Mosaic ImmunoEngineering Inc. - Quarter Report: 2006 August (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
(Mark
One)
x
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For
the
quarterly period ended August 31, 2006
OR
o
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For
the
transition period from ___________ to _______________
Commission
File Number 0-22182
PATRIOT
SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
84-1070278
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
6183
Paseo Del Norte, Suite 180, Carlsbad, California
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
92011
(Zip
Code)
|
(Issuer’s
telephone number): (760) 547-2700
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days. YES x
NO o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one):
Large
accelerated filer o
Accelerated
filer o
Non-accelerated
filer x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes
o
No
x
On
October 2, 2006, 369,536,087 shares of common stock, par value $.00001 per
share
(the issuer’s only class of voting stock) were outstanding.
INDEX
|
Page
|
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
ITEM
1. Financial Statements
|
|
Condensed
consolidated Balance Sheets as of August 31, 2006 (unaudited) and
May 31,
2006
|
3
|
Condensed
consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months ended
August
31, 2006 and 2005 (unaudited)
|
4
|
Condensed
consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended
August
31, 2006 and 2005 (unaudited)
|
5
|
Notes
to Condensed consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)
|
6-21
|
ITEM
2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations
|
22-29
|
ITEM
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
|
30
|
ITEM
4. Controls and Procedures
|
30
|
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
ITEM
1. Legal Proceedings
|
31
|
ITEM
1A. Risk Factors
|
32
|
ITEM
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds
|
32-33
|
ITEM
3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
|
33
|
ITEM
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
33
|
ITEM
5. Other Information
|
33
|
ITEM
6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
|
33-40
|
SIGNATURES
|
2
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Condensed
Consolidated Balance
Sheets
August
31, 2006
|
May
31, 2006
|
||||||
(Unaudited)
|
|||||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Current
Assets:
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
9,679,687
|
$
|
3,984,240
|
|||
Restricted
cash and cash equivalents
|
100,954
|
100,320
|
|||||
Marketable
securities and short term investments
|
5,994,017
|
3,518,879
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable
|
8,313
|
4,113
|
|||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
343,750
|
407,418
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
16,126,721
|
8,014,970
|
|||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
64,134
|
64,006
|
|||||
Other
assets, net
|
8,190
|
8,190
|
|||||
Investment
in affiliated company
|
4,444,440
|
3,952,914
|
|||||
Patents
and trademarks,
net of accumulated amortization of $590,026 and $584,387
|
25,948
|
31,587
|
|||||
$
|
20,669,433
|
$
|
12,071,667
|
||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$
|
377,295
|
$
|
695,323
|
|||
Accrued
liabilities and other
|
151,461
|
154,730
|
|||||
Accrued
contested fee payable
|
54,063
|
394,063
|
|||||
Accrued
income taxes payable
|
3,457,600
|
-
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
4,040,419
|
1,244,116
|
|||||
Total
liabilities
|
4,040,419
|
1,244,116
|
|||||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|||||||
Stockholders’
equity:
|
|||||||
Preferred
stock, $0.00001 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized: none
outstanding
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Common
stock, $0.00001 par value: 500,000,000 shares authorized: 369,413,587
and
366,199,765 shares issued and outstanding
|
3,694
|
3,661
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
71,202,223
|
69,551,981
|
|||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(52,737,818
|
)
|
(58,728,091
|
)
|
|||
Common
stock held in treasury, at cost - 2,075,003 shares and no shares
as of
August 31, 2006 and May 31, 2006, respectively
|
(1,839,085
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
16,629,014
|
10,827,551
|
|||||
$
|
20,669,433
|
$
|
12,071,667
|
See
accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements.
3
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
Three
months ended
|
|||||||
August
31, 2006
|
August
31, 2005
|
||||||
|
(As
restated, see Note 2)
|
|
|||||
Revenues
|
|||||||
Licenses
and royalties
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
10,000,000
|
|||
Other
|
26,375
|
10,070
|
|||||
26,375
|
10,010,070
|
||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
|||||||
Research
and development
|
-
|
88,707
|
|||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
2,732,524
|
1,162,396
|
|||||
Settlement
and license expense
|
-
|
1,918,054
|
|||||
Total
operating expenses
|
2,732,524
|
3,169,157
|
|||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
(2,706,149
|
)
|
6,840,913
|
||||
Other
income (expense):
|
|||||||
Interest
and other income
|
126,767
|
33,893
|
|||||
Loss
on sale of assets
|
(543
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Interest
expense
|
-
|
(202,484
|
)
|
||||
Change
in fair value of warrant and derivative liabilities
|
-
|
1,079,799
|
|||||
Equity
in earnings of affiliated company
|
12,070,198
|
(247,569
|
)
|
||||
Total
other income, net
|
12,196,422
|
663,639
|
|||||
Net
income before income taxes
|
9,490,273
|
7,504,552
|
|||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
3,500,000
|
-
|
|||||
Net
income
|
$
|
5,990,273
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
|||
Basic
income per common share
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
0.03
|
|||
Diluted
income per common share
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.02
|
|||
Weighted
average number of common shares outstanding - basic
|
368,837,051
|
291,335,488
|
|||||
Weighted
average number of common shares outstanding - diluted
|
420,646,769
|
367,216,524
|
See
accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidatedfinancial
statements.
4
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
Three
months ended
|
|||||||
August
31, 2006
|
August
31, 2005
|
||||||
(As
restated, see Note 2)
|
|||||||
Operating
activities:
|
|||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
5,990,273
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
|||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash provided by (used in) operating
activities:
|
|||||||
Amortization
and depreciation
|
10,635
|
14,536
|
|||||
Non-cash
interest expense related to convertible debentures, notes payable
and
warrants
|
-
|
187,256
|
|||||
Expense
related to extension of expiration date of stock options
|
324
|
125,000
|
|||||
Net
gain related to warrant re-pricing, reconveyance and
issuance
|
-
|
(538,208
|
)
|
||||
Non
cash compensation relating to issuance of stock options and vesting
of
warrants
|
1,584,451
|
-
|
|||||
Accrued
interest income added to investments
|
(634
|
)
|
(13,644
|
)
|
|||
Equity
in earnings of affiliated company
|
(12,070,198
|
)
|
247,569
|
||||
Loss
on disposal of fixed assets
|
543
|
-
|
|||||
Issuance
of stock
|
-
|
81,250
|
|||||
Change
in fair value of derivative liabilities
|
-
|
(1,079,799
|
)
|
||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
(4,200
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Prepaid
and other assets
|
63,668
|
(85,564
|
)
|
||||
Licenses
receivable
|
-
|
750,000
|
|||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
(321,297
|
)
|
(8,165
|
)
|
|||
Accrued
contested fee payable
|
(340,000
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Income
tax payable
|
3,457,600
|
-
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
(1,628,835
|
)
|
7,184,783
|
||||
Investing
activities:
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from sales of short-term investments
|
1,839,085
|
-
|
|||||
Purchases
of short-term investments
|
(4,314,223
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
(5,667
|
)
|
(9,541
|
)
|
|||
Investment
in affiliated company
|
-
|
(2,000,000
|
)
|
||||
Distributions
from affiliated company
|
11,578,672
|
-
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
9,097,867
|
(2,009,541
|
)
|
||||
Financing
activities:
|
|||||||
Net
repayment on line of credit
|
-
|
(902
|
)
|
||||
Payments
for capital lease obligations
|
-
|
(2,306
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from exercise of common stock warrants and options
|
65,500
|
206,437
|
|||||
Repurchase
of common stock for treasury
|
(1,839,085
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
(1,773,585
|
)
|
203,229
|
||||
Net
increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
5,695,447
|
5,378,471
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
3,984,240
|
591,426
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of period
|
$
|
9,679,687
|
$
|
5,969,897
|
|||
Supplemental
Disclosure of Cash Flow Information:
|
|||||||
Cash
payments for interest
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Cash
payments for income taxes
|
$
|
42,400
|
$
|
2,400
|
|||
Supplemental
Disclosure of Non-Cash Investing and Financing
Activities:
|
|||||||
Convertible
debentures, notes payable and accrued interest exchanged for common
stock
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
138,540
|
|||
Reclassification
of derivative liabilities associated with debt conversions and warrant
exercises
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
1,569,420
|
|||
Cashless
exercise of warrants
|
$
|
30
|
$
|
116
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidatedfinancial statements.
5
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
1.
Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
The
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Patriot Scientific
Corporation (the “Company”, “we”, “us” or “our”) presented herein have been
prepared pursuant to the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”)
for quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and do not include all of the information
and
footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America. These statements should be read in conjunction with our
audited financial statements and notes thereto included in Form 10-KSB for
our
fiscal year ended May 31, 2006.
In
the
opinion of management, the interim condensed consolidated financial statements
reflect all adjustments of a normal recurring nature necessary for a fair
statement of the results for interim periods. Operating results for the three
month period ended August 31, 2006 are not necessarily indicative of the results
that may be expected for the year ending May 31, 2007.
Reclassifications
Certain
reclassifications have been made to the 2005 financial statements in order
for
them to conform to the 2006 presentation. Such reclassifications have no impact
on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.
Investment
in Affiliated Company
The
Company has a 50% interest in Phoenix Digital Solutions, LLC (“Phoenix Digital”)
(see Note 4). This investment is accounted for using the equity method of
accounting since the investment provides the Company the ability to exercise
significant influence, but not control, over the investee. Significant influence
is generally deemed to exist if the Company has an ownership interest in the
voting stock of the investee of between 20% and 50%, although other factors,
such as representation on the investee’s Board of Directors, are considered in
determining whether the equity method of accounting is appropriate. Under the
equity method of accounting, the investment, originally recorded at cost, is
adjusted to recognize the Company’s share of net earnings or losses of the
investee and is recognized in the condensed consolidated statement of operations
in the caption “Equity in earnings of affiliated company.”
Derivative
Financial Instruments
In
connection with the issuance of certain convertible debentures (see Note 5),
the
terms of the debentures included an embedded reset conversion feature which
provided for a conversion of the debentures into shares of the Company's common
stock at a rate which was determined to be variable. The Company determined
that
the reset conversion feature was an embedded derivative instrument and that
the
conversion option was an embedded put option pursuant to Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 133, Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,
as
amended, and Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-19, Accounting
for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in,
a
Company's Own Stock.
The
accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments required that the
Company record the derivatives and related warrants at their fair values as
of
the inception date of the convertible debenture agreements and at fair value
as
of each subsequent balance sheet date. In addition, under the provisions
of EITF Issue No. 00-19, as a result of entering into the convertible debenture
agreements, the Company was required to classify all other non-employee warrants
as derivative liabilities and record them at their fair values at each balance
sheet date. Any change in fair value was recorded as non-operating,
non-cash income or expense at each balance sheet date. If the fair value
of the derivatives was higher at the subsequent balance sheet date, the Company
recorded a non-operating, non-cash charge. If the fair value of the
derivatives was lower at the subsequent balance sheet date, the Company recorded
non-operating, non-cash income.
During
the three months ended August 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company recognized other
income of approximately $0 and $1,079,799, respectively, related to recording
the warrant and derivative liabilities at fair value. At August 31, 2006, there
are no derivative liabilities since the related variable debt instruments were
settled in full during fiscal 2006. At the settlement date, the remaining
warrant liabilities with a value of approximately $6,744,000 were reclassified
to additional paid-in capital.
6
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Derivative
Financial Instruments, continued
The
Company’s derivative instruments were valued using a Monte Carlo simulation
model incorporating the instruments’ multiple reset dates.
The
following assumptions were used for valuing the embedded derivatives during
the
three months ended August 31, 2005:
Estimated
dividends
|
None
|
|||
Expected
volatility
|
101
- 229%
|
|||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
3.5
- 5.1%
|
|||
Expected
term (years)
|
2
- 7
|
Revenue
Recognition
The
Company recognizes revenue from the sale of its product upon shipment to the
customer, at which time title transfers and the Company has no further
obligations. Fees for maintenance or support are recorded on a straight-line
basis over the underlying period of performance. Revenue from technology license
agreements is recognized at the time the Company enters into a contract and
provides the customer with the licensed technology. At this point, the Company
has performed all of its obligations under contract, the rights to the Company’s
technology have been transferred and no significant performance obligations
remain.
Net
Income Per Share
The
Company applies SFAS No. 128, Earnings
Per Share,
for the
calculation of "Basic" and "Diluted" earnings per share. Basic earnings per
share includes no dilution and is computed by dividing income available to
common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding
for the period. Diluted earnings per share reflects the potential dilution
of
securities that could share in the earnings of an entity. At August 31, 2006,
potential common shares of 135,000 related to the Company’s outstanding warrants
and options were not included in the calculation of diluted income per share
as
they had an anti-dilutive effect. At August 31, 2005, potential common shares
of
88,905,000 related to the Company’s outstanding convertible debentures, warrants
and options were not included in the calculation of diluted loss per share
as
they had an anti-dilutive effect.
Three
Months Ended August 31, 2006
|
||||||||||
Numerator
(Income) |
|
Denominator
(Shares) |
|
Per
Share
Amount |
||||||
Basic
EPS:
|
||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
5,990,273
|
368,837,051
|
$
|
0.02
|
|||||
Diluted
EPS:
|
||||||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
||||||||||
Options
and warrants
|
-
|
51,809,718
|
||||||||
Income
available to common stockholders
|
$
|
5,990,273
|
420,646,769
|
$
|
0.01
|
7
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Net
Income Per Share, continued
Three
Months Ended August 31, 2005
(As
restated, See Note
2)
|
||||||||||
Numerator
(Income)
|
Denominator
(Shares)
|
Per
Share Amount
|
||||||||
Basic
EPS:
|
||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
291,335,488
|
$
|
0.03
|
|||||
Diluted
EPS:
|
||||||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
||||||||||
Options
and warrants
|
-
|
75,881,036
|
||||||||
Income
available to common stockholders
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
367,216,524
|
$
|
0.02
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
Change
in Accounting Principle
Effective
June 1, 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based
Payment,
which
establishes standards for the accounting of transactions in which an entity
exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services, primarily focusing
on
accounting for transactions where an entity obtains employee services in
share-based payment transactions. SFAS No. 123(R) requires a public entity
to measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award
of
equity instruments, including stock options, based on the grant-date fair value
of the award and to recognize it as compensation expense over the period the
employee is required to provide service in exchange for the award, usually
the
vesting period. SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes the Company’s previous accounting
under Accounting Principles Board Opinion (“APB”) No. 25, Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees,
for the
period beginning June 1, 2006 for the Company. In March 2005, the SEC issued
SAB
No. 107, Share-Based
Payment,
relating to SFAS No. 123(R). The Company has applied the provisions of SAB
No.
107 in its adoption of SFAS No. 123(R). Stock-based awards to non-employees
are
accounted for using the fair value method in accordance with SFAS No. 123,
Accounting
for Stock Based Compensation.
The
Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R) using the modified prospective transition
method, which requires the application of the accounting standard as of
June 1, 2006, the first day of the Company’s fiscal year 2007. The
Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements as of and for the three
months ended August 31, 2006 reflect the impact of adopting SFAS No. 123(R).
In
accordance with the modified prospective transition method, the Company’s
condensed consolidated financial statements for prior periods have not been
restated to reflect, and do not include, the impact of SFAS No. 123(R). SFAS
No.
123(R) requires companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment
awards on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The value of the
portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as
expense over the requisite service periods in the Company’s condensed
consolidated statement of operations. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R),
the Company accounted for stock-based awards to employees and directors using
the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB No. 25 as allowed under SFAS
No. 123. Under the intrinsic value method, no employee stock-based compensation
expense had been recognized in the Company’s condensed consolidated statements
of operations, other than as related to option grants to employees and directors
below the fair market value of the underlying stock at the date of
grant.
8
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Stock-Based
Compensation, continued
Stock-based
compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the value of
the
portion of share-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during
the period. Stock-based compensation expense recognized in the Company’s
condensed consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended August
31, 2006 included compensation expense for share-based payment awards granted
prior to, but not yet vested as of May 31, 2006 based on the grant date
fair value estimated in accordance with the pro forma provisions of SFAS No.
123
and compensation expense for the share-based payment awards granted subsequent
to May 31, 2006 based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance
with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). As stock-based compensation expense
recognized in the condensed consolidated statement of operations for the three
months ended August 31, 2006 is based on awards ultimately expected to vest,
it
has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. SFAS No. 123(R) requires forfeitures
to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent
periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The estimated average
forfeiture rate for the three months ended August 31, 2006, of
approximately 5% was based on historical forfeiture experience and estimated
future employee forfeitures. The estimated pricing term of option grants for
the
three months ended August 31, 2006 was one year. In the Company’s pro forma
information required under SFAS No. 123 for the periods prior to fiscal 2007,
the Company accounted for forfeitures as they occurred.
Summary
of Assumptions and Activity
The
following table illustrates the effect on net income and net income per share
for the three months ended August 31, 2005 as if the Company had applied the
fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to options granted under
the
Company's stock option plans. For purposes of this pro forma disclosure, the
fair value of the options is estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing
model and amortized on a straight-line basis to expense over the options'
vesting period:
Three
Months Ended
|
||||
August
31, 2005
(Unaudited)
|
||||
(As
restated
see Note 2) |
||||
Net
income - as reported
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
||
Add:
Share-based employee compensation included in net income, net of
tax
effects
|
-
|
|||
Deduct:
Share-based employee compensation expense determined under fair value
method, net of tax effects
|
182,250
|
|||
Net
income - pro forma
|
$
|
7,322,302
|
||
Net
income per common share - as reported
|
||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.03
|
||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.02
|
||
Net
income per common share - pro forma
|
||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.03
|
||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.02
|
9
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Stock-Based
Compensation, continued
The
fair
value of stock-based awards to employees and directors is calculated using
the
Black-Scholes option pricing model, even though this model was developed to
estimate the fair value of freely tradable, fully transferable options without
vesting restrictions, which differ significantly from the Company’s stock
options. The Black-Scholes model also requires subjective assumptions, including
future stock price volatility and expected time to exercise, which greatly
affect the calculated values. The expected term of options granted is derived
from historical data on employee exercises and post-vesting employment
termination behavior. The risk-free rate selected to value any particular grant
is based on the U.S. Treasury rate that corresponds to the pricing term of
the
grant effective as of the date of the grant. The expected volatility for the
three months ended August 31, 2006 and 2005 is based on the historical
volatilities of the Company’s common stock. These factors could change in the
future, affecting the determination of stock-based compensation expense in
future periods.
Three
Months Ended
|
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||
August
31, 2006 (Unaudited)
|
August
31, 2005(Unaudited)
|
||||||
Expected
term
|
5
years
|
5
years
|
|||||
Expected
volatility
|
156
|
%
|
128
|
%
|
|||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
5.00
|
%
|
3.72
|
%
|
|||
Expected
dividends
|
-
|
-
|
A
summary
of option activity as of August 31, 2006 and changes during the three months
then ended, is presented below:
Shares
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Contractual Term (Years)
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic Value
|
||||||||||
Options
outstanding at June 1, 2006
|
5,460,000
|
$
|
0.34
|
||||||||||
Options
granted
|
1,500,000
|
$
|
0.17
|
||||||||||
Options
exercised
|
(50,000
|
)
|
$
|
0.11
|
|||||||||
Options
forfeited
|
(250,000
|
)
|
$
|
0.08
|
|||||||||
Options
outstanding at August 31, 2006
|
6,660,000
|
$
|
0.32
|
3.21
|
$
|
3,361,750
|
|||||||
Options
exercisable at August 31, 2006
|
6,625,000
|
$
|
0.31
|
3.20
|
$
|
3,357,550
|
The
weighted average grant date fair value of options granted during the three
months ended August 31, 2006 was $1.14 per option. The total intrinsic value
of
options exercised during the three months ended August 31, 2006 was zero as
none
of the options that were exercised during the period had intrinsic
value.
10
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Stock-Based
Compensation, continued
A
summary
of the status of the Company’s non-vested stock options as of August 31, 2006
and changes during the three months then ended is presented below:
Shares
|
Weighted
Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
|
||||||
Non-vested
stock options at June 1, 2006
|
345,000
|
$
|
$0.24
|
||||
Non-vested
stock options granted
|
1,500,000
|
$
|
$1.02
|
||||
Vested
stock options
|
(1,560,000
|
)
|
$
|
$1.01
|
|||
Forfeited/cancelled
stock options
|
(250,000
|
)
|
$
|
$0.06
|
|||
Non-vested
stock options at August 31, 2006
|
35,000
|
$
|
$0.71
|
As
of
August 31, 2006, there was approximately $13,000 of total unrecognized
compensation cost related to employee and director stock option compensation
arrangements. That cost is expected to be recognized on a straight-line basis
over the next six months. The total fair value of shares vested during the
three
months ended August 31, 2006 was approximately $1,575,000.
As
a
result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on June 1, 2006, the Company’s income
before provision for income taxes and net income for the three months ended
August 31, 2006 were approximately $100,000 lower than if it had continued
to
account for share-based compensation under APB No. 25. Basic and
diluted net income per share for the three months ended August 31, 2006 were
not
affected by the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R).
The
following table summarizes employee stock-based compensation expense related
to
stock options under SFAS No. 123(R) for the three months ended August 31, 2006,
which was allocated as follows (in thousands):
Three
Months Ended
|
||||
August
31, 2006
|
||||
Employee
stock-based compensation expense included in:
|
||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
$
|
1,575,000
|
||
Employee
stock-based compensation expense related to employee stock
options
|
$
|
1,575,000
|
11
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
2.
Restatement of Previously Issued Financial Statements
During
the first quarter of fiscal 2007, the Company determined that the manner in
which it historically accounted for the reset conversion feature and embedded
put option of its convertible debentures issued during fiscal 2002 through
fiscal 2005 was not in accordance with SFAS No. 133, as amended, and EITF Issue
No. 00-19. The Company determined that the reset conversion feature was an
embedded derivative instrument and that the conversion option was an embedded
put option pursuant to SFAS No. 133. The accounting treatment of derivative
financial instruments required that the Company record the derivatives and
related warrants at their fair values as of the inception date of the
convertible debenture agreements and at fair value as of each subsequent balance
sheet date. In addition, under the provisions of EITF Issue No. 00-19, as
a result of entering into the convertible debenture agreements, the Company
was
required to classify all other non-employee warrants as derivative liabilities
and record them at their fair values at each balance sheet date. Any
change in fair value was required to be recorded as non-operating, non-cash
income or expense at each balance sheet date. If the fair value of the
derivatives was higher at the subsequent balance sheet date, the Company was
required to record a non-operating, non-cash charge. If the fair value of
the derivatives was lower at the subsequent balance sheet date, the Company
was
required to record non-operating, non-cash income. Accordingly, in
connection with the restatement adjustments, the Company has appropriately
reflected the non-operating, non-cash income or expense resulting from the
changes in fair value. The Company had previously not recorded the embedded
derivative instruments as liabilities and did not record the related changes
in
fair value.
In
addition, the Company determined the manner in which it accounted for its
interest in Phoenix Digital was not in accordance with appropriate accounting
literature. Beginning in June 2005, the Company accounted for its interest
in
Phoenix Digital as a variable interest entity, as defined in FASB Interpretation
46(R). Accordingly, the accounts and transactions of Phoenix Digital were
consolidated with those of the Company and the ownership interest of the other
member of Phoenix Digital was presented as a minority interest in the condensed
consolidated financial statements of the Company for the three month period
ended August 31, 2005. The Company has reassessed its accounting for its
interest in Phoenix Digital and after further consideration of FIN 46(R) and
other authoritative literature, has corrected its accounting policy to account
for its interest in Phoenix Digital in accordance with the equity method of
accounting for investments, as the Company did not have a controlling financial
interest in Phoenix Digital and determined that it was not the primary
beneficiary of the relationship.
The
following tables present a summary of the effects of the restatement adjustments
on the Company's condensed consolidated statements of operations and cash flows
for the three months ended August 31, 2005:
|
Statement
of Operations
|
|||||||||
Three
months ended August 31, 2005
|
As
Previously Reported
|
Adjustments
|
As
Restated
|
|||||||
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
$
|
1,675,719
|
$
|
(513,323
|
)
|
$
|
1,162,396
|
|||
Settlement
and license expense
|
$
|
3,855,132
|
$
|
(1,937,078
|
)
|
$
|
1,918,054
|
|||
Operating
income
|
$
|
4,390,512
|
$
|
2,450,401
|
$
|
6,840,913
|
||||
Change
in fair value of warrant and derivative
|
||||||||||
liabilities
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
1,079,799
|
$
|
1,079,799
|
||||
Equity
in earnings (loss) of affiliated company
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(247,569
|
)
|
$
|
(247,569
|
)
|
||
Interest
and other income
|
$
|
53,457
|
$
|
(19,564
|
)
|
$
|
33,893
|
|||
Total
other income (expense)
|
$
|
(149,027
|
)
|
$
|
812,666
|
$
|
663,639
|
|||
Income
before minority interest in loss of consolidated entity
|
$
|
4,241,485
|
$
|
(4,241,485
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Minority
interest in loss of consolidated entity
|
$
|
240,569
|
$
|
(240,569
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Income
before income taxes loss
|
$
|
4,482,054
|
$
|
3,022,498
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
$
|
(40,000
|
)
|
$
|
40,000
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Net
income
|
$
|
4,442,054
|
$
|
3,062,498
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
12
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Restatement
of Previously Issued Financial Statements, continued
Statement
of Operations
|
||||||||||
Three
months ended August 31, 2005
|
As
Previously Reported
|
Adjustments
|
As
Restated
|
|||||||
INCOME
PER COMMON SHARE:
|
||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.03
|
||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.02
|
Statement
of Cash Flows
|
||||||||||
Three
months ended August 31, 2005
|
As
Previously Reported
|
Adjustments
|
As
Restated
|
|||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
4,442,054
|
$
|
3,062,498
|
$
|
7,504,552
|
||||
Change
in fair value of warrant and derivative liabilities
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(1,079,799
|
)
|
$
|
(1,079,799
|
)
|
||
Net
gain related to warrant re-pricing, reconveyance and
issuance
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(538,208
|
)
|
$
|
(538,208
|
)
|
||
Non-cash
expense related to warrant re-pricing and issuance
|
$
|
1,397,491
|
$
|
(1,397,491
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Loss
in consolidated entity allocated to minority interest
|
$
|
(240,569
|
)
|
$
|
240,569
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Equity
in earnings of investee
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
247,569
|
$
|
247,569
|
||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
$
|
31,835
|
$
|
(40,000
|
)
|
$
|
(8,165
|
)
|
3.
License Agreements
In
February 2005, the Company entered into two separate licensing agreements with
one customer for the Company’s patent portfolio and Ignite microprocessor
technology. The aggregate amount of the two licenses was $3,050,000, of which
$2,950,000 was for licensing fees and $100,000 was for maintenance services.
Maintenance under the agreement is expected to be provided over a period not
to
exceed four years. Maintenance revenue recognized during the three months ended
August 31, 2006 was $6,250. The payment terms of the agreements required
aggregate payments of $300,000 at the time of execution, three quarterly
payments of $750,000 each on April 1, August 15, and November 15, 2005 and
one
final payment of $500,000 on February 15, 2006. The $500,000 payment due on
February 15, 2006 was paid in March 2006. Total payments received in fiscal
2005
amounted to $1,050,000 and total payments received in fiscal 2006 amounted
to
$2,000,000. The agreements also provide for the future payment of royalties
to
the Company based on sales of product using the Ignite licensed technology.
In
connection with this license agreement, the Company became obligated to the
former co-inventor of the patent portfolio technology for $207,600 pursuant
to a
July 2004 agreement under which the Company was obligated to pay a percentage
of
licensed proceeds to the co-inventor. The amount due was payable in four
installments of $51,900; $54,063 remains outstanding at August 31, 2006, and
is
included in accrued contested fee payable. The Company has reviewed the
potential obligation for future payments to the co-inventor of the patent
portfolio technology in connection with entering into license agreements. The
Company believes, based upon consultation with its legal counsel, that it has
no
further obligation to the co-inventor and has not provided an accrual for such
amount. The Company is aware of a lawsuit filed against it by the co-inventor
of
the patent portfolio technology The Company intends to vigorously defend itself
in this matter; however, it is possible that were the Company not to prevail
in
the suit, the ultimate amount payable to such co-inventor of the Ignite
technology could be significant.
13
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
4.
Investment in Affiliated Company/License Agreement
On
June
7, 2005, the Company entered into a Master Agreement (the “Master Agreement”)
with Technology Properties Limited Inc., a California corporation (“TPL”), and
Charles H. Moore (“Moore”), the co-inventor of certain of the Company’s
technology, pursuant to which the Company and Moore resolved all legal disputes
between them. Pursuant to the Master Agreement, the Company and TPL entered
into
the Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of Phoenix Digital Solutions,
LLC (the “LLC Agreement”) into which the Company and Moore contributed their
rights to certain of the Company’s technologies. The Company believes, based
upon consultation with its attorneys, it was not required by applicable law
or
other existing agreements to obtain approval for the contribution of the license
rights to Phoenix Digital from stockholders or any parties other that its
various warrant holders.
The
Company and TPL each own 50% of the membership interests of Phoenix Digital,
and
each have the right to appoint one member of the three member management
committee. The two appointees are required to select a mutually acceptable
third
member of the management committee. Pursuant to the LLC Agreement, the Company
and TPL agreed to establish a working capital fund for Phoenix Digital of
$4,000,000, of which the Company’s contribution was $2,000,000. The working
capital fund increases to a maximum of $8,000,000 as license revenues are
achieved. The Company and TPL are obligated to fund future working capital
requirements at the discretion of the management committee of Phoenix Digital
in
order to maintain working capital of not more than $8,000,000. Neither the
Company nor TPL is required to contribute more than $2,000,000 in any fiscal
year. Distributable cash and allocation of profits and losses will be allocated
to the members in the priority defined in the LLC Agreement. Phoenix Digital
has
committed to pay a quarterly amount ranging between $500,000 and $1,000,000
(based upon a percentage of the working capital fund balance of Phoenix Digital)
for supporting efforts to secure licensing agreements by the other member on
behalf of Phoenix Digital. During the three months ended August 31, 2006,
Phoenix Digital paid $968,000 to TPL pursuant to this commitment.
The
Company is accounting for its investment in Phoenix Digital under the equity
method of accounting, and accordingly has recorded its 50% share of Phoenix
Digital’s net income of $12,070,198 during the three months ended August 31,
2006 as an increase in its investment. Cash distributions of $11,578,672
received from Phoenix Digital during the three months ended August 31, 2006
have
been recorded as a reduction in the Company’s investment. The Company’s
investment in Phoenix Digital is $4,444,440 at August 31, 2006 and has been
recorded as “Investment in Affiliated Company”. The Company has recorded its 50%
share of Phoenix Digital’s net income as “Equity in Earnings of Affiliated
Company” in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations for
the three months ended August 31, 2006 and 2005.
Concurrently
with forming Phoenix Digital, the Company entered into a license agreement
with
a third party pursuant to which it received $10,000,000, which amount was
recorded as license revenue during the quarter ended August 31, 2005. In
connection with entering into the license agreement and forming Phoenix Digital,
the Company incurred various cash and non-cash expenses. Direct, incremental
cash costs incurred with the transactions included $170,000 paid to a committee
of the Company’s board of directors for their efforts in consummating the
transactions, approximately $1,328,000 paid to certain of the Company’s warrant
holders to obtain their approval of the agreement and release of their lien
and
blocking rights. Additionally, $960,000 was paid to the former co-inventor
of
the technology.
14
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Investment
in Affiliated Company/License Agreement, continued
The
Company also granted new warrants and agreed to re-price other outstanding
warrants in order to obtain the necessary approvals from certain security
interest holders as well as to obtain the release of their security interests
in
the Company’s intellectual property, and to finalize the LLC Agreement. The
Company granted a warrant to TPL to acquire up to 3,500,000 shares of the
Company’s common stock at a per share price of $0.125. The warrant has a term of
seven years. At the date of grant, the right to acquire 1,400,000 common shares
vested. The right to acquire the remaining 2,100,000 shares will vest in 700,000
increments only upon the Company’s common stock attaining a per share stock
price of $0.50, $0.75 and $1.00. On February 21, 2006, February 22, 2006 and
March 1, 2006 the rights to acquire the remaining 700,000 share increments
vested as the Company’s stock price reached $0.50, $0.75 and $1.00,
respectively. As additional consideration to the warrant holders for providing
approval for the transaction, the Company agreed to reset the per share exercise
price of approximately 35,000,000 warrants to $0.015 for which the warrant
holders also conveyed other warrants to acquire 12,000,000 shares back to the
Company. Further, the Company issued additional warrants to acquire
approximately 290,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at a per share price
of $0.03. The warrants issued and re-priced were valued using a Monte Carlo
simulation model and the following assumptions: volatility of 101% to 229%,
no
dividends, risk-free interest rates of approximately 3.5% to 5.1%, and
contractual terms ranging from two to seven years. The fair value of the
warrants issued and re-priced in excess of previously recorded expense was
approximately $83,000 and the fair value of the reconveyed warrants was
approximately $622,000. These amounts, together with the direct, incremental
cash costs previously described, are recorded as an expense and included in
settlement and license expense in the three months ended August 31,
2005.
During
the three months ended August 31, 2006, Phoenix Digital entered into licensing
agreements with third parties, pursuant to which it received aggregate proceeds
of $25,749,000. During September 2006 Phoenix Digital entered into licensing
agreements pursuant to which it received aggregate proceeds of
$6,950,000.
The
condensed balance sheet and statement of income of Phoenix Digital at August
31,
2006 and for the three months then ended are as follows:
Condensed
Balance Sheet
ASSETS:
|
||||
Cash
|
$
|
8,695,729
|
||
Prepaid
expenses
|
15,000
|
|||
Total
assets
|
$
|
8,710,729
|
||
LIABILITIES
AND MEMBERS’ EQUITY:
|
||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
$
|
299,585
|
||
Members’
equity
|
8,411,144
|
|||
Total
liabilities and members’ equity
|
$
|
8,710,729
|
15
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Investment
in Affiliated Company/License Agreement, continued
Condensed
Statement of Income
Revenues
|
$
|
25,749,000
|
||
Operating
expenses
|
1,717,917
|
|||
Operating
income
|
24,031,083
|
|||
Interest
income
|
109,312
|
|||
Net
income
|
$
|
24,140,395
|
5.
Convertible Debentures
From
fiscal 2002 through fiscal 2005, the Company raised approximately $5,400,000
through the issuance of convertible debentures, having stated interest rates
ranging from 8% to 12%, to a limited group of investors. The convertible
debentures entitled the debenture holders to convert the principal, and any
accrued interest thereon, into shares of the Company’s common stock for up to
two years from the date of issuance.
The
debentures were initially convertible into shares of common stock at conversion
prices ranging from approximately $0.02 to $0.10 per share. The debentures
contained provisions which allowed for the conversion rate to be reset on a
periodic basis based on a comparison of the market price of the Company's common
stock to the conversion price of the debentures. On those measurement dates
where the market price was less than the conversion rate, a new conversion
rate
was set based on a weighted average of the market price for the ten days prior
to the reset measurement date. As of May 31, 2005, the reset conversion rate
on
debentures outstanding ranged from $0.02 to $0.04.
Concurrent
with the issuance of the convertible debentures, the Company issued to the
debenture holders warrants to purchase shares of the Company's common stock.
These warrants are exercisable for five years from the date of issuance at
either initial negotiated exercise prices or prices equal to 115% of the volume
weighted average price for our common stock for the ten days previous to the
debenture date. The warrant exercise price is generally subject to being reset
on each six-month anniversary of its issuance; however, if the warrant holder
elects to have the warrant shares registered, then the exercise price is fixed
at the price in effect on the date of the election.
Except
for one debenture issued on March 23, 2004, the Company is responsible for
registering the resale of the shares of its common stock which will be issued
on
the conversion of the debentures. As of May 31, 2005, there have been six
registration statements. The convertible debentures were secured by
substantially all assets of the Company.
The
terms
of the convertible debentures included certain features that were considered
embedded derivative financial instruments, such as the conversion feature and
a
reset conversion feature which provided for a conversion of the debentures
into
shares of the Company’s common stock at a rate which was determined to be
variable. Because the debentures were not conventional convertible debt, the
Company was also required to record the related warrants at their fair values.
The total of the derivative and warrant liabilities at May 31, 2005 was
$9,274,712, consisting of the fair value of the conversion feature and reset
feature of $3,602,365 and the fair value of the warrants of $4,029,634. In
addition, under the provisions of EITF Issue No. 00-19, as a result of entering
into the convertible debenture agreements, the Company was required to classify
all other non-employee warrants as derivative liabilities and record them at
their fair values at each balance sheet date. The total fair value of the
non-employee warrants at May 31, 2005 was $1,642,713.
16
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Convertible
Debentures, continued
During
the three months ended August 31, 2005, the value of the warrant and derivative
liabilities decreased by $1,079,799, which is reflected as a component of other
income (expense) in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of
operations.
During
the three months ended August 31, 2005, holders of debentures with a principal
balance of $132,500 converted their debentures, together with accrued interest
thereon of approximately $6,000, into 8,295,789 shares of the Company’s common
stock. As of May 31, 2006, all outstanding debentures were repaid or converted
into shares of the Company’s common stock. As a result of the settlement of the
remaining debentures during 2006, the Company reclassified $6,743,935 related
to
the fair values of all outstanding warrants at the date of settlement to
additional paid-in capital.
The
following table presents the status and activity of the Company’s convertible
debentures as of May 31, 2006:
Original
|
Principal
Balance at May 31,
|
Conversion
Prices
|
Effective
Registration
|
Shares
Converted as of May 31,
|
Warrant
Shares
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Series
|
Dates
of Issuance
|
Principal
|
2006
|
Initial
|
Reset
|
Date
|
2006
|
Issued
|
|||||||||||||||||
A
|
4/23/02-6/10/02
|
$
|
1,000,000
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
0.08616-0.10289
|
$
|
0.04190-0.04457
|
10/29/2002
|
24,099,548
|
12,859,175
|
|||||||||||||
B
|
8/23/02-1/24/03
|
605,000
|
-
|
0.05126-0.0727
|
0.04381-0.04722
|
3/7/2003
|
14,777,350
|
11,234,835
|
|||||||||||||||||
C
|
3/24/02-6/9/03
|
510,000
|
-
|
0.041-0.065
|
0.041-0.065
|
6/26/2003
|
10,470,554
|
9,377,943
|
|||||||||||||||||
D
|
8/1/03-10/21/03
|
547,500
|
-
|
0.0172-0.048
|
0.0172-0.0477
|
11/18/2003
|
25,178,803
|
22,455,355
|
|||||||||||||||||
E
|
12/1/03-5/11/04
|
1,527,500
|
-
|
0.0267-0.10
|
0.0267-0.10
|
6/7/2004
|
46,794,618
|
30,395,392
|
|||||||||||||||||
F
|
3/23/04
|
723,168
|
-
|
0.09
|
0.09
|
Not
Registered
|
20,877,430
|
8,035,192
|
|||||||||||||||||
G
|
9/28/04-1/17/05
|
232,500
|
-
|
0.016710-0.04
|
0.01670-0.04
|
5/22/2006
|
8,267,358
|
8,259,678
|
|||||||||||||||||
G
|
11/17/04-11/18/04
|
257,500
|
-
|
0.016710-0.04
|
0.01670-0.04
|
Not
Registered
|
14,107,672
|
13,431,137
|
|||||||||||||||||
$
|
5,403,168
|
-
|
164,573,333
|
116,048,707
|
No
convertible debentures or warrants in connection with convertible debentures
were issued during the year ended May 31, 2006.
The
Company recorded the fair value of the derivative instruments and warrants
as a
debt discount which was amortized to interest expense over the term of the
convertible debentures. During the three months ended August 31, 2005, the
Company recorded interest expense of $187,256 related to the amortization of
the
debt discount.
17
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
6.
Stockholders’ Equity
During
July 2006 the Company commenced its Board of Director approved stock buyback
program in which the Company repurchases its outstanding common stock from
time
to time on the open market. As part of the program the Company purchased
2,075,003 shares of its common stock at an aggregate cost of $1,839,085 during
the three months ended August 31, 2006.
The
following table summarizes equity transactions during the three months ended
August 31, 2006:
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Treasury
|
|||||||||||
Shares
|
Amounts
|
Capital
|
Deficit
|
Stock
|
||||||||||||
Balance
June 1, 2006
|
366,199,765
|
$
|
3,661
|
$
|
69,551,981
|
$
|
(58,728,091
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
||||||
Exercise
of warrants and options at $0.11 to $0.40 per share
|
200,000
|
3
|
65,497
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Cashless
exercise of warrants
|
3,013,822
|
30
|
(30
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||
Extension
of stock options previously issued to a consultant
|
-
|
-
|
324
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Non-cash
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
1,584,451
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Repurchase
of common stock for treasury
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,839,085
|
)
|
||||||||||
Net
income
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
5,990,273
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Balance
August 31, 2006
|
369,413,587
|
$
|
3,694
|
$
|
71,202,223
|
$
|
(52,737,818
|
)
|
$
|
(1,839,085
|
)
|
Stock
Options
and Warrant Activity
As
of
August 31, 2006, we had 125,000 options outstanding pursuant to our 1996 Stock
Option Plan exercisable at a range of $0.07 to $0.08 per share expiring through
2009; 585,000 options outstanding pursuant to our 2001 Stock Option Plan
exercisable at a range of $0.07 to $0.70 per share expiring through 2011;
2,400,000 options outstanding pursuant to our 2003 Stock Option Plan exercisable
at a range of $0.05 to $0.17 per share expiring through 2011; and 2,050,000
options outstanding pursuant to our 2006 Stock Option Plan exercisable at $0.70
per share expiring through 2011. Some of the options outstanding under these
plans are not presently exercisable and are subject to meeting vesting
criteria.
During
the quarter ended August 31, 2006, we issued options to acquire 1,500,000 shares
of our common stock at a per share price of $0.17 to an officer outside of
the
above referenced plans.
During
the three months ended August 31, 2006, a director exercised stock options
to
purchase 50,000 shares of common stock for proceeds of $5,500.
During
the quarter ended August 31, 2006, we recorded $1,584,451 of non cash
compensation expense related to stock options issued and vesting of stock
options and warrants previously granted.
As
of
August 31, 2006, we had warrants outstanding to purchase 50,087,635 common
shares at exercise prices ranging from $0.02 to $1.00 per share, expiring at
various dates through 2012. Some of those outstanding warrants were not
exercisable as of August 31, 2006 as they are subject to meeting vesting
criteria. During the three months ended August 31, 2006, we issued no warrants
to purchase shares of common stock, investors exercised warrants to purchase
150,000 shares of common stock for proceeds of $60,000 and the Company had
investors exercise warrants of 3,111,585 to purchase 3,013,822 shares of common
stock on a cashless basis.
18
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Stockholders’
Equity, continued
In
connection with a previous debt agreement, the Company entered into an
Antidilution Agreement (the “Antidilution Agreement”) with Swartz Private
Equity, LLC (“Swartz”) wherein the Company was obligated to issue to Swartz
warrants equal to 11% of the common stock issued between January 28, 2002 and
March 11, 2002, 20% of the common stock issued between March 12, 2002 and April
1, 2003, and after April 1, 2003, 30% of the common stock issued to any parties
other than Swartz. There were no warrants issued during the three month periods
ended August 31, 2006 and 2005 in connection with the Antidilution agreement.
On
October 10, 2006, the Company entered into an Approval Rights Agreement and
Termination of Antidilution Agreement and Addendum to Warrants (the “Termination
Agreement”) with Swartz to terminate the Antidilution Agreement. In
consideration for entering into the Termination Agreement, the Company agrees
to
obtain Swartz’s written approval at least 30 days prior to entering into (i) any
acquisition of any business entity or asset of any kind where the aggregate
number of shares of common stock and derivative securities (on a fully diluted
basis) issued as consideration for the acquisition equals or exceeds 10% of
the
number of shares of common stock of the Company outstanding at the time of
the
acquisition (on a fully diluted basis) or (ii) any acquisition (regardless
of
size) by the Company of any business entity or asset of any kind that is not
unanimously approved by the Company’s board of directors.
7.
Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation
Beatie
and Osborne, LLP v. Patriot Scientific Corporation
Beatie
and Osborne, LLP is a New York law firm that formerly represented the Company
in
the Inventorship Litigation and the Infringement Litigation. On March 8,
2005, Beatie and Osborne were disqualified by United States District Judge
Jeremy Fogel in the Inventorship Litigation. Beatie and Osborne thereafter
withdrew from the representation of the Company in the Infringement Litigation.
Beatie and Osborne initiated litigation in the Supreme Court of New York on
June 8, 2005 claiming breach of contract, quantum merit, and unjust
enrichment and alleging claims against the Company, and former Company
representatives, Jeffrey Wallin and Lowell Giffhorn, for fraud and interference
with contractual relationship. Beatie and Osborne claimed a contingency fee
under the terms of its contingency fee agreement with respect to licensing
agreements entered into, and possibly with respect to license agreements to
be
entered into, by the Company. The Company caused a removal of the Beatie and
Osborne lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Southern District
of
New York and moved to transfer the action to the Southern District of
California. The transfer motion was denied on May 9, 2006, but Wallin and
Giffhorn were ordered dismissed from the action at that time. The circumstances
of the disqualification of Beatie and Osborne in the Inventorship Litigation
and
its withdrawal from the Infringement Litigation were claimed by the Company
to
have worked a forfeiture of any rights in Beatie and Osborne to a contingency
fee of any kind. In July, 2006 the Company and Beatie and Osborne reached a
settlement agreement whereby the Company paid Beatie and Osborne $340,000 and
Beatie and Osborne retained $96,000 of the Company's funds in its possession
through a retainer account. This settled the case in full.
Patriot
Scientific Corporation v. Russell Fish
On
April 6, 2006, we filed a declaratory relief lawsuit against Russell Fish
and The Fish Family Trust in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California. As a consequence of licensing agreements entered into
by
or on behalf of Patriot, Mr. Fish has presented demands for payment by us
under his July 2004 agreement related to the Inventorship Litigation. We contend
that Mr. Fish has been paid all sums that may have been owed to him. Our
action seeks declaratory relief that no further sums are owed to Mr. Fish.
Also,
on
April
6, 2006, Fish and, later, Robert Anderson, allegedly as trustee of The Fish
Family Trust, filed a lawsuit against the Company in the District Court of
Dallas County, Texas. The case was subsequently removed to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The lawsuit is based on
an
alleged breach of the contract entered into on July 27, 2004 and seeks
enforcement of the contract or damages. The California action has been
transferred to the Northern District of Texas. Mediation commenced on September
11, 2006 and is continuing while the proceedings are stayed.
19
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Commitments
and Contingencies, continued
on
April
6, 2006, Fish and, later, Robert Anderson, allegedly as trustee of The Fish
Family Trust, filed a lawsuit against the Company in the District Court of
Dallas County, Texas. The case was subsequently removed to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The lawsuit is based on
an
alleged breach of the contract entered into on July 27, 2004 and seeks
enforcement of the contract or damages. The California action has been
transferred to the Northern District of Texas. Mediation commenced on September
11, 2006 and is continuing while the proceedings are stayed.
Lowell
Giffhorn Arbitration
On
September 23, 2005, Lowell Giffhorn, a former executive officer
and a former director of Patriot, submitted a demand for arbitration with the
American Arbitration Association related to the termination of
Mr. Giffhorn's employment with the Company. Mr. Giffhorn asserts that
the termination of his employment with the Company was unlawful, retaliatory,
wrongful, violated public policy, violated the covenant of good faith and fair
dealing and violated securities laws. Mr. Giffhorn has demanded damages of
approximately $4,500,000 (excluding claims for punitive damages and attorneys
fees). The Company denies the allegations and believes the claims to be
frivolous and totally devoid of merit. The Company has retained litigation
counsel and intends to vigorously defend the claims. The amount, if any, of
ultimate liability with respect to the foregoing cannot be determined. Despite
the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company at this time does not
believe that Mr. Giffhorn's claim will have a material adverse impact on
its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
Patent
Litigation
Pursuant
to the joint venture that the Company entered into in June 2005 with Technology
Properties Ltd. (in settlement of inventorship/ownership litigation between
the
parties, and in return for a 50-50 sharing of net licensing and enforcement
revenues), the Company granted Technology Properties Ltd. (TPL) the complete
and
exclusive right to enforce and license its microprocessor patent portfolio.
The
Company then dismissed its patent infringement claims against Fujitsu Computer
Systems, Inc.; Matsushita Electric Corporation of America; NEC Solutions
(America) Inc.; Sony Electronics Inc.; and Toshiba America Inc., which had
been
pending in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California.
Thereafter, TPL, on behalf of the TPL/Patriot joint venture and Patriot, filed
patent infringement actions against the foregoing defendants (except Sony)
in
the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, which litigation
is currently pending. Litigation is not currently pending with regard to
Fujitsu.
In
February 2006, a license agreement was entered into with Fujitsu Corporation
regarding the Company's patent portfolio, and in connection with that
transaction, litigation involving Fujitsu and TPL and the Company in both
California and Texas was dismissed.
Profit
Sharing Plan
The
Company had a savings and profit-sharing plan that allows participants to make
contributions by salary reduction pursuant to Section 401(k) of the Internal
Revenue Code. At the Company’s discretion, the Company may match contributions
at 20% of the employee’s contribution up to 6% of the employee’s salary. The
Company contributions are vested 20% per year beginning with the first year
of
service. The Company made no matching contributions to the plan in fiscal 2006.
On December 31, 2005, the Company terminated the plan.
20
Patriot
Scientific Corporation
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Commitments
and Contingencies, continued
Current
401(k) Plan
In
January 2006, the Company adopted a retirement plan that complies with Section
401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. All employees are eligible to participate
in the plan. The Company matches 50% of each participant’s voluntary
contributions, subject to a maximum contribution of 6% of the participant’s
compensation. Participants fully vest in the Company’s contributions after three
years of vesting service. The Company’s matching contributions for the three
months ended August 31, 2006 were $2,562.
Employment
Contract
During
the quarter ended August 31, 2005, the Company terminated two of its officers,
each of whom had an employment contract with the Company. One of the officers
agreed to accept as severance approximately $150,000 and to have the maturity
date of options held by him extended for one year. Further, the Company agreed
to accelerate the vesting of all outstanding options held by the officer and
to
extend their term to June 2006. The Company recorded an expense of approximately
$125,000 related to this option modification in the quarter ended August 31,
2005.
The
Company has not reached an agreement with the other officer; however, it accrued
approximately $50,000 during the three month period ended August 31, 2005 for
amounts which it believes may be due to this
individual. The former officer has filed a complaint against the Company seeking
arbitration and claiming he is owed approximately $4,500,000. The Company
believes the claim is without merit and intends to vigorously defend
itself.
Guarantees
and Indemnities
The
Company has made certain guarantees and indemnities, under which it may be
required to make payments to a guaranteed or indemnified party. The Company
indemnifies its directors, officers, employees and agents to the maximum extent
permitted under the laws of the State of Delaware. In connection with its
facility leases, the Company has indemnified its lessors for certain claims
arising from the use of the facilities. The duration of the guarantees and
indemnities varies, and in many cases is indefinite. These guarantees and
indemnities do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential future
payments the Company could be obligated to make. Historically, the Company
has
not been obligated to make any payments for these obligations and no liabilities
have been recorded for these guarantees and indemnities in the accompanying
condensed consolidated balance sheets.
8.
Subsequent Events
During
the period September 1, 2006 through October 20, 2006, Phoenix Digital entered
into license agreements with third parties, pursuant to which it received
aggregate proceeds totaling $6,950,000.
On
September 7, 2006, the Company received proceeds of $12,250 from the issuance
of
122,500 shares of common stock in connection with the exercise of warrants.
On
September 19, 2006, the Company resumed its stock buyback program and purchased
1,199,824 shares at an aggregate cost of $934,490.
On
October 10, 2006, the Company entered into an Approval Rights Agreement and
Termination of Antidilution Agreement and Addendum to Warrants (the “Termination
Agreement”) with Swartz to terminate the Antidilution Agreement (see Note 6).
21
Item
2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
THE
FOLLOWING DISCUSSION INCLUDES FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO OUR
FUTURE FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE. ACTUAL RESULTS MAY DIFFER MATERIALLY FROM THOSE
CURRENTLY ANTICIPATED AND FROM HISTORICAL RESULTS DEPENDING UPON A VARIETY
OF
FACTORS, INCLUDING THOSE DESCRIBED BELOW UNDER THE SUB-HEADING, "RISK FACTORS"
SEE ALSO OUR ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB FOR THE YEAR ENDED MAY 31, 2006.
Overview
During
the fiscal years ended May 31, 2005 and May 31, 2006, the Company entered into
agreements for the licensing of its technology with Advanced Micro Devices
Inc.
("AMD") and Intel Corporation, among the largest of the microprocessor
manufacturers. During the 2006 fiscal year, the Company entered into licensing
agreements with Hewlett-Packard, Fujitsu and Casio through its joint venture
entity, Phoenix Digital. Additional licensing agreements for the use of the
Company’s technology were signed through its joint venture entity during the
three months ended August 31, 2006. We believe that these agreements represent
validation of the Company's position that its intellectual property was and
is
being infringed by major manufacturers of microprocessor technology. Also,
we
believe the agreements demonstrate the value of the Company's intellectual
property in that they are "arms length" transactions with major electronics
manufacturers.
In
June
2005, the Company entered into a series of agreements with Technology Properties
Limited, Inc. (“TPL”) and others to facilitate the pursuit of infringers of its
intellectual property. The Company intends to continue its joint venture with
TPL to pursue license agreements with infringers of its technology. Management
believes that utilizing the option of working through TPL, as compared to
creating and using a Company licensing team for those activities, avoids a
competitive devaluation of the Company’s principal assets and is a prudent way
to achieve the desired results as the Company seeks to obtain fair value from
users of its intellectual property.
RESTATEMENT
OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On
September 8, 2006, the Company determined that the manner in which it had
accounted for the reset conversion feature and embedded put option of certain
of
its convertible debentures was not in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 133, Accounting
For Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,
as
amended, and Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-19, Accounting
for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in,
a
Company's Own Stock.
The
Company determined that the reset conversion feature was an embedded derivative
instrument and that the conversion option was an embedded put option pursuant
to
SFAS No. 133. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments
required that the Company record the derivatives and related warrants at their
fair values as of the inception date of the convertible debenture agreements
and
at fair value as of each subsequent balance sheet date. In addition, under
the provisions of EITF No. 00-19, as a result of entering into the convertible
debenture agreements, the Company was required to classify all other
non-employee warrants as derivative liabilities and record them at their fair
values at each balance sheet date. Any change in fair value was required
to be recorded as non-operating, non-cash income or expense at each balance
sheet date. If the fair value of the derivatives was higher at the
subsequent balance sheet date, the Company was required to record a
non-operating, non-cash charge. If the fair value of the derivatives was
lower at the subsequent balance sheet date, the Company was required to record
non-operating, non-cash income. Accordingly, in connection with its
restatement adjustments, the Company has appropriately reflected the
non-operating, non-cash income or expense resulting from changes in fair value.
The Company had previously not recorded the embedded derivative instruments
as a
liability and did not record the related changes in fair value. The Company
did
not have any derivative instruments at May 31, 2006 as all derivative
instruments were settled prior to May 31, 2006.
22
In
addition, the Company determined the manner in which it accounted for its
interest in Phoenix Digital was not in accordance with appropriate accounting
literature. Beginning in June 2005, the Company accounted for its interest
in
Phoenix Digital as a variable interest entity, as defined in FASB Interpretation
46(R). Accordingly, the accounts and transactions of Phoenix Digital were
consolidated with those of the Company and the ownership interest of the other
member of Phoenix Digital was presented as a minority interest in the condensed
consolidated financial statements of the Company for the periods August 31,
2005, November 30, 2005 and February 28, 2006. The Company has reassessed its
accounting for its interest in Phoenix Digital and after further consideration
of FIN 46(R) and other authoritative literature, has corrected its accounting
policy to account for its interest in Phoenix Digital in accordance with the
equity method of accounting for investments, as the Company did not have a
controlling financial interest in Phoenix Digital and determined that it was
not
the primary beneficiary of the relationship.
Based
on
the foregoing, the Company’s Board of Directors determined that the Company was
required to restate its financial results for the year ended May 31, 2005 and
for the three month periods ended August 31, 2005, November 30, 2005 and
February 28, 2006.
See
Note
2 to the accompanying Condensed consolidated Financial Statements included
in
this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for a summary of the effects of the
restatement adjustments on the Company's Condensed consolidated financial
statements. The information provided in this Management's Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations reflects the effect
of
the restatement adjustments.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our
condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America,
which require us to make estimates and judgments that significantly affect
the
reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results could differ
from those estimates, and such differences could affect the results of
operations reported in future periods. We believe the following critical
accounting policies affect our most significant estimates and judgments used
in
the preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements.
1. Revenue
Recognition
Accounting
for revenue recognition is complex and affected by interpretations of guidance
provided by several sources, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). This guidance is
subject to change. We follow the guidance established by the SEC in Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 104, as well as generally accepted criteria for revenue
recognition, which require that, before revenue is recorded, there is persuasive
evidence of an arrangement, the fee is fixed or determinable, collection is
reasonably assured, and delivery to our customer has occurred. Applying these
criteria to certain of our revenue arrangements requires us to carefully analyze
the terms and conditions of our license agreements. Revenue from our technology
license agreements is generally recognized at the time we enter into a contract
and provide our customer with the licensed technology. We believe that this
is
the point at which we have performed all of our obligations under the agreement;
however, this remains a highly interpretive area of accounting and future
license agreements may result in a different method of revenue recognition.
Fees
for maintenance or support of our licenses are recorded on a straight-line
basis
over the underlying period of performance.
2. Assessment
of Contingent Liabilities
We
are
involved in various legal matters, disputes, and patent infringement claims
which arise in the ordinary conduct of our business. We accrue for estimated
losses at the time when we can make a reliable estimate of such loss and it
is
probable that it has been incurred. By their very nature, contingencies are
difficult to estimate. We continually evaluate information related to all
contingencies to determine that the basis on which we have recorded our
estimated exposure is appropriate.
23
3. Stock
Options and Warrants
The
Company applies Accounting Principles Board ("APB") Opinion 25, "Accounting
for
Stock Issued to Employees," and related Interpretations in accounting for all
stock option plans. Under APB Opinion 25, compensation cost has been recognized
for stock options granted to employees when the option price is less than the
market price of the underlying common stock on the date of grant.
Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation," and SFAS No. 148, "Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation-Transition and Disclosure," require the Company to provide pro
forma information regarding net income as if compensation cost for the Company's
stock option plans had been determined in accordance with the fair value based
method prescribed in SFAS No. 123. To provide the required pro forma
information, the Company estimates the fair value of each stock option at the
grant date by using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. SFAS No. 148 also
provides for alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the
fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation.
The
Company has elected to continue to account for stock based compensation under
APB No. 25.
The
Company applies SFAS No. 123 in valuing options granted to consultants and
others and estimates the fair value of such options using the Black-Scholes
option-pricing model. The fair value is recorded as expense as services are
provided or other obligations are incurred. Options granted to consultants
for
which vesting is contingent based on future performance are measured at their
then current fair value at each period end, until vested. The Black-Scholes
model requires the use of various inputs, including volatility of our stock,
duration of the warrant, and interest rates, over which we use our judgment.
Given that we have recorded significant non-cash expenses related to the
issuance of our warrants to third-parties, including the quarter ended August
31, 2005, our estimation of the value of warrants issued remains a critical
component of our financial statements.
4. Debt
Discount
We
have
issued warrants as part of our convertible debentures and other financings.
We
value the warrants using the Black-Scholes pricing model based on expected
fair
value at issuance and the estimated fair value is recorded as debt discount.
The
debt discount is amortized to non-cash interest over the life of the debenture
assuming the debenture will be held to maturity, which is normally two years.
If
the debenture is converted to common stock previous to its maturity date, any
debt discount not previously amortized is expensed to non-cash
interest.
5.
|
Derivative
Financial Instruments
|
In
connection with the issuance of certain convertible debentures, the terms of
the
debentures included a reset conversion feature which provided for a conversion
of the debentures into shares of the Company's common stock at a rate which
was
determined to be variable. The conversion option was therefore deemed to be
an
embedded put option pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) No. 133, Accounting
For Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities ,
as
amended, and Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-19, Accounting
for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in,
a
Company's Own Stock .
The
Company determined that the reset conversion feature was an embedded derivative
instrument and that the conversion option was an embedded put option pursuant
to
SFAS No. 133. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments
required that the Company record the derivatives and related warrants at their
fair values as of the inception date of the convertible debenture agreements
and
at fair value as of each subsequent balance sheet date. In addition, under
the provisions of EITF No. 00-19, as a result of entering into the convertible
debenture agreements, the Company was required to classify all other
non-employee warrants as derivative liabilities and record them at their fair
values at each balance sheet date. Any change in fair value was recorded
as non-operating, non-cash income or expense at each balance sheet date.
If the fair value of the derivatives was higher at the subsequent balance sheet
date, the Company recorded a non-operating, non-cash charge. If the fair
value of the derivatives was lower at the subsequent balance sheet date, the
Company recorded non-operating, non-cash income. As of May 31, 2006, the Company
does not have any outstanding derivative instruments as the related debt
instruments were settled prior to May 31, 2006.
24
6. Patents
and Trademarks
Patents
and trademarks are carried at cost less accumulated amortization and are
amortized over their estimated useful lives of four years. The carrying value
of
patents and trademarks is periodically reviewed and impairments, if any, are
recognized when the expected future benefit to be derived from an individual
intangible asset is less than its carrying value.
7. Income
Taxes
Deferred
income taxes are provided for by recognizing temporary differences in certain
income and expense items for financial and tax reporting purposes. Deferred
tax
assets consist primarily of income tax benefits from net operating loss
carry-forwards. A valuation allowance has been recorded to fully offset the
deferred tax asset as it is more likely than not that the assets will not be
utilized. We have historically provided a valuation allowance equal to 100%
of
our net deferred tax asset. In spite of the net income recorded by us during
the
quarter ended August 31, 2006, we do not believe that we have ample evidence
of
overcoming the “more likely than not” criteria established by generally accepted
accounting principles. We will continue to monitor our financial operating
results, and other factors, to determine when, if ever, we meet this criteria.
8.
|
Investment
in Affiliated Company
|
The
Company has a 50% interest in Phoenix Digital. This investment is accounted
for
using the equity method of accounting since the investment provides the Company
the ability to exercise significant influence, but not control, over the
investee. Significant influence is generally deemed to exist if the Company
has
an ownership interest in the voting stock of the investee of between 20% and
50%, although other factors, such as representation on the investee’s Board of
Directors, are considered in determining whether the equity method of accounting
is appropriate. Under the equity method of accounting, the investment,
originally recorded at cost, is adjusted to recognize the Company’s share of net
earnings or losses of the investee and is recognized in the condensed
consolidated statement of operations in the caption “Equity in earnings of
affiliated company”.
The
Company reviews its investment in affiliated company to determine whether events
or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be
recoverable. The primary factors the Company considers in its determination
are
the financial condition, operating performance and near term prospects of the
investee. If a decline in value is deemed to be other than temporary, the
Company would recognize an impairment loss.
Results
of Operations
In
June
2005, we entered into an agreement with Intel Corporation licensing our
intellectual property for a one-time payment of $10,000,000. The license revenue
was recognized in the quarter ended August 31, 2005. During the three month
period ended August 31, 2006 no such agreement was signed by the Company. In
connection with entering into the agreement with Intel Corporation, we entered
into an agreement with the co-owner of our patented technologies, through which
we settled all legal disputes between us and agreed to jointly pursue others
who
have infringed upon our joint rights. Future licensing agreements for the use
of
the Company’s technology are being made through a joint venture entity that is
accounted for in accordance with the equity method of accounting for investments
and, accordingly, the financial results of the joint venture are being recorded
in the Other Income section of the Company’s Condensed consolidated Statement of
Operations. Product sales amounting to approximately $10,000 and $26,000 were
also recorded in the three month periods ended August 31, 2005 and 2006,
respectively, in connection with communications products that are no longer
marketed by the Company. Inventory associated with the sales of these
communications products is carried at zero value and cost of sales is therefore
zero. Total revenues amounted to approximately $10,010,000 and $26,000 for
the
three months ended May 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively.
25
Research
and development expenses decreased from approximately $89,000 for the three
months ended August 31, 2005 to zero for the three months ended August 31,
2006.
Presently, we do not expect to replace recently discontinued “in house” research
and development operations. However, the Company may utilize consultants and
other outsourced contractors for research and development activities in future
periods.
Selling,
general and administrative expenses increased from approximately $1,162,000
for
the three months ended August 31, 2005 to approximately $2,733,000 for the
three
months ended August 31, 2006. Legal and accounting related expenses increased
by
approximately $205,000 for the three months ended August 31, 2006 compared
with
the three months ended August 31, 2005 related to legal and accounting matters
connected with the restatement of the Company’s financial statements for the
fiscal years 2005, 2004, 2003 and 2002, as well as the quarterly reports for
the
periods ended August 31, 2005, November 30, 2005 and February 28, 2006. Legal
expenses related to a dispute with a former executive officer as well as other
legal proceedings involving the interests of a co-inventor of a portion of
the
Company’s technology and other legal matters contributed to the increase in
legal expenses for the three months ended August 31, 2006. Salary costs and
related expenses included non-cash expenses associated with the fair value
of
options granted during the period in accordance with SFAS No. 123R. On June
5,
2006 1,500,000 options were granted to the chief executive officer of the
Company resulting in a non-cash compensation expense amounting to approximately
$1,527,000. No such non-cash compensation expense was incurred for the three
months ended August 31, 2005. Board of director fees amounting to approximately
$60,000 were paid during the three months ended August 31, 2006 with no
corresponding expense for the three months ended August 31, 2005. Other salary
expenses increased by approximately $85,000 for the three months ended August
31, 2006 as compared with the three months ended August 31, 2005. Insurance
expenses increased by approximately $36,000 for the three months ended August
31, 2006 as compared with the three months ended August 31, 2005 primarily
as a
result of increased costs of directors and officers insurance coverage.
Decreases in expenses were recorded for the three months ended August 31, 2006
as compared with the three months ended August 31, 2005 for patent enforcement
expenses, public relations and marketing and for settlement expenses in
connection with the termination of former executive officers in the approximate
amounts of $81,000, $12,000 and $320,000, respectively.
Settlement
and license expenses amounting to approximately $1,918,000 were recorded during
the three months ended August 31, 2005 in connection with the agreements
involving the formation of a joint venture and, separately, a license agreement
with Intel Corporation. The expenses consisted of both cash and non-cash
elements related to incremental, direct costs of completing the transactions.
In
connection with the transactions, it was necessary for the Company to obtain
the
consent of certain debenture and warrant holders. The necessary consents,
together with certain warrants held by the debenture holders and the release
of
their security interests in our intellectual property, were obtained in exchange
for cash, new warrants and repriced warrants. The expenses resulted primarily
from cash payments to debt holders of approximately $1,300,000, to co-owners
of
various intellectual property assets of approximately $960,000 and to a
committee of the Company’s board of directors of approximately $170,000.
Non-cash expenses totaled approximately $82,000 and resulted primarily from
the
incremental value of the effect of repricing various warrants and granting
other
warrants in excess of the expense previously recognized for warrants granted
to
these security holders. Offsetting
the non-cash expenses were non-cash benefits to the Company from the
reconveyance of warrants, amounting to approximately $622,000.
Other
income and expenses for the Company for the three months ended August 31, 2006
included equity in the earnings of Phoenix Digital. The investment is accounted
for in accordance with the equity method of accounting for investments. The
Company’s investment in the joint venture for the three months ended August 31,
2006 provided income in the amount of approximately $12,070,000 resulting from
licensing agreements for our intellectual property with Sony, Nikon, Seiko
Epson
and Pentax for one time payments. The Company’s investment in the joint venture
provided net expenses amounting to approximately $248,000 for the three months
ended August 31, 2005 as no license agreements had been signed through the
end
of that fiscal period. Total other income and expense for the three months
ended
August 31, 2006 amounted to net income of approximately $12,196,000 compared
with total other income and expense for the three months ended August 31, 2005
of net income amounting to approximately $664,000. Changes in the fair value
of
warrant and derivative liabilities amounted to net income in the 2005 fiscal
quarter of approximately $1,080,000 with no corresponding amount for the 2006
fiscal quarter as all convertible debt had been retired in prior fiscal periods.
Non-cash adjustments to interest expense for the three months ended August
31,
2005 amounted to expenses of approximately $203,000 resulting from amortization
of debt discount in connection with convertible debentures that were not
outstanding during the three months ended August 31, 2006. Interest income
and
other income increased from approximately $34,000 for the three months ended
August 31, 2005 to approximately $127,000 for the three months ended August
31,
2006 as interest bearing account balances increased from license revenues.
26
During
the quarter ended August 31, 2006, the Company recorded a provision for income
taxes of $3,500,000 related to federal and California taxes. Also, during the
quarters ended August 31, 2005, and August 31, 2006, the Company utilized
approximately $6,000,000 and $34,300,000, respectively, of its available federal
net operating loss carry-forwards and approximately $6,000,000 and $16,700,000
of its available state net operating loss carryforwards to offset its taxable
income arising in the respective quarters.
The
Company recorded net income (as restated) for the three months ended August
31,
2005 of approximately $7,504,552 compared with net income of approximately
$5,990,273 for the three months ended August 31, 2006.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The
Company’s cash, marketable securities and short-term investment balances
increased from approximately $7,503,000 as of May 31, 2006 to approximately
$15,674,000 as of August 31, 2006. We also held short term certificates of
deposit amounting to approximately $100,000 as of May 31, 2006 and approximately
$101,000 as of August 31, 2006. Total current assets increased from
approximately $8,015,000 as of May 31, 2006 to approximately $16,127,000 as
of
August 31, 2006. Total current liabilities increased from approximately
$1,244,000 as of May 31, 2006 to approximately $4,034,000 as of August 31,
2006.
During
the three month periods that ended August 31, 2005 and August 31, 2006 the
Company’s operating activities generated approximately $5,379,000 and $5,696,000
of cash, respectively. However, during recent years we have relied upon
financing activities to provide the funds necessary for the Company's operations
including sales of common stock, the issuance of convertible debentures and
notes payable and related conversions and exercises of common stock warrants.
We
believe that the Company will be able to avoid such methods of financing
operations for the foreseeable future.
We
believe the Company's current position as of May 31, 2006 will provide the
funds
necessary to support the Company's operations for the next 12
months.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
On
June
1, 2006, we adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123
(revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment
(“SFAS
123(R)”), which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense
for all share-based payment awards made to our employees and directors based
on
estimated fair values. We adopted SFAS 123(R) using the modified prospective
transition method, which requires the application of the accounting standard
as
of June 1, 2006, the first day of our fiscal year 2007. Our condensed
consolidated financial statements as of and for the three months ended August
31, 2006 reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). In accordance with the modified
prospective transition method, our condensed consolidated financial statements
for prior periods have not been restated to reflect, and do not include, the
impact of SFAS 123(R). The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately
expected to vest is recognized as an expense over the requisite service periods
in our condensed consolidated statement of operations. Prior to the adoption
of
SFAS 123(R), we accounted for stock-based awards to employees and directors
using the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB 25 as allowed under
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation (“SFAS
123”). As stock-based compensation expense recognized in the condensed
consolidated statement of operations for the first quarter of fiscal 2007 is
based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated
forfeitures. SFAS 123(R) requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of
grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures
differ from those estimated. We estimated forfeitures to be 5% of the options
issued.
27
Stock-based
compensation expense recognized under SFAS 123(R) for the three months ended
August 31, 2006 was $1,584,451, determined by the Black-Scholes valuation model,
and consisting of stock-based compensation expense related to employee and
director stock options and also vesting of warrants previously granted. See
Note
1 to the condensed consolidated financial statements for additional information.
In
July
2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting
for Uncertainty in Income Taxes - an interpretation of FASB Statement No.
109
(“FIN
48”). This interpretation clarifies the application of SFAS No. 109,
Accounting
for Income Taxes,
by
defining criteria that an individual tax position must meet for any part of
the
benefit of that position to be recognized in a company’s financial statements
and also provides guidance on measurement, derecognition, classification,
interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and
transition. FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2006. The Company expects to adopt FIN 48 on June 1, 2007. The Company is
currently assessing the impact the adoption of FIN 48 will have on its condensed
consolidated financial position and results of operations.
Risk
Factors
We
urge
you to consider the following discussion of risks as well as other information
regarding our common stock. The risks and uncertainties described below are
not
the only ones, as additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to
us
or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations.
If
any of the following risks actually occur, our business could be harmed.
WE
ARE CURRENTLY INVOLVED IN A LEGAL DISPUTE WHICH COULD IMPACT OUR FUTURE RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS AND WORKING CAPITAL
The
Company is being sued by a co-inventor of the patent portfolio technology
relating to proceeds we received under our recently signed license agreements.
We believe that the co-inventor’s claim lacks merit, a claim which the Company
disputes and which the Company intends to defend vigorously. Should we not
prevail in this dispute, the amount payable to the co-inventor could affect
our
business and operations. In addition, if we are required to litigate this
matter, or otherwise settle the matter outside of court, the cost of resolving
this matter may impact our future reported results of operations and consume
a
significant amount of cash.
WE
HAVE A HISTORY OF LOSSES AND, THEREFORE, MAY NOT CONTINUE ANNUAL
PROFITABILITY
We
have a
history of reported losses. Although we have entered into various license
agreements in fiscal 2006 and in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 which have
resulted in our reporting significant revenue and income, we may not be able
to
achieve sustained profitable operations in the future. Should the funds
generated from these agreements be insufficient to fund our operations, we
may
be forced to curtail our operations or seek additional external funding.
Additional funding may not be available to us or, if it is available, it may
not
be on terms favorable to us.
OUR
LIMITED ABILITY TO PROTECT OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAY INADVERTENTLY ADVERSELY
AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO COMPETE
A
successful challenge to our ownership of our technology could materially damage
our business prospects. Our technologies may infringe upon the proprietary
rights of others. Licenses required by us from others may not be available
on
commercially reasonable terms, if at all. We rely on a combination of patents,
trademarks, copyrights, trade secret laws, confidentiality procedures and
licensing arrangements to protect our intellectual property rights. We currently
have eight U.S. patents, one European patents and one Japanese patent issued.
Any issued patent may be challenged and invalidated. Patents may not be issued
for any of our pending applications. Any claims allowed from existing or pending
patents may not be of sufficient scope or strength to provide significant
protection for our products. Patents may not be issued in all countries where
our products can be sold so as to provide meaningful protection or any
commercial advantage to us. Our competitors may also be able to design around
our patents.
28
Vigorous
protection and pursuit of intellectual property rights or positions characterize
the fiercely competitive semiconductor industry, which has resulted in
significant and often protracted and expensive litigation. Therefore, our
competitors may assert that our technologies or products infringe on their
patents or proprietary rights or that their products do not infringe upon our
patents. If infringement claims against us are deemed valid, we may not be
able
to obtain appropriate licenses on acceptable terms, or at all. If an
infringement asserted by us is determined not to exist, the value of our patent
portfolio could be affected adversely. Litigation is costly and time-consuming
but may be necessary to protect our future patent and/or technology license
positions or to defend against infringement claims. (See our discussion of
Legal
Proceedings below.) We did not develop the technology which is the basis for
our
products. This technology, which was originally known as the ShBoom technology,
was acquired through a series of agreements from one of two co- inventors.
We
have been, are now, and may in the future be subject to claims from such prior
parties related to the technology. Such parties may also attempt to exploit
the
technology independently of our rights to do so. The asset purchase agreement
and plan of reorganization between us, nanoTronics Corporation and Helmut Falk
was the agreement under which we acquired the basic ShBoom technology. The
agreement also contained a number of warranties and indemnities related to
the
ownership of the technology and other matters. We believe nanoTronics
Corporation has been liquidated and, due to Mr. Falk’s death in July 1995, our
ability to obtain satisfaction for any future claims as a result of a breach
of
the agreement may be limited.
IF
A LARGE NUMBER OF OUR SHARES ARE SOLD ALL AT ONCE OR IN BLOCKS, THE MARKET
PRICE
OF OUR SHARES WOULD MOST LIKELY DECLINE
Our
common stock is currently listed for trading in the NASD Over-The-Counter
Bulletin Board Market and is subject to the “penny stock rules” adopted pursuant
to Section 15(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
“Exchange Act”). In general, the penny stock rules apply to non-NASDAQ or
non-national stock exchange companies whose common stock trades at less than
$5.00 per share or which have tangible net worth of less than $5,000,000
($2,000,000 if the company has been operating for three or more years). Such
rules require, among other things, that brokers who trade “penny stock” to
persons other than “established customers” complete certain documentation, make
suitability inquiries of investors and provide investors with certain
information concerning trading in the security, including a risk disclosure
document, quote information, broker’s commission information and rights and
remedies available to investors in penny stocks. Many brokers have decided
not
to trade “penny stock” because of the requirements of the penny stock rules, and
as a result, the number of broker-dealers willing to act as market makers in
such securities is limited. The “penny stock rules,” therefore, may have an
adverse impact on the market for our common stock and may affect our ability
to
attract competitive funding.
OUR
SHARE PRICE COULD BE LOWERED AS A RESULT OF SHORT SALES
The
downward pressure on the price of our common stock as the debenture holders
convert and sell material amounts of common stock could encourage short sales
by
the debenture holders or others. When an investor sells stock that he does
not
own, it is known as a short sale. The seller, anticipating that the price of
the
stock will go down, will buy the stock at a later date. If the price of the
stock goes down, the seller will profit to the extent of the difference between
the amount the seller originally sold it for less the amount the seller later
had to pay to buy it. Short sales enable the seller to profit in a down market.
Short sales could place significant downward pressure on the price of our common
stock.
29
Item
4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As
required by Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act, as of August 31,
2006, the end of the period to which this quarterly report relates, we have
carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation
of
our disclosure controls and procedures. This evaluation was carried out under
the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our
Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer.
Disclosure
controls and procedures are controls and other procedures that are designed
to
ensure that information required to be disclosed in our report filed or
submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported, within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commission’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include,
without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information
required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act is
accumulated and communicated to management, including the Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer as appropriate, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure. Management recognizes that any controls and
procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only
reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives, and management necessarily
applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible
controls and procedures. Based on the evaluation of our disclosure
controls and procedures as of August 31, 2006, our Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective.
Remediation
of Material Weaknesses Pertaining to Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As
reported in our 2006 Form 10-KSB, we determined that the Company's policies
and
procedures did not provide for adequate management oversight and review of
the
Company's accounting for (i) the identification of embedded derivatives in
its
debt instruments and (ii) its investment in Phoenix Digital. These deficiencies
resulted in the restatement of the Company's condensed consolidated financial
statements for the fiscal years ended May 31, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and
quarterly reports for the quarters ended August 31, 2005, November 30, 2005
and
February 28, 2006.
The
foregoing led our management to conclude that our disclosure controls and
procedures were not effective as of May 31, 2006 because of a material weakness.
In the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we implemented additional review procedures
to ensure that a complete review is performed on all terms of our debt
instruments and joint venture arrangements, and that supporting accounting
documentation is available to ensure that our accounting for the previously
noted material weaknesses is in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. These review procedures were in place
in connection with the preparation of our condensed consolidated financial
statements for the first quarter of fiscal 2007. As such, we believe that the
remediation initiative outlined above was sufficient to eliminate the material
weakness, discussed above.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There
were no changes to our internal control over financial reporting (as defined
in
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during our most
recently completed fiscal quarter that materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
30
PART
II- OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
Beatie
and Osborne, LLP v. Patriot Scientific Corporation
Beatie
and Osborne, LLP is a New York law firm that formerly represented the Company
in
the Inventorship Litigation and the Infringement Litigation. On March 8,
2005, Beatie and Osborne were disqualified by United States District Judge
Jeremy Fogel in the Inventorship Litigation. Beatie and Osborne thereafter
withdrew from the representation of the Company in the Infringement Litigation.
Beatie and Osborne initiated litigation in the Supreme Court of New York on
June 8, 2005 claiming breach of contract, quantum merit, and unjust
enrichment and alleging claims against the Company, and former Company
representatives, Jeffrey Wallin and Lowell Giffhorn, for fraud and interference
with contractual relationship. Beatie and Osborne claimed a contingency fee
under the terms of its contingency fee agreement with respect to licensing
agreements entered into, and possibly with respect to license agreements to
be
entered into, by the Company. The Company caused a removal of the Beatie and
Osborne lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Southern District
of
New York and moved to transfer the action to the Southern District of
California. The transfer motion was denied on May 9, 2006, but Wallin and
Giffhorn were ordered dismissed from the action at that time. The circumstances
of the disqualification of Beatie and Osborne in the Inventorship Litigation
and
its withdrawal from the Infringement Litigation were claimed by the Company
to
have worked a forfeiture of any rights in Beatie and Osborne to a contingency
fee of any kind. In July, 2006 the Company and Beatie and Osborne reached a
settlement agreement whereby the Company has paid Beatie and Osborne $340,000
and Beatie and Osborne has retained $96,000 of the Company’s funds in its
possession through a retainer account. This settled the case in
full.
Patriot
Scientific Corporation v. Russell Fish
On
April 6, 2006, we filed a declaratory relief lawsuit against Russell Fish
and The Fish Family Trust in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California. As a consequence of licensing agreements entered into
by
or on behalf of Patriot, Mr. Fish has presented demands for payment by us
under his July 2004 agreement related to the Inventorship Litigation. We contend
that Mr. Fish has been paid all sums that may have been owed to him. Our
action seeks declaratory relief that no further sums are owed to Mr. Fish.
Also,
on April 6, 2006, Fish and, later, Robert Anderson, allegedly as trustee of
The
Fish Family Trust, filed a lawsuit against the Company in the District Court
of
Dallas County, Texas. The case was subsequently removed to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The lawsuit is based on
an
alleged breach of the contract entered into on July 27, 2004 and seeks
enforcement of the contract or damages. The California action has been
transferred to the Northern District of Texas. Mediation commenced on September
11, 2006 and is continuing while the proceedings are stayed.
Lowell
Giffhorn Arbitration
On
September 23, 2005, Lowell Giffhorn, a former executive officer
and a former director of Patriot, submitted a demand for arbitration with the
American Arbitration Association related to the termination of
Mr. Giffhorn’s employment with the Company. Mr. Giffhorn asserts that
the termination of his employment with the Company was unlawful, retaliatory,
wrongful, violated public policy, violated the covenant of good faith and fair
dealing and violated securities laws. Mr. Giffhorn has demanded damages of
approximately $4,500,000 (excluding claims for punitive damages and attorneys
fees). The Company denies the allegations and believes the claims to be
frivolous and totally devoid of merit. The Company has retained litigation
counsel and intends to vigorously defend the claims. The amount, if any, of
ultimate liability with respect to the foregoing cannot be determined. Despite
the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company at this time does not
believe that Mr. Giffhorn's claim will have a material adverse impact on
its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
31
Patent
Litigation
Pursuant
to the joint venture that the Company entered into in June 2005 with Technology
Properties Ltd. (in settlement of inventorship/ownership litigation between
the
parties, and in return for a 50-50 sharing of net licensing and enforcement
revenues), the Company granted Technology Properties Ltd. (TPL) the complete
and
exclusive right to enforce and license its microprocessor patent portfolio.
The
Company then dismissed its patent infringement claims against Fujitsu Computer
Systems, Inc.; Matsushita Electric Corporation of America; NEC Solutions
(America) Inc.; Sony Electronics Inc.; and Toshiba America Inc., which had
been
pending in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California.
Thereafter, TPL, on behalf of the TPL/Patriot joint venture and Patriot, filed
patent infringement actions against the foregoing defendants (except Sony)
in
the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, which litigation
is currently pending. Litigation is not currently pending with regard to
Fujitsu.
In
February 2006, a license agreement was entered into with Fujitsu Corporation
regarding the Company’s patent portfolio, and in connection with that
transaction, litigation involving Fujitsu and TPL and the Company in both
California and Texas was dismissed.
Item
1A. Risk Factors
No
material changes from the risk factors contained in our 10-KSB for the year
ended May 31, 2006. Please see Part I, Item 2, above, for our risk factors.
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds
On
April
28, 2006 the Company’s Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program.
We commenced the program in July 2006 and plan to repurchase outstanding shares
of our common stock on the open market from time to time. As part of the
program, we purchased 2,075,003 shares of our common stock at an aggregate
cost
of $1,839,085 during the three months ended August 31, 2006.
Following
is a summary of all repurchases by the Company of its common stock during the
three month period ended August 31, 2006:
Period
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased
|
Average
Price Paid per Share
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans
or
Programs
|
|||||||
June
1 - 30, 2006
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
July
1 - 31, 2006
|
2,075,003
|
$
|
0.89
|
2,075,003
|
||||||
August
1 - 31, 2006
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Total
|
2,075,003
|
$
|
0.89
|
2,075,003
|
Issuance
of Common Stock
During
the three months ended August 31, 2006, investors exercised warrants to purchase
150,000 shares of common stock for proceeds of $60,000 and investors exercised
warrants of 3,111,585 to purchase 3,013,822 shares of common stock on a cashless
basis.
32
During
the three months ended August 31, 2006, a director exercised stock options
to
purchase 50,000 shares of common stock for proceeds of $5,500.
Item
3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None.
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
None.
Item
5. Other Information
None.
Item
6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
The
following Exhibits are filed as part of, or incorporated by reference into,
this Report:
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
2.1
|
Agreement
to Exchange Technology for Stock in Patriot Scientific Corporation,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Form 8-K dated
August 10, 1989*
|
|
2.2
|
Assets
Purchase Agreement and Plan of Reorganization dated June 22, 1994,
among the Company, nanoTronics Corporation and Helmut Falk, incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Form 8-K dated July 6,
1994*
|
|
2.2.1
|
Amendment
to Development Agreement dated April 23, 1996 between the Company and
Sierra Systems, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.2.1 to
Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2
filed April 29, 1996*
|
|
2.3
|
Form
of Exchange Offer dated December 4, 1996 between the Company and
certain shareholders of Metacomp, Inc. incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 2.3 to Form 8-K filed January 9,
1997*
|
|
2.4
|
Letter
of Transmittal to Accompany Shares of Common Stock of Metacomp, Inc.
Tendered Pursuant to the Exchange Offer Dated December 4, 1996
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.4 to Form 8-K filed
January 9, 1997*
|
|
3.1
|
Original
Articles of incorporation of the Company’s predecessor, Patriot
Financial Corporation, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to
registration statement on Form S-18, file no.
33-23143-FW*
|
|
3.2
|
Articles of
Amendment of Patriot Financial Corporation, as filed with the Colorado
Secretary of State on July 21, 1988, incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.2 to registration statement on Form S-18, File
No. 33-23143-FW*
|
|
3.3
|
Certificate
of Incorporation of the Company, as filed with the Delaware Secretary
of
State on March 24, 1992, incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.3 to Form 8-K dated May 12, 1992*
|
|
3.3.1
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Company,
as filed
with the Delaware Secretary of State on April 18, 1995, incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.3.1 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended May 31, 1995*
|
|
3.3.2
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Company,
as filed
with the Delaware Secretary of State on June 24,1997, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.3.2 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended May 31, 1997, filed July 18,
1997*
|
33
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
3.3.3
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Company,
as filed with the Delaware Secretary of State on April 28, 2000,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3.3 to Registration Statement
on Form S-3 filed May 5, 2000*
|
|
3.3.4
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Company,
as filed
with the Delaware Secretary of State on May 6, 2002, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.3.4 to Registration Statement on Form S-3
filed June 27, 2002*
|
|
3.3.5
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Company,
as filed
with the Delaware Secretary of State on October 16, 2003,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3.5 to Registration Statement
on Form SB-2 filed May 21, 2004*
|
|
3.4
|
Articles and
Certificate of Merger of Patriot Financial Corporation into the Company
dated May 1, 1992, with Agreement and Plan of Merger attached thereto
as Exhibit A, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to Form
8-K dated May 12, 1992*
|
|
3.5
|
Certificate
of Merger issued by the Delaware Secretary of State on May 8, 1992,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to Form 8-K dated
May 12, 1992*
|
|
Certificate
of Merger issued by the Colorado Secretary of State on May 12, 1992,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.6 to Form 8-K dated
May 12, 1992*
|
||
3.7
|
Bylaws
of the Company, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.7 to Form 8-K
dated May 12, 1992*
|
|
4.1
|
Specimen
common stock certificate, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1
Form 8-K dated May 12, 1992*
|
|
4.2
|
Form
of Stock Purchase Warrant (Labway Corporation) dated February 29,
1996, exercisable to purchase 253,166 common shares at $1.58 per
share
until August 31, 1996, granted to investors in connection with an
offering of securities made in reliance upon Regulation S, incorporated
by
reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended
February 29, 1996, filed March 15, 1996*
|
|
4.3
|
Form
of 6% Convertible Subordinated Promissory Note due September 30, 1998
aggregating $1,500,000 to six investors incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 4.3 to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended August 31,
1996, filed October 15, 1996*
|
|
4.4
|
Form
of 5% Convertible Term Debenture (CC Investments, LDC) due June 2,
1999 aggregating $2,000,000 to two investors incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 4.4 to Form 8-K dated June 16, 1997*
|
|
4.5
|
Form
of Stock Purchase Warrant (CC Investments, LDC) dated June 2, 1997
exercisable to purchase an aggregate of 400,000 common shares at
$1.69125
per share until June 2, 2002, granted to two investors in connection
with the offering of securities in Exhibit 4.4 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.5 to Form 8-K filed June 17,
1997*
|
|
4.6
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated June 2, 1997 by and among the Company and CC
Investments, LDC and the Matthew Fund, N.V. related to the registration
of
the common stock related to Exhibits 4.4 and 4.5 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.6 to Form 8-K filed June 17,
1997*
|
|
4.7
|
Form
of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock (Swartz Family Partnership, L.P.)
dated June 2, 1997 exercisable to purchase an aggregate of 211,733
common shares at $1.69125 per share until June 2, 2002, granted to a
group of investors in connection with the offering of securities
in
Exhibit 4.4 incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.7 to Form 8-K
filed June 17, 1997*
|
|
4.8
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated June 2, 1997 by and among the Company and
Swartz Investments, LLC related to the registration of the common
stock
related to Exhibit 4.7 incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.8
to Form 8-K filed June 17,
1997*
|
34
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
4.9
|
Form
of 5% Convertible Term Debenture (CC Investments, LDC) due June 2,
1999 aggregating $1,000,000 to two investors incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 4.9 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31,
1998, filed August 19, 1998*
|
|
4.10
|
Form
of Stock Purchase Warrant (CC Investments, LDC) dated November 24,
1997 exercisable to purchase an aggregate of 200,000 common shares
at
$1.50 per share until June 2, 2002, granted to two investors in
connection with the offering of securities described in Exhibit 4.9
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.10 to Form 10-KSB for the year
ended May 31, 1998, filed August 19, 1998*
|
|
4.11
|
Form
of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock (Swartz Family Partnership, L.P.)
dated November 24, 1997 exercisable to purchase an aggregate of
105,867 common shares at $1.50 per share until June 2, 2002, granted
to a group of investors in connection with the offering of securities
described in Exhibit 4.9 incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.11 to Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 1998,
filed August 19, 1998*
|
|
4.12
|
Form
of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock (Investor Communications Group,
Inc.)
dated June 16, 1997 exercisable to purchase an aggregate of 130,000
common shares at prices ranging from $2.50 to $7.50 per share until
June 15, 1999 incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.12 to Form
10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 1998, filed August 19,
1998*
|
|
4.13
|
Warrant
to Purchase Common Stock issued to Spellcaster Telecommunications,
Inc.
dated April 28, 1998 exercisable to purchase an aggregate of 100,000
common shares at $1.25 per share until April 28, 2000 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.13 to Form 10-KSB for the year ended
May 31, 1998, filed August 19, 1998*
|
|
4.14
|
Investment
agreement dated February 24, 1999 by and between the Company and
Swartz Private Equity, LLC for a maximum aggregate amount of $5,000,000
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.14 to Form 10-QSB/A for the
fiscal quarter ended November 30, 1998, filed March 5,
1999*
|
|
4.15
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated February 24, 1999 by and between the Company
and Swartz Private Equity, LLC related to the registration of the
common
stock related to Exhibit 4.14 incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.15 to Form 10-QSB/A for the fiscal quarter ended
November 30, 1998, filed March 5, 1999*
|
|
4.16
|
Form
of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock (Swartz Private Equity, LLC)
dated
February 24, 1999 exercisable to purchase common shares in connection
with the offering of securities in Exhibit 4.14 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.16 to Form 10-QSB/A for the fiscal quarter
ended November 30, 1998, filed March 5, 1999*
|
|
4.17
|
Amended
and Restated Investment Agreement dated July 12, 1999 by and between
the Company and Swartz Private Equity, LLC for a maximum aggregate
amount
of $5,000,000 incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.17 to
Pre-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2
filed July 15, 1999*
|
|
4.18
|
Investment
Agreement dated May 2, 2000 by and between the Company and Swartz
Private Equity, LLC for a maximum aggregate amount of $30,000,000
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.18 to Registration Statement
on Form S-3 filed May 5, 2000*
|
|
4.18.1
|
Waiver
and Agreement dated September 24, 2001 amending the Investment
Agreement (1) dated May 2, 2000 by and between the Company and
Swartz Private Equity, LLC for a maximum aggregate amount of $30,000,000
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.18.1 to Registration Statement
on Form S-1 filed October 11, 2001*
|
|
4.19
|
2001
Stock Option Plan of the Company dated February 21, 2001 incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.19 to Registration Statement on Form S-8
filed March 26, 2001*
|
35
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
4.20
|
Investment
agreement dated September 17, 2001 by and between the Company and
Swartz Private Equity, LLC for a maximum aggregate amount of $25,000,000
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.20 to Registration Statement
on Form S-1 filed October 11, 2001*
|
|
4.21
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated September 17, 2001 by and between the Company
and Swartz Private Equity, LLC related to the registration of the
common
stock related to Exhibit 4.20 incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.21 to Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed
October 11, 2001*
|
|
4.22
|
Warrant
to Purchase Common Stock dated September 17, 2001 exercisable to
purchase common shares in connection with the Offering of securities
in
Exhibit 4.20 incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.22 to
Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed October 11,
2001*
|
|
4.23
|
Financial
Consulting Services Agreement between the Company and M. Blaine
Riley, Randall Letcavage and Rosemary Nguyen incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 4.23 to Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed
January 22, 2002*
|
|
4.24
|
Form
of 8% Convertible Debenture (Lincoln Ventures, LLC) due June 10, 2004
aggregating $1,000,000 to six investors incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 4.24 to Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed
June 27, 2002*
|
|
4.25
|
Form
of Stock Purchase Warrant (Lincoln Ventures, LLC) dated June 10, 2002
exercisable to purchase an aggregate of 12,859,175 common shares
at
initial exercise prices ranging from $0.08616 to $0.10289 per share
until
June 10, 2007, granted to six investors in connection with the
offering of securities described in Exhibit 4.24 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.25 to Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed
June 27, 2002*
|
|
4.26
|
Form
of Registration Rights Agreement (Lincoln Ventures, LLC) dated
June 10, 2002 by and among the Company and six investors related to
the registration of the common stock related to Exhibit 4.24
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.26 to Registration Statement
on Form S-3 filed June 27, 2002*
|
|
4.27
|
2003
Stock Option Plan of the Company dated July 2, 2003 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.27 to Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed
September 4, 2003*
|
|
4.28
|
Form
of 8% Convertible Debenture, Stock Purchase Warrant, Registration
Rights
Agreement and Securities Purchase Agreement for financings entered
into
between September 28, 2004 and January 17, 2005 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.28 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2
filed February 2, 2005.*
|
|
4.29
|
Approval
Rights Agreement and Termination of Antidilution Agreement and Addendum
to
Warrants dated October 10, 2006, incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.29 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31,
2006*
|
|
10.1
|
1992
Incentive Stock Option Plan of the Company, incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K dated May 12,
1992*
|
|
10.1.1
|
Amendment
to 1992 Incentive Stock Option Plan dated January 11, 1995,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1.1 to Form S-8 filed
July 17, 1996*
|
|
10.2
|
1992
Non-Statutory Stock Option Plan of the Company, incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 to Form 8-K dated May 12,
1992*
|
|
10.2.1
|
Amendment
to 1992 Non-Statutory Stock Option Plan dated January 11, 1995
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2.1 to Form 10-KSB for fiscal
year ended May 31, 1996, filed August 16,
1996*
|
|
10.3
|
Lease
Agreement between the Company’s subsidiary Metacomp, Inc. and Clar-O-Wood
Partnership, a California limited partnership dated April 11, 1991 as
amended November 11, 1992 and November 2, 1995 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Form 10-KSB for fiscal year ended
May 31, 1997, filed July 18,
1997*
|
36
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
10.4
|
Stock
Purchase Agreement dated November 29 and 30, 1995, between the
Company and SEA, Ltd., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to
Form 8-K filed December 11, 1995*
|
|
10.4.1
|
Letter
Amendment to Stock Purchase Agreement dated January 31, 1996, between
the Company and SEA, Ltd., incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4.1 to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended
February 29, 1996, filed March 15, 1996*
|
|
10.5
|
1995
Employee Stock Compensation Plan of the Company, incorporated by
reference
to Exhibit 10.5 to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended
November 30, 1995, filed December 28, 1995*
|
|
10.6
|
Letter
Stock and Warrant Agreement dated January 10, 1996 between the
Company and Robert E. Crawford, Jr., incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.6 to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended
February 29, 1996, filed March 15, 1996*
|
|
10.7
|
Non-Exclusive
Manufacturing and Line of Credit Agreement dated February 28, 1996,
between the Company and Labway Corporation, incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 10.7 to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended
February 29, 1996, filed March 15, 1996*
|
|
10.8
|
Distribution
and Representation Agreement dated February 28, 1996, between the
Company and Innoware, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8
to Form 10-QSB for fiscal quarter ended February 29, 1996, filed
March 15, 1996*
|
|
10.9
|
Employment
Agreement dated November 20, 1995 between the Company and Elwood G.
Norris, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to Registration
Statement on Form SB-2 filed March 18, 1996*
|
|
10.9.1
|
First
Amendment to Employment Agreement dated May 17, 1996 between the
Company and Elwood G. Norris, incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.9.1 to Pre-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration
Statement on Form SB-2 filed May 23, 1996*
|
|
10.10
|
Employment
Agreement dated November 20, 1995 between the Company and Robert
Putnam, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to Registration
Statement on Form SB-2 filed March 18, 1996*
|
|
10.11
|
Sales
Contractual Agreement dated March 19, 1996 between the Company and
Evolve Software, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to
Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2
filed April 29, 1996*
|
|
10.11.1
|
Two
Year Stock Purchase Warrant dated March 19, 1996 Granted to Evolve
Software, Inc. Providing for the Purchase of up to 50,000 Common
Shares at
$2.85, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11.1 to Pre-Effective
Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2 filed
April 29, 1996*
|
|
10.12
|
Employment
Agreement dated as of May 8, 1996 between the Company and
Michael A. Carenzo, including Schedule A - Stock Option
Agreement, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to
Pre-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement on
Form SB-2 filed May 23, 1996*
|
|
10.12.1
|
First
Amendment to Employment Agreement dated as of May 8, 1996 between the
Company and Michael A. Carenzo dated September 23, 1996, incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.12.1 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year ended May 31, 1997, filed July 18, 1997*
|
|
10.13
|
1996
Stock Option Plan of the Company dated March 25, 1996 and approved by
the Shareholders on May 17, 1996, incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.13 to Pre-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration
Statement on Form SB-2 filed May 23, 1996*
|
|
10.14
|
Sales
Contractual Agreement dated June 20, 1996 between the Company and
Compunetics Incorporated incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14
to Form 10-KSB for fiscal year ended May 31, 1996, filed
August 16, 1996*
|
37
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
10.15
|
Sales
Contractual Agreement dated July 31, 1996 between the Company and
Premier Technical Sales, Inc. incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.15 to Form 10-KSB for fiscal year ended May 31,
1996, filed August 16, 1996*
|
|
10.16
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 1, 1997 between the Company and
Norman J. Dawson incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to
Form 10-KSB for fiscal year ended May 31, 1997, filed July 18,
1997*
|
|
10.17
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 1, 1997 between the Company and
Jayanta K. Maitra incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to
Form 10-KSB for fiscal year ended May 31, 1997, filed
July 18, 1997*
|
|
10.18
|
Technology
License and Distribution Agreement dated June 23, 1997 between the
Company and Sun Microsystems, Inc. incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.18 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31,
1997, filed July 18, 1997*
|
|
10.19
|
Employment
Agreement dated March 23, 1999 between the Company and James T.
Lunney incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19 to Form 10-KSB for
the fiscal year ended May 31, 1998, filed August 19,
1998*
|
|
10.20
|
Employment
Agreement dated July 28, 1997 between the Company and Phillip
Morettini incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31, 1998, filed
August 19, 1998*
|
|
10.21
|
Employment
Agreement dated July 23, 1998 between the Company and Lowell W.
Giffhorn incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31, 1998, filed
August 19, 1998*
|
|
10.22
|
Secured
Promissory Note dated June 12, 2000 between the Company and
James T. Lunney incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2000, filed
August 29, 2000*
|
|
10.23
|
Purchase
Agreement dated June 29, 2000 between the Company and 4S 37/38, LLC
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to Form 10-KSB for the
fiscal year ended May 31, 2000*
|
|
10.24
|
Employment
Agreement dated October 2, 2000 between the Company and
Miklos B. Korodi incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to
Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2000, filed
January 12, 2001*
|
|
10.25
|
Employment
Agreement dated December 1, 2000 between the Company and
Richard G. Blum incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25 to
Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2000, filed
January 12, 2001*
|
|
10.26
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 29, 2001 between the Company and Serge J.
Miller incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.26 to Form 10-KSB
for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2001, filed August 29,
2001*
|
|
10.27
|
Lease
Agreement dated February 23, 2001 between the Company and Arden
Realty Finance IV, LLC incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.27 to
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2001, filed
August 29, 2001*
|
|
10.28
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 1, 2001 between the Company and David H.
Pohl incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to Form 10-KSB
for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2001, filed August 29,
2001*
|
|
10.29
|
Employment
Agreement dated April 26, 2001 between the Company and David H.
Pohl incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 to Form 10-KSB for
the fiscal year ended May 31, 2001, filed August 29,
2001*
|
38
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
10.30
|
Employment
Agreement dated November 17, 2001 between the Company and
Lowell W. Giffhorn incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.30 to
Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed June 27,
2002*
|
|
10.31
|
Employment
Agreement dated December 20, 2001 between the Company and Jayanta
Maitra incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.31 to Registration
Statement on Form S-3 filed June 27, 2002*
|
|
10.32
|
Consulting
Agreement dated March 7, 2002 between the Company and SDMC, Inc.
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to Registration Statement
on Form S-3 filed June 27, 2002*
|
|
10.33
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 2, 2004 between the Company and Jayanta
Maitra incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.33 to Registration
statement on Form SB-2 filed May 21, 2004*
|
|
10.34
|
Consulting
Agreement dated March 18, 2004 between the Company and SDMC, Inc.
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 to Registration Statement
en Form SB-2 filed May 21, 2004*
|
|
10.35
|
Employment
Agreement dated June 1, 2004 between the Company and Patrick Nunally
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35 to Form 10-KSB for the
fiscal year ended May 31, 2004, filed August 19,
2004*
|
|
10.36
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Employment Agreement dated July 12, 2004 between the
Company and Patrick Nunally incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.36 to Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31,
2004, filed August 19, 2004*
|
|
10.37
|
Employment
Agreement dated September 1, 2004 between the Company and Lowell W.
Giffhorn incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 to Registration
Statement on Form SB-2 filed February 2, 2005*
|
|
10.38
|
IGNITE
License Agreement with Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., dated
February 21, 2005, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.38 to
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31,
2006*
|
|
10.39
|
Patent
Portfolio License Agreement with Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., dated
February 21, 2005, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.39 to
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended May 31,
2006*
|
|
10.40
|
Master
Agreement, dated as of June 7, 2005, by and among the Company,
Technology Properties Limited Inc., a California corporation and
Charles
H. Moore, an individual, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.40
to Form 8-K filed June 15, 2005*
|
|
10.41
|
Commercialization
Agreement dated as of June 7, 2005 by and among the JV LLC,
Technology Properties Limited Inc., a California corporation, and
the
Company, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.41 to Form 8-K filed
June 15, 2005*
|
|
10.42
|
Limited
Liability Company Operating Agreement of JV LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, dated as of June 7, 2005, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.42 to Form 8-K filed June 15,
2005*
|
|
10.43
|
Agreement
for Part-Time Employment dated August 3, 2005 between the Company and
Thomas J. Sweeney, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.3 to Form
8-K filed August 9, 2005*
|
|
14.1
|
Code
of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers incorporated by reference
to
Exhibit 14.1 to Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31,
2003, filed August 29, 2003*
|
|
31.1
|
Certification
of David H. Pohl, CEO, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002**
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
of Thomas J. Sweeney, CFO, pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
of David H. Pohl, CEO, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002**
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
of Thomas J. Sweeney, CFO, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
|
39
Exhibit No.
|
Document
|
|
99.1
|
Form
of ISO Plan Option (Gaspar) dated May 29, 1992, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 28.2 to registration statement on
Form SB-2, file no. 33-57858*
|
|
99.2
|
Form
of NSO Plan Option (Berlin) dated May 29, 1992, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 28.3 to registration statement on
Form SB-2, file no. 33-57858*
|
|
99.3
|
Form
of Incentive Stock Option Agreement to the Company’s 1996 stock Option
Plan (individual agreements differ as to number of shares, dates,
prices
and vesting), incorporated by reference to Pre-Effective Amendment
No. 2 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2 filed May 23,
1996*
|
|
99.4
|
Form
of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement to the Company’s 1996 Stock Option
Plan (individual agreement differ as to number of shares, date, prices
and
vesting), incorporated by reference to Pre-Effective Amendment No. 2
to Registration Statement on Form SB-2 filed May 23,
1996*
|
|
99.5
|
Press
Release of the Company dated November 4, 1996 incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 99.5 to Form 8-K filed January 9,
1997*
|
|
99.6
|
Form
of Incentive Stock Option Agreement to the Company’s 2001 Stock Option
Plan incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.6 to Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed March 26, 2001*
|
|
99.7
|
Form
of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement to the Company’s 2001 Stock Option
Plan incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.7 to Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed March 26, 2001*
|
|
99.8
|
Form
of Incentive Stock Option Agreement to the Company’s 2003 Stock Option
Plan incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.8 to Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed September 4, 2003*
|
|
99.9
|
Form
of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement to the Company’s 2003 Stock Option
Plan incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.9 to Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed September 4,
2003*
|
* |
Previously
filed in indicated registration statement or
report.
|
**
|
Exhibit filed
herewith this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended August 31, 2006.
|
40
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant
has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.
DATED:
October 23, 2006
|
PATRIOT
SCIENTIFIC
CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
/S/
DAVID H. POHL
|
||
David
H. Pohl
Chief
Executive Officer
|
In
accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the
following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on
the
dates indicated.
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
||
/S/
DAVID H. POHL
|
President,
Chief Executive
|
October
23, 2006
|
||
David
H. Pohl
|
Officer,
and Director
|
|||
/S/
THOMAS J. SWEENEY
|
Chief
Financial Officer and
|
October 23,
2006
|
||
Thomas
J. Sweeney
|
Principal
Accounting Officer
|
|||
/S/
CARLTON M. JOHNSON
|
Director
|
October 23,
2006
|
||
Carlton
M. Johnson
|
||||
/S/
GLORIA H. FELCYN
|
Director
|
October 23,
2006
|
||
Gloria
H. Felcyn
|
||||
/S/
HELMUT FALK, JR.
|
Director
|
October 23,
2006
|
||
Helmut
Falk, Jr.
|
||||
/S/
JAMES L. TURLEY
|
Director
|
October
23, 2006
|
||
James
L. Turley
|
41