consolidated balance sheet. ASU 2016-02 is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. The provisions of ASU 2016-02 are to be applied using a modified retrospective approach. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of this standard on its consolidated financial statements.

 

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This ASU affects entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The ASU is designed to simplify several aspects of accounting for share-based payment award transactions which include – the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, classification on the statement of cash flows and forfeiture rate calculations. ASU 2016-09 will become effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal 2018. Early adoption is permitted in any interim or annual period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.

 

All accounts receivable are trade related.  These receivables are current and management believes are collectible except for which a reserve has been provided. The reserve amount for uncollectible accounts was $-0- and $-0- as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

During 2003, the Company paid payroll net of taxes and accrued said taxes without payment due to cash flow limitations resulting from a 2002 warehouse fire that incinerated our inventory.  The Company subsequently received a tax lien in 2005 related to 2003 payroll taxes from the Internal Revenue Service and continued to accrue interest and penalty charges.  The original amount was $104,052.  In 2008, payments were made and the Internal Revenue Service issued a tax lien release for this amount and the liability carried on the Company’s books was relieved.  In 2009, the Company was notified by the Internal Revenue Service that additional payroll taxes, interest, and penalty charges were still owed.  After researching, it is believed that the Internal Revenue Service double booked the original payments made and released the lien in error.  Settlement was reached and the Company is currently paying $2,000 per month on a total liability of $44,824 as of March 31, 2016, including interest and penalties, with a potential balloon payment in one year subject to re-negotiation after one year with the IRS.  The Company has hired tax counsel to re-negotiate the current tax debt with the IRS.

 

The Company’s book losses and other timing differences result in a net deferred income tax benefit which is offset by a valuation allowance for a net deferred asset of zero. The Company has concluded, in accordance with the applicable accounting standards, that it is more likely than not that the Company may not realize the benefit of all of its deferred tax assets. Accordingly, management has provided a 100% valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets until such time as management believes that its projections of future profits as well as expected future tax rates make the realization of these deferred tax assets more-likely-than-not. Significant judgment is required in the evaluation of deferred tax benefits and differences in future results from our estimates could result in material differences in the realization of these assets. The Company has recorded a full valuation allowance related to all of its deferred tax assets. The Company has performed an assessment of positive and negative evidence regarding the realization of the net deferred tax asset in accordance with FASB ASC 740-10, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” This assessment included the evaluation of scheduled reversals of deferred tax liabilities, the availability of carry forwards and estimates of projected future taxable income. The availability of the Company’s net operating loss carry forwards is subject to limitation if there is a 50% or more change in the ownership of the Company’s stock.  The provision for income taxes consists of the state minimum tax imposed on corporations of $800. The Company has adopted guidance issued by the FASB that clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements and prescribes a recognition threshold of more likely than not and a measurement process for financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. In making this assessment, a company must determine whether it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination, based solely on the technical merits of the position and must assume that the tax position will be examined by taxing authorities. The Company’s policy is to include interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense.  The Company has not recognized any unrecognized tax benefits and does not have any interest or penalties related to uncertain tax positions as of March 31, 2016.

During 2013, the Company issued promissory notes in the aggregate amount of $42,500. These notes bear interest at 7% per annum and were due on June 30, 2014. The notes are secured by substantially all assets of the Company. As of March 31, 2016 the notes are past due.

During 2015, the Company issued promissory notes in the aggregate amount of $455,000. These notes bear interest at 10% per annum and are past due as of March 31, 2016. These notes are secured by substantially all assets of the Company. The convertible promissory note is convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock at a rate equal to $0.01 per share, subject to downward adjustments for future equity issuances. In connection with these convertible promissory notes, the Company issued 27,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, subject to downward adjustments for future equity issuances.  The warrants have a term of 7 years from the date of issuance. The Company is in default under the terms of these notes.

 

The conversion features and warrants are considered derivative liabilities pursuant to ASC 815 and were measured at their grant-date fair value and recorded as a liability and note discount on the date of issuance. Subsequent changes to the value of the derivative liabilities are recorded in earnings. As a result, during the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recorded an initial note discount of $455,000, with an additional immediate charge to interest expense of $749,809 relating to the excess value of the derivative liabilities over the promissory notes. Amortization of the note discount amounted to $77,000 during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and $0 for the three months ended March 31, 2015.

Preferred Stock

Upon confirmation of the Company’s Chapter 11 Reorganization Plan, the Company is authorized to issue 2,000 shares of preferred stock, no par value. The rights, privileges, and preferences of the preferred stock are to be determined by the Company’s board of directors and may be issued in series. As of December 31, 2015, there were no shares of preferred stock outstanding.  As of January 18, 2016, Imaging3 issued 2000 preferred voting shares to Dane Medley, CEO/Chairman. Each share constitutes 350,000 voting shares. The estimated value of these shares was not significant.

Common Stock

The Company is authorized to issue 1,000,000,000 shares of no par value common stock.

During the three months ended March 31, 2015, the company issued a total of 7,580,000 shares of common stock for cash proceeds of $77,000 and 5,825,000 shares of common stock for services, valued at 58,250.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016 the Company issued a total of 1,176,000 shares of common stock for cash in the amount of $29,400 and 500,000 shares were issued for services rendered valued at $12,500.

  

During 2014, the Board of Directors adopted, and the shareholders approved, the 2014 Stock Option Plan under which a total of 27,000,000 shares of common stock had been reserved for issuance. The 2014 Stock Option Plan will terminate in September 2024.

  

 

As of March 31, 2016, the members of the Board of Directors hold options to purchase 8,000,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.025.

 

 

The weighted average remaining contractual life of options outstanding issued under the Plan was 9.75 years at March 31, 2016. 

Following is a summary of warrants outstanding at March 31, 2016:

 

The Company’s only asset or liability measured at fair value on a recurring basis was its derivative liability associated with warrants to purchase common stock and the conversion feature embedded in convertible promissory notes.

In connection with previous financing transactions, the Company issued warrants to purchase common stock and convertible promissory notes. These instruments included provisions that could result in a reduced exercise price based on specified full-ratchet anti-dilution provisions. The “reset” provisions were triggered in the event the Company subsequently issued common stock, stock warrants, stock options or convertible debt with a stock price, exercise price or conversion price lower than contractually specified amounts. Upon triggering the “reset” provisions, the exercise / conversion price of the instrument will be reduced. Accordingly, pursuant to ASC 815, these instruments were not considered to be solely indexed to the Company’s own stock and were not afforded equity treatment.

The following table summarizes activity in the Company’s derivative liability during the year ended March 31, 2016:

The Company classifies the fair value of these derivative liabilities under level 3 of the fair value hierarchy of financial instruments.  The fair value of the derivative liability was calculated using a Black Scholes model. The Company’s stock price and estimates of volatility are the most sensitive inputs in validation of assets and liabilities at fair value. The liabilities were measured using the following assumptions:

Vuksich Litigation

In May of 2012, John M. Vuksich (“Vuksich”), a shareholder who alleges to hold shares or proxies totaling more than 30,000,000 shares in the Company (approximately 5.95 % of the outstanding stock in the Company at the time of the filing prior to the Company’s bankruptcy filing), filed a shareholder derivative action in the Los Angeles County Superior Court against the Company or (the “Vuksich Litigation”). In that litigation, Vuksich challenged certain corporate actions taken by the Company beginning in 2010, including the Company’s amendments to its articles of incorporation authorizing the Company to increase the authorized number of shares of common stock and to authorize the issuance of preferred stock. Among other things, Vuksich sought an order voiding certain other financing agreements and sought an order compelling the Company to fill vacancies on its Board of Directors. The Vuksich Litigation, which sought to alter the equity structure and management of the Company, required the Company to expend its already-limited resources both in terms of management time and attorney’s fees. Although the Company believed that the Vuksich Litigation could and would be defeated, it decided that the resources of the Company were better directed towards its business objectives in an effort to create value for the Company’s stakeholders.

There are currently four appeals pending in the “Vuksich Litigation.” If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court in any of these appeals, it could have a negative effect on the confirmed Plan:

 

·	Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case, Case No.: 13-56695 (9th Cir.), appeal filed September 30, 2013, appealing the District Court’s dismissal of the initial appeal of the order.

·	Order Disallowing Claims Nos. 23 and 24, Case No.: 14-55499 (9th Cir.), appeal filed March 31, 2014, appealing the District Court’s order affirming the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

·	Order Denying Motion for Abandonment of Potential Claims Against Officers and Directors, Case No.: 14-55521 (9th Cir.), appeal filed April 2, 2014, appealing the District Court’s order affirming the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

·	Order Confirming Debtor’s First Amended Plan, Case No.: 14-55466 (9th Cir.), appeal filed March 24, 2014, appealing the District Court’s order affirming in part and reversing in part the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

The above appeals were heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 9, 2015.  The court ruled in favor of the company on December 18, 2015.

On December 17, 2015 the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the rulings of the United States Bankruptcy Court and the United States District Court related to four appeals that John M. Vuksich had filed, asserting that: 

 

1.	That the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court should not have confirmed Imaging3’s chapter 11 plan of reorganization;

2.	That the claim that Vuksich filed in the Imaging3 bankruptcy case was improperly disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court;

3.	That the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court should have abandoned the Vuksich litigation;

4.	That the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court should have dismissed the Imaging3 chapter 11 bankruptcy case because the court had no jurisdiction over the case.

On February 2, 2016, the Ninth District Judges Tashima, Callahan, and Hurwitz have voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judges Callahan and Hurwitz have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Tashima so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35.The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc are denied.

During April 2016 John M. Vuksich appealed to Supreme Court on the most recent rulings dismissing his charges.  The Company will await the Supreme Courts response regarding this appeal.

The Company was involved in the following additional litigation: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Imaging3 & Dean Janes, Civil Action No. CV13-04616 GAF (AJWx) (U.S. Dist. Ct., C.D. Ca.), for which Fulbright & Jaworski LLP is counsel of record.  The Company settled this action by entering into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the SEC in which the Company covenanted to comply with federal and state securities laws through December 31, 2017, among other covenants.

 

On September 13, 2012, the Company filed In re Imaging3, Inc., Case No.  2:12-bk-41206-NB (Bankr. C.D. Ca.) (the “Bankruptcy Case”), a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code.  The Company’s plan of reorganization thereunder (the “Plan”) was confirmed on July 9, 2013 pursuant to the court’s Order Confirming Debtor's First Amended Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization Dated March 5, 2013, as Modified (the “Order”).  Pursuant to the Order, the Plan became effective on July 30, 2013 (“Effective Date”).  The Plan requires that the Company pay certain obligations on the Effective Date of the Plan. Of the Company’s obligations under the Plan, the Company is delinquent with regard to the obligations described in the chart below:

Class of Claim(s)

Payment Recipient

Amount of Each Periodic Payment & Amount of Total Claim

Payment Due Date

Status of Payment

Administrative Expense Claim

Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP

$50,000.00 (monthly) Total Claim: Approximately $1,101,213

*Greenberg Glusker agreed to be paid as follows: $50,000.00 on September 1, 2013 and thereafter no less than $50,000.00 per month on or before the 15th of each month, commencing on October 2013. Interest will be charged on the outstanding balance at the rate of 10% per annum from July 30, 2013

Not paid

Administrative Expense Claim

Mentor Group

Approx. $18,000

Effective Date

Not paid

Priority Tax Claims

IRS

$1,484.00 (monthly) Total Claim: $53,240.24

Monthly payment of $1,484 until 9/12/2017

Not Paid

Priority Tax Claims

State Board of Equalization

$341.00 (monthly) Total Claim: $14,917.94

Monthly payment of $341 until 9/12/2017 Modified by Stipulation Dated June 23, 2015 as follows: 1. Pay the balance of the Administrative Claim in the amount of $196.01 2. Pay all of the arrearages for Priority Tax Claims by payment of $6,240.70 3. Cure post-Stipulation Effective Date taxes in the aggregate amount of $31,367.12 together with monthly interest accruing after July 1, 2015 (“Post Stipulation Effective Date Taxes”), by payment of four installments, as follows: a. $8,000 on the Stipulation Effective Date; b. $8,000 sixty days from the Stipulation Effective Date; c. $8,000 ninety days from the Stipulation Effective Date; d. the balance of the Post Stipulation Effective Date Taxes one hundred twenty days from the Stipulation Effective Date.

Paid in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation with the State Board of Equalization

Class 1

North Surgery Center, L.P.

$1,673.00 (monthly) Total Claim: $53,792.83

Pay monthly with first payment due on first business day of the first calendar month following the Effective Date

Paid as scheduled until December 2013; Not Paid in and after January 2014.

Class 2

Precision Forging Dies

Total Claim: $45,278.06

Pay in full by the first business day of the thirteenth calendar month following the Effective Date (September 1, 2014)

Not Paid

Class 9

IRS (unsecured portion of tax claims)

Total Claim: $62,736.92

Cash equal to the value of pro rata shares of New Common Stock outstanding on the Effective Date

Not Paid

Section IV, F of the Plan provides “A creditor or party in interest may bring a motion to convert or dismiss the case under § 1112(b), after the Plan is confirmed, if there is a default in performing the Plan. If the Court orders the case converted to Chapter 7 after the Plan is confirmed, then all property that had been property of the Chapter 11 estate, and that has not been disbursed pursuant to the Plan, will revest in the Chapter 7 estate, and the automatic stay will be reimposed upon the revested property only to the extent that relief from stay was not previously granted by the Court during this case.”

 

 

Cautionary Statements

This Form 10-Q may contain “forward-looking statements,” as that term is used in federal securities laws, about Imaging3, Inc.’s financial condition, results of operations and business.  These statements include, among others:

·	statements concerning the potential benefits that Imaging3, Inc. (“Imaging3” or the “Company”) may experience from its business activities and certain transactions it contemplates or has completed; and

·

statements of Imaging3’s expectations, beliefs, future plans and strategies, anticipated developments and other matters that are not historical facts.  These statements may be made expressly in this Form 10-Q.  You can find many of these statements by looking for words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “opines,” or similar expressions used in this Form 10-Q.  These forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties that may cause Imaging3’s actual results to be materially different from any future results expressed or implied by Imaging3 in those statements.  The most important facts that could prevent Imaging3 from achieving its stated goals include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a)

volatility or decline of Imaging3’s stock price;

(b)

potential fluctuation in quarterly results;

(c)

failure of Imaging3 to earn revenues or profits;

(d)

inadequate capital to continue or expand its business, inability to raise additional capital or financing to implement its business plans;

(e)

failure to commercialize Imaging3’s technology or to make sales;

(f)

changes in demand for Imaging3’s products and services;

(g)

rapid and significant changes in markets;

(h)

litigation with or legal claims and allegations by outside parties;

 

(i)

insufficient revenues to cover operating costs, resulting in persistent losses;

 

(j)

dilution in the ownership of the Company through the issuance by us of additional securities and the conversion of outstanding warrants, notes and other securities; and

(k)

failure of Imaging3 to obtain approval of its proprietary medical imaging technology and device from the Federal Food and Drug Administration.

 

There is no assurance that Imaging3 will be profitable.  Imaging3 may not be able to successfully develop, manage or market its products and services. Imaging3 may not be able to attract or retain qualified executives and technology personnel. Imaging3 may not be able to obtain customers for its products or services. Imaging3’s products and services may become obsolete. Government regulation may hinder Imaging3’s business. Imaging3 may not be able to obtain the required approvals from the United States Food and Drug Administration for its products and services. Additional dilution in outstanding stock ownership may be incurred due to the issuance of more shares, warrants and stock options, or the exercise of outstanding warrants and stock options, or the conversion of notes. Imaging3 is exposed to other risks inherent in its businesses.

Because the statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.  Imaging3 cautions you not to place undue reliance on the statements, which speak only as of the date of this Form 10-Q.  The cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section should be considered in connection with any subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements that Imaging3 or persons acting on its behalf may issue.  Imaging3 does not undertake any obligation to review or confirm analysts’ expectations or estimates or to release publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Form 10-Q, or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

Current Overview

Though our efforts have been to market our refurbished equipment, a significant portion of our sales and revenues derive from services and the sale of parts, either from extended warranty purchases at the time of purchase of the refurbished equipment, or service contracts and time and material revenue realized upon warranty expiration, the majority of which is realized one year from equipment purchase as warranties expire.

Our sales effort through direct mail, broadcast facsimile and broadcast email to thousands of potential customers throughout the United States generates leads of potential customers desiring to purchase equipment either immediately or in the course of one year.  This lead generation through direct mail, broadcast and email will continue on a quarterly basis with the goal of increasing the total number of our leads for our sales staff.  Management expects that the marketing program will also eventually help stabilize the company.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.  The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities.  We monitor our estimates on an on-going basis for changes in facts and circumstances, and material changes in these estimates could occur in the future.  Changes in estimates are recorded in the period in which they become known.  We base our estimates on historical experience and other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances.  Actual results may differ from our estimates if past experience or other assumptions do not turn out to be substantially accurate.

We have identified the policies below as critical to our business operations and the understanding of our results of operations.

 

Revenue Recognition

Revenue is recognized upon shipment, provided that evidence of an arrangement exists, title and risk of loss have passed to the customer, fees are fixed or determinable and collection of the related receivable is reasonably assured.  Revenue is recorded net of estimated product returns, which is based upon the Company’s return policy, sales agreements, management estimates of potential future product returns related to current period revenue, current economic trends, changes in customer composition and historical experience. The Company accrues for warranty costs, sales returns, and other allowances based on its experience. Generally, the Company extends credit to its customers and does not require collateral.  The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers and historic credit losses have been within management’s expectations and has a revenue receivables policy for service and warranty contracts.  Equipment sales usually have a one year warranty of parts and service.  After a one year period, the Company contacts the buyer to initiate the sale of a new warranty contract for one year.  Warranty revenues are deferred and recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract or as services are performed.

Deferred Revenue

Deferred revenue consists substantially of amounts received from customers in advance of the Company's performance service period. Deferred revenue is recognized as revenue on a systematic basis that is proportionate to the period that the underlying services are rendered, which in certain arrangements is straight-line over the remaining contractual term or estimated customer life of an agreement.

Research and Development

Costs and expenses that can be clearly identified as research and development are charged to expense as incurred in accordance with FASB ASC 730-10. Included in research and development costs are operating costs, facilities, supplies, external services, clinical trial and manufacturing costs, and overhead directly related to the Company’s research and development operations, as well as costs to acquire technology licenses.

Other Accounting Factors

The effects of inflation have not had a material impact on our operation, nor are they expected to in the immediate future.

  

Although we are unaware of any major seasonal aspect that would have a material effect on the financial condition or results of operations, the first quarter of each fiscal year is always a financial concern due to slow collections after the holidays.

Results of Operation for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2016 Compared to the Three Months Ended March 31, 2015

We had revenues in the first quarter of 2016 of $11,627 compared to $83,232 in 2015.  The decrease in revenue is due to decreased sales.   

Our cost of revenue was $5,377 in the first quarter of 2016 compared to $51,163 in the first quarter of 2015.  The decrease in cost of revenue was as a result of decreased sales. We had a gross profit in the first quarter of 2016 of $6,250 compared to $32,069 in the first quarter of 2015. Again, lack of sales had a direct impact on decreased gross profit margin.  Our operating expenses decreased to$22,261 in the first quarter of 2016 as compared to $306,150 in the first quarter of 2015.  Our loss on operations decreased to $16,011 in the first quarter of 2016 compared to $274,081 in the first quarter of 2015.  Our net loss was $101,414 in the first quarter of 2016 compared to $274,498 in the first quarter of 2015.  All were affected by decreased revenue for the period.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

The Company's cash position was $22 at March 31, 2016, compared to $9,508 at December 31, 2015.  

As of March 31, 2016, the Company has a working capital deficit of $3,910,467 as compared to $3,850,953 at December 31, 2015.

Net cash used in operating activities amounted to $38,886 for the three month period ended March 31, 2016, as compared to net cash used in operating activities of $64,673 for the three month period ended March 31, 2015.  

 

Net cash provided by financing activities amounted to $29,400 and $77,000 for the three month periods ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.  The decrease in 2016 as compared to 2015 resulted from a decrease in proceeds from the issuance and sale of stock during the period.

The Company does not have sufficient capital to meet its current cash needs, which include the costs of compliance with the continuing reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  The Company intends to seek additional capital and long term debt financing to attempt to overcome its working capital deficit. The Company will need between $50,000 and $100,000 annually to maintain its reporting obligations.  The Company may attempt to do more private placements of its stock in the future to raise capital, but there is no assurance that the Company can raise sufficient capital or obtain sufficient financing to enable it to obtain approval of its prototype from the Federal Food and Drug Administration and to sustain monthly operations.  In order to address its working capital deficit, the Company also intends to endeavor to (i) reduce operating costs, (ii) reduce general, administrative and selling costs, (iii) increase sales of its existing products and services, and (iv) obtain the approval of the United States Food and Drug Administration to the Company’s proprietary medical imaging device so that the Company can

commence marketing and selling it.  There may not be sufficient funds available to the Company to enable it to remain in business and the Company’s needs for additional financing are likely to persist.

Going Concern Qualification

The Company has incurred significant losses from operations, and such losses are expected to continue. The Company’s auditors have included a "Going Concern Qualification" in their report for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012.  In addition, the Company has limited working capital. The foregoing raises substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans include seeking additional capital and/or debt financing. There is no guarantee that additional capital and/or debt financing will be available when and to the extent required, or that if available, it will be on terms acceptable to the Company. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.  The "Going Concern Qualification" might make it substantially more difficult to raise capital.

Not applicable.

 

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure based closely on the definition of “disclosure controls and procedures” in Rule 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.

At the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision 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. Based upon the foregoing, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of March 31, 2016, the disclosure controls and procedures of our Company were not effective to ensure that the information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports was recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely basis.

Imaging 3 is undertaking to improve its internal control over financial reporting and improve its disclosure controls and procedures.  As of March 31, 2016, we had identified the following material weaknesses which still exist as of March 31, 2016 and through the date of this report:

1.  As of March 31, 2016, and as of the date of this report, we did not maintain effective controls over the control environment.  Specifically, the Board of Directors does not currently have any independent members and no director qualifies as an audit committee financial expert as defined in Item 407(d)(5)(ii) of Regulation S-B.  Since these entity level programs have a pervasive effect across the organization, management has determined that these circumstances constitute a material weakness.

2.  As of March 31, 2016, and as of the date of this report, we did not maintain effective controls over financial statement disclosure.  Specifically, controls were not designed and in place to ensure that all disclosures required were originally addressed in our financial statements.  Accordingly, management has determined that this control deficiency constitutes a material weakness.

3. As of March 31, 2016, and as of the date of this report, we did not maintain adequate segregation of duties.  Accordingly, management has determined that this control deficiently constitutes a material weakness.

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended March 31, 2016, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

This report does not include an attestation report of our registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

 

Vuksich Litigation

In May of 2012, John M. Vuksich (“Vuksich”), a shareholder who alleges to hold shares or proxies totaling more than 30,000,000 shares in the Company (approximately 5.95 % of the outstanding stock in the Company at the time of the filing prior to the Company’s bankruptcy filing), filed a shareholder derivative action in the Los Angeles County Superior Court against the Company or (the “Vuksich Litigation”). In that litigation, Vuksich challenged certain corporate actions taken by the Company beginning in 2010, including the Company’s amendments to its articles of incorporation authorizing the Company to increase the authorized number of shares of common stock and to authorize the issuance of preferred stock. Among other things, Vuksich sought an order voiding certain other financing agreements and sought an order compelling the Company to fill vacancies on its Board of Directors. The Vuksich Litigation, which sought to alter the equity structure and management of the Company, required the Company to expend its already-limited resources both in terms of management time and attorney’s fees. Although the Company believed that the Vuksich Litigation could and would be defeated, it decided that the resources of the Company were better directed towards its business objectives in an effort to create value for the Company’s stakeholders.

There are currently four appeals pending in the “Vuksich Litigation.” If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court in any of these appeals, it could have a negative effect on the confirmed Plan:

·	Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case, Case No.: 13-56695 (9th Cir.), appeal filed September 30, 2013, appealing the District Court’s dismissal of the initial appeal of the order.

·	Order Disallowing Claims Nos. 23 and 24, Case No.: 14-55499 (9th Cir.), appeal filed March 31, 2014, appealing the District Court’s order affirming the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

·	Order Denying Motion for Abandonment of Potential Claims Against Officers and Directors, Case No.: 14-55521 (9th Cir.), appeal filed April 2, 2014, appealing the District Court’s order affirming the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

·	Order Confirming Debtor’s First Amended Plan, Case No.: 14-55466 (9th Cir.), appeal filed March 24, 2014, appealing the District Court’s order affirming in part and reversing in part the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

The above appeals were heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 9, 2015.  The court ruled in favor of the company on December 18, 2015.

On December 17, 2015 the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the rulings of the United States Bankruptcy Court and the United States District Court related to four appeals that John M. Vuksich had filed, asserting that: 

 

1.	That the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court should not have confirmed Imaging3’s chapter 11 plan of reorganization;

2.	That the claim that Vuksich filed in the Imaging3 bankruptcy case was improperly disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court;

3.	That the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court should have abandoned the Vuksich litigation;

4.	That the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court should have dismissed the Imaging3 chapter 11 bankruptcy case because the court had no jurisdiction over the case.

On February 2, 2016, the Ninth District Judges Tashima, Callahan, and Hurwitz have voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judges Callahan and Hurwitz have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Tashima so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35.The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc are denied.

During April 2016 John M. Vuksich appealed to Supreme Court on the most recent rulings dismissing his charges.  The Company will await the Supreme Courts response regarding this appeal.

The Company was involved in the following additional litigation: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Imaging3 & Dean Janes, Civil Action No. CV13-04616 GAF (AJWx) (U.S. Dist. Ct., C.D. Ca.), for which Fulbright & Jaworski LLP is counsel of record.  The Company settled this action by entering into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the SEC in which the Company covenanted to comply with federal and state securities laws through December 31, 2017, among other covenants.

On September 13, 2012, the Company filed In re Imaging3, Inc., Case No.  2:12-bk-41206-NB (Bankr. C.D. Ca.) (the “Bankruptcy Case”), a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code.  The Company’s plan of reorganization thereunder (the “Plan”) was confirmed on July 9, 2013 pursuant to the court’s Order Confirming Debtor's First Amended Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization Dated March 5, 2013, as Modified (the “Order”).  Pursuant to the Order, the Plan became effective on July 30, 2013 (“Effective Date”).  The Plan requires that the Company pay certain obligations on the Effective Date of the Plan. Of the Company’s obligations under the Plan, the Company is delinquent with regard to the obligations described in the chart below:

 

Class of Claim(s)	Payment Recipient	Amount of Each Periodic Payment & Amount of Total Claim	Payment Due Date	Status of Payment
Administrative Expense Claim	Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP	$50,000.00 (monthly)   Total Claim: Approximately $1,101,293	*Greenberg Glusker agreed to be paid as follows: $50,000.00 on September 1, 2013 and thereafter no less than $50,000.00 per month on or before the 15th of each month, commencing on October 2013. Interest will be charged on the outstanding balance at the rate of 10% per annum from July 30, 2013	Not paid
Administrative Expense Claim	Mentor Group	Approx. $18,000	Effective Date	Not paid
Priority Tax Claims	IRS	$1,484.00 (monthly)   Total Claim: $53,240.24	Monthly payment of $1,484 until 9/12/2017	Not Paid
Priority Tax Claims	State Board of Equalization	$341.00 (monthly)   Total Claim: $14,917.94	Monthly payment of $341 until 9/12/2017 Modified by Stipulation Dated June 23, 2015 as follows: 1.   Pay the balance of the Administrative Claim in the amount of $196.01 2.   Pay all of the arrearages for Priority Tax Claims by payment of $6,240.70 3.   Cure post-Stipulation Effective Date taxes in the aggregate amount of $31,367.12 together with monthly interest accruing after July 1, 2015 (“Post Stipulation Effective Date Taxes”), by payment of four installments, as follows: a. $8,000 on the Stipulation Effective Date; b. $8,000 sixty days from the Stipulation Effective Date; c. $8,000 ninety days from the Stipulation Effective Date; d. the balance of the Post Stipulation Effective Date Taxes one hundred twenty days from the Stipulation Effective Date.	Paid in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation with the State Board of Equalization
Class 1	North Surgery Center, L.P.	$1,673.00 (monthly)   Total Claim: $53,792.83	Pay monthly with first payment due on first business day of the first calendar month following the Effective Date	Paid as scheduled until December 2013; Not Paid in and after January 2014.
Class 2	Precision Forging Dies	Total Claim: $45,278.06	Pay in full by the first business day of the thirteenth calendar month following the Effective Date (September 1, 2014)	Not Paid
Class 9	IRS (unsecured portion of tax claims)	Total Claim: $62,736.92	Cash equal to the value of  pro rata shares of New Common Stock outstanding on the Effective Date	Not Paid

 

Section IV, F of the Plan provides “A creditor or party in interest may bring a motion to convert or dismiss the case under § 1112(b), after the Plan is confirmed, if there is a default in performing the Plan. If the Court orders the case converted to Chapter 7 after the Plan is confirmed, then all property that had been property of the Chapter 11 estate, and that has not been disbursed pursuant to the Plan, will revest in the Chapter 7 estate, and the automatic stay will be reimposed upon the revested property only to the extent that relief from stay was not previously granted by the Court during this case.”

 

 

 

Not applicable because we are a smaller reporting company.

There were no unregistered sales of equity securities during the period covered by this quarterly report.

None.

Not Applicable.

None.

(a)           Exhibits

 

 

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.