KOPIN CORP - Annual Report: 2006 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 30, 2006

OR

For the transition period             to             

Commission file number 0-19882

KOPIN CORPORATION

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  ¨

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

As of June 30, 2007 (the last business day of the most recent second fiscal quarter) the aggregate market value of outstanding shares of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $310,387,176.

As of March 14, 2008, 71,043,391 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, par value $.01 per share, were issued and outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None

Table of Contents

EXPLANATORY NOTE REGARDING RESTATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ended December 30, 2006 includes restatements of the following previously filed financial statements and data (and related disclosures): (1) our consolidated financial statements as of and for our fiscal years ended December 31, 2005 and December 25, 2004; (2) our selected consolidated financial data as of and for our fiscal years ended December 31, 2005, December 25, 2004, December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002 contained in Item 6 “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” and (3) our unaudited quarterly financial data for the first two quarters in our fiscal year ended December 30, 2006 and for all quarters in our fiscal year ended December 31, 2005. These corrections are discussed in “Legal Proceedings” included in Item 3, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in Item 7 and Note 2, “Restatement of Consolidated Financial Statements,” to Consolidated Financial Statements and Exhibit 99.1.

The restatement of our consolidated financial statements reflects the correction of the following errors, in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) No. 154 “Accounting Changes and Error Corrections”:

On November 1, 2006, in response to a derivative lawsuit filed against the Company related to the Company’s employee stock option granting practices and accounting (see Item 3—Legal Proceedings), our Board of Directors appointed a Special Investigation Committee of the Board of Directors, referred to as the Special Committee, composed solely of an independent director who was not on the Company’s Board of Directors and who had no affiliation with the Company during the period between 1995 and 2005, to conduct a comprehensive investigation of our historical stock option practices.

Responding to the findings of the Special Committee, filed in a Form 8-K on May 9, 2007, we reviewed the measurement dates for stock option and nonvested restricted common share grants (collectively, “stock-based awards”) used in our historical financial reporting. We reviewed the measurement dates for all 19.8 million of our historical stock-based award grants and reviewed all available evidence for each grant during the period from the January 1, 1995 through December 30, 2006, referred to as the Investigation Period.

Stock-based awards granted during the Investigation Period can be categorized as follows:

New Hire Employee Stock-Based Awards. Total awards made to new hire employees during the Investigation Period totaled 3.8 million.

All Other Stock-Based Awards to Non-Officer Employees. Total awards made to non-officers excluding new hires during the Investigation Period totaled 6.4 million.

All Other Stock-Based Awards to Officers. Total awards made to officers excluding new hires during the Investigation Period totaled 7.9 million.

Director Stock-Based Awards. Total awards made to members of the Board of Directors during the Investigation Period totaled 1.4 million.

Consultant Awards. Total awards made to consultants during the Investigation Period totaled 265,000.

Certain of the stock-based awards granted during the Investigation Period had exercise prices that tended to be at a price towards the lower end of range of common stock prices over a 90 day period from the original grant date.

2

Table of Contents

Impact of Restatement

For stock-based awards granted during the period January 1, 1995 through December 31, 2005 of the Investigation Period, the accounting principle applied under United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP) was Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25 (APB 25), “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees.” For stock-based awards granted during the period January 1, 2006 through December 30, 2006, of the Investigation Period we applied Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (SFAS 123R). APB 25 prescribed that there was a compensation element in a stock option award to an employee if the option exercise price was below the fair market value of the Company’s stock on the measurement date. The measurement date is the date that the number of options the employee was to receive and the option exercise price were known. We typically accounted for all stock-based awards to new hires, employees, officers and directors, through December 31, 2005 under APB 25 using the stated grant date as the measurement date. We typically issued stock options with an exercise price equal to the fair market value of our common stock on the recorded grant date, and therefore recorded no stock-based compensation expense. We recorded compensation expense for awards of restricted common shares for the fair value of the common shares on the grant date over the vesting period. We refer to the measurement date used when the stock-based award was granted during the Investigation Period as the Original Measurement Date. If, as a result of our option review, we used a different measurement date than the Original Measurement Date to determine if there was an element of compensation expense in a stock-based award, we referred to the new measurement date as the Revised Measurement Date.

We reviewed 14.3 million stock-based awards granted to officers and non-officers (excluding new hire consultant and Board of Directors’ awards, which are addressed below) to verify that the terms of the awards were approved and known with finality on the Original Measurement Date. We determined that for 11.5 million stock-based awards the number of shares was not known with finality on the Original Measurement Date. In those situations where we had either not completed the process of determining the number of stock options a particular employee was to receive or the administrative process was not finished on the Original Measurement Date, a compensation charge is required to reflect the difference between the exercise price of the stock-based award and the stock price (when it exceeds the exercise price) on the date the determination or process was completed. We recorded compensation expense of $33.6 million, excluding income tax effects, in connection with the restatement described above.

We reviewed 3.8 million stock-based awards granted to new hires to verify that the grant date was the same date as the date that the individual met the definition of an employee, generally the employee start date. We identified instances where employees did not start on their anticipated start date per their offer letter but commenced employment at a later date; however the option was granted based on the anticipated start date included in their offer letter. Compensation expense is required to reflect the difference between the exercise price of the stock option and the stock price on the employee start date. We identified 718,000 options following this pattern and recorded compensation expense of $0.6 million, excluding income tax effects, in connection with the restatement described above. We identified one situation where an offer letter gave the employee an option to purchase 120,000 shares of our common stock with an exercise price equal to our common stock price on the date he commenced employment but we incorrectly granted the option with an exercise price equal to our common stock price on the date we made the offer of employment. We recorded compensation expense of $1.0 million, excluding income tax effects, in connection with the restatement described above. We identified one situation where the employment offer letter gave the prospective employee an option to purchase 400,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price equal to our common stock price on the date the employment offer letter was accepted. In this situation, compensation expense should have been recorded to reflect the difference between the exercise price and our common stock price on the date employment commenced. We recorded compensation expense of $0.4 million, excluding income tax effects, in connection with the restatement described above.

We reviewed 265,000 stock option awards granted to consultants. We identified five grants to consultants totalling 205,000 options, which we accounted for incorrectly and we recorded compensation expense of $1.8 million, excluding income tax effects, in connection with the restatement described above. Of the $1.8 million of

3

Table of Contents

compensation expense, $1.6 million related to two grants made in January of 1996. We originally accounted for these consultant awards under APB 25 and recorded no compensation expense for these awards.

We also reviewed 1.4 million stock-based awards to members of the Board of Directors. We identified two awards totaling 300,000 options for which we recorded compensation expense of approximately $30,000, excluding income tax effects, as the result of an inconsistent pricing practice.

All financial information contained in this annual report gives effect to the restatements of our consolidated financial statements as described above. We have not amended, and we do not intend to amend, our previously filed annual reports or quarterly reports for each of the fiscal years and fiscal quarters of 1995 through 2005, and for the first two fiscal quarters of the fiscal year ended December 30, 2006. Financial information included in reports previously filed or furnished by us for the periods from fiscal 1995 through July 1, 2006 should not be relied upon and are superseded by the information in this annual report.

4

Table of Contents

Part I

Forward Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including without limitation statements made relating to our expectation that sales to Skyworks Solutions and the US Military will represent a significant portion of our revenues for 2008; our expectation that sales of our CyberDisplay products to customers who use them in camcorder applications will decline; our expectation that KoBrite will incur additional losses in the near term; our belief that in 2008 we will establish an 8-inch CyberDisplay manufacturing line; our belief that our material weakness in our internal controls will continue to exist in our fiscal year 2008; our expectation that a significant market for new wireless communications devices, including personal entertainment systems, will develop; our expectation that our CyberDisplay products will benefit from further general technological advances in the design and production of integrated circuits and active matrix LCDs, resulting in further improvements in resolution and miniaturization; our expectation that sales into the high speed fiber optic switching equipment market will not be significant in fiscal year 2008; our expectation not to pay cash dividends for the foreseeable future and to retain earnings for the development of our businesses; our expectation, based on current negotiations with our customers and certain contractual obligations, that the prices of certain products will decline in fiscal year 2008; our expectation that the sale prices of our commercial displays will decline, but our military product sales will increase, in fiscal year 2008; our expectation that we will expend between $5.0 and $9.0 million on capital expenditures over the next twelve months; our expectation that our third quarter would be our strongest sales quarter followed by our second quarter, fourth quarter and first quarter, in that order; our expectation that prices of our HBT transistors and display products sold for consumer electronic applications will decline by approximately 5 to 10 percent during fiscal year 2008, but may decline more depending on final negotiation with our customer; our expectation that competition will increase; our belief that our CyberDisplay products are well suited for new applications such as reading e-mail and browsing the Internet using digital wireless devices and other consumer electronics devices; our belief that small form factor displays will be a critical component in the development of advanced wireless communications systems; our belief that general technological advances in the design and fabrication of integrated circuits, LCD technology and LCD manufacturing processes will allow us to continue to enhance our CyberDisplay product manufacturing process; our belief that continued introduction of new products in our target markets is essential to our growth; our belief that GAIN HBT transistor wafers provide the performance characterization necessary for the next generation of wireless handsets and optoelectronic components; our belief that the costs of producing gallium arsenide integrated circuits by our customers will continue to exceed the costs associated with the production of competing silicon integrated circuits; our belief that our future success will depend primarily upon the technical expertise, creative skills and management abilities of our officers and key employees rather than on patent ownership; our belief that our available cash resources will support our operations and capital needs for at least the next twelve months; and our belief that the effect, if any, of reasonably possible near-term changes in interest rates on our financial position, results of operations, and cash flows should not be material. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about the industries in which we operate, management’s beliefs, and assumptions made by management. In addition, other written or oral statements, which constitute forward-looking statements, may be made by or on behalf of us. Words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “could”, “seeks”, “estimates”, and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions, which are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in outcomes and results include, but are not limited to, those discussed below in Item 1A and those set forth in our other periodic filings filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

5

Table of Contents

Introduction

We were incorporated in Delaware in 1984 and are a leading developer and manufacturer of III-V products and miniature flat panel displays. We use our proprietary semiconductor material technology to design, manufacture and market our III-V and display products. Our products enable our customers to develop and market an improved generation of products for applications in wireless and consumer electronic products. In December 2004, we adopted a fiscal year ending on the last Saturday in December by amending our bylaws to change our fiscal year end. The fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 includes 53 weeks and the fiscal years ended December 30, 2006 and December 25, 2004 each include 52 weeks. The fiscal years ended December 30, 2006, December 31, 2005 and December 25, 2004 are referred to as fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively, herein. Our principal executive offices are located at 200 John Hancock Road, Taunton, Massachusetts. Our telephone number is (508) 824-6696.

We commercially develop and manufacture gallium arsenide-based heterojunction bipolar transistor wafers (HBT transistor wafers) and other commercial semiconductor products that use gallium nitride and gallium arsenide-based substrates. From October 2000 until December 2004 we were developing light emitting diodes (LEDs) grown on sapphire substrates, which were called CyberLite™ LEDs. We stopped our internal CyberLite LED development activities in 2005 as discussed below. We collectively refer to our products based on compound semiconductor materials, including our HBT transistor wafers and CyberLite LEDs, as our “III-V” products because we use elements categorized on the III and V columns of the periodic table of elements to manufacture such products. Our primary III-V product is our HBT transistor wafer. Our HBT transistor wafers are customer-specific arrays of vertically oriented transistors that our customers use primarily to produce high performance integrated circuits for wireless communications products. Sales of our HBT transistor wafers to Skyworks Solutions, Inc. (Skyworks Solutions) accounted for approximately 36%, 32% and 31% of our total revenues for fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Skyworks Solutions also uses the foundry services of Advanced Wireless Semiconductor Company (AWSC) to process our HBT transistor wafers on their behalf. In 2005 we began selling HBT transistor wafers directly to AWSC for eventual resale by AWSC to Skyworks Solutions. Accordingly, an investor should view our sales to Skyworks Solutions and AWSC in the aggregate for evaluating the importance of Skyworks Solutions as a customer to Kopin. AWSC also purchases HBT transistor wafers from us for the processing and sale to other customers. Sales to AWSC in 2006 and 2005 were 13% and 7%, of our 2006 and 2005 revenues, respectively. In addition to Skyworks Solutions, original equipment manufacturers such as ANADIGICS and Triquint Semiconductor purchase our HBT transistor wafers.

In the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company entered into a joint venture, KoBrite Corp. (KoBrite), with a Taiwanese-based light emitting diode (LED) manufacturer, Kopin Taiwan Corporation (a Taiwanese-based III-V manufacturer), and financial investors, in which we agreed to transfer our CyberLite™ LED technology and production know-how and $3.0 million of cash for a 23% interest in KoBrite. Subsequent to its formation, KoBrite entered into agreements with us to purchase certain equipment and to have the Company perform research and training activities with KoBrite employees until KoBrite’s facilities were constructed and ready to receive the equipment. KoBrite agreed to pay us an estimated net $5.8 million for the equipment and $1.7 million for research and training activities and reimbursement of costs incurred in the transfer of the equipment. We discontinued manufacturing CyberLite LEDs as of March 31, 2005. As a result of such discontinued manufacturing operations, we recorded an impairment charge of $5.3 million in 2004 and $0.5 million in 2005. In addition, a charge of $0.3 million was recorded in 2005 for equipment that we transferred to KoBrite but was damaged in-transit and we agreed to reimburse KoBrite for the value of the damaged equipment. We retain the right to market KoBrite’s LEDs in the United States and to certain Japanese customers. For fiscal years 2005 and 2004, our CyberLite LED product sales were $0.7 million and $2.3 million, respectively. There were no CyberLite LED sales in 2006.

6

Table of Contents

Our CyberDisplay™ products are miniature, high performance, high resolution display products designed for consumer electronics, military and next generation mobile communications devices. To manufacture our CyberDisplays we purchase silicon-on-insulator wafers and perform several semi-conductor process steps at our Westborough, Massachusetts facility. After processing the wafers are cut into individual dies, the dies are then sent to our Korean subsidiary, Kowon, for back-end packaging and shipment to customers. Current applications of our CyberDisplay products include electronic view finders in camcorders and digital cameras, and we believe that our CyberDisplay products are well suited for new applications such as reading e-mail and browsing the Internet using digital wireless devices and viewing video from other consumer electronics devices such as MP3 or iPod^™ storage devices. Our displays are also used by the United States Government in thermal weapon sights and we are working to incorporate them in night-vision goggle devices. We currently sell our CyberDisplay product to Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung) for use in digital camcorders and Eastman Kodak Company (Kodak), Olympus Corporation (Olympus) and Fuji Corporation (Fuji) for digital still cameras. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, Samsung, the military customers, excluding research and development contracts, and JVC accounted for the following percentage of our total revenues (“*” denotes that the customer’s revenues were less than 10% of our total company revenues):

Industry Overview

III-V Products

Advanced semiconductor materials are used in the manufacture of integrated circuits for high frequency, low power applications. The rapid growth in the wireless communications industry, as well as the increasingly shorter product cycles of wireless products, has fueled demand for these integrated circuits, which are predominantly used in wireless handsets.

In first generation wireless handsets, integrated circuits used in high frequency, low power amplifiers were generally constructed with silicon-based semiconductors. These integrated circuits, while relatively inexpensive to manufacture, were unable to deliver the ever increasing performance demanded by wireless handset manufacturers and their customers. This inability led to the development of gallium arsenide products for use in wireless communications. gallium arsenide is generally regarded as having better performance characteristics than silicon due, in part, to its inherent physical properties that permit gallium arsenide integrated circuits to operate at much higher frequencies than silicon integrated circuits, or operate at the same frequency with lower power consumption. The reduction in system power requirements is particularly important in portable applications, such as wireless handsets, because it extends battery life.

The high performance characteristics of gallium arsenide have led to an increased use of gallium arsenide—based transistors to satisfy the industry’s need for even greater performance. These gallium arsenide transistors include gallium arsenide field effect transistors and for second generation wireless handset products our HBT transistor wafer. Second generation wireless communications products use digital signal processing and generally operate at higher cellular frequencies. Air interface standards in these frequency bands have increased in recent years. These standards, which include Global System Mobile, or GSM, Time Division Multiple Access, or TDMA, and Code Division Multiple Access, or CDMA, provide improved capacity, sound quality and capabilities at cellular and wireless frequency bands, but are incompatible with each other and have fragmented the market for equipment. Suppliers of wireless handsets now offer multi-mode and multi-band wireless handsets which are capable of switching from one high frequency band to another to enable consumers to use wireless handsets across various territories and different interface standards. This new generation of products is significantly more complex than the prior generation and requires certain key features, including:

7

Table of Contents

CyberDisplay™ Products

Small form factor displays are used in the consumer electronics industry in products such as camcorders and digital cameras. We also expect that a significant market for new wireless communications devices, including personal entertainment systems, will develop. In order for this market to develop, advances in wireless communications systems such as greater bandwidth and increased functionality, including real-time wireless data, broadband Internet access and mobile television, will be necessary. In addition, economic models must be developed and implemented which compensate the owners of the media content. We believe small form factor displays will be a critical component in the development of advanced mobile wireless communications systems as these systems must provide high resolution images without compromising the portability of the product.

There are several display technologies currently available. The most commonly used technology in portable applications is based on the traditional liquid crystal display, or LCD, which is now in widespread use in products requiring a solid state monochrome or color display. These displays form an image by either transmitting or blocking light emitted from a source located behind the LCD. The principal LCD technologies are passive and active matrix.

We believe that the high growth potential for portable communications products can be realized effectively only if these products are available at a reasonable price and are able to clearly present to end users the information they wish to access without compromising the size of the product. These products, as well as future models of digital cameras and other consumer electronics, are well suited for the use of a miniature, low cost display with low power consumption and sharp monochrome or rich, full color high resolution images. To date, display technologies have not fully addressed these needs due to constraints with respect to size, power consumption, resolution, cost or full color capability.

Our Solution

III-V Products

We manufacture our HBT transistor wafers using our proprietary metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) semiconductor growth techniques and our Wafer Engineering™ process. Our Wafer Engineering™

8

Table of Contents

process significantly reduces the number of defects which naturally occur when different semiconductor materials are combined. By depositing films of atomic-level thickness on gallium arsenide or indium phosphide wafers, we are able to create HBT transistor wafers that consist of a series of material layers which form a vertical transistor. This transistor structure enables the design of integrated circuits in which individual transistors are vertically arranged.

We believe that the vertical structure of an HBT transistor wafer, as opposed to the horizontal structure of a competing gallium arsenide field effect transistor, offers advantages to an integrated circuit manufacturer:

We believe our HBT transistor wafers also offer the following additional advantages over gallium arsenide field effect transistors:

CyberDisplay™ Products

Our principal CyberDisplay products are miniature high density color or monochrome active matrix LCDs with resolutions which range from approximately 320 x 240 resolution to 1280 x 1024 resolution. In contrast to current passive matrix and active matrix LCD approaches, our CyberDisplay products utilize high quality, single crystal silicon—the same high quality silicon used in conventional integrated circuits. This single crystal silicon is not grown on glass; rather, it is first formed on a silicon wafer and then lifted off as a thin film using our proprietary Wafer Engineering™ technology. The thin film is patterned into an integrated circuit (including the active matrix, driver circuitry and other logic circuits) in an integrated circuit foundry and then transferred to glass using our proprietary Wafer™ Engineering technology, so that the transferred layer is a fully functional active matrix integrated circuit.

9

Table of Contents

Our proprietary technology enables the production of transparent circuits on a transparent substrate, in contrast to conventional silicon circuits, which are on an opaque substrate. Our CyberDisplay products’ imaging properties are a result of the formation of a liquid crystal layer between the active matrix integrated circuit glass and the transparent glass. We believe our manufacturing process offers several advantages over conventional active matrix LCD manufacturing approaches with regard to small form factor displays, including:

Our use of high quality single crystal silicon in the manufacture of our CyberDisplay products offers several performance advantages. High quality silicon enables high-speed displays, which operate up to 240 frames per second, compared to 60 frames per second for most active matrix LCDs. The color CyberDisplay products we sell generate colors by using color filters with a white backlight. Color filter technology is a process in which display pixels are patterned with materials, which selectively absorb or transmit the red, green or blue colors of light. We previously developed, but did not commercialize, color CyberDisplays products using color sequential technology whereby a backlight composed of three LEDs emit a sequence of red, green and blue light. In color sequential technology, each pixel either blocks or transmits the colored light 180 times per second, which allows the generation of color images without using three separate pixels.

Our CyberDisplay products have the additional advantage of being fabricated using conventional silicon integrated circuit lithography processes. These processes enable the manufacture of miniature active matrix circuits, resulting in comparable or higher resolution displays relative to passive and other active matrix displays that are fabricated on glass. Our production partners, United Microelectronics Corporation, or UMC, and MagnaChip, fabricate integrated circuits for our CyberDisplay products in their foundries in Taiwan and Korean, respectively. The fabricated wafers are then returned to our facilities, where we lift the integrated circuits off the silicon wafers and transfer them to glass using our proprietary technology. The transferred integrated circuits are then processed and packaged with liquid crystal at our Westborough, Massachusetts facility. The packaged units are then assembled into display panels at our Westborough, Massachusetts facility, our Korean subsidiary, Kowon Technology Co., Ltd. (Kowon), or an Asian packaging company and shipped to customers. This arrangement allows us to benefit from UMC’s and MagnaChip’s economies of scale and advanced fabrication processes. We expect our CyberDisplay products will benefit from further general technological advances in the design and production of integrated circuits and active matrix LCDs, resulting in further improvements in resolution and miniaturization.

Strategy

Our objective is to be the leading supplier of advanced semiconductor materials and miniature displays that enable our customers to develop and manufacture differentiated communications, military and consumer electronic devices in high volumes. The critical elements of our strategy include:

10

Table of Contents

Markets and Customers

III-V Products

We develop and manufacture customer and application specific HBT transistor wafers for advanced integrated circuit applications. We believe we are one of the world’s leading suppliers of HBT transistor wafers and currently support volume production of four-inch and six-inch HBT transistor wafers. Our primary HBT transistor wafer product is based on an aluminum gallium arsenide vertical layer structure. We also offer customers HBT transistor wafers based on an indium gallium phosphide vertical layer structure. We vary our manufacturing process to create customized HBT transistor wafer products for customers. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, sales of III-V products accounted for 62%, 47% and 44% of our revenues, respectively.

Using our HBT transistor wafers, our customers have developed gallium arsenide power amplifiers for wireless handsets. Our HBT transistor wafers are used in Code Division Multiple Access, Global System Mobile and Time Division Multiple Access power amplifiers, and third generation (3G) wireless handset standards. In those countries where one uniform standard has not yet been adopted, the diversity of standards requires equipment capable of operating in multiple modes and bands. This equipment is likely to require higher performance semiconductor technology such as our HBT transistor wafers.

In addition to wireless handset power amplifiers, our HBT transistor wafers are also being used in the fabrication of power amplifiers for devices which communicate using wireless fidelity or “WiFi” integrated circuits. Our HBT transistor wafers are also used in high-speed fiber optic switching equipment used in broadband Internet data transmission, wireless local area network chipsets (WLAN) and high speed instrumentation. Since 2001, there has been a significant decline in sales of our III-V products in the high speed fiber optic switching equipment market. Accordingly, we do not expect sales in this market will be significant in fiscal year 2007 or 2008.

We design our HBT transistor wafers in collaboration with our customers’ engineering teams in order to create customized products that meet their specific application needs. Once our HBT transistor wafers have been “designed in” a customer’s product, we believe it would be costly for that customer to switch to an alternate

11

Table of Contents

supplier. Our largest customer for our HBT transistor wafers is Skyworks Solutions. Skyworks Solutions also uses the foundry services of Advanced Wireless Semiconductor Company (AWSC) to process our HBT transistor wafers on their behalf. In 2005, we began selling HBT transistor wafers directly to AWSC for eventual resale by AWSC to Skyworks Solutions. AWSC also purchases HBT transistor wafers from us for the processing and sale to other customers. Other customers of our gallium arsenide products include ANADIGICS and Triquint Semiconductor. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, sales of gallium arsenide products to Skyworks Solutions accounted for approximately 36%, 32%, and 31% of our total revenues, respectively. Sales to AWSC in 2006 and 2005 were 13% and 7% of our 2006 and 2005 revenues, respectively. We believe an investor should view our sales to Skyworks Solutions and AWSC in the aggregate for evaluating the importance of Skyworks Solutions as a customer to Kopin. We have entered into a purchase and supply agreement with Skyworks Solutions, which has a scheduled termination date of July 2008, excluding the agreement’s last buy option. Accordingly, we anticipate that sales of our HBT transistor wafers to Skyworks Solutions will continue to represent a significant portion of our revenues for the near future.

CyberDisplay™ Products

We currently sell our CyberDisplay products to customers as a single component; a unit which includes a lens and backlight; or as a complete module, which includes the display, lens, backlight and electronics which are assembled in a plastic housing. We provide our CyberDisplay products to Samsung, Olympus, Fuji and Kodak for use in digital camcorders and cameras. We also sell CyberDisplay products to the U.S. Military and certain foreign countries. In addition, we are working with other customers to develop additional and new applications for our CyberDisplay products.

In order for our CyberDisplay products to function properly in their intended applications, integrated circuit chip sets generally are required. Several companies have designed integrated circuit chip sets to work with our CyberDisplay products.

For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, sales to Samsung, as a percentage of total revenue, were 8%, 15% and 28%, respectively. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, sales to military customers, excluding research and development contracts, as a percentage of total revenue, were 16%, 11% and 7%, respectively. For fiscal year 2005, sales to JVC, as a percentage of total revenue, were 13%.

For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004, research and development revenues, primarily from multiple contracts with various U.S. governmental agencies, accounted for approximately 7%, 6%, and 2%, respectively, of our total revenues.

Sales and Marketing

We principally sell our HBT transistor wafer products directly to integrated circuit manufacturers in the United States and Asia. We sell our consumer electronic CyberDisplay products both directly and through distributors to original equipment manufacturers.

We believe that the technical nature of our products and markets demands a commitment to close relationships with our customers. Our sales and marketing staff, assisted by our technical staff and senior management, visit prospective and existing customers worldwide on a regular basis. We believe these contacts are vital to the development of a close, long-term working relationship with our customers, and in obtaining regular forecasts, market updates and information regarding technical and market trends. We also participate in industry specific trade shows and conferences.

Our design and engineering staff is actively involved with a customer during all phases of prototype design and production by providing engineering data, up-to-date product application notes, regular follow-up and technical assistance. In most cases, our technical staff works with each customer in the development stage to

12

Table of Contents

identify potential improvements to the design of the customer’s product in parallel with the customer’s effort. We have established a prototype product design group in Scotts Valley, California to assist our CyberDisplay customers with incorporating our products into their products and to reduce the time required to bring end products to the marketplace. This group is intended to assist customers in accelerating their design process, achieving cost-effective and manufacturable designs, and ensuring a smooth transition into high volume production. This group is also actively involved with research and development contracts for military applications.

Product Development

We believe that continued introduction of new products in our target markets is essential to our growth. We have assembled a group of highly skilled engineers who work internally as well as with our customers to continue our product development efforts. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004 we incurred total research and development expenses of $10.2 million, $12.3 million, and $15.0 million, respectively. Research and development expenses, which primarily related to our internal development programs for new HBT and CyberDisplay products and development of the processes to manufacture CyberDisplay products using 8 inch wafers, were $5.3 million, $5.8 million and $12.7 million, respectively, for fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004.

III-V Products

We intend to continue developing HBT transistor wafers and other gallium arsenide products for advanced integrated circuit applications from other compound materials. We are working with current and potential customers in the development of the next generation of HBT transistor wafers, which will be based on Gallium Arsenide Indium Nitride (GAIN). We believe GAIN-HBT^® transistor wafers will provide the performance necessary for the next generation of wireless handsets and optoelectronic components. We are also developing GaN (Gallium Nitride) high electron mobility transistor wafers.

In connection with the transfer of our CyberLite LED know-how into the KoBrite joint venture we have discontinued additional CyberLite LED development as of March 31, 2005.

CyberDisplay™ Products

Our product development efforts are focused towards continually enhancing the features, functions and manufacturability of our CyberDisplay products. A principal focus of this effort is the improvement of manufacturing processes for very small active matrix pixels, which we will use in succeeding generations of our CyberDisplay products. The pixel size of our current CyberDisplay products ranges from 12 to 15 microns and we believe that we will be able to achieve a pixel size of less than 10 microns in commercial production. This pixel size is in contrast to a pixel size of approximately 100 microns in a typical laptop computer display. The resolutions of our current commercially available CyberDisplay products are 521 x 218 (dot), 800 x 225 (dot), 200 x 225 (pixel), 320 x 240 (pixel), 640 x 480 (pixel), 854 x 480 (pixel), 800 x 600 (pixel) and 1,280 x 1,024 (pixel). In addition, we have demonstrated 2,560 x 2,048 resolution CyberDisplay products in a 1.5 inch diagonal display. We are also working on further decreasing the already low power consumption of our CyberDisplay products. Additional display development efforts include expanding the resolutions offered, transitioning from our six inch CyberDisplay production line to an eight inch line, increasing the quantity of CyberDisplay’s active matrix pixel arrays processed on each wafer by further reducing the display size, increasing the light throughput of our pixels and increasing manufacturing yields.

Funded Research and Development

We have entered into various development contracts with agencies of the U.S. government. These contracts help support the continued development of our core technologies. We intend to continue to pursue other U.S. government development contracts for applications that relate to our commercial product applications. Our

13

Table of Contents

contracts with U.S. government agencies contain certain milestones relating to technology development and may be terminated by the government agencies prior to completion of funding. Our policy is to retain our proprietary rights with respect to the principal commercial applications of our technology. To the extent technology development has been funded by a U.S. federal agency, under applicable U.S. federal laws the federal agency has the right to obtain a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, fully paid license to practice or have practiced this technology for governmental use. Revenues attributable to research and development contracts for fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004 totaled $5.2 million, $5.0 million and $2.1 million, respectively.

Competition

III-V Products

With respect to our HBT transistor wafers, we presently compete with several companies, including IQE, V-PEC, and Hitachi Cable, as well as integrated circuit manufacturers with in-house transistor growth capabilities, such as RF Micro Devices and Fujitsu. In the gallium arsenide HBT transistor wafer market, pricing competition is intense as a result of significant manufacturing overcapacity. The production of gallium arsenide integrated circuits has been and continues to be more costly than the production of silicon integrated circuits. Although we have reduced production costs of our HBT transistor wafers by achieving higher volumes and reducing raw material costs, we cannot be certain we will be able to continue to decrease production costs. In addition, we believe the costs of producing gallium arsenide integrated circuits by our customers will continue to exceed the costs associated with the production of competing silicon integrated circuits. As a result, we must target markets where these higher costs are justified by their superior performance.

CyberDisplay™ Products

The display market is highly competitive and is currently dominated by large Asian-based electronics companies including Sharp, Hitachi, Seiko, Toshiba, Sony, NEC and Sanyo. The display market consists of multiple segments, each focusing on different end-user applications applying different technologies. Competition in the display field is based on price and performance characteristics, product quality and the ability to deliver products in a timely fashion. The success of our display product offerings will also depend upon the adoption of our CyberDisplay products by consumers as an alternative to traditional active matrix LCDs and upon our ability to compete against other types of well-established display products. Particularly significant is the consumer’s willingness to use a near eye display device, a display viewed in a similar fashion as using a set of binoculars, as opposed to a direct view display which may be viewed from a distance of several inches to several feet. We cannot be certain that we will be able to compete against these companies and technologies or that the consumer will accept the use of such eyewear in general or our form factor specifically.

There are also a number of active matrix LCD and alternative display technologies in development and production. These technologies include reflective, field emission display, plasma, organic light emitting diode and virtual retinal displays, some of which target the high performance small form factor display markets in which our display products are sold. There are many large and small companies that manufacture or have in development products based on these technologies. Our CyberDisplay products will compete with other displays utilizing these and other competing display technologies.

Patents, Proprietary Rights and Licenses

An important part of our product development strategy is to seek, when appropriate, protection for our products and proprietary technology through the use of various United States and foreign patents and contractual arrangements. We intend to prosecute and defend our proprietary technology aggressively. Many of our United States patents and applications have counterpart foreign patents, foreign applications or international applications through the Patent Cooperation Treaty. In addition, we have licensed United States patents and some foreign counterparts to these United States patents from MIT.

14

Table of Contents

The process of seeking patent protection can be time consuming and expensive and we cannot be certain that patents will be issued from currently pending or future applications or that our existing patents or any new patents that may be issued will be sufficient in scope or strength to provide meaningful protection or any commercial advantage to us. We may be subject to or may initiate interference proceedings in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, which can demand significant financial and management resources. Patent applications in the United States typically are maintained in secrecy until they are published eighteen months after their earliest claim to priority and since publication of discoveries in the scientific and patent literature lags behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we were the first to conceive of inventions covered by pending patent applications or the first to file patent applications on such inventions. We cannot be certain that our pending patent applications or those of our licensors will result in issued patents or that any issued patents will afford protection against a competitor. In addition, we cannot be certain that others will not obtain patents that we would need to license, circumvent or cease manufacturing and sales of products covered by these patents, nor can we be sure that licenses, if needed, would be available to us on favorable terms, if at all.

We cannot be certain that foreign intellectual property laws will protect our intellectual property rights or that others will not independently develop similar products, duplicate our products or design around any patents issued to us. Our products might infringe the patent rights of others, whether existing now or in the future. For the same reasons, the products of others could infringe our patent rights. We may be notified, from time to time, that we could be or we are infringing certain patents and other intellectual property rights of others. Litigation, which could be very costly and lead to substantial diversion of our resources, even if the outcome is favorable, may be necessary to enforce our patents or other intellectual property rights or to defend us against claimed infringement of the rights of others. These problems can be particularly severe in foreign countries. In the event of an adverse ruling in litigation against us for patent infringement, we might be required to discontinue the use of certain processes, cease the manufacture, use and sale of infringing products, expend significant resources to develop non-infringing technology or obtain licenses to patents of third parties covering the infringing technology. We cannot be certain that licenses will be obtainable on acceptable terms, if at all, or that damages for infringement will not be assessed or that litigation will not occur. The failure to obtain necessary licenses or other rights or litigation arising out of any such claims could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business as we presently conduct it.

We also attempt to protect our proprietary information with contractual arrangements and under trade secret laws. We believe that our future success will depend primarily upon the technical expertise, creative skills and management abilities of our officers and key employees rather than on patent ownership. Our employees and consultants generally enter into agreements containing provisions with respect to confidentiality and employees generally assign rights to inventions made by them while in our employ. Agreements with consultants generally provide that rights to inventions made by them while consulting for us will be assigned to us unless the assignment of rights is prohibited by the terms of any agreements with their regular employers. Agreements with employees, consultants and collaborators contain provisions intended to further protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information. To date, we have had no experience in enforcing these agreements. We cannot be certain that these agreements will not be breached or that we would have adequate remedies for any breaches. Our trade secrets may not be secure from discovery or independent development by competitors.

Government Regulations

We are subject to a variety of federal, state and local governmental regulations related to the use, storage, discharge and disposal of toxic, volatile or otherwise hazardous chemicals used in our manufacturing process. The failure to comply with present or future regulations could result in fines being imposed on us, suspension of production or cessation of operations. Any failure on our part to control the use of, or adequately restrict the discharge of, hazardous substances, or otherwise comply with environmental regulations, could subject us to significant future liabilities. In addition, we cannot be certain that we have not in the past violated applicable laws or regulations, which violations could result in required remediation or other liabilities. We also cannot be certain that past use or disposal of environmentally sensitive materials in conformity with then existing environmental laws and regulations will protect us from required remediation or other liabilities under current or future environmental laws or regulations.

15

Table of Contents

Investments in Related Businesses

Since 1998, we have made investments totaling $4.3 million in Kowon Technology Co. LTD (Kowon), a manufacturer of optoelectronic products located in South Korea, and have accumulated an ownership interest in Kowon of 73%. Kowon’s revenues are principally denominated in U.S. dollars and its local expenses are principally denominated in South Korean won. In addition, Kowon holds U.S. dollars to pay certain expenses including purchases from Kopin. Accordingly, Kowon’s operations are subject to exchange rate fluctuations. Kowon is an integral part of our CyberDisplay assembly process, performing most of the backend packaging processes to complete the display.

In 2001 and 2002, we acquired an aggregate of 1,101,502 shares of Micrel Incorporated (Micrel) as part of their acquisition of a company we previously invested in. As of December 30, 2006, we held approximately 200,000 shares of Micrel valued at $2.2 million. Included in our net income were gains on the sale of Micrel stock of approximately $1.2 million, in the fiscal year ended 2006.

In 2000, we made an investment of $5.1 million and contributed certain technology for which we received a 40% interest in Kopin Taiwan Corporation (KTC), a Taiwan-based company. We account for our percent ownership interest in the operating results of this company using the equity method. We have manufactured products for KTC to sell to its customers and KTC manufactures product for us to sell to our customers. In addition, we provide technical services and sell raw substrates to KTC. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004 we had product sales of approximately $0, $0.3 million and $2.1 million, respectively, to KTC. For fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004 we had purchases of approximately $1.8 million, $2.8 million and $1.8 million, respectively, from KTC. For fiscal year 2004, we recorded losses of $0.8 million, which represented our ownership percentage of KTC’s operating results. As a result of our recording our proportional share of KTC’s operating results, our investment was written-off and the carrying value of this investment since December 25, 2004 has been $0. Dr. Hsieh, one of our Directors, is chairman of KTC. Dr. Hsieh owns approximately 1% of the outstanding common stock of KTC. KTC was also an investor in KoBrite and acquired an approximate 15% interest in KoBrite.

Since 2002, we have made investments in preferred stock totaling $5.4 million in Kenet, Inc. (Kenet). Our equity ownership percentage of Kenet is approximately 18% and we account for this investment on the cost basis. In the fiscal year ended December 30, 2006, we invested an additional approximate $2.5 million in Kenet to retain our approximate proportional interest in a Kenet equity offering. On January 30, 2008 Kopin and three other principle investors entered into a loan agreement with Kenet whereby each of the investors committed to loan Kenet up to $1.0 million each through May 28, 2008. The loan agreement provides for interest at the rate of ten percent per annum and provides for the issuance of warrants to purchase Kenet’s common stock. On January 30, 2008 Kenet borrowed $1.2 million under the loan agreement of which $0.3 million came from us. We have also been notified that Kenet anticipates drawing down an additional $1.6 million under the loan agreement in March 2008 of which $0.4 million would be from us. Our Chief Executive Officer is a founder and board member of Kenet and owns approximately 2% of Kenet. Certain of our directors and an officer have also invested in Kenet and their ownership ranges from 0.1% to 1.0%. We periodically review this investment for impairment. No impairment was deemed necessary on December 30, 2006 based on current projections.

In 2005, we contributed our CyberLite LED technology and production know-how and $3.0 million to a joint venture, KoBrite. For our contribution, we received a 23% interest in KoBrite. KoBrite was established under the laws of Mauritius and constructed manufacturing operations in China. Subsequent to its establishment, KoBrite entered into an agreement to pay us an estimated net $5.8 million for certain equipment and $1.7 million for the performance of research and training activities until such equipment was transferred to KoBrite. In the fourth quarter of 2005, certain equipment, which was to be transferred to KoBrite from Kopin, was damaged in transit and we recorded a charge of $0.3 million to reimburse KoBrite for the damaged equipment. We are accounting for our ownership interest in KoBrite using the equity method. In the fiscal year 2006, we invested an

16

Table of Contents

additional approximate $2.0 million in KoBrite to retain our approximate proportional interest in a KoBrite equity offering.

We may from time to time make further equity investments in these and other companies engaged in certain aspects of the display and electronics industries as part of our business strategy. These investments may not provide us with any financial return or other benefit and any losses by these companies or associated losses in our investments may negatively impact our operating results. Certain of our officers and directors have invested in some of the companies we have invested in.

Employees

As of December 30, 2006, our consolidated business employed 294 full-time and 5 part-time individuals. Of these, 14 hold Ph.D. degrees in Material Science, Electrical Engineering or Physics. Our management and professional employees have significant prior experience in semiconductor materials, device transistor and display processing, manufacturing and other related technologies. None of our employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We consider relations with our employees to be good.

Web Availability

We make available free of charge or through our website, www.kopin.com, our annual reports on Form 10-K and other reports required under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as well as certain of our corporate governance policies, including the charters for the Board of Directors’ audit, compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees and its code of ethics, corporate governance guidelines and whistleblower policy. We will provide to any person without charge, upon request, a copy of any of the foregoing materials. Any such request must be made in writing to us, c/o Investor Relations, Kopin Corporation, 200 John Hancock Road, Taunton, MA 02780.

The matters relating to the investigation by the Special Committee of the Board of Directors and the restatement of our consolidated financial statements may result in additional litigation and governmental enforcement action. On November 1, 2006, in response to a derivative lawsuit filed against us, we commenced a voluntary review of our historical practices in granting stock options and our Board of Directors appointed a special committee of independent directors (the Special Committee) to conduct this review. On May 3, 2007, the Special Committee presented the findings of its stock option investigation to our Board of Directors and proposed various remedial measures. The Special Committee’s review indicated that our financial statements for the period 1995 through July 1, 2006 should not be relied upon and the Company would need to restate its financial statements for fiscal 1995 through July 1, 2006 and the related interim periods. The Board of Directors accepted all of the findings of the Special Committee and has adopted, or is in the process of adopting, all of the remedial measures proposed. As a result of the Special Committee’s investigation, as well as our internal review of our historical financial statements, we have recorded additional stock-based compensation expense for numerous stock-based awards made from 1995 through July 1, 2006. We have restated our consolidated financial statements for these periods to correctly account for stock-based awards for which the Special Committee or management determined that the measurement date for accounting purposes was different from the stated grant date. For more information on these matters, see Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Restatement,” Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, and Item 9A, “Controls and Procedures.”

The internal review, the independent investigation, and related activities have required us to incur substantial expenses for legal, accounting, tax and other professional services, and have diverted management’s attention from our business.

17

Table of Contents

Our past stock option granting practices and the restatement of prior financial statements have exposed us to greater risks associated with litigation, regulatory proceedings and government enforcement actions. As described in Item 3, “Legal Proceedings,” two derivative lawsuits were filed in state courts against certain of our directors and certain of our current and former executive officers pertaining to allegations relating to stock-based awards. We may become the subject of, or otherwise be required to incur legal fees and costs in connection with, additional private litigation, regulatory proceedings, or government enforcement actions. No assurance can be given regarding the outcomes from such activities. The resolution of these matters will be time consuming, expensive, and will distract management from the conduct of our business. Our available directors’ and officers’ liability insurance may not be sufficient to cover our legal expenses or those of persons we are obligated to indemnify. Furthermore, if we are subject to adverse findings in litigation, regulatory proceedings or government enforcement actions, we could be required to pay damages or penalties or have other remedies imposed, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Furthermore, the restatements of our financial results, the derivative litigation, and any negative outcome that may occur from the investigation, could impact our relationships with customers and our ability to generate revenue.

Our common stock may be delisted from the NASDAQ Global Market and transferred to the National Quotation Service Bureau (the Pink Sheets), which may, among other things, reduce the price of our common stock and the levels of liquidity available to our stockholders. As a result of our Special Committee Investigation commencing in November 2006, we failed to timely file our Form 10-Q for the three month period ended September 30, 2006, in March 2007 we failed to timely file our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006, and in May 2007, August 2007, and November 2007 we failed to timely file our Forms 10-Q for the three month periods ended March 31, 2007, June 30, 2007, and September 29, 2007, respectively. On November 15, 2006, NASDAQ notified us that the failure to file our Form 10-Q for the three month period ended September 30, 2006 caused us to violate the requirements for continued listing as set forth in Marketplace Rule 4310(c)(14) and that the Company’s stock would be suspended from trading on November 27, 2006. On November 21, 2006 we requested a hearing before a NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Panel, or the Panel, to petition for continued listing on the NASDAQ Stock Market. The hearing was held on January 18, 2007. On February 22, 2007, the Panel informed us that we had been granted until May 14, 2007 to file our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006 and Form 10-Q for the interim period September 30, 2006 and any required restatements. On May 4, 2007, the Company made a request to the Panel for additional time beyond the May 14, 2007 deadline to file the delinquent Form 10-K and Forms 10-Q. On May 9, 2007, the Panel denied our request for additional time and notified the Company that it would suspend trading of the Company’s stock on May 16, 2007. On May 14, 2007, NASDAQ Listing and Hearing Review Council, or the Council, notified us that it had called the Company’s case for review and would delay its delisting pending a hearing before the Council. On May 16, 2007, NASDAQ informed us that the Company was not in compliance with NASDAQ Marketplace Rule 4310(c)(14) because it did not timely file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. NASDAQ stayed any delisting as a result of our failure to file our Form 10-Q on a timely basis pending the hearing before the Council. On July 27, 2007, the Council notified us that we had until September 25, 2007 to file our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006, and Forms 10-Q for the interim periods September 30, 2006 and March 31, 2007 and any required restatements or the Company would be delisted on September 27, 2007. On September 7, 2007, we requested that the NASDAQ’s Board of Directors exercise its discretionary authority under Rule 4809 to grant the Company continued listing beyond the Council’s September 25, 2007 deadline to allow the Company time to complete its investigation into the Company’s past stock option practices and related accounting and prepare and file its financial statements. On September 17, 2007, the NASDAQ’s Board of Directors called for review the July 27, 2007 decision of the Council regarding Kopin’s Common Stock and, pending further consideration, has stayed the Council’s decision to suspend the Company’s securities from trading. On October 17, 2007, the NASDAQ Board of Directors further stayed the suspension from trading until December 17, 2007. On December 12, 2007, the NASDAQ Board further stayed the suspension from trading until February 11, 2008. On February 7, 2008, the NASDAQ board further stayed the suspension from trading until March 17, 2008.

Although we have now filed our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006, our Forms 10-Q for the quarters ended September 30, 2006, March 31, 2007, June 30, 2007, and September 29, 2007, if the SEC

18

Table of Contents

disagrees with the manner in which we have accounted for and reported, or not reported, the financial impact of past stock-based awards, there could be further delays in filing subsequent SEC reports that might result in the delisting of our common stock from the NASDAQ Stock Market.

Failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls could adversely affect our ability to report our financial condition and results of operations accurately or on a timely basis. As a result, current and potential stockholders could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which could harm our business and the trading price of our stock. As required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, our management is required to periodically evaluate the design and effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures. Our management identified material weaknesses in our application of generally accepted accounting standards and controls over the accounting for the issuance of stock options, which continued through December 30, 2006. In addition, we must document and test our internal control procedures in order to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which requires our management to annually assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. As a result of the material weaknesses described above, our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 30, 2006, which could result in a material misstatement in our annual and interim financial statements. Any failure to implement or difficulties experienced in implementing improved controls or any failure to maintain existing effective controls could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and stock price. For a more detailed discussion of our disclosure controls and procedures, see Item 9A, “Controls and Procedures” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We have experienced a history of losses and have a significant accumulated deficit. Since inception, we have incurred significant net operating losses. As of December 30, 2006 we had an accumulated deficit of $153.8 million. While we did generate income from operations in 2005, there can be no assurance that we will maintain profitability in the future.

Our revenue and cash flow could be negatively affected by the loss of any of the few customers who account for a substantial portion of our revenues. A few customers account for a substantial portion of our revenues. In addition sales of our CyberDisplay products for military applications is a significant factor in our future growth and profitability. The table below indicates what the percentages of our total revenues were from a particular customer and sales to military applications in a given year. The symbol “*” indicates that sales to that particular customer for the given year were below 10 percent of our total revenues.

We anticipate that sales to Skyworks Solutions and military customers will continue to represent a significant portion of our revenues for 2007 and 2008. We believe that historically we have provided Skyworks Solutions with the vast majority of its HBT transistor wafers. A significant reduction or delay in orders from any of our significant customers, particularly Skyworks Solutions or military customers in the aggregate, would

19

Table of Contents

materially reduce our revenue and cash flow and adversely affect our ability to achieve or maintain profitability in the future. Our ability to generate cash flow and achieve profitability in 2008 will be dependent on developing new customers, increasing our market share of customers who use our CyberDisplay products for digital still camera applications and finding new applications for our CyberDisplay products, particularly eyewear devices. We have increased sales of CyberDisplay products for military applications in the year ended December 30, 2006 from historical levels. Such sales are to government contractors for the United States military. The amount and timing of such orders is dependent upon the United States military procurement processes, the government contractors’ ability to successfully manage the program, and our ability to deliver more sophisticated CyberDisplay products.

We may not be able to reduce the cost of raw materials from our vendors. A critical part of our business strategy is to increase our sales and use the purchasing power obtained from these sales to obtain reduced raw material and component pricing from our vendors. In addition, part of our purchasing strategy is to find multiple vendors of our needed raw materials in order to create competition for lowering raw material and component prices. If we are unable to execute our sales growth strategy or find multiple vendors of the same raw materials and components we may be unable to execute our purchasing strategy and our products may not be cost competitive with our competitors’ products. In addition, we may be able to execute our sales strategy but still be unable to reduce our raw material costs. If we are unable to reduce our raw material cost we may not be able to achieve profitability.

We may be unable to increase revenues from CyberDisplay™ products if new products and applications are not developed. CyberDisplay revenues for the fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004 were $27.2 million, $47.6 million and $49.1 million, respectively. The decrease in 2006 CyberDisplay revenues since 2004 has resulted primarily from a significant decrease in sales of our CyberDisplay product to customers for use in camcorders, offset, in part by an increase in sales of our displays to the military and digital still camera markets. We had initial sales of display products into the military product and digital still camera markets in 2004 and since then we have been gaining experience in selling displays into these markets. We believe that our success in penetrating these and other markets, particularly military thermal weapon sights and night vision goggles, will significantly impact our ability to increase sales of CyberDisplays. In addition, our military products have a higher gross margin than our consumer display products and our success in increasing sales of military products are expected to significantly impact our ability to achieve or maintain profitability. Discussions with our commercial customers indicate that our competition continue to dramatically reduce their prices and some competitors are offering lower prices than us. We believe the average sales price of our displays to consumer product customers will have to decline in 2008 if we are to remain competitive in the market place. We believe the average sales price of our displays products sold for consumer electronic applications will decrease in the range of 5% to 10% during in 2007 and 2008. Accordingly, if we are unable to enter into new markets, particularly eyewear, or maintain or expand existing market share in the military and digital camera application segment revenues from CyberDisplay products will decline, which may impact our ability to achieve or maintain profitability in the future.

Accordingly, if we are unable to successfully sell our display products to digital still cameras, eyewear, and military product makers, we may be unable to grow CyberDisplay product revenues and our ability to achieve or maintain profitability will be adversely affected.

The eyewear market segment may not develop or may take longer to develop than we anticipate. Eyewear is the term used by the Company to describe a device which is worn in a similar fashion as eye glasses and contains one or two CyberDisplay displays for the viewing of video images. The source of these video images may be storage devices such as video iPods, DVD players or digital multimedia broadcasting (DMB) tuners. Currently, the consumer may view the image through a direct view LCD display which may range in size from one to four inches diagonal. We believe that the consumer will find this experience unsatisfactory and we believe eyewear will be a preferred solution. We sell, to commercial eyewear manufacturers, individual components such as the display, backlight and integrated circuits, or a binocular display module (BDM), which contains the various components combined into one unit or, we sell a complete eyewear solution which contains the BDM and audio

20

Table of Contents

elements combined in a ready to use product. The eyewear manufacturing companies which are currently buying our displays for eyewear products tend to be small with limited financial resources and in-house engineering expertise. We believe that eyewear is a critical product for the long term revenue and cash flow growth of the CyberDisplay product line. If the eyewear market does not develop or we are unable to create and manufacture products which meet the needs of the eyewear market we may be unable to grow CyberDisplay product revenues and our ability to achieve or maintain profitability will be adversely affected.

We may not be able to increase our military production capacity. A critical part of our business strategy is to expand our military display production capacity and to implement a new manufacturing line which can utilize 8 inch wafers for our display production. The conversion of our existing 6 inch line to 8-inch will require the investment in new equipment and the redesign of our existing display products. It may also require the re-qualification of our existing display products with our customers. If we are unable to execute our military product display production facility plan, including the implementation of an 8 inch production line, or we can only manufacture and ship our CyberDisplay products in limited quantities, our revenues from CyberDisplay products may not grow, which may impact our ability to achieve or maintain profitability in the future.

Our ability to offer and manufacture higher level CyberDisplay assemblies and modules will impact our ability to increase revenues and achieve or maintain profitability. An important factor in our ability to expand into new military markets will be our ability to design and manufacture higher-level assemblies (HLAs). These HLAs typically consist of one or two CyberDisplay products, a backlight, lens and housing. Some HLAs also include a set of display driver electronics or a display driver chip. They are similar to our commercial BDM product but are designed to operate in the extreme conditions of combat. Our goal is to deliver an integrated HLA to our customer which eases integration into their products. These products require more complex integration of a greater variety of components than we currently use for our existing display products. They will require us to invest in additional engineering, manufacturing and test capability. Accordingly, if we are unable to develop and market these new display products or if we are unable to manufacture them in a cost-effective manner, our revenues may not grow and we may not be able to achieve or maintain profitability.

Our competitors can provide integrated solutions. Many portable consumer electronic devices, including camcorders and digital still cameras, have two displays for viewing images, an electronic viewfinder (EVF) and a flip-out or group view display. We only provide the display that is used as the electronic viewfinder. Our competitors may offer both EVF and flip-out displays and both displays may be run by the same interface electronics. A customer who buys our display is required to buy the flip-out display from another vendor who may compete with us. This may require our customer to purchase additional interface electronics to run our display. Our competitors may be able to offer a bundled solution of both displays and the interface electronics cheaper than the cost of buying our display and the other display and the interface electronics separately. If we are unable to offer displays with sufficient performance advantages over other displays to justify the additional cost of buying individual components versus a bundled solution or if our customers can not procure cost efficient interface electronics to run our display products, we may lose market share or be unable to grow our business which in turn would adversely affect our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

Our CyberDisplay™ products may not be widely accepted by the market. Our success will in large part depend on the widespread adoption of the viewing format of our CyberDisplay products in multiple applications. Our success also depends upon the widespread consumer acceptance of our customers’ products. CyberDisplay products work best when used close to the eye, which may not be acceptable to consumers. Potential customers may be reluctant to adopt our CyberDisplay products because of concerns surrounding perceived risks relating to:

21

Table of Contents

In addition, our customers may be reluctant to rely upon a relatively small company like us for a critical component. We cannot assure investors that prospective customers will adopt our CyberDisplay products or that consumers will accept our CyberDisplay products in future applications. If we fail to achieve market acceptance of our CyberDisplay products, our business may not be successful and we may not be able to achieve or maintain profitability.

Our ability to manufacture and distribute our CyberDisplay™ products would be severely limited if the third parties that we rely on to manufacture integrated circuits for our CyberDisplay™ products fail to provide those services. We depend on a Taiwanese company and a Korean company for the fabrication of integrated circuits for our CyberDisplay products. We have no long-term contracts with either of these two companies. These two companies use different methods to manufacture the integrated circuits and a shortage at one company cannot necessarily be supplied by the other company. If either company were to terminate its arrangement with us or become unable to provide the required capacity and quality on a timely basis, we would be able to manufacture and ship our CyberDisplay products only in limited quantities until replacement foundry services could be obtained. Furthermore, we cannot assure investors that we would be able to establish alternative manufacturing and packaging relationships on acceptable terms.

Our reliance on these foundries involves certain risks, including:

One of the foundries and several other third parties with which we do business are located in Taiwan. Due to natural disasters such as earthquakes and typhoons that have occasionally occurred in Taiwan, many Taiwanese companies, including the Taiwanese foundry we use, have experienced related business interruptions. Our business could suffer significantly if either of the foundries we use had operations which were disrupted for an extended period of time, due to natural disaster, political unrest or otherwise. In addition, our CyberDisplays are manufactured on 6-inch silicon wafers. Although we are installing an 8-inch manufacturing line, we currently do not anticipate redesigning all of our displays made on 6-inch wafers so they can be manufactured on 8-inch wafers. We cannot be assured that if the 6-inch manufacturing facilities we use were damaged they would be restored. If the 6-inch production facilities were not restored we may be required to redesign our displays so that they can be manufactured on an 8-inch production line. If the displays had to be redesigned we may have to have the displays re-qualified by our customers, which would adversely affect our business until such qualification is complete.

In fiscal year 2003, there was an outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). There were reports that consumer demand was negatively impacted by the outbreak of SARS. Our sales, manufacturing and distribution processes, and in turn our overall business operations, may be adversely affected if SARS, Avian Flu or similar situations occur.

We depend on third parties to provide integrated circuit chip sets and other critical raw materials for use with our CyberDisplay™ products. We do not manufacture the integrated circuit chip sets necessary for use with our CyberDisplay products. Instead, we rely on third party independent contractors for these integrated circuit chip sets and other critical raw materials such as special glasses and chemicals. We also use third parties to assemble our binocular display module (BDM). The critical raw materials, including the glasses and chemicals used in manufacturing the CyberDisplay products are used by other display manufacturers, many of which are

22

Table of Contents

much larger than Kopin. In addition, our higher-level CyberDisplay assemblies, BDMs, HLAs and other modules include lenses, backlights, printed circuit boards and other components, which we purchase from third party suppliers. Some of these third party contractors and suppliers are small companies with limited financial resources. In addition, relative to the commercial market, the military buys a small number of units which prevents us from qualifying and buying components economically from multiple vendors. If any of these third party contractors or suppliers were unable or unwilling to supply these integrated circuit chip sets or other critical raw materials to us, we would be unable to manufacture and sell our CyberDisplay products until a replacement supplier could be found. We cannot assure investors that a replacement third party contractor or supplier could be found on reasonable terms or in a timely manner. As recently as the third quarter of 2006, we have experienced situations when our vendors could not supply the quantity or quality of critical raw materials we needed. As a result, we were unable to meet customer demand and our revenues, manufacturing yield and gross margins were adversely affected. Currently there is strong worldwide demand for display materials because of the significant growth of display sales over the last few years. In addition, there is strong demand for silicon wafers as a result of an increase in demand for solar cell. Any interruption in our ability to manufacture and distribute our CyberDisplay products could cause our display business to be unsuccessful and the value of investors’ investment in us may decline.

If we are unable to significantly increase our unit sales volume and reduce our production costs, our business will suffer. Our III-V and CyberDisplay product lines currently have significant fixed costs and our ability to achieve or maintain profitability depends upon achieving significant sales volumes and higher gross profit margins. Our III-V product group is primarily comprised of heterojunction bipolar transistor (HBT) products. If we are unable to increase our III-V and CyberDisplay production levels and reduce manufacturing costs, we may lose customer orders and our business may be unprofitable.

We may be unable to increase revenues from our HBT transistor wafers if the third party foundries we plan on using can not get qualified or are unable to produce the required product. We have entered into an agreement with Kopin Taiwan Corporation (KTC) to provide foundry services to manufacture HBT transistor wafers for us. We entered into this agreement to provide us with additional capacity if needed. The ability to use KTC as a foundry is predicated on our ability to have our customers qualify our products, which utilize KTC’s HBT transistor wafers. If we are unable to get the products which utilize KTC’s wafers qualified by our customers and we are unable to meet customer demand utilizing only our internal resources we may lose customer orders and our profitability may be negatively affected.

We may not be able to increase revenues and maintain profitability if we are unable to qualify our large capacity metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) reactors. During 2006, we acquired MOCVD reactors that can produce our HBTs products on either 4 or 6 inch gallium arsenide (GaAs) wafers. We acquired the reactors primarily for their ability to process 6 inch GaAs wafers. We currently have older reactors which also can manufacture HBTs using either 4 or 6 inch GaAs wafers and we sell HBT products on both 4 and 6 inch GaAs wafers. We believe the industry will migrate to 6 inch wafers over the next several years. Our largest customer, who accounted for approximately 49% of our fiscal year 2006 total revenues, purchases our HBT product on 4 inch GaAs wafers and we expect this customer will eventually migrate to 6 inch GaAs wafers in its manufacturing process. If we are unable to get our reactors qualified by this customer and other customers or if we are able to get the reactor qualified but can not manufacture the quantity our customers require or can not manufacture HBT products on 6 inch GaAs wafers in a cost effective manner our revenues and profitability will decline significantly.

We may be unable to increase revenues from HBT transistor wafers if new product applications are not developed. A critical market for our HBTs is wireless handsets. The growth rate of the wireless handset market has slowed over the last several years. We expect prices of our HBT transistor will decline by approximately 5 to 10 percent during 2007 and 2008. If the wireless handset unit volume grows in the range of 5 to 10 percent in 2007 and 2008 our HBT revenues may decrease unless we increase our market share or new markets are

23

Table of Contents

developed. Revenues may also decline if we lose any of our customers or such customers reduce their orders from us. Accordingly, if we are unable to find additional applications for our HBT transistor wafers or increase our market share, our HBT transistor revenue may not grow and such absence of growth may impact our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

We generally do not have long-term contracts with our CyberDisplay customers, which makes forecasting our revenues and operating results difficult. We generally do not enter into long-term agreements with our commercial CyberDisplay customers obligating them to purchase our products. Our business is characterized by short-term purchase orders and shipment schedules and we generally permit orders to be canceled or rescheduled before shipment without significant penalty. As a result, our customers may cease purchasing our products at any time, which makes forecasting our revenues difficult. In addition, due to the absence of substantial non-cancelable backlog, we typically plan our production and inventory levels based on internal forecasts of customer demand, which are highly unpredictable and can fluctuate substantially. Our operating results are difficult to forecast because we are continuing to invest in capital equipment and increasing our operating expenses for new product development. If we fail to accurately forecast our revenues and operating results, our business may not be successful and the value of investors’ investment in us may decline.

We may not be able to realize any profits under a multi-year supply agreement with a significant HBT customer. We have a supply agreement with a significant HBT customer that expires in July 2008, excluding a last buy option contained in the agreement. Under the terms of this agreement we have agreed to maintain capacity levels for manufacturing HBT wafers and we committed to a declining pricing schedule. The agreement also requires us to give prior notice if we exit our HBT product line. In consideration for this agreement the customer agreed to source 100% of its HBT wafer needs from us subject to the customer’s right to source HBT wafers from other sources if we are unable to meet its requirements under certain circumstances. We agreed that failure to meet our supply obligations under the agreement would allow our customer to obtain court ordered specific performance. If we do not perform, we could then be liable for monetary damages up to a maximum of $45 million. The agreement obligates us to provide wafers at preset prices and as a result, our ability to make a profit under this agreement will be subject to fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, meeting customer wafer demand and to any increase in costs of goods or services required for us to perform under the agreement. If we are unable to manufacture the HBT wafers below these preset prices we may not be able to achieve or maintain profitability. There can be no assurance that this customer will agree to renew or extend our agreement when it is due to expire in which case we would potentially lose significant sales of our HBT products.

We may have to record additional impairment losses. In fiscal year 2004, we entered into an agreement to transfer our CyberLite LED operations into the KoBrite joint venture. Our CyberLite LED operations were performed in our facility located at 200 John Hancock Road, Taunton, MA. In addition, a portion of our III-V product line operations was performed in our 200 John Hancock Road facility. With the discontinuance of the CyberLite LED operations the recoverability of the 200 John Hancock Road leasehold improvement assets will be evaluated based on the cash flow from our III-V product line. In fiscal year 2004, based upon forecasted cash flow of our III-V product line, we recorded an impairment charge of $3.2 million. We use our Korean operation for the back end packing steps required to manufacture some of our commercial CyberDisplay products. Our competition is moving more of its manufacturing operations to China which may make our Korean subsidiary unprofitable and require us to exit it. We recently installed new MOCVD reactors for our III-V product line and a new 8-inch manufacturing line for our display products. The forecasts used in our impairment analyses are based on certain estimates relating to III-V and CyberDisplay product line cash flows generated from these new equipments and previously owned equipment. If such estimates were too high, we may be required to record an additional impairment charge in the future.

We may record additional losses from our investment in the KoBrite joint venture, which may impact our ability to achieve or maintain profitability. We account for our investment in the KoBrite joint venture using the equity method, which requires us to record our proportional share of their operating results up to the amount we

24

Table of Contents

have invested or committed to support, which is our current $5.0 million investment. For the twelve months ended December 30, 2006 and December 31, 2005, we recorded $0.6 million and $0.2 million, respectively, of losses from the KoBrite joint venture. We anticipate that the joint venture will incur additional losses in the near term. If the joint venture generates operating losses in the future, we will record additional losses, which will impact our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

A disruption to our information technology systems could significantly impact our operations and impact our revenue and profitability. We maintain proprietary data processing systems and use customized software systems. We also use software packages which are no longer supported by their developer. An interruption to these systems for an extended period may impact our ability to operate the businesses and process transactions which could result in a decline in sales and affect our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

Fluctuations in operating results make financial forecasting difficult and could adversely affect the price of our common stock. Our quarterly and annual revenues and operating results may fluctuate significantly for several reasons, including:

We typically plan our production and inventory levels based on internal forecasts of customer demand, which are highly unpredictable and can fluctuate substantially. Our operating results are difficult to forecast because we are continuing to invest in capital equipment and increasing our operating expenses for new product development.

As a result of these and other factors, investors should not rely on our revenues and our operating results for any one quarter or year as an indication of our future revenues or operating results. If our quarterly revenues or results of operations fall below expectations of investors or public market analysts, the price of our common stock could fall substantially.

We may be unable to modify our products to meet regulatory or customer requirements. From time to time our products are subject to new domestic and international requirements such as the European Union’s Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive. If we are unable to comply with these regulations we may not be permitted to ship our products, which would adversely affect our revenue and ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

Increased competition may result in decreased demand or lower prices for our products. Competition in the markets for our products is intense and we may not be able to compete successfully. We compete with several companies primarily engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing and selling integrated circuits or alternative display technologies, as well as the supply of other discrete products. Our competitors could develop

25

Table of Contents

new process technologies that may be superior to ours, including technologies that target markets in which our products are sold. Many of our existing and potential competitors have strong market position, considerable internal manufacturing capacity, established intellectual property rights and substantial technological capabilities. Furthermore, they also have greater financial, technical, manufacturing, and marketing resources than we do, and we may not be able to compete successfully with them.

In addition, many of our existing and potential customers manufacture or assemble displays and wireless communications devices and have substantial in-house technological capabilities and substantially greater resources than we do. We may not be able to sell our products to these customers and they may commercialize their internal capabilities to become our competitors. If one of our large customers establishes internal design and manufacturing capabilities, it could have an adverse effect on our operating results.

We expect competition to increase. This could mean lower prices or reduced demand for our products. Any of these developments would have an adverse effect on our operating results.

Disruptions of our production of our III-V and CyberDisplay products would adversely affect our operating results. If we were to experience any significant disruption in the operation of our facilities, we would be unable to supply III-V and CyberDisplay products to our customers. Our manufacturing processes are highly complex and customer specifications are extremely precise. We periodically modify our processes in an effort to improve yields and product performance and to meet particular customer requirements. In 2008, we anticipate establishing an 8-inch CyberDisplay manufacturing line. Converting to an 8-inch line will require changes to our manufacturing processes. Process changes or other problems that occur in the complex manufacturing process can result in interruptions in production or significantly reduced yields. Although we have two domestic manufacturing facilities for our HBT products, only one of the facilities contains our quality control testing and inspection systems. Loss of this facility could prevent us from shipping product made at our other facility. Additionally, as we introduce new equipment into our manufacturing processes, our III-V and CyberDisplay products could be subject to especially wide variations in manufacturing yields and efficiency. We may experience manufacturing problems that would result in delays in product introduction and delivery or yield fluctuations. We are also subject to the risks associated with the shortage of raw materials used in the manufacture of our products.

If we fail to keep pace with changing technologies, we may lose customers. Rapidly changing customer requirements, evolving technologies and industry standards characterize the wireless communications, semiconductor materials and display industries. To achieve our goals, we need to enhance our existing products and develop and market new products that keep pace with continuing changes in industry standards, requirements and customer preferences. If we cannot keep pace with these changes, our business could suffer.

We may not be successful in protecting our intellectual property and proprietary rights. Our success depends in part on our ability to protect our intellectual property and proprietary rights. We have obtained certain domestic and foreign patents and we intend to continue to seek patents on our inventions when appropriate. We also attempt to protect our proprietary information with contractual arrangements and under trade secret laws. Our employees and consultants generally enter into agreements containing provisions with respect to confidentiality and the assignment of rights to inventions made by them while in our employ. These measures may not adequately protect our intellectual and proprietary rights. Existing trade secret, trademark and copyright laws afford only limited protection and our patents could be invalidated or circumvented. Moreover, the laws of certain foreign countries in which our products are or may be manufactured or sold may not fully protect our intellectual property rights. Misappropriation of our technology and the costs of defending our intellectual property rights from misappropriation could substantially impair our business. If we are unable to protect our intellectual property and proprietary rights, our business may not be successful and the value of investors’ investment in us may decline.

26

Table of Contents

Our products could infringe on the intellectual property rights of others. Companies in the wireless communications, semiconductor and display industries steadfastly pursue and protect intellectual property rights. This has resulted in considerable and costly litigation to determine the validity of patents and claims by third parties of infringement of patents or other intellectual property. Our products, including former products such as our light emitting diodes (LEDs), could be found to infringe on the intellectual property rights of others. Other companies may hold or obtain patents or inventions or other proprietary rights in technology necessary for our business. Periodically companies inquire about our products and technology in their attempts to assess whether we violate their intellectual property rights. If we are forced to defend against infringement claims, we may face such costly litigation, diversion of technical and management personnel, and product shipment delays, even if the allegations of infringement are unwarranted. If there is a successful claim of infringement against us and we are unable to develop non-infringing technology or license the infringed or similar technology on a timely basis, or if we are required to cease using one or more of our business or product names due to a successful trademark infringement claim against us, it could adversely affect our business.

Our business could suffer if we lose the services of, or fail to attract, key personnel. In order to continue to provide quality products in our rapidly changing business, we believe it is important to retain personnel with experience and expertise relevant to our business. Our success depends in large part upon a number of key management and technical employees. The loss of the services of one or more key employees, including Dr. John C.C. Fan, our President and Chief Executive Officer, could seriously impede our success. We do not maintain any “key-man” insurance policies on Dr. Fan or any other employees. In addition, due to the level of technical and marketing expertise necessary to support our existing and new customers, our success will depend upon our ability to attract and retain highly skilled management, technical, and sales and marketing personnel. Competition for highly skilled personnel is intense and there may be only a limited number of persons with the requisite skills to serve in these positions. If the III-V or CyberDisplay markets experience an upturn, we may need to increase our workforce. Due to the competitive nature of the labor markets in which we operate, we may be unsuccessful in attracting and retaining these personnel. Our inability to attract and retain key personnel could adversely affect our ability to develop and manufacture our products.

Recent rulemaking by the Financial Accounting Standards Board requires us to expense equity compensation given to our employees and may reduce our ability to effectively utilize equity compensation to attract and retain employees. We historically have used stock options as a significant component of our employee compensation program in order to align employees’ interests with the interests of our stockholders, encourage employee retention, and provide competitive compensation packages. The Financial Accounting Standards Board has adopted changes that require companies to record a charge to earnings based on the fair value of employee stock-based awards and other equity incentives effective January 1, 2006, which we have adopted. By causing us to incur significantly increased compensation costs, such accounting changes may cause us to reduce the availability and amount of equity incentives provided to employees, which may make it more difficult for us to attract, retain and motivate key personnel.

We may pursue acquisitions and investments that could adversely affect our business. In the past, we have made, and in the future we may make, acquisitions of, and investments in, businesses, products and technologies that could complement or expand our business. If we identify an acquisition candidate, we may not be able to successfully negotiate or finance the acquisition or integrate the acquired businesses, products or technologies into our existing business and products. Future acquisitions could result in potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities, the incurrence of debt and contingent liabilities, amortization expenses and write-downs of acquired assets.

We may incur significant liabilities if we fail to comply with stringent environmental and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or if we did not comply with these regulations in the past. We are subject to a variety of federal, state and local governmental regulations related to the use, storage, discharge and disposal of toxic or otherwise hazardous chemicals used in our manufacturing process. We are also subject to federal International

27

Table of Contents

Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) laws which regulate the export of technical data and sale of products to other nations which may use these products for military purposes. The failure to comply with present or future regulations could result in fines being imposed on us, suspension of production, or a cessation of operations. Any failure on our part to control the use of, or adequately restrict the discharge of, hazardous substances, or otherwise comply with environmental regulations, could subject us to significant future liabilities. Any failure on our part to obtain any required licenses for the export of technical data and/or sales of our products or to otherwise comply with ITAR, could subject us to significant future liabilities. In addition, we cannot be certain that we have not in the past violated applicable laws or regulations, which violations could result in required remediation or other liabilities. We also cannot be certain that past use or disposal of environmentally sensitive materials in conformity with then existing environmental laws and regulations will protect us from required remediation or other liabilities under current or future environmental laws or regulations.

Investors should not expect to receive dividends from us. We have not paid cash dividends in the past, nor do we expect to pay cash dividends for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that earnings, if any, will be retained for the development of our businesses.

Our stock price may be volatile in the future. The trading price of our common stock has been subject to wide fluctuations in response to quarter-to-quarter variations in results of operations, announcements of technological innovations or new products by us or our competitors, general conditions in the wireless communications, semiconductor and display markets, changes in earnings estimates by analysts or other events or factors. In addition, the public stock markets recently have experienced extreme price and trading volatility. This volatility has significantly affected the market prices of securities of many technology companies for reasons frequently unrelated to the operating performance of the specific companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

None.

We lease our III-V and CyberDisplay product fabrication facilities. Our III-V product manufacturing facilities and corporate headquarters are located in Taunton, Massachusetts. The Taunton facilities occupy 25,100 and 60,000 square feet, including 6,000 and 4,900 square feet of contiguous environmentally controlled production clean rooms. The Taunton facilities are occupied under leases that expire in 2010 and 2012.

Our CyberDisplay production facility occupies 74,000 square feet in Westborough, Massachusetts, of which 10,000 square feet consist of contiguous environmentally controlled production clean rooms, of which 7,000 square feet are operated at a Class 10 level. We occupy our Westborough facility under a lease that expires in March 2012.

In addition to our Massachusetts facilities, we lease a 5,800 square foot design facility in Scotts Valley, California for developing prototypes of products incorporating our CyberDisplay product. This facility is occupied under a lease that expires in October 2012. Our subsidiary, Kowon Technology Co., LTD, owns two facilities in Kyungii-Do, South Korea, in which it manufactures its optoelectronic products and in which its corporate headquarters are located. These facilities occupy an aggregate of 28,000 square feet.

28

Table of Contents

Derivative Lawsuits—On August 15, 2006, two lawsuits were filed in Superior Court, Bristol County, Massachusetts against certain officers and directors of Kopin, purportedly derivatively on behalf of the Company (the “Derivative Suits”). The complaints in the Derivative Suits assert that the named officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties and other obligations to the Company in connection with the Company’s historical stock-based award granting process, the accounting for past stock-based awards, and historical sales of stock by certain individual defendants. Kopin is also named as a nominal defendant in the Derivative Suits, although the lawsuits are derivative in nature and purportedly asserted on behalf of Kopin. Kopin is in the process of evaluating these claims.

Securities Law Action—On September 6, 2007, a complaint was filed against the Company and certain of its directors and officers in Superior Court, Bristol County, Massachusetts purportedly on behalf of a class of shareholders who held Kopin stock on September 6, 2007 (the “Securities Law Action”). The plaintiffs in this action assert claims arising under Delaware General Corporations Law § 211(c), alleging that the Company failed to hold an annual shareholder meeting within the past thirteen months. The plaintiffs seek an order requiring the Company to schedule an annual shareholder meeting and to provide notice of the meeting in accordance with Kopin’s by-laws. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot predict the outcome of the Securities Law Action at this time, and we can give no assurance that the claim will not have a material adverse affect on our financial position or results of operations.

As a result of the Special Committee investigation, each of the Company’s present senior officers has voluntarily agreed to eliminate any benefit received by such individuals from options having been granted to them at prices below the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the appropriate measurement date. For unexercised options this will be accomplished by either canceling them or increasing their exercise price to the appropriate fair market value and, for exercised options, by such individuals compensating the Company for the amount of such benefit, after reduction for any taxes paid, either through a cash payment or canceling vested options having a value equal to the amount of the payment.

Late SEC Filings and NASDAQ Delisting Proceedings

As a result of our Special Committee Investigation commencing in November 2006, we failed to timely file our Form 10-Q for the three month period ended September 30, 2006, in March 2007 we failed to timely file our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006, and in May 2007, August 2007, and November 2007 we failed to timely file our Forms 10-Q for the three month periods ended March 31, 2007, June 30, 2007, and September 29, 2007, respectively. On November 15, 2006 NASDAQ notified us that the failure to file our Form 10-Q for the three month period ended September 30, 2006 caused us to violate the requirements for continued listing as set forth in Marketplace Rule 4310(c)(14) and that the Company’s stock would be suspended from trading on November 27, 2006. On November 21, 2006, we requested a hearing before a NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Panel, or the Panel, to petition for continued listing on the NASDAQ Stock Market. The hearing was held on January 18, 2007. On February 22, 2007, the Panel informed us that we had been granted until May 14, 2007 to file our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006 and Form 10-Q for the interim period September 30, 2006 and any required restatements. On May 4, 2007, the Company made a request to the Panel for additional time beyond the May 14, 2007 deadline to file the delinquent Form 10-K and Forms 10-Q. On May 9, 2007, the Panel denied our request for additional time and notified the Company that it would suspend trading of the Company’s stock on May 16, 2007. On May 14, 2007, NASDAQ Listing and Hearing Review Council, or the Council, notified us that it had called the Company’s case for review and would delay its delisting pending a hearing before the Council. On May 16, 2007, NASDAQ informed us that the Company was not in compliance with NASDAQ Marketplace Rule 4310(c)(14) because it did not timely file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. NASDAQ stayed any delisting as a result of our failure to file our Form 10-Q on a timely basis pending the hearing before the Council. On July 27, 2007, the Council notified

29

Table of Contents

us that we had until September 25, 2007 to file our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006, and Forms 10-Q for the interim periods September 30, 2006 and March 31, 2007 and any required restatements or the Company would be delisted on September 27, 2007. On September 7, 2007, we requested that the NASDAQ’s Board of Directors exercise its discretionary authority under Rule 4809 to grant the Company continued listing beyond the Council’s September 25, 2007 deadline to allow the Company time to complete its investigation into the Company’s past stock option practices and related accounting and prepare and file its audited financial statements. On September 17, 2007 the NASDAQ’s Board of Directors called for review the July 27, 2007 decision of the Council regarding Kopin’s Common Stock and, pending further consideration, has stayed the Council’s decision to suspend the Company’s securities from trading. On October 17, 2007, the NASDAQ Board of Directors further stayed the suspension from trading until December 17, 2007. On December 12, 2007, the Board of Directors of the NASDAQ granted the Company additional time to regain compliance with NASDAQ rules regarding the timely filing of periodic reports with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The Board instructed the NASDAQ staff to give the Company until February 11, 2008 to file all delayed periodic reports necessary to regain compliance with the filing requirements. On February 7, 2008, the NASDAQ board further stayed the suspension from trading until March 17, 2008.

Although we have now filed our Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006, our Forms 10-Q for the quarters ended September 30, 2006, March 31, 2007, June 30, 2007, and September 29, 2007, if the SEC disagrees with the manner in which we have accounted for and reported, or not reported, the financial impact of past stock-based awards, there could be further delays in filing subsequent SEC reports that might result in the delisting of our common stock from the NASDAQ Stock Market.

Indemnification Obligations

Subject to certain limitations, we are obligated to indemnify our current and former directors, officers and employees in connection with the investigation of our historical stock option practices and related government inquiries and litigation. These obligations arise under the terms of our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws, applicable contracts, and Delaware law. The obligation to indemnify generally means that we are required to pay or reimburse the individuals’ reasonable legal expenses and possibly damages and other liabilities incurred in connection with these matters. The litigation associated with our stock option investigation is in its early stages and we have not yet incurred any expenses specifically for the defense of a current or former officer or director.

Other Legal Matters

We are named from time to time as a party to lawsuits in the normal course of our business. Litigation in general, and intellectual property and securities litigation in particular, can be expensive and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover, the results of legal proceedings are difficult to predict.

Not applicable.

30

Table of Contents

Part II

Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “KOPN.” The following table sets forth, for the quarters indicated, the range of high and low sale prices for the Company’s common stock as reported on the NASDAQ National Market for the periods indicated.

As of December 2007, there were 523 stockholders of record of our common stock, which does not reflect those shares held beneficially or those shares held in “street” name.

In the past three years, we have not sold any securities which were not registered under the Securities Act.

We have not paid cash dividends in the past, nor do we expect to pay cash dividends for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that earnings, if any, will be retained for the development of our businesses.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table sets forth information as of December 30, 2006 about shares of the Company’s common stock outstanding and available for issuance under our existing equity compensation plans.

31

Table of Contents

Kopin Corporation

S&P 500 Information Technology Index

Nasdaq Stock Market—U.S. Index

On October 9, 2002, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $15.0 million of our common stock over a two year period. Through September 23, 2004, we repurchased a total of 103,200 shares for an aggregate $378,319 under this program. Our Board of Directors subsequently authorized an extension of this program pursuant to which we were authorized to purchase up to $14,621,681 of our common stock through October 2006. The specific timing and amount of repurchases varied based on market conditions, securities law limitations, and other factors. The repurchases were made using our cash resources. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2006, we repurchased 160,000 shares for $546,900 under this program. The transactions occurred in open market purchases.

32

Table of Contents

We have restated our consolidated financial statements as of and for each of the years ended December 31, 2002, December 31, 2003, December 25, 2004 and December 31, 2005, which is reflected in the following selected financial data. The restatement is more fully described in the “Explanatory Note” immediately preceding Part I, Item 1 and in Note 2, “Restatement of Consolidated Financial Statements,” which is included in “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” in Item 8 of this Form 10-K. This information should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, and our “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Item 7 of this Form 10-K.

33

Table of Contents

34

Table of Contents

A summary of the adjustments to the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 25, 2004, and December 31, 2003 and 2002 is below (in thousands):

35

Table of Contents