e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2007
Commission File Number 000-50583
BioVeris Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
DELAWARE
|
|
80-0076765 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)
|
|
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
16020 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE, GAITHERSBURG, MD 20877
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
301-869-9800
(Registrants 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 $0.001 par value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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 o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.
Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark 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 registrants knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K
or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or
a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer o Accelerated filer þ Non-accelerated filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act)
Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the
registrant as of September 29, 2006, computed by reference to the closing sale price of such stock
quoted on The Nasdaq National Market on such date, was approximately $192,172,350.
The number of shares outstanding of the registrants Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share, as
of May 25, 2007 was 27,247,902.
Documents Incorporated by Reference: Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement for our 2007 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K Report.
BIOVERIS CORPORATION
Annual Report On Form 10-K
For The Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2007
Table Of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
PART I |
|
|
|
|
Item 1. Business |
|
|
4 |
|
Item 1A. Risk Factors |
|
|
25 |
|
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments |
|
|
40 |
|
Item 2. Properties |
|
|
40 |
|
Item 3. Legal Proceedings |
|
|
40 |
|
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
|
|
41 |
|
PART II |
|
|
|
|
Item 5. Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder
Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities |
|
|
41 |
|
Item 6. Selected Consolidated Financial Data |
|
|
42 |
|
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operation |
|
|
44 |
|
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
|
|
58 |
|
Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
|
|
59 |
|
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting
and Financial Disclosure |
|
|
84 |
|
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures |
|
|
84 |
|
Item 9B. Other Information |
|
|
85 |
|
PART III |
|
|
|
|
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant |
|
|
85 |
|
Item 11. Executive Compensation |
|
|
85 |
|
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
|
|
85 |
|
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions |
|
|
86 |
|
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services |
|
|
86 |
|
PART IV |
|
|
|
|
Item 15. Exhibits |
|
|
86 |
|
Signatures |
|
|
92 |
|
As used herein, BioVeris, we, us and our refer to BioVeris Corporation and its
subsidiaries. M-SERIES, TRICORDER, BIOVERIFY, and BIOVERIS are our trademarks. This Form 10-K also
contains disclosures relating to brand names, trademarks or service marks of other companies, and
these brand names, trademarks or service marks are the property of those other holders.
2
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
In addition to historical information, this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this report that are not statements of historical
fact, including statements about the proposed merger transaction with Roche Holding Ltd and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries and affiliates, which we collectively refer to in this Form 10-K as
Roche, markets and potential markets, market growth for diagnostic and vaccine products, potential
impact of competitive products, our expectations regarding future revenue, the potential market for
products in development, the description of our plans and objectives for future operations,
assumptions underlying such plans and objectives, the need for and availability of additional
capital and other forward-looking statements included in ITEM 7 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A), are forward-looking statements.
The words may, should, will, expect, could, anticipate, believe, estimate, plan,
intend and similar expressions have been used to identify certain of the forward-looking
statements. In this Form 10-K we have based these forward-looking statements on managements
current expectations, estimates and projections and they are subject to a number of risks,
uncertainties and assumptions which could cause actual results to differ materially from those
described in the forward-looking statements. The following factors are among those that may cause
actual results to differ materially from our forward-looking statements:
|
|
|
completion of the proposed merger transaction with Roche on a timely basis, if at all; |
|
|
|
|
changes in our strategy and business plan, including our plans for vaccines, the
clinical diagnostics, biosecurity, life science and industrial markets and other healthcare
opportunities; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to develop and introduce new or enhanced products; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to enter into new collaborations on favorable terms, if at all; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to expand the distribution and to maintain or increase sales of existing
products, including as a result of proposed merger transaction with Roche; |
|
|
|
|
changes in customer demand, the timing of significant orders or the demand for rapid
testing products in each of our markets; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to expand our manufacturing capabilities or find a suitable manufacturer on
acceptable terms or in a timely manner; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to develop our selling, marketing and distribution capabilities; |
|
|
|
|
our and our licensees ability to obtain approvals from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as the FDA, and other governmental
approvals for our and their clinical testing products or for vaccine products, including
regulatory changes, uncertainties or delays; |
|
|
|
|
the ability of our licensees to effectively develop and market products based on the
technology we license to them; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to win competitively awarded government contracts in the future and retain
existing government contracts; |
|
|
|
|
domestic and foreign governmental and public policy changes, particularly related to
healthcare costs and biosecurity funding, that may affect new investments and purchases
made by our customers; |
|
|
|
|
competition from companies with greater financial and capital resources than ours; |
|
|
|
|
availability of financing and financial resources in the amounts, at the times and on
the terms required to support our future business; |
3
|
|
|
our dependence on a limited number of suppliers for materials used in the manufacturing
of our products; |
|
|
|
|
rapid technological developments in each of our markets and our ability to respond to
those changes in a timely, cost-effective manner; |
|
|
|
|
any potential future disputes regarding the scope, permitted use, royalties, payment
obligations and other material terms of our license agreements, including those with Roche,
which we refer to in this Form 10-K as the Roche License, and with Meso Scale Diagnostics,
LLC, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as MSD; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to receive payment over time from Meso Scale Technologies, LLC., which we
refer to in this Form 10-K as MST, from the sale of our interests in MSD; |
|
|
|
|
protection and validity of our patent and other intellectual property rights and the
scope of third party patent rights; |
|
|
|
|
relationships between us and certain companies with which we are affiliated; and |
|
|
|
|
changes in general economic, business and industry conditions. |
These factors are not necessarily all of the important factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those expressed in any of our forward-looking statements. Other unknown or
unpredictable factors could also have material adverse effects on future events. We disclaim any
intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements.
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Summary
We are a global healthcare and biosecurity company developing proprietary technologies in
diagnostics and vaccinology. We are dedicated to the commercialization of innovative products and
services for healthcare providers, their patients and their communities.
We were organized as IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on June
6, 2003, and converted into BioVeris Corporation, a newly formed Delaware corporation on September
22, 2003. On February 13, 2004, IGEN International, Inc., which we refer to in this Form 10-K as
IGEN, and Roche consummated a merger transaction pursuant to which Roche acquired IGEN and IGEN
simultaneously distributed our common stock to its stockholders.
On April 4, 2007, we and an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche entered into an Agreement and
Plan of Merger, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as the Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the
proposed Merger Agreement, a subsidiary of Roche will be merged with and into us, with BioVeris
surviving as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche. The completion of the proposed merger
is subject to a number of customary conditions, including, among others, approval by our
stockholders, the absence of certain legal impediments to the consummation of the merger, the
completion of a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States under Section
271 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, and the expiration or termination of the
applicable waiting periods under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as
amended, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as the HSR Act, and under certain German anti-trust
laws, and other customary conditions. The applicable waiting periods
under the HSR Act and German anti-trust laws have expired
and we have scheduled a special meeting of stockholders for June 25, 2007 at which our stockholders
will vote on the Merger Agreement.
4
For more information about the Merger Agreement, see ITEM 8 Consolidated Financial Statements
and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. The foregoing
description of the Merger Agreement does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to the full text of the Merger Agreement, a copy of which is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which we
refer to in this Form 10-K as the SEC, and the terms of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Diagnostics
We develop, manufacture and market our M-SERIES family of products, which can serve as a platform
for diagnostic systems to be used for the detection and measurement of biological or chemical
substances. We incorporate our technologies into our instrument systems, tests and reagents, which
are the biological and chemical components used to perform such tests. Using the M-SERIES platform,
we intend to integrate technologies and products to develop small, expandable and modular systems
that can perform a wide variety of tests for the following markets:
|
|
|
Non-clinical diagnostics for the biosecurity, life science and industrial markets. The
non-clinical diagnostics market includes biosecurity products for the detection of
bacteria, viruses and toxins that may pose a military or public health threat; life science
testing for drug discovery and development that is performed by pharmaceutical and
biotechnology companies; and industrial testing for the detection of foodborne and
waterborne disease causing pathogens. |
|
|
|
|
Clinical diagnostics. The clinical diagnostics market includes the testing of patient
samples to measure the presence of disease and monitor medical conditions. We are
developing products to be used in the clinical diagnostics market and believe that our
products will be ideally suited for the immunodiagnostic and nucleic acid testing market
segments of the clinical testing market. |
Our M-SERIES instruments are used in biodefense programs for homeland security, including by the
Department of Defense, or DOD. We believe there will be an increasing opportunity to sell our
products as biosecurity tools for use by commercial, governmental and military organizations around
the world, as well as in public health.
We are also selling two types of M-SERIES instruments for life science research to pharmaceutical
and biotechnology researchers, as well as to scientists at academic and government research
institutions. Immunogenicity testing is performed by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in
order to characterize the ability of protein-based therapeutics to stimulate an immune response.
Antibodies that result from an immune response to a protein-based drug can reduce its efficacy and
cause significant side effects, such as allergic reactions. Because of serious side effects that
have been reported over the last few years, it has become increasingly necessary to determine if an
immune response to protein-based drugs develops in patients by screening for the presence of
antibodies, confirming their specificity, characterizing the type of antibodies present and
determining whether they interfere with binding events. Immunogenicity testing is done during
pre-clinical studies and may continue through the clinical trials required for regulatory approval.
In some cases, the FDA requires additional testing after a drug has been approved. We believe our
M-SERIES product line for the life science market is ideally suited to perform immunogenicity
testing by measuring low affinity antibodies with high sensitivity, all in the presence of the
highly concentrated drug.
We believe that the emergence of simple, more accurate and cost-effective clinical diagnostic
products is shifting the site of clinical diagnostic testing from clinical reference laboratories
and central hospital laboratories to decentralized patient care centers, such as physicians
offices, ambulatory clinics, hospital emergency rooms, surgical and intensive care units, hospital
satellite laboratories and nurses stations, which are collectively referred to as clinical
point-of-care sites.
Our own product development efforts are focused on M-SERIES instruments and tests for the
biosecurity market and for the clinical diagnostics market, particularly for point-of-care sites.
We are seeking to develop, market and sell products for the clinical point-of-care market segment
through a combination of direct efforts and collaborative arrangements. We also are pursuing
opportunities in the clinical reference laboratory and central hospital laboratory market segments
through collaborative arrangements.
5
The first clinical diagnostic system being developed by us is a clinical analyzer that builds on
the M-SERIES instruments we sell in the biosecurity and life science markets. We believe that the
clinical analyzer will provide results to a physician rapidly with the same levels of sensitivity,
accuracy or consistency as a large instrument in a clinical reference laboratory or in a central
laboratory, thereby permitting the physician to make a more timely
decision regarding the patients course of treatment. Among the applications that we plan to develop is a
proprietary approach for determining an individuals personal immune status through unique
diagnostic panels. We will seek approval from the FDA for the clinical analyzer and other in vitro
diagnostics products at the appropriate stage of their product development. There can be no
assurance that such approval will be obtained.
Vaccines
Since fiscal 2005, we have expanded our business model to target the field of vaccines and have
obtained rights to certain vaccine candidates through license and option agreements. These vaccine
candidates include:
|
|
|
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B and Y |
|
|
|
|
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup C, in combination with certain other vaccines; |
|
|
|
|
Haemophilus influenzae type b |
|
|
|
|
Group A and Group B Streptococcus; |
|
|
|
|
Chlamydia; |
|
|
|
|
Candida albicans; |
|
|
|
|
Pneumococcus; |
|
|
|
|
Anthrax bacilli; and |
|
|
|
|
Urinary tract infection (E coli). |
Under these license and option agreements, we paid certain upfront fees and may also make
additional future payments for patent costs, milestone fees, including for initiating and
completing human clinical trials and receiving regulatory approvals, and royalties on future sales.
In connection with our efforts to determine an individuals personal immune status through unique
diagnostic test panels, we entered into a license and research agreement with Jewish General
Hospital or JGH in Montreal under which we received an exclusive, worldwide license to the use of
a JGH database that contains demographic data and the serologic status of an immigrant population
linked to numerous infectious diseases.
Investor Information
We were organized as IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on June
6, 2003, and converted to BioVeris Corporation, a newly formed Delaware corporation, on September
22, 2003. Our executive offices are located at 16020 Industrial Drive, Gaithersburg, Maryland
20877. Our Internet website is located at http://www.bioveris.com. Information contained on our
website is not part of this Form 10-K or any other filing which may incorporate by reference this
Form 10-K. We provide to the public on our website, free of charge, our annual report on Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed
or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon
as practicable after such material is filed electronically with, or furnished to, the SEC. Any
report, proxy statement or other information we file with the SEC may be read and copied at the
SECs Public Reference Room at 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. Information on the
operation of the Public Reference Room is available by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC
also maintains a web site (http://www.sec.gov) that makes available reports, proxy statements and
other information regarding issuers that file electronically with it.
6
Our Strategy
Our strategy is based on the direct development and sale of products utilizing our technologies,
while at the same time entering into collaborations with third parties that can assist us in
product development, manufacturing and marketing efforts. Key elements of our strategy are to:
|
|
pursue collaborative relationships to accelerate new product development and enhance global manufacturing and marketing
capabilities; however, under the terms of the Merger Agreement, we currently have restrictions on our ability to pursue
such relationships; |
|
|
|
establish leadership positions in emerging markets; |
|
|
|
develop and market product line extensions and an expanded menu of assays; and |
|
|
|
maximize high value-added opportunities in vaccines. |
Our Technology
Our
technologies, include:
|
|
ECL technology developed and owned by us; |
|
|
|
various improvements to ECL technology developed by Roche and licensed to us; |
|
|
|
polymerase chain reaction technology developed by Roche and licensed to us for use in several specified markets, including
the human and animal in vitro diagnostics markets, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as PCR technology; and |
In addition, we have rights to a portfolio of unique vaccine candidates.
ECL Technology
ECL technology is based on electrochemiluminescence that is protected by patents in the United
States and internationally. ECL technology permits the detection and measurement of a biological or
chemical substance within a given sample. It works by labeling the targeted substance within a
sample using a compound and binding the newly labeled substance to magnetizable beads. The beads
can then be separated from the rest of the sample using a magnet. When this newly labeled substance
is stimulated, the label emits light at a particular wavelength.
The light emitted by the label can be measured with a high degree of accuracy. The level of
intensity of the light emitted by the label is determined by the amount of the targeted biological
substance present in the sample for the label to attach itself to. Thus, the light emissions permit
the accurate detection and measurement of the targeted biological or chemical substance.
ECL technology provides a uniform format that can be used to conduct a multitude of tests,
including immunodiagnostic tests and nucleic acid tests. The essential component of an ECL
technology-based system is the flow cell, which contains a magnet to separate the labeled substance
from the sample being tested and a light detector to measure the electrochemiluminescence. The
flow cell has been designed so that it can be incorporated into a variety of instruments, ranging
from large central laboratory random access systems to small batch systems.
We believe that the major features and benefits of ECL technology-based systems are:
|
|
Simplicity: uniform testing format reduces time and labor in performing a test or series of tests and permits complete
automation of the testing process. |
|
|
|
Flexibility: enables a single instrument to perform immunodiagnostic tests on large and small molecules and to perform
nucleic acid tests, including in the form of DNA and RNA tests.
|
7
|
|
Cost: reduces the cost per test by minimizing the amount of expensive reagents needed and the number of steps required to
prepare a sample for testing. |
|
|
|
Speed: reduces time from test set-up to detection, producing rapid results and enabling high sample throughput. |
|
|
|
Sensitivity: allows detection of targeted biological substances at very low concentrations. |
|
|
|
Consistency: provides highly-reproducible measurements. |
|
|
|
Accuracy: provides results that are identical or close to the standard reference measurement. |
|
|
|
Stability: extends the shelf-life of the reagent that contains the label used in testing and improves measurement accuracy. |
We believe that ECL technology is well suited for the continued development and sale of the
M-SERIES family of instruments that can be used in all of our target diagnostic markets. We believe
the technology will permit immunodiagnostic and nucleic acid tests to be performed using the same
detection method.
ECL technology is well established in the market, evidenced by the fact that our licensees have
developed multiple product lines based on ECL technology. There can be no assurance that we will
succeed in profitably developing, marketing and selling products based on ECL technology.
Improvements from Roche
We acquired from Roche Diagnostics and its affiliates an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive,
fully-paid, royalty-free, perpetual license under certain patents covering technologies based on:
|
|
Roche Diagnostics ECL instruments and all aspects of ECL assays
developed prior to the completion of the merger between Roche and
IGEN; |
|
|
|
certain PCR technology; and |
|
|
|
certain aspects of ECL technology and robotics used or developed prior
to the completion of the merger between Roche and IGEN. |
The license, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as the improvements license agreement, may be used
without a field restriction (except as set forth in the next sentence) to develop, make, reproduce,
modify, use, sell and otherwise commercially exploit any product or service based on ECL
technology. In addition, we are licensed to use certain intellectual property rights of Hitachi
High Technology Corporation and its affiliates only outside the field defined in the improvements
license agreement to develop, make, reproduce, modify, use, sell and otherwise commercially exploit
any product or services based on ECL technology. Subject to an exception, the field in the
improvements license agreement is the same as the field in the license agreement. We may sublicense
rights under both of these licenses to affiliates and third parties.
The improvements license agreement restricts our right to use such improvements in certain types of
ECL products. In addition, the license does not permit us to develop, use, manufacture or sell ECL
assays that contain labeling that make them useable on ECL instruments manufactured, sold or placed
by Roche Diagnostics or its licenses or resellers, in the field.
PCR Technology
PCR technology includes the amplification of specific nucleic acid sequences to a sufficient
quantity of the nucleic acid sequence to permit detection and quantification. The process of
nucleic acid amplification is commonly used for diagnostic procedures involving infectious agents,
such as the AIDS virus, because of the need to detect the smallest amount of virus possible in the
blood or other clinical samples.
8
The PCR license agreements obtained by us from Roche and its affiliates will allow us to develop
nucleic acid tests for several specified markets, including the human and animal in vitro
diagnostics markets. We believe that nucleic acid tests are currently one of the fastest growing
segments of the clinical diagnostics market and would complement our immunodiagnostic product line.
We do not currently sell any product based on the PCR technology licensed from Roche. For more
information about the license fee and royalty payments in connection with the PCR license
agreements, see ITEM 8 Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements Note 2.
Vaccines
Since fiscal 2005, we have expanded our business model to target the field of vaccines and have
obtained rights to certain vaccine candidates through license and option agreements. These vaccine
candidates include:
|
|
|
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B and Y |
|
|
|
|
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup C, in combination with certain other vaccines; |
|
|
|
|
Haemophilus influenzae type b |
|
|
|
|
Group A and Group B Streptococcus; |
|
|
|
|
Chlamydia; |
|
|
|
|
Candida albicans; |
|
|
|
|
Pneumococcus; |
|
|
|
|
Anthrax bacilli; and |
|
|
|
|
Urinary tract infection (E coli). |
Under these license and option agreements, we paid certain upfront fees and may also make
additional future payments for patent costs, milestone fees, including for initiating and
completing human clinical trials and receiving regulatory approvals, and royalties on future sales.
Products and Markets Using Our Technology
The following table summarizes the range of products that we have licensed, developed or are
developing:
BioVeris Products
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diagnostics |
|
Customer Application |
|
Market |
|
Status |
M-SERIES (clinical diagnostics
analyzer and tests)
|
|
Screen, monitor and diagnose
medical conditions
|
|
Clinical
|
|
Development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M-SERIES (M384 Analyzer, reagents,
biomarkers and antibody panels)
|
|
Drug discovery and development
|
|
Life science
|
|
Product sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M-SERIES (M1M Analyzer, reagents,
biomarkers and antibody panels)
|
|
Drug discovery and development
|
|
Life science
|
|
Product sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M-SERIES (M1M(R) Analyzer and reagents)
|
|
Detection of food and
beverage contaminants and
bacteria, viruses and toxins
|
|
Biosecurity
|
|
Product sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cell culture reagents
|
|
Biological research
|
|
Life science
|
|
Product sales |
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vaccines |
|
Customer Application |
|
Market |
|
Status |
Neisseria meningitides serogroup
B, Y and C (combination only)
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Haemophilus influenzae type b
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group A & B streptococcus
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chlamydia
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group A streptococcus
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pneumococcus
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthrax bacilli
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Urinary tract infection (E. coli)
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Candida albicans
|
|
Preventative medicine
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
Pre-clinical research |
The following table summarizes the range of products that our licensees have developed using
our ECL technology. For a description of the commercial arrangements and license agreements that
we have with our licensees see Business-Collaborations and License Arrangements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Licensee Products |
|
Customer Application |
|
Market |
|
Status |
|
Licensee |
Elecsys 2010 /ECL
module of E170
/ cobas e 601 /cobas
e 411
|
|
Screen, monitor and diagnose
medical conditions
|
|
Clinical
|
|
Product sales
|
|
Roche |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NucliSens/NASBA QR
|
|
Screen, monitor and diagnose
medical conditions
|
|
Clinical
|
|
Product sales
|
|
bioMérieux |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Screen, monitor and diagnose
medical conditions
|
|
Life science
|
|
Product sales
|
|
bioMérieux |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Picolumi
|
|
Screen, monitor and diagnose
medicak conditions
|
|
Clinical
|
|
Product sales
|
|
Eisai (Japan) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector product line
|
|
Drug discovery and development
|
|
Life science
|
|
Product sales
|
|
MSD |
Our Products and Markets
Non-Clinical Diagnostics
Biosecurity. We are commercializing products in the emerging market segment for biosecurity, which
involves the detection of bacteria, viruses and toxins that may pose a military or public health
threat, as well as for the detection of foodborne and waterborne disease causing pathogens. We
believe there will be an increasing opportunity to use our products as a biosecurity tool in
commercial, governmental and military organizations around the world, as well as in public health,
due to the early adoption of our products by key decision makers. Our presence in the biosecurity
market may also provide us with the opportunity to sell products to other diagnostics markets. We
believe that tests developed for the biosecurity field may also have utility in the clinical
diagnostic markets by providing tests for patients exposed to biological agents or toxins. We
expect that our non-clinical products for biosecurity will generally not require the approval of a
U.S. government agency prior to marketing of the products in the United States. See ITEM 1
Business Government Regulation Biosecurity and Industrial Testing Products for a more detailed
description of the government regulations to which we are subject in connection with our
biosecurity products.
10
Our M-SERIES M1M Analyzer is designed to function in demanding field environments, as well as in
the laboratory. The M1M is an automated analyzer designed for use
with our BioVerify(TM) test kits
for the detection of botulinum neurotoxins, anthrax, ricin, staphylococcal enterotoxins A and B, E. coli O157, and salmonella,
among others. The system has easy-to-use sample handling and can detect biological agents quickly
and with high sensitivity. System software reports positive or negative results automatically in a
standard format. The M1M Analyzer was built with specification and configuration inputs from our
customers and is designed to meet the needs of field, mobile and centralized laboratories. The
M-SERIES M1M Analyzer was also designed for use by first responders, such as trauma centers,
emergency medical workers, firefighters and police. We market the M-SERIES product family directly
through our own sales, marketing and applications teams. M1M instrument systems originally designed
for the biosecurity market are now also being used in life science.
U.S. Army scientists at Fort Detrick and the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) have
developed ECL technology-based biological tests designed to measure specific agents and toxins in
environmental samples. We have a contract with the DOD pursuant to which the DOD may purchase these
tests from us. The tests are used by various laboratories and field sites of the DOD. For risks
related to our contracts with the government see ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to
Regulation and Government Contracts.
We expect to continue to work with commercial and U.S. governmental agencies to expand the use of
ECL technology-based products in a variety of homeland security and biodefense initiatives,
including the development of reagents for the detection of biological agents, such as anthrax,
staphylococcus enterotoxin B and botulinum, or toxins in environmental samples.
We are also engaged in initiatives for product development for this market, including:
|
|
our Cooperative Research and Development Agreement with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases for
the development of tests for the detection of biological toxins; and |
|
|
|
the continued integration of our ECL technology into the Air Force biological testing program. |
Certain of our U.S. government contracts contain provisions that grant to the U.S. government a
non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to use inventions made by us in the
course of performing such contracts, or have such inventions used by or on behalf of the U.S.
government, for research or other government purposes. See ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating
to Regulation and Government Contracts.
Life Science. We provide products and services for the discovery and development of new drugs to
the life science market. Our product development and marketing efforts center on two M-SERIES
instruments the M384 and the M1M(R) instruments each of which build on the ECL technology-based
applications provided by the M-SERIES systems.
Our products can be used by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, universities and other
research organizations in most phases of drug discovery, including:
|
|
validating targets identified through genomics; |
|
|
|
screening large numbers of compounds generated through combinatorial chemistry; |
|
|
|
re-testing and optimization of lead compounds; and |
|
|
|
clinical trial testing of drug candidates. |
After identifying disease targets and synthesizing chemical compounds, researchers attempt to find
compounds that are drug candidates. This drug discovery process involves developing an assay to
determine whether a particular compound has the desired effect on a target and then screening
compounds using that assay. We believe that the need of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies
to rapidly identify therapeutic targets, screen thousands of compounds per day against those
targets and then optimize the leads has created new opportunities for ECL technology-based systems
in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry. Our M-SERIES instruments are compatible with
multi-well microplates that are commonly used in drug discovery and development laboratories and
can be fully integrated with many existing automation and robotic systems. These instruments were
designed to enable researchers to test new biological targets against potential drug compounds with higher levels of accuracy and sensitivity.
We believe they may also perform highly sensitive tests more quickly at a lower cost than other
methods and this may permit a drug candidate to move more rapidly into the later stages of drug
development, clinical trials and ultimately into the market.
11
We believe that the sensitivity and accuracy of these M-SERIES systems create advantages over many
competitive detection technologies. They permit the user to:
|
|
more quickly adapt the ECL technology to develop and then perform the
specific, desired assays, compared to the longer periods required by
other existing competing technologies; |
|
|
|
reduce the use of rare components, such as proprietary compounds,
antibodies or clinical trial samples, that must be used to run assays;
and |
|
|
|
have more confidence in the test results. |
Our expertise in developing assays allows us to assist customers in determining whether a proposed
assay is feasible and to assist with the development and performance of assays that comply fully
with the FDAs Good Manufacturing Practices.
Immunogenicity testing is performed by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in order to
characterize the ability of protein-based therapeutics to stimulate an immune response. Antibodies
that result from an immune response to a protein-based drug can reduce its efficacy and cause
significant side effects, such as allergic reactions. Because of serious side effects, it has
become increasingly necessary to determine if an immune response to protein-based drugs develops in
patients by screening for the presence of antibodies, confirming their specificity, characterizing
the type of antibodies present and determining whether they interfere with binding events.
Immunogenicity testing is done during pre-clinical studies and may continue through the clinical
trials required for regulatory approval. In some cases the FDA requires additional testing after a
drug has been approved. We believe our M-SERIES product line for the life science market is ideally
suited to perform immunogenicity testing by measuring low affinity antibodies with high
sensitivity, all in the presence of the highly concentrated drug.
During 2007, we introduced for sale eight new products for use in life science research. These new
products are focused on meeting the demand among pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for a
means to measure potential immune response to protein-based therapeutics that are in development.
Two of the new products are pharmacodynamic biomarkers designed to measure cytokine levels that may
be elevated in response to a drug treatment. These cytokine products detect human IL-2 and
TNF-a, molecules that are up-regulated in inflammation and in many immune responses. In
addition, six of the new products can be used for immunogenicity testing, assay development, and
hybridoma screening. These products compose a panel of antibodies that are prelabeled with our
detection label BV-TAG Plus and may be used to quantitate and characterize the following mouse
antibodies: IgM, IgG, IgG1, IgG2a, IgG2b, and IgG3.
Our M-SERIES life science customers include many of the major pharmaceutical and biotechnology
companies in the United States and Europe. In addition to the M-SERIES instruments we sell or
lease, we also typically sell proprietary reagents to customers. We market the M-SERIES product
family directly through our own sales, marketing and applications teams. We believe that our
presence in the life science market provides us with the opportunity to identify novel tests that
may have utility in the clinical diagnostics market.
While continuing to support our existing bio-pharmaceutical and academic customers, we may
selectively pursue other commercial opportunities in the life science or other markets in support
of our overall corporate strategy. Our products that will be sold only for research use in the life
science market generally do not require the approval of a government agency prior to marketing of
the products in the United States. See ITEM 1 Business Government Regulation Life Science
Research Products for a more detailed description of the government regulations to which we are
subject in connection with our products for the life science market.
12
Clinical Diagnostics
We plan to manufacture and sell products utilizing our technologies for the clinical in vitro
diagnostics market either directly or through additional licensees. In vitro diagnostic testing,
which is the process of analyzing blood, urine and other samples to screen for, monitor and
diagnose diseases and other medical conditions or to determine the chemical and microbiological
constituents of the samples is one type of testing used by the clinical diagnostics market. We
believe that our ECL technology is ideally suited for the immunodiagnostic and nucleic acid testing
segments of the clinical diagnostics market. Clinical diagnostic testing is performed in many
locations, including testing by clinical reference laboratories, central hospital laboratories, and
blood banks, as well as testing at clinical point-of-care sites. Our products for the clinical in
vitro diagnostics market will generally require approval or clearance by the FDA prior to the
marketing of the products, which we will seek in the appropriate stage of product development.
There can be no assurance that such approval will be obtained. See ITEM 1 Business Government
Regulation Clinical Diagnostic Products for a more detailed description of the government
regulations to which we are subject in connection with products for the clinical in vitro
diagnostics market.
Point-of-Care Systems. Many diagnostic tests performed today involve a follow-up treatment decision
by the physician because the test and treatment process are usually decoupled. In most situations,
samples of blood are drawn from a patient in the physicians office, emergency room or hospital
room and sent to a laboratory at another location where the tests are performed. Test results are
normally returned to the physician several hours or even several days later. We believe that there
is demand among physicians, patients and third-party payers for clinical diagnostic products that
reduce turnaround time by bringing laboratory testing closer to the patient and providing the
physician with fast, quality and cost-effective results thereby permitting the physician to deliver
prompt feedback to the patient.
Most immunodiagnostic systems for clinical point-of-care sites have had limited market penetration
because of the lengthy turnaround time for test results, the need for skilled labor to perform the
tests, regulations, lack of sensitivity and the high cost of the tests. We believe that the
emergence of simple, more accurate and cost-effective diagnostic products is shifting the site of
in vitro diagnostic testing from clinical reference laboratories and central hospital laboratories
to alternative sites.
We are developing a new instrument system, a clinical analyzer that would be a part of our M-SERIES
family of instruments. We plan to integrate ECL and other technologies into a small, expandable and
modular system for the performance of immunodiagnostic and nucleic acid tests. The clinical
analyzer is being designed for ease of use and the ability to provide fast results and is expected
to be marketed to clinical point-of-care sites bringing laboratory testing closer to the patient
thereby providing the associated benefits described above. We believe that the clinical analyzer
may also be used in clinical reference laboratories, central hospital laboratories and blood banks,
which presently constitute the majority of the clinical diagnostics market. Currently, most
available immunoassay tests for use at the clinical point-of-care sites are often not as sensitive,
accurate, or consistent as similar tests run in a central laboratory. We believe the clinical
analyzer under development will provide rapid turn-around time with the same levels of sensitivity,
accuracy and consistency as a large instrument in a clinical reference laboratory or a hospital
central laboratory.
We have also explored collaborative business arrangements to accelerate the development,
manufacture and marketing of ECL technology-based products for clinical point-of-care applications.
Clinical/Reference and Central Hospital Laboratory Systems. One of the significant applications of
ECL technology is in large, highly automated clinical immunodiagnostic systems used in clinical
reference laboratories, central hospital laboratories and blood banks. These laboratories currently
constitute the vast majority of the clinical diagnostics market. To serve these laboratories,
systems must be able to perform a wide variety of immunodiagnostic tests on a large number of
samples consistently, cost effectively and quickly. Although we do not currently manufacture or
sell products for the clinical diagnostics market, we may pursue opportunities for the clinical
reference and central hospital laboratory market segment, including through collaborative
arrangements.
Vaccines
In fiscal 2005, we expanded our business model to target the field of vaccines and have rights to
certain vaccine candidates through license and option agreements.
13
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B, serogroup Y and serogroup C (for combinations only)
Meningococcal disease is a bacterial infection that strikes approximately 1.2 million people
worldwide each year, causing meningitis or sepsis in the majority of cases. Approximately 10% of
the individuals who contract meningococcal disease will die. Of the survivors, up to 20% suffer
long-term permanent disabilities such as hearing loss, brain damage and limb amputations.
Meningococcal disease often begins with symptoms that can be mistaken for common viral illnesses,
such as the flu. It can progress very rapidly and kill an otherwise healthy young person in 48
hours or less. Communitywide outbreaks of meningococcal disease can persist for several months and
controlling them remains a major challenge in public health.
Currently, there is no effective vaccine available against disease caused by meningococcal
serogroup B, which is responsible for one-third of meningococcal disease in the United States and
up to 70% in Europe and Canada. The availability of an effective vaccine that would prevent
meningococcal serogroup B for use by various population groups is expected to be in high demand for
both mass immunization and catch-up vaccination programs.
We have entered into license and option agreements for exclusive patent rights to unique vaccine
candidate for Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B and serogroup Y and now have candidates for
vaccines against bacterial meningitis, including that of streptococcal, pneumococcal and
meningococcal origin. We have also entered into a license agreement for nonexclusive, worldwide
patent rights and know-how to use Neisseria meningitidis group C vaccine as a component in new
vaccine candidates for the prevention of meningitis and sepsis. The new combination vaccine
candidates would consist of the Neisseria meningitidis group C components and additional vaccine
candidates to protect against other disease causing organisms.
We believe that the availability of an effective vaccine that would prevent meningococcal disease,
for use by various population groups, could satisfy a significant unmet medical need. These vaccine
candidates, which may be used in combination with other vaccines, are expected to have the
advantage of reducing the number of injections that a child would receive during a single office
visit.
Haemophilus influenzae type b
Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) disease predominantly occurred as meningitis during the
pre-vaccine era in the United States, originally accounting for 50-65 percent of cases. Presently
there are licensed Hib vaccines available and recommended as part of the childhood immunization
schedule, but none are licensed in combination with other bacterial vaccines for infants in the
United States.
We have entered into a license agreement for exclusive patent rights to a unique vaccine candidate
for Hib under which we received exclusive rights, subject to potential future modification, to
patents and know-how related to the manufacture, production, use, marketing, distribution and sale
of the vaccine or vaccine combination candidates. As with Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B,
serogroup Y and serogroup C, this vaccine candidate for Hib may be used in combination with other
vaccines, and is expected to have the advantage of reducing the number of injections that a child
would receive during a single office visit.
Group A Streptococcus
GAS, also known as Streptococcus pyogenes, causes a range of mild to severe diseases in both
children and adults. Most infections are mild or noninvasive, accounting for more than 10 million
cases annually in the U.S., and primarily include strep throat (pharyngitis) and impetigo (skin
infection). Industry analysts have estimated that the potential market for an effective GAS vaccine
could exceed $1 billion annually.
Invasive disease from GAS occurs when the organism spreads to deeper areas of the body (e.g.,
blood, muscles, lungs, bones, spinal cord and abdomen) and results in severe illness, which may
include necrotizing fasciitis (flesh-eating bacteria) and Streptococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome
(STSS). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that approximately 11,000 cases of
invasive disease occurred in the U.S. in 2003, which resulted in 1,700 deaths. While the overall
mortality rate for invasive disease is between 10% and 13%, it increases to 25% for flesh-eating
bacteria and to 45% for STSS, in spite of available antibiotics. There is currently no vaccine for
this disease. The technology licensed by us is based on the use of bacterial polysaccharide in a
new vaccine to elicit protective antibodies, which should complement our existing carbohydrate
conjugate vaccine platform.
14
We received an exclusive, worldwide license of patents and know-how to manufacture, use and
commercialize a unique vaccine candidate for GAS, including pharmaceutical, therapeutic, diagnostic
and vaccine applications thereof.
Group B Streptococcus
We have entered into agreements under which we license patent rights to candidates for a GBS
conjugate vaccine. GBS is a leading cause of sepsis, pneumonia, and meningitis among newborns.
Approximately 25% of pregnant women are carriers for GBS and the newborn infection is predominantly
transmitted from mother to baby during labor. Although antibiotic intervention has been used during
labor to reduce the rate of disease, the incidence of GBS early-onset disease remains at 0.5 per
1000 live births, and the incidence of late-onset disease remains at 0.3 per 1000, with an overall
mortality rate of approximately 4%. In addition, GBS accounts for 4 to 7 cases of serious disease
per 100,000 non-pregnant adults, with a mortality rate of approximately 20 %. As a result, the
Centers for Disease Control have stated that intrapartum chemoprophylaxis is not a permanent or
comprehensive strategy for GBS disease prevention, and that further work on GBS vaccine
development is warranted.
Chlamydia
Chlamydia is a sexually transmitted disease caused by Chlamydia trachomatis. According to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Chlamydia is the most frequently reported infectious
disease in the U.S., with estimates of nearly 3 million cases annually, resulting in a total
healthcare cost, estimated by the Institute of Medicine, of more than $2 billion. Although
antibiotic therapy is available, chlamydia is a silent disease, showing no symptoms in three
quarters of infected women and half of infected men. If left untreated in women, 40% of the
infections will cause pelvic inflammatory disease with permanent damage, resulting in chronic pain,
infertility and potentially fatal ectopic pregnancy. Infected pregnant women may transmit the
infection to the eyes and respiratory tracts of their newborn, resulting in pneumonia and
conjunctivitis. It has been estimated that by age 30, half of all sexually active women have been
infected. Screening is recommended annually for all sexually active women under 26 years of age, as
well as older women with certain risk factors and all pregnant women.
There is no vaccine currently available to protect against Chlamydia. The vaccine technology
licensed by us is expected to cover all Chlamydial infections, including those caused by Chlamydia
psittaci, which often results in pneumonia and endocarditis in humans, and Chlamydia pneumoniae,
which is responsible for some pneumonia, bronchitis, pharyngitis, laryngitis, and sinusitis. In
addition, C. pneumoniae infections have been implicated by some investigators to be associated with
atherosclerotic vascular disease, Alzheimers disease, asthma and reactive arthritis.
We have licensed exclusive patent rights to a unique vaccine candidate for Chlamydia under which we
received exclusive rights to commercialize products for possible use in the prevention, diagnosis
and treatment of all Chlamydial infections.
Candida albicans
Candida albicans is the most common of the Candida species, which are ubiquitous, opportunistic
pathogens that colonize more than half of all healthy individuals in the U.S., causing systemic
disease in nearly 15% of those who are immunocompromised. Resulting diseases include:
|
|
|
Genital candidiasis, or vaginal yeast infections, which is the second most common cause
of vaginitis. Vaginal candidiasis affects approximately 75% of all women at least once
during their lifetime. While certain risk factors increase the likelihood of contracting
vaginal candidiasis (e.g., pregnancy, diabetes, antibiotic use, birth control pill use,
corticosteroid use, being immunocompromised), approximately 10% of women have recurring
yeast infections without precipitating risk. Antifungal therapy has a high success rate;
however, prolonged use of antifungal drugs, particularly through self-medication without
formal diagnosis, has resulted in increased drug resistance. The carbohydrate-based vaccine
technology is expected to be a safe approach that provides long-lasting immunity for this
vulnerable population. |
15
|
|
|
Invasive or systemic candidiasis, which is common in newborns of low birth weight and
immunocompromised people. Although relatively rare, systemic candidiasis represents the
most serious Candida infection, with a mortality rate as high as 77% for those who are
immunocompromised. This group includes patients scheduled to receive abdominal surgery;
transplantations including bone marrow, kidney or heart; and immunosuppressive cancer
therapy. A successful vaccine could be used to provide protection prior to initiating
treatment of individuals who are at high risk of developing serious conditions due to
Candida albicans and augment conventional antifungal drug therapy. |
|
|
|
|
Oropharyngeal candidiasis or thrush, which is common in infants and immunocompromised
adults. |
|
|
|
|
Esophagitis, which is common for immunocompromised people and occurs in the majority of
people with AIDS. |
|
|
|
|
Cutaneous candidiasis, which is common with heavily moistened skin and diaper rash. |
We have entered into an agreement for exclusive patent rights to a vaccine candidate for Candida
albicans, under which we acquired a first option for exclusive rights to commercialize products for
possible use in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of Candida albicans infections.
Pneumococcus
Streptococcus pneumoniae, also called pneumococcus, causes an acute bacterial infection.
Pneumococcus infections are among the leading causes worldwide of illness and death for young
children, persons with underlying dehabilitating medical conditions and the elderly. Each year in
the United States, pneumococcal disease accounts for a significant number of cases of meningitis,
bacteremia, pneumonia, and acute otitis media.
Some pneumococci bacteria are encapsulated with their surfaces composed of complex polysaccharides
and such encapsulated bacteria are pathogenic for humans. They are antigenic and form the basis for
classifying pneumococci by serotypes of which ninety serotypes have been identified. After the
widespread use of the 7-valent pnuemococcal vaccine, replacement serotypes have emerged. Serotype
replacement currently results in an ongoing need for pneumococcal vaccine development.
We received an exclusive, worldwide license of patents and know-how to manufacture, use and
commercialize a unique vaccine candidate for pneumococcus.
Anthrax
Anthrax is caused by the spore-forming, non-motile gram-positive bacterium, Bacillus anthracis, a
zoonotic disease in herbivores, such as sheep, goats, and cattle following ingestion of spores.
Human infections are acquired through direct contact either with infected animals, animal products
or intentional exposure. The most common naturally occurring cases of infection are cutaneous,
followed by gastrointestinal and inhalational anthrax, the latter resulting in a fatality rate of
greater than 80% if left untreated. Multiple U.S. government agencies have concluded that the use
of anthrax will increase as an instrument of terrorism, that environmental contamination will
spread, and that lower doses of spores than previously believed are required to induce inhalational
anthrax.
We received an exclusive, worldwide license of patents and know-how to manufacture, use and
commercialize a unique vaccine candidate for anthrax.
Urinary tract infection (E. coli)
UTI is the second most common bacterial infection in humans and the most frequent infection in
women. 40-50% of adult women have at least one UTI in their lifetime, and more than half of
sexually active young women who are starting a new method of contraception will develop a UTI
within the first year. Recurrent UTI occurs in 25-50% of healthy women after their initial
infection, in spite of antibiotic therapy. Worldwide, about 150 million UTIs are estimated to occur
annually resulting in approximately $6 billion of direct healthcare costs. UTIs account for at
least 8 million doctor visits annually in the U.S., resulting in approximately $1.6 billion in annual
healthcare costs. UTIs are one of the most common reasons that antibiotics are prescribed, leading
to greater drug resistance, including a spread of multidrug-resistant UTIs.
16
The urinary tract is the dominant site for nosocomial (hospital-acquired) infection, usually
occurring as catheter-associated UTI, which accounts for more than 1 million infected patients
annually in the U.S. Infections may occur in the bladder (cystitis) or kidneys (pyelonephritis). E.
coli is the most frequent cause of nosocomial UTI, accounting for nearly half the infections.
We received an exclusive, worldwide license of patents and know-how to manufacture, use and
commercialize a unique vaccine candidate for UTI (E. coli).
Collaborations and License Arrangements
We expect to explore and negotiate collaborative business arrangements to accelerate the research,
development, manufacture and marketing of ECL technology-based products and vaccines. Under the
terms of the Merger Agreement, we currently have restrictions on our ability to pursue such
relationships. In addition, we have license arrangements with Roche Diagnostics, bioMérieux, Eisai
and MSD.
Roche Diagnostics
Effective in February 2004, we granted Roche a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to
patents and information relating to our proprietary ECL technology, subject to certain limitations
described in the Roche License. The license may be used by Roche to commercially exploit only
certain ECL products and is royalty-free provided such products are used in a specified field. Our
right to terminate the license is restricted, except under certain circumstances.
Pursuant to the Roche License, we and Roche have engaged a field monitor to review placements and
sales of products and services by Roche in 2005. The field monitor was tasked with preparing a
written report, including a list of any sales or placements of products and services that were not
within the licensed field and identifying sales or placements of products or services in violation
of the license grant. While the field monitors work has been completed, they will not issue their
written report pending the completion of the proposed merger between us and Roche. Although Roche
may not knowingly sell or actively market outside the field, they may continue the identified
out-of-field sales until the Company notifies Roche in writing that they are prohibited from making
any further such sales. The Company has notified Roche that it is prohibited from making any
further sales to certain types of customers. For a more complete description of the Roche License,
refer to the agreement on file with the SEC.
Under the improvements license agreement with Roche, we have a worldwide, non-exclusive,
fully-paid, royalty-free, perpetual license under certain patents covering and technologies based
on:
|
|
Roche Diagnostics ECL instruments and all aspects of ECL assays
developed prior to the completion of the merger with IGEN; |
|
|
|
certain PCR technology; and |
|
|
|
all aspects of ECL technology and robotics that, prior to the
completion of the merger with IGEN, Roche Diagnostics or any of its
affiliates used or developed to be used in performing ECL testing
(other than specific antibodies, antigens and reagents). |
In addition, we are licensed to use certain intellectual property rights of Hitachi High Technology
Corporation and its affiliates only outside the field defined in the improvements license agreement
to develop, make, reproduce, modify, use, sell and otherwise commercially exploit any product or
service based on ECL technology.
17
bioMérieux
bioMérieux, Inc., or bioMérieux, has a license from us for the development and worldwide use,
manufacture and sale of ECL technology-based nucleic acid test systems on a non-exclusive basis for
certain segments of the clinical diagnostics and life science markets. bioMérieux specializes in
products for central hospital laboratories and blood banks and has incorporated its proprietary
nucleic acid sequence-based amplification technology and ECL technology into its NucliSens line of
diagnostic virology products, which are marketed with test kits for the detection of HIV-1 RNA and
CMV (cytomegalovirus). Our agreement with bioMérieux extends until September 2011 and we receive
royalty payments from bioMérieux on the relevant product sales by bioMérieux.
Eisai
Eisai Co., Ltd., or Eisai, a leading Japanese pharmaceutical company, has a license from us to
manufacture and market a class of ECL technology-based diagnostic systems for the clinical
diagnostics market in Japan on a non-exclusive basis. Eisai introduced its first ECL-based product
under the trade name Picolumi in 1997. We receive royalties on the relevant product sales by Eisai.
Our agreement with Eisai extends until the later of May 2010, or the expiration of the patents we
license to Eisai. Eisai is obligated to make royalty payments to us at a reduced royalty rate for a
period of seven years after expiration of the agreement.
MSD
As part of the merger and related transactions between IGEN and Roche, we assumed IGENs interest
in MSD, a joint venture formed in 1995 by IGEN and MST, which is a company established and
wholly-owned by Mr. Jacob Wohlstadter, a son of our chief executive officer. An independent
committee of IGENs board of directors, with the advice of independent advisors and counsel,
negotiated and approved the MSD agreements.
MSD develops, manufactures, markets and sells products utilizing a combination of MSTs multi-array
technology and our ECL technology. MSDs Sector line of instrumentation is used in drug discovery
for high throughput screening, high content screening, multiplexing and target validation. MSD also
manufactures and markets a line of its own reagents, assays and plates that are used on these
systems.
The joint venture agreement among MSD, MST and us, which we refer to in the Form 10-K as the MSD
joint venture agreement, expired upon completion of the IGEN merger and related transactions. As a
result, MSD and MST had the right to purchase our interests in MSD and pursuant to the settlement
agreement we entered into with MSD, MST and Jacob Wohlstadter in August 2004, which is referred to
in this Form 10-K as the settlement, in December 2004 MST purchased our interests in MSD. For a
more complete description of this purchase and the MSD agreements, see ITEM 7 Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and ITEM 8
Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements Note 5.
Patents and Other Proprietary Rights
We pursue a policy of seeking patent protection to preserve our technology and our right to
capitalize on the results of our research and development activities and, to the extent it may be
necessary or advisable, to exclude others from appropriating our technology. We also rely on trade
secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovations and licensing opportunities to develop and
maintain our competitive position.
We intend to prosecute and defend our intellectual property, including our patents, trade secrets
and know-how. We plan to regularly search for third-party patents in our fields of endeavor, both
to shape our patent strategy as effectively as possible and to identify possible collaborations and
licensing opportunities.
We own or have exclusively licensed numerous issued and pending U.S. patents and patent
applications in the diagnostics field. Additionally, we own or have exclusively licensed granted
foreign patents and pending foreign patent applications in the diagnostics field. These patents and
patent applications are important to our business and cover various aspects of ECL technology and
products, as well as the methods for their production and use.
The pending patent applications in the diagnostics field may not be granted and others may
challenge our patents. Certain ECL patents have begun to expire; however, patent coverage for
certain key aspects of our ECL technology will continue through 2022 in the U.S. We plan to continue to protect our technology with new
patent filings, which could further extend our patent coverage.
18
We also have exclusively licensed certain issued U.S. patents and pending U.S. patent applications
in the field of vaccines. Additionally, we have exclusively licensed certain granted foreign
patents and pending foreign patent applications in the field of vaccines.
Our business could be harmed if we lose our patent protection or if pending patents are not issued
to us. See ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and Our Business The success of our
business depends on patents that will expire over time and that must be actively pursued, obtained,
maintained and protected; and, ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and Our Business -
Our business could be harmed if we infringe, or our licensees are alleged to have infringed, the
intellectual property of others.
Government Regulation
The research and development, manufacturing, marketing, sale and distribution of both existing and
future products based on ECL technology are subject to comprehensive government regulation.
Government regulation by various Federal, state and local agencies, which includes detailed
inspection of, and controls over, research and laboratory procedures, safety, clinical
investigations, manufacturing, marketing, sampling, labeling, distribution, record keeping, storage
and disposal practices, substantially increases the time, difficulty and costs incurred in
obtaining and maintaining the clearance or approval to market newly developed and existing
products. In particular, government regulatory actions can result in, among other things, delays in
the release of our and our licensees products, injunction, seizure or recall of our or our
licensees products, suspension or revocation of the authority necessary for their production and
sale, and other civil or criminal sanctions, including monetary penalties that could be
substantial.
International sales of products by us and our licensees will also be subject to a significant
degree of government regulation, including export regulations, international standards (such as
those set by the International Organization for
Standards), European Union directives and other country-specific rules and regulations. For
example, many countries, directly or indirectly through reimbursement limitations, control the cost
of most clinical diagnostic products. Furthermore, many developing countries limit the importation
of raw materials and finished products. International regulations may also have an impact on U.S.
regulations. In addition, the FDA, the Commerce Department or the State Department regulate the
export of products from the United States.
Biosecurity and Industrial Testing Products
Our biosecurity products are subject to stringent Federal, state, local and foreign laws,
regulations and policies governing their manufacture, storage, sale, distribution and export. In
addition, the U.S. government has adopted, and is expected to continue to adopt, laws, regulations
and rules governing the research, development, procurement and handling of pathogens that may be
used in a bioterrorist attack or other agents that may cause a public health emergency and to
permit government inspection and oversight of facilities engaged in the research, development,
manufacture or sale of select agents. Under several statutes recently enacted, the Department of
Homeland Security, the FDA, the Department of Commerce and various other regulatory authorities
have been charged with establishing and implementing programs designed to enhance the security of
food and water supplies, as well as the environment, from terrorist attacks. These legislative
initiatives include recordkeeping, registration, notification, import, export, manufacturing and
various other compliance measures. This is a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape and many of the
possible rules and regulations have not yet been proposed or adopted. We may be required to incur
significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations in the future, and such laws or
regulations may have a material adverse effect upon our ability to do business.
Life Science Research Products
Our life science products that are sold for research use only, including the M-SERIES instruments,
must be properly labeled as for research use only not for use in diagnostic procedures, as
required by the FDA, but do not generally require FDA approval prior to marketing. Research does
not include clinical investigations and is narrowly defined by the FDA to apply to the early
development of product concepts. The FDA has begun to impose distribution requirements and
procedures on companies selling research use only products, such as
the requirement that the seller receive specified representations from its customers as to the customers intended use of the
product. We expect that the FDA will develop additional restrictions of this nature, some of which
may adversely affect us.
19
Clinical Diagnostic Products
The FDA and other Federal, state, local, and foreign governmental authorities regulate, among other
things, the development, clinical testing, manufacture, packaging, labeling, storage, distribution
and promotion of medical devices, including products intended for clinical diagnostic purposes. The
FDA imposes specific requirements on the conduct of clinical studies and requires approval of the
study by an institutional review board and, in some cases, by the FDA, depending upon the product
and its use. Before a new device can be introduced into the market, the manufacturer must generally
obtain marketing clearance through a section 510(k) pre-market notification or approval through a
pre-market approval application. The testing, preparation of necessary applications and processing
of those applications by the FDA is expensive and time-consuming.
Our clinical diagnostic products under development and the clinical diagnostic products of our
licensees will be regulated as medical devices. Significant difficulties or costs may be
encountered to obtain FDA clearances or approvals and that could delay or preclude us or our
licensees from marketing products for clinical diagnostic purposes. Furthermore, the FDA may
request additional data following the original submission. Delays imposed by the governmental
review process may materially reduce the period during which our or our licensees will have the
exclusive right to exploit our products or technologies.
The FDA will clear a device under section 510(k) if the submitted information establishes that the
proposed device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed class I or II medical device,
or to a class III medical device for which the FDA has not yet called for a pre-market approval
application. Commercial distribution can begin only after the FDA issues an order that the device
is substantially equivalent to a device that is legally marketed and not subject to a pre-market
approval requirement. The FDA may determine that a proposed device is not substantially equivalent
to a legally marketed device, in which case a pre-market approval will be required to market the
device, unless additional information can be submitted to support a substantial equivalence
determination, or the FDA, pursuant to a timely request, makes a risk-based determination that a
device that is not a substantially equivalent device can be classified into class I or II. A FDA
request for additional data could require that clinical studies of the devices safety and
effectiveness be performed. Clearance, if obtained, may be conditioned on labeling restrictions or
conducting a lengthy post-market surveillance study.
A pre-market approval application must be filed and approved before a device can be marketed if a
proposed device is not substantially equivalent to a legally marketed device, as discussed above,
or if it is a class III device that was in commercial distribution prior to May 28, 1976, for which
the FDA has called for pre-market approval. A pre-market approval application must be supported by
valid scientific evidence, which typically includes extensive pre-clinical data and well controlled
or partially controlled clinical trials, to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the device.
Obtaining approval can take several years and approval may be conditioned on, among other things,
substantial restrictions on indications for use and the conduct of postmarket surveillance studies.
Generally, the pre-market approval process requires much more extensive pre-filing testing than
does the section 510(k) pre-market notification procedure and involves a significantly longer FDA
review after the date of filing. In responding to a pre-market approval application, the FDA may
grant marketing approval, may request additional information, may set restrictive limits on claims
for use or may deny the application altogether.
After the pre-market clearance or approval for the medical device has been received, it may still
be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after
the device reaches the market. The FDA may require post-market surveillance programs to monitor the
effect of medical devices that have been sold, and has the power to prevent or limit further
marketing of medical devices based on the results of these post-marketing programs. In addition,
the FDAs medical device reporting regulation requires reports to the FDA whenever information
reasonably suggests that a marketed device may have caused or contributed to death or serious
injury, or when a device malfunctions and if the malfunction were to recur, the device would be
likely to cause or contribute to a death or a serious injury.
20
In addition to obtaining FDA approval for each medical device, under the pre-market approval
application procedures, we or our licensees must seek FDA approval of our or their manufacturing
facilities and procedures. The FDA will also inspect clinical diagnostics companies on a routine basis for regulatory compliance with its
Good Manufacturing Practices regardless of whether the product was cleared under section 510(k) or
approved under pre-market approval.
We and our licensees clinical diagnostic products will be affected by the Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments of 1988, which is intended to insure the quality and reliability of medical
testing and may have the effect of discouraging, or increasing the cost of, clinical diagnostic
testing.
The regulations establish numerous requirements applicable to clinical diagnostics. Under these
regulations, the specific requirements that a laboratory must meet depend upon the complexity of
the tests performed by the laboratory. Under the clinical laboratory improvement regulations, all
laboratories performing moderately complex or highly complex tests will be required to comply with
stringent standards and requirements. Because the regulations interpretation is uncertain, it is
possible that certain of our or our licensees products may be categorized as highly complex tests,
in which case penetration of the point-of-care market would be reduced because a large percentage
of laboratories do not meet the standards required to conduct such tests. In addition, future
changes in regulations or interpretations made by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
FDA, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services or other regulatory bodies may adversely affect us
and our licensees.
In addition to the foregoing, we will be, and our licensees are, subject to numerous Federal, state
and local laws and regulations relating to such matters as safe working conditions, laboratory and
manufacturing practices, fire hazard control, and environmental protection, including disposal of
hazardous or potentially hazardous substances.
While we expect that compliance with these laws and regulations may have a material effect on our
financial results, capital requirements or competitive position, we presently have no plans for
material capital expenditures relating to such matters. However, we and our licensees may be
required to incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations in the future, and
such laws or regulations may have a material adverse effect upon us and our licensees ability to
do business.
Sales of our and our licensees products outside the U.S. are also subject to extensive regulatory
requirements, which vary widely from country to country. The time required to obtain the necessary
approvals may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA clearance or approval.
Vaccines
In the U.S., our potential vaccine products are primarily regulated under Federal law and are
subject to rigorous FDA approval procedures. No vaccine product can be marketed in the U.S. until
an appropriate application is approved by the FDA. The FDA applies the approval procedures on a
product-by-product basis and typically requires, among other things, an extensive three-phase human
clinical testing program. In Phase I, studies are conducted with a relatively small number of
subjects to begin to assess the safety of the product. In Phase II, the product is evaluated in a
larger group of subjects to begin to assess efficacy and appropriate dosing. Phase III studies are
conducted in the target population with a number of subjects that is large enough to provide
sufficient data to establish statistically the safety and efficacy of the product. The FDA approves
products to treat specified medical conditions or disorders. Further studies would be required to
market the product for other uses. The FDA must inspect and approve all facilities used to
manufacture, fill, test and distribute biologic products. If any change in manufacturing facilities
or processes occurs after FDA approval, additional regulatory review and possibly additional
clinical studies may be required.
Approval procedures in Europe are comparable to those in the U.S. In 1995, the European Union
established a centralized procedure for approval of products derived from the use of high
technology/biotechnology processes. This procedure leads to the grant of a single license for the
entire European Union. The European Union has also adopted a decentralized procedure under which a
license granted in one member state is mutually recognized by the other member states recognizing
the original license. This procedure is replacing independent national licensing of products in the
European Union. In addition, products must receive country pricing approvals in some territories
before they can be marketed in that country.
21
Government Contracts and Regulation
Our contracts with U.S. and foreign government agencies and departments require that we comply with
numerous regulations, rules and policies, including those governing procedures for soliciting,
awarding and funding government contracts. In addition, we are required to comply with numerous
ongoing obligations following the award of a government contract, including those relating to
record keeping, workplace compliance, third-party contracting and disclosure of information.
Failure to comply with these requirements may lead to a denial of a contract award, a challenge to
a previously awarded contract, attempts by the U.S. government to terminate a contract and
restrictions on a companys ability to participate in future bids to secure government contracts.
In addition, we are required to obtain certain security clearance certifications and comply with
security clearance standards and requirements, including those affecting personnel and facilities.
Sales of certain of our products to international government agencies may be subject to local
government regulations and procurement policies and practices, as well as to regulations relating
to import-export control, including prior notification of, and pre-clearance for, export of certain
goods having military applications.
During the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, agencies of the U.S. government accounted
for 33%, 30%, and 27% of our total revenue, respectively, and 52% and
44% of our total accounts
receivable as of March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
Environmental Regulation
Our operations are subject to stringent foreign, Federal, state and local laws, rules and
regulations relating to the protection of the environment, including those governing the use,
handling and disposal of hazardous, radioactive and infectious materials and wastes, the discharge
of pollutants into the air and water and the cleanup of contaminated sites. Some of our operations
will require permits, and these permits will be subject to modification, renewal and revocation by
issuing authorities. Although we believe that we are in compliance with these laws and regulations
in all material respects, we may be required to incur significant costs to maintain or achieve
compliance if additional or stricter environmental and health and safety requirements are imposed
in the future or in the event of any noncompliance at our facilities.
Reimbursement
Third-party payors, such as governmental programs and private insurance plans, can indirectly
affect the pricing or the relative attractiveness of our or our licensees products by regulating
the maximum amount of reimbursement they will provide for diagnostic testing services. In recent
years, healthcare costs have risen substantially and third-party
payors
have come under increasing pressure to reduce such costs. In this regard, the Federal government,
in an effort to reduce healthcare costs, may take actions that reduce reimbursement rates. If the
reimbursement amounts for diagnostic testing services are decreased in the future, it may decrease
the amount which physicians, clinical laboratories and hospitals are able to charge patients for
such services and consequently, the price we and our collaborators will be able to charge for
products.
Seasonal Aspects, Backlog and Renegotiation
There are no significant seasonal aspects to our business. Orders for our products are generally
filled on a current basis and order backlog is not material to our business. A material portion of
our business is subject to contracts that may be terminated at the election of the government.
In the event our biosecurity business expands, the portion of our business subject to contracts
that may be terminated at the election of the government is likely to expand. For a further
description of risks related to our contracts with the government, see ITEM 1A Risk Factors
Risks Relating to Regulation and Government Contracts.
Competition
We compete in the non-clinical diagnostics markets, including biosecurity, industrial and life
science markets with our diagnostic instruments, reagents and assays and expect to compete in the
clinical diagnostics market. We believe that the principal competitive factors in these markets
are:
22
|
|
the time required to run tests with the product; |
|
|
|
the level of sensitivity, accuracy and consistency of the product; |
|
|
|
the relative ease of use of the product; |
|
|
|
the quality of support and services for the product; |
|
|
|
flexibility and expandability of the product; |
|
|
|
product time-to-market; |
|
|
|
product safety; |
|
|
|
market acceptance of product; and |
|
|
|
product price. |
Although we believe that we compete favorably with respect to the above factors, competition in the
diagnostics market is intense and we do not hold a leading competitive position in any of the
markets in which we compete.
We expect to compete with a number of domestic and international companies, including Roche,
Johnson & Johnson, Abbott Laboratories, Siemens, Biosite Incorporated and Dade Behring, Inc. Many
of our competitors now have and in the future may continue to have access to greater resources than
we do and, therefore, may be better equipped than we are to develop, manufacture, market and sell
their products. These companies may develop and introduce products and processes competitive with
or superior to ours. In addition, we will directly compete against our current and future
licensees, including bioMérieux, Roche and MSD.
Manufacturing
Our current commercial manufacturing operations consist of the manufacture of the M-SERIES family
of products and reagents, biosecurity and industrial testing products, and cell culture research
biologicals. We operate a qualified ISO 9001 facility. We use a variety of suppliers and believe
that we do not depend on any supplier that cannot be replaced in the ordinary course of business.
Any changes in source of supply may require additional engineering or technical development, with
costs and delays that could be significant, to ensure consistent and acceptable performance of the
products.
We do not manufacture any clinical diagnostic products. We are presently evaluating plans for
future manufacturing of our clinical diagnostic products. These plans may include direct and
third-party manufacturing.
See ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and Our Business We have limited manufacturing
experience, which puts us at a competitive disadvantage and could have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition and revenue, ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and
Our Business We have limited manufacturing facilities for our products and we may not find
additional facilities suitable for future growth, which could materially adversely affect our
business and prospects and ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and Our Business We
depend on a limited number of suppliers for materials used in the manufacturing of our products,
and any interruption in the supply of those materials could hamper our ability to manufacture
products and meet customer orders.
Sales and Marketing
We maintain a direct sales and marketing group in the United States and Europe. Our direct sales
group focuses on sales of the M-SERIES family of products, together with reagents and services, to
various government agencies in the biosecurity market, food and beverage producers and contract
testing laboratories in the industrial market and other potential customers in the life science
market.
23
We also utilize several distributors for select markets or products. In addition to our direct and
indirect sales and marketing efforts, our licensees and collaborators also conduct sales and
marketing of products based on our technology. See ITEM 1 Business-Collaborations and License
Arrangements.
We are evaluating plans for the marketing and sale of our products currently in development. We may
seek to market and sell a portion of our products indirectly through distributors who sell products
that complement our products.
Human Resources
As of May 15, 2007, we and our subsidiaries employed 206 individuals, of whom 135 were engaged in
research, product development, manufacturing and operations support, and 42 in marketing, sales and
applications support and general administration. Of our employees, 27 have Ph.D. degrees. None of
our employees is covered by a collective bargaining agreement and management considers relations
with its employees to be satisfactory.
Operating Segment
We currently operate in one significant business segment. We are currently engaged in the
development, manufacturing and marketing of products for the detection and measurement of
biological and chemical substances. Information related to this segment is incorporated herein by
reference to ITEM 8 Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements Note 10.
Geographic Segments
Financial information about geographic segments is incorporated herein by reference to ITEM 8
Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements-Note 10.
Executive Officers of BioVeris Corporation
The names and ages of our executive officers at May 25, 2007 and their respective positions and
offices with us are set forth below.
Samuel J. Wohlstadter, age 65, is our Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive
Officer. He was one of the founders of IGEN and, from IGENs formation in 1982 until its merger
with Roche, he was IGENs Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Wohlstadter has
been a venture capitalist for more than 25 years and has experience in founding, supporting and
managing high technology companies, including Amgen Inc., a biotechnology company, and Applied
Biosystems, Inc., a medical and biological research products company. Mr. Wohlstadter is also Chief
Executive Officer of Hyperion Catalysis International, an advanced materials company, which he
founded in 1981; of Wellstat Therapeutics Corporation, a drug discovery company, which he founded
in 1985; of Proteinix Corporation, a development stage company organized to conduct research in
intracellular metabolic processes, which he founded in 1988; and of Wellstat Biologics Corporation,
a drug discovery company, which commenced operations in 1994.
George V. Migausky, age 52, has served as our Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and
Secretary since September 2003. From 1985 until the completion of IGENs merger with Roche, he was
IGENs Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Between 1985 and 1992, in addition to serving as
IGENs Chief Financial Officer on a part-time basis, Mr. Migausky also served as financial advisor
to several other privately held companies. Prior to joining IGEN in 1985, he spent nine years in
financial management and public accounting positions, most recently as a Manager with the High
Technology Group of Deloitte & Touche.
24
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Forward-Looking Information and Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results
Risks Relating to Us and Our Business
THE EFFECT
ON US AND OUR STOCKHOLDERS IF THE MERGER WITH ROCHE WERE NOT TO BE COMPLETED COULD HAVE A MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON OUR BUSINESS PROSPECTS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION,
INCLUDING THE LIKELIHOOD THAT IN SUCH EVENT, THE PRICE THAT MIGHT BE RECEIVED BY OUR HOLDERS OF
COMMON STOCK IN THE OPEN MARKET WOULD BE LESS THAN THE PER SHARE CASH PRICE TO BE PAID IN THE
MERGER.
Should the proposed merger with Roche not be completed, the effect of the resulting public
announcement of termination of the Merger Agreement on the market price of our common stock would
be significant. In that regard, the market price could be affected by many factors, including:
|
|
|
the reason or reasons for which the Merger Agreement was terminated and whether such
termination resulted from factors adversely affecting us; |
|
|
|
|
the status of the ongoing out-of-field sales issue with Roche and the results of various
field monitor and audit processes; |
|
|
|
|
the possibility that, as a result of the termination of the Merger Agreement, the
marketplace would change its view of the potential value to us of Roches out-of-field
sales under the Roche License; |
|
|
|
|
the possibility that, as a result of the termination of the Merger Agreement, the
marketplace would consider us to be an unattractive acquisition candidate; |
|
|
|
|
the possible sale of shares of our common stock by short-term investors following an
announcement of termination of the Merger Agreement; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain additional debt and/or equity financing on terms that were
acceptable to us in light of our available cash resources and our expected future cash
flows; |
|
|
|
|
the possibility that, as a result of the announcement of the Merger Agreement, our
product sales may decline or customers may defer placing orders; |
|
|
|
|
the resolution of the disagreements with Roche regarding payments for out-of-field sales
under the Roche License and future interaction between us and Roche, including the risks of
litigation that could be expensive and prolonged; and |
|
|
|
|
our ability to attract and retain key personnel. |
While the potential payment to us for out-of-field sales by Roche may be material to our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows, the amount and timing of any payments for past as
well as future out-of-field sales we might receive from Roche is uncertain, speculative and
difficult to quantify. In addition, the costs and difficulty of resolving the issues with Roche,
including the management time, would be significant.
In addition, there would be disruption to our business that may result from the announcement of the
transaction and the resulting distraction of the attention of our management and employees. The
Merger Agreement contains certain limitations regarding the operation of our business during the
period between the signing of the Merger Agreement and the completion of the proposed merger.
The terms of the Merger Agreement includes provisions prohibiting us from soliciting an alternate
takeover proposal from a third party, or entering into negotiations or discussions regarding an
alternate proposal unless such proposal is deemed to be a superior proposal by our board of
directors. It also includes a $12.0 million termination fee to be paid to Roche if the Merger
Agreement is terminated under circumstances specified in the Merger Agreement.
The effect on us and our stockholders if the merger with Roche were not to be completed could have
a material adverse effect on our business prospects and financial condition.
25
OUR BUSINESS HAS A HISTORY OF LOSSES AND WE EXPECT TO HAVE FUTURE LOSSES AND
NEGATIVE CASH FLOW.
We incurred net losses of $30.5 million, $27.9 million and $77.6 million for the years ended March
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. We expect to continue to incur operating losses and negative
cash flow as a result of our expenses for manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, research
and product development, and general and administrative costs.
While we seek to attain profitability, we cannot be sure that we will ever achieve product or other
revenue sufficient for us to attain this objective. Our ability to become profitable in the future
will depend on, among other things, our ability to:
|
|
expand the distribution and increase sales of certain of our products; |
|
|
upgrade and enhance the M-SERIES family of products; |
|
|
introduce new products into the market; |
|
|
develop our marketing, sales and distribution capabilities cost-effectively; and |
|
|
continue existing collaborations and establish successful new collaborations with corporate partners to develop and
market products that incorporate our technologies and provide necessary funding. |
TO ACHIEVE COMMERCIAL SUCCESS, WE MUST COMPLETE THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR PRODUCTS AND THOSE PRODUCTS
MUST GAIN MARKET ACCEPTANCE OR OUR BUSINESS COULD BE MATERIALLY ADVERSELY AFFECTED.
Many of our potential products, including certain M-SERIES products, are at an early stage of
development and we have not introduced any clinical diagnostics products into the marketplace.
Products under development require additional research and development efforts, including clinical
testing and regulatory approval, prior to commercial use. Our potential products are subject to the
risks of failure inherent in the development of products based on new technologies. These risks
include the possibilities that:
|
|
our design or approach may not be successful; |
|
|
our products may not be compatible with existing technology or may rely on technology that has become obsolete; |
|
|
our products may be found ineffective or fail to meet the applicable regulatory standards or receive necessary
regulatory clearances; |
|
|
our estimates of the market size and potential for our products may prove incorrect; |
|
|
third parties may market superior or equivalent products; |
|
|
our products may not be recognized or accepted in the market due to unfamiliar brand names; and |
|
|
our product development costs may outweigh potential future cash flows associated with those products. |
Our business, business prospects and financial results would be hurt if our products are not
accepted as alternatives to other existing or new products and do not gain market acceptance.
In addition, we have licensed certain PCR technology from Roche that we plan to integrate into
certain of our new instrument systems. Although we do not currently sell any product based on the
PCR technology licensed from Roche, any products that we may develop using PCR technology will be
also subject to the risks of failure inherent in the development of products based on new
technologies as described above.
26
We have recorded a net book value for the PCR licenses of $13.4 million at March 31, 2007. If we
are unable to successfully develop any products using PCR technology because such PCR technology
has become obsolete or the future cash flows attributable to products using PCR technology are
insufficient to realize the remaining carrying value of the license, we would be required to
write-off the remaining net book value or record an impairment of the value of the PCR license.
Such a write-off or the recording of such an impairment could have a material adverse effect on our
future results of operations.
OUR QUARTERLY OPERATING RESULTS MAY FLUCTUATE SIGNIFICANTLY, AND THESE FLUCTUATIONS MAY CAUSE OUR
STOCK PRICE TO BE VOLATILE.
Our quarterly operating results will depend upon:
|
|
the volume and timing of orders and product deliveries for biosecurity products, M-SERIES systems or other products,
which are based on our customers requirements that may vary over time; |
|
|
|
the success of M-SERIES system upgrades and enhancements and customer acceptance of those enhancements and upgrades; |
|
|
|
costs incurred related to expansion into the field of vaccines; |
|
|
|
the amount of revenues recognized or collectible from royalties and other contract revenues, which revenues are
dependent upon the efforts and compliance of our licensees and collaborators, including Roche; |
|
|
|
whether our instruments are sold or leased to customers, which will affect the timing of the recognition of revenue
from the sale or lease; |
|
|
|
the timing of our introduction of new products, which could involve increased expenses associated with product
development and marketing; |
|
|
|
the volume and timing of product returns and warranty claims, which, if products are returned or have warranty claims
that are unexpected, may involve increased costs in excess of amounts reserved for returns or claims; |
|
|
|
our competitors introduction of new products, which may affect the purchase decision of or timing of orders by our
customers and prospective customers while the competitors product is assessed; |
|
|
|
the amount of expenses we incur in connection with the operation of our business, including: |
|
|
|
costs associated with Roche and the related merger transaction, including costs incurred
in connection with the agreed-upon procedures of the independent field monitor and the
independent auditor reviewing Roches compliance with their license from us; |
|
|
|
|
research and development costs, which increase or decrease based on the products in
development; |
|
|
|
|
sales and marketing costs, which are based on product launches or promotions and sales
incentives that might be in effect from time to time; |
|
|
|
|
expenses associated with share-based compensation arrangements, including employee stock options; |
|
|
|
|
the amount that we may record related to the potential impairment of the license to use PCR technology; |
|
|
|
|
amounts received from MSD or MST as payment for allocated operating costs, the
purchase of our interests in MSD and the related accretion of income on the note receivable from
MST; |
|
|
|
|
unexpected termination of government contracts or orders, which could result in decreased
sales and increased |
27
|
|
|
costs due to excess capacity, inventory, personnel and other expenses; and |
|
|
|
|
additional costs which we may incur as we explore new healthcare opportunities, including
costs for acquisitions of technologies, facilities and personnel. |
These factors may cause our quarterly operating results to fluctuate significantly, which in turn,
may cause our stock price to be volatile. In addition, because our revenues and operating results
are expected to be volatile and difficult to predict, we believe that period-to-period comparisons
of our results of operations are not a reliable indication of our future performance.
WE MAY CHANGE THE FOCUS OF OUR BUSINESS OR ENTER INTO NEW HEALTHCARE FIELDS, WHICH COULD RESULT IN
THE INCURRENCE OF ADDITIONAL COSTS AND EXPOSURE TO ADDITIONAL OR DIFFERENT BUSINESS RISKS.
We have broad discretion in determining the future strategy and focus of our business and may enter
new healthcare fields in which we have limited or no experience. During fiscal 2005, we expanded
our business model to target the field of vaccines. A significant change in the focus of our
business could result in a loss of our investment, the incurrence of additional costs, including
research and development costs, and exposure to additional or different business risks. Incurrence
of additional costs and exposure to additional risks could materially adversely affect our
business.
IF WE ARE UNABLE TO ESTABLISH NEW COLLABORATIONS, OR IF ANY COLLABORATIONS WE ESTABLISH DO NOT
RESULT IN THE SUCCESSFUL INTRODUCTION OR MARKETING OF NEW PRODUCTS BASED ON OUR TECHNOLOGY, OUR
GROWTH MAY BE SLOWED AND OUR BUSINESS COULD BE MATERIALLY ADVERSELY AFFECTED.
One aspect of our strategy is to enter into collaborative relationships with established healthcare
and other companies to assist us in developing our technologies or manufacturing or marketing our
products for certain markets. We may not be able to enter into collaborations on terms that are
favorable to us, if at all. In addition, we cannot assure that third parties, including our
licensees, suppliers or others will not object to possible new collaborations. In addition, under
the terms of the Merger Agreement, we currently have restrictions on our ability to pursue such
relationships.
As a result of this strategy, we may have no, or only limited, control over the amount of resources
that our collaborators will devote to the development or marketing of products based on our
technology. For instance, our collaborators:
|
|
may decide not to, or may fail to successfully, develop, market or sell products based on our technology; |
|
|
may not devote sufficient resources to the development, marketing or sale of these products based on our technology; or, |
|
|
may terminate their agreements with us. |
If any of these events occur with respect to one of the companies we are collaborating with, we
would not receive the benefits of the collaboration and our growth could be slowed and our business
could be materially adversely affected.
WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RAISE SUFFICIENT ADDITIONAL CAPITAL TO SUCCESSFULLY DEVELOP OUR BUSINESS.
We will need substantial amounts of money to fund our operations on an ongoing basis. We expect our
available cash to be sufficient to fund our operations for at least one year, but cannot predict
how long our available cash will be sufficient to fund our operations thereafter.
We may need to raise substantial amounts of money to fund a variety of future activities integral
to the development of our business, including:
28
|
|
for research and development to successfully develop our technologies, including future payment obligations under
license or option agreements; |
|
|
to obtain regulatory approval for our products; |
|
|
to file and prosecute patent applications to protect our technology; |
|
|
to respond to innovations that our competitors develop; |
|
|
to retain qualified employees, particularly in light of competition for qualified scientists and engineers; |
|
|
to make new arrangements to market our technology; |
|
|
to manufacture products ourselves or through a third party; |
|
|
to provide funding for expanded or new facilities; and |
|
|
to market different products to different geographic markets, either through expanding our sales and distribution
capabilities or relying on a third party. |
The failure to raise sufficient additional capital for us to develop our business would adversely
affect our business prospects.
OUR ACCESS TO FUNDS COULD BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY MANY FACTORS, INCLUDING VOLATILITY IN THE PRICE
OF OUR COMMON STOCK, LOSSES FROM OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL MARKET CONDITIONS.
We may not have access to enough funds on favorable terms, if at all, to successfully operate and
develop our business. We may try to raise necessary additional capital by issuing additional debt
or equity securities. Holders of debt securities would have priority over our equity holders with
respect to the proceeds from the sale of our assets in the event of liquidation of our business,
and any debt financings that we obtain may contain restrictive terms that limit our operating
flexibility. If we raise additional capital by selling additional common or preferred stock, the
holdings of existing stockholders would be diluted.
If we are unable to raise additional capital, we may have to consider pursuing arrangements with
other companies that may not be available on terms favorable to us. In addition, we may have to
scale back, or even eliminate, some of our programs.
WE MAY
EXPERIENCE DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND OTHER DIFFICULTIES THAT
COULD DELAY OR PREVENT OUR INTRODUCTION OF NEW OR ENHANCED PRODUCTS OR AFFECT THE PERFORMANCE OF
EXISTING PRODUCTS, WHICH COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS. IN ADDITION, IF THE MARKETS FOR OUR
PRODUCTS CHANGE OR EVOLVE IN AN UNEXPECTED MANNER, OUR BUSINESS COULD BE MATERIALLY ADVERSELY
AFFECTED.
The development of new or enhanced products is a complex and uncertain process that requires the
accurate anticipation of technological and market trends, as well as precise technological
execution. We may experience design, development, implementation and other difficulties that could
delay or prevent our introduction of new or enhanced products, or products that we may develop,
manufacture or market with third parties or affect the performance of our existing products. These
difficulties and delays may cause expenses to increase and our product sales to fluctuate. In
addition, if we experience design, development or implementation difficulties in developing,
manufacturing, distributing or marketing these instruments, we would sell fewer of our products and
our business prospects would be adversely affected.
We expect the markets for our products to change and evolve. These changes could facilitate the
market demand for
29
our new or enhanced products, including the need for products that could be utilized in clinical
point-of-care sites and field-testing of environmental samples in the biosecurity market. If market
demand does not change or evolve as we anticipate or if we are not able to develop products that
meet the evolving market demand, our business prospects would be adversely affected.
In addition, the markets for our products are characterized by evolving industry standards and
government regulations, the need for updated and effective technology and new product
introductions. Our success will depend in part upon our ability to profitably enhance existing
products and develop and introduce new products. We may not be able to avoid the obsolescence of
our products due to technological change and evolving industry standards and government
regulations.
If we experience design, development, implementation or other difficulties that delay or prevent
our introduction of new or enhanced products or if the markets change or evolve in an unexpected
manner, our business could be materially adversely affected.
VACCINE DEVELOPMENT IS A LONG, EXPENSIVE AND UNCERTAIN PROCESS, AND DELAY OR FAILURE CAN OCCUR AT
ANY STAGE OF THE PROCESS.
To develop vaccine candidates, we must provide the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities with
clinical data that demonstrates adequate safety and immune response. Statistically significant
effectiveness of our vaccine product candidates cannot be demonstrated in humans, but instead must
be demonstrated, in part, by utilizing animal models before they can be approved for commercial
sale. Vaccine development to show adequate evidence of effectiveness in animal models and safety
and immune response in humans is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can
occur at any stage of our animal studies or clinical trials. Any delay or significant adverse
clinical events arising during any of our clinical trials could force us to abandon a vaccine
candidate altogether or to conduct additional clinical trials in order to obtain approval from the
FDA or foreign regulatory bodies. These development efforts and clinical trials are lengthy and
expensive and the outcome is uncertain. If we are unable to successfully develop our vaccine
candidates, our business could suffer.
WE EXPECT TO RELY ON SALES OF THE M-SERIES PRODUCT FAMILY FOR A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF OUR
REVENUES, AND A DECLINE IN SALES OF THESE PRODUCTS COULD CAUSE ADVERSE FINANCIAL RESULTS AND
NEGATIVELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS PROSPECTS.
We expect to derive a significant portion of our revenues from sales of M-SERIES products. Our
current and potential life science customers are from the pharmaceutical and biotechnology
industries and are subject to risks faced by those industries, including the availability of
capital, reduction and delays in research and development expenditures, government regulation and
the uncertainty resulting from technological change. In addition, the ongoing consolidation of the
pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries could reduce the number of potential customers and they
may develop their own competing products or in-house capabilities.
Any factor adversely affecting the pricing or demand of M-SERIES products, including market
acceptance of competing products, could cause our revenues to decline, resulting in adverse
financial results and negatively affecting our business prospects.
Additionally, we intend to market M-SERIES products in markets in which we have little or no
experience. We may not be able to successfully market the M-SERIES family of products in those
markets, which could cause an adverse affect on our business prospects.
OUR BUSINESS COULD BE HARMED IF WE HAVE FUTURE DISAGREEMENTS WITH ROCHE OVER THE SCOPE OF THE
LICENSE AGREEMENT.
Roche, through one of its affiliates, has been licensed by us to exploit ECL technology, subject to
the limitations of the Roche License. Although the terms of the license agreement were negotiated
in an effort to minimize the areas of potential future disputes, there are no assurances that we
and Roche will continue to agree on the scope, permitted use and other material terms of the
license agreement. Current and future disputes with Roche, or future disputes with any licensee,
over the scope of the license agreement, such as disputes over the field, the types of products
that Roche is permitted to develop and sell, or royalties owed, including payments for sales by Roche of
licensed products that employ ECL technology and which are outside the licensed field, might lead
to lengthy and costly legal proceedings, which could adversely affect our financial condition and
future business prospects.
30
MST HAS PURCHASED OUR INTERESTS IN MSD BUT THERE IS NO ASSURANCE THAT WE WILL RECEIVE THE FULL
PURCHASE PRICE.
MST purchased our entire interests in MSD and is required to pay us the outstanding purchase price
over time, plus simple (cumulated, not compounded) interest at the fixed annual rate of 5.5%. The
purchase price is payable over time in installments equal to the sum of 5% of MSD net sales, as
determined in accordance with the MSD agreements, and 20% of the net proceeds realized by MSD from
the sale of its debt or equity securities in any third-party financing after the date of the sale
of our interests in MSD. Because the purchase price is payable only out of a percentage of MSDs
net sales or future financings, our receipt of the purchase price is dependent on MSDs future
performance. In the event sufficient future net sales of MSD or third-party financings do not
materialize, we will not receive the full purchase price for our interests in MSD.
We have recorded the net present value of the receivable due to us from the sale of our interests
in MSD in the amount of approximately $6.0 million at March 31, 2007, including approximately $1.6
million classified as other current assets. If we do not receive the full purchase price over time,
from the sale of our interests in MSD, we would be required to write off the remaining net present
value or record an impairment of the value of the receivable. Such a write-off or the recording of
such an impairment could have a material adverse effect on our future results of operations.
OUR COMPETITORS AND POTENTIAL COMPETITORS MAY HAVE OR DEVELOP DIAGNOSTIC AND VACCINE PRODUCTS AND
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN OUR EXISTING OR FUTURE DIAGNOSTIC AND VACCINE PRODUCTS.
Our business will be subject to intensive competition from established companies, development stage
companies and research and academic institutions, and we expect this competition to intensify. Many
of these companies and institutions have one or more competitive advantages over us, including,
among other things:
|
|
more established diagnostic or vaccine products; |
|
|
longer-standing relationships with customers; |
|
|
greater expertise and resources in developing, manufacturing, marketing and selling diagnostic or vaccine products; |
|
|
a larger, more experienced workforce; and |
|
|
more experience in obtaining regulatory approval for clinical testing or vaccine products. |
As a result, our competitors may develop, manufacture, market or sell diagnostic or vaccine
products that are more effective or commercially attractive than our current or future diagnostic
or vaccine products. In addition, these competitors may offer broader product lines, discounts and
may have greater name recognition than us. Furthermore, we compete against companies that utilize
ECL technology licensed to them by us, including Roche and MSD.
As a result, we may not be able to compete successfully against our competitors. This could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and revenues.
31
WE HAVE LIMITED MANUFACTURING EXPERIENCE, WHICH PUTS US AT A COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE AND COULD
HAVE A MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON OUR BUSINESS, FINANCIAL CONDITION AND REVENUE.
We lack experience in large-scale manufacturing and have no experience in the manufacturing of
clinical diagnostic or vaccine products, which could hamper our ability to manufacture existing
products or new products that we develop. We have two options to address this competitive
disadvantage. First, we could expand our internal ability to manufacture products, which, to date,
has only been done in a limited way. Second, we could contract with a third party to manufacture
products for us based on our technology, which, to date, we have not done.
If we are unable to expand our own manufacturing capability or find a suitable manufacturer on
acceptable terms in a timely manner, we may be unable to meet demand for existing products and
could be delayed in introducing new products to the market. Failure to meet demand for existing
products or delays in introducing new products could put us at a competitive disadvantage and could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and revenue.
WE HAVE LIMITED MANUFACTURING FACILITIES FOR OUR CURRENT PRODUCTS AND WE MAY NOT FIND ADDITIONAL
FACILITIES SUITABLE FOR FUTURE GROWTH, WHICH COULD MATERIALLY ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS AND
PROSPECTS.
We face risks inherent in operating a single facility for the manufacture of our current products.
We do not have alternative production facilities available should our Gaithersburg, Maryland manufacturing
facility cease to function. If our facility were not operational for an extended period of time,
including due to an unforeseen plant shutdown, then our business and future prospects could be
materially adversely affected.
In addition, we may need to expand and enhance our research, development and production facilities.
We may also be required to make material capital expenditures at a new facility at a time when we
have limited capital resources available to us.
We may also experience difficulties or delays in integrating our operations into new facilities.
These difficulties might include delays in the availability of a new facility or problems
associated with equipment installation. In addition, any facility that we obtain for production of
vaccines, clinical testing or biosecurity products will be subject, on an ongoing basis, to a
variety of regulatory requirements including quality systems regulations, international quality
standards and other regulatory standards. We may encounter difficulties expanding our manufacturing
operations in accordance with these regulations and standards, which could result in manufacturing
delays and an inability to meet product demand and our business prospects could be materially
adversely affected.
If we are unable to pay for facility enhancements and improvements to meet our future growth needs,
our business would suffer.
WE HAVE NO EXPERIENCE SELLING, MARKETING OR DISTRIBUTING CLINICAL DIAGNOSTIC OR VACCINE PRODUCTS.
OUR FAILURE TO ESTABLISH AN EFFECTIVE SALES FORCE OR TO ESTABLISH AN EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
FOR OUR CLINICAL DIAGNOSTIC OR VACCINE PRODUCTS COULD MATERIALLY ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS
PROSPECTS AND REVENUES.
We need to develop selling, marketing and distribution capabilities for our planned clinical
diagnostic and vaccine products. To market clinical diagnostic or vaccine products directly to
customers, and not through a licensee or third party distributor or collaborator, we will need to
develop a substantial sales force with technical expertise. We will also need to establish a
distribution system to support our sales force. Alternatively, we could license or contract with
another company to provide sales and distribution services for our products. We may not be able to
develop a sufficient sales and distribution force or find a suitable company to fill that role for
us, which could materially adversely affect our business prospects and revenues.
FAILURE TO MANAGE OUR GROWTH COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS.
We expect to grow by increasing our presence in existing markets and introducing new products we
develop into new potential markets. Our growth strategy will place a strain on our management and
our operating and financial systems.
32
As we grow, our personnel, systems, manufacturing capabilities and resources, procedures and
controls may be inadequate to support future operations and we will need to hire, train and retain additional
personnel. We may also need to improve and expand our financial and management controls, reporting
systems and operating systems as well as other aspects of our infrastructure, including research
and development or manufacturing facilities. We may encounter difficulties integrating additional
personnel, as well as improving, expanding and integrating new systems or facilities, which could
adversely affect our business.
THE SUCCESS OF OUR BUSINESS DEPENDS ON PATENTS THAT WILL EXPIRE OVER TIME AND THAT MUST BE ACTIVELY
PURSUED, OBTAINED, MAINTAINED AND PROTECTED.
Our business success or failure will depend, in part, on our ability to pursue, obtain, and
maintain adequate patent protection for ECL technology, vaccines and our other technologies. Our
patents may not adequately protect our technology from being used by our competitors.
Our business depends heavily on patents that will expire over time and may be challenged or
circumvented by competitors. Patents allow us, for a time, to prevent others from using our
inventions to compete against us.
Companies may challenge or seek to invalidate patents or circumvent valid claims in patents, all of
which could make it necessary for us to defend our patents in litigation. Litigation over patents
poses the following risks to our business:
|
|
litigation costs can be extremely high, which could drain our financial resources; and |
|
|
litigation over our patents could discourage other companies from working with us to develop and market new products
based on the technology covered by those disputed patents. |
If we lose some patent protection, our competitive advantage could be eroded, third parties may be
able to use our technology without paying us and our financial condition and business prospects
would be adversely affected.
OUR BUSINESS COULD BE HARMED IF WE INFRINGE, OR OUR LICENSEES ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE INFRINGED, THE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF OTHERS.
If our products or services were to infringe the intellectual property (including patent rights) of
others, we or our licensees could:
|
|
be required to alter, or abandon products or processes; |
|
|
be required to obtain a license from the intellectual property holder; |
|
|
lose customers that are reluctant to continue using our or our licensees products or services; |
|
|
be forced to abandon development work with respect to these products; and |
|
|
be required to pay damages that could be substantial. |
If we or our licensees infringe the intellectual property (including patent rights) of others, our
business could be damaged if we were unable to make necessary alterations or obtain a necessary
license on acceptable terms, if at all.
In addition, if our products or services were alleged to have infringed the intellectual property
(including patent rights) of others, we would be forced to defend ourselves in litigation and might
be enjoined from further sale of our products or required to pay monetary damages or amounts in
settlement of the suit, which could adversely affect our prospects, drain our financial resources
and discourage other companies from working with us.
WE INTEND TO DEVELOP PRODUCTS THAT ARE BASED ON PATENTS AND TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE LICENSED FROM
OTHERS AND THE OWNERS OF THOSE PATENTS AND TECHNOLOGY MIGHT CLAIM THAT PRODUCTS DEVELOPED OR SOLD
BY US VIOLATE THOSE LICENSES. ADDITIONALLY, A THIRD PARTY MIGHT OBJECT TO A LICENSE THAT WE HOLD OR
TO THE SCOPE OF THE LICENSE
GRANTED TO US.
33
Our success or failure will also depend, in part, on the patent rights and technology of others,
including patents and technology being licensed to us from affiliates of Roche. We have been
licensed by affiliates of Roche to exploit certain improvements from Roche Diagnostics and certain
PCR technology, subject to certain limitations. Although the terms of the improvements license
agreement and the PCR license agreements were negotiated in an effort to minimize the areas of
potential future disputes, there are no assurances that we and Roche will continue to agree on the
scope, permitted use and other material terms of the improvements license agreement or the PCR
license agreements. Future disputes with Roche over the scope, permitted use, obligations owed and
other material terms of the improvements license agreement or the PCR license agreements, such as
disputes over the field, types of products that we are permitted to develop and sell, other
obligations may lead to lengthy and costly legal proceedings, or could interfere with or preclude
us from proceeding with one or more development programs, whether conducted independently or
through a collaborative arrangement. In addition, third parties may object to the scope, permitted
use and other material terms of one or more of the licenses granted to us by certain Roche
affiliates.
We also license technology from other companies and academic institutions. Because access to this
technology is necessary to operate our business, we must be certain that we comply with these
license agreements. Our business could be harmed if we breached any of these license agreements and
lost the rights to use this patented technology or if we were unable to renew existing licenses on
acceptable terms, if at all, or get additional licenses that we may need on acceptable terms, if at
all. In addition, we may need to litigate the scope and validity of patents held by others and such
litigation could be a substantial cost for us.
WE AND MSD MAY HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE SCOPE OF THE EXCLUSIVE LICENSE TO OUR TECHNOLOGY
PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO MSD AND THE SCOPE OF MSDS RIGHTS UNDER THE FORMER JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT
WITH US, WHICH COULD AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO EXPAND OUR BUSINESS DIRECTLY OR THROUGH COLLABORATIONS.
We intend to expand our business through internal development programs and through new or expanded
collaborative arrangements. MSD may view the scope of its exclusive license and other rights under
its license agreement and other agreements with us in a way that interferes with or precludes us
from proceeding with one or more development programs. There are no assurances that MSD will not
object to our future business plans, whether conducted independently or through a collaborative
arrangement, including our Merger Agreement with Roche. Additionally, MSD may believe that we must
obtain MSDs consent prior to entering into proposed collaborative arrangements. The other party to
a proposed collaboration with us may also require us to obtain MSDs consent to avoid any future
disputes or disagreements. For example, in connection with the 2004 merger and related transactions
between Roche and IGEN, Roche required IGEN to obtain MSDs consent to the execution and delivery
of the license agreement. If we are required to obtain MSDs consent for any reason in the future,
there are no assurances that we will be able to obtain that consent at all or on terms that would
not have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In
addition, if we choose not to obtain MSDs consent, MSD may sue us to enforce rights it believes it
has. Such a lawsuit could materially harm our business and future business prospects.
WE RELY ON TRADE SECRETS AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT CANNOT BE PROTECTED BY PATENTS, WHICH COULD
HARM OUR BUSINESS IF THEY WERE DISCLOSED TO OR INDEPENDENTLY DEVELOPED BY OTHERS.
In addition to patents, we also rely in our business on trade secrets, know-how and other
proprietary information. If this information were disclosed to or independently developed by
competitors, our business would suffer.
We seek to protect this information, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with
licensees, employees and consultants that prohibit these parties from disclosing our confidential
information. These agreements may not provide adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how
and other proprietary information or ensure that the information we share with others during the
course of our business will remain confidential. We may not have sufficient legal remedies under
the agreements or otherwise to correct or compensate for unauthorized disclosures or sufficient
resources to seek redress.
34
If we are not able to be adequately redressed for the unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets,
know-how or other proprietary information, our competitive position may be undermined and our business may suffer.
WE DEPEND ON A LIMITED NUMBER OF SUPPLIERS FOR MATERIALS USED IN THE MANUFACTURING OF OUR PRODUCTS,
AND ANY INTERRUPTION IN THE SUPPLY OF THOSE MATERIALS COULD HAMPER OUR ABILITY TO MANUFACTURE
PRODUCTS AND MEET CUSTOMER ORDERS.
We depend on vendors to supply key materials that we use in our products. Some of these materials
are available only from limited sources. From time to time, suppliers may extend lead time, limit
supplies or increase prices due to capacity constraints or other factors. In the event of a
reduction in, interruption of, or degradation in, the quality of the supply of any of the materials
required by us, or an increase in the cost of obtaining those materials, we would be forced to
locate an alternative source of supply. If no alternative source were available or if an
alternative source were not available on a timely basis, at a reasonable cost or otherwise on
acceptable terms, our ability to manufacture one or more of our products would be delayed or
halted.
Any changes in sources of supply may require additional engineering or technical development to
ensure consistent and acceptable performance of our products. If any of these events occur, our
product costs may increase, we might be unable to deliver products in a timely fashion, we could
lose sales as well as customers, and our business would be significantly harmed as a result.
WE DEPEND ON HIGHLY TRAINED AND SKILLED EMPLOYEES AND MANAGEMENT, AND WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ATTRACT
AND RETAIN SUFFICIENT PERSONNEL, WHICH COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR BUSINESS.
We need to hire staff and retain our staff, both of which are difficult in a competitive
marketplace. Because we are a technology company, we depend heavily on scientists and engineers to
develop products and to build a successful business. Research and development efforts could suffer
if we are not able to hire and retain enough qualified scientists and engineers, which would
adversely affect our business. We compete with other technology companies and research and academic
institutions for experienced scientists. Many of these companies and institutions have greater
resources than we do and thus may be in a better position to attract desirable candidates.
In addition to scientists, we also need to hire managers who have regulatory, manufacturing and
marketing capabilities. If we are not able to hire managers with these skills, or develop expertise
in these areas, our business could suffer.
OUR ABILITY TO DEVELOP PRODUCTS MAY BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY SOCIAL ISSUES RELATING TO ANIMAL
TESTING.
Our research and development activities have involved, and in the future might involve, limited
testing in mice and rats. In addition, testing in the future may involve other animals. Animal
rights groups and other organizations and individuals have attempted to stop animal testing
activities by pressing for legislation and regulation of such activities and by other means. Our
ability to develop products may be negatively affected by a ban on animal testing or by action
taken by groups or individuals opposed to these tests.
Risks Relating to Regulation and Government Contracts
OUR ABILITY TO OBTAIN AND RETAIN U.S. GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS IS SUBJECT TO UNCERTAINTIES, AND OUR
U.S. GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS MAY BE TERMINATED, WHICH COULD MATERIALLY ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR FINANCIAL
CONDITION, OPERATING RESULTS, BUSINESS AND PROSPECTS.
Our ability to secure or retain U.S. government contracts is subject to uncertainties related to
the governments future funding commitments. The prospects for our biosecurity business are also
highly sensitive to changes in national and international government policies and funding
priorities. Changes in domestic or foreign government policies or priorities, including funding
levels through agency or program budget reductions by the U.S. Congress or executive agencies,
could materially adversely affect our ability to retain or obtain U.S. government contracts, and
our business prospects could suffer.
35
The U.S. government can terminate, suspend or modify any of its contracts with us either for its
convenience or if we default by failing to perform under the terms of the applicable contract. A
termination or suspension for convenience could result in our having excess capacity, inventory,
personnel, unreimbursable expenses or charges, or other adverse effects on our financial condition.
A termination arising out of our default could expose us to claims for damages and may have a
material adverse effect on our ability to compete for future U.S. government contracts and orders.
U.S. government contracts may span one or more years and may include multiple renewal options in
favor of the U.S. government. U.S. government agencies generally have the right not to exercise
these option periods for any reason, including lack of funding, or if the agency is not satisfied
with the counterpartys performance of the contract. If the U.S. government terminates or fails to
renew upon expiration any of our contracts, our financial condition and operating results could be
materially adversely affected.
In addition to unfavorable termination provisions, certain of our U.S. government contracts contain
provisions that grant to the U.S. government a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable,
paid-up license to use inventions made by us in the course of performing such contracts, or have
such inventions used by or on behalf of the U.S. government, for research or other government
purposes. New U.S. government contracts we enter into may also include similar provisions.
WE MUST OBTAIN FDA CLEARANCE OR APPROVAL TO MARKET OUR CLINICAL DIAGNOSTIC AND VACCINE PRODUCTS,
WHICH IS OFTEN COSTLY AND TIME CONSUMING. IF WE DO NOT OBTAIN THE NECESSARY CLEARANCES OR
APPROVALS, OUR BUSINESS PROSPECTS WOULD SUFFER.
The manufacture, packaging, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution and sale of clinical
diagnostic products and vaccines are subject to governmental regulation by national and local
government agencies in the United States and abroad. The FDA regulates many of the areas in which
we conduct our research and in which we are and expect to be developing, manufacturing and
marketing products. In particular, we must obtain FDA clearance or approval before we can market
clinical diagnostic or vaccine products. The process of obtaining necessary clearances or approvals
is often costly, time consuming and uncertain.
We have very limited experience obtaining FDA clearance and approval and may not be successful in
obtaining FDA clearance or approval for any of our clinical diagnostic products, which would
materially adversely affect our business prospects. Further, clearance or approval may place
substantial restrictions on the indications for which the product may be marketed or to whom it may
be marketed.
To obtain permission from the FDA to market clinical diagnostic products in the U.S., we, or the
companies we work with, will need to either obtain Section 510(k) pre-market notification clearance
or approval of a pre-market approval application from the FDA. To obtain clearance for marketing,
we, or the companies we work with, must demonstrate substantial equivalence to a similar legally
marketed product by submitting a pre-market notification to the FDA. The FDA may require
preclinical and clinical data to support a substantial equivalence determination. Clinical trials
for gathering supporting data can take extended periods of time to complete and there can be no
assurance that the FDA will find a device substantially equivalent.
If we do not successfully demonstrate substantial equivalence, or if we are required to obtain
pre-market approval, we would have to conduct extensive clinical testing of these diagnostic
products, which could take years to complete. Extensive testing could involve substantial
additional costs and might delay bringing clinical diagnostic products to market, weakening our
competitive position. If we fail to obtain FDA clearance or approval for new clinical diagnostic
products altogether, we will be unable to market these products at all for clinical use in the U.S.
We may begin to distribute reagents specifically for research use under an exemption. If the FDA
disagrees with our classification of, or the manner in which we market and sell those reagents, it
may impose restrictions on our business operations and subject us to sanctions that could adversely
affect our business prospects.
Our vaccine candidates are in pre-clinical stages of development and have not received regulatory
approval from the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities to be marketed and sold. The FDA or foreign
regulatory authorities may refuse to approve an application if they believe that applicable
regulatory criteria are not satisfied and they may require additional testing for safety or
effectiveness.
36
WE ARE SUBJECT TO COMPREHENSIVE GOVERNMENT REGULATION, WHICH MAY INVOLVE SIGNIFICANT COSTS AND MAY
RESTRICT OUR ABILITY TO CONDUCT BUSINESS.
We expect that certain of our future products will be subject to continuing FDA requirements,
including compliance with the FDAs Good Manufacturing Practices and the FDAs medical device
reporting regulations. We expect that we may need to spend a substantial amount of money to comply
on an ongoing basis with government regulations. Government agencies, such as the FDA, Department
of Homeland Security, Department of Commerce and the Environmental Protection Agency regulate many
of our products as well as products that we plan to develop, manufacture, market and sell,
including products for the clinical diagnostics, biosecurity and industrial markets. The costs of
complying with governmental regulations and any restrictions that government agencies might impose
could have a significant impact on our business. If we increase our manufacturing and expand our
product offerings, these costs will increase.
Whether we directly manufacture products or contract with another company to manufacture products
based on our technology, the FDA and other government agencies will continually review and
periodically inspect the manufacturing process. If any of these agencies were to discover a problem
with our products, the manufacturing process or the manufacturing facility, they could place
restrictions on these products and on the manufacturer and impose sanctions. For example, the FDA
could require us to recall, or even totally withdraw, a product from the market or close a
manufacturing facility.
In addition to FDA regulations, the process of manufacturing products is subject to a variety of
environmental laws and regulations, including laws and regulations governing the use, management
and disposal of hazardous, radioactive and infectious materials and wastes, the discharge of
pollutants into the air and water, and the cleanup of contaminated sites. We could incur
substantial costs, including cleanup costs, fines and penalties, claims for damages, such as
personal injury or property damages, and loss of permits required for our operations, if we fail to
comply with these laws or regulations. Our operations are also subject to various employee health
and safety laws and regulations, including those concerning occupational injury and illness and
employee exposure to hazardous, radioactive and infectious materials.
While we have procedures in place to protect employees from exposure to such materials, we cannot
assure you that potentially harmful exposure will not occur or that we will not be liable to
employees as a result. In addition, because of the limited information currently available
regarding some of the hazardous, radioactive and infectious materials used in our businesses, there
may be unknown risks involved with the use of and exposure to such materials. In some circumstances
there may be no body of knowledge or standard protocols for dealing with these risks. Costs
associated with such environmental, health and safety matters could have a material adverse effect
on our business and financial condition.
Our biosecurity products are subject to stringent Federal, state, local and foreign laws,
regulations and policies governing their manufacture, storage, sale, distribution and export. In
addition, the U.S. government has adopted, and is expected to continue to adopt laws, regulations
and rules governing the research, development, procurement and handling of pathogens that may be
used in a bioterrorist attack or other agents that may cause a public health emergency and to
permit government inspection and oversight of facilities engaged in the research, development,
manufacture or sale of select agents. Under several statutes recently enacted, the Department of
Homeland Security, FDA, Department of Commerce and various other regulatory authorities have been
charged with establishing and implementing programs designed to enhance the security of food and
water supplies, as well as the environment, from terrorist attacks. These legislative initiatives
include recordkeeping, registration, notification, import, export, manufacturing and various other
compliance measures. This is a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape and many of the possible rules
and regulations have not yet been proposed or adopted. We may be required to incur significant
costs to comply with such laws and regulations in the future, and such laws or regulations may have
a material adverse effect upon our ability to do business. In addition, the DOD or other government
agencies may require additional security measures to be implemented at our facility, which could
cause us to incur substantial additional costs.
OUR BUSINESS COULD BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY A NEGATIVE AUDIT BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
37
U.S. government agencies routinely audit and investigate government contractors. These agencies
review a contractors performance under its contracts. If an audit results in a finding of improper
activities, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions,
including termination of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and
suspension or prohibition from doing business with the U.S. government. In addition, we could
suffer serious harm to our business reputation if allegations of impropriety were made against us.
COST OVER-RUNS ON CONTRACTS WITH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT COULD SUBJECT US TO LOSSES OR ADVERSELY AFFECT
OUR FUTURE BUSINESS.
Our U.S. government contracts are fixed-price contracts and therefore we receive a fixed price
irrespective of the actual costs we incur in connection with the performance of the contracts.
Consequently, we will be required to absorb any costs in excess of the fixed price that may be set
forth in the contract. If we are unable to control the costs we incur in performing under these
contracts, our financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected.
Cost over-runs also may adversely affect our ability to sustain our performance under the contracts
and obtain future U.S. government contract awards.
RESTRICTIONS ON HEALTHCARE COSTS AND HEALTHCARE AND INSURANCE FINANCING PRACTICES COULD LIMIT
DEMAND FOR OUR PRODUCTS, WHICH WOULD HURT OUR BUSINESS AND BUSINESS PROSPECTS.
In the U.S. and elsewhere, demand for clinical diagnostic testing is dependent, in part, on
consumers ability to be reimbursed for the cost of the tests by third-party payers, such as
government agencies, health maintenance organizations and private insurers. Medicaid and other
third-party payers are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical services, including
clinical diagnostic tests. They are also attempting to contain costs by limiting their coverage of,
and the amount they will reimburse for, clinical diagnostic tests and other healthcare products.
Without adequate coverage and reimbursement, consumer demand for clinical diagnostic tests may
decrease. Decreased demand would likely cause potential sales of our clinical diagnostic products,
and sales by our licensees, to decrease because fewer tests would be performed or prices would be
lowered, or both. Reduced sales or royalty income would hurt our business and business prospects.
In many foreign markets, governments directly set the prices that clinical diagnostic companies may
charge for their products and services. In the U.S., a number of legislative and regulatory
proposals aimed at changing the healthcare system have been proposed in recent years and we expect
this to continue. Foreign and domestic legislative and regulatory initiatives that limit healthcare
coverage may have a material adverse effect on our business and business prospects.
Risks Relating to the Industry
WE ARE EXPOSED TO PRODUCT LIABILITY RISKS THAT, IF NOT ADEQUATELY COVERED BY INSURANCE, MAY HAVE A
MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION.
Product liability is a major risk in marketing products for vaccines and for the clinical
diagnostics, biosecurity and industrial markets. We may not be able to insure ourselves adequately
against risk of product liability. We may face product liability for claims and lawsuits brought by
customers. Damages awarded in product liability cases can be very large. While we have product
liability insurance, this coverage is limited.
We may not have adequate product liability insurance to cover us against our potential liabilities
or be able to maintain current levels of product liability insurance on acceptable terms, if at
all. Claims or losses in excess of our product liability insurance coverage or not covered by our
product liability insurance could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
38
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock
OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS EXERCISE SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE OVER US AND MAY HAVE
SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE OVER THE OUTCOME OF PROPOSED CORPORATE ACTIONS SUPPORTED OR OPPOSED BY OTHER STOCKHOLDERS.
Our executive officers and directors, in the aggregate, own approximately 25% of the outstanding
shares of our common stock. Our chairman and chief executive officer owns approximately 19% of the
outstanding shares of our common stock. As a result, certain of our executive officers or directors
may have significant influence over the election of directors and may be able to significantly
influence the outcome of proposed corporate actions supported or opposed by other stockholders.
In addition, as a result of their stockholdings, certain of our executive officers and directors
could have significant influence over the outcome of potential transactions, including any
acquisition transactions, that may be supported or opposed by other stockholders. For example,
concurrently with the execution of the Merger Agreement, Roche entered into a Stockholders
Agreement with Mr. Wohlstadter, our chairman and chief executive officer, and his wife, Nadine
Wohlstadter (together the Stockholders), pursuant to which the Stockholders have agreed to vote
all of their shares of Common Stock and Series B Preferred Stock in favor of the Merger Agreement.
PROVISIONS IN OUR CHARTER DOCUMENTS MAY DISCOURAGE POTENTIAL ACQUISITIONS OF US, EVEN THOSE WHICH
THE HOLDERS OF A MAJORITY OF OUR COMMON STOCK MAY FAVOR, WHICH MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE MARKET
PRICE OF OUR COMMON STOCK, REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF OFFERS TO ACQUIRE US AND PREVENT CHANGES IN OUR
MANAGEMENT.
Our certificate of incorporation and by-laws contain provisions that may have the effect of
discouraging a third party from acquiring us by means of a tender offer, proxy contest or
otherwise. Our certificate of incorporation and by-laws:
|
|
classify our board of directors into three classes, with directors of each class serving for a staggered three-year
period; |
|
|
provide that our directors may be removed only for cause and only upon the approval of the holders of at least a
majority of the voting power of all our shares entitled to vote generally in the election of such directors then
outstanding, voting together as a single class; |
|
|
prohibit our stockholders from calling special meetings and prohibit action by our stockholders by written consent; |
|
|
require at least 66 2/3% of the voting power of all our shares entitled to vote generally in the election of directors
then outstanding, voting together as a single class, to alter, amend or repeal certain provisions, including the
provisions relating to our classified board, the election, appointment and removal of our directors and action by
stockholders by written consent described above; |
|
|
permit our board of directors to fill vacancies and newly created directorships on our board of directors; and |
|
|
contain advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals. |
In addition, under our certificate of incorporation, our board of directors also has the authority
to issue up to 15,000,000 shares of preferred stock in one or more series. Our board of directors
can fix the powers, preferences and rights of any such series without stockholder approval. Our
board of directors could, therefore, issue, without stockholder approval, preferred stock with
voting and other rights that could adversely affect the voting power of the holders of our common
stock or otherwise make it more difficult for a third party to gain control of us. Such provisions
would make the removal of incumbent directors more difficult and time-consuming and may have the
effect of discouraging a tender offer or other takeover attempt not previously approved by our
board of directors.
In addition, we have adopted a stockholder rights agreement, pursuant to which one right attached
to each share of our common stock outstanding. These rights will in most cases cause substantial
dilution to a person that attempts to acquire or merge with us without the approval of our board of
directors by permitting the holders of these rights (other than the person attempting to acquire or
merge with us) to, upon the occurrence of specified circumstances, purchase, at a substantial
discount, shares of our Series A participating cumulative preferred stock or shares of common stock
of the person that attempts to acquire or merge with us. Accordingly, the existence of these rights
may deter potential acquirers from making a takeover proposal or a tender offer.
39
WE DO NOT PLAN TO PAY ANY CASH DIVIDENDS ON OUR COMMON STOCK.
We have no plans to pay cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, if at all.
WE MAY NEED TO RAISE ADDITIONAL CAPITAL IN THE FUTURE AND WE MAY GRANT OPTIONS OR OTHER
EQUITY-BASED AWARDS TO OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES AND CONSULTANTS, FROM TIME TO
TIME, EITHER OF WHICH WOULD RESULT IN DILUTION TO OUR STOCKHOLDERS.
Your investment in our common stock could be diluted if we issue additional shares of our common
stock or securities convertible into, or exercisable for, shares of our common stock in the future,
which we may need to do to raise funds for our business. Sales of additional shares of our common
stock or the conversion of securities into, or the exercise of securities for, shares of our common
stock could cause the market price of our common stock to decrease.
Under the BioVeris 2003 stock incentive plan, our executive officers, directors, employees and
consultants are from time to time granted options or other equity-based awards, such as phantom
stock or restricted stock, to purchase up to 5.3 million shares of our common stock. If our
executive officers, directors, employees and consultants exercise their options or other
equity-based awards, if and when granted and exercisable, and purchase shares of our common stock,
your investment in our common stock will be diluted.
THE EXON-FLORIO ACT MAY INHIBIT POTENTIAL ACQUISITION BIDS, WHICH MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE MARKET
PRICE OF OUR COMMON STOCK.
Section 721 of Title VII of the Defense Production Act of 1950, also known as the Exon-Florio Act,
authorizes the President of the U.S. or his designees to initiate an investigation into the
potential effects on national security of a business combination of a U.S. corporation and a
foreign entity that could result in foreign control of the U.S. corporation. Subject to certain
exceptions, under the Exon-Florio Act, the president may suspend or prohibit any foreign
acquisition, merger or takeover of a U.S. corporation if there is credible evidence that the
foreign entity exercising control might take action that threatens national security and there is
no provision of law adequate to protect national security. Due to our current and potential future
involvement in the biodefense industry, the Exon-Florio Act could inhibit potential acquisition
bids from foreign entities, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. The
Merger Agreement with Roche is currently under review pursuant to the Exon-Florio Act.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
Our principal administrative, marketing, manufacturing and research and development facilities
consist of approximately 317,000 square feet located in several buildings in Gaithersburg,
Maryland, of which approximately 178,000 square feet is currently under sublease. We have an
additional 9,000 square feet of leased research and development, sales and office facilities in San
Diego, California; the District of Columbia; and Oxfordshire, England.
Our leases expire at various times during fiscal years 2008 through 2015. We believe that current
facilities should be adequate for immediate business requirements but additional facilities may be
required if we successfully expand our business operations.
See ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and Our Business We Have Limited Manufacturing
Facilities For Our Current Products And We May Not Find Additional Facilities Suitable For Future
Growth, Which Could Materially Adversely Affect Our Business And Prospects and ITEM 7
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
40
We are involved, from time to time, in various routine legal proceedings arising out of the normal
and ordinary operation of our business, which we do not anticipate will have a material adverse
impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. However, we may
in the future be involved in litigation relating to our business, products or intellectual
property, which could adversely affect our prospects or impair our financial resources.
The success of our business depends on patents that will expire over time and that must be actively
pursued, obtained, maintained and protected. Our business could be harmed if we have future
disagreements with Roche over the scope of our license agreement with Roche or if we infringe, or
are alleged to have infringed, the intellectual property of others. In addition, we are exposed to
product liability risks that, if not adequately covered by insurance, may have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition. See ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to Us and Our
Business and ITEM 1A Risk Factors Risks Relating to the Industry.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
During the fourth quarter of the last fiscal year, no matter was submitted to a vote of our
security holders.
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF
EQUITY SECURITIES
Common Stock
Our common stock began trading on February 17, 2004 and is quoted on The Nasdaq National Market
under the symbol BIOV. Prior to that time, there was no public market for our common stock. As of
May 17, 2007, there were approximately 151 holders of record of our common stock. The number of
record holders is based on the actual number of holders in our books and does not include holders
of our common stock in street name or individual participants in security position listings
maintained by depositary trust companies.
The following table sets forth the range of high and low bid price per share of our common stock as
quoted on The Nasdaq National Market for fiscal 2007 and 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended March 31, 2007 |
|
High |
|
Low |
First quarter |
|
$ |
8.35 |
|
|
$ |
3.39 |
|
Second quarter |
|
|
10.00 |
|
|
|
5.65 |
|
Third quarter |
|
|
14.25 |
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
Fourth quarter |
|
|
14.27 |
|
|
|
11.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended March 31, 2006 |
|
High |
|
Low |
First quarter |
|
$ |
5.49 |
|
|
$ |
4.11 |
|
Second quarter |
|
|
6.09 |
|
|
|
4.20 |
|
Third quarter |
|
|
6.34 |
|
|
|
4.35 |
|
Fourth quarter |
|
|
5.10 |
|
|
|
3.72 |
|
No cash dividends have been paid on our common stock to date, and we currently intend to
retain any earnings for development of our business.
2003 Stock Incentive Plan
In September 2003, our Board of Directors adopted the 2003 stock incentive plan pursuant to which
5.3 million shares of our common stock have been reserved for issuance upon the exercise of options
granted under the plan. The 2003 stock incentive plan was approved by IGEN stockholders prior to
the completion of the merger and related transactions on February 13, 2004. The following table
sets forth certain information as of March 31, 2007 with respect to the equity compensation plans
(including individual compensation arrangements) under which our
equity securities are authorized for issuance, aggregated by (i) all compensation plans previously approved by our
security holders, and (ii) all compensation plans not previously approved by our security holders.
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of securities |
|
|
Number of securities to |
|
Weighted-average |
|
remaining available for future |
|
|
be issued upon exercise |
|
exercise price |
|
compensation plans (excluding |
|
|
of outstanding options |
|
of options |
|
securities reflected in column (a)) |
Plan category |
|
(a) |
|
(b) |
|
(c) |
Equity compensation
plans approved by
security holders |
|
|
911,800 |
|
|
$ |
7.05 |
|
|
|
3,867,348 |
|
Equity compensation
plans not approved
by security holders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
911,800 |
|
|
$ |
7.05 |
|
|
|
3,867,348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more information about our 2003 stock incentive plan, see ITEM 8 Consolidated Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 3.
Series B Preferred Stock
On February 17, 2004, we sold 1,000 shares of series B preferred stock to Samuel J. Wohlstadter for
an aggregate consideration of $7.5 million. The shares of series B preferred stock were not, and
will not be, registered under the Securities Act of 1933 and were sold solely to Samuel J.
Wohlstadter pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. There is no established public
trading market for shares of series B preferred stock. As of March 31, 2007, Samuel J. Wohlstadter
is the only holder of series B preferred stock.
The proceeds from the sale of series B preferred stock were applied to fund a portion of the $37.5
million capital contribution that we made to MSD following the completion of the IGEN merger and
related transactions. Under the terms of the series B preferred stock, we may redeem the series B
preferred stock at $0.01 per share at any time that we are no longer entitled to receive
distributions with respect to our class C interest in MSD pursuant to the MSD agreements. We will
declare dividends for the series B preferred stock in connection with any payments received from
MSD related to the sale of our class C interests in MSD.
In connection with the settlement, we received a $2.0 million non-refundable pre-payment from MSD
for future amounts payable by MSD to us pursuant to the buy-out of our interests in MSD. The holder
of our series B preferred stock received a pro-rata share, representing the proportionate amount of
our class C interest in MSD that was funded by the sale of the series B preferred stock, of the
portion of the $2.0 million that was allocable to our class C interests.
During the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, we paid dividends of approximately $97,000 and
$54,000, respectively, in respect of shares of series B preferred stock.
In connection with the Merger Agreement, on April 4, 2007, Mr. Wohlstadter entered into an
agreement with Roche whereby he agreed (i) conditioned upon the closing of the merger, to sell his
1,000 shares of our series B preferred stock to Roche, (ii) conditioned upon the closing of the
Merger, to release us from certain claims and (iii) enter into a non-disclosure and
non-solicitation agreement with us.
ITEM 6. SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with our
consolidated financial statements and notes and the other information contained in or incorporated
by reference into this Form 10-K. The selected consolidated balance sheet data as of March 31, 2007
and 2006 and the selected consolidated statements of operations data for the fiscal years ended
March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 have been derived from our consolidated financial statements that
have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm,
and are included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. The selected consolidated balance sheet data as of
March 31, 2004 and 2003 and the selected consolidated statements of operations data for the fiscal
years ended March 31, 2004 and 2003 have been derived from audited financial statements not
included in this Form 10-K.
42
Our assets and businesses were owned and operated by IGEN until the completion of merger and
related transactions between Roche and IGEN on February 13, 2004. The accompanying financial
statements have been prepared and are presented as if we had been operating as a separate entity
using IGENs historical cost basis in the assets and liabilities and including the historical
operations of the businesses and assets transferred to us from IGEN.
The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction ITEM 1A Risk Factors and
ITEM 8 Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 (1) |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except
per share data) |
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales |
|
$ |
18,958 |
|
|
$ |
19,054 |
|
|
$ |
24,662 |
|
|
$ |
18,741 |
|
|
$ |
16,487 |
|
Roche payment |
|
|
2,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty income |
|
|
2,305 |
|
|
|
1,561 |
|
|
|
1,249 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
Contract fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
24,063 |
|
|
|
20,615 |
|
|
|
26,299 |
|
|
|
19,956 |
|
|
|
17,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product costs |
|
|
11,034 |
|
|
|
8,706 |
|
|
|
12,860 |
|
|
|
12,247 |
|
|
|
8,005 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
18,518 |
|
|
|
17,695 |
|
|
|
21,485 |
|
|
|
19,821 |
|
|
|
22,766 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
24,621 |
|
|
|
24,688 |
|
|
|
32,212 |
|
|
|
18,656 |
|
|
|
20,453 |
|
Roche and merger related costs |
|
|
5,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
59,479 |
|
|
|
51,089 |
|
|
|
66,557 |
|
|
|
126,426 |
|
|
|
51,224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(35,416 |
) |
|
|
(30,474 |
) |
|
|
(40,258 |
) |
|
|
(106,470 |
) |
|
|
(33,450 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
4,506 |
|
|
|
3,851 |
|
|
|
3,191 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net |
|
|
424 |
|
|
|
(1,230 |
) |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
(1,063 |
) |
|
|
154 |
|
Loss on joint venture impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35,077 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in
loss of joint venture (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,524 |
) |
|
|
(19,616 |
) |
|
|
(17,598 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss before cumulative effect of a change
in accounting principle |
|
|
(30,486 |
) |
|
|
(27,853 |
) |
|
|
(77,573 |
) |
|
|
(127,019 |
) |
|
|
(50,894 |
) |
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting
principle (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(30,486 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,853 |
) |
|
$ |
(77,573 |
) |
|
$ |
(93,319 |
) |
|
$ |
(50,894 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per common share before cumulative effect
of a
change in accounting principle (basic and diluted) |
|
$ |
(1.13 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.04 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.90 |
) |
|
$ |
(4.75 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.90 |
) |
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting
principle (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss (basic and diluted) |
|
$ |
(1.13 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.04 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.90 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.49 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.90 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in computing net loss per common share |
|
|
26,940 |
|
|
|
26,810 |
|
|
|
26,728 |
|
|
|
26,728 |
|
|
|
26,728 |
(4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31 |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004(1) |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments (5) |
|
$ |
43,978 |
|
|
$ |
69,631 |
|
|
$ |
95,629 |
|
|
|
182,509 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Working capital |
|
|
46,311 |
|
|
|
72,184 |
|
|
|
98,639 |
|
|
|
169,184 |
|
|
|
4,733 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
80,365 |
|
|
|
105,853 |
|
|
|
134,165 |
|
|
|
232,814 |
|
|
|
29,160 |
|
Long term obligations |
|
|
816 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
1,890 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
Series B preferred stock |
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity |
|
|
59,843 |
|
|
|
89,063 |
|
|
|
115,254 |
|
|
|
193,826 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net
investment by parent (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,665 |
|
43
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable
Interest Entities, or FIN 46. FIN 46 provides guidance on variable interest entities such
as the MSD joint venture and the framework through which an enterprise assesses
consolidation of a variable interest entity. We adopted FIN 46 as of March 31, 2004 and
determined that MSD qualified as a variable interest entity. Accordingly, beginning March
31, 2004 we consolidated the financial results of MSD. We had historically recorded
approximately 100% of MSDs losses. |
|
|
|
On August 12, 2004, BioVeris, MSD and MST entered into a settlement agreement that resolved
litigation between the parties and constituted a reconsideration event under FIN 46. We
determined that we no longer meet the conditions to be designated as the primary beneficiary
of MSD. Accordingly, for the period April 1, 2004 through August 12, 2004, we consolidated
the financial results of MSD and beginning August 13, 2004, we deconsolidated the financial
results of MSD and accounted for this investment on the equity method through December 13,
2004, the date of the sale of our interests in MSD. |
|
|
|
The audited MSD financial statements were filed as Exhibit 99.9 to the Form 10-K for the year
ending March 31, 2005. |
|
(2) |
|
In connection with the merger and related transactions between Roche and IGEN, we made a
$37.5 million payment to MSD. We determined that, at the time of the payment, recording the
entire payment to the investment in joint venture account would result in the book value of
our investment in MSD being greater than its fair market value. Accordingly, we expensed
$33.7 million, which represents the amount of the payment that gave rise to the net recorded
investment exceeding the fair market value of our interests. Upon implementation of FIN 46,
we recorded a one-time, non-cash $33.7 million adjustment to reflect this change in
accounting principle, thereby adjusting the book value of our investment in the joint venture
to equal the consolidated net assets of MSD. |
|
(3) |
|
See Note 5 of the consolidated financial statements for a description of the recording
of losses under the equity method of accounting related to the MSD investment. |
|
(4) |
|
Based on the number of shares of our common stock outstanding upon completion of the
IGEN merger and related transactions. |
|
(5) |
|
Prior to the completion of the merger and related transactions, IGEN held all cash in a
centralized treasury and provided all the necessary funding for the operations of BioVeris.
Accordingly, prior to February 13, 2004, no cash is reflected on the accompanying condensed
consolidated balance sheets and IGENs (Parents) net investment in us is shown in lieu of
stockholders equity. |
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATION
The numbers in this Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations may not tie directly to the numbers in our Consolidated Financial Statements due to
rounding.
Overview
We develop, manufacture and market our M-SERIES family of products, which can serve as a platform
for diagnostic systems to be used for the detection and measurement of biological or chemical
substances. We incorporate our technologies into our instrument systems, tests and reagents, which
are the biological and chemical components used to perform such tests. Using the M-SERIES platform,
we intend to integrate technologies and products to develop small, expandable and modular systems
that can perform a wide variety of tests for the following markets:
|
|
|
Non-clinical diagnostics for the biosecurity, life science and industrial markets. The
non-clinical diagnostics market includes biosecurity products for the detection of
bacteria, viruses and toxins that may pose a military or public health threat; life science testing for drug discovery and development that is
performed by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies; and industrial testing for the
detection of foodborne and waterborne disease causing pathogens. |
44
|
|
|
Clinical diagnostics. The clinical diagnostics market includes the testing of patient
samples to measure the presence of disease and monitor medical conditions. We are
developing products to be used in the clinical diagnostics market and believe that our
products will be ideally suited for the immunodiagnostic and nucleic acid testing market
segments of the clinical testing market. |
Our M-SERIES instruments are used in biodefense programs for homeland security, including by the
DOD. We believe there will be an increasing opportunity to sell our products as biosecurity tools
for use by commercial, governmental and military organizations around the world, as well as in
public health.
We are also selling two types of M-SERIES instruments for life science research to pharmaceutical
and biotechnology researchers, as well as to scientists at academic and government research
institutions. Immunogenicity testing is performed by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in
order to characterize the ability of protein-based therapeutics to stimulate an immune response.
Antibodies that result from an immune response to a protein-based drug can reduce its efficacy and
cause significant side effects, such as allergic reactions. Because of serious side effects that
have been reported over the last few years, it has become increasingly necessary to determine if an
immune response to protein-based drugs develops in patients by screening for the presence of
antibodies, confirming their specificity, characterizing the type of antibodies present and
determining whether they interfere with binding events. Immunogenicity testing is done during
pre-clinical studies and may continue through the clinical trials required for regulatory approval.
In some cases, the FDA requires additional testing after a drug has been approved. We believe our
M-SERIES product line for the life science market is ideally suited to perform immunogenicity
testing by measuring low affinity antibodies with high sensitivity, all in the presence of the
highly concentrated drug.
We believe that the emergence of simple, more accurate and cost-effective clinical diagnostic
products is shifting the site of clinical diagnostic testing from clinical reference laboratories
and central hospital laboratories to decentralized patient care centers, such as physicians
offices, ambulatory clinics, hospital emergency rooms, surgical and intensive care units, hospital
satellite laboratories and nurses stations, which are collectively referred to as clinical
point-of-care sites.
Our own product development efforts are focused on M-SERIES instruments and tests for the
biosecurity market and for the clinical diagnostics market, particularly for point-of-care sites.
We are seeking to develop, market and sell products for the clinical point-of-care market segment
through a combination of direct efforts and collaborative arrangements. We also are pursuing
opportunities in the clinical reference laboratory and central hospital laboratory market segments
through collaborative arrangements.
The first clinical diagnostic system being developed by us is a clinical analyzer that builds on
the M-SERIES instruments we sell in the biosecurity and life science markets. We believe that the
clinical analyzer will provide results to a physician rapidly with the same levels of sensitivity,
accuracy or consistency as a large instrument in a clinical reference laboratory or in a central
laboratory, thereby permitting the physician to make a more timely decision regarding the patients
course of treatment. Among the applications that we plan to develop is a proprietary approach for
determining an individuals personal immune status through unique diagnostic panels. We will seek
approval from the FDA for the clinical analyzer and other in vitro diagnostics products at the
appropriate stage of their product development. There can be no assurance that such approval will
be obtained.
Since fiscal 2005, we have expanded our business model to target the field of vaccines and have
obtained rights to certain vaccine candidates through license and option agreements. These vaccine
candidates include:
|
|
|
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B and Y |
|
|
|
|
Neisseria meningitidis serogroup C, in combination with certain other vaccines; |
|
|
|
|
Haemophilus influenzae type b |
45
|
|
|
Group A and Group B Streptococcus; |
|
|
|
|
Chlamydia; |
|
|
|
|
Candida albicans; |
|
|
|
|
Pneumococcus; |
|
|
|
|
Anthrax bacilli; and |
|
|
|
|
Urinary tract infection (E coli). |
In connection with our efforts to determine an individuals personal immune status through
unique diagnostic test panels, we entered into a license and research agreement with Jewish
General Hospital (JGH) in Montreal under which we received an exclusive, worldwide license
to the use of a JGH database that contains demographic data and the serologic status of an
immigrant population linked to numerous infectious diseases.
Roche
On February 13, 2004, IGEN and Roche consummated a merger and certain related transactions,
pursuant to which Roche acquired IGEN and IGEN simultaneously distributed shares of our common
stock to its stockholders. The transaction occurred in the following steps:
|
|
IGEN restructured its operations so that we, a newly formed,
wholly-owned subsidiary of IGEN at the time, assumed IGENs
biodefense, life science and industrial product lines as well as
IGENs opportunities in the clinical diagnostics and healthcare fields
and the ownership of IGENs intellectual property, IGENs equity
interest in MSD, cash and certain other rights and licenses currently
held by IGEN; and |
|
|
|
a wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche merged with and into IGEN, as a
result of which IGEN became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche and we
became an independent, publicly-traded company. Simultaneously with
the completion of the merger, certain ongoing commercial agreements
between certain affiliates of Roche and us became effective. |
On April 4, 2007, we and an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche entered into a Merger
Agreement. Pursuant to the proposed Merger Agreement, a subsidiary of Roche will be merged with
and into us, with BioVeris surviving as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche. The
completion of the proposed merger is subject to a number of customary conditions, including, among
others, approval by our stockholders, the absence of certain legal impediments to the consummation
of the merger, the completion of a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United
States under Section 271 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, and the expiration or
termination of the applicable waiting periods under the HSR Act and under certain German anti-trust
laws, and other customary conditions. The applicable waiting periods
under the HSR Act and German anti-trust laws have expired
and we have scheduled a special meeting of stockholders for June 25, 2007 at which our stockholders
will vote on the Merger Agreement.
Our results of operations in the future are likely to fluctuate substantially from quarter to
quarter as a result of various factors, which include:
|
|
the volume and timing of orders and product deliveries for biosecurity products, M-SERIES systems or other products,
which are based on our customers requirements that may vary over time; |
|
|
the success of M-SERIES system upgrades and enhancements and customer acceptance of those enhancements and upgrades; |
|
|
costs incurred related to expansion into the field of vaccines; |
46
|
|
the amount of revenues recognized or collectible from royalties and other contract revenues, which revenues are
dependent upon the efforts and compliance of our licensees and collaborators, including Roche, and which as a result of
the announcement of the Merger Agreement, may decline; |
|
|
whether our instruments are sold or leased to customers, which will affect the timing of the recognition of revenue
from the sale or lease; |
|
|
the timing of our introduction of new products, which could involve increased expenses associated with product
development and marketing; |
|
|
the volume and timing of product returns and warranty claims, which, if products are returned or have warranty claims
that are unexpected, may involve increased costs in excess of amounts reserved for returns or claims; |
|
|
our competitors introduction of new products, which may affect the purchase decision of or timing of orders by our
customers and prospective customers while the competitors product is assessed; |
|
|
the amount of expenses we incur in connection with the operation of our business, including: |
|
|
|
costs associated with Roche and the related merger transaction, including costs incurred
in connection with the agreed-upon procedures of the independent field monitor and the
independent auditor reviewing Roches compliance with their license from us; |
|
|
|
|
research and development costs, which increase or decrease based on the products in
development; and |
|
|
|
|
sales and marketing costs, which are based on product launches or promotions and sales
incentives that might be in effect from time to time; |
|
|
|
|
expenses associated with share-based compensation arrangements, including employee stock options; |
|
|
|
|
the amount that we may record related to the potential impairment of the license to use PCR technology; |
|
|
|
|
amounts received from MSD or MST as payment for allocated operating costs, the
purchase of our interests in MSD and the related accretion of income on the note receivable from
MST; |
|
|
|
|
unexpected termination of government contracts or orders, which could result in decreased
sales and increased costs due to excess capacity, inventory, personnel and other expenses;
and |
|
|
|
|
additional costs which we may incur as we explore new healthcare opportunities, including
costs for acquisitions of technologies, facilities and personnel. |
We expect to incur additional operating losses as a result of our expenses for manufacturing,
marketing and sales capabilities, research and product development, and general and
administrative costs. Our ability to become profitable in the future will be affected by,
among other things, our ability to expand the distribution and increase sales of existing
products, upgrade and enhance the M-SERIES family of products, introduce new products into the
market, generate higher revenue, develop marketing, sales and distribution capabilities
cost-effectively, and continue collaborations originally established by IGEN or establish
successful new collaborations with corporate partners to develop, manufacture, market and sell
products that incorporate our technologies.
Results of Operations
Years Ended March 31, 2007 and 2006
Revenues. Our revenues for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007 increased by approximately $3.5
million, or 17%, to $24.1 million from $20.6 million in fiscal 2006. Product sales were $19.0
million in fiscal 2007 compared to the prior years product sales of $19.1 million. Royalty
income increased to $2.3 million during fiscal 2007 from $1.6 million
in the prior year.
47
During fiscal 2007, we also received and recognized as revenue, a $2.8 million payment from Roche.
This payment represented Roches unilateral, preliminary calculation of amounts owed to us for
Roches sales to certain customers in 2004 that were outside Roches licensed field, under a
license agreement between the parties. We have notified Roche that the $2.8 million
payment does not represent full satisfaction of Roches obligations for 2004 out-of-field sales
and we expressly reserved all rights to seek additional payments. Additionally, we do not believe
that this payment is indicative of amounts that will be owed for years after 2004. The amount and
timing of any additional payments that we might receive from Roche relating to out-of-field sales
in 2004, 2005 or 2006 is uncertain because, among other things: (1) the amount of such sales and
placements has not yet been determined; (2) there may be disputes between Roche and us concerning
the agreement and/or the field monitors and the independent auditors findings; and (3) we do not
have a history of Roche payments from which we could reasonably estimate the amount of sales by
Roche that payments would be based upon. We do not anticipate receiving any further payments from
Roche while the proposed merger is pending.
Sales of biosecurity products for fiscal 2007 were $8.5 million, a decrease of $100,000 from the
prior year. Sales of products for the life science market were $10.5 million for each of fiscal
2007 and 2006. These product sales reflect orders and product deliveries which are based on
customers requirements. Sales of our products for the biosecurity and life science markets are
subject to a number of uncertainties, including the fact that we generally are not a party to
significant long-term contracts for the sale of our products that would provide predictable sales.
Therefore, the volume and timing of product orders from our biosecurity and life science customers
are based on their requirements, which may vary over time. In addition, as a result of the
announcement of the Merger Agreement, our product sales may decline or customers may defer placing
orders. As a result, we believe that we do not have sufficient information to reasonably project
our future sales.
Operating Costs and Expenses. Product costs were $11.0 million (58% of total product sales) for
fiscal 2007 compared to $8.7 million (46% of total product sales) for fiscal 2006. The current
year increase of $2.3 million includes approximately $1.2 million of costs incurred in connection
with detection module upgrades for certain existing customers. We may incur an additional cost of
approximately $ 300,000 related to these voluntary upgrades during fiscal 2008 to enhance overall
customer satisfaction. Product costs also increased in fiscal 2007 by approximately $1.1 million
due to lower margin instrument sales being a larger component of the sales mix and higher service
costs related to instrumentation. Our future profit margin is subject to change due to a number
of uncertainties relating to, among other things, the launch of new instrument systems.
Research and development expenses were $18.5 million for fiscal 2007, which represents an increase
of 5% over the prior year costs of $17.7 million. Research and development expenditures increased
in the current year due primarily to higher facilities and consulting costs. Research and
development expenses primarily relate to ongoing development costs and product enhancements
associated with vaccines, the M-SERIES family of products, development of new assays and research
and development of new systems and technologies, including point-of-care products. We expect
research and development costs to increase as product development and core research expand,
including costs associated with our efforts in vaccines, and developing clinical diagnostics and
biosecurity testing products.
We have expanded our business model to target the field of vaccines which will require substantial
research and development expenditures. For example, we have entered into several license and option
agreements for patent rights to unique vaccine candidates. Under these agreements, we are
responsible for conducting or sponsoring the research and development of these vaccine candidates
and may be required to make additional payments for license and milestone fees, including for
initiating and completing human clinical trials and receiving regulatory approvals.
Selling, general and administrative expenses were $24.6 million in fiscal 2007, compared to the
prior year costs of $24.7 million. Included as selling, general and administrative expenses during
fiscal 2007 was share-based compensation expense under FAS 123R associated with our 2003 Stock
Incentive Plan of approximately $600,000. These expenses in the current year were offset by lower
facilities costs and legal and accounting related fees.
Costs of $5.3 million in the current year associated with the proposed Roche merger, disputes with
Roche over the license agreement between Roche and us, fees of the independent field monitor
reviewing Roches compliance with the license agreement between the parties, and the independent
certified public accountant examining the sales and accounting records and accounts of all
uses of our technology by Roche, are classified as Roche and merger related costs.
There were no significant similar costs in the prior fiscal year.
48
Since 1995 we had engaged the law firm of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr to provide legal
services. Jennifer M. Drogula, who became the daughter-in-law of our Chief Executive Officer in
March 2002, has been a partner of that firm since January 2001. We recorded approximately $400,000
and $300,000 in legal fees with that law firm for the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
Our Chief Executive Officer, Samuel J. Wohlstadter, is the principal and controlling stockholder, a
director and the Chief Executive Officer of each of Wellstat Biologics Corporation, Wellstat
Therapeutics Corporation, Hyperion Catalysis International, Proteinix Corporation, Advanced Vision
Therapy and Integrated Chemical Synthesizers, Inc. These companies are therefore considered our
affiliates for the purpose of this discussion. We have shared services arrangements with certain
of these affiliated companies. These shared services include accounting and finance, human
resources and other administrative services, as well as facility related costs and services. Shared
services costs allocated to these companies totaled $400,000 and $500,000 for the years ended March
31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which reduced certain Operating Costs and Expenses for the
respective years. Amounts allocated to these affiliated companies are calculated and billed monthly
based upon costs incurred by us and are determined through allocation methods that include time
spent and square footage utilized. The amount due from the affiliated companies was approximately
$12,000 and $256,000 at March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. All such balances due were paid
subsequent to each respective fiscal year end. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, these
shared services would be terminated within sixty days of the closing of the merger transaction.
Interest Income. Interest income was $4.5 million and $3.9 million in fiscal 2007 and 2006,
respectively, including $1.9 million in each year from the accretion of income related to the note
receivable from MSD. During fiscal 2006, we recorded an out of period adjustment of $600,000 to
reduce accumulated other comprehensive loss and interest income in order to reflect the
amortization related to prior periods of the purchase price premium of short-term investments. The
impact of this adjustment on current and prior interim and annual periods was not material, as the
adjustment was comprised of relatively small amounts related to each of the quarterly reporting
periods dating back to the quarter ended June 30, 2004. For all periods, comprehensive loss was not
impacted by this adjustment.
Other Income / Expense. Other income was approximately $400,000 and other expense was approximately
$1.2 million in fiscal 2007 and 2006, respectively. The 2007 amount includes approximately
$600,000 of foreign currency gains. The 2006 amount includes approximately $600,000 of foreign
currency losses and $300,000 for the write-off of furniture and equipment.
Share-based Payments. In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, which requires that
companies recognize expense associated with share-based compensation arrangements, including
employee stock options, using a fair value-based option model, and eliminates the alternative to
use the intrinsic value method of accounting for share-based payments under APB 25, Accounting for
Stock Issued to Employees. SFAS 123R was effective for our fiscal year beginning April 1, 2006.
We have adopted SFAS 123R using the modified prospective transition method. Under this method,
compensation expense is reflected in the financial statements beginning April 1, 2006 with no
restatement of prior periods. As such, compensation expense is recognized for awards that are
granted, modified, repurchased or cancelled on or after April 1, 2006 as well as for the portion of
awards previously granted that have not vested as of April 1, 2006. We have implemented the
straight-line expense attribution method.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123R, we accounted for stock-based awards to employees and
directors using the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB 25, as allowed under SFAS No.
123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Under the intrinsic value method, no employee
stock-based compensation expense had been recognized in our Consolidated Statements of Operations
for any period prior to our adoption of SFAS No. 123R on April 1, 2006, as the exercise price of
the stock options granted to employees and directors was equivalent to the fair market value of the
underlying stock at the date of grant.
During the year ended March 31, 2007, we recorded share-based compensation expense associated with
our 2003 Stock Incentive Plan of approximately $700,000, including $17,000 to product costs,
$49,000 to research and development, and $600,000 to selling, general and administrative costs.
49
Net Loss. The net loss for fiscal year 2007 was $30.5 million ($1.13 per common share), compared to
a net loss of $27.8 million ($1.04 per common share) in fiscal year 2006, an increase of $2.7
million. The increase in the net loss is primarily the result of $5.3 million of Roche and merger
related expenses, offset by an increase in revenue of $3.4 million, including the $2.8 million
Roche payment which we received and recognized as revenue in the current year.
Years Ended March 31, 2006 and 2005
During fiscal year 2005, MSDs results of operations for the period from April 1, 2004 through
August 12, 2004 were consolidated with the results of operations of BioVeris and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries.
Revenues. Consolidated revenues for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006 decreased by approximately
$5.7 million, or 22%, to $20.6 million from $26.3 million in fiscal 2005. Of this $5.7 million
decrease, $4.3 million represents MSD revenues which were consolidated with BioVeris revenues during fiscal 2005.
Consolidated product sales were $19.1 million in fiscal 2006, a decrease of 23% over the prior
years product sales of $24.7 million. Of this $5.6 million decrease, $4.0 million represents MSD
product sales. BioVeriss sales of biosecurity products for fiscal 2006 were $8.6 million, a
decrease of $800,000 from the prior year. Sales of products for the life science market were $10.5
million for fiscal 2006, a decrease of $800,000 from the prior year. These changes in product sales
reflect the change of orders and product deliveries for biosecurity and life science products,
which are based on our customers requirements.
Operating Costs and Expenses. Consolidated product costs were $8.7 million (46% of total product
sales) for fiscal 2006 compared to $12.9 million (52% of total product sales) for fiscal 2005. The
current year decrease of $4.2 million consists of $3.7 million due to the consolidation of MSDs
product costs, and a $500,000 reduction in Bioveris costs. BioVeris product costs in fiscal 2006,
as a percentage of total product sales, were 46% compared to 44% in fiscal 2005.
Consolidated research and development expenses were $17.7 million for fiscal 2006, which represents
a decrease of 18% over the prior year costs of $21.5 million. The $3.8 million decrease consists of
$3.7 million due to the consolidation of MSDs research and development expenses, and a $100,000
reduction in BioVeris costs. Research and development expenses primarily relate to ongoing
development costs and product enhancements associated with vaccines, the M-SERIES family of
products, development of new assays and research and development of new systems and technologies,
including point-of-care products.
Consolidated selling, general and administrative expenses were $24.7 million in fiscal 2006, which
represents a decrease of 23% over the prior year costs of $32.2 million. The $7.5 million decrease
consists of $4.5 million due to the consolidation of MSDs selling, general and administrative
expenses, and a $3.0 million reduction in BioVeris costs. BioVeris decrease in selling, general
and administrative costs of $3.0 million was primarily attributable to lower professional fees in
the current year. Professional fees in the prior year included costs associated with our litigation
and settlement with MSD.
Since 1995 we had engaged the law firm of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr to provide legal
services. Jennifer M. Drogula, who became the daughter-in-law of our Chief Executive Officer in
March 2002, has been a partner of that firm since January 2001. We recorded approximately $300,000
and $2.2 million in legal fees with that law firm for the years ended March 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
Our Chief Executive Officer, Samuel J. Wohlstadter, is the principal and controlling stockholder, a
director and the Chief Executive Officer of each of Wellstat Biologics Corporation, Wellstat
Therapeutics Corporation, Hyperion Catalysis International, Proteinix Corporation and Integrated
Chemical Synthesizers, Inc. These companies are therefore considered our affiliates for the purpose
of this discussion. We have shared services arrangements with certain of these affiliated
companies. These shared services include accounting and finance, human resources and other
administrative services, as well as facility related costs and services. Shared services costs
allocated to these companies totaled $500,000 and $400,000 for the years ended March 31, 2006 and
2005, respectively, which reduced certain Operating Costs and Expenses for the respective years.
Amounts allocated to these affiliated companies are calculated and billed monthly based upon costs
incurred by us and are determined through allocation methods that include time spent and square
footage utilized. The amount due from the affiliated companies was
approximately $256,000 and $8,000 at March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. All such balances due were paid subsequent to each
respective fiscal year end.
50
Interest Income. Interest income was $3.9 million and $3.2 million in fiscal 2006 and 2005,
respectively, including $1.9 million and $200,000, respectively, from the accretion of income
related to the note receivable from MSD. During fiscal 2006, we recorded an out of period
adjustment of $600,000 to reduce accumulated other comprehensive loss and interest income in order
to reflect the amortization related to prior periods of the purchase price premium of short-term
investments. The impact of this adjustment on current and prior interim and annual periods was not
material, as the adjustment was comprised of relatively small amounts related to each of the
quarterly reporting periods dating back to the quarter ended June 30, 2004. For all periods,
comprehensive loss was not impacted by this adjustment.
Other Income / Expense. Other expense was $1.2 million and other income was $100,000 in fiscal 2006
and 2005, respectively. The 2006 amount includes approximately $600,000 of foreign currency losses
and $300,000 for the write-off of furniture and equipment.
Loss on Joint Venture Impairments. In fiscal 2005, the book value of our interests in MSD, as
recorded in the investment in joint venture account on our unconsolidated balance sheet, was
greater than the fair market value purchase price of these interests determined by the appraisal
process. Utilizing the guidance of Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 18, during the
fiscal year ended March 31, 2005, we recorded non-cash charges of $35.1 million, as loss on joint
venture impairment, representing the amount by which the book value of our interests in MSD
exceeded the fair market value. These impairment charges were classified as non-operating costs on
the Statement of Operations consistent with the guidance of APB 30.
Equity in Loss of Joint Venture. Effective March 31, 2004, we consolidated the financial results of
MSD in accordance with FIN 46 which provides guidance on variable interest entities such as the MSD
joint venture and the framework through which an enterprise assesses consolidation of a variable
interest entity. We adopted FIN 46 as it was determined that MSD qualified as a variable interest
entity. The settlement agreement between the parties has been determined to constitute a
reconsideration event under FIN 46 and we determined that we no longer meet the conditions to be
designated as the primary beneficiary of MSD, as certain provisions of the settlement agreement
reallocated the obligation to absorb the majority of MSDs future expected losses. Accordingly, we
consolidated the financial results of MSD as of March 31, 2004 and for the period from April 1,
2004 through August 12, 2004, and beginning August 13, 2004, we deconsolidated the financial
results of MSD.
For the period from August 13, 2004 through December 13, 2004, the date of the sale of our
interests in MSD, we recorded our proportionate share of MSD losses, representing approximately
100% of MSDs losses, as equity in loss of joint venture consistent with accounting for equity
method investments. We recorded equity in loss of joint venture of $5.5 million for the year ended
March 31, 2005.
Net Loss. The net loss for fiscal year 2006 was $27.8 million ($1.04 per common share), compared to
a net loss of $77.6 million ($2.90 per common share) in fiscal year 2005, a decrease of $49.8
million. The decrease in the net loss is primarily caused by the prior years non-cash charges of
$35.1 million representing the amount by which the book value of our interests in MSD exceeded the
fair market value purchase price, MSDs consolidated losses of $7.5 million in the prior year and a
decrease in operating expenses in the current year of approximately $3.7 million.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31: |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
(In Thousands) |
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments |
|
$ |
43,978 |
|
|
$ |
69,631 |
|
|
$ |
95,629 |
|
Working capital |
|
|
46,311 |
|
|
|
73,414 |
|
|
|
98,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended March 31: |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Cash provided by (used in): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
|
(25,925 |
) |
|
|
(24,450 |
) |
|
|
(31,059 |
) |
Investing activities |
|
|
13,476 |
|
|
|
12,458 |
|
|
|
(59,789 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(49,922 |
) |
Capital expenditures (included in investing activities above) |
|
|
(960 |
) |
|
|
(1,028 |
) |
|
|
(1,855 |
) |
51
Cash Used in Operating Activities
Net cash
used for operations was $25.9 million, $24.5 million and $31.1 million during the years
ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The change in cash used for operations in the
current fiscal year resulted primarily from a higher net loss and higher working capital
requirements, partially offset by lower non-cash adjustments. The non-cash adjustments in fiscal
2007 were primarily from depreciation and amortization, stock-based compensation and the accretion
of interest income. The non-cash adjustments in fiscal 2006 were primarily due to depreciation,
amortization, stock-based compensation and accretion of interest income.
Cash Used in Investing Activities
We used approximately $1.0 million, $1.0 million and $1.9 million of cash for the acquisition of
equipment and leasehold improvements during the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Our investments in MSD totaled $3.0 million for the year ended March 31, 2005.
During
fiscal 2007, we purchased $56.8 million of short-term investments and received proceeds of
$71.2 million from the sales and maturities of short-term investments. During
fiscal 2007, we recorded an out-of-period adjustment to increase
purchases of short-term investments of approximately
$8.8 million to correct a classification error of
short-term investments in the statement of cash flows. The impact of
this adjustment to reflect the purchases of highly liquid short-term
investments on a prior interim and annual periods and the period in
which the correction was made was not significant or material to the
consolidated financial statements. During fiscal 2006, we
purchased $15.2 million of short-term investments and received
proceeds of $28.7 million from the
sales and maturities of short-term investments. During fiscal 2005, we purchased $108.7 million of
short-term investments and received proceeds of $53.8 million from the sales and maturities of
short-term investments.
Cash Used in or Provided by Financing Activities
During the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, we paid dividends of approximately $97,000 and
$54,000, respectively, in respect of shares of Series B preferred stock. We received $46,000 for
the issuance of our common stock related to the exercise of stock options during fiscal 2007.
During fiscal 2005, we used $20.0 million of cash for the distribution gain payment to Roche
associated with the merger and related transactions between Roche and IGEN. We also recorded $29.2
million as a reduction of cash which represents the MSD cash balance at the deconsolidation date,
which is no longer reflected on our consolidated balance sheet. In fiscal 2004, we had recorded an
increase in cash of $35.1 million from the initial consolidation MSD.
Roche
On April 4, 2007, we and Roche entered into a Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the proposed Merger
Agreement, a subsidiary of Roche will be merged with and into us, with BioVeris surviving as an
indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche. The completion of the proposed merger is subject to a
number of customary conditions, including, among others, approval by our stockholders, the absence
of certain legal impediments to the consummation of the merger, the completion of a review by the
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States under Section 271 of the Defense Production
Act of 1950, as amended, and the expiration or termination of the applicable waiting periods under
the HSR Act and under certain German anti-trust laws, and other customary conditions. The
applicable waiting period under the HSR Act has expired and we have scheduled a special meeting of
stockholders for June 25, 2007 at which our stockholders will vote on the Merger Agreement.
Effective in February 2004, we granted Roche a worldwide, non-exclusive license to patents and
information relating to our proprietary ECL technology, subject to certain limitations described in
the Roche License. The license may be used by Roche to commercially exploit only certain ECL
products and is royalty-free provided such products are used in a specified field. Our right to
terminate the license is restricted, except under certain circumstances.
52
Pursuant to the Roche License, we and Roche have engaged a field monitor to review placements and
sales of products and services by Roche in 2005. The field monitor was tasked with preparing a
written report, including a list of any sales or placements of products and services that were not
within the licensed field and identifying sales or placements of products or services in violation
of the license grant. While the field monitors work has been completed, they will not issue their
written report pending the completion of the proposed merger between
us and Roche. In connection with mutually agreed-upon procedures, we are required to share equally with Roche one-half of the
costs incurred, which remaining amount for us subsequent to March 31, 2007 is presently estimated
at $300,000. Should the field monitors report be issued, pursuant to the license agreement, Roche
must pay to us, within 30 days after receiving the field monitors report, 65% of all undisputed
revenues earned through out-of-field sales of products for 2005. Although Roche may not knowingly
sell or actively market outside the field, they may continue the identified out-of-field sales
until we notify Roche in writing that they are prohibited from making any further such sales and we
have notified Roche that it is prohibited from making any further sales to certain types of
customers.
Although a field monitor has not been engaged to address 2004, we believe that we are entitled to
additional payments for out-of-field sales during 2004. We have exercised our contractual right to
appoint an independent
certified public accountant to examine the sales and accounting records and accounts of all uses
of our ECL technology by Roche and its affiliates. The independent
certified public accountant had been examining 2004 and 2005.
We had also invoked the dispute resolution process under the Roche License by notifying Roche that
a dispute exists with respect to restrictions that Roche has attempted to impose on the scope of
the audit. In addition, we had invoked the dispute resolution process under the Roche License by
notifying Roche that a dispute exists with respect to the appointment of a field monitor to review
placements and sales of products and services by Roche in 2006. Any disputes under the Roche
license have been suspended pending the completion of the proposed merger between us and Roche.
The amount and timing of any additional payments that we might receive from Roche relating to
out-of-field sales in 2004, 2005 and 2006 is uncertain because, among other things: (1) the amount
of such sales and placements has not yet been determined; (2) there may be disputes between Roche
and us concerning the agreement and/or the field monitors findings; and (3) we do not have a
history of Roche payments from which we could reasonably estimate the amount of sales by Roche that
payments would be based upon. We have not recorded any revenue on the potential future payments
from Roche, as the amounts are not reliably measurable in accordance with the criteria set forth in
Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) 104.
MSD
MSD was a joint venture formed by MST and IGEN in 1995. MSD was formed to develop, manufacture,
market and sell products utilizing a combination of MSTs multi-array technology together with our
ECL technology.
Effective March 31, 2004, we consolidated the financial results of MSD in accordance with FIN 46,
which provides guidance on variable interest entities such as the MSD joint venture and the
framework through which an enterprise assesses consolidation of a variable interest entity. We
adopted FIN 46 as it was determined that MSD qualified as a variable interest entity and we were
the primary beneficiary. On August 12, 2004, BioVeris, MSD and MST entered into a settlement
agreement that resolved litigation between those parties and constituted a reconsideration event
under FIN 46. We determined that we no longer met the conditions to be designated as the primary
beneficiary of MSD, as through the provisions of the settlement agreement, we transferred our
economic interests to MST and reallocated the obligation to absorb the majority of MSDs future
expected losses. Accordingly, beginning August 12, 2004, we deconsolidated the financial results of
MSD.
Except for the period during which we consolidated the financial results of MSD, which was March
31, 2004 through August 12, 2004, we had recorded our proportionate share of MSD losses,
representing approximately 100% of MSDs losses. For this consolidation period, we reclassified
amounts in the statement of operations formerly recorded on a net basis as equity in loss of
joint venture to amounts recorded on a gross basis primarily as revenue, product costs, research
and development expenses and selling, general and administrative expenses. As a result, certain of
our revenues and expenses for the year ended March 31, 2006 decreased.
The MSD joint venture agreement expired upon completion of the IGEN merger. As a result, MSD and
MST had the option to purchase our interests in MSD and pursuant to the settlement, MSD or MST
agreed to purchase, and we agreed to sell, our entire interest in MSD. Fair market value for the
purchase of our interests in MSD was determined in accordance with the valuation process set forth
in the MSD joint venture agreement. The fair market value was determined by the independent
appraisers to be approximately $9.9 million which equals the average of the two closest
determinations, less a 7.5% discount factor. The purchase of our interests was completed on
December 13, 2004 and, accordingly, we no longer hold an equity interest in MSD.
53
MSD or MST is required to pay us the outstanding purchase price over time in installments equal to
the sum of 5% of MSD net sales, as determined in accordance with the MSD agreements, and 20% of the
net proceeds realized by MSD from the sale of its debt or equity securities in any third-party
financing after the date of the sale of our interests in MSD. Upon the sale of our interests in
MSD, we recorded a discounted note receivable of $4.5 million that had a balance at March 31, 2007
of approximately $6.0 million, including approximately $1.6 million classified as other current
assets, which represented the net present value of future payments that we expect to realize from
the sale of our interests in MSD. Calculating the net present value of future payments that we
expect to realize from MSD as payment for the purchase price, requires assumptions about MSD, which
are assessed and updated periodically, including the timing and amount of MSDs future financings
and revenue, and an appropriate discount rate. If actual results differ from these assumptions, the
net present value of future payments received by us could differ from the amount reflected on the
balance sheet at March 31, 2007. We expect that MSD will require substantial additional funding for
its ongoing operations. If MSD is not able to obtain this funding, or in the event sufficient net
sales or third-party financings of MSD do not materialize, we may not receive all payments due from
MST for the purchase of our interests in MSD.
During the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, operating costs allocated to MSD by us in
connection with shared personnel and facilities totaled $47,000, $700,000 and $700,000,
respectively. The costs allocated for fiscal 2005 are net of a $500,000 write-off of unpaid costs
in connection with the settlement agreement, in which all claims against MSD, MST and Jacob
Wohlstadter were dismissed and released. The specific nature and amount of our allocations are
being reviewed by and discussed with MSD.
For a more complete description of the sale of our MSD interests and the MSD agreements, see ITEM
8, Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements Note 5.
Contractual Obligations
We have contractual obligations associated with ongoing business activities which will result in
cash payments in future periods. In addition, we believe that material commitments for capital
expenditures may be required in a variety of areas, such as product development programs, sponsored
research and the relocation and build-out of new facilities and related facility infrastructure. We
have not, at this time, made material commitments for any such capital expenditures and have not
secured additional sources to fund such commitments if they become necessary in the future.
As of March 31, 2007, our material future obligations were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
Sponsored |
|
|
|
|
Lease |
|
Research |
|
|
Years ended March 31, |
|
Payments |
|
& Other |
|
Total |
|
2008 |
|
$ |
5,240 |
|
|
$ |
1,306 |
|
|
$ |
6,546 |
|
2009 |
|
|
5,421 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
5,697 |
|
2010 |
|
|
4,860 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
5,038 |
|
2011 |
|
|
3,103 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
3,183 |
|
2012 |
|
|
2,523 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,523 |
|
2013 and thereafter |
|
|
5,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,968 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
27,115 |
|
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
|
28,955 |
|
Less:
sublease income |
|
|
(16,200 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,200 |
) |
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,915 |
|
|
$ |
1,840 |
|
|
$ |
12,755 |
|
|
|
|
Included in the table above is an operating lease in which we subleased certain space at our
cost and with equivalent terms and conditions to our primary lease, to companies in which our
Chief Executive Officer, Samuel J. Wohlstadter, is the principal and controlling stockholder, a
director and the Chief Executive Officer. These companies are therefore considered our affiliates
for the purpose of this discussion. The subleases with the affiliated companies provide for
annual rental payments to us of approximately $300,000 and such amount is included in the table
above as a component of sublease income.
Subsequent
to March 31, 2007, we subleased a facility to a third party under an
arrangement that will further reduce its annual operating lease
payments by approximately $1.0 million from fiscal 2008 through
2015.
Under vaccine license agreements, we are responsible for conducting or sponsoring the research and
development of vaccine candidates and may be required to make additional payments for patent costs,
milestone fees, including for initiating and completing human clinical trials and receiving regulatory approvals, and royalties
on future sales.
54
Product development for our clinical diagnostic and vaccine products are at an early development
stage. Product development is subject to a number of technical and commercial uncertainties and in
part depends upon our ability to enter into new collaborative arrangements. Accordingly, the
business plan for our clinical diagnostic and vaccine products, including immunodiagnostic and PCR
technology-based products, is evolving and does not have definitive product introduction timelines
or budgets and we have not yet determined the additional funding, personnel, facilities, equipment
or technology that may be required to implement our plans.
Our ability to become profitable in the future will depend on, among other things, the introduction
of new products to the market. If we are unable to develop new products, our business prospects and
financial results would be adversely affected. Furthermore, we will need substantial amounts of
money to fund our operations on an ongoing basis. We expect our available cash to be sufficient to
fund our operations for at least one year, but we cannot predict how long our available cash will
be sufficient to fund our operations thereafter.
Our future access to funds could be adversely impacted by many factors, including the volatility of
the price of our common stock, continuing losses from our operations, establishment of new business
arrangements, the status of new product launches, general market conditions and other factors. If
we are unable to raise additional capital, we may have to scale back, or even eliminate, some
programs, which we have the ability to do. Alternatively, we may consider pursuing arrangements
with other companies, such as granting licenses or entering into joint ventures or collaborations,
on terms that may not be favorable to us.
Prior to entering into the Merger Agreement with Roche, we would from time to time have discussions
with third parties, including multinational corporations, regarding various business arrangements
including distribution, marketing, research and development, joint venture and other business
agreements, which could have provided us with substantial up-front fees or payments. The Merger
Agreement contains certain limitations regarding the operation of our business during the period
between the signing of the Merger Agreement and the completion of the proposed merger, including
entering into new business arrangements without the permission of Roche.
Should the proposed merger with Roche not be completed, the effect on us could have a material
adverse effect on our business prospects and financial condition. In that regard, our business
could be affected by many factors, including:
|
|
|
the reason or reasons for which the Merger Agreement was terminated and whether such
termination resulted from factors adversely affecting us; |
|
|
|
|
the status of the ongoing out-of-field sales issue with Roche and the results of various
field monitor and audit processes and the resolution of the disagreements with Roche
regarding payments for out-of-field sales under the Roche License and future interaction
between us and Roche, including the risks of litigation that could be expensive and
prolonged; |
|
|
|
|
the possibility that, as a result of the termination of the Merger Agreement, the
marketplace would consider us to be an unattractive acquisition candidate; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain additional debt and/or equity financing or complete other business
arrangements on terms that were acceptable to us in light of our available cash resources
and our expected future cash flows; |
|
|
|
|
the possibility that, as a result of the announcement of the Merger Agreement, our
product sales may decline or customers may defer placing orders; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to attract and retain key personnel and the distraction of the attention of
our management and employees. |
55
While the potential payment to us for out-of-field sales by Roche may be material to our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows, the amount and timing of any payments for past as
well as future out-of-field sales we might receive from Roche is uncertain, speculative and
difficult to quantify. In addition, the costs and difficulty of resolving the issues with Roche, including the management time, would be significant.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of March 31, 2007, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements, as defined by SEC Regulation S-K,
Item 303 (a) (4).
Critical Accounting Policies
A critical accounting policy is one that is both important to the portrayal of our financial
position and results of operations and requires the application of difficult, subjective or complex
judgments by management. As a result, critical accounting policies are subject to an inherent
degree of uncertainty. In applying those policies, management uses its judgment to determine the
appropriate assumptions to be used in the determination of certain estimates. These estimates are
based on our managements experience, terms of existing contracts, observance of trends in the
industry, information provided by customers, and information available from other outside sources,
as appropriate. Significant changes to these estimates could have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements. Our critical accounting policies include:
Revenue Recognition We derive revenue principally from four sources: product sales, Roche
payments, royalty income and contract fees.
Product sales are recognized as revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the
price to the buyer is fixed or determinable, collectibility is reasonably assured and the product
is shipped to the customer thereby transferring title and risk of loss. For instrument sales, the
instrument and the related installation are considered to be separate elements under EITF 00-21.
Revenue is recognized for the instrument upon shipment or delivery, depending on the terms of each
order, and is recognized for the installation when complete based upon the residual value method.
For instrument and reagent sales, there is no option of return and refund, only the option to
repair or replace the product.
Other than the installation required for the instruments and the standard warranty, there are no
contingencies, allowances or other post-sale obligations. For instrument leases, the instrument
rental and related minimum reagent purchases are considered to be separate elements under EITF
00-21 and, accordingly, the sales price is allocated to the two elements based upon their relative
fair values. Instrument rental revenue is recognized ratably over the life of the lease agreements
and the related reagent revenue is recognized upon shipment. Revenue associated with extended
warranty arrangements is recognized over the term of the extended warranty contract.
Roche payments are recorded as revenue on a cash basis, as we do not have sufficient information to
reliably estimate such payments in accordance with the revenue criteria described within SAB 104,
until the payments have been received by us.
Royalty income is recorded as revenue in accordance with SAB 104. The revenue is recorded on the
accrual basis in accordance with contract terms when third party results are reliably measurable
and collectibility is probable.
Revenue from services performed under contracts is recognized when obligations under the contract
have been satisfied.
The majority of our product sales and contract fees contain standard terms and conditions. Certain
transactions may contain negotiated terms that require contract interpretation to determine the
appropriate amount of revenue to be recognized. In addition, we must assess whether collectibility
is reasonably assured. While management believes its interpretations and judgments are reasonable,
different assumptions could result in changes in the timing of revenue recognition.
Share-based Payments In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R which requires that
companies recognize expense associated with share-based compensation arrangements, including
employee stock options, using a fair value-based option model, and eliminates the alternative to
use the intrinsic value method of accounting for share-based payments under APB 25, Accounting for
Stock Issued to Employees. SFAS 123R was effective for the Companys fiscal year beginning April
1, 2006. We have adopted SFAS 123R using the modified prospective transition method. Under this method, compensation expense is reflected in the financial
statements beginning April 1, 2006 with no restatement of prior periods. As such, compensation
expense is recognized for awards that are granted, modified, repurchased or cancelled on or after
April 1, 2006 as well as for the portion of awards previously granted that have not vested as of
April 1, 2006. We have implemented the straight-line expense attribution method.
56
The fair value of stock option grants during the year ended March 31, 2007, were estimated on the
date of grant using a Black-Scholes option valuation model that uses the following assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
Expected stock price volatility |
|
|
55% - 63.2 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
4.65% -5.08 |
% |
Expected option term (in years) |
|
|
5.5 - 7.5 |
|
As our common stock does not have a sufficient amount of historical activity, the expected
volatility factor is based primarily upon historical stock prices of comparable publicly traded
companies and is used to calculate the expected volatility rate based on the expected term of the
equity awards. The expected term is based on the simplified method allowed under SAB 107 due to
the limited history of employee stock options granted by us. The simplified method calculates the
term based on the vesting and contractual terms of the equity awards. The risk-free interest rate
used is determined by the market yield curve based upon the risk-free interest rates established by
the Federal Reserve, or non-coupon bonds that have maturities equal to the expected term. The
dividend yield is based upon the fact that we have not historically granted dividends on our common
stock and do not expect to issue dividends in the foreseeable future. Stock options granted prior
to April 1, 2006 were valued based on the grant date fair value of those awards, using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model, as previously calculated for pro-forma disclosures under SFAS
123. Alternative estimates and judgments could yield materially different results.
Inventory We record our inventory at the lower of cost or market using the first-in, first-out
method. We regularly review inventory quantities on hand and record a reserve for excess and
obsolete inventory based primarily on an estimated forecast of product demand and production
requirements for the next twelve months. Reserves are recorded for the difference between the cost
and the market value. Those reserves are based on significant estimates. Our estimates of future
product demand may prove to be inaccurate, in which case we may have understated or overstated the
provision required for excess and obsolete inventory. In addition, our industry is characterized by
technological change, frequent new product development and product obsolescence that could result
in an increase in the amount of obsolete inventory quantities on hand. Although we make every
effort to ensure the accuracy of our forecasts of future product demand, any significant
unanticipated changes in demand or technological developments could have a significant impact on
the values of our inventory and our reported operating results.
Evaluation of Long-lived Assets We have long-lived assets recorded on our balance sheet that
include equipment and leasehold improvements, investments, licenses and other assets. We evaluate
the potential impairment of long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the carrying amount of an asset may not be fully recoverable. In evaluating the recoverability
of an asset, our policy is to compare the carrying amount of an asset with the projected
undiscounted cash flow. An impairment loss is measured and recorded based on discounted estimated
future cash flows.
We recorded a discounted note receivable which had an original balance of $4.5 million. This note
receivable has a balance of approximately $6.0 million at March 31, 2007, including approximately
$1.6 million classified as other current assets, which represents the net present value of future
payments that we expect to realize from the sale of our interests in MSD. We accrete to fair value
using the effective interest method. Calculating the net present value of future payments that we
expect to realize as payment for the purchase price requires assumptions about MSD, including the
timing and amount of MSDs future financings and revenue, and an appropriate discount rate. If
actual results differ from these assumptions, the net present value of future payments received by
us could differ from the amount reflected on the consolidated balance sheet at March 31, 2007.
Warranty Reserve We warrant our products against defects in material and workmanship for one year
after sale and record estimated future warranty costs at the time revenue is recognized. A reserve
for future warranty claims is recorded based upon managements review of historical results,
supplemented by expectations of future costs. Unanticipated changes in actual warranty costs could
impact our operating results.
57
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
For a description of recent accounting pronouncements, see ITEM 8, Consolidated Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 2.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
We are exposed to changes in exchange rates where we sell products directly in local currencies,
primarily in the United Kingdom and Germany. Certain other foreign sales are denominated in U.S.
dollars and have no exchange rate risk. Gains and (losses) resulting from foreign currency
transactions were approximately $600,000, ($600,000) and $200,000 for the years ended March 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005 respectively. The majority of the exchange differences providing gains or
losses were from one bank account maintained in British Pounds. A summary of the balances
on this account in U.S. dollars are (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended March 31 |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Low |
|
$ |
3,642 |
|
|
$ |
2,936 |
|
|
$ |
689 |
|
Average |
|
$ |
4,170 |
|
|
$ |
3,643 |
|
|
$ |
1,897 |
|
High |
|
$ |
4,740 |
|
|
$ |
4,122 |
|
|
$ |
3,290 |
|
Future average balances for this account are estimated to range from $1.0 million to $2.0
million.
Our balance sheet at March 31, 2007 had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $44.0
million, which is approximately 55% of total assets. We invest excess cash in accordance with a
policy approved by our Board of Directors. The policy is designed to provide both liquidity and
safety of principal. The policy limits investments to certain types of instruments issued by
institutions with strong investment grade credit ratings and places restrictions on our investments
by terms and concentrations by type and issuer. We invest our excess cash in money market funds,
securities of the U.S. Treasury, and certificates of deposit with original maturities of three
months or less. At March 31, 2007, we had invested $26.4 million in securities of U.S. government
agencies, municipal bonds, assets backed securities, and U.S. corporate debt, which were recorded
as short-term investments.
Our invested cash is sensitive to changes in interest rates. Based on our cash, cash equivalents
and short-term investments balance at March 31, 2007, a 1% movement in interest rates would have an
approximately $400,000 impact on our annual interest income and annual net loss. Actual changes in
rates may differ from the hypothetical assumption used in computing this exposure.
58
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 8. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
|
Page |
|
|
|
|
|
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
|
|
59 |
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Years Ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 |
|
|
61 |
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2007 and 2006 |
|
|
62 |
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 |
|
|
63 |
|
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders Equity for the Years Ended March 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005 |
|
|
64 |
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
65 |
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of BioVeris Corporation:
We have completed integrated audits
of BioVeris Corporations consolidated financial statements and
of its internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007, in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Our opinions, based on
our audits, are presented below.
Consolidated financial statements
In our opinion, the consolidated balance sheets and
the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of BioVeris Corporation and its subsidiaries at March 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results
of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended March 31,
2007 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial
statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements
in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about
whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit of financial
statements 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, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
As discussed in Note 2 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements, the Company changed
the manner in which it accounts for share-based compensation in 2007.
Internal control over financial reporting
Also, in our opinion, managements assessment, included in Managements Annual Report on Internal
Control Over Financial Reporting, appearing under ITEM 9A, that the Company maintained effective
internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007 based on criteria established in
Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO), is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on those criteria.
Furthermore, in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007, based on criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the COSO. The Companys management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express
opinions on managements assessment and on the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit. We conducted our audit of internal control over financial
reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United
States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance
about whether
59
effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. An audit of internal control
over financial reporting includes obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial
reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating
effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we consider necessary in
the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A
companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i)
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that
transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company;
and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized
acquisitions, use, or disposition of the companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in condition, or that
the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Baltimore, Maryland
June 5, 2007
60
BIOVERIS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
REVENUES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales |
|
$ |
18,958 |
|
|
$ |
19,054 |
|
|
$ |
24,662 |
|
Roche payment |
|
|
2,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty income |
|
|
2,305 |
|
|
|
1,561 |
|
|
|
1,249 |
|
Contract fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
24,063 |
|
|
|
20,615 |
|
|
|
26,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING COSTS AND EXPENSES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product costs |
|
|
11,034 |
|
|
|
8,706 |
|
|
|
12,860 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
18,518 |
|
|
|
17,695 |
|
|
|
21,485 |
|
Selling, general, and administrative |
|
|
24,621 |
|
|
|
24,688 |
|
|
|
32,212 |
|
Roche and merger related costs |
|
|
5,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
59,479 |
|
|
|
51,089 |
|
|
|
66,557 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS FROM OPERATIONS |
|
|
(35,416 |
) |
|
|
(30,474 |
) |
|
|
(40,258 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTEREST INCOME |
|
|
4,506 |
|
|
|
3,851 |
|
|
|
3,191 |
|
OTHER, NET |
|
|
424 |
|
|
|
(1,230 |
) |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS ON JOINT VENTURE IMPAIRMENTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35,077 |
) |
EQUITY IN LOSS OF JOINT VENTURE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,524 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS |
|
$ |
(30,486 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,853 |
) |
|
$ |
(77,573 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per common share (basic and diluted) |
|
$ |
(1.13 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.04 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.90 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING (basic and diluted) |
|
|
26,940 |
|
|
|
26,810 |
|
|
|
26,728 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
61
BIOVERIS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
17,550 |
|
|
$ |
29,693 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
26,428 |
|
|
|
39,938 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
4,966 |
|
|
|
3,360 |
|
Note receivable current |
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
|
1,230 |
|
Inventory, net |
|
|
6,446 |
|
|
|
5,429 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
1,524 |
|
|
|
2,508 |
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
58,517 |
|
|
|
82,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment and leasehold improvements, net |
|
|
3,617 |
|
|
|
3,456 |
|
|
|
|
OTHER NONCURRENT ASSETS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note receivable-noncurrent |
|
|
4,388 |
|
|
|
4,436 |
|
Technology licenses, net |
|
|
13,406 |
|
|
|
15,356 |
|
Other |
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS |
|
$ |
80,365 |
|
|
$ |
105,853 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
$ |
8,177 |
|
|
$ |
5,362 |
|
Accrued wages and benefits |
|
|
3,426 |
|
|
|
1,862 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
603 |
|
|
|
1,520 |
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
12,206 |
|
|
|
8,744 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NONCURRENT DEFERRED LIABILITIES |
|
|
816 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
13,022 |
|
|
|
9,290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS
(See Note 7) and CONTINGENCIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SERIES B PREFERRED STOCK, 1,000 shares designated, issued and outstanding |
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share, 15,000,000 shares authorized,
issuable in series: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A, 600,000 shares designated, none issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.001 per share, 100,000,000 shares authorized,
27,248,000 and 27,238,000 shares issued and outstanding at March 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
205,549 |
|
|
|
205,997 |
|
Deferred compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(128 |
) |
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(145,728 |
) |
|
|
(115,145 |
) |
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
59,843 |
|
|
|
89,063 |
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
$ |
80,365 |
|
|
$ |
105,853 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
62
BIOVERIS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(30,486 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,853 |
) |
|
$ |
(77,573 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3,695 |
|
|
|
3,778 |
|
|
|
6,229 |
|
Loss on disposal of equipment |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
Equity in loss of joint venture |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,524 |
|
Joint venture impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,077 |
|
Accretion of interest on note receivable |
|
|
(1,911 |
) |
|
|
(1,860 |
) |
|
|
(171 |
) |
Amortization of (discount) premium on short-term investments |
|
|
(803 |
) |
|
|
1,337 |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
1,194 |
|
|
|
845 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in accounts receivable |
|
|
(1,606 |
) |
|
|
790 |
|
|
|
(988 |
) |
Increase in inventory |
|
|
(2,085 |
) |
|
|
(1,085 |
) |
|
|
(1,516 |
) |
Decrease in other current assets |
|
|
994 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
1,139 |
|
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
4,408 |
|
|
|
(814 |
) |
|
|
1,306 |
|
Increase (decrease) in other liabilities |
|
|
553 |
|
|
|
(404 |
) |
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
|
(25,925 |
) |
|
|
(24,450 |
) |
|
|
(31,059 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenditures for equipment and leasehold improvements |
|
|
(960 |
) |
|
|
(1,028 |
) |
|
|
(1,855 |
) |
Purchases of short term-investments |
|
|
(56,756 |
) |
|
|
(15,215 |
) |
|
|
(108,706 |
) |
Sales and maturities of short-term investments |
|
|
71,192 |
|
|
|
28,701 |
|
|
|
53,817 |
|
Investments in joint venture, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,045 |
) |
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
13,476 |
|
|
|
12,458 |
|
|
|
(59,789 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of distribution gain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,000 |
) |
Consolidation of joint venture cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29,222 |
) |
Proceeds
from note receivable |
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of preferred stock dividends |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(49,922 |
) |
|
|
|
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
(12,143 |
) |
|
|
(12,046 |
) |
|
|
(140,770 |
) |
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF YEAR |
|
|
29,693 |
|
|
|
41,739 |
|
|
|
182,509 |
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF YEAR |
|
$ |
17,550 |
|
|
$ |
29,693 |
|
|
$ |
41,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF NON-CASH INVESTING AND
FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfer of inventory to fixed assets |
|
$ |
1,068 |
|
|
$ |
891 |
|
|
$ |
217 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
63
BIOVERIS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
Paid - in |
|
Deferred |
|
Comprehensive |
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Amount |
|
Capital |
|
Compensation |
|
Loss |
|
Deficit |
|
Total |
|
|
|
BALANCE at March 31, 2004 |
|
|
26,728 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
203,464 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(9,665 |
) |
|
$ |
193,826 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77,573 |
) |
|
|
(77,573 |
) |
Unrealized losses from
short-term
investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(999 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(999 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(78,572 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE at March 31, 2005 |
|
|
26,728 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
203,464 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(999 |
) |
|
|
(87,238 |
) |
|
|
115,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27,853 |
) |
|
|
(27,853 |
) |
Unrealized gains from short-term
investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,982 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of
restricted common stock |
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,533 |
|
|
|
(2,533 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred
compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
845 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
845 |
|
Dividends paid on preferred
stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
27,238 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
205,997 |
|
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
(115,145 |
) |
|
|
89,063 |
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,486 |
) |
|
|
(30,486 |
) |
Unrealized gains from
short-term
investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,363 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification from the
adoption of FAS 123R |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
1,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred
compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
462 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
462 |
|
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
Dividends paid on preferred
stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE at March 31, 2007 |
|
|
27,248 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
205,549 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(145,728 |
) |
|
$ |
59,843 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
64
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. SUBSEQUENT EVENT
Merger
Agreement On April 4, 2007, BioVeris Corporation (the Company) and an indirect
wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche entered into a Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the proposed Merger
Agreement, a subsidiary of Roche will be merged with and into the Company, with BioVeris surviving
as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche. In connection with the merger, each outstanding
share of the Companys common stock (the Common Stock), including restricted stock awards, other
then those held by the Company and other then those shares with respect to which appraisal rights
are properly exercised, will be converted into the right to receive $21.50 in cash, without
interest. Each option to purchase the Companys Common Stock that is outstanding and unexercised
immediately prior to the effective time of the merger will be cancelled in exchange for the right
to receive the difference between $21.50 and the exercise price of such option.
The completion of the Merger is subject to a number of customary conditions, including, among
others, approval by the Companys stockholders, the absence of certain legal impediments to the
consummation of the Merger, the completion of a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in
the United States under Section 271 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, and the
expiration or termination of the applicable waiting periods under the HSR Act and under certain
German anti-trust laws, and other customary conditions. The
applicable waiting periods under the HSR
Act and German anti-trust laws have expired and the Company has scheduled a special meeting of stockholders for June 25, 2007
at which the Companys stockholders will vote on the Merger Agreement.
The Company has made customary representations, warranties and covenants in the Merger Agreement,
which expire at the effective time of the Merger. The Company may not solicit competing proposals
or, subject to exceptions that permit the Board of Directors to take actions required by their
fiduciary duties, participate in any discussions or negotiations regarding alternative business
transactions. The Merger Agreement contains specified termination rights for the parties, and
provides that, in certain circumstances, the Company would be required to pay Roche a termination
fee of $12,000,000.
Asset Transfer Agreements In connection with the merger, two private limited liability companies
controlled by Samuel J. Wohlstadter, the Companys President and Chief Executive Officer, have
entered into agreements with the Company to acquire certain assets from the Company. These
transactions were approved by a Special Committee of independent directors of the Companys Board
of Directors, with Mr. Wohlstadter abstaining.
32 Mott Street Acquisition I, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (Vaccines Newco), has
entered into an agreement with the Company (the Vaccines Asset Transfer Agreement) to acquire
certain assets related to the research, development, manufacture, production, testing, sale,
distribution and use of vaccine candidates from the Company in exchange for $3,859,000, paid as
follows: (a) $1,000,000 to be paid at closing, (b) three annual payments of $50,000 to be paid on
the anniversaries of the closing date and (c) a final payment of $2,709,000 to be paid on the
earlier of the third anniversary of closing or the receipt of certain third party financing by
Vaccines Newco.
32 Mott Street Acquisition II, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (ECL Newco), has entered
into an agreement with the Company (the ECL Asset Transfer Agreement) to acquire the ECL License
(as defined below) and certain sublicenses and certain non-intellectual property assets of the
Company related to the research, development, manufacture, production, testing, sale, distribution
and use of certain small instruments that use electrochemiluminescent (ECL) technology that are
currently under development (the ECL Business) by the Company in exchange for $2,718,000 paid as
follows: (a) $1,000,000 to be paid at closing, (b) three annual payments of $50,000 to be paid on
the anniversaries of the closing date and (c) a final payment of $1,568,000 to be paid on the
earlier of the third anniversary of closing or the receipt of certain levels of financing by ECL
Newco. In addition, in connection with certain severance obligations of the Company, at closing,
ECL Newco will pay $779,000 to the Company.
The payments made in connection with the Vaccines Asset Transfer Agreement and the ECL Asset
Transfer Agreement will not affect the consideration to be paid to the Companys shareholders in
the Merger.
65
The transactions contemplated by the Vaccines Asset Transfer Agreement and the ECL Asset Transfer
Agreement are conditioned upon, among others, all of the conditions to the Merger Agreement, except
for those which can only be satisfied at the closing of the Merger Agreement, being satisfied. The
Vaccines Asset Transfer Agreement and the ECL Asset Transfer Agreement will terminate, if, among
others, the Merger Agreement is terminated.
In connection with the ECL Asset Transfer Agreement, ECL Newco has entered into a related license
agreement with the Company with respect to certain ECL technology (the ECL License Agreement),
pursuant to which the Company would grant to ECL Newco a limited non-exclusive license, subject to
certain restrictions, to use the Companys ECL technology in connection with the ECL Business.
Stockholders Agreement Concurrently with the execution of the Merger Agreement, Roche entered
into a Stockholders Agreement (the Stockholders Agreement) with Mr. Wohlstadter and his wife,
Nadine Wohlstadter (together the Stockholders), pursuant to which the Stockholders have agreed to
vote all of their shares of Common Stock and Series B Preferred Stock in favor of the Merger
Agreement. The Stockholders collectively own approximately 20% of the outstanding Company Common
Stock. The Stockholders Agreement will terminate upon termination of the Merger Agreement in
accordance with its terms.
Rights Agreement Amendment In connection with the Merger Agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, on April 4, 2007, the Company and Computershare Trust Company, N.A. (formerly
EquiServe Trust Company, N.A.) (the Rights Agent) entered into Amendment No. 1 (the Rights
Amendment) to the Rights Agreement, dated as of January 9, 2004 between the Company and the Rights
Agent (the Rights Agreement) to exempt the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated
thereby from the Rights Agreement.
The Rights Amendment (i) excludes Roche, and its subsidiaries, associates and affiliates, from the
definition of Acquiring Person under the Rights Agreement; (ii) makes each of (a) the approval,
execution, delivery or public announcement of the Merger Agreement, (b) the consummation of the
Merger or transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement or (c) the execution or delivery of the
Stockholders Agreement, an Exempt Event; (iii) prohibits a Distribution Date (as defined in the
Rights Agreement) from occurring solely as a result of an Exempt Event; (iv) prohibits an Exempt
Event from being deemed to be a Business Combination (as defined in the Rights Agreement); and (v)
terminates the Rights Agreement as of the effective time of the Merger Agreement.
The Rights Amendment further provides that if for any reason the Merger Agreement is terminated in
accordance with its terms, then the Amendment shall be of no further force and effect, and the
Rights Agreement shall remain exactly the same as it existed before the execution of the Rights
Amendment.
Other Agreements On April 4, 2007, Mr. Wohlstadter entered into an agreement with Roche (the
Transaction Agreement) whereby he agreed (i) conditioned upon the closing of the merger, to sell
his 1,000 shares of the Companys Series B Preferred Stock to Roche, (ii) conditioned upon the
closing of the merger, to release the Company from certain claims and (iii) enter into a
non-disclosure and non-solicitation agreement with the Company (the Non-Disclosure and
Non-Solicitation Agreement). In consideration for these agreements, Roche agreed to pay Mr.
Wohlstadter a sum equal to $2,750,000. The Transaction Agreement will terminate upon the
termination of the Merger Agreement pursuant to its terms.
The Non-Disclosure and Non-Solicitation Agreement provides that Mr. Wohlstadter will (i) hold in
confidence and not use any confidential information or trade secrets related to the ECL Business
except as permitted by the ECL License, (ii) refrain from transferring any technology related to
the ECL Business conceived of and owned by him prior to the closing of the Merger Agreement, and
(iii) refrain from soliciting any of the Companys customers or employees for a period of two years
following the closing of the Merger Agreement, except as permitted by the ECL Asset Transfer
Agreement or the ECL License. The Non-Disclosure and Non-Solicitation Agreement will become
effective only upon the closing of the transactions contemplated by the ECL Asset Transfer
Agreement, and will be null and void in the event that the ECL Transfer Agreement is terminated.
On April 4, 2007, the Companys Board of Directors adopted a Severance Plan for the benefit of
employees providing that if a participating employee is terminated under certain conditions within
six months following a change of control (which, by terms of the Severance Plan, would include the
Merger) the employee is entitled to a lump-sum payment.
66
The amount of the severance payment is based on the individual employees term of service to the
Company and, in no event, shall exceed twenty-six times the employees weekly base salary.
2. ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Company is a global healthcare company developing proprietary technologies in diagnostics and
vaccinology, and is dedicated to the commercialization of innovative products and services for
healthcare providers, their patients and their communities.
Consolidation Accounting The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the
Company and its subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been
eliminated.
The Company adopted FASB Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an
Interpretation of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, as revised or FIN 46, as of March 31, 2004.
FIN 46 requires certain variable interest entities to be consolidated by the primary beneficiary of
the entity if the equity investors in the entity do not have the characteristics of a controlling
financial interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its
activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties. The Company
determined that MSD (a joint venture formed in 1995 by IGEN and MST), qualified as a variable
interest entity with the Company as the primary beneficiary. Accordingly, beginning March 31, 2004,
the Company began to consolidate the financial results of MSD.
On August 12, 2004, the Company, MSD and MST entered into a settlement agreement (settlement) that
resolved litigation between the parties and constituted a reconsideration event under FIN 46. The
Company determined that it no longer met the conditions to be designated as the primary beneficiary
of MSD. Accordingly, beginning August 12, 2004, the Company deconsolidated the financial results
of MSD and resumed accounting for this investment using the equity method through December 13,
2004, the date of the sale of the Companys interests in MSD. The statement of operations include
the consolidated revenues and expenses of MSD for the period from April 1, 2004 through August 12,
2004, and reflects MSDs net losses for the period from August 13, 2004 through December 13, 2004,
the date of the sale of the Companys interests in MSD, as equity in loss of joint venture.
Estimates
and Reclassifications The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and
accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Certain reclassifications
have been made to conform prior period financial information to the current presentation.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents Cash and cash equivalents include cash in banks, money market funds,
securities of the U.S. Treasury, and certificates of deposit with original maturities of three
months or less at the time of purchase.
Short-Term Investments Short-term investments consist primarily of corporate, federal and
municipal debt-securities that are classified as available-for-sale. The Company invests its
excess cash in accordance with a policy approved by the Companys Board of Directors. This policy
is designed to provide both liquidity and safety of principal. The policy limits investments to
certain types of instruments issued by institutions with strong investment grade credit ratings and
places restrictions on the Companys investment by terms and concentrations by type and issuer.
These available-for-sale securities are accounted for at their fair market value and unrealized
gains and losses on these securities, if any, are included in accumulated other comprehensive gain
or loss in stockholders equity. The Company uses the specific identification method in computing
realized gains and losses on the sale of investments, which are included in results of operations
as generated. For the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Company did not have any
realized gains or losses.
67
The following is a summary of the Companys available-for-sale marketable securities at March 31,
2007 and 2006 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
Gross |
|
Estimated |
|
|
Amortized |
|
Unrealized |
|
Unrealized |
|
Fair |
|
|
Cost |
|
Gains |
|
Losses |
|
Value |
Certificates of deposit |
|
$ |
2,500 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,500 |
|
U.S. government agencies |
|
|
10,119 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
10,116 |
|
U.S. corporate debt |
|
|
9,544 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
9,541 |
|
Asset-backed securities |
|
|
4,270 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
26,433 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
26,428 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March
31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Value |
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
$ |
5,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,000 |
|
U.S. government agencies |
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
14,916 |
|
U.S. corporate debt |
|
|
20,066 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
20,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
40,066 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(128 |
) |
|
$ |
39,938 |
|
|
|
|
During the
year ended March 31, 2007, the Company recorded an out-of-period
adjustment to increase purchases of short-term investments of
approximately $8.8 million to correct a classification error of short-term investments in the statement of
cash flows. The impact of this adjustment to reflect the purchases of
highly liquid short-term investments on the prior interim and annual
periods and the period in which the correction was made was not
significant or material to the consolidated financial statements.
Concentration
of Credit Risk The Company places its cash and cash equivalents and short-term
investments with highly rated financial institutions. At March 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company has
$44.0 million and $69.6 million, respectively, of cash and cash equivalents and short-term
investments in excess of federally insured limits. The Company has not experienced any losses on
these accounts related to amounts in excess cash of insured limits. During the years ended March
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 agencies of the U.S. government accounted for 33%, 30% and 27% of total
revenue, respectively, and 52% and 44% of total accounts receivable as of March 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
Allowance
for Doubtful Accounts The Company maintains reserves on customer accounts where
estimated losses may result from the inability of its customers to make required payments. These
reserves are determined based on a number of factors, including the current financial condition of
specific customers, the age of accounts receivable balances and historical loss rates. Amounts
later determined and specifically identified to be uncollectible are charged or written-off against
the reserve. Historically, the Company has not experienced significant credit losses related to an
individual customer or group of customers and estimated losses have been within the Companys
expectation. Allowance for doubtful accounts was approximately $100,000 and $300,000 at March 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively.
Inventory
Inventory is recorded at the lower of cost or market using the first-in, first-out
method and consists of the following, net of reserves for excess and obsolete inventory of
approximately $700,000 and $400,000 at March 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March
31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Finished Goods |
|
$ |
1,232 |
|
|
$ |
2,058 |
|
Work in process |
|
|
2,037 |
|
|
|
865 |
|
Raw materials |
|
|
3,177 |
|
|
|
2,506 |
|
|
|
|
Total, net |
|
$ |
6,446 |
|
|
$ |
5,429 |
|
|
|
|
Equipment
and Leasehold Improvements Equipment and leasehold improvements are carried at
cost, less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation on equipment, which includes
lab instruments and furniture, is computed over the estimated useful lives of the assets,
generally three to five years, using the straight-line method of depreciation. Leasehold
improvements are amortized on a straight-line basis over the shorter of the assets estimated
useful life or the term of the lease. Equipment and leasehold improvements consist of the
following (in thousands):
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31 |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Lab instruments and equipment |
|
$ |
8,964 |
|
|
$ |
7,579 |
|
Office furniture and equipment |
|
|
5,012 |
|
|
|
4,659 |
|
Leasehold improvements |
|
|
4,160 |
|
|
|
4,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,136 |
|
|
|
16,432 |
|
Accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(14,519 |
) |
|
|
(12,976 |
) |
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,617 |
|
|
$ |
3,456 |
|
|
|
|
Technology
Licenses Simultaneous with the execution of the merger between Roche and IGEN,
the Company entered into worldwide, non-exclusive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) license
agreements with certain affiliates of Roche. One agreement grants the Company rights to make,
import, use and sell certain PCR products within specified fields, while the other agreement grants
the Company rights to perform certain PCR services within specified fields.
The Company paid Roche a license fee of $50 million in fiscal 2004 and in the future will also pay
royalties on sales of the licensed products in the licensed fields and on any instrument,
accessory, device or system sold for use with the licensed products in the licensed fields
depending on the field, the year, the country of sale and the patents covering such products.
During fiscal 2004, the Company performed a valuation of the PCR technology licenses and recorded a
value of $19.5 million and reflected a $30.5 million adjustment reducing the amount recorded for
consideration paid by Roche with respect to the merger and related transactions with IGEN.
These PCR licenses are being amortized over an estimated useful life of ten years, which is based
upon a consideration of the range of patent lives and the weighted average remaining life of the
most important underlying patents, as well as a consideration of technological obsolescence and
product life cycles. Amortization expense was approximately $2.0 million for each of the years
ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005. Accumulated amortization was $6.1 million and $4.1 million at
March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Amortization expense is expected to approximate $2.0 million
for each year through March 31, 2014.
Evaluation
of Long-lived Assets The Company evaluates the potential impairment of long-lived
assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset
may not be fully recoverable. In evaluating the recoverability of an asset, the Companys policy is
to compare the carrying amount of an asset with the projected undiscounted future cash flow. An
impairment loss is measured and recorded based on discounted estimated future cash flows.
Management believes that no impairment of these assets exists as of March 31, 2007.
Warranty
Reserve The Company warrants its products against defects in material and workmanship
for one year after sale and records estimated future warranty costs at the time revenue is
recognized. A reserve for future warranty claims is recorded based upon managements review of
historical claims, supplemented by expectations of future costs. The Company also offers extended
warranty arrangements to customers, under which revenue recognition for the payment is initially
deferred and amortized over the contract period on a straight-line basis, and related costs are
recorded as incurred.
The following is a reconciliation of the Companys general product warranty reserve (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
390 |
|
|
$ |
366 |
|
Provisions recorded |
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
484 |
|
Actual costs incurred |
|
|
(568 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
$ |
372 |
|
|
$ |
390 |
|
|
|
|
69
The following is a reconciliation of the Companys deferred revenue related to extended
warranty contracts and includes a summary of the revenue and cost components associated with
extended warranties (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Deferred revenue, beginning of period |
|
$ |
670 |
|
|
$ |
621 |
|
Extended warranties issued |
|
|
1,238 |
|
|
|
1,172 |
|
Amortization of extended warranties |
|
|
(1,333 |
) |
|
|
(1,123 |
) |
Costs incurred during the period |
|
|
2,092 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
Settlement during the period of costs incurred |
|
|
(2,092 |
) |
|
|
(960 |
) |
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
$ |
575 |
|
|
$ |
670 |
|
|
|
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments The carrying amounts of the Companys financial
instruments, which include cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts receivable, accounts
payable and accrued expenses, approximate their fair value due to their short maturities.
Comprehensive
Loss Comprehensive loss is comprised of net loss and other items of comprehensive
loss. The Companys comprehensive loss for the years ended
March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $30.4
million, $27.0 million and $78.6 million, respectively. Other comprehensive income (loss) of
$(123,000), $871,000 and ($999,000) for the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively,
includes unrealized gains and losses on available for sale securities that are excluded from net
loss.
During the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006, the Company recorded an out of period adjustment of
$600,000 to reduce accumulated other comprehensive loss and interest income in order to reflect the
amortization related to prior periods of the purchase price premium of short-term investments. The
impact of this adjustment on fiscal 2006 and on prior interim and annual periods was not material
to the accompanying consolidated financial statements, as the adjustment was comprised of
insignificant amounts related to each of the quarterly reporting periods dating back to the quarter
ended June 30, 2004. For all periods, comprehensive loss was not impacted by this adjustment.
Revenue
Recognition The Company derives revenue principally from four sources: product sales,
Roche payments, royalty income and contract fees.
Product sales are recognized as revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the
price to the buyer is fixed or determinable, collectibility is reasonably assured and the product
is shipped to the customer thereby transferring title and risk of loss. For instrument sales, the
instrument and the related installation are considered to be separate elements under Emerging
Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue No. 00-21 (EITF 00-21) Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with
Multiple Deliverables. Revenue is recognized for the instrument upon shipment or delivery,
depending on the terms of each order, and is recognized for the installation when complete using
the residual value method. For instrument and reagent sales, there is no option of return and
refund and instead there is only the option to repair or replace the product.
Other than the installation required for the instruments and the standard warranty, there are no
contingencies, allowances or other post-sale obligations. For instrument leases, the instrument
rental and related minimum reagent purchases are considered to be separate elements under EITF
00-21 and, accordingly, the sales price is allocated to the two elements based upon their relative
fair values. Instrument rental revenue is recognized ratably over the life of the lease agreements
and the related reagent revenue is recognized upon shipment. Revenue associated with extended
warranty arrangements is recognized over the term of the extended warranty contract.
Roche payments are recorded as revenue on a cash basis, as the Company does not have sufficient
information to reliably estimate such amounts, in accordance with the revenue criteria described
within SAB 104, until the payments have been received by the Company (see Note 4).
Royalty income is recorded as revenue in accordance with SAB 104. The revenue is recorded on the
accrual basis in accordance with contract terms when third party results are reliably measurable
and collectibility is probable.
70
Revenue from services performed under contracts is recognized when obligations under the contract
have been satisfied.
Research and Development Research and development costs are expensed as incurred and include
salaries, benefits, facilities costs, overhead costs, contract services and other outside costs.
During the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Company was a party to license agreements
providing patent rights to certain technology under which the Company paid approximately $1.6
million, $1.6 million and $250,000, respectively. These amounts are included as research and
development costs.
Foreign Currency Gains and losses from foreign currency transactions such as those resulting from
the settlement of foreign receivables or payables, are included in the results of operations as
incurred. These amounts were not material during the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Income
Taxes Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are computed annually for differences
between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities that will result in taxable
or deductible amounts in the future based on enacted tax laws and rates applicable to the periods
in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. A valuation allowance is
established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized.
Share-based
Payments Effective April 1, 2006, the Company adopted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123R, a revision of SFAS 123, Share-Based Payments (SFAS 123R),
which requires that companies recognize expense associated with share-based compensation
arrangements, including employee stock options, using a fair value-based option model. See Note 3
for a further discussion on accounting for share-based payments.
Loss
Per Share The Company uses SFAS No. 128 Earnings per Share for the calculation of basic
and diluted loss per share. For each of the three years ended March 31, 2007, the Company incurred
a net loss; therefore, net loss per common share does not reflect the potential dilution that could
occur to common shares related to outstanding stock options and restricted stock, and it did not
assume the exercise of outstanding options or vesting of restricted stock because to do so would
have been anti-dilutive.
New Accounting Standards In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48 Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN 48), to clarify
certain aspects of accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprises
financial statements in accordance with FAS 109 and prescribes a recognition threshold and
measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of tax positions
taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosures and transition.
FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. While the Company is still
evaluating FIN 48, this pronouncement is not expected to have a significant impact on the Companys
results of operations and financial condition.
In September 2006, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (FAS 157),
which addresses how companies should measure the fair value when they are required to use a fair
value measure for recognition or disclosure purposes under accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America. The FASB believes that the new standard will make the measurement
of fair value more consistent and comparable and improve disclosures about those measures. The
Company will be required to adopt FAS 157 for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and
interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is assessing FAS 157 to determine if it
will have a material impact on the Companys results of operations and financial condition.
In September 2006, the Staff of the SEC issued SAB No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year
Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements (SAB 108). SAB
108 provides guidance on the consideration of the effects of prior year misstatements in
quantifying current year misstatements for the purpose of determining whether the current years
financial statements are materially misstated. SAB 108 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2006. While the Company is assessing the requirements of SAB 108, its adoption
is not expected to have a significant effect on its financial statements.
71
3. STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
Shareholder Rights Plan In December 2003, the Companys Board of Directors adopted a shareholder
rights plan and declared a dividend of one preferred stock purchase right (Right) for each outstanding share of
the Companys common stock. The Rights were issued to the holders of record of the Companys common
stock outstanding as of February 13, 2004, and with respect to shares of the Companys common stock
issued thereafter. Prior to becoming exercisable, the Rights are evidenced by certificates
representing shares of the Companys common stock and are transferable only in connection with the
transfer of the Companys common stock. Each Right, when exercisable, will detach from the
Companys common stock and will entitle the registered holder to purchase from the Company one
one-thousandth of a share of Series A participating cumulative preferred stock, par value $0.001
per share, at a price of $50.00, subject to adjustment. Subject to certain exceptions, the Rights
are triggered upon the earlier of (1) such time as the Company learns that a person (other than
Samuel Wohlstadter and Nadine Wohlstadter and their affiliates, associates and heirs and any trust
or foundation to which they have transferred or may transfer shares of the Companys common stock)
has become the beneficial owner of more than 10% of the Companys common stock then outstanding and
(2) such date as may be designated by the Companys Board of Directors following the commencement
of, or the first public disclosure of an intent to commence, a tender offer or exchange offer that
would result in a person becoming the beneficial owner of more than 10% of the Companys common
stock then outstanding. If triggered, the Rights would cause substantial dilution to the person
that caused them to be triggered. Subject to certain conditions, the Rights are redeemable in
whole, but not in part, for $0.001 per Right (subject to adjustment) at the option of the Board of
Directors. Until a Right is exercised, the holder of the Right has no rights as a stockholder of
the Company. The Rights will expire in 2014 unless redeemed by the Company prior to that date.
In connection with the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, on April 4,
2007, the Company and the Rights Agent entered into the Rights Amendment to the Rights Agreement to
exempt the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby from the Rights Agreement.
The Rights Amendment (i) excludes Roche, and its subsidiaries, associates and affiliates, from the
definition of Acquiring Person under the Rights Agreement; (ii) makes each of (a) the approval,
execution, delivery or public announcement of the Merger Agreement, (b) the consummation of the
Merger or transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement or (c) the execution or delivery of the
Stockholders Agreement, an Exempt Event; (iii) prohibits a Distribution Date (as defined in the
Rights Agreement) from occurring solely as a result of an Exempt Event; (iv) prohibits an Exempt
Event from being deemed to be a Business Combination (as defined in the Rights Agreement); and (v)
terminates the Rights Agreement as of the effective time of the Merger Agreement. The Rights
Amendment further provides that if for any reason the Merger Agreement is terminated in accordance
with its terms, then the Amendment shall be of no further force and effect, and the Rights
Agreement shall remain exactly the same as it existed before the execution of the Rights Amendment.
Stock Option Plan In September 2003, the Board of Directors of the Company adopted the 2003 Stock
Incentive Plan (Stock Plan) under which 5.3 million shares of common stock have been reserved for
issuance upon exercise of options granted to employees, non-employee directors or consultants of
the Company and its subsidiaries. The Stock Plan was approved by an affirmative vote of the IGEN
stockholders prior to the completion of the merger.
The Stock Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options intended to qualify under Section
422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, non-statutory stock options, restricted stock
awards and other share-based awards, including the grant of shares based upon certain conditions,
the grant of securities convertible into common stock of the Company and the grant of stock
appreciation rights. Incentive stock options may only be granted to employees of the Company and
its subsidiaries. The Stock Plan also provides that on the day following each annual meeting of the
Companys stockholders, each non-employee director will receive an automatic grant of options to
purchase 4,000 shares of the Companys common stock. In addition, any person who is appointed or
elected as a non-employee director at any other time will receive an automatic grant of options to
purchase 4,000 shares of the Companys common stock on the date of such appointment or election.
Each grant will have an exercise price equal to fair market value on the date of grant and will
vest in full on the first anniversary of the grant date. Each option to purchase the Companys
common stock that is outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to the effective time of the
merger will be cancelled in exchange for the right to receive the difference between $21.50 and the
exercise price of such option.
72
Activity related to options under the Stock Plan was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2004 |
|
|
20,300 |
|
|
|
$15.80 |
|
Granted |
|
|
123,900 |
|
|
|
$ 7.53 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled/forfeited |
|
|
(21,200 |
) |
|
|
$ 8.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2005 |
|
|
123,000 |
|
|
|
$ 8.89 |
|
Granted |
|
|
361,900 |
|
|
|
$ 4.97 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled/forfeited |
|
|
(26,900 |
) |
|
|
$ 7.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
458,000 |
|
|
|
$ 5.88 |
|
Granted |
|
|
487,000 |
|
|
|
$ 8.08 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(8,833 |
) |
|
|
$ 5.20 |
|
Cancelled/forfeited |
|
|
(24,367 |
) |
|
|
$ 6.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2007 |
|
|
911,800 |
|
|
|
$ 7.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable at March
31, 2007 |
|
|
246,875 |
|
|
|
$ 6.38 |
|
Options available for future
grant at March 31, 2007 |
|
|
3,867,348 |
|
|
|
|
|
Summary information about the Companys stock options outstanding at March 31, 2007 is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Total |
|
Range
of Exercise Prices |
|
Options Outstanding |
|
|
Remaining
Years of Contractual Life |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
|
Options Exercisable |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
|
Intrinsic Value |
|
$4.33 - $6.62 |
|
|
417,900 |
|
|
8.22 |
|
|
$ 5.23 |
|
|
|
219,975 |
|
|
$ 5.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
$7.84 - $12.95 |
|
|
475,000 |
|
|
9.33 |
|
|
$ 8.30 |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
$ 11.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
$15.80 |
|
|
18,900 |
|
|
7.02 |
|
|
$ 15.80 |
|
|
|
18,900 |
|
|
$ 15.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
911,800 |
|
|
8.72 |
|
|
$ 7.05 |
|
|
|
246,875 |
|
|
$ 6.38 |
|
|
$ |
5,690,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair value of the Companys options for the year ended March 31, 2007 was estimated at the
date of grant using a Black-Scholes option pricing model. Option valuation models require the
input of subjective assumptions which can vary over time. The weighted average assumptions used
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
Expected stock price volatility |
|
|
55.53 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
5.04 |
% |
Expected option term (in years) |
|
|
7.42 |
|
Based on this calculation, the weighted average fair value of options granted during the year
ended March 31, 2007 was $8.08.
As the Companys common stock does not have a sufficient amount of historical activity, the
expected volatility factor is based primarily upon historical stock prices of comparable publicly
traded companies and is used to calculate the expected volatility rate based on the expected term
of the equity awards. The expected term is based on the simplified method allowed under SAB 107
due to the limited history of employee stock options granted by the Company. The simplified
method calculates the term based on the vesting and contractual terms of the equity awards. The
risk-free interest rate used is determined by the market yield curve based upon the risk-free
interest rates established by the Federal Reserve, or non-coupon bonds that have maturities equal
to the expected term. The dividend yield is based upon the fact that the Company has not
historically granted dividends on its common stock, and does not expect to issue dividends in the
foreseeable future. Stock options granted prior to April 1, 2006 were valued based on the grant
date fair value of those awards, using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model, as previously calculated for pro-forma disclosures under SFAS 123.
73
Share-based Payments In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, which requires that
companies recognize expense associated with share-based compensation arrangements, including
employee stock options, using a fair value-based option model, and eliminates the alternative to
use the intrinsic value method of accounting for share-based payments under Accounting Principles
Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB 25). SFAS 123R is effective
for the Companys fiscal year beginning April 1, 2006. The Company has adopted SFAS 123R using the
modified prospective transition method. Under this method, compensation expense is reflected in
the financial statements beginning April 1, 2006 with no restatement of prior periods. As such,
compensation expense is recognized for awards that are granted, modified, repurchased or cancelled
on or after April 1, 2006 as well as for the portion of awards previously granted that have not
vested as of April 1, 2006. The Company has implemented the straight-line expense attribution
method.
Share-based compensation expense recognized during the year ended March 31, 2007 was calculated
based on awards ultimately expected to vest and has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. SFAS
123R requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in
subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.
The Company recorded share-based compensation expense during the year ended March 31, 2007,
associated with its Stock Plan as follows (in thousands, except per
share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
Product costs |
|
$ |
17 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
69 |
|
Selling, general, and administrative |
|
|
638 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on net loss per common share (basic and diluted) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
As of March 31, 2007, total compensation cost related to non-vested stock options not yet
recognized as expense was $2.5 million, which is expected to be allocated to expense and
production costs over a weighted-average period of 4.0 years.
Pro-forma Information for Periods Prior to Adoption of SFAS 123R Prior to the adoption of SFAS
No. 123R, the Company accounted for stock-based awards to employees and directors using the
intrinsic value method in accordance with APB 25, as allowed under SFAS No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS 123). Under the intrinsic value method, no employee stock-based
compensation expense had been recognized in the Companys Consolidated Statements of Operations for
any period prior to its adoption of SFAS No. 123R on April 1, 2006, as the exercise price of the
stock options granted to employees and directors was equivalent to the fair market value of the
underlying stock at the date of grant.
The following table illustrates the effect on net loss and net loss per share if the Company had
applied the fair value recognition provisions to share-based employee compensation during the
years ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Net loss, as reported |
|
$ |
(27,853 |
) |
|
$ |
(77,573 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation
expense determined under FAS 123 |
|
|
(237 |
) |
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro-forma net loss |
|
$ |
(28,090 |
) |
|
$ |
(77,797 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and
diluted loss per common share as
reported |
|
$ |
(1.04 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.90 |
) |
Basic and
diluted loss per common share pro forma |
|
$ |
(1.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.91 |
) |
74
The Company did not record any compensation expense related to employee options in its
consolidated statement of operations for the years ended March 31, 2006 and 2005.
The fair value of the Companys options for the years ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 was estimated
at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option pricing model. Option valuation models require
the input of subjective assumptions which can vary over time. The assumptions used are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Expected stock price volatility |
|
|
65.00 |
% |
|
|
74.00 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
3.97 |
% |
|
|
3.48 |
% |
Expected option term (in years) |
|
|
3-5 |
|
|
|
3-5 |
|
Series B Preferred Stock In February 2004, the Company issued 1,000 shares of its Series B
preferred stock to its chairman and chief executive officer for $7.5 million. The Series B
preferred stock economically mirrored the class C interest in MSD (see Note 5) that was held by the
Company. Under the terms of the Series B preferred stock, the Company may redeem the Series B
preferred stock for $0.01 per share at any time it is no longer entitled to receive distributions
with respect to its class C interests in MSD, pursuant to the MSD limited liability company
agreement. The shares of the Companys Series B preferred stock are entitled in the aggregate to
1,000 votes on all matters on which holders of the Companys common stock may vote. The Company
will declare dividends for the Series B preferred stock in connection with any payments received
from MSD related to the sale of the Companys class C interests in MSD. These payments are received
over time in installments based on MSDs net sales and the net proceeds realized by MSD from the
sale of its debt or equity securities in any third-party financing, as determined in accordance
with the MSD agreements.
The holder of the Companys Series B preferred stock is entitled to an approximately 6.03% pro-rata
share, representing a proportionate amount of the Companys class C interest in MSD that was funded
by the sale of the Series B preferred stock. During the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, the
Company declared dividends of approximately $97,000 and $54,000, respectively, in respect of shares
of Series B preferred stock.
Conditioned upon the closing of the merger, the holder of the Companys Series B preferred stock
entered into an agreement with Roche whereby he agreed to sell his
1,000 shares to Roche (see Note 1).
Restricted Stock During the year ended March 31, 2006, the Company granted 510,871 shares of
restricted stock under the Stock Plan. The fair value of the restricted stock awards on the date
of grant is being amortized on a straight line basis over the vesting period. Deferred
compensation of $2,533,000 was initially recorded based on the fair value of the shares on the
respective grant dates and is being recognized as compensation expense on a straight line basis
over the vesting term through July 2010. The Company recorded compensation expense related to the
restricted stock awards of approximately $500,000 and $800,000 during the years ended March 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively. The Company did not deem a discount appropriate for post-vesting
restrictions and did not use a discount in the calculation of the total deferred compensation. In
accordance with SFAS 123R, deferred share-based compensation is no longer reflected as a separate
component of stockholders equity in the condensed consolidated balance sheet. As a result, upon
adoption of SFAS 123R, the Company reclassified its deferred share-based compensation at April 1,
2006 to additional paid-in capital.
Activity during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 related to the restricted stock is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
510,871 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(144,578 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Non-vested at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
366,293 |
|
Granted |
|
|
1,148 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(124,249 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Non-vested at March 31, 2007 |
|
|
243,192 |
|
|
|
|
|
75
4. ROCHE
On April 4, 2007, the Company and an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche entered into a
Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the proposed Merger Agreement, a subsidiary of Roche will be merged
with and into the Company, with the Company surviving as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of
Roche (see Note 1).
Effective in February 2004, the Company granted Roche Diagnostics, an affiliate of Roche, a
worldwide, non-exclusive license to patents and information relating to the Companys proprietary
ECL technology, subject to certain limitations described in the relevant Roche License. The
license may be used by Roche to commercially exploit only certain ECL products and is royalty-free
provided such products are used in a specified field. The Companys right to terminate the license
is restricted, except under certain circumstances.
Pursuant to the Roche License, the Company and Roche have engaged a field monitor to review
placements and sales of products and services by Roche in 2005. The field monitor was tasked with
preparing a written report, including a list of any sales or placements of products and services
that were not within the licensed field and identifying sales or placements of products or services
in violation of the license grant. While the field monitors work has been completed, they will
not issue their written report pending the completion of the proposed merger between the Company
and Roche. Should the field monitors report be issued, pursuant to the Roche License, Roche must
pay to the Company, within 30 days after receiving the field monitors report, 65% of all
undisputed revenues earned through out-of-field sales of products for 2005. Although Roche may not
knowingly sell or actively market outside the field, they may continue the identified out-of-field
sales until the Company notifies Roche in writing that they are prohibited from making any further
such sales and the Company has notified Roche that it is prohibited from making any further sales
to certain types of customers.
During the year ended March 31, 2007, the Company received and recognized as revenue a $2.8 million
payment from Roche. This payment represents Roches unilateral, preliminary calculation of amounts
owed to the Company for Roches sales to certain customers in 2004 that were outside Roches
licensed field. The Company has notified Roche that the $2.8 million payment does not
represent full satisfaction of Roches obligations for 2004 out-of-field sales and the Company has
expressly reserved all rights to seek additional payments. Additionally, the Company does not
believe that this payment is indicative of amounts that will be owed for years after 2004, the
amounts of which cannot currently be estimated.
Although a field monitor has not been engaged to address 2004, the Company believes that it is
entitled to additional payments for out-of-field sales during 2004. The Company has exercised its
contractual right to appoint an independent certified public accountant to examine the sales and
accounting records and accounts of all uses of the Companys ECL technology by Roche and its
affiliates. The independent certified public accountant had been examining 2004 and 2005. The Company had also invoked the
dispute resolution process under the Roche License by notifying Roche that a dispute exists with
respect to restrictions that Roche has attempted to impose on the scope of the audit. In addition,
the Company had invoked the dispute resolution process under the Roche License by notifying Roche
that a dispute exists with respect to the appointment of a field monitor to review placements and
sales of products and services by Roche in 2006. Any disputes have been suspended pending the
completion of the proposed merger between the Company and Roche.
The amount and timing of any additional payments that the Company might receive from Roche relating
to out-of-field sales in 2004, 2005 and 2006 is uncertain because, among other things: (1) the
amount of such sales and placements has not yet been determined; (2) there may be disputes between
Roche and the Company concerning the agreement and/or the field monitors findings; and (3) the
Company does not have a history of Roche payments from which it could reasonably estimate the
amount of sales by Roche that payments would be based upon. The Company has not recorded any
revenue on the potential future payments from Roche, as the amounts are not reliably measurable in
accordance with the criteria set forth in SAB 104.
76
5. NOTE RECEIVABLE FROM MESO SCALE DIAGNOSTICS
MSD was a joint venture formed by IGEN and MST in 1995. MST was established and was wholly-owned
by Mr. Jacob Wohlstadter, a son of the Companys chief executive officer, and Jacob Wohlstadter is
the president and chief executive officer of MSD. MSD develops, manufactures, markets and sells
products utilizing a combination of MSTs multi-array technology together with the Companys electrochemiluminescence (ECL) technology.
MSDs Sector line of instrumentation is used for high throughput screening, high content screening,
multiplexing and target validation. MSD also manufactures and markets a line of its own reagents,
assays and plates that are used on these systems.
Pursuant to the agreements executed in connection with the merger and related transactions between
IGEN and Roche, the MSD joint venture agreement expired upon the completion of the merger on
February 13, 2004. However, the MSD limited liability company agreement continued (and the Company
remained a member of MSD) and many provisions of the MSD joint venture agreement survived its
expiration. In addition, certain other MSD agreements, including certain licenses, subleases and
other arrangements with MSD, MST and Jacob Wohlstadter assigned to the Company by IGEN continue
indefinitely in accordance with their terms. In August 2004, an independent committee of the
Companys Board of Directors, with the advice of independent counsel, negotiated and approved an
agreement with MSD, MST and Jacob Wohlstadter to settle pending litigation and other disputes,
pursuant to which MSD or MST agreed to purchase the Companys interest in MSD, as provided for in
the MSD agreements (the settlement). The Company also agreed to further amendments to the MSD
limited liability company agreement and certain of the other MSD agreements that continue to be in
effect. On December 13, 2004, the Company completed the sale to MST of its interests in MSD.
Equity interest and capital contributions
Until the time of the sale of its interests in MSD on December 13, 2004, the Company held a 31%
voting equity interest in MSD. MST was the only other member of MSD and owned the remaining 69%
voting equity interest. The Company also held non-voting interests that entitled it to receive a
preferred return on substantially all of its capital contributions. Following the completion of the
buyout of the Companys interests in MSD on December 13, 2004, the Company no longer holds these
interests and is entitled to receive only the buyout purchase price.
None of the Companys executive officers or directors had any ownership interest in MST or MSD,
other than through ownership of interests in the Company and other than the Series B preferred
stock of the Company purchased by Samuel Wohlstadter. Mr. Samuel Wohlstadter and Mrs. Nadine
Wohlstadter disclaim any ownership interest in MST or MSD as a result of Mr. Jacob Wohlstadters
ownership interest in those entities.
Since inception of the MSD joint venture through March 31, 2004, the equity method had been
utilized by the Company to account for this investment. The Company has recorded only its
proportionate share of MSD losses, representing approximately 100% of MSDs losses, for each
respective period as equity in loss of joint venture consistent with accounting for equity method
investments (except for the period from March 31, 2004 through August 12, 2004, during which time
the Company consolidated the financial results of MSD, as discussed below).
Effective March 31, 2004, the Company consolidated the financial results of MSD in accordance with
FIN 46, which provides guidance on variable interest entities such as the MSD joint venture and the
framework through which an enterprise assesses consolidation of a variable interest entity. The
Company adopted FIN 46 as it determined that MSD qualified as a variable interest entity and the
Company was a primary beneficiary. The settlement agreement between the parties was determined to
constitute a reconsideration event under FIN 46 and the Company determined that it no longer meets
the conditions to be designated as the primary beneficiary of MSD, as certain provisions of the
settlement agreement reallocated the obligation to absorb the majority of MSDs future expected
losses. Accordingly, beginning August 12, 2004, the Company deconsolidated the financial results of
MSD and resumed accounting for this investment using the equity method through December 13, 2004, the
date of the sale of the Companys interests in MSD. See Note 2 for a discussion of consolidation
accounting for MSD.
The Company made no capital contributions to MSD during fiscal 2007 and 2006. During the year ended
March 31, 2005, the Companys capital contribution to MSD was $5.0 million, as part of the
settlement, of which $3.0 million was in cash and $2.0 million was in the form of a credit against
payment of the purchase price for the buyout by MST of the Companys interest in MSD.
77
The following is a summary of the Companys investment in the MSD joint venture (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at April 1, 2004 |
|
$ |
46,208 |
|
Capital contribution |
|
|
5,045 |
|
Equity in loss of joint venture |
|
|
(5,524 |
) |
Valuation adjustment |
|
|
(35,077 |
) |
Sale of interests |
|
|
(10,652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buyout of the Companys interest in MSD
Pursuant to the MSD joint venture agreement, MSD and MST had a joint right to purchase the
Companys entire interest in MSD upon termination or expiration of the MSD joint venture agreement
at a price equal to fair market value less a discount that depended on the circumstances giving
rise to termination or expiration of the agreement. Pursuant to the settlement, MST agreed to
purchase, and the Company agreed to sell, its entire interest in MSD. The purchase of the
Companys interests was completed on December 13, 2004.
The following table summarizes the adjustments provided in the joint venture and settlement
agreements (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Fair market value purchase price |
|
$ |
9,898 |
|
Add: |
|
|
|
|
Appraisal fees and costs |
|
|
85 |
|
Rent payment obligations (March 1, 2004 through August 31, 2005) |
|
|
2,335 |
|
Less: |
|
|
|
|
Prepayment credit |
|
|
(2,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,318 |
|
|
|
|
|
Upon closing of the sale of the Companys interests in MSD, the total purchase price balance
was approximately $10.3 million (net of the $2.0 million prepayment by MSD). The Company recorded
a discounted note receivable which had an original balance of $4.5 million. This note receivable
had a balance of approximately $6.0 million at March 31, 2007, including approximately $1.6
million classified as other current assets, which represents the net present value of future
payments that the Company expects to realize from the sale of its interests in MSD. The note
receivable will be accreted to fair value using the effective interest method over the term of the
expected payments on the note. Accretion recorded as a component of interest income was
approximately $1.9 million during each of the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006. Calculating
the net present value of future payments that the Company expects to realize as payment for the
purchase price requires assumptions about MSD, including the timing and amount of MSDs future
financings and revenue, and an appropriate discount rate. If actual results differ from these
assumptions, which are assessed and updated periodically, the net present value of future payments
received by the Company could differ from the amount reflected on the balance sheet at March 31,
2007.
As provided in the MSD joint venture agreement, MST is required to pay the Company the outstanding
purchase price plus simple (cumulated, not compounded) interest at the fixed annual rate of 0.5%
over the prime rate, or 5.5%, in effect on the purchase date. The purchase price is payable over
time in installments equal to the sum of 5.0% of MSD net sales, as determined in accordance with
the MSD agreements, and 20% of the net proceeds realized by MSD from the sale of its debt or
equity securities in any third-party financing after the date of the sale of the Companys
interest in MSD. In the event sufficient net sales or third-party financings of MSD do not
materialize, the Company may not receive all payments due from MST for the purchase of its
interests in MSD. As security for the payment obligation, the Company holds a security interest in
the interests in MSD that have been purchased. MST may repay all or any part of the outstanding
purchase price plus accrued interest at any time and from time to time without penalty.
As part of the settlement, the Company received a $2.0 million non-refundable prepayment from MSD
for future amounts payable by MST to the Company for the purchase price in the form of a credit
against amounts the Company agreed to pay MSD pursuant to the settlement. This prepayment was
recorded as a deferred liability on the Companys balance sheet. The amount of the prepayment
credit outstanding from time to time bears simple interest (cumulated, not compounded) at the
fixed annual rate of 0.5% over the prime rate, or 5.0%, in effect on the date that MST purchased
the Companys interests in MSD. The prepayment credit had been fully utilized at March 31, 2007
and the amount outstanding at March 31, 2006 was approximately $1.2 million.
78
The holder of the Companys Series B preferred stock received a pro-rata share of payments from
the sale of the Companys MSD interests, payable in the form of a dividend to the holder of the
Series B preferred stock. This pro-rata share approximates 6.03% of the $9.9 million sale price,
representing the proportionate amount of the Companys Class C interest in MSD that was funded by
the sale of the Series B stock (including payments allocated to the $2.0 million prepayment).
When the Company ceased to be a member of MSD, it became entitled to receive quarterly royalty
payments from MSD of 3% of the net sales price on all products developed and sold by MSD using the
patents licensed from the Company. During the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company
recognized royalties of approximately $1.2 million and $500,000, respectively.
Transitional services and subleases
When the MSD joint venture agreement expired, the Company was no longer required to provide
research personnel and corporate services to MSD. The Company has continued, and expects that it
will continue, to provide limited corporate services to MSD on a transitional basis at MSDs
expense. The Company bills MSD for the cost of these services on a periodic basis.
MSD leases certain facilities and related equipment from the Company (including laboratory
facilities located in the Companys corporate headquarters) pursuant to sublease agreements which
remained in effect following the expiration of the joint venture agreement. The term of each
sublease will expire one day prior to the expiration of the prime lease for that facility. Each
sublease agreement provides that, subject to certain exceptions, the Company must exercise all
available extension rights under the prime lease.
Effective September 1, 2005, MSD was required to pay its pro-rata share of all rental and other
expenses the Company incurs under the prime lease. As previously described, as part of the
settlement, MSDs rental and expense payment obligations for the period from March 1, 2004 through
August 31, 2005, which approximate $2.3 million, were added to the purchase price of the Companys
interests in MSD in lieu of MSD making payments to the Company.
During the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, operating costs allocated to MSD by the
Company in connection with shared personnel and facilities were approximately $47,000, $700,000 and
$700,000, respectively. Operating costs allocated to MSD for the year ended March 31, 2005 are net
of a $500,000 write off of unpaid costs in connection with the settlement agreement, in which all
claims against MSD, MST and Jacob Wohlstadter were dismissed and
released. The specific nature and amount of our allocations are being
reviewed by and discussed with MSD. At March 31, 2007 and
2006, other current assets include $700,000 and $800,000, respectively, for net amounts due from
MSD for these allocated operating costs. For the period from August 13, 2004 through December 13,
2004, these allocated operating costs reduced certain of the Companys operating costs and expenses
and increased Equity in Loss of Joint Venture in the accompanying consolidated statements of
operations. MSD-related losses included in the Equity in Loss of
Joint Venture was $5.5 million for
the year ended March 31, 2005.
Certain indemnification agreements and obligations
Jacob Wohlstadter and JW Consulting Services, L.L.C., a company established and wholly-owned by
Jacob Wohlstadter, have an indemnification agreement with IGEN that the Company assumed. Pursuant
to the indemnification agreement, the Company will indemnify Jacob Wohlstadter and JW Consulting
Services, L.L.C. against any claims arising out of the performance or non-performance of services
to or for the benefit of the Company.
The Company agreed under the settlement to indemnify MSD, MST and Jacob Wohlstadter and their
respective directors, officers, employees and agents for any losses, costs, fees and expenses
arising out of or related in any way to past, current or future audits of MSD, or the preparation
of MSD audited or unaudited financial statements requested by the Company.
79
In addition, the Company agreed to indemnify MSD, MST and Jacob Wohlstadter and their respective
directors, officers, employees and agents for any losses, costs, fees and expenses with respect to
regulatory (SEC or otherwise) or legal proceedings and investigations resulting from or related to
the fact that the Company is (or its predecessor, IGEN, was) an issuer of publicly traded
securities. The Company is not required to indemnify MSD, MST or
Jacob Wohlstadter for acts either resulting in a criminal conviction or finally adjudged by a court of
competent jurisdiction to constitute fraud or intentional misrepresentations.
6. RELATED PARTIES
The Companys chairman and chief executive officer, Mr. Samuel Wohlstadter, is the principal and
controlling stockholder, a director and the chief executive officer of each of Wellstat Biologics
Corporation, Wellstat Therapeutics Corporation, Hyperion Catalysis International, Proteinix
Corporation, Advanced Vision Therapy and Integrated Chemical Synthesizers, Inc. These companies are
therefore considered the Companys affiliates for the purpose of this discussion.
The Company has shared services arrangements with each of these affiliated companies. These shared
services include accounting and finance, human resources and other administrative services, as well
as facility related costs and services. Shared services costs allocated to these companies totaled
$400,000, $500,000 and $400,000 for the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively,
which reduced certain operating costs and expenses for the respective periods. Amounts allocated to
these affiliated companies are calculated and billed monthly based upon costs incurred by the
Company and are determined through allocation methods that include time-spent and square footage
utilized. The amount due from affiliated companies under the shared services arrangements was
approximately $12,000 and $300,000 at March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. All such balances were
settled subsequent to each respective year-end. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, these
shared services would be terminated within sixty days of the closing of the merger transaction.
Since 1995 the Company has engaged the law firm of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr to
provide legal services. Jennifer M. Drogula, who became the daughter-in-law of our Chief Executive
Officer in March 2002, has been a partner of that firm since January 2001. The Company recorded
approximately $400,000, $300,000 and $2.2 million in legal fees with that law firm for the years
ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
7. COMMITMENTS
The Company leased office, laboratory and manufacturing facilities pursuant to operating leases
expiring at various times from fiscal 2008 through fiscal 2015. Rent expense for these operating
leases totaled approximately $2.9 million, $3.7 million and $3.3 million for the years ended March
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Rent expense for the years ended March 31, 2007 and 2006 is
net of $2.2 million and $750,000, respectively, of sublease income related to the sublease of
portions of several of its facilities.
At March 31, 2007, the future minimum operating lease payments are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
$ |
5,240 |
|
2009 |
|
|
5,421 |
|
2010 |
|
|
4,860 |
|
2011 |
|
|
3,103 |
|
2012 |
|
|
2,523 |
|
2013 and thereafter |
|
|
5,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,115 |
|
Less: sublease income |
|
|
(16,200 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,915 |
|
|
|
|
|
Included in the table above is an operating lease in which the Company subleased certain
space at its cost and with equivalent terms and conditions to its primary lease, to companies in
which its chief executive officer, Samuel J. Wohlstadter, is the principal and controlling
stockholder, a director and the chief executive officer. These companies are therefore considered
BioVeris affiliates for the purpose of this discussion. The subleases with the affiliated
companies provide for annual rental payments to the Company of approximately $300,000 and such
amount is included in the table above as a component of sublease income.
80
Subsequent to March 31, 2007, the Company sub-leased a facility to a third party under an
arrangement that will further reduce its annual operating lease payments by approximately $1.0
million from fiscal 2008 through 2015.
At March 31, 2007, the Company had committed to payments for sponsored research and other license
and option agreements of approximately $600,000 and $300,000 in each of fiscal 2008 and 2009,
respectively. The Company may also be required to make additional payments for patent costs,
milestone fees, including for the initiation and completion of human clinical trials and the
receipt of regulatory approvals, and royalties on future sales.
8. INCOME TAXES
For the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Company recorded no Federal or state income
tax expense nor would it have owed any Federal or state income taxes.
In connection with the merger and related transactions between Roche and IGEN, Roche acquired all
of the historical net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards of IGEN. The Company, however,
has assumed IGENs historical cost basis in the assets and liabilities transferred to the Company
from IGEN. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities have been computed for differences between
financial reporting and tax bases of the assets and liabilities assumed that will result in taxable
or deductible amounts in the future. The computation of deferred income taxes is based on enacted
tax laws and rates applicable to periods in which the differences are expected to affect the
taxable income of the Company. The approximate tax effects of temporary differences that will give
rise to the Companys deferred tax assets are as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Deferred tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accruals and reserves |
|
$ |
861 |
|
|
$ |
1,102 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
262 |
|
Equipment and leasehold improvements |
|
|
1,494 |
|
|
|
715 |
|
Net operating loss carryforwards |
|
|
54,762 |
|
|
|
43,633 |
|
Discount on note receivable |
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
923 |
|
Capital loss carryforward |
|
|
13,540 |
|
|
|
13,540 |
|
Research and development credits |
|
|
1,762 |
|
|
|
1,182 |
|
Other |
|
|
543 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets |
|
|
73,353 |
|
|
|
61,350 |
|
Less: valuation allowance |
|
|
(73,353 |
) |
|
|
(61,350 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A valuation allowance equal to the total net deferred tax assets has been provided as of March
31, 2007 and 2006 as management has determined that it is more likely than not that deferred
tax assets will not be realized. The increase in the valuation allowance on the deferred tax asset
was $12.0 million and $10.9 million for the years ended
March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Net operating loss (NOL)
carryforwards as of March 31, 2007 approximately $142.0 million
and $6.1 million in the U.S. and the United Kingdom, respectively. The U.S. NOL
carryforwards will begin to expire in 2024 and the U.K. NOL carryforwards can be carried forward
indefinitely.
The provision for income taxes recorded in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations
differs from the amount that would have resulted by applying the U.S. Federal income tax statutory
rate as a result of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
Income tax provision at federal statutory
rate |
|
|
34.0 |
% |
|
|
34.0 |
% |
|
|
34.0 |
% |
State and local taxes net of federal benefit |
|
|
4.5 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
Non-deductible items |
|
|
(0.5 |
)% |
|
|
(0.2 |
)% |
|
|
(0.3 |
)% |
Change in valuation allowance |
|
|
(40.0 |
)% |
|
|
(40.4 |
)% |
|
|
(39.0 |
)% |
Other |
|
|
1.9 |
% |
|
|
2.0 |
% |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
|
Effective tax rates |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
81
9. EMPLOYEE SAVINGS PLAN
The Company has an Employee Savings Plan intended to qualify under Sections 401(a) and 401(k) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and subject to the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974, as amended. The Company made discretionary contributions of $200,000,
$400,000 and $300,000 for the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The Company
is not obligated under any post-retirement benefit plan.
10. SEGMENT INFORMATION
The Company operates in one significant business segment. It is currently engaged in the
development, manufacturing and marketing of products for the detection and measurement of
biological and chemical substances.
Product
sales by region are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
United States |
|
$ |
15,600 |
|
|
$ |
15,352 |
|
|
$ |
16,270 |
|
United Kingdom |
|
|
881 |
|
|
|
1,122 |
|
|
|
3,993 |
|
All other foreign |
|
|
2,477 |
|
|
|
2,580 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
18,958 |
|
|
$ |
19,054 |
|
|
$ |
20,703 |
|
|
|
|
Substantially all of the Companys assets are held in the United States.
Product
sales by market are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Life science |
|
$ |
10,457 |
|
|
$ |
10,473 |
|
|
$ |
11,341 |
|
Biosecurity |
|
|
8,501 |
|
|
|
8,581 |
|
|
|
9,362 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
18,958 |
|
|
$ |
19,054 |
|
|
$ |
20,703 |
|
|
|
|
11.
QUARTERLY OPERATING RESULTS (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
June 30 |
|
September 30 |
|
December 31 |
|
March 31 |
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands, except per share data):
|
Fiscal years
ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
4,088 |
|
|
$ |
5,486 |
|
|
$ |
9,146 |
|
|
$ |
5,343 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(8,760 |
) |
|
|
(8,267 |
) |
|
|
(4,188 |
) |
|
|
(14,201 |
) |
Net loss |
|
|
(7,372 |
) |
|
|
(7,028 |
) |
|
|
(2,724 |
) |
|
|
(13,362 |
) |
Net loss per common share |
|
|
(0.27 |
) |
|
|
(0.26 |
) |
|
|
(0.10 |
) |
|
|
(0.50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
4,889 |
|
|
$ |
6,149 |
|
|
$ |
5,465 |
|
|
$ |
4,112 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(7,605 |
) |
|
|
(7,115 |
) |
|
|
(7,354 |
) |
|
|
(8,400 |
) |
Net loss |
|
|
(6,668 |
) |
|
|
(6,503 |
) |
|
|
(7,510 |
) |
|
|
(7,172 |
) |
Net loss per common share |
|
|
(0.25 |
) |
|
|
(0.24 |
) |
|
|
(0.28 |
) |
|
|
(0.27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
8,245 |
|
|
$ |
7,851 |
|
|
$ |
5,299 |
|
|
$ |
4,904 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(13,245 |
) |
|
|
(10,190 |
) |
|
|
(8,784 |
) |
|
|
(8,039 |
) |
Net loss (2) |
|
|
(12,851 |
) |
|
|
(45,618 |
) |
|
|
(11,974 |
) |
|
|
(7,130 |
) |
Net loss per common share |
|
|
(0.48 |
) |
|
|
(1.71 |
) |
|
|
(0.45 |
) |
|
|
(0.27 |
) |
82
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Company adopted FIN 46 as of March 31, 2004 and determined that MSD qualified as a
variable interest entity. Accordingly, beginning March 31, 2004, the Company consolidated the
financial results of MSD. The Company has historically recorded approximately 100% of MSDs
losses. On August 12, 2004, BioVeris, MSD and MST entered into a settlement agreement that
resolved litigation between the parties and constituted a reconsideration event under FIN 46.
The Company determined that it no longer met the conditions to be designated as the primary
beneficiary of MSD, as certain provisions of the settlement agreement reallocated the
obligation to absorb the majority of MSDs future expected losses. Accordingly, for the period
April 1, 2004 through August 12, 2004, the Company consolidated the financial results of MSD
and beginning August 13, 2004, deconsolidated the financial results of MSD and accounted for
this investment using the equity method through December 13, 2004, the date of the sale of its
interests in MSD. |
|
(2) |
|
See Note 5 of the consolidated financial statements for a description of the recording of
losses under the equity method of accounting related to the MSD investment. |
|
The sum of quarterly per share amounts may not be equal to per share amounts reported for
year-to-date periods. This is due to the effects of rounding for each period.
83
12. VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
The following tables set forth activity in the Companys valuation and qualifying accounts (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at |
|
|
|
Beginning |
|
Provisions |
|
|
|
|
|
End of |
|
For the years ended March 31, |
|
of Period |
|
Recorded |
|
Write-offs |
|
Period |
|
Allowance for doubtful
accounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
$ |
227 |
|
2006 |
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
253 |
|
2007 |
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory reserve |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
715 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
(773 |
) |
|
271 |
|
2006 |
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
401 |
|
2007 |
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
522 |
|
|
|
(264 |
) |
|
659 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax valuation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
7,234 |
|
|
|
43,220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,454 |
|
2006 |
|
|
50,454 |
|
|
|
10,896 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
61,350 |
|
2007 |
|
|
61,350 |
|
|
|
12,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,353 |
|
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
None
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
Controls and Procedures
We have carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and the participation of our management,
including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of
the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Securities Exchange
Act), as of March 31, 2007. Based upon this evaluation, our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer concluded that, as of March 31, 2007, our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective.
Our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, does not
expect that our disclosure controls and procedures will prevent all errors or fraud. A control
system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute,
assurance that the objectives of the control system are met and our disclosure controls and
procedures are designed to provide this reasonable assurance. Because of inherent limitations in
all control systems, no evaluation of control can provide absolute assurance that all control
issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
During the fourth quarter of the year ended March 31, 2007, there were no changes in our internal
control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially effect, our internal control over financial reporting.
84
Managements Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and
15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of,
a companys principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by a companys board
of directors, management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external
purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Our internal control over financial
reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
|
|
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and
dispositions of our assets; |
|
|
|
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being
made only in accordance with authorizations of our management
and directors; and |
|
|
|
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely detection of unauthorized acquisitions, use or
disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on
the financial statements. |
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in condition, 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 as of
March 31, 2007. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal ControlIntegrated
Framework.
Based on our assessment, our management has concluded that, as of March 31, 2007, our internal
control over financial reporting is effective based on those criteria. Our managements assessment
of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007 has been
audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated
in their report which appears in Part II Item 8 Consolidated Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
Not applicable.
PART III
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
The information required under this item may be found under Executive Officers of BioVeris
Corporation in Part I, Item 1 Business of this annual report on Form 10-K, as well as under
sections captioned Directors, Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance and
Governance which will be filed in an amendment to this Annual Report on Form 10-K or in our Proxy
Statement (the 2007 Proxy Statement), which will be filed with the SEC not later than 120 days
after the close of our fiscal year ended March 31, 2007, and which is incorporated herein by
reference.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information required under this item may be found under the section captioned Compensation and
Other Information Concerning Directors and Officers which will be filed in an amendment to this
Annual Report on Form 10-K or in the 2007 Proxy Statement, and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS
The information required under this item may be found under the section captioned Securities
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management which will be filed in an amendment to this
Annual Report on Form 10-K or in the 2007 Proxy Statement, and is incorporated herein by reference.
85
For certain information with respect to our 2003 stock incentive plan, see ITEM 5 Market for
Companys Common Stock and Related Stockholder Matters 2003 Stock Incentive Plan and ITEM 8
Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements Note 3.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
The information required under this item may be found under the section captioned Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions which will be filed in an amendment to this Annual Report
on Form 10-K or in the 2007 Proxy Statement, and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
The information required under this item may be found under the section captioned Audit Fees and
Pre-approval of Services by the Independent Auditor which will be filed in an amendment to this
Annual Report on Form 10-K or in the 2007 Proxy Statement, and is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
(a) |
|
Documents filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. |
|
(1) |
|
Consolidated Financial Statements. |
The financial statements listed in the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements are filed as part
of this annual report on Form 10-K. See ITEM 8 Consolidated Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
(2) |
|
Financial Statement Schedules. |
Financial statement schedules are omitted because they are not applicable, or not required, or
because the required information is included in the financial statements or notes thereto.
The following exhibits are referenced or included as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
|
|
|
2.1(13)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated July 24, 2003 among Roche
Holding Ltd, 66 Acquisition Corporation II, IGEN International,
Inc. and IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC. |
|
|
|
2.2(17)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger by and
among Roche Holding Ltd, Lili Acquisition Corporation and BioVeris
Corporation, dated as of April 4, 2007. |
|
|
|
2.3(17)
|
|
Vaccines Asset Transfer Agreement
between BioVeris Corporation and 32 Matt Street Acquisition I, LLC, dated April 4, 2007. |
|
|
|
2.4(17)
|
|
ECL Asset Transfer Agreement between
BioVeris Corporation and 32 Matt Street Acquisition II, LLC, dated April 4,
2007. |
|
|
|
3.1(9)
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of BioVeris Corporation. |
|
|
|
3.2(14)
|
|
Certificate of Voting Powers, Designations, Preferences and
Relative, Participating, Optional and other Special Rights and
Qualifications, Limitations or Restrictions of Series A
Participating Cumulative Preferred Stock of BioVeris Corporation. |
|
|
|
3.3(11)
|
|
Form of Certificate of Designation of Series B Preferred Stock of
BioVeris Corporation. |
|
|
|
3.4(9)
|
|
Bylaws of BioVeris Corporation. |
|
|
|
4.1(14)
|
|
Rights Agreement dated January 9, 2004 between BioVeris
Corporation and EquiServe Trust Company, N.A. |
|
|
|
4.1(18)
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Rights
Agreement, dated as of April 4, 2007, by and between BioVeris
Corporation and Computershare Trust Company, N.A. |
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Form of Right Certificate for BioVeris Series A Preferred Stock.
Filed as Exhibit B to the Rights Agreement filed as Exhibit 4.1 to
this Form 10-K. |
86
|
|
|
4.3(11)
|
|
Specimen Common Stock Certificate. |
|
|
|
4.4(11)
|
|
Specimen Series B Preferred Stock Certificate. |
|
|
|
10.1(13)
|
|
License Agreement dated July 24, 2003 by and between IGEN
International, Inc. and IGEN LS LLC. |
|
|
|
10.2(13)
|
|
Improvements License Agreement dated July 24, 2003 by and between
Roche Diagnostics GmbH and IGEN International, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.3(13)
|
|
Covenants Not to Sue dated July 24, 2003 among IGEN Integrated
Healthcare, LLC, Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale
Technologies, LLC., Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Roche Holding Ltd and
IGEN LS LLC. |
|
|
|
10.4(13)
|
|
License Agreement (Human IVD, Veterinary IVD, HLA Typing,
Paternity, DNA Manufacturing and Plasma Testing) dated as of
July24, 2004 among IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC, F. Hoffman-La
Roche Ltd, Roche Diagnostics GmbH and Roche Molecular Systems,
Inc. |
|
|
|
10.5(13)
|
|
License agreement (Human IVD Services and Animal Diagnostics
Services) dated July 24, 2003 among IGEN Integrated Healthcare,
LLC, F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd, Roche Diagnostics GmbH and Roche
Molecular Systems, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.6(1*)
|
|
Agreement dated May 25, 1990 between IGEN, Inc. and Eisai Co., Ltd. |
|
|
|
10.7(4)
|
|
Supplemental Agreement dated July 23, 1997 between IGEN, Inc. and
Eisai Co., Ltd. |
|
|
|
10.8(6)
|
|
Extension Agreement dated July 11, 2002 between IGEN
International, Inc. and Eisai Co., Ltd. |
|
|
|
10.9(1*)
|
|
License and Technology Developmental Agreement dated May 19, 1993
between IGEN, Inc. and Organon Teknika B.V. |
|
|
|
10.10(1*)
|
|
Term Sheet for Consolidation of Research Projects between IGEN,
Inc. and Proteinix Corporation dated December 14, 1993. |
|
|
|
10.11(1*)
|
|
Term Sheet for Consolidation of Cancer Research Projects between
IGEN, Inc. and Pro-Neuron, Inc. dated December 14, 1993. |
|
|
|
10.12(10)
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement entered into between BioVeris
Corporation and its directors and officers. |
|
|
|
10.13(13+)
|
|
BioVeris Corporation 2003 Stock Incentive Plan. |
|
|
|
10.14(2)
|
|
Lease Agreement between IGEN International, Inc. and W-M 16020
Limited Partnership dated September 27, 1994. |
|
|
|
10.15(3*)
|
|
Joint Venture Agreement, dated as of November 30, 1995, between
Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC. and
IGEN, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.16(3)
|
|
Limited Liability Company Agreement, dated as of November 30,
1995, between Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale
Technologies, LLC., and IGEN, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.17(3*)
|
|
IGEN/MSD License Agreement, dated as of November 30, 1995, between
Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., and IGEN, Inc. |
87
|
|
|
10.18(3+)
|
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of November 30, 1995, between
IGEN, Inc. and Jacob Wohlstadter. |
|
|
|
10.19(5*)
|
|
Amendment No.1 to Joint Venture Agreement between Meso Scale
Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC., and IGEN
International, Inc. dated August 15, 2001. |
|
|
|
10.20(5)
|
|
First Amendment of Limited Liability Company Agreement of Meso
Scale Diagnostics, LLC. dated August 15, 2001 between IGEN
International, Inc. and Meso Scale Technologies, LLC. |
|
|
|
10.21(5*)
|
|
Amendment No.1 to IGEN/MSD License Agreement dated August 15, 2001
between Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC. and IGEN International, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.22(5)
|
|
MSD/MST Sublicense Agreement dated November 30, 1995 between
MesoScale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC. and
IGEN, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.23(5*)
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to MSD/MST Sublicense Agreement dated August 15,
2001 between Meso Scale Technologies, LLC. and IGEN International,
Inc. |
|
|
|
10.24(5+)
|
|
Consulting Agreement between IGEN International, Inc. and Jacob N.
Wohlstadter dated November 30, 1996. |
|
|
|
10.25(5+)
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between IGEN International, Inc., Jacob
N. Wohlstadter and JW Consulting Services, L.L.C. dated November
30, 1996. |
|
|
|
10.26(5+*)
|
|
Employment Agreement between Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., IGEN
International, Inc., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC. and Jacob N.
Wohlstadter dated August 15, 2001. |
|
|
|
10.27(8+)
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between IGEN International, Inc. and
Jacob N. Wohlstadter dated October 6, 2001. |
|
|
|
10.28(10+)
|
|
BioVeris Corporation Termination Protection Program. |
|
|
|
10.29(7)
|
|
Letter Agreement dated March 21, 2003 between IGEN International,
Inc., Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC.
and JW Consulting Services, L.L.C. |
|
|
|
10.30(12*)
|
|
Solicitation, Offer and Award dated June 20, 2003 between IGEN
International, Inc. and U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command,
as amended September 2, 2003. |
|
|
|
10.31(12)
|
|
Letter Agreement dated August 15, 2001 between IGEN International,
Inc., Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC.
and Jacob N. Wohlstadter. |
|
|
|
10.32(12)
|
|
Letter Agreement dated December 1, 2003 between IGEN
International, Inc., BioVeris Corporation, Meso Scale Diagnostics,
LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC. and JW Consulting Services,
L.L.C. and Jacob N. Wohlstadter. |
|
|
|
10.33(12)
|
|
Equity Right Purchase and License Amendment Agreement dated
December 30, 2003 between IGEN International, Inc. and Proteinix
Corporation. |
|
|
|
10.34(12)
|
|
Equity Right Purchase and License Amendment Agreement dated
December 30, 2003 between IGEN International, Inc. and Wellstat
Therapeutics Corporation. |
88
|
|
|
10.35(15)
|
|
Services Agreement dated February 10, 2004, among Wellstat
Therapeutics Corporation, Wellstat Biologics Corporation, Hyperion
Catalysis International Corporation, Proteinix, Inc., Integrated
Chemical Synthesizers, Inc. and BioVeris Corporation. |
|
|
|
10.36(15)
|
|
Agreement dated August 12, 2004, among BioVeris Corporation,
MesoScale Diagnostics, LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC., Jacob
N. Wohlstadter and Richard J. Massey. |
|
|
|
10.37(16)
|
|
Charter for the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board
of Directors dated November 15, 2004. |
|
|
|
10.38(17)
|
|
ECL License Agreement between
BioVeris Corporation and 32 Matt Street Acquisition II, LLC, dated
April 4, 2007. |
|
|
|
10.39(17)
|
|
Amendment to BioVeris Corporation
Termination Protection Plan, dated April 4, 2007.
|
|
|
|
10.40(17)
|
|
BioVeris Corporation Severance Plan, dated April 4, 2007. |
|
|
|
10.41(17)
|
|
Non-Disclosure and Non-Solicitation
Agreement between BioVeris Corporation
and Samuel J. Wohlstadter, dated April 4, 2007.
|
|
|
|
14.1(15)
|
|
Corporate Code of Conduct and Business Ethics. |
|
|
|
21.1
|
|
List of Subsidiaries of BioVeris Corporation. Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
23.1
|
|
Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
23.2
(20)
|
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP. |
|
|
|
23.3
(20)
|
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP. |
|
|
|
23.4
(19)
|
|
Consent of Aronson & Company. |
|
|
|
99.1(13)
|
|
Restructuring Agreement dated July 24, 2003 between IGEN
International, Inc. and IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC. |
|
|
|
99.2(13)
|
|
Post-Closing Covenants Agreement dated July 24, 2003 among Roche
Holding Ltd, IGEN International, Inc. and IGEN Integrated
Healthcare, LLC. |
|
|
|
99.3(13)
|
|
Tax Allocation Agreement dated as of July 24, 2003 among Roche
Holding Ltd, 66 Acquisition Corporation II, IGEN International,
Inc. and IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC. |
|
|
|
99.4(13)
|
|
Ongoing Litigation Agreement dated July 24, 2003 between IGEN
International, Inc., Roche Diagnostics GmbH and Roche Diagnostics
Corporation. |
|
|
|
99.5(13)
|
|
Global Consent and Agreement dated July 24, 2003 among Roche
Holding Ltd, IGEN International, Inc., IGEN Integrated Healthcare,
LLC, Meso Scale Diagnostics LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC.,
Jacob Wohlstadter and JW Consulting Services, L.L.C. |
|
|
|
99.6(13)
|
|
Release and Agreement dated July 24, 2003 among IGEN
International, Inc., IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC, Hyperion
Catalysis International, Inc., Wellstat Biologics Corporation,
Wellstat Therapeutics Corporation, Proteinix Corporation and
Integrated Chemical Synthesizers, Inc. |
|
|
|
99.7(13)
|
|
Letter Agreement dated July 24, 2003 among Meso Scale Diagnostics,
LLC., Meso Scale Technologies, LLC., JW Consulting Services,
L.L.C., Jacob N. Wohlstadter and IGEN International, Inc. |
|
|
|
99.8(13)
|
|
Letter Agreement dated July 24, 2003 between Samuel J. Wohlstadter
and IGEN Integrated Healthcare, LLC. |
|
|
|
99.9
(20)
|
|
Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC. Financial Statements at December 31,
2004 and years ended 2003 and 2002. |
89
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302
of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certificate of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certificate of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
+ |
|
Denotes management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
|
* |
|
Denotes confidential treatment applied. |
|
(1) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN, Inc.s Registration Statement on Form S-1, as amended
(Registration No. 33-72992), filed December 16, 1993. |
|
(2) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN, Inc.s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended March 31, 1995, filed July 14, 1995. |
|
(3) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN, Inc.s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
1995, filed February 14, 1996. |
|
(4) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN International, Inc.s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 1997, filed November 14, 1997. |
|
(5) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN International, Inc.s Amendment to Form 8-K, filed
September 5, 2001. |
|
(6) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN International, Inc.s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2002, filed August 14, 2002. |
|
(7) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN International, Inc.s Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended March 31, 2003, filed June 30, 2003. |
|
(8) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to IGEN International, Inc.s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
December 31, 2001, filed February 14, 2002. |
|
(9) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-4
(Registration No. 333-109196), filed September 26, 2003. |
|
(10) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-4
(Registration No. 333-109196), filed November 12, 2003. |
|
(11) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-4
(Registration No. 333-109196), filed December 11, 2003. |
|
(12) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-4
(Registration No. 333-109196), filed December 30, 2003. |
|
(13) |
|
Previously filed as an annex to BioVeris Corporations Registration Statement on Form S-4
(Registration No. 333-101916), filed January 13, 2004. |
90
|
|
|
(14) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Form 8-A filed February 10, 2004. |
|
(15) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2004, filed August 16, 2004. |
|
(16) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004, filed November 15, 2004. |
|
(17) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations
Form 8-K filed April 10, 2007. |
|
(18) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations
Form 8-A filed April 6, 2007. |
|
(19) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005, filed
June 14, 2005. |
|
(20) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to BioVeris Corporations
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004, filed
August 16, 2004, and for the fiscal year ended March 31,
2005, filed June 14, 2005. |
91
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioVeris Corporation
|
|
Date: June 7, 2007 |
By: |
/s/ Samuel J. Wohlstadter
|
|
|
|
Samuel J. Wohlstadter |
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed
below by the following persons on behalf of the Company and in the capacities and on the dates
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
/s/ Samuel J. Wohlstadter
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
Samuel J. Wohlstadter
|
|
(Principal Executive Officer) Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ George V. Migausky
|
|
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
George V. Migausky
|
|
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William J. Crowley Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
William J. Crowley Jr. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Richard J. Massey
|
|
Director
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
Richard J. Massey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John Quinn
|
|
Director
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
John Quinn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Anthony Rees
|
|
Director
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony Rees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Joop Sistermans
|
|
Director
|
|
June 7, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joop Sistermans |
|
|
|
|
92