Rezolute, Inc. - Annual Report: 2016 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

For the transition period from              to

ANTRIABIO, INC

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

(303)222-2128

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code)

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT: None

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT: Common Stock, par value $0.001

(Title of Class)

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). x Yes ¨ No

Indicate by checkmark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of 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 the Form 10-K. x

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is ¨ a large accelerated filer, ¨ an accelerated file, ¨ a non-accelerated filer, or x a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act)

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and ask price of such common equity as of the last business day of the registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter (December 31, 2015) was $31,438,587

Number of shares of issuer’s common stock outstanding as of September 26, 2016: 35,529,097

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Annual Report”) contains statements reflecting assumptions, expectations, projections, intentions or beliefs about future events that are intended as “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements included or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report, other than statements of historical fact, that address activities, events or developments that we expect, believe or anticipate will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. These statements appear in a number of places, including, but not limited to “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” These statements represent our reasonable judgment of the future based on various factors and using numerous assumptions and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause our actual results and financial position to differ materially from those contemplated by the statements. You can identify these statements by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts, and use words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “may,” “should,” “plan,” “project” and other words of similar meaning. In particular, these include, but are not limited to, statements relating to the following:

Any or all of our forward-looking statements may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions or by known or unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors including, among others:

In addition, there may be other factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from the results referenced in the forward-looking statements, some of which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report, including “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” Many of these factors will be important in determining our actual future results. Consequently, no forward-looking statement can be guaranteed. Our actual future results may vary materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and we disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Annual Report, except as otherwise required by applicable law.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

AntriaBio, Inc. (“AntriaBio”, the “Company”. “we” or “us”) is a biopharmaceutical company that develops novel, sustained release injectable therapies. We apply our proprietary formulation and manufacturing capabilities to known, well-characterized molecules to create differentiated, patent-protected therapies that have the potential to significantly improve existing standards of care.

Lead Product Candidate: AB101

Our lead product candidate (“AB101”), a microsphere formulation of PEGylated human recombinant insulin, is being developed as an extended acting basal insulin intended for once-weekly subcutaneous injection, for use alone and in combination with bolus prandial insulin or oral glucose lowering therapies, to improve glycemic control in patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. We believe that AB101 has the potential to provide a near peak-less, slow and uniform release of basal insulin. The current standard of care in the $11 billion basal insulin market is daily or twice a day injections.

AB101 Formulation

To formulate AB101 we use PEGylation chemistry to attach a low molecular weight (5000 Daltons) polyethylene glycol (“PEG”) to the phenylalanine amino acid residue on the N-terminus of insulin’s B peptide chain to create PEGylated insulin (“peginsulin”). By attaching a PEG in this fashion, human insulin becomes amphiphilic and can be uniformly co-dissolved in a solvent with a biodegradable polymer (“PLGA”). Following the dissolution of peginsulin and PLGA, the solvent is removed through an emulsification process and when dried, uniform microspheres are formed in a solid state solution. Prior to administration, the microspheres are reconstituted in an aqueous solution and when injected, the microspheres dissolve through hydrolysis, releasing insulin at a slow, steady and predictable rate over the course of a week.

AB101 Preclinical Studies and Clinical Plans

In 2015, as a precursor to our US clinical studies and in order to fulfill requirements of the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in support of an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) filing, we conducted pre-clinical studies, including acute and sub-acute toxicity studies in two species, safety pharmacology, and mutagenicity/genotoxicity studies.

The intended clinical development plan for AB101 is consistent with the FDA’s Guidance for Industry, Diabetes Mellitus: Developing Drugs and Therapeutic Biologics for Treatment and Prevention, and will be generally modeled after recent development programs for long-acting basal insulin products.  Variations will be introduced to account for the specific characteristics of AB101, as applicable.  The overall goal of the program will be to demonstrate efficacy and safety of once-weekly AB101 compared to currently available basal insulins.

The single ascending dose study in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus will be followed by repeat dose pharmacokinetics and the pharmacodynamics studies.  Euglycemic clamping will be utilized to evaluate the time-action profile for glucose lowering following repeated once-weekly doses of AB101, and to determine steady-state.

In addition, the Company plans to conduct a Phase 2 program to assess and confirm the intended dosing profile, specifically of the once weekly dosing frequency, and for dose-ranging.  The Phase 3 registration program will comprise multiple studies to compare efficacy and safety to currently available basal insulins, in various combinations with bolus insulin and/or oral glucose lowering agents.  It will be of adequate size to meet recommended guidance for assessing chronic safety when used for Diabetes Mellitus.

Next Product Candidate: AB301

In September 2015, we announced the addition of AB301 to our product development pipeline. As a potential treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes, AB301 is a once-weekly injectable combination of a PEGylated human glucagon-like peptide-1 (“GLP-1”) agonist and AB101, our basal insulin lead product candidate. We believe that there is a potential advantage of combining a GLP-1 agonist with basal insulin to complement glycemic control while attenuating weight gain and hypoglycemic risk. As a once-weekly injectable therapy, AB301 would be differentiated from potential competing combination therapies that require daily injections. In vitro and in vivo studies completed to date indicate that AB301 has the potential to be a well-tolerated, effective therapy for type 2 diabetes and we are engaged in ongoing preclinical studies of AB301. Prior to initiating any IND-enabling studies for AB301, we are monitoring the FDA’s actions with respect to its evaluation around potential competing combination therapies.

Competition

We face competition from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and private research organizations in recruiting and retaining highly qualified scientific personnel and consultants and in the development and acquisition of technologies.

If successfully commercialized, AB101 would compete directly against Sanofi’s Lantus and Toujeo, Novo Nordisk’s Levemir and Tresiba, Eli Lilly’s Basaglar as well as any other branded or biosimilar basal insulin therapies that obtain regulatory approval in advance of AB101.

Sanofi’s iGlarLixi and Novo Nordisk’s IDegLiraare daily injectable GLP-1 agonist and basal insulin combination therapies that are currently under regulatory review by the FDA. IDegLira was approved for commercial use in the European Union under the trade name Xultophy in September 2014. Adocia recently announced plans to develop BioChaperone Glargine Dulaglutide and BioChaperone Liraglutide, which are GLP-1 agonist and basal insulin combination therapies consisting of insulin glargine (Lantus®) and either Eli Lilly’s Trulicty (dulaglutide) or Novo Nordisk’s Victoza (liraglutide). If we successfully develop and commercialize AB301, it would compete directly against iGlarLixi, IDegLira, BioChaperone Glargine Dulaglutide, BioChaperone Liraglutide and any other GLP-1 agonist and basal insulin combination therapies that obtain regulatory approval. Sanofi and Novo Nordisk are large pharmaceutical companies with substantially greater financial, marketing and development resources than AntriaBio. Further, the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are very competitive and are characterized by rapid and continuous technological innovation.

We believe there are a number of additional therapies in preclinical and clinical development to treat diabetes that may result in effective, commercially successful treatments, including drugs that may be in development by Sanofi, Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly and other organizations. Each of these therapies and others may compete with AB101 and AB301.

Intellectual Property

As an innovator in the development of extended release drug therapies, we are executing a patent strategy to protect technologies and inventions that are essential to our business. As part of this strategy, we will continue to build on our existing patent portfolio by filing patent applications for additional product candidates, and novel technologies, through ongoing research and development. Our patent strategy also involves relying upon trade secrets and know-how – particularly in formulation and manufacturing – in order to develop and maintain our competitive position.

One of our patents involves a single-step method for rapidly and efficiently preparing conjugates of insulin and its analogs with hydrophilic polymers, such as PEG. This method includes reacting a protein and a hydrophilic polymer in the presence of at least one organic solvent and at least one metal chelator, under near-neutral conditions. More specifically, this invention is directed to the site-specific modification of the proteins with PEG. It also provides a pharmaceutical formulation for the uniform mixture of the protein-PEG conjugate in a biodegradable polymer. This patent, which expires in April 2024, is issued in the US, Australia, India, Japan and Europe, and is pending in Canada, Brazil, China and Hong Kong.

As it relates to this invention, our lead product candidate, AB101, is comprised of a PEG molecule linked to human recombinant insulin specifically at the phenylalanine amino acid at position B1. We formulate a biodegradable microsphere that is a homogenous solid solution of PLGA and the insulin-PEG conjugate is formulated. We plan to apply this method of preparing protein-polymer conjugates, and formulating them with biodegradable polymers to future product candidates as well.

As part of our strategy to enhance our patent portfolio, in July 2014, we filed a nonprovisional patent application covering novel methods and systems used to create biodegradable microparticles with superior syringeability, injectability, flowability, and uniformity. This patent is issued in the US and is pending in other jurisdictions, which expires in 2034. The methods claimed in the patent are directed towards the microsphere manufacturing technology platform that is broadly applicable to current and future products under development.

Additionally, we filed a provisional patent application in December 2014 around novel compositions and systems used to create formulations for sustained release products that are used by themselves or in combination with other molecules. Further, we filed a provisional patent application in June 2015 around improved methods for site-specific amine pegylation.

We plan on filing additional patent applications over time that are directed towards both technology enhancements and product candidates.

Government Regulation

Regulation by governmental authorities in the US and other countries is a significant factor in the development, manufacture and marketing of pharmaceutical products. All of our potential products will require regulatory approval by governmental agencies prior to commercialization. In particular, pharmaceutical therapies are subject to rigorous preclinical testing and clinical trials and other pre-market approval requirements by the FDA and regulatory authorities in foreign countries. Various federal, state and foreign statutes and regulations also govern or influence the manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage, record keeping and marketing of such products.

We are also subject to various federal, state, and local laws, regulations and recommendations relating to safe working conditions; laboratory and manufacturing practices; the experimental use of animals; and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances, including radioactive compounds and infectious disease agents, used in connection with our research, development and manufacturing.

Research and Development

We incurred approximately $9,448,000 and $4,701,000 in research and development expenses for the years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Employees

As of June 30, 2016, we had thirty full-time employees as well as four contract employees, all of whom have experience with pharmaceutical, biotechnology or medical product companies. None of our employees or contractors are covered by collective bargaining agreements.

Corporate Information

In March 2010, an entity was incorporated in Delaware (“Antria Acquisition Corp.”) with the express purpose of acquiring the assets of PR Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a corporation that prior to declaring bankruptcy in 2008, developed proprietary technology to be used with active pharmaceutical ingredients to create sustained release injectable formulations, including what is now known as AB101.

On July 26, 2010, the Company was incorporated in Nevada under the name “Fits My Style Inc.” and had no revenue and or operations other than capital formation and the development of a business plan related to the creation of a retail related mobile application.

On January 31, 2013, the following transactions occurred: (i) Antria Acquisition Corp. purchased the assets of PR Pharmaceuticals Inc.; (ii) Antria Acquisition Corp. became a wholly-owned operating subsidiary of the Company in a reverse merger; and (iii) the Company ceased operations of “Fits My Style” and instead became a sustained release biopharmaceutical corporation known as “AntriaBio, Inc.”

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.

Investors should consider carefully the following information about these risks before deciding to purchase any of our securities. If any of the events or developments described below actually occur, our business, results of operations and financial condition would likely suffer and Investors may lose all or part of their investment. In addition, it is also possible that other risks and uncertainties that affect our business may arise or become material in the future.

Risks Related to Our Business

We will need substantial additional capital to fund our operations. If we fail to obtain additional capital, we may be unable to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates or continue our research and development programs.

Our operations consume substantial amounts of cash. We expect to spend substantial amounts on research and development, including preclinical and clinical studies for our product candidates, manufacturing materials and expanding our research and development program. As of June 30, 2016, we have $4.1 million in cash on hand. It is anticipated that we will need at least an additional $15 million in capital through December 2017 to cover operating expenses, clinical testing and development of pipeline products. We expect that our cash used by operations will continue to increase for the next several years. If we are unable to raise additional capital by the end of first quarter calendar year 2017, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue one or more of our drug development or research and development programs. We also may be required to: seek collaborators for our product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available; and relinquish, license or otherwise dispose of rights to technologies, product candidates or products that we would otherwise seek to develop or commercialize ourselves on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify, discover or formulate product pipeline candidates.

Our primary strategy is to formulate and develop differentiated long-acting injectable therapies by applying our proprietary technology to known and well-characterized molecules. Research and development programs require substantial technical, financial and human resources to identify new product pipeline candidates. Our research and development programs may initially demonstrate success in identifying potential product pipeline candidates but subsequently fail to yield them. Through our research and development programs, if we are unable to formulate innovative long-acting therapies based on our microsphere platform technology or otherwise, our long-term business, financial position, income, expansion and outlook may be materially adversely affected.

Our corporate objectives are dependent upon one another and to the extent that there is a delay or complication in any one objective, our ability to timely complete our other goals could be adversely impacted.

Our corporate objectives are dependent upon one another and to the extent that there is a delay or complication in any one objective, our ability to complete our other goals in a timely fashion could be adversely impacted. For example, prior to conducting our first human study, we must first file an IND for AB101 with the FDA and produce AB101 material under current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) conditions. We had experienced delays in finalizing the completion of our cGMP manufacturing suite as well as a delay in receiving certain equipment or parts for equipment used in the manufacturing process which has had an adverse impact our ability to manufacture sterile product which is needed to submit our IND and begin clinical studies.

Our manufacturing experience is limited.

We currently manufacture AB101. The manufacture of drugs for clinical trials and for commercial sale is subject to regulation by the FDA under cGMP regulations and by other regulators under other laws and regulations. We cannot assure you that we can successfully manufacture our products under cGMP regulations or other laws and regulations in sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercial sale, or in a timely or economical manner.

Our manufacturing facilities require specialized personnel and are expensive to operate and maintain. Any delay in the regulatory approval of product candidates to be manufactured in these facilities will require us to continue to operate these expensive facilities and retain specialized personnel, which may increase our losses. Construction of our manufacturing facility has been completed and validation is currently underway. Validation is an ongoing process that must be maintained to allow us to manufacture under cGMP guidelines. We cannot guarantee that the FDA or any foreign regulatory agencies will approve our other facilities or, once approved, that any of our facilities will remain in compliance with cGMP regulations.

The manufacture of pharmaceutical products is a highly complex process in which a variety of difficulties may arise from time to time. Specifically, the manufacture of microspheres consists of twelve highly engineered unit operations to produce a steril dry powder in vial for resuspension. We may not be able to resolve any such difficulties with this process in a timely fashion, if at all. We are currently the sole manufacturer of AB101 and if anything were to interfere with our continuing manufacturing operations in our facility, it could materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

If one or more of our product candidates progress to mid- to late-stage development, we may incur significant expenses in the expansion and/or construction of manufacturing facilities and increases in personnel in order to manufacture product candidates. We cannot assure you that we have the necessary funds or that we will be able to develop this manufacturing infrastructure in a timely or economical manner, or at all.

Currently, our other potential product candidates are manufactured in small quantities for use in various studies. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully manufacture additional product candidates at a larger scale in a timely or economical manner, or at all. If and when any of these product candidates are ready for clinical trials, we will need to manufacture them in larger quantities. If we are unable to successfully increase our manufacturing scale or capacity, the regulatory approval of such clinical studies may be delayed.

If we fail to develop manufacturing capacity and experience, fail to manufacture our product candidates economically or on reasonable scale or volumes, or in accordance with cGMP regulations, our development programs and commercialization of any approved products will be materially adversely affected. This may result in delays in filing our IND or in commencing our clinical trials. Any such delays could materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Results of preclinical testing or earlier clinical studies are not necessarily predictive of future results, therefore none of the product candidates we advance into clinical studies may have favorable results in later clinical studies or receive regulatory approval.

Success in preclinical testing and early clinical studies does not ensure that later clinical studies will generate adequate data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of an investigational drug or biologic. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry, including those with greater resources and experience, have suffered significant setbacks in Phase 3 clinical studies, even after seeing promising results in earlier clinical studies. We do not know whether any clinical studies we may conduct will demonstrate adequate efficacy and safety to result in regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates. If later stage clinical studies do not produce favorable results, our ability to achieve regulatory approval for any of our product candidates may be adversely impacted. Even if we believe that our product candidates have performed satisfactorily in preclinical testing and clinical studies, we may still fail to obtain FDA approval for our product candidates.

We may experience delays in our clinical trials that could adversely affect our financial position and our commercial prospects.

Many factors could affect the timing of clinical trials, including lack of cGMP drug product, slow patient recruitment, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, competing clinical trials and new drugs approved for the conditions we are investigating. Other companies may be conducting clinical trials or may announce plans for future trials that will be seeking patients with the same indications as those we are studying. As a result of all of these factors, our trials may take longer to enroll patients than we anticipate. Delays in patient enrollment in the trials may increase our costs and slow down our product development and approval process. Our product development costs will also increase if we need to perform more or larger clinical trials than planned. Any delays in completing our clinical trials will delay our ability to generate revenue from product sales, and we may have insufficient capital resources to support our operations.

Due to our reliance on contract research organizations or other third parties to conduct clinical trials, we may not have complete control over the timing, conduct and expense of our clinical trials.

We plan to rely primarily on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. As a result, we will have less control over the conduct of the clinical trials, the timing and completion of the trials, the required reporting of adverse events and the management of data developed through the trial than would be the case if our own staff conducted all clinical trials. Communicating with outside parties can also be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes and difficulties in coordinating activities. Outside parties may have staffing difficulties, may undergo changes in priorities or may become financially distressed, adversely affecting their willingness or ability to conduct our trials. We may experience unexpected increased costs that are beyond our control. Problems with the timeliness or quality of the work of a contract research organization may lead us to seek to terminate the relationship and use an alternative service provider. However, making this change may be costly and may delay our trials, and contractual restrictions may make such a change difficult or impossible. Additionally, it may be impossible to find a replacement organization that can conduct our trials in an acceptable manner and at an acceptable cost.

Adverse events in our clinical trials may force us to stop development of our product candidates or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Our product candidates may produce serious adverse events in patients during clinical trials. These adverse events could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials of our product candidates and could result in the FDA, or other regulatory authorities requesting additional preclinical data or denying approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. An institutional review board, independent data safety monitoring board, the FDA, other regulatory authorities or the Company itself may suspend or terminate clinical trials at any time. We cannot assure you that any of our product candidates will prove safe for human use.

If our product candidates do not meet safety or efficacy requirements, they will not receive regulatory approval and we will be unable to market them.

The process of drug development, regulatory review and approval typically is expensive, takes many years and the timing of any approval cannot be accurately predicted. If we fail to obtain regulatory approval for our current or future product candidates, we will be unable to market and sell such products and therefore may never be profitable.

As part of the regulatory approval process, we must conduct preclinical studies and clinical trials for each product candidate to demonstrate safety and efficacy. The number of preclinical studies and clinical trials that will be required varies depending on the product candidate, the indication being evaluated, the trial results and regulations applicable to any particular product candidate.

The results of preclinical studies and initial clinical trials of our product candidates do not necessarily predict the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy despite having progressed through initial clinical trials. We cannot assure you that the data collected from the preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates will be sufficient to support approval by FDA or a foreign regulatory authority. In addition, the continuation of a particular study after review by an independent data safety monitoring board does not necessarily indicate that our product candidate will achieve the clinical endpoint.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies can delay, limit or deny approval for many reasons, including:

Any delay in, or failure to receive or maintain, approval for any of our products could prevent us from ever generating meaningful revenues or achieving profitability.

Our product candidates are prone to the risks of failure inherent in drug development. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any product candidate for a target indication, we must demonstrate safety in preclinical studies and effectiveness with substantial evidence gathered in well-controlled clinical studies. With respect to approval in the US, to the satisfaction of the FDA and, with respect to approval in other countries, to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities in those countries, we must demonstrate that the product candidate is safe and effective for use for that target indication and that the manufacturing facilities, processes and controls are adequate.

Despite our efforts, our product candidates may not:

We are not permitted to market AB101 or any of our other product candidates in the US until we receive approval of a new drug application, or approval of a biologics license application, from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from such countries. We have not submitted a new drug application or biologics license application or received marketing approval for any of our product candidates.

Preclinical testing and clinical studies are long, expensive and uncertain processes. We may spend several years completing our testing for any particular product candidate, and failure can occur at any stage. Negative or inconclusive results or adverse medical events during a clinical study could also cause us or the FDA to terminate a clinical study or require that we repeat it or conduct additional clinical studies. Additionally, data obtained from a clinical study is susceptible to varying interpretations and the FDA or other regulatory authorities may interpret the results of our clinical studies less favorably than we do. The FDA and equivalent foreign regulatory agencies have substantial discretion in the approval process and may decide that our data is insufficient to support a marketing application and require additional preclinical, clinical or other studies.

Any failure or delay by our third-party suppliers on which we rely or intend to rely to provide materials necessary to develop and manufacture our drug products may delay or impair our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

We rely upon a small number of third-party suppliers for the manufacture of certain raw materials that are necessary to formulate our drug products, including AB101, for preclinical and clinical testing purposes. We intend to continue to rely on them in the future. We also expect to rely upon third parties to produce materials required for the commercial production of our product candidates if we succeed in obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. If we are unable to arrange for third-party sources, or do so on commercially unreasonable terms, we may not be able to complete development of or market our product candidates.

There are a small number of suppliers for raw materials that we use to manufacture our drugs. Such suppliers may not sell these raw materials at the times we need them or on commercially reasonable terms. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these raw materials by our manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of these raw materials. Although we generally do not begin a clinical study unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete the clinical study, any significant delay in the supply of raw material components needed to produce a product candidate for a clinical study due to the need to replace a third-party manufacturer could considerably delay completion of our clinical studies, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we or our manufacturers are unable to purchase these raw materials after regulatory approval has been obtained for our product candidates, the commercial launch of our product candidates would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply of such product candidates, which would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our product candidates.

If we successfully commercialize any of our product candidates, we may be required to establish commercial manufacturing capabilities of larger scale. In addition, as our drug development pipeline increases and matures, we will have a greater need for clinical study and commercial manufacturing capacity. We have no experience manufacturing pharmaceutical products on a commercial scale and we may need to rely on third-party manufacturers with capacity for increased production scale to meet our projected needs for commercial manufacturing, the satisfaction of which on a timely basis may not be met.

Our competitors may develop and market drugs that are less expensive, more effective or safer than our product candidates.

The pharmaceutical market is highly competitive. If approved by regulatory agencies and subsequently commercialized, our product candidates that contain currently approved active ingredients will likely face competition from existing products on the market. In particular, if we successfully commercialize AB101, our product candidate would compete directly against Sanofi’s Toujeo and Lantus, Novo Nordisk’s Levemir and Tresiba and Eli Lilly’s Basaglar, a biosimilar insulin glargine that will become available in the US in December 2016. Additionally, other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may develop improved formulations of the same drugs that compete with drug products we are developing. It is possible that our competitors will develop and market products that are less expensive, more effective or safer than our future products or that will render our products obsolete. We expect that competition from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, universities and public and private research institutions will increase. Many of these competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, research and other resources than we do. We may not have the financial resources, technical and research expertise or marketing, distribution or support capabilities to successfully compete with these competitors.

After the completion of our clinical studies, we cannot predict whether or when we will obtain regulatory approval to commercialize our product candidates and we cannot, therefore, predict the timing of any future revenue from these product candidates.

Even if we achieve positive clinical results and file for regulatory approval, we cannot commercialize any of our product candidates until the appropriate regulatory agencies have reviewed and approved the applications for such product candidates. We cannot assure that the regulatory agencies will complete their review processes in a timely manner or that we will obtain regulatory approval for any product candidate we develop. Satisfaction of regulatory requirements typically takes many years, is dependent upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product and requires the expenditure of substantial resources. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action or changes in FDA policy during the period of product development, clinical studies and FDA regulatory review.

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may still face future development and regulatory hurdles.

Even if US regulatory approval is obtained for a particular drug candidate, the FDA may still impose significant restrictions on marketing, indicated uses and/or require potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance. For example, the label ultimately approved, if any, may include restrictions on use. Further, the FDA may require that long-term safety data may need to be obtained as a post-market requirement. Even if the FDA or a foreign regulatory agency approves a product candidate, the approval may impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses, conditions for use, labeling, advertising, promotion, marketing and/or production of such product and may impose requirements for post-approval studies, including additional research and development and clinical trials. The FDA and other agencies also may impose various civil or criminal sanctions for failure to comply with regulatory requirements, including substantial monetary penalties and withdrawal of product approval.

In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with current good manufacturing practices and regulations. If we or a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. If we, our product candidates or the manufacturing facilities for our product candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our products and generate revenue.

If any of our product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval does not achieve broad market acceptance, the revenue that we generate from its sales, if any, will be limited

The commercial success of our product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval from the FDA or other regulatory agencies will depend upon the acceptance of these products by the medical community, including physicians, patients and payors. The degree of market acceptance of any of our approved products will depend on a number of factors, including:

If our product candidates are approved, but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, health care payors and patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from these products, and we may not become or remain profitable. In addition, our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful.

Recently enacted and future legislation or regulatory reform of the health care system in the US and foreign jurisdictions may affect our ability to sell our products profitably.

Our ability to commercialize our future products successfully, alone or with collaborators, will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for the products will be available from government and health administration authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payors. The continuing efforts of the US and foreign governments, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of health care services to contain or reduce health care costs may adversely affect our ability to set fair prices for our products, generate revenues and achieve and maintain profitability.

Specifically, in both the US and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the health care system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably. In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Health Care Reform Law, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

We will not know the full effects of the Health Care Reform Law until applicable federal and state agencies issue regulations or guidance under the new law. Although it is too early to determine the effect of the Health Care Reform Law, the new law appears likely to continue the pressure on pharmaceutical pricing, especially under the Medicare program, and also may increase our regulatory burdens and operating costs. We expect further federal and state proposals and health care reforms to continue to be proposed by legislators, which could limit the prices that can be charged for the products we develop and may limit our commercial opportunity.

Also in the US, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, also called the Medicare Modernization Act, or MMA, changed the way Medicare covers and pays for pharmaceutical products. The legislation expanded Medicare coverage for drug purchases by the elderly and introduced a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for drugs. In addition, this legislation authorized Medicare Part D prescription drug plans to use formularies where they can limit the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class. As a result of this legislation and the expansion of federal coverage of drug products, we expect that there will be additional pressure to contain and reduce costs. These cost reduction initiatives and other provisions of this legislation could decrease the coverage and price that we receive for any approved products and could seriously harm our business. While the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, and any reduction in reimbursement that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors.

The continuing efforts of government and other third-party payors to contain or reduce the costs of health care through various means may limit our commercial opportunity. It will be time-consuming and expensive for us to go through the process of seeking reimbursement from Medicare and private payors. Our products may not be considered cost-effective, and government and third-party private health insurance coverage and reimbursement may not be available to patients for any of our future products or sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive and profitable basis. Our results of operations could be adversely affected by the MMA, the Health Care Reform Law, and additional prescription drug coverage legislation, by the possible effect of this legislation on amounts that private insurers will pay and by other health care reforms that may be enacted or adopted in the future. In addition, increasing emphasis on managed care in the US will continue to put pressure on the pricing of pharmaceutical products. Cost control initiatives could decrease the price that we or any potential collaborators could receive for any of our future products and could adversely affect our profitability.

In some foreign countries, including major markets in the European Union and Japan, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take up to 12 months or longer after the receipt of regulatory marketing approval for a drug product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical study that compares the cost effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies. Such pharmacoeconomic studies can be costly and the results uncertain. Our business could be harmed if reimbursement of our products is unavailable, limited in scope or amount or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels.

We face potential product liability exposure, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability.

The use of our product candidates in clinical studies and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval expose us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liabilities. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

We currently do not have any product liability insurance coverage as we have not yet begun clinical trials for AB101, our lead product candidate. We plan to obtain product liability insurance prior to beginning our clinical trials. This product liability insurance coverage for our clinical studies may not be sufficient to reimburse us for all expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain this product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and adversely affect our business.

If we use hazardous and biological materials in a manner that causes injury or violates applicable law, we may be liable for damages.

Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of potentially hazardous substances, including toxic chemical and biological materials. We could be held liable for any contamination, injury or other damages resulting from these hazardous substances. In addition, our operations produce hazardous waste products. While third parties are responsible for disposal of our hazardous waste, we could be liable under environmental laws for any required cleanup of sites at which our waste is disposed. Federal, state, foreign and local laws and regulations govern the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. If we fail to comply with these laws and regulations at any time, or if they change, we may be subject to criminal sanctions and substantial civil liabilities, which may harm our business. Even if we continue to comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding hazardous materials, we cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or discharge and our resultant liability for any injuries or other damages caused by these accidents.

If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may be unable to generate any revenue.

We currently do not have dedicated staff for the sale, marketing and distribution of drug products. The cost of establishing and maintaining such a staff may exceed the cost-effectiveness of doing so. In order to market any products that may be approved by the FDA, we must build our sales, marketing, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. If we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to generate product revenue and may not become profitable. We will be competing with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

Guidelines and recommendations published by various organizations may adversely affect the use of any products for which we may receive regulatory approval.

Government agencies issue regulations and guidelines directly applicable to us and to our product candidates. In addition, professional societies, practice management groups, private health or science foundations and organizations involved in various diseases from time to time publish guidelines or recommendations to the medical and patient communities. These various sorts of recommendations may relate to such matters as product usage and use of related or competing therapies. For example, organizations like the American Diabetes Association have made recommendations about therapies in the diabetes therapeutics market. Changes to these recommendations or other guidelines advocating alternative therapies could result in decreased use of any products for which we may receive regulatory approval, which may adversely affect our results of operations.

Our independent registered public accounting firm’s report, contained herein, includes an explanatory paragraph that expresses substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Our financial statements have been prepared on the basis that we will continue as a going concern. For the period from March 24, 2010 to June 30, 2016, we have an accumulated deficit of approximately $44.0 million. As of June 30, 2016, our total stockholder’s equity was approximately $8.8 million and we had working capital of approximately $2.8 million. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future as we develop and commercialize AB101, and we must raise additional capital from external sources in order to sustain our operations. Primarily as a result of our history of losses and limited cash balances, our independent registered public accounting firm has included in their audit report an explanatory paragraph expressing substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is contingent upon, among other factors, our ability to obtain financing to continue to fund our operations. We cannot provide any assurance that we will be able to raise additional capital. If we are unable to secure additional capital, we may be required to curtail our research and development initiatives and take additional measures to reduce costs in order to conserve our cash in amounts sufficient to sustain operations and meet our obligations. These measures could cause significant delays in the development of AB101 and other product candidates.

We are at an early stage of development as a company and we do not have, and may never have, any products that generate significant revenues.

We are at an early stage of development as a proprietary product specialty pharmaceutical company and we do not have any commercial products. Our existing product candidates will require extensive additional clinical evaluation, regulatory review, significant marketing efforts and substantial investment before they generate any revenues. Our efforts may not lead to commercially successful products, for a number of reasons, including:

We do not expect to be able to market any of our product candidates for a number of years. If we are unable to develop, receive approval for, or successfully commercialize any of our product candidates, we will be unable to generate significant revenues. If our development programs are delayed, we may have to raise additional capital or reduce or cease our operations.

Initially, we expect to derive all of our revenues, if any, from AB101. As we cannot currently enter the market with AB101, it is uncertain whether AB101 will achieve and sustain high levels of demand and market acceptance. Our success will depend to a substantial extent on our ability to successfully commercialize and market our products. Failure of consumers to accept AB101 would significantly adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

We have never generated any revenues and may never become profitable.

Since inception, we have not generated any revenues and have incurred an accumulated deficit of $44,044,830 through June 30, 2016. We expect to continue to incur substantial operating losses for the next several years as we move AB101 and other product candidates into clinical trials and continue our research and development efforts. To become profitable, we must successfully develop, manufacture and market our product candidates, either alone or in conjunction with possible collaborators. We may never have any revenues or become profitable.

Our limited operating history makes it difficult to evaluate our business and prospects.

Our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, acquiring product and technology rights and conducting preclinical studies. We have not demonstrated an ability to produce product under cGMP conditions, conduct clinical trials, obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize a product candidate. Consequently, any predictions about our future performance may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully testing, developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products.

If we are unable to successfully remediate the material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, the accuracy and timing of our financial reporting may be adversely affected, which may adversely affect investor confidence in us and, as a result, the value of our common stock.

In connection with the audit of the fiscal 2016 consolidated financial statements of AntriaBio, Inc., we noted a material weakness in our controls, principally as a result of not having segregated duties as our Chief Accounting Officer can initiate and complete transactions and not having measures that would prevent the Chief Accounting Officer from overriding the internal control system. A material weakness is a deficiency or combination of deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that results in more than reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. We have also begun evaluating and implementing additional procedures to improve the segregation of duties. We cannot assure that these or other measures will fully remediate the deficiencies or material weakness described above. We also cannot assure you that we have identified all of our existing significant deficiencies and material weaknesses, or that we will not in the future have additional significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

Our current patent positions and license portfolio may not include all patent rights needed for the full development and commercialization of our product candidates. We cannot be sure that patent rights we may need in the future will be available to license on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

We typically develop our product candidates using compounds that we have in-licensed, including the original composition of matter patents and patents that claim the activities and methods for such compounds’ production and use to the extent known at that time. For example, as part of the assets acquired from PR Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Company obtained a license agreement that was originally executed with Brookwood Pharmaceuticals. The license agreement allows the Company to use certain controlled delivery technology for AB101 depending upon the Company’s formulation. Based upon the AB101 formulation that has been selected, the Company believes that the license is applicable and that under the terms of the license agreement, the Company would owe a single digit royalty to the license holder if such formulation is commercialized. The Company is still evaluating the need for a similar license for AB301. Such determination is dependent upon the Company’s final selection of a clinical candidate from the various formulations of AB301 that are currently in preclinical development. To the extent that the Company concludes that the technology is applicable to the formulation of the AB301 clinical candidate, the Company may need to obtain a license and no assurance can be given that a license will be granted, or that one will be granted on commercially reasonable terms.

As we learn more about the mechanisms of action and new methods of manufacture and use of these product candidates, we may file additional patent applications for these new inventions or we may need to ask our licensors to file them. We may also need to license additional patent rights or other rights on compounds, treatment methods or manufacturing processes because we learn that we need such rights during the continuing development of our product candidates.

Although our patents may prevent others from making, using or selling similar products, they do not ensure that we will not infringe the patent rights of third parties. We may not be aware of all patents or patent applications that may impact our ability to make, use or sell any of our product candidates or proposed product candidates. For example, because we sometimes identify the mechanism of action or molecular target of a given product candidate after identifying its composition of matter and therapeutic use, we may not be aware until the mechanism or target is further elucidated that a third party has an issued or pending patent claiming biological activities or targets that may cover our product candidate. US patent applications filed after November 29, 2000 are confidential in the US Patent and Trademark Office for the first 18 months after such applications’ earliest priority date, and patent offices in other countries often publish patent applications for the first time six months or more after filing. Furthermore, we may not be aware of published or granted conflicting patent rights. Any conflicts resulting from patent applications and patents of others could significantly reduce the coverage of our patents and limit our ability to obtain meaningful patent protection. If others obtain patents with conflicting claims, we may need to obtain licenses to these patents or to develop or obtain alternative technology.

We may not be able to obtain any licenses or other rights to patents, technology or know-how from third parties necessary to conduct our business as described in this report and such licenses, if available at all, may not be available on commercially reasonable terms. Any failure to obtain such licenses could delay or prevent us from developing or commercializing our drug candidates or proposed product candidates, which would harm our business. Litigation or patent interference proceedings may be necessarily brought against third parties, as discussed below, to enforce any of our patents or other proprietary rights or to determine the scope and validity or enforceability of the proprietary rights of such third parties.

If our or our licensors’ patent positions do not adequately protect our product candidates or any future products, others could compete with us more directly, which would harm our business.

Our commercial success will depend in part on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain additional patents and protect our existing patent positions, particularly those patents for which we have secured exclusive rights, as well as our ability to maintain adequate protection of other intellectual property for our technologies, product candidates and any future products in the US and other countries. If we or our licensors do not adequately protect our intellectual property, competitors may be able to use our technologies and erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could materially harm our business, negatively affect our position in the marketplace, limit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and delay or render impossible our achievement of profitability. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the US, and we may encounter significant problems in protecting our proprietary rights in these countries.

The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, including our own patent position, involve complex legal and factual questions, and, therefore, validity and enforceability cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents may be challenged, deemed unenforceable, invalidated or circumvented. We and our licensors will be able to protect our proprietary rights from unauthorized use by third parties only to the extent that our proprietary technologies, product candidates and any future products are covered by valid and enforceable patents or are effectively maintained as trade secrets.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain, and we cannot ensure that:

We may be unable to adequately prevent disclosure of trade secrets and other proprietary information.

We rely on trade secrets to protect our proprietary know-how and technological advances, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We rely in part on confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. Costly and time consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights. Failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could enable competitors to use our proprietary information to develop products that compete with our products or cause additional, material adverse effects upon our competitive business position.

Litigation regarding patents, patent applications and other proprietary rights may be expensive and time consuming. If we are involved in such litigation, it could cause delays in bringing product candidates to market and harm our ability to operate.

Our commercial success will depend in part on our ability to manufacture, use, sell and offer to sell our product candidates and proposed product candidates without infringing patents or other proprietary rights of third parties. Although we are not currently aware of any litigation or other proceedings or third-party claims of intellectual property infringement related to our product candidates, the pharmaceutical industry is characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Other parties may obtain patents in the future and allege that the use of our technologies infringes these patent claims or that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Likewise, third parties may challenge or infringe upon our or our licensors’ existing or future patents. Proceedings involving our patents or patent applications or those of others could result in adverse decisions regarding the patentability of our inventions relating to our product candidates or the enforceability, validity or scope of protection offered by our patents relating to our product candidates.

Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management’s time and attention in pursuing these proceedings. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court. Patent litigation is costly and time-consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, if we do not obtain a license, develop or obtain non-infringing technology, fail to defend an infringement action successfully or have our patents declared invalid, we may incur substantial monetary damages; encounter significant delays in bringing our product candidates to market; or be precluded from participating in the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates or methods of treatment requiring licenses.

If our patent and other intellectual property protection is inadequate, our sales and profits could suffer or competitors could force our products completely out of the market.

Patents which prevent the manufacture or sale of our products may be issued to others. We may have to license those patents and pay significant fees or royalties to the owners of the patents in order to keep marketing our products. This would cause profits on sales to suffer.

We have been granted patents or licensed patents in the US, but patent applications that have been, or may in the future be, filed by us may not result in the issuance of additional patents. The scope of any patent issued may not be sufficient to protect our technology. The laws of foreign jurisdictions in which we intend to sell our products may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the US.

In addition to patent protection, we also rely on trade secrets, proprietary know-how and technology advances. We enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees and others, but these agreements may not be effective in protecting our proprietary information. Others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information or obtain access to our know-how. Litigation, which is expensive, may be necessary to enforce or defend our patents or proprietary rights and may not end favorably for us. We may also choose to initiate litigation against other parties who we come to believe are infringing these patents. If such litigation is unsuccessful or if the patents are invalidated or canceled, we may have to write off the related intangible assets and such an event could significantly reduce our earnings. Any of our licenses, patents or other intellectual property may be challenged, invalidated, canceled, infringed or circumvented and may not provide any competitive advantage to us.

If the Company is required to impair their long-lived assets, the Company’s financial condition and results would be negatively affected.

If we are unable to manufacture products in our manufacturing facilities or successfully develop products using our patents that were purchased, the Company may incur events which could cause our long-lived assets to be impaired. If we evaluate our long-lived assets and deem that there is an impairment, under current accounting standards, the Company will be required to write down the assets. Any write-down would have a negative effect on our consolidated financial statements.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Investors may experience dilution if we issue additional shares of common stock.

In general, stockholders do not have preemptive rights to any common stock issued by us in the future. Therefore, stockholders may experience dilution of their equity investment if we issue additional shares of common stock in the future. This includes shares issuable under equity incentive plans, or if we issue securities that are convertible into shares of our common stock. Given that we will we require additional capital, we intend to raise funds in the future by issuing common stock that will cause dilution to our stockholders. We also have significant outstanding warrants to purchase common stock as well as a stock option pool available to employees, which if exercised, would cause dilution to our stockholders.

There is a limited trading market for our common stock, which could make it difficult to liquidate an investment in our common stock, in a timely manner.

Our common stock is currently traded on the OTCQB. Because there is a limited public market for our common stock, investors may not be able to liquidate their investment whenever desired. We cannot assure that we will maintain an active trading market for our common stock and a lack of an active public trading market could mean that investors may be exposed to increased risk. In addition, if we failed to meet the criteria set forth in SEC regulations, various requirements would be imposed by law on broker-dealers who sell our securities to persons other than established customers and accredited investors. Consequently, such regulations may deter broker-dealers from recommending or selling our common stock, which may further affect its liquidity.

With a limited trading market for our common stock, the trading price can be impacted by naked short selling.

Our stock price has been under downward pressure for over a year. Following some investigation and with the assistance of outside advisors, we believe we are the target of naked short selling. Naked short selling is when an investor sells shorts associated with shares that they do not possess and have not confirmed their ability to possess. This means they are betting the price of the shares will go down and they do not intend to consummate the transaction, but instead to settle the transaction in cash. 

Naked short selling, a practice that is prohibited by the SEC's Regulation SHO, damages the value of companies by artificially pushing a company’s stock price down. In fact, the lower the price, the better. Upon tracking our trading activity, we have determined that approximately 44% of our daily trading volume is short selling and we believe that the short sellers have been lax at complying with Regulation SHO. There are no assurances that we will be able to curb the naked short selling of our stock.

If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they downgrade us or our sector, the price of our common stock could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will depend in part on research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about us or our business. We do not control these analysts. Furthermore, if one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrades us or the industry in which we operate or the stock of any of our competitors, the price of our common stock will likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage altogether, we could lose visibility, which could also lead to a decline in the price of the common stock.

We cannot ensure that our common stock will be listed on a securities exchange, which may adversely affect your ability to dispose of our common stock in a timely fashion.

We plan to seek listing of our common stock on the NYSE MKT or NASDAQ exchange as soon as reasonably practicable. In 2011,the NYSE MKT and the NASDAQ amended their listings to restrict the ability of companies that have completed reverse mergers to list their securities on such exchanges. In order to become eligible to list their securities on such exchange, reverse merger companies must have had their securities traded on an over-the-counter (OTC) market for at least one year, maintained a certain minimum closing price for no less than 30 of the most recent 60 days prior to the filing of an initial listing application and prior to listing, and timely filed with the SEC all required reports since consummation of the reverse merger, including one annual report containing audited financial statements for a full fiscal year commencing after the date of the filing of the Form 8-K containing the Company’s Form 10 information. To date the Company has not met all of the filing requirements above and may not be able to satisfy the initial listing standards of the NYSE MKT or NASDAQ exchanges in the foreseeable future or at all. Even if we are able to list our common stock on such exchange, we may not be able to maintain a listing of the common stock on such stock exchange.

The market price and trading volume of our common stock may be volatile, which may adversely affect its market price.

The market price of our common stock could be subject to significant fluctuations due to factors such as:

As a result, shares of our common stock may trade at prices significantly below the price an investor paid to acquire them. Furthermore, declines in the price of our common stock may adversely affect the Company’s ability to conduct future offerings or to recruit and retain key employees.

Our common stock may be considered a “penny stock.”

Trades of our common stock are subject to Rule 15g-9 promulgated by the SEC under the Exchange Act, which imposes certain requirements on broker/dealers who sell securities subject to the rule to persons other than established customers and accredited investors. For transactions covered by the rule, broker/dealers must make a special suitability determination for purchasers of the securities and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction prior to sale. The SEC also has other rules that regulate broker/dealer practices in connection with transactions in “penny stocks.” Penny stocks generally are equity securities with a price of less than $5.00 (other than securities listed on a national securities exchange, provided that current price and volume information with respect to transactions in that security is provided by the exchange or system). The penny stock rules require a broker/dealer, prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from the rules, to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document prepared by the SEC that provides information about penny stocks and the nature and level of risks in the penny stock market. The broker/dealer also must provide the customer with current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock, the compensation of the broker/dealer and its salesperson in the transaction, and monthly account statements showing the market value of each penny stock held in the customer’s account. The bid and offer quotations, and the broker/dealer and salesperson compensation information, must be given to the customer orally or in writing prior to effecting the transaction and must be given to the customer in writing before or with the customer’s confirmation. These disclosure requirements have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity in the secondary market for our common stock. As a result of the foregoing, investors may find it difficult to sell their shares.

We have no current plan to pay dividends on our common stock and investors may lose the entire amount of their investment.

We have no current plans to pay dividends on our common stock. Therefore, investors will not receive any funds absent a sale of their shares. We cannot assure investors of a positive return on their investment.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not required for smaller reporting companies.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Our corporate headquarters are located at 1450 Infinite Drive, Louisville, Colorado. On May 5, 2014, we entered into a lease agreement for the lease of 27,000 square feet of office, lab and clean room space in Louisville, Colorado.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

None.

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.

Market Information

Our common stock is currently quoted on the OTCQB of the OTC Markets Group under the trading symbol “ANTB.” The OTCQB is an inter-dealer quotation and trading system and only market makers can apply to quote securities on the OTCQB. Trading in our common stock on the OTCQB has been limited and sporadic and the quotations set forth below are not necessarily indicative of actual market conditions. Further, these prices reflect inter-dealer prices without retail mark-up, mark-down, or commission, and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

The following table sets forth the high and low last reported sale price information for our common stock for the fiscal quarters:

Holders

As of September 26, 2016 there were of record approximately 346 holders of common stock.

Dividends

We have never paid cash dividends and intend to employ all available funds in the development of our business. We have no plans to pay cash dividends in the near future. If we issue in the future any preferred stock or obtain financing from a bank, the terms of those financings may contain restrictions on our ability to pay dividends for so long as the preferred stock or bank financing is outstanding.

Unregistered Sale of Equity Securities

On May 9, 2016 we entered into a consulting agreement with an investor relations firm. As part of the compensation for our investor relations firm, we agreed to issue a warrant to purchase 10,000 shares of common stock as part of the agreement in reliance on an exemption from registration under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act. The warrants contain a cashless exercise rights, and shall be adjusted both as to the number of Financing Warrant Shares and price into which and at which they are exercisable, based on any splits, conversions, or reorganizations that affect the Company’s common stock.

On April 29, 2016, we completed a close of a private placement transaction with accredited investors in which we issued either Class A Units or Class B Units. Each Class A Unit is priced at $1.10 and consists of one share of our common stock and one-half of one common share purchase warrant. If the Investor had previously invested in one of the Company’s previous private placement transactions and also invested a minimum of $50,000 in this private placement transaction, then the investor would receive Class B Units. Each Class B Unit is priced at $1.10 and consists of one share of common stock and one warrant. We issued an aggregate of 161,679 units and received gross cash proceeds of $178 thousand, excluding placement agent compensation, transaction costs, fees and expenses. We relied on an exemption from registration under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act.

As part of the Placement Agent Agreement dated April 11, 2016, we agreed to modify existing warrants at the time of a financial close on the private placement transaction in reliance on an exemption from registration under Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act. On June 24, 2016, we completed the close and modified existing warrants in which we re-issued warrants to purchase 327,046 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.32 per share.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

Upon our acquisition of Antria Acquisition Corporation pursuant to the Reverse Merger, we assumed the option agreements (“Assumed Options”). The Assumed Options are governed by the terms of their respective option agreements. The Assumed Options generally are nontransferable and expire no later than five years from the date of grant. All of the Assumed Options have vested as of June 30, 2016. The Assumed Options have an exercise price of $4.50 per share.

In June 2013, the Company approved the grant of options to purchase 8,334 shares of common stock to contractors of the Company. The options are governed by the terms of their respective option agreements and expire no later than five years from the date of the grant. The first 25% of the shares of common stock issuable and/or exercised under the option agreement vested immediately on the grant date with the remainder vesting in 25% intervals through October 2015. The options have an exercise price of $4.50.

On March 26, 2014, the Board and the holders of a majority of the Company’s issued and outstanding stock, adopted the Company’s 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan. With the effectiveness of the plan by stockholder approval, the board issued to executives, directors and other employees options to purchase 2,835,000 shares of common stock and have issued additional options to purchase 460,000 shares of common stock through June 30, 2015. The options are governed by the 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan and expire no later than seven years from the date of the grant. The options vest on a monthly basis over 48 months with some options subject to a one year cliff and have an exercise price based on the fair value of the common stock on the date of grant.

On February 23, 2015, the Board adopted the Company’s 2015 Non Qualified Stock Option Plan which allows the Company to issue up to 6,850,000 shares of common stock in the form of stock options. The 2015 Non Qualified Stock Option Plan will be administered by a committee of the Board, or the entire Board of a committee has not been formed. The Board or Committee has the authority to issue options to any eligible persons, which includes employees, officers, non-employee directors, consultants, independent contractors, or advisors providing services to the Company. The Board or Committee also determines the terms and conditions of any options issued. The Board has issued options to purchase 4,112,000 shares of common stock during the year ended June 30, 2015 and issued options to purchase an additional 285,000 shares of common stock through June 30, 2016. The options are governed by the 2015 Non Qualified Stock Option Plan and expire no later than ten years from the date of the grant. The options vest on a monthly basis over 48 months with some options subject to a one year cliff and have an exercise price based on the fair value of the common stock on the date of grant.

The following table displays equity compensation plan information as of June 30, 2016:

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.

Not required for smaller reporting companies.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of contain forward-looking statements which involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report. We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements or the risk factors. You should read the following discussion in conjunction with Antria’s financial statements and related notes.

Summary

Since inception, we have raised $38.3 million, which has enabled us to advance our microsphere platform, including completing preclinical studies for our lead product candidate, AB101, a potential once-weekly injectable basal insulin for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. We continue to believe that AB101’s unique human insulin based formulation has the potential to significantly disrupt the annual $11 billion basal insulin market that is dominated by daily injections of insulin analogs. Our primary objective is to manufacture clinical material in our Louisville, Colorado facility and to commence a clinical study at a contract research organization in Southern California. In order to achieve this objective, we will need to demonstrate that the formulation meets the intended specification at clinical scale, certify the sterility of our manufacturing process and raise additional capital.

Capital Requirements 

Given our ongoing financial needs as well as our desired strategy to advance AB101 while scaling the business to include additional product candidates, we have reached a point in our evolution where we believe we need to raise capital in a different manner by conducting a relatively large institutionally focused round before the end of calendar year 2016. Fortunately, we have received a great deal of interest from the Korean investment community including large, sophisticated healthcare funds.

Concurrent with our planned capital raise in the 4^th quarter of calendar year 2016, we will establish a subsidiary in Seoul which will be led by our Founder and Chairman of the Scientific Advisory Board, Dr. Hoyoung Huh. We plan to expand our core capabilities by tapping into the scientific prowess and know how that exists in Korea. In addition, we may also seek to in-license or acquire technologies and/or product candidates that complement our existing pipeline.

AB101 Update

In accordance with the initial feedback that we received from the FDA in 2015, as a precursor to filing an IND and starting a clinical study, we conducted a six-month stability study of the drug substance (PEGylated insulin) used in AB101, which was satisfactorily completed in June 2016. We also met face-to-face with the FDA in the 2^nd quarter of calendar year 2016 in a pre-IND meeting to discuss our Phase 1 clinical study design. Notably, given the complexity of microsphere products, the agency advised us to ensure that our manufacturing process was robust before filing our IND and commencing a clinical study.

We have constructed a $3.2 million GMP sterile manufacturing suite in our Louisville, Colorado facility to produce AB101 material suitable for injection into patients. Based on the guidance received from the FDA and introduction of a senior manufacturing leader to the Louisville site, in calendar year 2016 we have been methodically engineering, testing and certifying the processes to be used in clinical manufacturing, to include the sterility assurance of the process and product as mandated by the FDA. In the 3^rd quarter of calendar year 2016 we have successfully demonstrated our process by manufacturing sample batches of AB101 material at clinical scale. This has been a significant and complex scientific and engineering undertaking, as prior to this calendar year we had only manufactured AB101 in small non-sterile batches in our laboratories for use in animal studies and for analytical purposes. Furthermore, as part of our testing process we have needed to make adjustments to certain equipment, including further customization in specific instances. This combined endeavor, coupled with delays that we have experienced in receiving specialized parts and equipment from third party suppliers, has contributed to extending the timeline that we established in calendar year 2015 to commence clinical studies.

We have made significant progress in demonstrating that we can manufacture AB101 at clinical scale, but we still must demonstrate that our manufacturing process can be conducted in a sterile fashion prior to making AB101 material for the clinical study, a fundamental and mandated exercise to ensure patient safety in the clinic. Qualifying the sterility of a manufacturing process and environment is generally complex and particularly so when manufacturing microsphere products as AB101 cannot be sterile filtered as is common with most injectable products. Based on our current timeline, which includes a capital raise to be completed prior to the end of calendar year 2016, we are planning to have our facility fully qualified to enable the manufacture of clinical material by the end of the first quarter of calendar year 2017. Following the financing and manufacturing campaign, we will plan to file an IND with the FDA and commence the clinical study in the first half of calendar year 2017.

Naked Short Selling

Our stock price has been under downward pressure for over a year. Following some investigation and with the assistance of outside advisors, we believe we are the target of naked short selling. Naked short selling is when traders sell short shares they do not possess and have not confirmed their ability to possess. This means they are betting the price of the shares will go down and they do not intend to consummate the transaction, but instead intend to settle the transaction in cash.  

Naked short selling, a practice that is prohibited by the SEC's Regulation SHO, damages the value of companies by artificially pushing a company’s stock price down. In fact, the lower the price, the better. Upon tracking our trading activity, we have determined that approximately 44% of our daily trading volume is short selling and we believe that short sellers have been lax in complying with Regulation SHO. We will continue working with outside advisors to address this problem. 

Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of the consolidated financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. On an on-going basis, management evaluates its estimates and judgments, including those related to the useful lives of depreciable assets, the fair value of share-based payments and warrants, fair value of derivative instruments, income tax valuation allowances and the probability and potential magnitude of contingent liabilities. Management bases its estimates and judgments on historical experience and on various factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstance, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. The methods, estimates, and judgments used by us in applying these most critical accounting policies have a significant impact on the results we report in our consolidated financial statements.

Patents

Costs of establishing patents consisting of legal fees paid to third parties and related costs are currently expensed as incurred. We will continue this practice unless we can demonstrate that such costs add economic value to our business, in which case we will capitalize such costs as part of intangible assets. The primary consideration in making this determination is whether or not we can demonstrate that such costs have, in fact, increased the economic value of our intellectual property. The $68,000 value of the patents acquired in connection with the asset acquisition from PRP is being amortized over the remaining patent lives of approximately eight years.

Research and Development

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. These costs consist primarily of expenses for personnel engaged in the design and development of product candidates, the scientific research necessary to produce commercially viable applications of our proprietary drugs, early stage clinical testing of product candidates, and development equipment and supplies, facilities costs and other related overhead.

Stock-Based Compensation

We account for stock-based payments by recognizing compensation expense based upon the estimated fair value of the awards on the date of grant. We determine the estimated grant date fair value of options using the Black-Scholes option pricing model and recognize compensation costs ratably over the vesting period using the straight-line method. Common stock issued in exchange for services is recorded at fair value of the common stock at the date which we became obligated to issue the shares. The value of the shares is expensed over the requisite service period.

Derivatives

We account for our liability warrants by recording the fair value of the warrant derivative liability. The fair value of the warrants is calculated using either the Black-Scholes pricing model or the Lattice Model. We recorded the derivative expense at the inception of each instrument reflecting the difference between the fair value and the cash received. Changes in the fair value in subsequent periods were recorded to derivative gains or losses for the period.

Income Taxes

We use the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, we recognize deferred assets and liabilities based on the differences between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts in the financial statements that will result in taxable or deductible amounts in future years. We establish a valuation allowance for all deferred tax assets for which there is uncertainty regarding realization.

Results of Operations

The Company recorded net losses of $14,935,542 and $11,362,364 for the years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Revenues - We are a preclinical stage company and have not yet generated any revenues.

Expenses – Research and development costs include salaries, benefits and other staff-related costs; consultants and outside costs; material manufacturing costs; and facilities and other costs. Research and development costs for the years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 were $9,448,388 and $4,701,209, respectively. The increase is due to the Company increasing the number of research and development employees. The Company has also seen a significant increase in the manufacturing costs as the Company completed preclinical studies in the current year and had increased the manufacturing costs as we are doing more development work to manufacture AB101.

General and administrative costs as of June 30, 2016 and 2015 were $5,502,902 and $5,996,673, respectively. The decrease is mainly due to the Company no longer using several consultants in 2016 that were used in 2015. The remaining expenses have remained fairly consistent between the years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015.

Factors impacting our Results Operations

We have not generated any revenues since our inception in March 2010. Since inception, we have engaged in organizational activities, conducted private placements which raised additional capital, built out the manufacturing suite, produced material for our lead product candidate under good laboratory practices (GLP), conducted studies using the GLP material, and conducted research and development on our pipeline product candidates.

Due to the time required to conduct clinical trials and obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we anticipate it will be some time before we generate substantial revenues, if ever. We expect to generate operating losses for the foreseeable future, therefore we are continuing to evaluate raising additional capital in the near future to maintain the current operating plan. We cannot assure you that we will secure such financing or that it will be adequate to execute our business strategy. Even if we obtain this financing, it may be costly and may require us to agree to covenants or other provisions that will favor new investors over our existing stockholders.

Net Cash Used in Operating Activities

During the year ended June 30, 2016, our operating activities used approximately $10.5 million in cash. The use of cash was $4.6 million lower than the net loss due to non-cash charges for stock-based compensation, derivative expenses, amortization and depreciation as well as other non-cash activities. Net cash used in operating activities also included a $42,083 increase in other assets and cash provided by a $26,370 increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses and a $105,484 decrease in the deferred lease liability.

During the year ended June 30, 2015, our operating activities used approximately $7.1 million in cash. The use of cash was $3.9 million lower than the net loss due to non-cash charges for stock-based compensation, derivative expenses, amortization and depreciation as well as other non-cash activities. Net cash provided by operating activities also included a $172,514 decrease in other assets and a $436,688 increase in accounts payable and accrued expense and cash used in operating activities of a $264,716 decrease in accounts payable and accrued expenses – related party.

Net Cash Used in Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities during the year ended June 30, 2016 was $1,454,123. During the year, the Company purchased $2,091,790 of fixed assets for the facility, received $187,500 as a return of the security deposit on the lease of the facility and had a decrease in restricted cash of $450,167 as the construction project was completed and the restriction was released.

Net cash used in investing activities during the year ended June 30, 2015 was $3,613,124. During the year, the Company purchased $3,107,957 of fixed assets for the facility, paid $55,000 for the acquisition of the contingent liabilities from the Estate of PRP and had an increase in restricted cash of $450,167 which is being restricted for the construction of the lab and manufacturing facilities.

Net Cash from Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities during the year ended June 30, 2016 was $10,725,928. During the year, the Company received proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock of $6,347,615 and proceeds from an equity issuance of $5,362,521 and paid out issuance costs of $890,357. The Company also made lease payments of $93,851.

Net cash provided by financing activities during the year ended June 30, 2015 was $10,036,190. During the year, the Company received proceeds from equity financings of $11,175,656 and paid out issuance costs of $1,071,568. The Company also made payments of $67,898 on the lease payable.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of June 30, 2016, we have approximately $4.1 million in cash on hand and working capital of approximately $2.8 million. During the year ended June 30, 2016, we closed on a Series A Preferred Stock Offering in which we issued Series A Preferred Stock. On June 24, 2016, with the consent of the Series A Stockholders all of the Series A Preferred Stock was converted to common stock and warrants. During the year ended June 30, 2016, we also closed on an equity transaction in which we issued units consisting of one share of common stock and a warrant to purchase either one-half or one share of common stock.

The Company received net proceeds of approximately $11.7 million from the transactions above. While we do have cash on hand, we anticipate that we will need an additional $15 million to cover operating expenses, clinical trials of AB101 and continuing research and development of our product pipeline through the calendar year end 2017. We are currently evaluating raising additional capital to fund our current and future operations.

Going Concern

The continuation of our business is dependent upon obtaining further financing and achieving a break even or profitable level of operations in our business. The issuance of additional equity securities by us could result in a significant dilution in the equity interests of our current or future stockholders. Obtaining commercial loans, assuming those loans would be available, will increase our liabilities and future cash commitments. There are no assurances that we will be able to obtain additional financing through private placements and/or bank financing or other means necessary to support our working capital requirements. To the extent that funds generated from operations and any private placements, public offerings and/or bank financing are insufficient, we will have to raise additional working capital. No assurance can be given that additional financing will be available, or if available, will be on terms acceptable to us. These conditions raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We had no off-balance sheet transactions.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations at June 30, 2016.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K reguarding the impact of certain accounting pronouncements on our consolidated financial statements.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISKS.

Not required for smaller reporting companies.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.

Our Financial Statements and Supplementary data are incorporated by reference to Item 15 part IV at page F-1 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain “disclosure controls and procedures” as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act, that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our chief executive officer and chief accounting officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

As of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of senior management, including our chief executive officer (our principal executive officer) and our chief accounting officer (our principal financial officer), of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(b) and 15d-15(b). Based upon this evaluation, the chief executive officer and chief accounting officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report were not effective at the reasonable assurance level.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Our internal control over financial reporting has been designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP.

Our internal control over financial reporting includes policies and procedures that pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect transactions and dispositions of our assets; provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorization of our management and directors; and provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on our financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting at June 30, 2016. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework. Based on that assessment under those criteria, our management has determined that, at June 30, 2016, our internal control over financial reporting was not effective due to a material weakness in the system of internal control. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, that creates a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected in a timely manner.

The material weakness assessed by management was that (1) we have not segregated duties as our chief accounting officer can initiate and complete transactions in the general ledger system, (2) we have not implemented measures that would prevent the chief accounting officer from overriding the internal control system and (3) the chief accounting officer is responsible for complex accounting issues without additional review from within the Company. We do not believe that these control weaknesses have resulted in deficient financial reporting because the chief executive officer is aware of his responsibilities under the SEC reporting requirement and personally certifies the financial reports.

This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of our independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management's report was not subject to attestation by our independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to the exemption provided to issuers that are not “large accelerated filers” nor “accelerated filers” under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

Changes in internal controls over financial reporting

During the period covered by this Annual Report, there have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

See Item 5 of this annual report on Form 10-K for a description of our unregistered sales of securities during our fiscal year ended June 30, 2016. Such description is incorporated herein by reference.

See Item 11 of this annual report on Form 10-K for a description of executive bonuses approved by the Board on September 26, 2016. Such description is incorporated herein by reference.

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to our current directors, executive officers and key employees. The term for each director expires at our next annual meeting or until his or her successor is appointed. The ages of the directors, executive officer and key employees are shown as of September 26, 2016.

Set forth below is biographical information with respect to each of the aforementioned individuals.

Nevan C. Elam. Mr. Elam serves as our Chief Executive Officer and as the Chairman of our Board. Mr. Elam was as a Managing Director of Konus Advisory Group, Inc. from January 2012 to September 2014. Prior to his service with Antria and Konus Advisory Group, Inc., Mr. Elam served as Chief Executive Officer and President of AeroSurgical Ltd., a medical device company operating out of Ireland. Prior to his service with AeroSurgical Ltd., Mr. Elam was Head of the Pulmonary Business Unit and Senior Vice President of Nektar Therapeutics from April, 2007 through December 2008 and served as Nektar's Senior Vice President of Corporate Operations and General Counsel from January 2005 through April 2007. From March 2004 through December 2004, Mr. Elam served as an Advisor to E2open, Inc. From February 2002 through March 2004, Mr. Elam served as Chief Financial Officer of E2open and from October 2000 to February 2002, he served as Vice President of Business and Corporate Development of E2open. Prior to E2open, Mr. Elam was a Partner in the corporate practice of the law firm of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, where he served for eight years. He serves as Director of pH Pharma, Co., Ltd, Savara, Inc., AeroSurgical Ltd. and Aerogen Ltd. Mr. Elam received his Juris Doctorate from Harvard Law School and a Bachelors of Arts from Howard University. We believe that Mr. Elam’s experience advising pharmaceutical companies of their unique legal and regulatory obligations qualifies him to serve on the Board.

Sankaram Mantripragada, Ph.D. Dr. Mantripragada serves as our Chief Scientific Officer. Prior to his service with our Company, Dr. Mantripragada served as the Chief Scientific Officer of Antria Delaware. Prior to his service with Antria Delaware, Dr. Mantripragada served as VP of Research and Development of PR Pharmaceuticals from June 2005 until October 2009. From October 2004 until June 2005, Dr. Mantripragada was an advisor to companies specializing in diabetes, cell-based therapies and cardiovascular diseases. Dr. Mantripragada served as Director, Research and Development of Guidant Corporation, now part of Abbott Vascular, from September 2003 until October 2004. Prior to that, he served as Director, Research and Development and Vice President, Scientific Development of SkyePharma from September 1992 until September 2003. Prior to that, he was an Assistant Professor of Biochemistry at the University of Virginia, School of Medicine from January 1989 until September 1994. Dr. Mantripragada obtained his Ph.D. in Molecular Biophysics from the Indian Institute of Science and completed a postdoctoral research program at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry in Germany.

Hoyoung Huh, M.D., Ph.D. Dr. Huh serves as a member of our Board, Chairman of our Scientific Advisory Board and Business Development. Dr. Huh is also currently the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of pH Pharma, Co., Ltd. Dr. Huh was a Managing Director of Konus Advisory Group, Inc. from January 2012 to September 2014 with Mr. Elam. Prior to founding Konus Advisory Group, Inc., Dr. Huh was Chief Executive Officer of BiPar Sciences, Inc. from February 2008 until December 2010. In addition, Dr. Huh has been involved in the formation, management and board positions of multiple biotechnology and innovation-based companies. Dr. Huh currently serves as the Chairman of the Board of Geron Corporation and CytomX Therapeutics as well as on the board of directors for Addex Therapeutics, ReSurge International and SF Jazz. Dr. Huh holds an M.D. from Cornell University Medical College, a Ph.D. in Genetics/Cell Biology from the Cornell University/Sloan-Kettering Institute, and a Bachelor’s degree in biochemistry from Dartmouth College. We believe that Dr. Huh’s medical experience and his experience working with pharmaceutical companies qualifies him to serve on the Board.

Barry Sherman, M.D. Dr. Sherman serves as a member of our Board. Dr. Sherman was most recently President and CEO of StemPar Sciences, a newly formed company in the emerging field of cancer metabolism. He has more than 30 years of experience in academic and pharmaceutical biomedical research. Dr. Sherman was Genentech's first Senior Vice President and Chief Medical Officer, served as President and CEO of Anergen Inc., and was a founder of Pain Therapeutics and BiPar Sciences. Prior to joining Genentech in 1985, Dr. Sherman was Professor of Medicine and Endocrinology at the University of Iowa-College of Medicine, where he served as Associate Chairman of the Department of Internal Medicine and Director of the National Institutes of Health-Sponsored Clinical Research Center. Dr. Sherman is a graduate of the University of Michigan where he received both his A.B. and M.D. degrees with honors. We believe that Dr. Sherman’s medical experience and his experience working with pharmaceutical companies qualifies him to serve on the Board.

David F. Welch, Ph.D. Dr. Welch serves as a member of our Board. Dr. Welch is the co-founder of Infinera Corporation and has served as the President since June 2013 and as a member of the Board since October 2010. Dr. Welch has served in various executive roles within Infinera Corporation since May of 2001. Prior to joining Infinera, Dr. Welch served in various executive roles, including as Chief Technology Officer of the Transmission Products Group of JDS Uniphase Corporation, an optical component company, and Chief Technology Officer and Vice President of Corporate Development of SDL Inc., an optical component company. Dr. Welch holds over 130 patents, and has been awarded the Optical Society of America’s (“OSA”) Adolph Lomb Medal, Joseph Fraunhofer Award, the John Tyndall Award and the IET JJ Thompson Medal for Achievement in Electronics, in recognition of his technical contributions to the optical industry. He is a Fellow of OSA and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. We believe that Dr. Welch’s leadership experience and his experience with public companies qualifies him to serve on the Board.

Morgan Fields. Ms. Fields serves as our Chief Accounting Officer. Ms. Fields, has served as the Controller of Antria Delaware since October 2012. Prior to joining AntriaBio, Ms. Fields was an Assurance Director with McGladrey LLP and had been with McGladrey LLP since 2003. Ms. Fields received her Bachelor's degree in accounting as well as her Masters in Accounting from the University of Northern Iowa.

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships between any of our directors or executive officers.

Legal Proceedings

During the past ten years, we are not aware of any legal proceedings to which any of our executive officers or any associate of any of our executive officers, directors or person nominated to become a director was involved in which is required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 401(f) of Regulation S-K.

Code of Ethics

We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics that is applicable to all of our employees, officers and directors. The code is available on our web site, www.antriabio.com, under the “Investor Relations” tab. We intend to disclose future amendments to, or waivers from, certain provisions of our code of ethics, if any, on the above website within four business days following the date of such amendment or waiver. 

Committees of the Board of Directors

We have no standing audit, compensation, corporate governance or nominating committee as our entire Board performs the function of each of these committees. We do not have a financial expert on our Board, however we will consider adding a financial expert as we continue to grow and increase our Board.

The Company has established a Scientific Advisory Board. Dr. Huh serves as the Chairman of the Scientific Advisory Board. The other members of the board are Fredrick B. Kraemer, M.D., Philip Home, M.A., D.Phil., D.M., F.R.C.P., Jerrold Olefsky, M.D., Andrew R. Hoffman, M.D., and C. Ronald Kahn, M.D.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our executive officers and directors, and persons who own more than 10% of our common stock, to file reports regarding ownership of, and transactions in, our securities with the SEC and to provide us with copies of those filings. Based solely on our review of the copies of such forms received by us, or written representations from certain reporting persons, we believe that during the period from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016, other than Hoyoung Huh, all filing requirements applicable to its officers, directors and ten percent beneficial owners were complied with.

Hoyoung Huh, a director and stockholder of Antria Delaware did not timely report the sale of his beneficial ownership of shares and his acquisition of shares in the equity offering on one Form 4.

Non-Employee Director Compensation

In consideration for their service on the Board, Antria compensates its non-employee directors with an annual fee as well as in the form of options for each year for their continued service. Antria also reimburses its directors for reasonable out of pocket expenses incurred in attending Antria’s board meetings and in carrying out their board duties. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016, Dr. Sherman was paid $25,000 in director fees. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, Dr. Sherman was paid $12,500 in director fees and was granted an option to purchase up to 75,000 shares of common stock under the 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan and 187,000 shares of common stock under the 2015 Non Qualified Stock Option Plan.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation Table

The following table shows the particulars of compensation paid to our current executive officers during the periods ending June 30, 2016 and 2015.

Outstanding Equity Awards

The following table provides a summary of equity awards outstanding for each of the Named Executive Officers and Directors as of June 30, 2016:

Director Compensation

The following table shows the particulars of compensation paid to our current directors during the years ending June 30, 2016 and 2015.

Employment Agreements

Nevan Elam

On June 18, 2012, we entered into an agreement with Nevan Elam to serve as Chief Executive Officer of Antria Delaware. Under the terms of this agreement, Mr. Elam will be entitled to receive an annual base of two hundred thirty thousand dollars ($230,000) until the executive commits full time to the business at which time his salary will increase to three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000). At any time following the date of Mr. Elam’s employment agreement, the Board may request in writing that Mr. Elam commit one hundred percent (100%) of his time and energy to the business of the Company and Mr. Elam shall have 60 days to comply with the Board’s request or shall tender his resignation as an officer of the Company. Mr. Elam is entitled to an annual bonus equal to forty percent (40%) of his base salary based on criteria set by the Board. Mr. Elam is also eligible for a one-time bonus when the Company raises an aggregate of five million dollars in financing. Mr. Elam is also eligible to receive grants of options to purchase shares of common stock as consideration for services rendered. Mr. Elam will be eligible to participate in all benefit programs available to our executives and employees, including any employee incentive option plan, and medical and dental benefit plans. We will also provide life and disability insurance. Also under the terms of the agreement, Mr. Elam will be entitled to reimbursement for reasonable travel and business expenses and receives a monthly automobile allowance. Additionally, at age 65, Mr. Elam is entitled to a pension benefit equal to one-month's salary for each year of employment. The agreement requires Mr. Elam to undertake certain confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation obligations. In the event that we terminate Mr. Elam’s employment without cause, the Company will pay the base salary severance on a monthly basis to Mr. Elam for a period of six months.

On March 26, 2014, we entered into an amended and restated employment agreement with Mr. Elam, amending his employment agreement. The amended employment agreement provides, among other things, for: (i) an increase in Mr. Elam’s base salary from $230,000 to $390,000; (ii) a termination of the bonus due to Mr. Elam under the Employment Agreement upon the Company raising at least $5,000,000 in an equity financing; (iii) a termination of the car allowance granted to Mr. Elam under the Employment Agreement; and (iv) the termination of the pension benefit at the age of 65 equal to one-month salary for each year of employment.

On February 23, 2015, we entered into a second amended and restated employment agreement with our Chief Executive Officer, Nevan Elam, amending the Employment Agreement between the Company and Mr. Elam dated March 26, 2014. The CEO Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement provides, among other things, for: (i) an increase in Mr. Elam’s base salary from $390,000 to $450,000 based on current market data; and (ii) an increase in Mr. Elam’s target bonus from 50% to 60% of his annual salary.

Sankaram Mantripragada

On April 1, 2012, we entered into an agreement with Sankaram Mantripragada to serve as Chief Scientific Officer of the Company. Dr. Mantripragada will report to the Chief Executive Officer and under the terms of the employment agreement, Dr. Mantripragada is entitled to receive an annual base salary of two hundred seventy five thousand ($275,000) which increased to two hundred ninety five thousand ($295,000) on January 1, 2013 that is subject to annual adjustment recommended by the Chief Executive Officer and approved by the Compensation Committee, if any, or the Board. Dr. Mantripragada is eligible for one-time bonuses when certain clinical testing has begun. Dr. Mantripragada also is entitled to receive an annual cash bonus of up to forty percent (40%) of his base salary, determined based on specified criteria agreed upon in advance. Dr. Mantripragada is eligible to receive grants of options to purchase shares of our common stock as consideration for services rendered, at the Board’s discretion. Dr. Mantripragada is eligible to participate in all benefit programs available to our executives and employees, including medical and dental benefit plans. Also under the terms of the agreement, Dr. Mantripragada is entitled to reimbursement for reasonable travel and business expenses and receives a monthly automobile allowance. Additionally, at the age of 65, Dr. Mantripragada is entitled to a pension benefit equal to one month’s salary for each year of his employment. If he is terminated other than for cause or due to or after a change of control, all of Dr. Mantripragada’ unvested options will accelerate, and he will continue to receive his then base salary and health insurance for a period of up to twelve months. The agreement also requires Dr. Mantripragada to undertake certain confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation obligations.

On March 26, 2014, we entered into an amended and restated employment agreement with Dr. Mantripragada, amending the employment agreement. The amended employment agreement amends the employment agreement to remove the pension benefit owned to Dr. Mantripragada such that Dr. Mantripragada is no longer entitled to a pension benefit at the age of 65 equal to one-month’s salary for each year of employment.

On February 23, 2015, we entered into a second amended and restated employment agreement (the “CSO Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement”) with our Chief Scientific Officer, Sankaram Mantripragada, amending the CSO Employment Agreement between the Company and Dr. Mantripragada dated March 26, 2014 (the “CSO Employment Agreement”). The CSO Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement provides, among other things, for: (i) an increase in Mr. Mantripragada’s base salary from $295,000 to $350,000 based on current market data; and (ii) an increase in Mr. Mantripragada’s target bonus from 40% to 45% of his annual salary.

Hoyoung Huh

On January 7, 2015, we entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Employment Agreement”) with Dr. Huh with an effective date of January 1, 2015 (the “Effective Date”). Under the terms of the Employment Agreement, beginning on Effective Date, Dr. Huh will be paid a base salary of $216,000 (the “Base Salary”) per annum payable in accordance with our payroll practices for executives, but no less than once per month. In addition, we agreed to pay Dr. Huh a one-time cash payment of $95,000 in consideration for his efforts to support the Company in the 2014 calendar year. Dr. Huh will also be entitled to earn an annual performance bonus equal to 200% (the “Target Bonus”) of the Base Salary based upon performance criteria set by the Board in its sole discretion. Dr. Huh is also entitled to a one-time transaction related bonus (the “Transaction Bonus”) payable in cash or equity of the Company, subject to the Board’s discretion, equal to three percent (3%) of the gross proceeds of, (i) a Business Combination (as defined in the Employment Agreement), (ii) an equity or debt financing of the Company or (iii) strategic partnerships and collaborations

Morgan Fields

On January 27, 2014, the Company entered into an employment agreement with Morgan Fields (the “CAO Employment Agreement”) to serve as the Controller of the Company. Under the terms of the CAO Employment Agreement Ms. Fields will be entitled to receive an annual base of $100,000 an annual bonus of up to 15% of her base salary based on criteria set by the Company. Ms. Fields is eligible to participate in all benefit programs available to our executives and employees, including medical and dental benefit plans. The agreement also requires Ms. Fields to undertake certain confidentiality obligations. On July 18, 2014, the Board approved the appointment of Ms. Fields to Chief Accounting Officer. The board approved the change in the annual salary to $130,000 and the issuance of additional stock options for 25,000 shares of common stock. All other terms of the original CAO Employment Agreement remain.

On February 23, 2015, we entered into an amended and restated employment agreement (the “CAO Amended and Restated Employment Agreement”) with our Chief Accounting Officer, Morgan Fields, amending the CAO Employment Agreement. The CAO Amended and Restated Employment Agreement provides, among other things, for: (i) an increase in Ms. Fields’ base salary from $130,000 to $145,000 based on current market data; and (ii) an increase in the target bonus from 15% to 25% of her annual salary.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

We do not have a standing compensation committee, however our entire Board performs similar functions. Because we assumed the employment agreements of Antria Delaware in connection with the Reverse Merger, the Board did not have any deliberations concerning the compensation of our executive officers. All amendments to compensation agreements were approved by the Board. With respect to the amendments to Messrs. Elam and Mantripragada’s employment agreements, Dr. Huh and Dr. Sherman participated in the deliberation of such amendments.

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The following tables set forth information as of September 26, 2016, regarding the ownership of our common stock by:

The number of shares beneficially owned and the percentage of shares beneficially owned are based on 35,529,097 shares of common stock outstanding as of September 26, 2016.

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. Under these rules, beneficial ownership includes any shares as to which the individual or entity has sole or shared voting power or investment power and includes any shares that an individual or entity has the right to acquire beneficial ownership of within 60 days through the exercise of any warrant, stock option, or other right. Shares subject to options that are exercisable within 60 days following September 26, 2016, are deemed to be outstanding and beneficially owned by the optionee for the purpose of computing share and percentage ownership of that optionee but are not deemed to be outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person. Except as indicated in the footnotes to this table, and as affected by applicable community property laws, all persons listed have sole voting and investment power for all shares shown as beneficially owned by them.

Information regarding our Equity Compensation Plan is set forth in Item 5 above and is incorporated herein by Reference.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.

Advisory Agreement

On July 2, 2012, Antria Delaware and Konus Advisory Group, Inc. (“Konus”) entered into an advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) whereby Konus agreed to provide Antria Delaware services including, but not limited to, finance and strategy, clinical design, project management and portfolio assessment. Antria Delaware agreed to pay Konus a monthly retainer in the amount of $9,000 per month to cover general and administrative matters plus an hour fee ranging from $100 to $700 per hour for additional services provided to Antria Delaware. On March 11, 2015, the advisory agreement was terminated and the remaining outstanding payable balance due to Konus of $132,339 was written off by Konus.

pH Pharma Collaboration Agreement

On February 29, 2016, we entered into a Strategic Collaboration and License Agreement (“Collaboration Agreement”) with pH Pharma Co., Ltd.(“PH”). Dr. Huh, and officer and Director of the Company is also the CEO of PH and a majority owner. Pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement, the Company conditionally granted PH an exclusive, transferable, license under AB101 patents, patent applications and all other relevant Company intellectual property to manufacture and or offer for sale the Company’s lead product candidate, AB101, in Korea, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam (the “License”). The License shall only become effective when PH has purchased a minimum of $8 million of the Company’s securities. In addition, under the terms of the Collaboration Agreement, PH and the Company agree to work together to explore opportunities to utilize the Company’s proprietary microsphere platform for different therapeutic opportunities.

As of June 30, 2016, PH has invested $2 million into the Company and in order for the License to become effective, PH must purchase at least $6 million of the Company’s common stock in one or more private placement transactions at prices to be negotiated in good faith by the parties based on commercially reasonable terms.

pH Pharma Services Agreement

On July 1, 2016, the Company and PH entered into a Master Services Agreement in which PH will perform business development services in Korea for the Company at a price of $10,350 per month.

Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons

We rely on our Board to review related party transactions on an ongoing basis to prevent conflicts of interest. Our Board reviews a transaction in light of the affiliations of the director, officer or employee and the affiliations of such person’s immediate family. Transactions are presented to our Board for approval before they are entered into or, if this is not possible, for ratification after the transaction has occurred. If our Board finds that a conflict of interest exists, then it will determine the appropriate remedial action, if any. Our Board approves or ratifies a transaction if it determines that the transaction is consistent with the best interests of the Company.

Director Independence

Because our common stock is not currently listed on a national securities exchange, we have used the definition of “independence” of the NASDAQ Stock Market to determine whether our current director or our new directors are independent. We have determined that as of the date of this Annual Report Barry Sherman and David Welch would qualify as “independent” in accordance with the published listing requirements of The NASDAQ Stock Market and for purposes of Section 16 of the Exchange Act. NASDAQ Listing Rule 5605(a)(2) provides that an “independent director” is a person other than an officer or employee of the Company or any other individual having a relationship which, in the opinion of our Board, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.

The NASDAQ listing rules provide that a director cannot be considered independent if:

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES.

Audit-Related Fees

The aggregate fees billed by EKS&H LLLP for professional services rendered to us in connection with the audits of our annual financial statements for the years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 were $112,895 and $124,292, respectively.

Audit fees represent amounts billed for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements, the reviews of the financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and reviews of any other SEC filings. Our board of directors pre-approves all audit and non-audit services performed by our auditors and the fees to be paid in connection with such services in order to assure that the provision of such services does not impair the auditor’s independence.

Tax Fees

The aggregate fees billed by BKD for professional services rendered to us in connection with the completion of the tax returns for the years ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 were $8,875 and $8,200, respectively.

All Other Fees

None

PART IV

The following documents are filed as part of this Form 10-K, as set forth on the Index to Financial Statements found on page F-1.

Not Applicable.

* Filed herewith

SIGNATURES

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

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this registration statement has been signed by the following persons in the capacities and on the dated indicated.

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

ANTRIABIO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders

AntriaBio, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Louisville, CO

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of AntriaBio, Inc. and subsidiary (the “Company”) as of June 30, 2016 and 2015, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the periods then ended. The Company’s management is responsible for these consolidated 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 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 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 financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of AntriaBio, Inc. and subsidiary as of June 30, 2016 and 2015, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the periods then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations that raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 3. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ EKS & H LLLP

September 28, 2016

Denver, Colorado

AntriaBio, Inc.

Consolidated Balance Sheets

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements

AntriaBio, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Operations