The Company recorded share-based compensation expense in the following expense categories of its consolidated statements of operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Nine months ended
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
2021
|
|
2020
|
|
2021
|
|
2020
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Research and development
|
|
$
|
96
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
$
|
213
|
|
$
|
234
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
770
|
Total share-based compensation
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
$
|
151
|
|
$
|
421
|
|
$
|
1,004
|
During the nine months ended September 30, 2020, as part of the termination arrangement with the Company’s former chief executive officer, the Company modified certain options to purchase 236,970 shares of common stock, issued an 80,000 fully vested stock option grant, and accelerated the vesting of 3,300 restricted stock units resulting in recording $153,000, $70,000, and $4,000, respectively, of share-based compensation.
In March 2020, the Company issued 35,000 common stock awards to an employee to be earned upon the achievement of certain milestones. Such milestones were achieved during the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and the Company issued 23,793 fully vested shares of common stock to the employee with 11,207 common shares withheld to cover taxes. The Company recognized share-based compensation of $140,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2020.
7. Commitments and Contingencies
On April 14, 2017, representatives for the estate of an individual plaintiff filed a wrongful death complaint with the Suffolk Superior Court, in the County of Suffolk, Massachusetts (the “Court”), against the Company and other defendants, including Harvard Bioscience, Inc. (“Harvard Bioscience”), our former parent entity prior to the spin-off of the Company in 2013, as well as another third party. The complaint seeks payment for an unspecified amount of damages and alleges that the plaintiff sustained terminal injuries allegedly caused by products, including one synthetic trachea scaffold and two bioreactors, provided by certain of the named defendants and utilized in connection with surgeries performed by third parties in Europe in 2012 and 2013. This lawsuit relates to the Company’s first-generation trachea scaffold technology for which the Company discontinued development in 2014, and not to the Company’s current Cellframe technology nor to its lead development Cellspan Esophageal Implant product candidate.
On October 1, 2019, the Court entered an order granting plaintiffs’ motion to compel the defendants to produce discovery. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a motion for sanctions against the Company on January 6, 2020 claiming failure to produce the required discovery. The Company’s counsel at the time, which had been selected for the case by its liability insurance carrier, never notified the Company of plaintiffs’ motion and never responded to plaintiff’ motion. As a result of the failure of the Company’s former counsel to respond, on January 29, 2020, the Court entered an order allowing plaintiffs’ sanctions against the Company and the other defendants, which establishes a sanction of admitted liability. In June 2021, the Company was informed of these 2019 and 2020 court actions by new defense counsel appointed by its liability insurance carrier. On June 9, 2021, the Company, together with the other defendants, filed a motion to vacate the Court’s order allowing plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, and following a hearing on such motion, on August 6, 2021 the Court issued a ruling in our favor, vacating the sanctions. This case will now proceed on the merits, which the Company will continue to oppose vigorously.
On September 15, 2021, one of the Company’s product liability insurance carriers which had been providing a defense to the Company and Harvard Bioscience, notified each party that it was denying coverage under the applicable policy for the lawsuit and would no longer be providing a defense to each such company with respect thereto, or covering related legal expenses incurred after September 30, 2021. The insurance carrier also filed a corresponding complaint for declaratory judgment with the Court asking the Court to declare that said insurance carrier is not required to defend, indemnify or provide coverage to the Company and Harvard Bioscience with respect to the lawsuit described above. The Company believes the insurance carrier’s grounds for denying coverage are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against this complaint for declaratory judgment and the insurance carrier’s denial of the claim and related matters.
There can be no assurance that the Company and the other defendants will prevail in the insurance coverage litigation. As such, it is unclear at this point if our product liability insurance coverage will reimburse the Company for all or any portion of any defense costs or damages if the Company were to lose the underlying case on the merits.