RespireRx Pharmaceuticals Inc. - Annual Report: 2013 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

[X]    Annual Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013

OR

[  ]     Transition Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Commission file number 1-16467

Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

126 Valley Road, Suite C

Glen Rock, New Jersey 07452

(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

(201) 444-4947

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, $0.001 par value

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES [  ] NO [X]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. YES [  ] NO [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports); and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES [  ] NO [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). YES [  ] NO [X]

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “accelerated filer,” “large accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). YES [  ] NO [X]

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2013 was approximately $8,500,000 (based on the closing sale price of the common stock as reported by the Over the Counter Bulletin Board). As of December 31, 2013, there were 144,041,556 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: NONE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms “Cortex,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and, unless the context indicates otherwise, its consolidated subsidiaries. This Annual Report on Form 10-K is being filed by new management substantially after the deadline for its filing. In an effort to provide the most current information, at various points in the document, information regarding events that occurred after December 31, 2013 has been included.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and we intend that such forward-looking statements be subject to the safe harbors created thereby. These forward-looking statements, which may be identified by words including “anticipates,” “believes,” “intends,” “estimates,” “expects,” “plans,” and similar expressions include, but are not limited to, statements regarding (i) future research plans, expenditures and results, (ii) potential collaborative arrangements, (iii) the potential utility of our proposed products and (iv) the need for, and availability of, additional financing.

The forward-looking statements included herein are based on current expectations that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements are based on assumptions regarding our business and technology, which involve judgments with respect to, among other things, future scientific, economic and competitive conditions, and future business decisions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond our control. Although we believe that the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements are reasonable, actual results may differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking information included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that our objectives or plans will be achieved.

Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. We do not undertake and specifically decline any obligation to update any forward-looking statements or to publicly announce the results of any revisions to any statements to reflect new information or future events or developments.

PART I

Item 1. Business

Since its formation in 1987, the Company has engaged in the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative pharmaceuticals for the treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders. In 2011, however, we conducted a re-evaluation of our strategic focus and determined that clinical development in the area of respiratory disorders, particularly respiratory depression and sleep apnea, provided the most cost-effective opportunities for potential rapid development and commercialization of our compounds. As a result of our scientific discoveries and the acquisition of strategic, exclusive license agreements, we believe we are now a leader in the discovery and development of innovative pharmaceuticals for the treatment of respiratory disorders.

Saying that there exists an unmet need for new drug treatments for breathing disorders is an understatement. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of respiratory disorders is reaching epidemic proportions, with estimates that 1 in 4 men and 1 in 10 women in this country have sleep apnea. Sleep apnea places a considerable burden on society and the health care system because of its association with adverse events ranging from loss of productivity to increased risk of cardiopulmonary illness and related death. No drugs currently are approved for the treatment of sleep apnea.

Even in patients without sleep apneas, the use of drugs such as propofol, used as an anesthetic during surgery, and opioid analgesics such as morphine, used for the treatment of post-surgical and chronic pain, are well known for producing respiratory depression. In fact, while respiratory depression is the leading cause of death from the overdose of most classes of abused drugs, it also arises during normal, physician-supervised procedures such as surgical anesthesia, post-operative analgesia and as a result of normal outpatient management of pain.

Although naloxone (Narcan) and nalmefene (Revex) can reverse respiratory depression associated with opioids, they have several major shortcomings. First and foremost, these opioid antagonists do not reverse the respiratory depression produced by other classes of drugs often given/taken either alone or in combination with narcotics. Second, while these drugs reverse the serious side effects of the opioids, they also dramatically reduce their analgesic effectiveness. Third, the side effects of opioid antagonists are themselves serious and include seizures, agitation, convulsions, tachycardia, hypotension, nausea, and vomiting.

Clearly, considerable need exists for pharmaco-therapeutic agents to 1.) treat sleep apnea, and 2.) prevent and reverse the respiratory depression produced by different classes of drugs. The Company currently has two drug platforms, each with a clinical stage compound directed at these needs.

Sleep Apnea

Sleep apnea is a serious disorder in which breathing repeatedly stops long enough to disrupt sleep, and temporarily decreases the amount of oxygen and increases the amount of carbon dioxide in the blood. Apnea is defined by more than five periods per hour of ten seconds or longer without breathing. The repetitive cessation of breathing during sleep has substantial impact on the affected individuals. The disorder is associated with major co-morbidities including excessive daytime sleepiness and increased risk of cardiovascular disease (such as hypertension, stroke and heart failure), diabetes and weight gain. Sleep apnea is often made worse by central nervous system depressants such as opioids, benzodiazepines, barbiturates and alcohol. It is therefore important for these patients to seek therapy.

The most common type of sleep apnea is obstructive sleep apnea (“OSA”), which occurs by repetitive narrowing or collapse of the pharyngeal airway during sleep. There is currently no approved pharmacotherapy, and the most common treatment is to use continuous positive airway pressure (“CPAP”) delivered via a nasal or full-face mask, as long as patients are able to tolerate the treatment. It is estimated that in more than 50% of cases patients stop using the CPAP device on a regular basis. Given the large patient population and a lack of suitable treatment options, there is a very large opportunity for pharmacotherapy to treat this disorder.

Central sleep apnea (“CSA”), a less frequently diagnosed type of sleep apnea, is caused by alterations in the brain mechanisms responsible for maintaining normal respiratory drive. CSA is most frequently observed in heart failure patients and in patients taking chronic opioids. In fact, CSA is a predictor of mortality in heart failure patients. CPAP has not demonstrated efficacy in treating CSA and no drugs presently are approved for this indication.

Mixed sleep apnea, a third type of sleep apnea, is a combination of central and obstructive factors occurring in the same episode of sleep apnea.

Drug-induced Respiratory Depression

Drug-induced respiratory depression (“RD”) is a life-threatening condition caused by a variety of depressant drugs, including analgesic, hypnotic, and anesthesia medications. RD is a leading cause of death from the overdose of some classes of abused drugs, yet it also arises during normal, physician-supervised procedures such as surgical anesthesia and post-operative pain management. For example, in the hospital setting, anesthetics, such as propofol, are well known for their propensity to produce RD. With more than 40 million surgical procedures performed annually, it is notable that post-operative respiratory failure produces the highest mortality rate, the second highest attributable number of deaths and the second largest overall excess cost to the Medicare system, when compared to other patient safety indicators.

In the hospital setting, the most serious complication of patient-controlled analgesia is RD and, despite nurses’ vigilance, adverse events associated with opioids continue to increase. Drug-induced RD is associated with a high mortality rate relative to other adverse drug events. If high-risk patients are receiving combination therapies, they are at even higher risk.

Outside the hospital, the primary risk factor for RD is the use of a single opioid in large doses or concomitant use of opioids and sedative agents. Whether as a result of normal outpatient management of pain or as a result of substance abuse, RD has been reported to be the leading cause of death from drug overdose, with the drug overdose death rate tripling since 1991. It has been estimated that nearly 15,000 people die every year as a result of overdoses involving prescription painkillers. Oxycodone and fentanyl have been reported to be the two most frequently reported drugs associated with death and serious nonfatal outcomes from 1998 to 2005, exceeding the number of deaths from heroin and cocaine combined. Opioid use has increased significantly along with a dramatic increase in unintentional poisoning deaths from opioids. Unintentional deaths from opioids are not only related to diversion for nonmedical use and misuse by patients, but by prescriber’s error as well.

Cannabinoids

In order to expand the Company’s respiratory disorders program, on August 10, 2012, pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among Pier Pharmaceuticals Inc., a privately-held corporation, (“Pier”) Pier Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Merger Sub”) and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cortex, and Cortex, Merger Sub merged with and into Pier (the “Merger”) and Pier became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cortex. Pier had been formed in June 2007 (under the name SteadySleep Rx Co.) as a clinical stage pharmaceutical company to develop a pharmacologic treatment for the respiratory disorder known as obstructive sleep apnea and had been engaged in research and clinical development activities since formation.

Through the Merger, the Company gained access to an Exclusive License Agreement, as amended (the “License Agreement”), that Pier had entered into with the University of Illinois on October 10, 2007. The License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders (including sleep apnea), of which dronabinol is a specific example of one type of cannabinoid. Dronabinol is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring substance in the cannabis plant, otherwise known as Δ9-THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Dronabinol is currently approved by the U. S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and is sold generically for use in refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, as well as for anorexia in patients with AIDS. The License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment.

However, on June 27, 2014, the Company entered into a new license agreement with the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. In exchange for certain milestone and royalty payments, the License Agreement grants the Company (i) exclusive rights to several issued and pending patents in numerous jurisdictions and (ii) the non-exclusive right to certain technical information that is generated by the University of Illinois in connection with certain clinical trials as specified in the License Agreement, all of which relate to the use of cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders. The Company is developing dronabinol for the treatment of OSA, the most common form of sleep apnea.

The Company previously conducted a 21 day, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose escalation Phase 2 clinical study in 22 patients with OSA, in which dronabinol produced a statistically significant reduction in the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI), the primary therapeutic end-point, and was observed to be safe and well tolerated. Dronabinol is currently under investigation, at the University of Illinois and other centers, in a potentially pivotal Phase 2 OSA clinical trial, fully funded by the National Institutes of Health.

Dronabinol is a Schedule III, controlled generic drug with a relatively low abuse potential that is approved by the FDA for the treatment of AIDS related anorexia and chemotherapy induced emesis. The use of dronabinol for the treatment of OSA is a novel indication for an already approved drug and, as such, the Company believes that it should only require approval by the FDA of a supplemental new drug application.

Ampakines

Since its founding, the Company has been engaged in the research and clinical development of a class of compounds referred to as ampakines. By acting as positive allosteric modulators of AMPA glutamate receptors, ampakines increase the excitatory effects of the neurotransmitter glutamate. Early preclinical and clinical research suggested that these ampakines might have therapeutic potential for the treatment of memory and cognitive disorders, depression, attention deficit disorder and schizophrenia. Given our current focus on respiratory disorders, we may seek to partner, out-license or sell our rights to the use of ampakine compounds for the treatment of neurological and psychiatric indications, as we focus on the development of our compounds for the treatment of brain-related breathing disorders.

The early ampakines discovered by Cortex, Eli Lilly and Company, and others were ultimately abandoned due to the presence of undesirable side effects, particularly convulsive activity. Subsequently, Cortex scientists discovered a new, chemically distinct series of molecules termed “low impact” as opposed to the “high impact” designation given to the earlier compounds. While these low impact compounds shared many pharmacological properties with the high impact compounds, they did not produce convulsive effects in animals. These low impact compounds do not bind to the same molecular site as the high impact compounds and, as a result, do not produce the undesirable electrophysiological and biochemical effects that lead to convulsive activity.

The Company owns patents and patent applications for certain families of chemical compounds that claim the chemical structures and their use in the treatment of various disorders. These patents cover, among other compounds, the Company’s lead ampakines CX1739 and CX1942 and extend through at least 2028.

In order to broaden the use of the Company’s ampakine technology into the area of respiratory disorders, on May 8, 2007, the Company entered into a license agreement, as subsequently amended, with the University of Alberta granting the Company exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. These patents, along with the Company’s own patents claiming chemical structures, comprise the Company’s principal intellectual property supporting the Company’s research and clinical development program in the use of ampakines for the treatment of respiratory disorders.

The Company has obtained pre-clinical results indicating that several of its low impact ampakines, including CX717, CX1739 and CX1942, were able to antagonize the respiratory depression caused by opioids, barbiturates and anesthetics without offsetting the analgesic effects of the opiates or the sedative effects of the anesthetics. Dr. John Greer, Director of the Neuroscience and Mental Health Institute at the University of Alberta, has shown that these ampakine effects are due to a direct action on neurons in pre-Botzinger’s complex, a brain stem region responsible for regulating respiratory drive.

After several Phase 1 and 2 studies to demonstrate safety and tolerability, the first of these low impact compounds, CX717, was tested in two Phase 2A clinical studies to determine its ability to antagonize the respiratory depressant effects of fentanyl, a potent opioid analgesic. In both of these studies, one of which was published in a peer-reviewed journal, CX717 antagonized the respiratory depression produced by fentanyl without altering the analgesia produced by this drug.

After considerable delay in the development of CX717, due to regulatory issues with the FDA, the Company finally has decided to terminate development of this compound because of the impending loss of its U.S. patents in 2017 and international patents in 2018. Nevertheless, the Company believes that CX717 has demonstrated clinical proof of principle for the use of low impact ampakines in the treatment of opioid-induced respiratory depression.

The Company’s present lead ampakine, CX1739, has demonstrated safety and tolerability in several Phase 1 clinical studies, with maximum well-tolerated single dose identified as 900mg and 450 mg twice-a-day (for a 900mg total daily dose) for 7 days. Pharmacokinetic results to date from the volunteers who have taken CX1739 show that drug absorption over the range of 50mg to 1200mg was linear and predictable, with an approximate half-life of 8 hours.

The Company has conducted a single dose, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with CX1739 in 20 subjects with moderate to severe sleep apnea. Analysis of a range of sleep apnea parameters assessed by overnight polysomnography revealed that, while a single dose of CX1739 improved a number of sleep apnea parameters across most of the patients who were given the drug, the primary effects were observed within a sub-group of patients diagnosed with either central or mixed sleep apnea. CX1739 was safe, but the dose appeared to be near the limits of tolerability. There were no serious adverse events and no clinically relevant changes in vital signs, cardiovascular or other safety assessments.

We believe that the results from this study merit conducting a larger study with CX1739 that will be focused on patients with central and/or mixed sleep apnea. It is possible that repeated daily treatment with CX1739 for several weeks may prove to be tolerated better and with greater efficacy than a single dose. However, given the time and expense necessary to conduct such a clinical trial, the Company is not currently planning to conduct such a study. Instead, subsequent to additional funding, and using a design similar to that in which CX717 demonstrated clinical efficacy, the Company plans to conduct two clinical studies investigating the ability of orally administered CX1739 to antagonize the respiratory depressant effects of fentany and propofol without altering the analgesic and anesthetic effects of these drugs. The Company’s short term commercial goals are to obtain FDA approval for the use of orally administered CX1739 for the following indications: 1.) pre-surgical administration for the prevention of respiratory depression produced by propofol and 2.) peri- and post-operative administration in a hospital setting for the prevention of respiratory depression produced by opiods. The Company believes that these goals can be achieved in a timely and cost-effective manner. Longer term goals include obtaining FDA approval for the use oral administration of CX1739 given concomitantly with an opioid analgesic for the safe management of pain in a home setting. The Company believes that successful commercial implementation of these goals will require corporate partnership.

In addition to CX1739, the Company is developing CX1942, a soluble ampakine, to be used in an injectable formulation as a rescue medication for the emergency treatment of drug-induced respiratory depression. Animal studies have indicated that intravenously injected CX1942 can reverse the respiratory depression produced by fentanyl. In October 2014, the Company intends to begin a study, funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse, to determine the parameters whereby CX1942 is able to reverse the respiratory depression and lethality produced by a number of respiratory depressant drugs, including opioids. One aspect of the study will be to determine whether intramuscular or subcutaneous injections are as effective as intravenous. Upon completion of this study and the choice of a route of administration, preclinical toxicology and safety studies can be conducted relatively quickly and inexpensively, since the clinical indication supported by these studies is for acute use.

Manufacturing

We have no experience or capability to either manufacture bulk quantities of the new compounds that we develop, or to produce finished dosage forms of the compounds, such as tablets or capsules. We rely, and presently intend to continue to rely, on the manufacturing and quality control expertise of contract manufacturing organizations or current and prospective corporate partners. There is no assurance that we will be able to enter into manufacturing arrangements to produce bulk quantities of our compounds on favorable financial terms. There is, however, substantial availability of both bulk chemical manufacturing and dosage form manufacturing capability throughout the world that we believe we can readily access. See “Risk Factors – Risks related to our business – We are at an early stage of development and we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize our products and technologies” for a discussion of certain risks related to the development and commercialization of our products.

Marketing

We have no experience in the marketing of pharmaceutical products and do not anticipate having the resources to distribute and broadly market any products that we may develop. We will therefore continue to seek commercial development arrangements with other pharmaceutical companies for our proposed products for those indications that require significant sales forces to effectively market. In entering into such arrangements, we may seek to retain the right to promote or co-promote products for certain of the Orphan Drug indications in North America. We believe that there is a significant expertise base for such marketing and sales functions within the pharmaceutical industry and expect that we could recruit such expertise if we choose to directly market a drug. See “Risk Factors—Risks related to our business—We are at an early stage of development and we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize our products and technologies” for a discussion of certain risks related to the marketing of our products.

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, the Company employed three people (all officers), one of whom was full time. The Company currently employs six people (including certain contractors who provide substantial services to the Company), one of whom is full time.

Technology Rights

University of California, Irvine License Agreements

The Company entered into a series of license agreements in 1993 and 1998 with the University of California, Irvine (“UCI”) that granted the Company proprietary rights to certain chemical compounds that acted as ampakines and their therapeutic uses. These agreements granted the Company, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the license agreement, that were then held by UCI; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the license agreements, subject to the provisions of the license agreements. The Company was required, among other terms and conditions, to pay UCI a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain additional payments.

Under such license agreements, the Company was required to make minimum annual royalty payments of approximately $70,000. The Company was also required to spend a minimum of $250,000 per year to advance the ampakine compounds until the Company began to market an ampakine compound. At December 31, 2012, the Company was not in compliance with its minimum annual payment obligations and believed that this default constituted a termination of the license agreements. On April 15, 2013, the Company received a letter from UCI indicating that the license agreements between UCI and the Company had been terminated due to the Company’s failure to make certain payments required to maintain the agreements. Since the patents covered in these license agreements had begun to expire and the therapeutic uses described in these patents were no longer germane to the Company’s new focus on respiratory disorders, the loss of these license agreements is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s current drug development programs. In the opinion of management, the Company has made adequate provision for any liability relating to this matter in its financial statements at December 31, 2013 and 2012.

University of Alberta License Agreement

On May 8, 2007, the Company entered into a license agreement, as subsequently amended, with the University of Alberta granting the Company exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. The Company agreed to pay the University of Alberta a licensing fee and a patent issuance fee, which were paid, and prospective payments consisting of a royalty on net sales, sublicense fee payments, maintenance payments and milestone payments. The prospective maintenance payments commence on the enrollment of the first patient into the first Phase 2B clinical trial and increase upon the successful completion of the Phase 2B clinical trial. As the Company does not at this time anticipate scheduling a Phase 2B clinical trial, no maintenance payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta. In addition, no other prospective payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta.

University of Illinois License Agreement

Through the merger with Pier, the Company gained access to the License Agreement that Pier had entered into with the University of Illinois on October 10, 2007. The License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders (including sleep apnea), of which dronabinol is a specific example of one type of cannabinoid. The License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment.

On June 27, 2014, the Company entered into a new license agreement with the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois that was similar, but not identical, to the License Agreement between the parties that had been terminated on March 21, 2013. In exchange for certain milestone and royalty payments, the License Agreement grants the Company (i) exclusive rights to several issued and pending patents in numerous jurisdictions and (ii) the non-exclusive right to certain technical information that is generated by the University of Illinois in connection with certain clinical trials as specified in the License Agreement, all of which relate to the use of cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders. The Company is developing dronabinol for the treatment of OSA, the most common form of sleep apnea.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

In addition to the other matters set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, our continuing operations and the price of our common stock are subject to the following risks:

Risks related to our business

Our independent registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

In its audit opinion issued in connection with our balance sheets as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and our statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficiency), and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, our independent registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern given our limited working capital, recurring net losses and negative cash flows from operations. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or amounts of liabilities that might be necessary should we be unable to continue in existence. While we have relied principally in the past on external financing to provide liquidity and capital resources for our operations, we can provide no assurance that cash generated from our operations together with cash received in the future from external financing, if any, will be sufficient to enable us to continue as a going concern.

We have a history of net losses; we expect to continue to incur net losses and we may never achieve or maintain profitability.

Since our formation on February 10, 1987 through the end of our most recent fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, we have generated only modest operating revenues and we have incurred net losses of $129,542,788. We have also experienced additional losses subsequent to this period. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, our net loss was $1,201,457 and as of December 31, 2013, we had an accumulated deficit of $129,542,788. For the year ended December 31, 2012, our net loss was $7,572,244 and as of December 31, 2012, we had an accumulated deficit of $128,341,331. We have not generated any revenue from product sales to date, and it is possible that we will never generate revenues from product sales in the future. Even if we do achieve significant revenues from product sales, we expect to incur significant net losses over the next several years. As with other companies in the biotechnology industry, it is possible that we will never achieve profitable operations.

We will need additional capital in the future and, if such capital is not available on terms acceptable to us or available to us at all, we may need to scale back our research and development efforts and may be unable to continue our business operations.

We will require substantial additional funds to advance our research and development programs and to continue our operations, particularly if we decide to independently conduct later-stage clinical testing and apply for regulatory approval of any of our proposed products, and if we decide to independently undertake the marketing and promotion of our products. Additionally, we may require additional funds in the event that we decide to pursue strategic acquisitions of or licenses for other products or businesses. Based on our operating plan as of December 31, 2013, we estimated that our existing cash resources may not be sufficient to meet our requirements for 2014. We believe that we will require additional capital to fund on-going operations. Additional funds may result from agreements with larger pharmaceutical companies that include the license or rights to the technologies and products that we are currently developing, although there is no assurance that we will secure such a transaction in a timely manner, or at all.

Our cash requirements in the future may differ significantly from our current estimates, depending on a number of factors, including:

To finance our future activities, we may seek funds through additional rounds of financing, including private or public equity or debt offerings and collaborative arrangements with corporate partners. We cannot say with any certainty that we will be able to obtain the additional needed funds on reasonable terms, or at all. The sale of additional equity or convertible debt securities could result in additional and possibly substantial dilution to our stockholders. If we issued preferred equity or debt securities, these securities could have rights superior to holders of our common stock, and such instruments entered into in connection with the issuance of securities could contain covenants that will restrict our operations. We might have to obtain funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or others that may require us to relinquish rights to our technologies, product candidates or products that we otherwise would not relinquish. In early March 2009 and again in August 2011, we reduced our workforce in an effort to conserve our capital resources. In 2012, several members of management departed. In March 2013 the then-current remaining members of management were removed by our newly elected board of directors and new officers were appointed. If adequate funds are not available in the future, as required, we could lose our key employees and might have to further delay, scale back or eliminate one or more of our research and development programs, which would impair our future prospects. In addition, we may be unable to meet our research spending obligations under our existing licensing agreements and may be unable to continue our business operations.

Our products rely on licenses from research institutions and if we lose access to these technologies or applications, our business could be substantially impaired.

Under our agreements with The Regents of the University of California, we had exclusive rights to certain ampakine compounds for all applications for which the University had patent rights, other than endocrine modulation. The license securing these rights has since been terminated.

Under a patent license agreement with The Governors of the University of Alberta, we have exclusive rights to the use of certain ampakine compounds to prevent and treat respiratory depression induced by opiate analgesics, barbiturates and anesthetic and sedative agents.

On May 8, 2007, the Company entered into a license agreement, as subsequently amended, with the University of Alberta granting the Company exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. The Company agreed to pay the University of Alberta a licensing fee and a patent issuance fee, which were paid, and prospective payments consisting of a royalty on net sales, sublicense fee payments, maintenance payments and milestone payments. The prospective maintenance payments commence on the enrollment of the first patient into the first Phase 2B clinical trial and increase upon the successful completion of the Phase 2B clinical trial. As the Company does not at this time anticipate scheduling a Phase 2B clinical trial, no maintenance payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta. In addition, no other prospective payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta.

Through the merger with Pier, the Company gained access to an Exclusive License Agreement (as amended, the Pier License Agreement), that Pier had entered into with the University of Illinois on October 10, 2007. The Pier License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders (including sleep apnea), of which dronabinol is a specific example of one type of cannabinoid. Dronabinol is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring substance in the cannabis plant, otherwise known as Δ9-THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Dronabinol is currently approved by the FDA and is sold generically for use in refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, as well as for anorexia in patients with AIDS. Pier’s business plan was to determine whether dronabinol would significantly improve subjective and objective clinical measures in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. In addition, Pier intended to evaluate the feasibility and comparative efficacy of a proprietary formulation of dronabinol. The Pier License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment and on June 27, 2014, the Company entered into a new license agreement with the University of Illinois that was similar, but not identical, to the Pier License Agreement that had been terminated. If we are unable to comply with the terms of the new license agreement, such as required payments thereunder, the new license agreement might be terminated.

We are at an early stage of development and we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize our products and technologies.

The development of ampakine products and cannabinoid products is subject to the risks of failure commonly experienced in the development of products based upon innovative technologies and the expense and difficulty of obtaining approvals from regulatory agencies. Drug discovery and development is time consuming, expensive and unpredictable. On average, only one out of many thousands of chemical compounds discovered by researchers proves to be both medically effective and safe enough to become an approved medicine. All of our proposed products are in the preclinical or early clinical stage of development and will require significant additional funding for research, development and clinical testing before we are able to submit them to any of the regulatory agencies for clearances for commercial use.

The process from discovery to development to regulatory approval can take several years and drug candidates can fail at any stage of the process. Late stage clinical trials often fail to replicate results achieved in earlier studies. Historically, in our industry more than half of all compounds in development failed during Phase 2 trials and 30% failed during Phase 3 trials. We cannot assure you that we will be able to complete successfully any of our research and development activities. Even if we do complete them, we may not be able to market successfully any of the products or be able to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals or assure that healthcare providers and payors will accept our products. We also face the risk that any or all of our products will not work as intended or that they will be unsafe, or that, even if they do work and are safe, that our products will be uneconomical to manufacture and market on a large scale. Due to the extended testing and regulatory review process required before we can obtain marketing clearance, we do not expect to be able to commercialize any therapeutic drug for several years, either directly or through our corporate partners or licensees.

We may not be able to enter into the strategic alliances necessary to fully develop and commercialize our products and technologies, and we will be dependent on our corporate partners if we do.

We are seeking pharmaceutical company partners to develop other major indications for the ampakine compounds and cannabinoids. These agreements would potentially provide us with additional funds in exchange for exclusive or non-exclusive license or other rights to the technologies and products that we are currently developing. Competition between biopharmaceutical companies for these types of arrangements is intense. We cannot give any assurance that our discussions with candidate companies will result in an agreement or agreements in a timely manner, or at all. Additionally, we cannot assure you that any resulting agreement will generate sufficient revenues to offset our operating expenses and longer-term funding requirements.

Risks related to our industry

If we fail to secure adequate intellectual property protection, it could significantly harm our financial results and ability to compete.

Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our products and processes in the United States and elsewhere. We have filed and intend to continue to file patent applications as we need them. However, additional patents that may issue from any of these applications may not be sufficiently broad to protect our technology. Also, any patents issued to us or licensed by us may be designed around or challenged by others, and if such design or challenge is effective, it may diminish our rights.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient protection of our proprietary rights in our products or processes prior to or after obtaining regulatory clearances, our competitors may be able to obtain regulatory clearance and market similar or competing products by demonstrating the equivalency of their products to our products. If they are successful at demonstrating the equivalency between the products, our competitors would not have to conduct the same lengthy clinical tests that we have or will have conducted.

We also rely on trade secrets and confidential information that we try to protect by entering into confidentiality agreements with other parties. Those confidentiality agreements may be breached, and our remedies may be insufficient to protect the confidential information. Further, our competitors may independently learn our trade secrets or develop similar or superior technologies. To the extent that our consultants, key employees or others apply technological information independently developed by them or by others to our projects, disputes may arise regarding the proprietary rights to such information or developments. We cannot assure you that such disputes will be resolved in our favor.

We may be subject to potential product liability claims. One or more successful claims brought against us could materially impact our business and financial condition.

The clinical testing, manufacturing and marketing of our products may expose us to product liability claims. We have never been subject to a product liability claim, and we require each patient in our clinical trials to sign an informed consent agreement that describes the risks related to the trials, but we cannot assure you that the coverage limits of our insurance policies will be adequate or that one or more successful claims brought against us would not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and result of operations. Further, if one of our ampakine or cannabinoid compounds is approved by the FDA for marketing, we cannot assure you that adequate product liability insurance will be available, or if available, that it will be available at a reasonable cost. Any adverse outcome resulting from a product liability claim could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We face intense competition that could result in products that are superior to the products that we are developing.

Our business is characterized by intensive research efforts. Our competitors include many companies, research institutes and universities that are working in a number of pharmaceutical or biotechnology disciplines to develop therapeutic products similar to those we are currently investigating. Most of these competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and/or other resources than we do. In addition, many of our competitors have experience in performing human clinical trials of new or improved therapeutic products and obtaining approvals from the FDA and other regulatory agencies. We have no experience in conducting and managing later-stage clinical testing or in preparing applications necessary to obtain regulatory approvals. Accordingly, it is possible that our competitors may succeed in developing products that are safer or more effective than those that we are developing and/or may obtain FDA approvals for their products faster than we can. We expect that competition in this field will continue to intensify.

We may be unable to recruit and retain our senior management and other key technical personnel on whom we are dependent.

We are highly dependent upon senior management and key technical personnel and currently do not carry any insurance policies on such persons. In particular, we were highly dependent on our President and Chief Executive Officer, Mark A. Varney, Ph.D. and our Vice President of Preclinical Development, Steven A. Johnson, Ph.D., each of whom entered into employment agreements with us and served in those roles until removed in March 2013. Since our change in management in March 2013, we are now highly dependent on Arnold S. Lippa, Ph.D., our President and Chief Executive Officer, Jeff E. Margolis, our Treasurer and Secretary, and, since his appointment in April 2013, our Chief Financial Officer Robert N. Weingarten. Competition for qualified employees among pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies is intense. The loss of any of our senior management, or our inability to attract, retain and motivate the additional or replacement highly-skilled employees and consultants that our business requires, could substantially hurt our business and prospects.

The regulatory approval process is expensive, time consuming, uncertain and may prevent us from obtaining required approvals for the commercialization of some of our products.

The FDA and other similar agencies in foreign countries have substantial requirements for therapeutic products. Such requirements often involve lengthy and detailed laboratory, clinical and post-clinical testing procedures and are expensive to complete. It often takes companies many years to satisfy these requirements, depending on the complexity and novelty of the product. The review process is also extensive, which may delay the approval process even more.

As of yet, we have not obtained any approvals to market our products. Further, we cannot assure you that the FDA or other regulatory agency will grant us approval for any of our products on a timely basis, if at all. Even if regulatory clearances are obtained, a marketed product is subject to continual review, and later discovery of previously unknown problems may result in restrictions on marketing or withdrawal of the product from the market.

Other risks

Our stock price may be volatile and our common stock could decline in value.

The market price of securities of life sciences companies in general has been very unpredictable. The range of sales prices of our common stock for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, as quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board, was $0.03 to $0.10 and $0.02 to $0.11, respectively. The following factors, in addition to factors that affect that market generally, could significantly affect our business, and the market price of our common stock could decline:

Our common stock is thinly traded and you may be unable to sell some or all of your shares at the price you would like, or at all, and sales of large blocks of shares may depress the price of our common stock.

Our common stock has historically been sporadically or “thinly-traded,” meaning that the number of persons interested in purchasing shares of our common stock at desired prices at any given time may be relatively small or nonexistent. As a consequence, there may be periods of several days or more when trading activity in shares of our common stock is minimal or non-existent, as compared to a seasoned issuer that has a large and steady volume of trading activity that will generally support continuous sales without an adverse effect on share price. This could lead to wide fluctuations in our share price. You may be unable to sell your common stock at or above your purchase price, which may result in substantial losses to you. Also, as a consequence of this lack of liquidity, the trading of relatively small quantities of shares by our stockholders may disproportionately influence the price of shares of our common stock in either direction. The price of shares of our common stock could, for example, decline precipitously in the event a large number of share of our common shares are sold on the market without commensurate demand, as compared to a seasoned issuer which could better absorb those sales without adverse impact on its share price.

There is a large number of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be issued or sold, and if such shares are issued or sold, the market price of our common stock may decline.

As of December 31, 2013, we had 144,041,556 shares of our common stock outstanding.

If all warrants and options outstanding as of December 31, 2013 are exercised prior to their expiration, up to 9,166,668 additional shares of our common stock could become freely tradable. Such sales of substantial amounts of common stock in the public market could adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common stock and could also make it more difficult for us to raise funds through future offerings of common stock. Included in the 9,166,668 potentially issuable shares of common stock were shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants to purchase up to 4,000,000 shares of common stock which expired unexercised in June 2014.

Since December 31, 2013, we have issued our Series G Preferred Stock and additional convertible notes and warrants, all of which are convertible into shares of our common stock (see Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012—Subsequent Events—Series G Preferred Stock Placement) and may in the future issue additional equity or equity-based securities. If some or all of our Series G Preferred Stock, convertible Notes or warrants converts to common stock, or if we issue additional equity or equity-based securities, the number of shares of our common stock outstanding could increase substantially, which could adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common stock and could also make it more difficult for us to raise funds through future offerings of common stock.

Our charter document may prevent or delay an attempt by our stockholders to replace or remove management.

Certain provisions of our restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of our business, even if such change in control would be beneficial to our stockholders. Our restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, allowed the Board of Directors of the Company, referred to as the Board or Board of Directors, to issue as of December 31, 2013 up to 3,507,500 shares of preferred stock without stockholder approval. The ability of our Board of Directors to issue additional preferred stock may have the effect of delaying or preventing an attempt by our stockholders to replace or remove existing directors and management. While additional shares of our preferred stock have been authorized and issued in March and April 2014, the Company retains the authority to issue a substantial number of shares of preferred stock without stockholder approval.

If our common stock is determined to be a “penny stock,” a broker-dealer may find it more difficult to trade our common stock and an investor may find it more difficult to acquire or dispose of our common stock in the secondary market.

In addition, our common stock may be subject to the so-called “penny stock” rules. The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has adopted regulations that define a “penny stock” to be any equity security that has a market price per share of less than $5.00, subject to certain exceptions, such as any securities listed on a national securities exchange. For any transaction involving a “penny stock,” unless exempt, the rules impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers, subject to certain exceptions. If our common stock is determined to be a “penny stock,” a broker-dealer may find it more difficult to trade our common stock and an investor may find it more difficult to acquire or dispose of our common stock on the secondary market.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

As of December 31, 2013, the Company did not maintain any operating facilities.

On May 14, 2012, the Company executed a three-year lease for approximately 5,000 square feet of office space beginning June 1, 2012 at a monthly rate of $9,204. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company substantially vacated its operating facility and abandoned its furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements. In May 2013, the Company received notice that it had been sued in the Superior Court of California in a complaint filed on March 28, 2013 by its former landlord, PPC Irvine Center Investment, LLC, seeking among other things, $57,535 in past due rent, termination of the lease agreement, and reasonable attorney’s fees. On May 23, 2013, a settlement was reached with the landlord that provided for the Company to relinquish its security deposit in the amount of $29,545, transfer title to its remaining furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements, and pay an additional $26,000.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We were not a party to any material legal proceedings, nor has any material proceeding been terminated during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, except the resolution of the matter related to our lease discussed in Item 2—Properties above.

Since December 31, 2013, we have been periodically subject to various pending and threatened legal actions and claims. See Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012—Commitments and Contingencies—Pending or Threatened Legal Actions and Claims and Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012—Subsequent Events—Debt Settlements for details regarding these matters.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Our common stock is quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board, referred to as OTCBB, under the symbol “CORX”. The following table presents quarterly information on the high and low sales prices of the common stock furnished by the OTCBB for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. The quotations on the OTCBB reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

As of December 31, 2013, there were 403 stockholders of record of our common stock, and approximately 8,000 beneficial owners. The high and low sales prices for our common stock on December 31, 2013, as quoted on the OTC market, were $0.0275 and $0.0261, respectively.

We have never paid cash dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying such dividends in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends, if any, will be determined by the Board in light of conditions then existing, including our financial condition and requirements, future prospects, restrictions in financing agreements, business conditions and other factors deemed relevant by the Board.

During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, we did not repurchase any of our securities.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Not applicable to smaller reporting companies.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes related thereto appearing elsewhere in this document.

Overview

Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Cortex”) was formed in 1987 to engage in the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative pharmaceuticals for the treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders. In 2011, prior management conducted a re-evaluation of Cortex’s strategic focus and determined that clinical development in the area of respiratory disorders, particularly respiratory depression and sleep apnea, provided the most cost-effective opportunities for potential rapid development and commercialization of Cortex’s compounds. Accordingly, Cortex narrowed its clinical focus at that time and abandoned other avenues of scientific inquiry. This re-evaluation provided the impetus for Cortex’s acquisition of Pier in August 2012, as described below. Cortex and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Pier Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Pier”), are collectively referred to herein as the “Company.”

On March 22, 2013, the Company received a written consent of stockholders holding a majority of the Company’s common stock signed by Origin Ventures II LP, Illinois Emerging Technologies Fund, LP, Illinois Ventures LLC, Samyang Optics Co. Ltd., Samyang Value Partners Co., Ltd., Steven Chizzik, Kenneth M. Cohen, Peter Letendre, David W. Carley and Aurora Capital LLC (the “Written Consent”) (i) removing Charles J. Casamento, M. Ross Johnson, John F. Benedik and Mark A. Varney from their positions as directors of the Company, and (ii) appointing each of Arnold S. Lippa, Ph.D. and Jeff E. Margolis to fill two of the vacancies created, each to hold such office until the next annual meeting of the stockholders and until their successors have been duly elected and qualified. The Written Consent did not remove Moogak Hwang, Ph.D., a representative of Samyang Optics Co. Ltd., a lender to and significant stockholder of the Company, from the Board of Directors. Dr. Hwang continued to serve as a director until his resignation from the Board of Directors effective September 30, 2013.

Following the delivery of the Written Consent, the Board of Directors, acting by unanimous written consent dated March 22, 2013, removed all officers of the Company and appointed Dr. Lippa, as Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Margolis, as Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary. On April 29, 2013, Robert N. Weingarten was appointed as a director, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

Since new management’s appointment in March 2013, it has continued to implement this revised strategic focus, including seeking the capital to fund such efforts. As a result of the Company’s scientific discoveries and the acquisition of strategic, exclusive license agreements (including a new license agreement with the University of Illinois, as described below), management believes that the Company is now a leader in the discovery and development of innovative pharmaceuticals for the treatment of respiratory disorders.

Since its formation in 1987, Cortex has been engaged in the research and clinical development of a class of compounds referred to as ampakines. By acting as positive allosteric modulators of AMPA glutamate receptors, ampakines increase the excitatory effects of the neurotransmitter glutamate. Preclinical research suggested that these ampakines might have therapeutic potential for the treatment of certain respiratory disorders, as well as cognitive disorders, depression, attention deficit disorder and schizophrenia.

In its early stages, Cortex entered into a series of license agreements in 1993 and 1998 with the University of California, Irvine (“UCI”) that granted Cortex proprietary rights to certain chemical compounds that acted as ampakines and their therapeutic uses. These agreements granted Cortex, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the license agreement, that were then held by UCI; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the license agreements, subject to the provisions of the license agreements. Cortex was required, among other terms and conditions, to pay UCI a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain additional payments.

At December 31, 2012, the Company was not in compliance with its minimum annual payment obligations and believed that this default constituted a termination of the license agreements. On April 15, 2013, UCI notified the Company that these license agreements were terminated due to the Company’s failure to make its obligatory payments. Since the patents covered in these license agreements had begun to expire and the therapeutic uses described in these patents were no longer germane to the Company’s new focus on respiratory disorders, the loss of these license agreements is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s current or future drug development programs.

The Company also owns patents and patent applications for certain families of chemical compounds, including ampakines, which claim the chemical structures and their use in the treatment of various disorders. These patents cover, among other compounds, the Company’s lead ampakines CX1739 and CX1942, and extend through at least 2028.

On May 8, 2007, Cortex entered into a license agreement, as subsequently amended, with the University of Alberta granting Cortex exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. These patents, along with Cortex’s own patents claiming chemical structures, comprise Cortex’s principal intellectual property supporting Cortex’s research and clinical development program in the use of ampakines for the treatment of respiratory disorders. Cortex has completed pre-clinical studies indicating that several of its ampakines, including CX717, CX1739 and CX1942, were efficacious in treating drug induced respiratory depression caused by opiates or certain anesthetics without offsetting the analgesic effects of the opiates or the anesthetic effects of the anesthetics. In two clinical Phase 2 studies, one of which was published in a peer-reviewed journal, CX717, a predecessor compound to CX1739 and CX1942, antagonized the respiratory depression produced by fentanyl, a potent narcotic, without affecting the analgesia produced by this drug. In addition, Cortex has conducted a Phase 2A clinical study in which patients with sleep apnea were administered CX1739, Cortex’s lead clinical compound. Preliminary results suggested that CX1739 might have use for the treatment of central and mixed sleep apnea, but not obstructive sleep apnea.

In order to expand the Company’s respiratory disorders program, the Company acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding equity securities of Pier effective August 10, 2012 pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger, as described below.

Loan from SY Corporation Co., Ltd.

On June 25, 2012, the Company borrowed 465,000,000 Won (the currency of South Korea, equivalent to approximately $400,000 US dollars) from and executed a secured note payable to SY Corporation Co., Ltd., formerly known as Samyang Optics Co. Ltd. (“Samyang”), an approximately 20% common stockholder of the Company at that time. The note accrues simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum and has a maturity date of June 25, 2013, although Samyang was permitted to demand early repayment of the promissory note on or after December 25, 2012. Samyang did not demand early repayment. The Company has not made any payments on the promissory note. At June 30, 2013 and subsequently, the promissory note was outstanding and in technical default, although Samyang has not issued a notice of default or a demand for repayment. The Company believes that Samyang is in default of its obligations under its January 2012 license agreement, as amended, with the Company, but the Company has not yet issued a notice of default. The Company anticipates entering into discussions with Samyang with a view toward a comprehensive resolution of the aforementioned matters.

Merger with Pier Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Cortex acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding equity securities of Pier effective August 10, 2012 pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger. Pier was formed in June 2007 (under the name SteadySleep Rx Co.) as a clinical stage pharmaceutical company to develop a pharmacologic treatment for the respiratory disorder known as obstructive sleep apnea and had been engaged in research and clinical development activities since formation.

In connection with the merger transaction with Pier, Cortex issued 58,417,893 newly issued shares of its common stock with an aggregate fair value of $3,271,402 ($0.056 per share), based upon the closing price of the Company’s common stock on August 10, 2012. The shares of common stock were issued to stockholders, convertible note holders, warrant holders, option holders, and certain employees and vendors of Pier in satisfaction of their interests and claims. The common stock issued by Cortex represented approximately 41% of the 144,041,556 common shares outstanding immediately following the closing of the transaction.

Through the merger, Cortex gained access to an Exclusive License Agreement, as amended (the “License Agreement”), that Pier had entered into with the University of Illinois on October 10, 2007. The License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids, of which dronabinol is a specific example, for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders (including sleep apnea). Dronabinol is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring substance in the cannabis plant, otherwise known as Δ9-THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Pier’s business plan was to determine whether dronabinol would significantly improve subjective and objective clinical measures in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (“OSA”). In addition, Pier intended to evaluate the feasibility and comparative efficacy of a proprietary formulation of dronabinol.

The License Agreement granted Pier, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the License Agreement, that were then held by the University of Illinois; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the License Agreement, subject to the provisions of the License Agreement. Pier was required under the License Agreement, among other terms and conditions, to pay the University of Illinois a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain milestone payments.

Prior to the merger, Pier conducted a 21 day, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose escalation Phase 2 clinical study in 22 patients with obstructive sleep apnea, in which dronabinol produced a statistically significant reduction in the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (“AHI”), the primary therapeutic end-point, and was observed to be safe and well tolerated. Dronabinol is currently under investigation, at the University of Illinois and other centers, in a potentially pivotal 120 patient, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2B OSA clinical trial, fully funded by the National Institutes of Health.

Dronabinol is a Schedule III, controlled generic drug with a relatively low abuse potential that is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for the treatment of AIDS-related anorexia and chemotherapy induced emesis. The use of dronabinol for the treatment of OSA is a novel indication for an already approved drug and, as such, the Company believes that it would only require approval by the FDA of a supplemental new drug application.

The Company accounted for the Pier transaction pursuant to ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations. The Company identified and evaluated the fair value of the assets acquired. Based on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the history and status of Pier, including its business and intellectual property at the time of the merger transaction, the Company determined that the identifiable intangible assets were comprised solely of contract-based intangible assets, and that there was no measurable goodwill.

The intangible asset acquired in the Pier transaction consisted of the License Agreement. Unless terminated earlier, the License Agreement would terminate upon expiration or termination of all patent rights. The License Agreement defined patent rights as all of the University of Illinois’ rights in the patents and patent applications, and (b) all of the University of Illinois’ rights in all divisions, continuations, continuation-in-part applications, reissues, renewals, re-examinations, foreign counterparts, substitutions or extensions thereof. Based upon the expiration date of the underlying patents, the License Agreement would be amortized on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the underlying patents of 172 months from the date of acquisition.

The following table summarizes the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed by the Company at the closing of the Pier transaction on August 10, 2012.

The License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment. New management subsequently opened negotiations with the University of Illinois and as a result, the Company ultimately entered into a new license agreement with the University of Illinois on June 27, 2014, the material terms of which were similar to the License Agreement that had been terminated on March 21, 2013.

Additional information with respect to the Pier transaction, including the impairment of the License Agreement that resulted in the Company recording an impairment charge to operations of $3,321,678 at December 31, 2012, is included in Notes 3 and 4 to the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, which is included elsewhere in this document.

Significant Developments Subsequent to December 31, 2013

Series G Preferred Stock Placement

On March 14, 2014, the Company filed a Certificate of Designation, Preferences, Rights and Limitations, (the “Certificate of Designation”) of its Series G Preferred Stock (“Series G Preferred Stock”) with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware to amend the Company’s certificate of incorporation. The number of shares designated as Series G Preferred Stock is 1,700 (which shall not be subject to increase without the written consent of a majority of the holders of the Series G Preferred Stock or as otherwise set forth in the Certificate of Designation). The Stated Value of each share of Series G Preferred Stock is $1,000.

The Company shall pay a stated dividend on the Series G Preferred Stock at a rate per share (as a percentage of the Stated Value per share) of 1.5% per annum, payable quarterly within 15 calendar days of the end of each fiscal quarter of the Company, in duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable shares of Series G Preferred Stock, which may include fractional shares of Series G Preferred Stock.

The Series G Preferred Stock shall be convertible, beginning 60 days after the last share of Series G Preferred Stock is issued in the Private Placement, at the option of the holder, into common stock at the applicable conversion price, at a rate determined by dividing the Stated Value of the shares of Series G Preferred Stock to be converted by the conversion price, subject to adjustments for stock dividends, splits, combinations and similar events as described in the form of Certificate of Designation. The stated value of the Series G Preferred Stock is $1,000 per share, and the fixed conversion price is $0.0033. Accordingly, at the option of the holder, each share of Series G Preferred Stock is convertible commencing on the date that is 60 calendar days after the date on which the last share of Series G Preferred Stock is issued pursuant to a Purchase Agreement, into 303,030.3 shares of common stock. In addition, the Company has the right to require the holders of the Series G Preferred Stock to convert such shares into common stock under certain enumerated circumstances set forth in the Certificate of Designation.

Upon either (i) a Qualified Public Offering (as defined in the Certificate of Designation) or (ii) the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the Stated Value of the Series G Preferred Stock issued and outstanding, all outstanding shares of Series G Preferred Stock, plus all accrued or declared, but unpaid, dividends thereon, shall mandatorily be converted into such number of shares of common stock determined by dividing the Stated Value of such Series G Preferred Stock (together with the amount of any accrued or declared, but unpaid, dividends thereon) by the Conversion Price (as defined in the Certificate of Designation). If not earlier converted, the Series G Preferred Stock shall be redeemed by conversion on the two year anniversary of the date the last share of Series G Preferred Stock is issued in the Private Placement at the Conversion Price.

Except as described in the Certificate of Designation, holders of the Series G Preferred Stock will vote together with holders of the Company common stock on all matters, on an as-converted to common stock basis, and not as a separate class or series (subject to limited exceptions).

In the event of any liquidation or winding up of the Company prior to and in preference to any Junior Securities (including common stock), the holders of the Series G Preferred Stock will be entitled to receive in preference to the holders of the Company common stock a per share amount equal to the Stated Value, plus any accrued and unpaid dividends thereon.

On March 18, 2014, the Company entered into Securities Purchase Agreements with various accredited investors (the “Initial Purchasers”), pursuant to which the Company sold an aggregate of 753.22 shares of its Series G Preferred Stock for a purchase price of $1,000 per share, or an aggregate purchase price of $753,220. This financing represents the initial closing on a private placement of up to $1,500,000 (the “Private Placement”). The Initial Purchasers in this tranche of the Private Placement consisted of (i) Arnold S. Lippa, the Company’s Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, who had not previously owned common stock in the Company and who invested $250,000 for 250 shares of Series G Preferred Stock, and (ii) new, non-affiliated, accredited investors. Neither the Series G Preferred Stock nor the underlying shares of common stock have any registration rights.

The placement agents and selected dealers in connection with the initial tranche of the Private Placement received cash fees totaling $3,955 as compensation and warrants totaling approximately 5.6365% of the shares of common stock into which the Series G Preferred Stock may convert, exercisable for five years at a fixed price of $0.00396, which is 120% of the conversion price at which the Series G Preferred Stock may convert into the Company’s common stock. Aurora Capital LLC was one of the placement agents.

On April 17, 2014, the Company entered into Securities Purchase Agreements with various accredited investors (together with the Initial Purchasers, the “Purchasers”), pursuant to which the Company sold an aggregate of 175.28 shares of its Series G Preferred Stock, for a purchase price of $1,000 per share, or an aggregate purchase price of $175,280. This was the second and final closing on the Private Placement. The Purchasers in the second and final tranche of the Private Placement consisted of new, non-affiliated, accredited investors and non-management investors who had also invested in the first closing. Neither the Series G Preferred Stock nor the underlying shares of common stock have any registration rights.

The placement agents and selected dealers in connection with the second tranche of the Private Placement received cash fees of $3,465 as compensation and warrants totaling approximately 12% of the shares of common stock into which the Series G Preferred Stock may convert, exercisable for five years at a fixed price of $0.00396, which is 120% of the conversion price at which the Series G Preferred Stock may convert into the Company’s common stock. Aurora Capital LLC was one of the placement agents.

The stated value of the Series G Preferred Stock is $1,000 per share, and the fixed conversion price is $0.0033. Accordingly, at the option of the holder, each share of Series G Preferred Stock is convertible commencing on the date that is sixty calendar days after the date on which the last share of Series G Preferred Stock is issued pursuant to a Purchase Agreement, into 303,030.3 shares of common stock. The aggregate of 928.5 shares of Series G Preferred Stock sold in the Private Placement are convertible into a total of 281,363,634 shares of common stock. The Company had 144,041,556 shares of common stock, plus an additional 57,000,000 shares of common stock issued to management on April 14, 2014, issued and outstanding immediately prior to the closing of the Private Placement of Series G Preferred Stock described herein.

The warrants that the placement agents and selected dealers received in connection with the Private Placement represent the right to acquire 19,251,271 shares of common stock exercisable for five years at a fixed price of $0.00396, which is 120% of the conversion price at which the Series G Preferred Stock may convert into the Company’s common stock.

Purchasers in the Private Placement of the Series G Preferred Stock have executed written consents in favor of (i) approving and adopting an amendment to the Company’s certificate of incorporation that increases the number of authorized shares of the Company to 1,405,000,000, 1,400,000,000 of which are shares of common stock and 5,000,000 of which are shares of preferred stock, and (ii) approving and adopting the Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 2014 Equity, Equity-Linked and Equity Derivative Incentive Plan.

The shares of Series G Preferred Stock were offered and sold without registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), in reliance on the exemptions provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act as provided in Rule 506(b) of Regulation D promulgated thereunder. The shares of Series G Preferred Stock and the Company’s common stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series G Preferred Stock have not been registered under the Securities Act or any other applicable securities laws, and unless so registered, may not be offered or sold in the United States except pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.

Capitalized terms in this section that are not otherwise defined have the meanings ascribed to them in the Stock Purchase Agreements, the form of which was previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on March 24, 2014.

Convertible Note and Warrant Financing

On November 5, 2014, the Company entered into a Convertible Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with various accredited, non-affiliated investors (each, a “Purchaser”), pursuant to which the Company sold an aggregate principal amount of $238,500 of its (i) 10% Convertible Notes due September 15, 2015 (each a “Note”, and together, the “Notes”) and (ii) Warrants to purchase shares of common stock (the “Warrants”) as described below.  This financing represents the initial closing on a private placement of up to $1,000,000, and the Company may close on one or more additional tranches of this private placement in the near future. Unless otherwise provided for in the Notes, the outstanding principal balance of each Note and all accrued and unpaid interest is due and payable in full on September 15, 2015.  At any time, each Purchaser may elect, at its option and in its sole discretion, to convert the outstanding principal amount into a fixed number of shares of the Company’s common stock equal to the quotient obtained by dividing the outstanding principal amount by $0.035 (an aggregate of 6,814,286 shares), plus any accrued and unpaid interest under the Note, which is treated in the same manner as the outstanding principal amount.  In the case of a Qualified Financing (as defined in the Purchase Agreement), the outstanding principal amount and accrued and unpaid interest under the Notes automatically convert into common stock at a common stock equivalent price of $0.035.  In the case of an Acquisition (as defined in the Purchase Agreement), the Company may elect to either:  (i) convert the outstanding principal amount and all accrued and unpaid interest under the Notes into shares of common stock or (ii) accelerate the maturity date of the Notes to the date of closing of the Acquisition. Each Warrant to purchase shares of common stock shall be exercisable into a fixed number of shares of common stock of the Company calculated as each Purchaser’s investment amount divided by $0.035 (an aggregate of 6,814,286 shares for the initial closing).  The Warrants do not have any cashless exercise provisions and are exercisable through September 15, 2015 at a fixed price of $0.035 per share. The shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Notes and exercise of the Warrants are not subject to any registration rights.

On December 9, 2014, a second closing for $46,000 was conducted under this financing. On December 31, 2014, a third closing for $85,000 was conducted under this financing.

Placement agent fees, brokerage commissions, finder’s fees and similar payments were made in the form of cash and warrants to qualified referral sources in connection with the sale of the Notes and Warrants.  In connection with the initial closing, fees of $16,695 were paid in cash, based on 7% of the aggregate principal amount of the Notes issued to such referral sources, and the fees paid in warrants (the “Placement Agent Warrants”) consisted of 477,000 warrants, reflecting warrants for that number of shares equal to 7% of the number of shares of common stock into which the corresponding Notes are convertible. In connection with the second closing, fees of $700 were paid in cash and 20,000 Placement Agent Warrants were issued. In connection with the third closing, fees of $3,500 were paid in cash and 100,000 Placement Agent Warrants were issued. The Placement Agent Warrants have cashless exercise provisions and are exercisable through September 15, 2015 at a fixed price of $0.035 per share. Aurora Capital LLC is acting as the placement agent for this financing.

The Notes and Warrants were offered and sold without registration under the Securities Act in reliance on the exemptions provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act as provided in Rule 506 of Regulation D promulgated thereunder. The Notes and Warrants and the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Notes and exercise of the Warrants have not been registered under the Securities Act or any other applicable securities laws, and unless so registered, may not be offered or sold in the United States except pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.

Awards to Officers and Directors as Compensation

On April 14, 2014, the Board of Directors of the Company awarded a total of 57,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company, including awards of 15,000,000 shares to each of the Company’s three executive officers, who were also the directors of the Company, and 4,000,000 shares and 8,000,000 shares to two other individuals. The individual who received the 8,000,000 shares was an associated person of Aurora Capital LLC. These awards were made to those individuals on that date as compensation for services rendered through March 31, 2014. None of the officers or directors of the Company had earned or received any cash compensation from the Company since joining the Company in March and April 2013, and there were no prior compensation arrangements or agreements with such individuals. As the initial closing of the Series G Preferred Stock was completed on March 18, 2014, and such closing represented approximately 81% of the total amount of such financing, the Company’s Board of Directors determined that it was appropriate at that time to begin consideration with respect to compensation for such officers for the period since they joined the Company in March and April 2013 through March 31, 2014. Such deliberations were concluded on April 14, 2014 with the issuance of the aforementioned stock awards. Accordingly, as a result of these factors, the fair value of these stock awards will be charged to operations as stock-based compensation effective as of March 18, 2014.

On July 17, 2014, the Board of Directors of the Company awarded stock options to purchase a total of 15,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company, consisting of options for 5,000,000 shares to each of the Company’s three executive officers, who are also directors of the Company. The stock options were awarded as compensation for those individuals through December 31, 2014. The awarded stock options vest in three equal installments on July 17, 2014 (at issuance), September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2014, and expire on July 17, 2019. The exercise price of the stock options of $0.05 per share was in excess of the closing market price of a share of the Company’s common stock on the date of issuance. The Company believes and intends that a portion of the stock options awarded qualify as incentive stock options under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The issuance of incentive stock awards is restricted as to amount as set forth in the Plan, and the form of award of the awarded stock options reflects this intention and the limits under the Plan.

In connection with the appointment of James Sapirstein and Kathryn MacFarlane as directors of the Company on September 3, 2014, the Board of Directors awarded an aggregate of 4,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company to the new directors, consisting of 2,000,000 shares to each new director, vesting 50% upon appointment to the Board of Directors, 25% on September 30, 2014 and 25% on December 31, 2014.

All of these awards were made under the Company’s 2014 Equity, Equity-Linked and Equity Derivative Incentive Plan.

Debt Settlements

During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the Company executed settlement agreements with four former executives that resulted in the settlement of potential claims totaling approximately $1,336,000 for a total of approximately $118,000 in cash, plus the issuance of options to purchase 4,300,000 shares of common stock exercisable at $0.04 per share for periods ranging from five to ten years. In addition to other provisions, the settlement agreements included mutual releases.

During the three months ended June 30, 2014, the Company also executed settlement agreements with certain former service providers that resulted in the settlement of potential claims totaling approximately $591,000 for a cost of approximately $155,000 in cash, plus the issuance of options to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock exercisable at $0.04 per share for a period of five years. In addition to other provisions, the settlement agreements included mutual releases.

The aforementioned agreements resulted in the settlement of potential claims totaling approximately $1,927,000 for a cost of approximately $273,000 in cash, plus the issuance of options to purchase 5,550,000 shares of common stock exercisable at $0.04 per share for periods ranging from five to ten years. The Company continues to explore ways to reduce its indebtedness, and might in the future enter additional settlements of potential claims, including, without limitation, those by other former executives or third party creditors.

University of Illinois 2014 Exclusive License Agreement

On June 27, 2014, the Company entered into an Exclusive License Agreement (the “2014 License Agreement”) with the University of Illinois, the material terms of which were similar to the License Agreement between the parties that had been previously terminated on March 21, 2013. The 2014 License Agreement became effective on September 18, 2014, upon the completion of certain conditions set forth in the 2014 License Agreement, including (i) the payment by the Company of a $25,000 licensing fee, (ii) the payment by the Company of certain outstanding patent costs (not to exceed $16,000), and (iii) the assignment to the University of Illinois of certain rights the Company holds in certain patent applications. In exchange for certain milestone and royalty payments, the 2014 License Agreement granted the Company (i) exclusive rights to several issued and pending patents in numerous jurisdictions and (ii) the non-exclusive right to certain technical information that is generated by the University of Illinois in connection with certain clinical trials as specified in the 2014 License Agreement, all of which relate to the use of cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders. The Company is developing dronabinol (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol), a cannabinoid, for the treatment of OSA, the most common form of sleep apnea.

Settlement with the Institute for the Study of Aging

On September 2, 2014, the Company entered into a Release Agreement (the “Release Agreement”) with the Institute for the Study of Aging (the “Institute”) to settle an outstanding promissory note, dated May 30, 2000, issued by the Company in favor of the Institute for the principal amount of $247,300 (the “Note”), which was made pursuant to an Agreement to Accept Conditions of Loan Support, also dated May 30, 2000 (the “Loan Support Agreement”). At August 31, 2014, the amount owed under the Note, including accrued interest was approximately $337,000. Pursuant to the terms of the Release Agreement, the Institute received 1,000,000 restricted shares of the Company’s common stock as settlement of all obligations of the Company under the Note and the Loan Support Agreement. Such common shares are “restricted securities” as defined under Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and are not subject to any registration rights. The Release Agreement also includes a mutual release between the Company and the Institute, releasing each party from all claims up until the date of the Release Agreement.

Appointment of New Directors

On September 3, 2014, James Sapirstein and Kathryn MacFarlane were appointed as new directors of the Company. These two new directors are considered to be independent directors. In connection with those appointments and in conformity with its corporate policy of indemnifying all directors and officers, the Board of Directors also agreed at that time to enter into indemnification agreements for all directors and officers of the Company, namely, each existing director of the Company, Arnold S. Lippa, Jeff E. Margolis, and Robert N. Weingarten, each of whom is also an officer of the Company, and with the two new directors. Pursuant to the indemnity agreements, the Company will indemnify each director or officer when such individual is a party or threatened to become a party, by virtue of being a director or officer of the Company, from the costs and expenses, fines and certain other amounts in connection with certain proceedings, including proceedings in the right of the Company, so long as such director or officer acted in good faith and reasonably believed that such actions were not opposed to the best interests of the Company.

Appointment of Chairman of the Company’s Scientific Advisory Board

On September 18, 2014, John Greer, Ph.D. was appointed to the position of Chairman of the Company’s Scientific Advisory Board, which is currently being formed. Dr. Greer is the Director of the Neuroscience and Mental Health Institute at the University of Alberta. He holds two grants regarding research into neuromuscular control of breathing and is the inventor on the use patents licensed by the Company with respect to ampakines. Dr. Greer is expected to assist the Company in forming the rest of its Scientific Advisory Board.

In connection with the appointment of Dr. Greer as Chairman of the Company’s Scientific Advisory Board on September 18, 2014, the Board of Directors awarded 2,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company to Dr. Greer (through his wholly-owned consulting company, Progress Scientific, Inc.), vesting 25% upon appointment, 25% on September 30, 2014, 25% on December 31, 2014, and 25% on March 31, 2015. This award was made under the Company’s 2014 Equity, Equity-Linked and Equity Derivative Incentive Plan.

National Institute on Drug Abuse Grant

On September 18, 2014, the Company entered into a contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a division of the National Institutes of Health. The funding under the contract is a Phase 1 award granted under the Small Business Innovation Research Funding Award Program. The purpose of the project is to determine the most useful injectable route of administration for CX1942, the Company’s proprietary, soluble ampakine molecule, a potential rescue medication for drug-induced respiratory depression and lethality. The grant is entitled “Novel Treatment of Drug-Induced Respiratory Depression” and is valued at $148,583, which is to be paid in increments over the expected six-month duration of the study which commenced in October 2014. The study will measure the potency, latency to onset and duration of action of CX1942 administered to rats. The Company anticipates that the data obtained from the study will be used to finalize preclinical studies in preparation for initiating Phase 1 clinical studies. The preclinical studies will be performed in collaboration with Dr. David Fuller of the University of Florida and Dr. John Greer of the University of Alberta.

Appointment of Senior Vice President of Research and Development

Richard Purcell was appointed as the Company’s Senior Vice President of Research and Development effective October 15, 2014. Mr. Purcell’s commitment to the Company is for 30 hours per week in order to allow him to comply with his previous professional commitments. Mr. Purcell provides his services to the Company through his consulting firm, DNA Healthlink, Inc., with which the Company has contracted for his services.

Going Concern

The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been presented on the basis that it is a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company has incurred net losses of $1,201,457 and $7,572,244 for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, negative operating cash flows of $182,435 and $1,861,870 for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and incurred additional net losses and negative operating cash flows in the 2014 fiscal year. The Company expects to continue to incur net losses and negative operating cash flows for several more years thereafter. As a result, management and the Company’s auditors believe that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

The Company is currently, and has for some time, been in significant financial distress. It has limited cash resources and current assets and has no ongoing source of revenue. Beginning in late 2012, the Company’s business activities were reduced to minimal levels, and the prior Board of Directors of the Company, which was removed by the written consent of stockholders holding a majority of the outstanding shares on March 22, 2013, had retained bankruptcy counsel to assist the Company in preparations to file for liquidation under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. New management, which was appointed during March and April 2013, has evaluated the status of numerous aspects of the Company’s existing business and obligations, including, without limitation, debt obligations, financial requirements, intellectual property, licensing agreements, legal and patent matters and regulatory compliance, and has raised new capital to fund its business activities.

From June 2013 through March 2014, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer advanced short-term loans to the Company aggregating $150,000 in order to meet its minimum operating needs. In March and April 2014, the Company completed a private placement by selling 928.5 shares of its Series G Preferred Stock for gross proceeds of $928,500 and repaid the aggregate advances. The Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer invested $250,000 in the Series G Preferred Stock private placement.  During November and December 2014, the Company sold convertible notes (with warrants) in an aggregate principal amount of $369,500 to various accredited investors. The Company intends to continue this financing until it has sold an aggregate principal amount of $1,000,000 of such notes, although there can be no assurances that the Company will be successful in this regard.   

The Company will need to raise additional capital, either through the current financing or otherwise, or both, to be able to pay its liabilities and fund its business activities going forward. As a result of the Company’s current financial situation, the Company has limited access to external sources of debt and equity financing. Accordingly, there can be no assurances that the Company will be able to secure additional financing in the amounts necessary to fully fund its operating and debt service requirements. If the Company is unable to access sufficient cash resources, the Company may be forced to discontinue its operations entirely and liquidate.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In April 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-08 (ASU 2014-08), Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205) and Property, Plant and Equipment (Topic 360). ASU 2014-08 amends the requirements for reporting discontinued operations and requires additional disclosures about discontinued operations. Under ASU 2014-08, only disposals representing a strategic shift in operations or that have a major effect on the Company’s operations and financial results should be presented as discontinued operations. ASU 2014-08 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2014. As the Company is engaged in research and development activities, the Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09 (ASU 2014-09), Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 will eliminate transaction- and industry-specific revenue recognition guidance under current U.S. GAAP and replace it with a principle based approach for determining revenue recognition. ASU 2014-09 will require that companies recognize revenue based on the value of transferred goods or services as they occur in the contract. ASU 2014-09 also will require additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. ASU 2014-09 is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and early adoption is not permitted. Entities can transition to the standard either retrospectively or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. As the Company does not expect to have any operating revenues for the foreseeable future, the Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In June 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-10 (ASU 2014-10), Development Stage Entities (Topic 915): Elimination of Certain Financial Reporting Requirements, Including an Amendment to Variable Interest Entities Guidance in Topic 810, Consolidation. ASU 2014-10 eliminated the requirement to present inception-to-date information about income statement line items, cash flows, and equity transactions, and clarifies how entities should disclosure the risks and uncertainties related to their activities. ASU 2014-10 also eliminated an exception provided to development stage entities in Consolidations (ASC Topic 810) for determining whether an entity is a variable interest entity on the basis of the amount of investment equity that is at risk. The presentation and disclosure requirements in Topic 915 will no longer be required for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2014, and the revised consolidation standards will take effect in annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of ASU 2014-10 is not expected to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In August 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-15 (ASU 2014-15), Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern (Subtopic 205-10). ASU 2014-15 provides guidance as to management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. In connection with preparing financial statements for each annual and interim reporting period, an entity’s management should evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or within one year after the date that the financial statements are available to be issued when applicable). Management’s evaluation should be based on relevant conditions and events that are known and reasonably knowable at the date that the financial statements are issued (or at the date that the financial statements are available to be issued when applicable). Substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern exists when relevant conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, indicate that it is probable that the entity will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). ASU 2014-15 is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2014-15 on the Company’s financial statement presentation and disclosures.

Management does not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet effective, authoritative guidance, if currently adopted, would have a material impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

Concentration of Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. The Company limits its exposure to credit risk by investing its cash with high credit quality financial institutions.

The Company’s research and development efforts and potential products rely on licenses from research institutions and if the Company loses access to these technologies or applications, its business could be substantially impaired.

Under the Company’s agreements with The Regents of the University of California, the Company had exclusive rights to certain ampakine compounds for all applications for which the University had patent rights, other than endocrine modulation. The license securing these rights has since been terminated.

Under a patent license agreement with The Governors of the University of Alberta, the Company has exclusive rights to the use of certain ampakine compounds to prevent and treat respiratory depression induced by opiate analgesics, barbiturates and anesthetic and sedative agents.

On May 8, 2007, the Company entered into a license agreement, as subsequently amended, with the University of Alberta granting the Company exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. The Company agreed to pay the University of Alberta a licensing fee and a patent issuance fee, which were paid, and prospective payments consisting of a royalty on net sales, sublicense fee payments, maintenance payments and milestone payments. The prospective maintenance payments commence on the enrollment of the first patient into the first Phase 2B clinical trial and increase upon the successful completion of the Phase 2B clinical trial. As the Company does not at this time anticipate scheduling a Phase 2B clinical trial, no maintenance payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta. In addition, no other prospective payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta.

Through the merger with Pier, the Company gained access to the License Agreement that Pier had entered into with the University of Illinois on October 10, 2007. The Pier License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders (including sleep apnea), of which dronabinol is a specific example of one type of cannabinoid. Dronabinol is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring substance in the cannabis plant, otherwise known as Δ9-THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Dronabinol is currently approved by the FDA and is sold generically for use in refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, as well as for anorexia in patients with AIDS. Pier’s business plan was to determine whether dronabinol would significantly improve subjective and objective clinical measures in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. In addition, Pier intended to evaluate the feasibility and comparative efficacy of a proprietary formulation of dronabinol. The Pier License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment and on June 27, 2014, the Company entered into a new license agreement with the University of Illinois, the material terms of which were similar to the Pier License Agreement that had been terminated. If the Company is unable to comply with the terms of the new license agreement, such as required payments thereunder, the Company risks the new license agreement being terminated.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The Company prepared its consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires the use of estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Management periodically evaluates the estimates and judgments made. Management bases its estimates and judgments on historical experience and on various factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates as a result of different assumptions or conditions.

The following critical accounting policies affect the more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

License Agreement

The License Agreement with the University of Illinois acquired in the Pier transaction was an acquired intangible asset recorded at cost of $3,411,157 (based on the fair value ascribed to the License Agreement in August 2012) and was being amortized on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of its underlying patents of 172 months from the date of acquisition.

The Company performed an impairment assessment of the carrying value of the License Agreement as of December 31, 2012 and determined that it had no expected future value at that date. The Company made this determination because it was unable to make a $75,000 payment due under the License Agreement at December 31, 2012, as a result of which the License Agreement was forfeited during the three months ended March 31, 2013. The Company recorded an impairment charge to operations of $3,321,678 at December 31, 2012 to write-off the License Agreement.

Research Grant Revenue

The Company records research grant revenues when the expenses related to the grant projects are incurred. Amounts received under research grants are nonrefundable, regardless of the success of the underlying research, to the extent that such amounts are expended in accordance with the approved grant project.

Stock-Based Compensation

 The Company periodically issues common stock and stock options to officers, directors and consultants for services rendered. Such issuances vest and expire according to terms established at the issuance date.

The Company accounts for stock-based payments to officers and directors by measuring the cost of services received in exchange for equity awards based on the grant date fair value of the awards, with the cost recognized as compensation expense on the straight-line basis in the Company’s financial statements over the vesting period of the awards. The Company accounts for stock-based payments to consultants by determining the value of the stock compensation based upon the measurement date at either (a) the date at which a performance commitment is reached or (b) at the date at which the necessary performance to earn the equity instruments is complete.

Options granted to members of the Company’s Scientific Advisory Board and to outside consultants are revalued each reporting period to determine the amount to be recorded as an expense in the respective period. As the options vest, they are valued on each vesting date and an adjustment is recorded for the difference between the value already recorded and the then current value on the date of vesting.

The fair value of stock options is determined utilizing the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, and is affected by several variables, the most significant of which are the life of the equity award, the exercise price of the security as compared to the fair market value of the common stock on the grant date, and the estimated volatility of the common stock over the term of the equity award. Estimated volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The fair value of common stock is determined by reference to the quoted market price of the Company’s common stock.

The Company recognizes the fair value of stock-based compensation in general and administrative costs and in research and development costs, as appropriate, in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.

The Company issues new shares to satisfy stock option exercises.

Results of Operations

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

Revenues. The Company had no revenues during the year ended December 31, 2013. Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2012 of $48,309 consisted of grant revenues awarded by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for research on Parkinson’s Disease.

General and Administrative. For the year ended December 31, 2013, general and administrative expenses were $932,973, a decrease of $1,013,624 or approximately 52%, as compared to $1,946,597 for the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2012, is primarily the result of cost reductions realized during the period as a result of the Company’s efforts to reduce facility and personnel costs, which had begun in May 2012, partially offset by accrued severance costs of $585,000 relating to the termination of certain corporate officers in March 2013 and the accrual of $85,000 for the reimbursement of legal fees incurred by Aurora Capital LLC in conjunction with the removal of the Company’s former Board of Directors on March 22, 2013.

Through May 31, 2012, the Company leased approximately 32,000 square feet of research laboratory, office and expansion space. Effective June 1, 2012, the Company entered into a new operating lease agreement for approximately 5,000 square feet of office space at a monthly rate of $9,204.

On June 15, 2012, each of the Company’s executive officers at that time agreed to defer 50% of their base salary, effective June 1, 2012, until the Company secured sufficient capital or certain corporate transactions occurred, in an effort to preserve the Company’s financial resources.

Commencing in October 2012, the Company ceased payment of all salaries and consulting fees, and by March 31, 2013, all officers, management and employees had either resigned or been terminated, and had been replaced by new management in March and April 2013. No compensation arrangements were made with new management until 2014.

For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, stock-based compensation costs included in general and administrative expenses were $0 and $170,805, respectively. Stock-based compensation costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes $131,700 attributed to the value of options to acquire 2,195,000 common shares granted on August 3, 2012 to directors of the Company for past services.

Research and Development. For the year ended December 31, 2013, research and development expenses were $206,911, a decrease of $619,791 or approximately 75%, as compared to $826,702 for the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in research and development expenses for the year ended December 30, 2013, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2012, reflects the Company’s efforts to reduce facility and personnel costs, and outside experts and consultants, which had begun in May 2012.

The research and development costs incurred during the year ended December 31, 2013 consisted of costs related to the UCI license agreements and other patent costs and patent legal fees.

For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, stock-based compensation costs included in research and development expenses were $0 and $8,513, respectively.

Pier Merger-Related Costs. During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company incurred merger costs of $1,246,107 in connection with its acquisition of Pier, including severance payments of $429,231 and the fair value of stock options to purchase 5,166,668 shares of the Company’s common stock totaling $310,000 granted to two individuals whose employment was terminated pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement. Merger costs also included $506,876 in legal and other merger related fees, including $250,000 to the Company’s investment banker.

Impairment Loss from Termination of License Agreement. The Company performed an impairment assessment of the carrying value of the License Agreement as of December 31, 2012 and determined that it had no future value at such date. Accordingly, the Company recorded an impairment charge to operations of $3,321,678 at December 31, 2012 to write off the License Agreement.

(Gain) Loss on Settlement of Office Lease. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company substantially vacated its operating facility and abandoned its furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements. In May 2013, the Company received notice that it had been sued in the Superior Court of California in a complaint filed by its former landlord, PPC Irvine Center Investment, LLC, seeking among other things, $57,535 in past due rent, termination of the lease agreement, and reasonable attorneys’ fees. On May 23, 2013, a settlement was reached with the landlord that provided for the Company to relinquish its security deposit in the amount of $29,545, transfer title to its remaining furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements, and to pay an additional $26,000. The transfer of the Company’s furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements resulted in a loss of $39,126, which was recorded at December 31, 2012. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recorded a gain of $1,990 with respect to the final disposition of this matter.

Interest Income. Interest income was $0 for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $92 for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Interest Expense. During the year ended December 31, 2013, interest expense was $56,338 (including $48,688 to related parties), a decrease of $140,646, as compared to $196,984 (including $187,843 to related parties) for the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease resulted primarily from the amortization of discount of $143,919 and the amortization of other financing costs of $21,370 on the Company’s note payable to Samyang, which was funded on June 25, 2012 and fully-amortized as of December 25, 2012, partially offset by additional accrued interest on the note.

Foreign Currency Transaction Loss. Foreign currency transaction loss was $7,224 and $40,278 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, reflecting the $399,774 loan from Samyang in June 2012 being denominated in South Korean currency.

Loss on Sale of Assets. The Company realized a loss on sale of assets of $3,173 during the year ended December 31, 2012. There were no gains or losses from the sale of assets during the year ended December 31, 2013.

Net Loss. For the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company incurred a net loss of $1,201,457, as compared to a net loss of $7,572,244 for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Liquidity and Capital Resources – December 31, 2013

The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been presented on the basis that it is a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company has incurred net losses of $1,201,457 and $7,572,244 for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, negative operating cash flows of $182,435 and $1,861,870 for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and incurred additional net losses and negative operating cash flows in the 2014 fiscal year. The Company expects to continue to incur net losses and negative operating cash flows for several more years thereafter. As a result, management and the Company’s auditors believe that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

At December 31, 2013, the Company had a working capital deficit of $4,188,424, as compared to working capital deficit of $3,021,240 at December 31, 2012, a decrease in working capital of $1,167,184 for the year ended December 31, 2013. At December 31, 2013, the Company had cash and money market funds aggregating $14,352, as compared to $152,179 at December 31, 2012, a decrease of $137,827 for the year ended December 31, 2013. The decrease in working capital and cash during the year ended December 31, 2013 was the result of cash utilized by the Company to fund its operating activities.

The Company is currently, and has for some time, been in significant financial distress. It has limited cash resources and current assets and has no ongoing source of revenue. Beginning in late 2012, the Company’s business activities were reduced to minimal levels, and the prior Board of Directors of the Company, which was removed by the written consent of stockholders holding a majority of the outstanding shares on March 22, 2013, had retained bankruptcy counsel to assist the Company in preparations to file for liquidation under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. New management, which was appointed during March and April 2013, has evaluated the status of numerous aspects of the Company’s existing business and obligations, including, without limitation, debt obligations, financial requirements, intellectual property, licensing agreements, legal and patent matters and regulatory compliance, and has raised new capital to fund its business activities.

From June 2013 through March 2014, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer advanced short-term loans to the Company aggregating $150,000 in order to meet its minimum operating needs, of which a total of $75,000 had been advanced at December 31, 2013. In March and April 2014, the Company completed a private placement by selling 928.5 shares of its Series G Preferred Stock for gross proceeds of $928,500 and repaid the aggregate advances. The Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer invested $250,000 in the Series G Preferred Stock private placement.  During November and December 2014, the Company sold convertible notes (with warrants) in an aggregate principal amount of $369,500 to various accredited investors. The Company intends to continue this financing until it has sold an aggregate principal amount of $1,000,000 of such Notes, although there can be no assurances that the Company will be successful in this regard.

The Company will need to raise additional capital to be able to pay its liabilities and fund its business activities going forward. As a result of the Company’s current financial situation, the Company has limited access to external sources of debt and equity financing. Accordingly, there can be no assurances that the Company will be able to secure additional financing in the amounts necessary to fully fund its operating and debt service requirements. If the Company is unable to access sufficient cash resources, the Company may be forced to discontinue its operations entirely and liquidate.

Operating Activities. For the year ended December 31, 2013, operating activities utilized cash of $182,435, as compared to utilizing cash of $1,861,870 for the year ended December 31, 2012, to support the Company’s ongoing operations, including research and development activities.

Investing Activities. There were no investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2013. For the year ended December 31, 2012, investing activities generated cash of $24,700, consisting primarily of $23,208 of cash received in connection with the Pier merger.

Financing Activities. For the year ended December 31, 2013, financing activities generated cash of $44,608 consisting of $75,000 in proceeds from notes payable issued to the Company’s Chairman and $4,728 paid by Samyang, a related party, for short-swing trading profits, partially offset by the payment of deferred financing costs of $35,120 relating to the issuance of Series G preferred stock which closed in 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2012, financing activities generated cash of $378,404, consisting of the proceeds from the note payable issued to Samyang in June 2012 of $399,774, partially offset by related financing costs of $21,370.

On June 25, 2012, the Company borrowed 465,000,000 Won (the currency of South Korea, equivalent to approximately $400,000 US dollars) from and executed a secured note payable to Samyang, an approximately 20% common stockholder of the Company at that time. The note accrues simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum and had a maturity date of June 25, 2013, although Samyang was permitted to demand early repayment of the promissory note on or after December 25, 2012. Samyang did not demand early repayment. The Company has not made any payments on the promissory note. At June 30, 2013 and subsequently, the promissory note was outstanding and in technical default, although Samyang has not issued a notice of default or a demand for repayment. The Company believes that Samyang is in default of its obligations under its January 2012 license agreement, as amended, with the Company, but the Company has not yet issued a notice of default. The Company anticipates entering into discussions with Samyang with a view toward a comprehensive resolution of the aforementioned matters.

Principal Commitments

Lease Commitment

On May 14, 2012, the Company executed a three-year lease for approximately 5,000 square feet of office space beginning June 1, 2012 at a monthly rate of $9,204. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company substantially vacated its operating facility prior to the scheduled termination of the lease agreement in May 2015. In May 2013, a settlement with the landlord was reached and the lease was terminated.

University of California, Irvine License Agreements

The Company entered into a series of license agreements in 1993 and 1998 with the University of California, Irvine (“UCI”) that granted the Company proprietary rights to certain chemical compounds that acted as ampakines and their therapeutic uses. These agreements granted the Company, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the license agreement, that were then held by UCI; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the license agreements, subject to the provisions of the license agreements. The Company was required, among other terms and conditions, to pay UCI a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain additional payments.

Under such license agreements, the Company was required to make minimum annual royalty payments of approximately $70,000. The Company was also required to spend a minimum of $250,000 per year to advance the ampakine compounds until the Company began to market an ampakine compound. The commercialization provisions in the agreements with UCI required the Company to file for regulatory approval of an ampakine compound before October 2012. In March 2011, UCI agreed to extend the required date for filing regulatory approval of an ampakine compound to October 2015. At December 31, 2012, the Company was not in compliance with its minimum annual payment obligations and believed that this default constituted a termination of the license agreements.

On April 15, 2013, the Company received a letter from UCI indicating that the license agreements between UCI and the Company had been terminated due to the Company’s failure to make certain payments required to maintain the agreements. Since the patents covered in these license agreements had begun to expire and the therapeutic uses described in these patents were no longer germane to the Company’s new focus on respiratory disorders, the loss of these license agreements is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s current drug development programs. In the opinion of management, the Company has made adequate provision for any liability relating to this matter in its financial statements at September 30, 2013.

University of Alberta License Agreement

On May 8, 2007, the Company entered into a license agreement, as amended, with the University of Alberta granting the Company exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. The Company agreed to pay the University of Alberta a licensing fee and a patent issuance fee, which were paid, and prospective payments consisting of a royalty on net sales, sublicense fee payments, maintenance payments and milestone payments. The prospective maintenance payments commence on the enrollment of the first patient into the first Phase 2B clinical trial and increase upon the successful completion of the Phase 2B clinical trial. As the Company does not at this time anticipate scheduling a Phase 2B clinical trial, no maintenance payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta. In addition, no other prospective payments are currently due and payable to the University of Alberta.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

At December 31, 2013, the Company did not have any transactions, obligations or relationships that could be considered off-balance sheet arrangements.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Not applicable for smaller reporting companies.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Our financial statements and other information required by this item are set forth herein in a separate section beginning with the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements on page F-1.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

Not applicable.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports that we file with the SEC under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, to allow for timely decisions regarding required disclosures.

As required by SEC Rule 15d-15(b), we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer who were appointed to their positions in March and April 2013, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the most recent fiscal year covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective to ensure the information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or submitted to the SEC under the Exchange Act was timely recorded, processed and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. In particular, the Company failed to complete and file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the periods ended March 31, 2013, June 30, 2013 and September 30, 2013, and its December 31, 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K in a timely manner because the Company’s accounting and financial staff had resigned by October 26, 2012 and its financial and accounting systems had been shut-down at December 31, 2012.

Since being appointed in March and April 2013, new management has taken steps to bring the Company’s periodic reporting current. With the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Company has now filed all periodic reports for periods ending on or before December 31, 2013. The Company anticipates filing its outstanding periodic reports for periods ending in 2014 in the near future, and currently expects to file timely its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2014.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our internal control over financial reporting is designed to ensure that material information regarding our operations is made available to management and the board of directors to provide them reasonable assurance that the published financial statements are fairly presented. There are limitations inherent in any internal control, such as the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls. As a result, even effective internal controls can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation. As conditions change over time so too may the effectiveness of internal controls.

Our management, consisting of our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013 based on the framework in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (“COSO”) of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, our management has concluded that material weaknesses in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting existed as of December 31, 2013 as a result of a lack of personnel and non-functioning accounting systems. As a result of these material weaknesses, our internal control over financial reporting was not effective at such date.

Prior management, which had shut-down the Company and was preparing to cause it to file for liquidation under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, was replaced on March 22, 2013 in conjunction with the change in control of the Board of Directors on such date. Since that date, new management has instituted a program to reestablish the Company’s accounting and financial staff functions, as well as to install new accounting and internal control systems.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to rules of the SEC that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

As described above, there were changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the fourth quarter of 2012 that have materially affected, and are reasonably likely to continue to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting until we are current in our periodic reporting.

In response to such changes, new management has retained accounting personnel, established accounting and internal control systems, addressed the preparation of delinquent SEC financial filings, and has been diligently working to bring delinquent SEC filings current as promptly as reasonably possible under the circumstances. However, as of the date of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Company had not completed the process to reestablish adequate internal controls over financial reporting. The Company currently expects to reestablish adequate internal controls over financial reporting in connection with the filing of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2014, which it currently anticipates filing on time.

Item 9B. Other Information

None.

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

Directors

The names of each of the directors and certain biographical information about them are set forth below:

Arnold S. Lippa, Ph.D.: Dr. Lippa is a Senior Managing Director and founder of T Morgen Capital LLC through which he administers his family’s assets. T Morgan Capital LLC is a significant equity owner and managing member of Aurora Capital LLC (“Aurora”), a boutique investment bank and securities firm of which Mr. Margolis is the president and founder. As of December 31, 2013, Aurora owned approximately 2.1% of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company. Dr. Lippa and Mr. Margolis jointly manage, since 2004, Atypical BioCapital Management LLC and Atypical BioVentures Fund LLC, a life sciences fund management company and venture fund, respectively. Since 2006, Dr. Lippa has also been the Executive Chairman of the board of Xintria Pharmaceutical Corporation, a Delaware corporation, as well as a member of its board of directors. Dr. Lippa was co-founder of DOV Pharmaceutical, Inc., where he served as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer from its inception in 1995 through 2005. Dr. Lippa stepped down as a director of DOV Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in 2006.

We believe that Dr. Lippa’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his position as the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, and his experience working in management roles in other pharmaceutical companies as described above. Dr. Lippa provides the Board with both technical and scientific expertise in drug discovery and drug development, research management, governmental regulations and strategic planning expertise that is important to the advancement of our research platforms as well as to the overall success of the Company. Dr. Lippa was appointed to our board of directors in March 2013.

Jeff E. Margolis: Mr. Margolis is the president and founder of Aurora, and has been since its inception in 1994. Aurora Capital Corp., a corporation wholly owned by Mr. Margolis, is a significant equity owner and managing member of Aurora. As of December 31, 2013, Aurora owned approximately 2.1% of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company. Dr. Lippa and Mr. Margolis jointly manage, since 2004, Atypical BioCapital Management LLC and Atypical BioVentures Fund LLC, a life sciences fund management company and venture fund, respectively. Since 2006, Mr. Margolis has also been the Chief Financial Officer of Xintria Pharmaceutical Corporation, a Delaware corporation, as well as a member of its board of directors.

We believe that Mr. Margolis’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his significant experience in operational and management roles within pharmaceutical companies as described above. He also has extensive prior experience working in business development and provides the Company with extremely useful expertise in financing and capital markets, knowledge gained though his position as President of Aurora. Mr. Margolis also provides broad financial expertise. Mr. Margolis was appointed to our board of directors in March 2013.

Robert N. Weingarten: Mr. Weingarten is an experienced business consultant and advisor with an ongoing consulting practice. Since 1979 he has provided financial consulting and advisory services to numerous public companies in various stages of development, operation or reorganization. Mr. Weingarten received a B.A. Degree (Accounting) from the University of Washington in 1974, and an M.B.A. Degree (Finance) from the University of Southern California in 1975. Mr. Weingarten is a Certified Public Accountant (inactive) in the State of California. Mr. Weingarten was the Non-Executive Chairman of New Dawn Mining Corp. (“New Dawn”) from August 31, 2005 through September 30, 2010, and was named the Executive Chairman of New Dawn in October 2010. On July 8, 2010, Mr. Weingarten was appointed to the board of directors of Central African Gold Limited (formerly known as Central African Gold Plc and listed on the Alternative Investment Market of the London Stock Exchange at that time). Central African Gold Limited is an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of New Dawn. Both New Dawn and Central African Gold Limited have ceased to be publicly traded reporting companies in their respective jurisdictions.

We believe that Mr. Weingarten’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his breadth of experience with public companies, especially those in the development phase. He has also served in managements capacities at other public companies and as a result brings a wealth of experience on financial matters. Mr. Weingarten was appointed to our board of directors in April 2013.

In addition to the directors mentioned above, the Company notes that John F. Benedik, Charles J. Casamento, M. Ross Johnson, Ph.D. and Mark A. Varney, Ph.D. served as directors until May, 2013. In addition, Moogak Hwang, Ph.D. served as a director from August 2012 to September 2013.

Executive Officers

Each executive officer of the Company serves at the discretion of the Board of Directors. The names of the Company’s executive officers are set forth below. At December 31, 2013, each of our executive officers was also a member of our board of directors, and their biographical information appears above in the immediately prior section.

In addition to the officers listed above, the Company notes that Mark A. Varney, Ph.D. served as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company until March 2013, and Steven A. Johnson, Ph.D. served as a Vice President, Preclinical Development of the Company until March 2013.

BOARD COMMITTEES

The board of directors has historically maintained a standing Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, and Governance and Nominations Committee. As noted above, since the changes in the composition of our board of directors on March 22, 2013, the functions of each of the committees described below have been and are currently being addressed by the full board of directors.

Audit Committee. Traditionally, the Audit Committee meets with the Company’s independent registered public accountants and management to prepare for and to review the results of the annual audit and to discuss the annual and quarterly financial statements, earnings releases and related matters. The Audit Committee, among other things, (i) selects and retains the independent registered public accountants, (ii) reviews with the independent registered public accountants the scope and anticipated cost of their audit, and their independence and performance, (iii) reviews accounting practices, financial structure and financial reporting, (iv) receives and considers the independent registered public accountants’ comments as to controls, adequacy of staff and management performance and procedures in connection with audit and financial controls, (v) reviews and pre-approves all audit and non-audit services provided to the Company by the independent registered public accountants, and (vi) reviews and pre-approves all related-party transactions. The Audit Committee does not itself prepare financial statements or perform audits, and its members are not auditors or certifiers of the Company’s financial statements.

Charles J. Casamento and M. Ross Johnson, Ph.D. began 2013 as members of the Audit Committee, but on March 22, 2013 were removed as members of the board of directors of the Company. Since the change in composition of our board of directors in March 2013, the composition of an Audit Committee has not been determined, nor has the current board of directors adopted an amended written charter. Company records indicate that the Audit Committee previously operated under a written charter adopted by the previous board of directors. When an Audit Committee is reestablished along with a written charter, such charter will be made available on the Company’s website at www.cortexpharm.com.

Compensation Committee. The traditional functions of the Compensation Committee include, without limitation, administering the Company’s incentive ownership programs and approving the compensation to be paid to the Company’s directors and executive officers. The Compensation Committee typically meets no less frequently than annually as circumstances dictate to discuss and determine executive officer and director compensation. Historically, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer annually reviews the performance of each executive officer (other than the Chief Executive Officer, whose performance is reviewed by the Compensation Committee). The conclusions reached and recommendations based on these reviews, including with respect to salary adjustments and annual award amounts, are presented to the Compensation Committee, who can exercise its discretion in modifying any recommended adjustments or awards to executive officers. The Compensation Committee is entitled to, but generally does not, retain the services of any compensation consultants. Based on Company records available to the current board of directors, neither the Compensation Committee nor management has engaged a compensation consultant in the past fiscal year. The Compensation Committee has the power to form and delegate authority to subcommittees when appropriate, provided that such subcommittees are composed entirely of directors who would qualify for membership on the Compensation Committee.

The Company’s records indicate that M. Ross Johnson, Ph.D. (chair), and Charles J. Casamento began 2013 as the members of the Compensation Committee, but on March 22, 2013 were removed as members of the board of directors of the Company. Since the change in composition of our board of directors in March 2013, the members of the board of directors have performed the functions of the Compensation Committee and the composition of a Compensation Committee has not been determined nor has the current board of directors adopted a written charter. Company records indicate that the Compensation Committee previously operated under a written charter adopted by the board of directors. When a Compensation Committee is reestablished along with a written charter, such charter will be made available on the Company’s website at www.cortexpharm.com.

Governance and Nominations Committee. The traditional functions of the Governance and Nominations Committee include, without limitation, (i) identifying individuals qualified to become members of the board of directors, (ii) recommending director nominees for the next annual meeting of stockholders and to fill vacancies that may be created by the expansion of the number of directors serving on the board of directors and by resignation, retirement or other termination of services of incumbent directors, (iii) developing and recommending to the board of directors corporate governance guidelines and changes thereto, (iv) ensuring that the board of directors and the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws are structured in a way that best serves the Company’s practices and objectives, (v) leading the board of directors in its annual review of the board of directors’ performance; and (vi) recommending to the board of directors nominees for each committee. Accordingly, the Governance and Nominations Committee annually reviews the composition of the board of directors as a whole and makes recommendations, if deemed necessary, to enhance the composition of the board of directors. The Governance and Nominations Committee first considers a candidate’s management experience and then considers issues of judgment, background, conflicts of interest, integrity, ethics and commitment to the goal of maximizing stockholder value when considering director candidates. The Governance and Nominations Committee also focuses on issues of diversity, such as diversity of gender, race and national origin, education, professional experience and differences in viewpoints and skills. The Governance and Nominations Committee does not have a formal policy with respect to diversity; however, the board of directors and Governance and Nominations Committee believe that it is essential that the members of the board of directors represent diverse viewpoints. In considering candidates for the board of directors, the Governance and Nominations Committee considers the entirety of each candidate’s credentials in the context of these standards. With respect to the nomination of continuing directors for re-election, the individual’s contributions to the board of directors are also considered.

The Company’s records indicate that M. Ross Johnson, Ph.D. and John F. Benedik began 2013 as the members of the Governance and Nominations Committee, but on March 22, 2013 were removed as members of the board of directors of the Company. Since the change in composition of our board of directors in March 2013, the members of the board of directors have performed the functions of the Governance and Nominations Committee and the composition of a Governance and Nominations Committee has not been determined nor has the current board of directors adopted a written charter. When a Governance and Nominations Committee is reestablished along with a written charter, such charter will be made available on the Company’s website at www.cortexpharm.com.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the Company’s executive officers and directors and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of the Company’s outstanding common stock, whom the Company refers to collectively as the “reporting persons,” to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the SEC, and to furnish the Company with copies of these reports.

Based solely on the Company’s review of the copies of these reports received by it and written representations received from certain of the reporting persons with respect to the filing of reports on Forms 3, 4 and 5, the Company believes that all such filings required to be made by the reporting persons for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 were made on a timely basis.

Code of Ethics

We have previously adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which covers all of our directors and employees, including our principal executive and financial officers. Any amendment to, or waiver from, any applicable provision (related to elements listed under Item 406(b) of Regulation S-K) of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to our directors or executive officers will be posted on our website at www.cortexpharm.com or in a report filed with the SEC on a Current Report on Form 8-K. The Company is in the process of updating its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Any amendment or waiver to its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to its directors or executive officers will be posted on its website at www.cortexpharm.com and/or filed in a report with the Securities and Exchange Commission on a Current Report on Form 8-K.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

Summary Compensation Table

The table below summarizes the total compensation paid or earned by each of the named executive officers for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. The information contained under the heading “All Other Compensation” for all named executive officers includes the estimated value of equity awards using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model and does not reflect actual cash payments or actual dollars awarded.

Narrative to Summary Compensation Table

In June 2004, the board of directors approved a performance-based incentive compensation program for named executive officers that included cash bonus targets of 20% of respective annual base salaries. Actual bonus amounts may differ from the established targets based upon our performance, as well as that of the individual named executive officer, as compared to established goals. No performance bonuses were awarded to the named executive officers for the years ended December 31, 2013 or 2012.

The exercise price for our stock options is no less than the fair market value of the stock on the date of the grant. Options generally vest at a rate of 33 1/3% per year starting on the anniversary date of the option grant and the vesting of any unvested portion is contingent upon the officer’s continued employment with the Company. Accordingly, the option will provide a return to the named executive officer only if he or she remains in the Company’s employ and the market price of the Company’s common stock appreciates over the option term. The vested portion of the option will provide a return to the named executive officer regardless of whether he or she remains in our employee, but only if the market price of the our common stock appreciates over the option exercise price during the term of the vested options. There were no stock options received by the named executive officers during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

In connection with the recent changes to our board membership and taking into account the Company’s current operating structure and business plans, management is currently reevaluating the compensation policies of the Company and, as a result of that reassessment, and in light of the Company’s current financial circumstances, will likely make substantial adjustments to such policies, including the termination of such policies.

The Company does not have any arrangements or agreements regarding compensation with its current executive officers and paid no compensation to any named executive officer in 2013. No named executive officer received cash compensation in 2013. In April 2014, Arnold Lippa, Ph.D., Jeff E. Margolis and Robert N. Weingarten were each issued 15,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to compensate those individuals for their efforts as officers and directors of the Company since joining the Company in March 2013, in the case of Dr. Lippa and Mr. Margolis, and in April 2013, in the case of Mr. Weingarten. The Company will account for the issuance of these shares of common stock effective as of March 18, 2014.

See also “Employment and Consulting Agreements—Termination or Change in Control” for further discussion of compensation arrangements pursuant to which the amounts listed under the Summary Compensation Table were paid or awarded and the criteria for such payment or award.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

There were no outstanding unvested stock awards as of December 31, 2013. There also were no outstanding option awards with current directors or officers of the Company as of December 31, 2013. There were outstanding option awards as of December 31, 2013 with two former officers of the Company:

OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED FOR 2012

None of the Company’s named executive officers exercised any options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock or had any outstanding unvested stock awards during the year ended December 31, 2013.

Employment and Consulting Agreements – Termination or Change in Control

As of December 31, 2013, two of the named executive officers listed above, Mark A. Varney, Ph.D. and Steven M. Johnson, Ph.D., had been removed as officers by the new board of directors on March 22, 2013. Each of these officers had entered into employment agreements and/or severance agreements governing payments upon termination or in the event the Company became subject to a change-in-control. Because each of these executive officers listed in the summary compensation table for 2013 was removed in early 2013, the terms and conditions related to the departure of those officers, under their respective employments agreements, as amended, are known. The details of the contracts applicable to the departure for each officer are discussed below. The Company has recently entered into settlement agreements with these officers regarding the amounts owed. Accordingly, the ultimate amounts paid in respect to the departures of these officers were different than the contractual amounts described below. See Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012—Subsequent Events—Debt Settlements for details regarding these matters.

The new officers appointed by the board of directors, Arnold S. Lippa, Ph.D., Jeff E. Margolis and Robert N. Weingarten, have not entered into any compensation arrangements or employment agreements with the Company. Upon entering into such arrangements or agreements, the Company will disclose the information required regarding these agreements or agreements, consistent with applicable law.

With respect to named executive officers who are no longer with the Company:

The Company has recently executed settlement agreements with Messrs. Varney and Johnson that, together with similar agreements with other former officers of the Company, resulted in the settlement of potential claims totaling approximately $1,336,000 for a total of approximately $118,000 in cash, plus the issuance of options to purchase 4,300,000 shares of common stock exercisable at $0.04 per share for periods ranging from five to ten years. In addition to other provisions, the settlement agreements include mutual releases.

Director Compensation

The Compensation Committee historically uses a combination of cash and stock-based incentive compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve on the Board of Directors. In setting director compensation, the Compensation Committee considers the significant amount of time that directors expend in fulfilling their duties to the Company, as well as the skill-level required by the Company of members of the Board of Directors.

Director Summary Compensation Table

The following table shows the compensation received by the non-employee members of our board of directors for the year ended December 31, 2013. Directors who are also employees of the Company did not receive any additional compensation for services as a director.

(1) Removed from the board of directors by written consent on March 22, 2013.

(2) Appointed to the board of directors on August 3, 2012; resigned from the board of directors effective September 30, 2013.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

Beneficial Ownership of Common Stock

The following table sets forth certain information regarding the beneficial ownership of the Company’s common stock as of December 31, 2013, by (i) each person known by the Company to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding common stock, (ii) each of the Company’s directors, (iii) each of the Company’s named executive officers, and (iv) all of the Company’s executive officers and directors as a group. Except as indicated in the footnotes to this table, the Company believes that the persons named in this table have sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares of common stock indicated. In computing the number and percentage ownership of shares beneficially owned by a person, shares of common stock that a person has a right to acquire within sixty (60) days of December 31, 2013 pursuant to options, warrants or other rights are considered as outstanding, while these shares are not considered as outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of any other person or group.

The Company is not aware of any arrangements that may at a subsequent date result in a change of control of the Company.

EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION

The following table sets forth information regarding outstanding options, warrants and rights and shares reserved for future issuance under our existing equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2013. Our stockholders approved the Company’s 2006 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended. From October 2006 through December 31, 2013, all stock options granted and issued under stockholder approved plans were issued from the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan. In March 2014, the Company’s stockholders approved, by written consent, the Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 2014 Equity, Equity-Linked and Equity Derivative Incentive Plan, filed as exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

Director Independence

As of December 31, 2013, no member of the board of directors was an “independent director”, as that term is defined under Section 803 of the NYSE Amex Company Guide. In September 2014, the board of directors added James Sapirstein, RPh., M.B.A. and Kathryn MacFarlane, PharmD. as members of the board of directors, both of whom are independent directors. As noted above, as of December 31, 2013, all of the functions of the Audit, Compensation and Governance and Nominations Committees were being performed by the full board of directors.

Transactions with Related Persons

In 2013, the Company engaged in certain transactions with Arnold S. Lippa, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, and certain of his affiliates. These transactions have been previously disclosed and are discussed in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012—Organization and Business Operations—Going Concern and Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012—Subsequent Events—Working Capital Advances.

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services

Haskell & White LLP, acted as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012 and 2013 and for the interim periods in such fiscal years. The following table shows the approximate fees that were incurred by us for audit and other services provided by Haskell & White LLP in fiscal 2012 and 2013.

All audit related services, tax services and other services rendered by Haskell & White LLP were pre-approved by our Board of Directors. The Board of Directors has adopted a pre-approval policy that provides for the pre-approval of all services performed for us by our independent registered public accounting firm.

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(INCLUDING REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM)

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Stockholders and Board of Directors

Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiary

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiary (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficiency) and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2013. Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s management is responsible for these financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 of the consolidated financial statements, the Company does not currently possess sufficient working capital to fund its operations and commitments. This raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to this matter are also described in Note 1. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements and

report of independent registered public accounting firm.

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements and

report of independent registered public accounting firm.

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIENCY)

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements and

report of independent registered public accounting firm.

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Continued)

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Continued)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements and

report of independent registered public accounting firm.

CORTEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

AND SUBSIDIARY

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

1. Organization and Business Operations

Business

Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Cortex” or the “Company”) was formed in 1987 to engage in the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative pharmaceuticals for the treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders. In 2011, prior management conducted a re-evaluation of Cortex’s strategic focus and determined that clinical development in the area of respiratory disorders, particularly respiratory depression and sleep apnea, provided the most cost-effective opportunities for potential rapid development and commercialization of Cortex’s compounds. Accordingly, Cortex narrowed its clinical focus at that time and abandoned other avenues of scientific inquiry. This re-evaluation provided the impetus for Cortex’s acquisition of Pier Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Pier”) in August 2012 (see Note 3). Since new management’s appointment in March 2013, it has continued to implement this revised strategic focus, including seeking the capital to fund such efforts. As a result of the Company’s scientific discoveries and the acquisition of strategic, exclusive license agreements (including a new license agreement with the University of Illinois, as described at Note 12), management believes that the Company is now a leader in the discovery and development of innovative pharmaceuticals for the treatment of respiratory disorders.

Since its formation in 1987, Cortex has been engaged in the research and clinical development of a class of compounds referred to as ampakines. By acting as positive allosteric modulators of AMPA glutamate receptors, ampakines increase the excitatory effects of the neurotransmitter glutamate. Preclinical research suggested that these ampakines might have therapeutic potential for the treatment of certain respiratory disorders, as well as cognitive disorders, depression, attention deficit disorder and schizophrenia.

In its early stages, Cortex entered into a series of license agreements in 1993 and 1998 with the University of California, Irvine (“UCI”) that granted Cortex proprietary rights to certain chemical compounds that acted as ampakines and their therapeutic uses. These agreements granted Cortex, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the license agreement, that were then held by UCI; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the license agreements, subject to the provisions of the license agreements. Cortex was required, among other terms and conditions, to pay UCI a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain additional payments.

At December 31, 2012, the Company was not in compliance with its minimum annual payment obligations and believed that this default constituted a termination of the license agreements. On April 15, 2013, UCI notified the Company that these license agreements were terminated due to the Company’s failure to make its obligatory payments. Since the patents covered in these license agreements had begun to expire and the therapeutic uses described in these patents were no longer germane to the Company’s new focus on respiratory disorders, the loss of these license agreements is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s current or future drug development programs.

Cortex also owns patents and patent applications for certain families of chemical compounds, including ampakines, which claim the chemical structures and their use in the treatment of various disorders. These patents cover, among other compounds, Cortex’s lead ampakines CX 1739 and CX1942, and extend through at least 2028.

On May 8, 2007, Cortex entered into a license agreement, as subsequently amended, with the University of Alberta granting Cortex exclusive rights to practice patents held by the University of Alberta claiming the use of ampakines for the treatment of various respiratory disorders. These patents, along with Cortex’s own patents claiming chemical structures, comprise Cortex’s principal intellectual property supporting Cortex’s research and clinical development program in the use of ampakines for the treatment of respiratory disorders. Cortex has completed pre-clinical studies indicating that several of its ampakines, including CX717, CX1739 and CX1942, were efficacious in treating drug induced respiratory depression caused by opiates or certain anesthetics without offsetting the analgesic effects of the opiates or the anesthetic effects of the anesthetics. In two clinical Phase 2 studies, one of which was published in a peer-reviewed journal, CX717, a predecessor compound to CX1739 and CX1942, antagonized the respiratory depression produced by fentanyl, a potent narcotic, without affecting the analgesia produced by this drug. In addition, Cortex has conducted a Phase 2A clinical study in which patients with sleep apnea were administered CX1739, Cortex’s lead clinical compound. Preliminary results suggested that CX1739 might have use for the treatment of central and mixed sleep apnea, but not obstructive sleep apnea.

In order to expand Cortex’s respiratory disorders program, the Company acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding equity securities of Pier effective August 10, 2012 pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger (see Note 3). Pier was formed in June 2007 (under the name SteadySleep Rx Co.) as a clinical stage pharmaceutical company to develop a pharmacologic treatment for the respiratory disorder known as obstructive sleep apnea and had been engaged in research and clinical development activities since formation.

Through the merger, the Company gained access to an Exclusive License Agreement, as amended (the “License Agreement”), that Pier had entered into with the University of Illinois on October 10, 2007. The License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids, of which dronabinol is a specific example, for the treatment of sleep related breathing disorders (including sleep apnea). Dronabinol is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring substance in the cannabis plant, otherwise known as Δ9-THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Pier’s business plan was to determine whether dronabinol would significantly improve subjective and objective clinical measures in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. In addition, Pier intended to evaluate the feasibility and comparative efficacy of a proprietary formulation of dronabinol.

The License Agreement granted Pier, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the License Agreement, that were then held by the University of Illinois; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the License Agreement, subject to the provisions of the License Agreement. Pier was required under the License Agreement, among other terms and conditions, to pay the University of Illinois a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain milestone payments.

Prior to the merger, Pier conducted a 21 day, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose escalation Phase 2 clinical study in 22 patients with obstructive sleep apnea (“OSA”), in which dronabinol produced a statistically significant reduction in the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (“AHI”), the primary therapeutic end-point, and was observed to be safe and well tolerated. Dronabinol is currently under investigation, at the University of Illinois and other centers, in a potentially pivotal 120 patient, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2B OSA clinical trial, fully funded by the National Institutes of Health.

Dronabinol is a Schedule III, controlled generic drug with a relatively low abuse potential that is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for the treatment of AIDS-related anorexia and chemotherapy induced emesis. The use of dronabinol for the treatment of OSA is a novel indication for an already approved drug and, as such, the Company believes that it would only require approval by the FDA of a supplemental new drug application.

The License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment (see Note 4). New management subsequently opened negotiations with the University of Illinois and as a result, the Company ultimately entered into a new license agreement with the University of Illinois on June 27, 2014, the material terms of which were similar to the License Agreement that had been terminated on March 21, 2013 (see Note 12).

Going Concern

The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been presented on the basis that it is a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company has incurred net losses of $1,201,457 and $7,572,244 for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, negative operating cash flows of $182,435 and $1,861,870 for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and incurred additional net losses and negative operating cash flows in the 2014 fiscal year. The Company expects to continue to incur net losses and negative operating cash flows for several more years thereafter. As a result, management and the Company’s auditors believe that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

The Company is currently, and has for some time, been in significant financial distress. It has limited cash resources and current assets and has no ongoing source of revenue. Beginning in late 2012, the Company’s business activities were reduced to minimal levels, and the prior Board of Directors of the Company, which was removed by the written consent of stockholders holding a majority of the outstanding shares on March 22, 2013, had retained bankruptcy counsel to assist the Company in preparations to file for liquidation under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. New management, which was appointed during March and April 2013, has evaluated the status of numerous aspects of the Company’s existing business and obligations, including, without limitation, debt obligations, financial requirements, intellectual property, licensing agreements, legal and patent matters and regulatory compliance, and has raised new capital to fund its business activities.

From June 2013 through March 2014, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer advanced short-term loans to the Company aggregating $150,000 in order to meet its minimum operating needs. In March and April 2014, the Company completed a private placement by selling 928.5 shares of its Series G Preferred Stock for gross proceeds of $928,500 (see Note 12) and repaid the aggregate advances. The Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer invested $250,000 in the Series G Preferred Stock private placement. During November and December 2014, the Company sold convertible notes (with warrants) in an aggregate principal amount of $369,500 to various accredited investors (see Note 12). The Company intends to continue this financing until it has sold an aggregate principal amount of $1,000,000 of such notes, although there can be no assurances that the Company will be successful in this regard.

The Company will need to raise additional capital, either through the current financing or otherwise, or both, to be able to pay its liabilities and fund its business activities going forward. As a result of the Company’s current financial situation, the Company has limited access to external sources of debt and equity financing. Accordingly, there can be no assurances that the Company will be able to secure additional financing in the amounts necessary to fully fund its operating and debt service requirements. If the Company is unable to access sufficient cash resources, the Company may be forced to discontinue its operations entirely and liquidate.

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the financial statements of Cortex and Pier, its wholly-owned subsidiary, from its August 10, 2012 acquisition date. Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Cash Concentrations

The Company’s cash balances may periodically exceed federally insured limits. The Company has not experienced a loss in such accounts to date. The Company maintains its accounts with financial institutions with high credit ratings.

Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid short-term investments with maturities of less than three months when acquired to be cash equivalents.

Concentrations of Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. The Company limits its exposure to credit risk by investing its cash with high credit quality financial institutions.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The authoritative guidance with respect to fair value established a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three levels, and requires that assets and liabilities carried at fair value be classified and disclosed in one of three categories, as presented below. Disclosure as to transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2, and activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, is also required.

Level 1. Observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets for an identical asset or liability that the Company has the ability to access as of the measurement date. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 1 inputs include active-exchange traded securities and exchange-based derivatives.

Level 2. Inputs, other than quoted prices included within Level 1, which are directly observable for the asset or liability or indirectly observable through corroboration with observable market data. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 2 inputs include fixed income securities, non-exchange based derivatives, mutual funds, and fair-value hedges.

Level 3. Unobservable inputs in which there is little or no market data for the asset or liability which requires the reporting entity to develop its own assumptions. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 3 inputs include infrequently-traded, non-exchange-based derivatives and commingled investment funds, and are measured using present value pricing models.

The Company determines the level in the fair value hierarchy within which each fair value measurement falls in its entirety, based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. In determining the appropriate levels, the Company performs an analysis of the assets and liabilities at each reporting period end.

Deferred and Capitalized Financing Costs

Costs incurred in connection with ongoing financing activities, including legal and other professional fees, cash finders and placement agent fees, and escrow agent fees, are deferred until the related financing is either completed or abandoned. Costs related to abandoned financings are charged to operations.

Costs related to completed debt financings are capitalized on the balance sheet and amortized over the term of the related debt agreements. Amortization of these costs is calculated on the straight-line basis, which approximates the effective interest method, and is charged to interest expense in the consolidated statements of operations. Costs related to completed equity financings are charged directly to additional paid-in capital.

Deferred financing costs included in the consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2013 and 2012 were $35,120 and $0, respectively.

Furniture and Equipment

Furniture and equipment are recorded at cost and depreciated on a straight-line basis over the lesser of their estimated useful lives, ranging from three to five years.

Long-Lived Assets

The Company reviews its long-lived assets, including intangible assets such as the License Agreement, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the total amount of an asset may not be recoverable, but at least annually, in conjunction with the preparation of the Company’s fiscal year-end audited financial statements. An impairment loss is recognized when estimated future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition is less than the asset’s carrying amount. The Company does not have any goodwill.

License Agreement

The License Agreement with the University of Illinois acquired in the Pier transaction was an acquired intangible asset recorded at cost of $3,411,157 (based on the fair value ascribed to the License Agreement in August 2012, as described in Note 3), and was being amortized on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of its underlying patents of 172 months from the date of acquisition.

The Company performed an impairment assessment of the carrying value of the License Agreement as of December 31, 2012 and determined that it had no expected future value at that date. The Company made this determination because it was unable to make a $75,000 payment due under the License Agreement at December 31, 2012, as a result of which the License agreement was forfeited during the three months ended March 31, 2013. The Company recorded an impairment charge to operations of $3,321,678 at December 31, 2012 to write off the License Agreement (see Note 4).

Research Grant Revenues

The Company records research grant revenues when the expenses related to the grant projects are incurred. Amounts received under research grants are nonrefundable, regardless of the success of the underlying research, to the extent that such amounts are expended in accordance with the approved grant project.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company periodically issues common stock and stock options to officers, directors and consultants for services rendered. Such issuances vest and expire according to terms established at the issuance date.

The Company accounts for stock-based payments to officers and directors by measuring the cost of services received in exchange for equity awards based on the grant date fair value of the awards, with the cost recognized as compensation expense on the straight-line basis in the Company’s financial statements over the vesting period of the awards. The Company accounts for stock-based payments to consultants by determining the value of the stock compensation based upon the measurement date at either (a) the date at which a performance commitment is reached or (b) at the date at which the necessary performance to earn the equity instruments is complete.

Options granted to members of the Company’s Scientific Advisory Board and to outside consultants are revalued each reporting period to determine the amount to be recorded as an expense in the respective period. As the options vest, they are valued on each vesting date and an adjustment is recorded for the difference between the value already recorded and the then current value on the date of vesting.

The fair value of stock options is determined utilizing the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, and is affected by several variables, the most significant of which are the life of the equity award, the exercise price of the security as compared to the fair market value of the common stock on the grant date, and the estimated volatility of the common stock over the term of the equity award. Estimated volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The fair value of common stock is determined by reference to the quoted market price of the Company’s common stock.

The Company recognizes the fair value of stock-based compensation in general and administrative costs and in research and development costs, as appropriate, in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.

The Company issues new shares to satisfy stock option exercises.

There were no stock options issued during the year ended December 31, 2013. For options granted during the year ended December 31, 2012, the fair value of each option award was estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model using the following input variables: expected life – 10 years; expected volatility – 176%; expected dividend yield – 0%; risk-free interest rate – 0.30%.

There were no stock options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

Income Taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes under an asset and liability approach for financial accounting and reporting for income taxes. Accordingly, the Company recognizes deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected impact of differences between the financial statements and the tax basis of assets and liabilities.

The Company records a valuation allowance to reduce its deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. In the event the Company was to determine that it would be able to realize its deferred tax assets in the future in excess of its recorded amount, an adjustment to the deferred tax assets would be credited to operations in the period such determination was made. Likewise, should the Company determine that it would not be able to realize all or part of its deferred tax assets in the future, an adjustment to the deferred tax assets would be charged to operations in the period such determination was made.

Pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Sections 382 and 383, use of the Company’s net operating loss and credit carryforwards may be limited if a cumulative change in ownership of more than 50% occurs within any three-year period since the last ownership change. The Company may have had a change in control under these Sections. However, the Company does not anticipate performing a complete analysis of the limitation on the annual use of the net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards until the time that it projects it will be able to utilize these tax attributes.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company did not have any unrecognized tax benefits related to various federal and state income tax matters.

The Company is subject to U.S. federal income taxes and income taxes of various state tax jurisdictions. As the Company’s net operating losses have yet to be utilized, all previous tax years remain open to examination by Federal authorities and other jurisdictions in which the Company currently operates or has operated in the past. The Company had no unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and does not anticipate any material amount of unrecognized tax benefits within the next 12 months.

The Company is currently delinquent with respect to certain of its U.S. federal and applicable states income tax filings and no potential penalties, interest or other charges have been provided for in the Company’s consolidated financial statements because no income was generated during those periods.

Foreign Currency Transactions

The note payable to related party, which is denominated in a foreign currency (the South Korean Won), is translated into the Company’s functional currency (the United States dollar) at the exchange rate on the balance sheet date. The foreign currency exchange gain or loss resulting from translation is recognized in the related consolidated statements of operations.

Research and Development Costs

Research and development costs consist primarily of fees paid to consultants and outside service providers, patent fees and costs, and other expenses relating to the acquisition, design, development and testing of the Company’s treatments and product candidates.

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred over the life of the underlying contracts on the straight-line basis, unless the achievement of milestones, the completion of contracted work, or other information indicates that a different expensing schedule is more appropriate. Payments made pursuant to research and development contracts are initially recorded as advances on research and development contract services in the Company’s balance sheet and then charged to research and development costs in the Company’s statements of operations as those contract services are performed. Expenses incurred under research and development contracts in excess of amounts advanced are recorded as research and development contract liabilities in the Company’s balance sheet, with a corresponding charge to research and development costs in the Company’s statements of operations. The Company reviews the status of its research and development contracts on a quarterly basis.

Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Components of comprehensive income or loss, including net income or loss, are reported in the financial statements in the period in which they are recognized. Comprehensive income or loss is defined as the change in equity during a period from transactions and other events and circumstances from non-owner sources. Net income (loss) and other comprehensive income (loss) are reported net of any related tax effect to arrive at comprehensive income (loss). The Company did not have any items of comprehensive income (loss) for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

Earnings per Share

The Company’s computation of earnings per share (“EPS”) includes basic and diluted EPS. Basic EPS is measured as the income (loss) available to common stockholders divided by the weighted average common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS is similar to basic EPS but presents the dilutive effect on a per share basis of potential common shares (e.g., warrants and options) as if they had been converted at the beginning of the periods presented, or issuance date, if later. Potential common shares that have an anti-dilutive effect (i.e., those that increase income per share or decrease loss per share) are excluded from the calculation of diluted EPS.

Loss per common share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the respective periods. Basic and diluted loss per common share is the same for all periods presented because all warrants and stock options outstanding are anti-dilutive.

At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company excluded the outstanding securities summarized below, which entitle the holders thereof to acquire shares of common stock, from its calculation of earnings per share, as their effect would have been anti-dilutive.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions. These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual amounts may differ from those estimates.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In April 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-08 (ASU 2014-08), Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205) and Property, Plant and Equipment (Topic 360). ASU 2014-08 amends the requirements for reporting discontinued operations and requires additional disclosures about discontinued operations. Under ASU 2014-08, only disposals representing a strategic shift in operations or that have a major effect on the Company’s operations and financial results should be presented as discontinued operations. ASU 2014-08 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2014. As the Company is engaged in research and development activities, the Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09 (ASU 2014-09), Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 will eliminate transaction- and industry-specific revenue recognition guidance under current U.S. GAAP and replace it with a principle based approach for determining revenue recognition. ASU 2014-09 will require that companies recognize revenue based on the value of transferred goods or services as they occur in the contract. ASU 2014-09 also will require additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. ASU 2014-09 is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and early adoption is not permitted. Entities can transition to the standard either retrospectively or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. As the Company does not expect to have any operating revenues for the foreseeable future, the Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In June 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-10 (ASU 2014-10), Development Stage Entities (Topic 915): Elimination of Certain Financial Reporting Requirements, Including an Amendment to Variable Interest Entities Guidance in Topic 810, Consolidation. ASU 2014-10 eliminated the requirement to present inception-to-date information about income statement line items, cash flows, and equity transactions, and clarifies how entities should disclosure the risks and uncertainties related to their activities. ASU 2014-10 also eliminated an exception provided to development stage entities in Consolidations (ASC Topic 810) for determining whether an entity is a variable interest entity on the basis of the amount of investment equity that is at risk. The presentation and disclosure requirements in Topic 915 will no longer be required for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2014, and the revised consolidation standards will take effect in annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of ASU 2014-10 is not expected to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In August 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-15 (ASU 2014-15), Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern (Subtopic 205-10). ASU 2014-15 provides guidance as to management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. In connection with preparing financial statements for each annual and interim reporting period, an entity’s management should evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or within one year after the date that the financial statements are available to be issued when applicable). Management’s evaluation should be based on relevant conditions and events that are known and reasonably knowable at the date that the financial statements are issued (or at the date that the financial statements are available to be issued when applicable). Substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern exists when relevant conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, indicate that it is probable that the entity will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). ASU 2014-15 is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2014-15 on the Company’s financial statement presentation and disclosures.

Management does not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet effective, authoritative guidance, if currently adopted, would have a material impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

3. Merger with Pier Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

On August 10, 2012, pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among Pier, a privately-held corporation, Pier Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Merger Sub”) and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cortex, and Cortex, Merger Sub merged with and into Pier and Pier became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cortex. Pier was formed in June 2007 (under the name SteadySleep Rx Co.) as a clinical stage pharmaceutical company to develop a pharmacologic treatment for the respiratory disorder known as obstructive sleep apnea and had been engaged in research and clinical development activities since formation. As a result, Cortex acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding equity securities of Pier.

In connection with the merger transaction with Pier, Cortex issued 58,417,893 newly issued shares of its common stock with an aggregate fair value of $3,271,402 ($0.056 per share), based upon the closing price of Cortex’s common stock on August 10, 2012. The shares of common stock were issued to stockholders, convertible note holders, warrant holders, option holders, and certain employees and vendors of Pier in satisfaction of their interests and claims. The common stock issued by Cortex represented approximately 41% of the 144,041,556 common shares outstanding immediately following the closing of the transaction.

Pier was formed on June 25, 2007 as a closely-held clinical stage pharmaceutical company to develop a pharmacologic treatment for the respiratory disorder known as obstructive sleep apnea and has been engaged in research and early clinical development activities since formation. Pier was a development stage company, as it had not commenced any revenue-generating operations, did not have any cash flows from operations, and was dependent on debt and equity funding to finance its operations.

On October 10, 2007, Pier obtained the basis for its research and clinical development activities by entering into a License Agreement with the University of Illinois. The License Agreement covered certain patents and patent applications in the United States and other countries claiming the use of certain compounds referred to as cannabinoids, of which dronabinol is a specific example, for the treatment of breathing-related sleep disorders (including sleep apnea). Dronabinol is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring substance in the cannabis plant, otherwise known as Δ9-THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Pier’s business plan was to determine whether dronabinol administration to humans would significantly improve subjective and objective clinical measures in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. In addition, Pier intended to evaluate the feasibility and comparative efficacy of a proprietary formulation of dronabinol.

The License Agreement granted Pier, among other provisions, exclusive rights: (i) to practice certain patents and patent applications, as defined in the License Agreement, that were then held by the University of Illinois; (ii) to identify, develop, make, have made, import, export, lease, sell, have sold or offer for sale any related licensed products; and (iii) to grant sub-licenses of the rights granted in the License Agreement, subject to the provisions of the License Agreement. Pier was required under the License Agreement to pay the University of Illinois a license fee, royalties, patent costs and certain milestone payments.

The License Agreement was the basis for Pier’s research and development activities, and was Pier’s primary asset and its only intellectual property asset. By providing Cortex with the means to expand its respiratory disorders program, the License Agreement was the central reason that Cortex entered into the merger transaction with Pier in August 2012.

The transaction brought together a series of unique drug products that in preclinical animal models and early clinical studies have shown efficacy in preventing or reversing drug-induced respiratory depression and in reducing obstructive, central and mixed sleep apneas. Phase 2 clinical assets include Cortex’s CX1739, a compound targeting opiate-induced respiratory depression and central sleep apnea, and Pier’s dronabinol, a compound that was, at the time, about to begin a Phase 2B study in obstructive sleep apnea patients that was funded entirely by a National Institutes of Health grant of nearly $5 million. Subsequent to the closing of the transaction, the Company intended to focus entirely on treatments for breathing disorders, and expected to have multiple opportunities for value-generating clinical milestones with dronabinol and CX1739.

Pursuant to the terms of the transaction, Cortex agreed to issue contingent consideration, consisting of up to approximately 18,300,000 additional shares of common stock, to Pier’s former security holders and certain other creditors and service providers (the “Pier Stock Recipients”) that received the Company’s common stock as part of the Pier transaction if certain of the Company’s stock options and warrants outstanding immediately prior to the closing of the merger were subsequently exercised. In the event that such contingent shares were issued, the ownership percentage of the Pier Stock Recipients, following their receipt of such additional shares, could not exceed their ownership percentage as of the initial transaction date. 

The stock options and warrants outstanding at June 30, 2012 were all out-of-the-money on August 10, 2012. During late July and early August 2012, the Company issued options to officers and directors at that time to purchase a total of 7,361,668 shares of common stock exercisable for ten years at $0.06 per share (see Note 8). By October 1, 2012, these options were also out-of-the-money and continued to be out-of-the-money through December 31, 2013. All of the aforementioned options and warrants became increasingly out-of-the-money as December 31, 2012 approached (with most options and warrants being out of the money by multiples of the exercise price at such date), reflecting the fact that the Company’s prospects were very negative. The Company was unable to raise operating capital subsequent to its acquisition of Pier, had run out of working capital and essentially ceased business operations during the fourth quarter of 2012, had not filed its September 30, 2012 Form 10-Q Quarterly Report with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission due on November 14, 2012, had accepted the resignations of most of its officers and directors, and had prepared to shut-down and liquidate. There were no stock options or warrants exercised from August 10, 2012 through December 31, 2013, and all of these stock options and warrants were out-of-the-money at December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2013, approximately 2,100,000 contingent shares of common stock remained issuable under the Pier merger agreement due to forfeitures and expirations of stock options and warrants occurring since August 10, 2012.

The Company concluded that the issuance of any of the contingent shares to the Pier Stock Recipients was remote, given the large spread between exercise prices of these stock options and warrants as compared to the common stock trading range, the expiration of most of the lower priced option and warrants within two years, the Company’s distressed financial condition and capital requirements, and that these stock options and warrants have remained and have become increasingly out-of-the-money through December 31, 2013, and have continued to expire, as time passes. Accordingly, the Company considered the fair value of the contingent consideration to be immaterial and therefore did not ascribe any value to such contingent consideration; if any such shares are ultimately issued to the former Pier stockholders, the Company will recognize the fair value of such shares as a charge to operations.

The Company agreed to file a registration statement on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, with the SEC within ninety days after the closing of the transaction covering the shares of common stock issued to the former Pier stockholders, as well as the contingent shares, and to take certain other actions to maintain the effectiveness of such registration statement for a period not exceeding three years. The Company has not filed this registration statement. The Agreement and Plan of Merger did not provide for any financial penalties in the event that the Company failed to comply with the registration statement filing requirements.

The Company accounted for the Pier transaction pursuant to ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations. The Company identified and evaluated the fair value of the assets acquired. Based on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the history and status of Pier, including its business and intellectual property at the time of the merger transaction, the Company determined that the identifiable intangible assets were comprised solely of a contract-based intangible asset, and that there was no measurable goodwill.

The intangible asset acquired in the Pier transaction consisted of the License Agreement. Unless terminated earlier, the License Agreement would terminate upon expiration or termination of all patent rights. The License Agreement defined patent rights as all of the University of Illinois’ rights in the patents and patent applications, and (b) all of the University of Illinois’ rights in all divisions, continuations, continuation-in-part applications, reissues, renewals, re-examinations, foreign counterparts, substitutions or extensions thereof. Based upon the expiration date of the underlying patents, the License Agreement would be amortized on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the underlying patents of 172 months from the date of acquisition.

The following table summarizes the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed by the Company at the closing of the Pier transaction on August 10, 2012.

The following pro forma operating data presents the results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2012, as if the merger had occurred on the first day of the period presented. The pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of the financial results that might have occurred had the merger transaction actually taken place on the first day of the period presented, or of future results of operations. Pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2012 is summarized as follows:

As a condition of the Pier transaction, positions for two of Cortex’s executive officers were eliminated and thus the severance agreements for such executive officers were amended. As amended, the severance agreements provided for the grant of fully vested, ten-year options to purchase up to a total of 5,166,668 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.06 per share, which was in excess of the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the closing date of the Pier acquisition. The fair value of these options, as calculated pursuant to the Black-Scholes option-pricing model was determined to be $310,000 ($0.06 per share) and was charged to merger costs on August 10, 2012. The Black-Scholes option-pricing model utilized the following inputs: exercise price per share-$0.06; stock price per share – $0.056; expected dividend yield – 0.00%; expected volatility – 176%; average risk-free interest rate – 0.31%; expected life – 10 years. As amended, the severance agreements also required the payment of $429,231 for various other amounts due the two executive officers. As of August 10, 2012, these amounts were accrued and charged to merger costs. As a result of the management change that occurred on March 22, 2013, these officers asserted claims against the Company (see Note 12).

Pier merger-related costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 are summarized as follows:

The License Agreement was terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make a required payment (see Note 4). New management subsequently opened negotiations with the University of Illinois and as a result, the Company ultimately entered into a new license agreement with the University of Illinois on June 27, 2014, the material terms of which were similar to the License Agreement that had been terminated on March 21, 2013 (see Note 12).

4. Impairment and Termination of University of Illinois License Agreement

At December 31, 2012, the Company was obligated to pay a $75,000 milestone fee to the University of Illinois under the License Agreement (see Note 3). At such date, due to the Company’s distressed financial condition, lack of working capital and inability to raise additional operating capital, the Company was unable to make such payment on a timely basis, or within the 30-day cure period.

At December 31, 2012, the Company determined that the License Agreement would be forfeited during the first quarter of the 2013 fiscal year. Accordingly, the License Agreement had no expected future value and was therefore impaired at December 31, 2012, as a result of which the Company recorded a charge to operations of $3,321,678 at December 31, 2012 (reflecting the remaining unamortized carrying value of the License Agreement at December 31, 2012).

Subsequently, on February 19, 2013, the University of Illinois notified the Company that it had defaulted under the License Agreement due to non-payment of the $75,000 milestone fee due December 31, 2012. On March 22, 2013, the University of Illinois notified the Company that the License Agreement had been terminated effective March 21, 2013 due to the Company’s failure to make the required $75,000 payment.

5. Notes Payable

Note Payable to Related Party

On June 25, 2012, the Company borrowed 465,000,000 Won (the currency of South Korea, equivalent to approximately $400,000 US dollars) from and executed a secured note payable to SY Corporation Co., Ltd., formerly known as Samyang Optics Co. Ltd. (“Samyang”), an approximately 20% common stockholder of the Company at that time. The note accrues simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum and has a maturity date of June 25, 2013, although Samyang was permitted to demand early repayment of the promissory note on or after December 25, 2012. Samyang did not demand early repayment. The Company has not made any payments on the promissory note. At June 30, 2013 and subsequently, the promissory note was outstanding and in technical default, although Samyang has not issued a notice of default or a demand for repayment. The Company believes that Samyang is in default of its obligations under its January 2012 license agreement, as amended, with the Company, but the Company has not yet issued a notice of default. The Company anticipates entering into discussions with Samyang with a view toward a comprehensive resolution of the aforementioned matters.

Pursuant to the terms of this borrowing arrangement, Samyang was granted the right to designate a representative to serve on the Company’s Board of Directors, pursuant to which Samyang designated Moogak Hwang, Ph.D. as its representative. In this regard, the Company elected Dr. Hwang to its Board of Directors on August 3, 2012. Dr. Hwang resigned from the Company’s Board of Directors effective September 30, 2013.

The promissory note is secured by collateral that represents a lien on certain patents owned by the Company, including composition of matter patents for certain of the Company’s high impact ampakine compounds and the low impact ampakine compounds CX2007 and CX2076, and other related compounds. The security interest does not extend to the Company’s patents for its ampakine compounds CX1739 and CX1942, or to the patent for the use of ampakine compounds for the treatment of respiratory depression.

In connection with this financing, the Company issued to Samyang two-year detachable warrants to purchase 4,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at a fixed exercise price of $0.056 per share. The warrants have a call right for consideration of $0.001 per share, in favor of the Company, to the extent that the weighted average closing price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $0.084 per share for each of ten consecutive trading days, subject to certain circumstances. Additionally, an existing license agreement with Samyang was expanded to include rights to ampakine CX1739 in South Korea for the treatment of sleep apnea and respiratory depression. The unexercised warrants expired on June 25, 2014.

The Company used the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the two-year detachable warrants to purchase 4,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at a fixed exercise price of $0.056 per share. The Company applied the relative fair value method to allocate the proceeds from the borrowing to the note payable and the detachable warrants. The Company did not consider the expansion of the existing license agreement with Samyang to have any significant value. Consequently, approximately 64% of the proceeds of the borrowing were attributed to the debt instrument.

The 36% value attributed to the warrant was being amortized as additional interest expense over the life of the note. Additionally, financing costs aggregating $21,370 incurred in connection with the transaction were also amortized over the expected life of the note. In that repayment could be demanded after six months, that period was used as the expected life of the note payable for amortization purposes.

Note payable to Samyang consists of the following at December 31, 2013 and 2012:

Notes Payable to Chairman

On June 25, 2013, the Arnold Lippa Family Trust, an affiliate of Dr. Lippa, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, began advancing funds to the Company in order to meet minimum operating needs. At December 31, 2013, Dr. Lippa had advanced a total of $75,000 to the Company. Such advances reached a maximum of $150,000 on March 3, 2014 and were due on demand with interest at a rate per annum equal to the “Blended Annual Rate”, as published by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service of approximately 0.22% for the period outstanding. In March 2014, the Company repaid the working capital advances, including accrued interest of $102, with the proceeds from the private placement of its Series G Preferred Stock (see Note 12).

6. Furniture, Equipment and Leasehold Improvements

During the year ended December 31, 2012, in connection with the downsizing of the Company’s operations, the Company disposed of furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements costing a total of $1,170,849.

On May 14, 2012, the Company executed a three-year lease for approximately 5,000 square feet of office space beginning June 1, 2012 at a monthly rate of $9,204. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company substantially vacated its operating facility and abandoned its furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements. In May 2013, the Company received notice that it had been sued in the Superior Court of California in a complaint filed on March 28, 2013 by its former landlord, PPC Irvine Center Investment, LLC, seeking among other things, $57,535 in past due rent, termination of the lease agreement, and reasonable attorney’s fees. On May 23, 2013, a settlement was reached with the landlord that provided for the Company to relinquish its security deposit in the amount of $29,545, transfer title to its remaining furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements, and pay an additional $26,000. The transfer of the Company’s furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements resulted in a loss of $39,126, which was recorded at December 31, 2012. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recorded a gain of $1,990 with respect to the final resolution of this matter.

In order to estimate the fair value of the liability to be accrued with respect to the Company’s potential liability under the abandoned lease at December 31, 2012, the Company considered various factors, including the current lease rates for similar office space in Irvine, California, the desirability of the area to businesses, and the estimated time that it would take to find a new tenant for the office space. Taking these factors into account, the Company concluded that the potential rental income from a sublease of its operating facility would equal or exceed the Company’s remaining lease obligation. The Company also considered the negotiations with the landlord during May 2013, which indicated that a settlement for substantially less than the remaining payments under the lease was more likely than not to be successful.

7. Project Advance

In June 2000, the Company received $247,300 from the Institute for the Study of Aging (the “Institute”) to fund testing of CX516, the Company’s ampakine in patients with mild cognitive impairment (“MCI”). Patients with MCI represent the earliest clinically-defined group with memory impairment beyond that expected for normal individuals of the same age and education, but such patients do not meet the clinical criteria for Alzheimer’s disease. During 2002 and 2003, the Company conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study with 175 elderly patients displaying MCI and issued a final report on June 21, 2004. CX516 did not improve the memory impairments observed in these patients.