Item 1. Financial
Statements (Unaudited).
Certain information
and footnote disclosures required under United States generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted from
the following consolidated financial statements pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
However, Senesco Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its wholly owned subsidiary, Senesco, Inc., a New Jersey corporation
(collectively, “Senesco” or the “Company”), believe that the disclosures are adequate to assure that the
information presented is not misleading in any material respect.
The results of operations
for the interim periods presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire fiscal year.
SENESCO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
|
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
|
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,312,056
|
|
|
$
|
2,001,325
|
|
Prepaid research supplies and expenses
|
|
|
1,459,643
|
|
|
|
1,548,524
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Assets
|
|
|
2,771,699
|
|
|
|
3,549,849
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment, furniture and fixtures, net
|
|
|
6,491
|
|
|
|
5,857
|
|
Intangibles, net
|
|
|
3,476,784
|
|
|
|
3,393,992
|
|
Deferred income tax assets, net
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Security deposit
|
|
|
5,171
|
|
|
|
5,171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS
|
|
$
|
6,260,145
|
|
|
$
|
6,954,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
932,167
|
|
|
$
|
594,514
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
304,986
|
|
|
|
369,695
|
|
Line of credit
|
|
|
2,199,108
|
|
|
|
2,199,108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Liabilities
|
|
|
3,436,261
|
|
|
|
3,163,317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrant liabilities
|
|
|
94,739
|
|
|
|
238,796
|
|
Grant payable
|
|
|
99,728
|
|
|
|
99,728
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES
|
|
|
3,630,728
|
|
|
|
3,501,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, authorized 5,000,000 shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A 10,297 shares issued and 995 and 3,379 shares outstanding, respectively
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
(liquidation preference of $1,044,750 and $3,463,475
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012, respectively)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series B 1,200 shares issued and 0 and 1,200 outstanding, respectively
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
(liquidation preference of $0 and $1,230,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012, respectively)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value, authorized 350,000,000 shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
issued and outstanding 116,753,185 and 94,112,483, respectively
|
|
|
1,167,532
|
|
|
|
941,125
|
|
Capital in excess of par
|
|
|
71,611,793
|
|
|
|
69,952,152
|
|
Deficit accumulated during the development stage
|
|
|
(70,149,918
|
)
|
|
|
(67,440,295
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Stockholders' Equity
|
|
|
2,629,417
|
|
|
|
3,453,028
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
$
|
6,260,145
|
|
|
$
|
6,954,869
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
SENESCO TECHNOLOGIES,
INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
|
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
|
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
|
Three months ended September 30,
|
|
|
Amounts from
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Inception
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
1,790,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
732,720
|
|
|
|
645,959
|
|
|
|
32,347,397
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
513,433
|
|
|
|
634,186
|
|
|
|
21,749,038
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
1,246,153
|
|
|
|
1,280,145
|
|
|
|
54,096,435
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations
|
|
|
(1,246,153
|
)
|
|
|
(1,280,145
|
)
|
|
|
(52,306,435
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-operating income (expense)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant income
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
244,479
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value – warrant liability
|
|
|
(20,148
|
)
|
|
|
271,703
|
|
|
|
8,309,982
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of state income tax loss – net
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
586,442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other noncash (expense) income, net
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
205,390
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(785,171
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,147,048
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-off of patents abandoned
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,909,224
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of debt discount and financing costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(11,227,870
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense – convertible notes
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2,027,930
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest (expense) income - net
|
|
|
(33,982
|
)
|
|
|
(30,541
|
)
|
|
|
250,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(2,085,454
|
)
|
|
|
(1,038,983
|
)
|
|
|
(59,022,208
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred dividends
|
|
|
(624,169
|
)
|
|
|
(908,846
|
)
|
|
|
(11,127,710
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss applicable to common shares
|
|
$
|
(2,709,623
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,947,829
|
)
|
|
$
|
(70,149,918
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per common share
|
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted-average number
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of common shares outstanding
|
|
|
107,449,311
|
|
|
|
79,289,756
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
SENESCO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
CONDENSED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2012
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital in Excess
|
|
|
Deficit
Accumulated
During the
Development
|
|
|
Stockholders'
Equity
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
of Par Value
|
|
|
Stage
|
|
|
(Deficiency)
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2012
|
|
|
4,579
|
|
|
$
|
46
|
|
|
|
94,112,483
|
|
|
$
|
941,125
|
|
|
$
|
69,952,152
|
|
|
$
|
(67,440,295
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,453,028
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock at $0.26 per share
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
353,895
|
|
|
|
3,539
|
|
|
|
97,031
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
100,570
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions and other fees related to the issuance of common stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6,387
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6,387
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock converted into common stock
|
|
|
(3,584
|
)
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
|
13,784,615
|
|
|
|
137,846
|
|
|
|
(137,810
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock in lieu of cash payment for dividends
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,600,000
|
|
|
|
16,000
|
|
|
|
432,000
|
|
|
|
(333,526
|
)
|
|
|
114,474
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock in exchange for warrants
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,902,192
|
|
|
|
69,022
|
|
|
|
(69,022
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deemed dividend - preferred stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
240,891
|
|
|
|
(240,891
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
785,171
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
785,171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of warrant liability
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
164,205
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
164,205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair market value of options and warrants vested
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
153,562
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
153,562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends accrued and upaid at September 30, 2012
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(49,752
|
)
|
|
|
(49,752
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2,085,454
|
)
|
|
|
(2,085,454
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance July 1, 1998 (inception) through September 30, 2012
|
|
|
995
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
|
116,753,185
|
|
|
$
|
1,167,532
|
|
|
$
|
71,611,793
|
|
|
$
|
(70,149,918
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,629,417
|
|
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements
SENESCO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(unaudited)
|
|
Three months ended September 30,
|
|
|
Cumulative
Amounts from
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Inception
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(2,085,454
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,038,983
|
)
|
|
$
|
(59,022,208
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash capital contribution
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
85,179
|
|
Noncash conversion of accrued expenses into equity
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
131,250
|
|
Noncash loss (income) related to change in
fair value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of warrant liability
|
|
|
20,148
|
|
|
|
(271,703
|
)
|
|
|
(8,631,241
|
)
|
Noncash charge for change in warrant terms
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
115,869
|
|
Issuance of common stock and warrants for interest
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,003,386
|
|
Issuance of common stock for services
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
53,800
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
153,562
|
|
|
|
123,551
|
|
|
|
12,259,515
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
63,572
|
|
|
|
57,319
|
|
|
|
1,163,877
|
|
Write-off of intangibles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,909,224
|
|
Amortization of convertible note discount
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,000,000
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,227,869
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
785,171
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,147,048
|
|
(Increase) decrease in operating assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
88,881
|
|
|
|
(378,455
|
)
|
|
|
(1,459,643
|
)
|
Security deposit
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7,187
|
|
|
|
(5,171
|
)
|
Increase (decrease) in operating liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
337,653
|
|
|
|
389,565
|
|
|
|
932,167
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
21,281
|
|
|
|
430,235
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(636,454
|
)
|
|
|
(1,090,238
|
)
|
|
|
(37,658,844
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patent costs
|
|
|
(145,717
|
)
|
|
|
(128,839
|
)
|
|
|
(6,370,429
|
)
|
Purchase of equipment, furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
(1,281
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(185,947
|
)
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
|
|
(146,998
|
)
|
|
|
(128,839
|
)
|
|
|
(6,556,376
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from grant
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
99,728
|
|
Proceeds from draw-down on line of credit
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,199,108
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of bridge notes
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
525,000
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock and warrants, net
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,754,841
|
|
Redemption of convertible notes and warrants
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2,160,986
|
)
|
Proceeds from issuance of convertible notes
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,340,000
|
|
Deferred financing costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(651,781
|
)
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warrants, net and exercise of warrants and options
|
|
|
94,183
|
|
|
|
451,097
|
|
|
|
25,421,366
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
94,183
|
|
|
|
451,097
|
|
|
|
45,527,276
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(689,269
|
)
|
|
|
(767,980
|
)
|
|
|
1,312,056
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
2,001,325
|
|
|
|
3,609,954
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
1,312,056
|
|
|
$
|
2,841,974
|
|
|
$
|
1,312,056
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of convertible note into common stock
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
10,000,000
|
|
Conversion of bridge notes into common stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
534,316
|
|
Conversion of preferred stock into common stock
|
|
|
137,810
|
|
|
|
1,555
|
|
|
|
356,924
|
|
Allocation of preferred stock proceeds to warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and beneficial conversion feature
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
8,526,135
|
|
Allocation of convertible debt proceeds to warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and beneficial conversion feature
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,340,000
|
|
Warrants issued for financing costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
690,984
|
|
Issuance of common stock for interest payments on
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
convertible notes
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,003,386
|
|
Issuance of common stock for dividend payments on
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
preferred stock
|
|
|
448,000
|
|
|
|
10,848
|
|
|
|
4,069,943
|
|
Issuance of common stock in settlement of accounts payable
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
Dividends accrued on preferred stock
|
|
|
(64,722
|
)
|
|
|
119,998
|
|
|
|
49,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest
|
|
|
34,990
|
|
|
|
33,310
|
|
|
|
406,673
|
|
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements
SENESCO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
(unaudited)
Note 1 - Basis of Presentation:
The financial statements
included herein have been prepared by Senesco Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”), without audit, pursuant to the rules
and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial
statements prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted pursuant
to such rules and regulations. These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the
audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2012, as amended.
In the opinion of the
Company’s management, the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, consisting
solely of those which are of a normal recurring nature, necessary to present fairly its financial position as of September 30,
2012, the results of its operations and cash flows for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.
Interim results are not
necessarily indicative of results for the full fiscal year.
Note 2 – Liquidity:
As shown in the accompanying condensed
consolidated financial statements, the Company has a history of losses with a deficit accumulated during the development stage
from July 1, 1998 (inception) through September 30, 2012 of $70,149,918. Additionally,
the Company has
generated minimal revenues by licensing its technology for certain crops to companies willing to share in its development costs.
In addition, the Company’s technology may not be ready for commercialization for several years. The Company expects to continue
to incur losses for the next several years because it anticipates that its expenditures on research and development and administrative
activities will significantly exceed its revenues during that period. The Company cannot predict when, if ever, it will become
profitable.
As of September 30, 2012, the Company
had cash and cash equivalents in the amount of $1,312,056, which consisted of checking accounts and money market funds. The
Company estimates that its cash and cash equivalents as of September 30, 2012 will cover its expenses through December 2012.
The Company has the ability to draw down on its unused line of credit and delay certain costs, if necessary, which will
provide the Company with enough cash to fund its operations at least through March 31, 2013. In order to provide the Company
with the cash resources necessary to fund operations through at least September 30, 2013, the Company plans on raising
additional capital through a private or public placement of its Common Stock in the near future.
The Company will need additional capital
and plans to raise additional capital through the placement of debt instruments or equity or both. However, the Company may not
be able to obtain adequate funds for its operations when needed or on acceptable terms.
If the Company
is unable to raise additional funds, it will need to do one or more of the following:
|
·
|
delay, scale-back or eliminate some or all of its research and product development programs;
|
|
·
|
license third parties to develop and commercialize products or technologies that it would otherwise
seek to develop and commercialize itself;
|
|
·
|
seek strategic alliances or business combinations;
|
|
·
|
attempt to sell the Company;
|
Note 3 – Intangible Assets:
The Company conducts research
and development activities, the cost of which is expensed as incurred, in order to generate patents that can be licensed to third
parties in exchange for license fees and royalties. Because the patents are the basis of the Company’s future revenue, the
patent costs are capitalized. The capitalized patent costs represent the outside legal fees incurred by the Company to submit and
undertake all necessary efforts to have such patent applications issued as patents.
The length of time that it takes
for an initial patent application to be approved is generally between four to six years. However, due to the unique nature of each
patent application, the actual length of time may vary. If a patent application is denied, the associated cost of that application
would be written off. However, the Company has not had any patent applications denied as of September 30, 2012. Additionally, should
a patent application become impaired during the application process, the Company would write down or write off the associated cost
of that patent application.
Issued patents and agricultural
patent applications pending are being amortized over a period of 17 years from inception, the expected economic life of the patent.
The Company assesses the impairment
in value of intangible assets whenever events or circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors
the Company considers important which could trigger an impairment review include the following:
• significant negative
industry trends;
• significant underutilization
of the assets;
• significant changes
in how the Company uses the assets or its plans for their use; and
• changes in technology
and the appearance of competing technology.
If a triggering event occurs and the Company's
review determines that the future undiscounted cash flows related to the groups, including these assets, will not be sufficient
to recover their carrying value, the Company will reduce the carrying values of these assets down to its estimate of fair value
and continue amortizing them over their remaining useful lives. To date, except for certain patents and patents pending that the
Company abandoned during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, the Company has not recorded any impairment of intangible
assets.
Note 4 - Loss Per Share:
Basic earnings (loss) per share is computed
by dividing net income (loss) available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares assumed to be outstanding
during the period of computation. Diluted earnings per share is computed similar to basic earnings per share except that the denominator
is increased to include the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if the potential common shares
had been issued and if the additional common shares were dilutive.
For all periods presented, basic and diluted
loss per share are the same, as any additional Common Stock equivalents would be anti-dilutive. Potentially dilutive shares of
Common Stock have been excluded from the calculation of the weighted average number of dilutive common shares.
As of September 30, 2012, there were 59,571,479
additional potentially dilutive shares of Common Stock. These additional shares include 3,826,923 shares issuable upon conversion
of the Preferred Stock, and 55,744,556 shares issuable upon the exercise of outstanding options and warrants. As of September 30,
2011, there were 88,806,984 additional potentially dilutive shares of Common Stock. These additional shares included 17,944,444
shares issuable upon conversion of Preferred Stock and 70,862,540 shares issuable upon the exercise of outstanding options and
warrants.
Note 5 – Stock-Based Transactions:
The terms and vesting schedules for share-based
awards vary by type of grant and the employment status of the grantee. Generally, the awards vest based upon time-based conditions
or achievement of specified goals and milestones.
The fair value of each stock
option and warrant granted or vesting has been determined using the Black-Scholes model. The material factors incorporated in the
Black-Scholes model in estimating the value of the options and warrants granted during the three months ended September 30, 2012
and 2011 include the following:
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants granted
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
4,213,000
|
|
Estimated life in years (1)
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
3.0-10.0
|
|
Risk-free interest rate (2)
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
1.0%-1.9%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
102-105%
|
|
Dividend paid
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
(1)
|
Expected life for employee based stock options was estimated using the “simplified” method, as allowed under the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No.110.
|
|
(2)
|
Represents the interest rate on a U.S. Treasury security with a maturity date corresponding to that of the option or warrant term.
|
The economic values of the options will
depend on the future price of the Company's Common Stock, which cannot be forecast with reasonable accuracy.
Stock option activity under the Company’s
2008 Plan and 1998 Plan for the three months ended September 30, 2012 is summarized as follows:
|
|
Number of Options
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
|
Outstanding at July 1, 2012
|
|
|
15,647,742
|
|
|
$
|
0.50
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Outstanding at September 30, 2012
|
|
|
15,647,742
|
|
|
$
|
0.50
|
|
Exercisable at September 30, 2012
|
|
|
11,777,429
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
Not Exercisable at September 30, 2012
|
|
|
3,870,313
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
There were no options granted during the
three months ended September 30, 2012. The weighted average grant date fair value of options granted during the three months ended
September 30, 2011 was $0.18.
As of September 30, 2012, the aggregate
intrinsic value of stock options outstanding was $6,473, with a weighted-average remaining term of 7.3 years. The aggregate intrinsic
value of stock options exercisable at that same date was $6,473, with a weighted-average remaining term of 6.7 years. As of September
30, 2012, the Company has 11,588,876 shares available for future stock option grants.
Stock-based
compensation expense for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 amounted to $
153,391
and $123,551, respectively.
As of September
30, 2012
, total stock-based compensation expense not yet recognized related to stock option grants amounted to approximately
$864,000
,
which will be recognized over the next 36 months.
Note 6 –Line of Credit:
On February 17, 2010, the Company entered
into a credit agreement with JMP Securities LLC. The agreement provides the Company with, subject to certain restrictions, including
the existence of suitable collateral, up to a $3.0 million line of credit upon which the Company may draw at any time (the “Line
of Credit”). Any draws upon the Line of Credit accrue at an annual interest rate of (i) the broker rate in effect at the
interest date (which was 3.75% at September 30, 2012), plus (ii) 2.0%. There are no other conditions or fees associated with the
Line of Credit. The Line of Credit is not secured by any assets of the Company, but it is secured by certain assets of a member
of the Company’s Board of Directors, Harlan W. Waksal, M.D., which is currently held by JMP Securities. The balance outstanding
as of September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012 was $2,199,108. In April 2011, we were required to enter into a new demand note with
the clearing agent for JMP Securities in connection with the Line of Credit.
Total interest expense recorded under the
Line of Credit for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 amounted to $34,990 and $33,310, respectively.
Note 7 – Income Taxes:
No provision for income taxes has been
made for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 given the Company’s losses in 2012 and 2011 and available net
operating loss carryforwards. A benefit has not been recorded as the realization of the net operating losses is not assured and
the timing in which the Company can utilize its net operating loss carryforwards in any year or in total may be limited by provisions
of the Internal Revenue Code regarding changes in ownership of corporations.
Note 8 - Fair Value Measurements:
The following tables provide the assets and liabilities carried
at fair value measured on a recurring basis as of September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012:
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurement at
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
September 30, 2012
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,312,056
|
|
|
$
|
1,312,056
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrant Liabilities
|
|
$
|
94,739
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
94,739
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurement at
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
June 30, 2012
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
2,001,325
|
|
|
$
|
2,001,325
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrant Liabilities
|
|
$
|
238,796
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
238,796
|
|
The following table summarizes the changes
in fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial instruments:
|
|
Three months ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
Beginning Balance
|
|
$
|
238,796
|
|
|
$
|
711,259
|
|
Reclassification of warrant liabilities
|
|
|
(164,205
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
Loss (gain) due to change in fair value of warrant
liabilities, net
|
|
|
20,148
|
|
|
|
(271,703
|
)
|
Ending Balance
|
|
$
|
94,739
|
|
|
$
|
439,556
|
|
Note 9 – Warrant Liabilities:
The warrant liabilities represent the fair
value of Common Stock purchase warrants, which have exercise price reset features and cash settlement features.
The fair value of the warrants that have
exercise price reset features is estimated using an adjusted Black-Scholes model. The Company computes valuations, each quarter,
using the Black-Scholes model for such warrants to account for the various possibilities that could occur due to changes in the
inputs to the Black-Scholes model as a result of contractually-obligated changes. The Company effectively weights each calculation
based on the likelihood of occurrence to determine the value of the derivative at the reporting date. The Company has an unobservable
input for the estimation of the likelihood of a reset occurring, which was estimated to be 75% made up of various reset amounts
with probabilities ranging between 10% and 25% per occurrence. These estimates of the likelihood of completing an equity raise
that would meet the criteria to trigger the reset provisions are based on numerous factors, including the remaining term of the
financial instruments and the Company’s overall financial condition.
The fair value of the warrants that have
cash settlement features is estimated using a probability –weighted Black-Scholes model. The unobservable input used by the
Company on certain warrants was the estimation of the likelihood of a fundamental transaction, as defined in the related agreements,
which was estimated to be 15% at September 30, 2012.
Changes in the unobservable input values
would likely cause material changes in the fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial instruments. The significant unobservable
input used in the fair value measurement is the estimation of the likelihood of the occurrence of a change to the strike price
of the warrants or the occurrence of a fundamental transaction. A significant increase (decrease) in the this likelihood would
result in a higher (lower) fair value measurement.
During the three months ended
September 30, 2012, the Company issued 3,390,625 shares of common stock in exchange for 9,687,500 warrants that were included
in the computation of warrant liabilities. In connection with this exchange, the Company compared the value of the common
stock issued with the Black-Scholes value of the warrants exchanged. The difference in these values resulted in a loss on the
extinguishment of debt in the amount of $785,171. Additionally, the value of the warrants on the date of the exchange, in the
amount of $164,205, were reclassified from warrant liabilities to additional paid in capital.
At ended September 30, 2012 and 2011,
the Company revalued all of the remaining warrant liabilities, using the adjusted Black-Scholes and Black-Scholes models. A
(loss) gain on the change in fair value of the warrant liabilities in the amount of $(20,148)
and
$271,703 was recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and
2011, respectively.
At September 30, 2012 and 2011, there were
an aggregate of 11,620,314 and 21,307,814 warrants included in the fair value of the warrant liabilities, which are valued at $94,739
and $439,556, respectively.
The assumptions used to value the warrants
were as follows:
|
|
September 30, 2012
|
|
|
June 30, 2012
|
|
Warrants issued on December 20, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated life in years
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.50
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
(1)
|
|
|
0.09%
|
|
|
|
0.15%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
72%
|
|
|
|
75%
|
|
Dividend paid
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
Range of estimated strike prices
|
|
|
$0.32-$0.35
|
|
|
|
$0.33-$0.36
|
|
Range of estimated probabilities
|
|
|
10% - 50%
|
|
|
|
10% - 50%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants issued on June 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated life in years
|
|
|
0.75
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
Risk-free interest rate (1)
|
|
|
0.15%
|
|
|
|
0.21%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
72%
|
|
|
|
75%
|
|
Dividend paid
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
Range of estimated strike prices
|
|
|
$0.32-$0.35
|
|
|
|
$0.33-$0.36
|
|
Range of estimated probabilities
|
|
|
10% - 50%
|
|
|
|
10% - 50%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants issued on April 1, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated life in years
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
2.75
|
|
Risk-free interest rate (1)
|
|
|
0.30%
|
|
|
|
0.39%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
75%
|
|
|
|
78%
|
|
Dividend paid
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
Estimated probability of a fundamental transaction
|
|
|
15%
|
|
|
|
15%
|
|
|
(1)
|
Represents the interest rate on a U.S. Treasury security with a maturity date corresponding to
that of the warrant term.
|
Note 10- At Market Issuance Sales Agreement
On December 22, 2010, the Company
entered into an At Market Issuance Sales Agreement (the “ATM”) under which the Company, from time to time, was
able to issue and sell shares of its Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share, with an aggregate offering price of up to
$5,500,000.
During the three months ended September
30, 2012, the Company issued 353,895 shares of Common Stock under the ATM for gross proceeds in the amount of $100,570. From the
inception of the ATM through September 30, 2012, the Company has issued 8,099,909 shares of Common Stock under the ATM for gross
proceeds in the amount of $2,463,661.
As the Company expects that it will no
longer be listed on the NYSE MKT exchange, the Company will no longer be able to issue and sell shares of its Common Stock under
the ATM after the Company is delisted.
Note 11 –Preferred Stock
During the three months ended September
30, 2012, 3,584 shares of Preferred Stock were converted into 13,784,615 shares of Common Stock. During the three months ended
September 30, 2012, the Company issued an additional 1,600,000 shares of Common Stock for the payment of dividends in the amount
of $448,000. Total dividends payable on the outstanding 995 shares of Preferred Stock at September 30, 2012 amounted to $49,752.
On August 8, 2012, the Company completed
an exchange (the “Exchange”) of certain five-year warrants issued by the Company in 2010 (the “Warrants”)
to purchase 17,262,500 shares of Common Stock (the “Warrant Shares”) for 6,902,192 shares of Common Stock, and 2,384
shares of the Company’s 10% Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Series A Preferred
Stock”) were converted into 9,169,231 shares of Common Stock, pursuant to warrant exchange agreements (the “Warrant
Exchange Agreements”) by and between the Company and certain holders of the Warrants (the “Warrant Holders”).
Following the Exchange, Warrants to purchase 19,745,313 Warrant Shares and 995 shares of Series A Preferred Stock remain outstanding.
Pursuant to the terms of the Warrant Exchange
Agreements, the Company and each Warrant Holder agreed to exchange the Warrant held by such Warrant Holder for a number of shares
of Common Stock equal to the product of (i) the number of Warrant Shares underlying the Warrant, multiplied by (ii) 0.35; provided,
that if such Warrant Holder also owned shares of the Company’s Series A Preferred Stock, such Warrant Holder additionally
converted such shares of Series A Preferred Stock into the number of shares of Common Stock as determined pursuant to the terms
set forth in the Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of 10% Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
and the Company exchanged the Warrant held by such Warrant Holder for a number of shares of Common Stock equal to the product of
(i) the number of Warrant Shares underlying the Warrant, multiplied by (ii) 0.45.
Additionally, certain members of the Company’s
board of directors that owned shares of the Company’s 10% Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share
(the “Series B Preferred Stock”), agreed to convert 1,200 shares of Series B Preferred Stock into 4,615,385 shares
of Common Stock, as determined pursuant to the terms set forth in the Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations
of 10% Series B Convertible Preferred Stock. Such conversions were not made pursuant to Warrant Exchange Agreements and therefore
such directors did not receive any additional Common Stock. Following this conversion, no shares of Series B Preferred Stock remain
outstanding.
In connection with the warrant exchange,
a beneficial dividend in the amount of $240,891 was recorded on the conversion of the Convertible Preferred Stock.
Note 12 – Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In July 2012, the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2012-02, “Intangibles-Goodwill
and Other (Topic 350): Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment” (“ASU 2012-02”). This
ASU states that an entity has the option first to assess qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events and circumstances
indicates that it is more likely than not that the indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired. If, after assessing the totality
of events and circumstances, an entity concludes that it is not more likely than not that the indefinite-lived intangible asset
is impaired, then the entity is not required to take further action. However, if an entity concludes otherwise, then it is required
to determine the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset and perform the quantitative impairment test by comparing
the fair value with the carrying amount in accordance with Codification Subtopic 350-30, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other, General
Intangibles Other than Goodwill. Under the guidance in this ASU, an entity also has the option to bypass the qualitative assessment
for any indefinite-lived intangible asset in any period and proceed directly to performing the quantitative impairment test. An
entity will be able to resume performing the qualitative assessment in any subsequent period. The amendments in this ASU are effective
for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted,
including for annual and interim impairment tests performed as of a date before July 27, 2012, if a public entity’s financial
statements for the most recent annual or interim period have not yet been issued or, for nonpublic entities, have not yet been
made available for issuance. The Company is evaluating the impact of this ASU and does not expect its adoption to have a significant
impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In June 2011, the FASB issued FASB ASU
No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income in U.S. GAAP and IFRS. This ASU provides companies
the option to present the components of net income and other comprehensive income either as one continuous statement of comprehensive
income or as two separate but consecutive statements. It eliminates the option to present components of other comprehensive income
as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The provisions of this new guidance are effective for fiscal
years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. We adopted this disclosure standard in the first
quarter of fiscal 2013 and it did not have a material impact on our results of operations.
Other recent accounting pronouncements
issued by the FASB (including its Emerging Issues Task Force) and the SEC did not or are not believed by management to have a material
impact on our present or future financial statements.
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion and analysis should
be read in conjunction with our condensed consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto included in this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q. The discussion and analysis may contain forward-looking statements that are based upon current expectations
and entail various risks and uncertainties. Our actual results and the timing of events could differ materially from those anticipated
in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and
elsewhere in this report.
Overview
Our Business
The primary business
of Senesco Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation incorporated in 1999, and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Senesco, Inc., a New
Jersey corporation incorporated in 1998, collectively referred to as “Senesco,” “we,” “us”
or “our,” is to utilize our patented and patent-pending technology related to certain genes, primarily eukaryotic translation
initiation Factor 5A, or Factor 5A, and deoxyhypusine synthase, or DHS, and related technologies for human therapeutic applications
to develop novel approaches to treat cancer and inflammatory diseases.
For agricultural applications,
we have licensed applications of the Factor 5A, DHS and Lipase platforms to enhance the quality, productivity and stress resistance
of fruits, flowers, vegetables, agronomic and biofuel feedstock crops through the control of cell death, referred to herein as
senescence, and growth in plants.
Human Therapeutic
Applications
We believe that our Factor
5A gene regulatory technology could have broad applicability in the human therapeutic field, by either inducing or inhibiting programmed
cell death, also known as apoptosis, which is the natural process the human body goes through in order to eliminate redundant or
defective cells. Inducing apoptosis is useful in treating cancer where the defective cancer cells have failed to respond to the
body’s natural apoptotic signals. Conversely, inhibiting apoptosis may be useful in preventing, ameliorating or treating
an exaggerated, acute immune response in a wide range of inflammatory and ischemic diseases attributable to or aggravated by premature
apoptosis.
SNS01-T for Multiple
Myeloma
We have developed a therapeutic candidate,
SNS01-T, an improved formulation of SNS01, for the potential treatment of multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin B-cell lymplomas. SNS01-T
utilizes our Factor 5A technology and comprises two active components: a DNA plasmid, or pDNA, expressing human eIF5A containing
a lysine to arginine substitution at amino acid position 50, or eIF5A
K50R,
and a small inhibitory
RNA, or siRNA. These two components are combined in a fixed ratio with a polymer, polyethyleneimine, or PEI, which enables self-assembly
of the DNA and RNA into nanoparticles with demonstrated enhanced delivery to tissues and protection from degradation in the blood
stream. Under the control of a B cell selective promoter, SNS01-T’s DNA plasmid up-regulates the apoptotic pathways within
cancer cells by preferentially expressing the stable arginine form of the Factor 5A death message in target cells. The siRNA, by
silencing the eIF5A gene, reduces expression of the hypusine form of Factor 5A that supports cell survival and proliferation. The
silencing of the eIF5A gene by an eIF5A siRNA also down-regulates anti-apoptotic proteins, such as NFkB, ICAM and pro-inflammatory
cytokines, which protect malignant cells from apoptosis and promote cell growth in multiple myeloma. The PEI, a cationic polymer,
promotes auto-assembly of a nanoparticle with the other two components for intravenous delivery and protects the combination from
degradation in the bloodstream until it is taken up by the tumor cell, where the siRNA and DNA plasmid are released.
We have performed efficacy, toxicological
and dose-finding studies
in vitro
in non-human and human cells and
in vivo
in mice with SNS01. Our efficacy studies
in severe combined immune-deficient, or SCID, mice with subcutaneous human multiple myeloma tumors tested SNS01 dose ranging from
0.15 mg/kg to 1.5 mg/kg. In these studies, mice treated with a dose of either 0.75 mg/kg or 1.5 mg/kg both showed, compared to
relevant controls, a 91% reduction in tumor volume and a decrease in tumor weight of 87% and 95%, respectively. For mice that received
smaller doses of either 0.38 mg/kg or 0.15 mg/kg, there was also a reduction in tumor volume of 73% and 61%, respectively, and
weight of 74% and 36%, respectively. All SNS01 treated mice survived. This therapeutic dose range study provided the basis for
a non-good laboratory practices, or GLP, 8-day maximum tolerated dose study in which normal mice received two intravenous doses
of increasing amounts of SNS01 (from 2.2 mg/kg). Body weight, organ weight and serum levels of liver enzymes were used as clinical
indices to assess toxicity. A dose between 2.2 mg/kg and 2.9 mg/kg was well tolerated with respect to these clinical indices, and
the survival rate at 2.9 mg/kg was 80%. Mice receiving above 2.9 mg/kg of SNS01 showed evidence of morbidity and up to 80% mortality.
The 2.9 mg/kg threshold was therefore determined to be the maximum tolerated dose in mice in this study. We have also completed
our pivotal GLP toxicology studies in mice and dogs, employing SNS01-T, an improved formulation of SNS01, and have an open investigational
new drug application, or IND, with the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA. We have also been granted orphan drug
status for SNS01-T by the FDA for the potential treatment of multiple myeloma, mantle cell lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.
We are conducting a Phase 1b/2a clinical
study with SNS01-T in multiple myeloma, diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients. The clinical
study is an open-label, multiple-dose, dose-escalation study, which is evaluating the safety and tolerability of SNS01-T when
administered by intravenous infusion to relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients. The study design calls for four cohorts
of three to six patients each. Patients in each cohort will receive twice-weekly dosing for six weeks followed by up to a four-week
safety data review period before escalating to a higher dose level in the next cohort. While the primary objective of the initial
study is to evaluate safety and tolerability, the effect of SNS01-T on tumor response will also be evaluated using multiple, well-established
criteria including measurement of the monoclonal protein, or M-protein. We have selected Mayo Clinic, University of Arkansas for
Medical Sciences and the Randolph Cancer Center at West Virginia University as our clinical sites. The study is open and we have
completed our first cohort. The results of the first cohort showed that SNS01-T was safe and well tolerated and met the criteria
for Stable Disease in 2 of the 3 evaluable patients. We are now treating patients in the second cohort.
We have demonstrated in human multiple
myeloma cell lines that there may be an additional benefit to combining SNS01-T with other approved myeloma drugs, such as bortezomib
and lenalidomide. We have shown, in vitro, that these drugs are up to forty (40) times more effective in inhibiting cell growth
when used in combination with SNS01-T. These results further reinforce the significance of our target and will guide us in designing
future clinical studies. We have demonstrated that
a high level of tumor eradication in a mouse model
of human multiple myeloma was achieved with a combination of SNS01-T and lenalidomide. While SNS01-T alone performed well by completely
eliminating tumors in 40% of the animals, complete tumor eradication was achieved in five out of six or 83% of the treated animals
that received SNS01-T combined with the optimal study dose of lenalidomide. This effect lasted throughout 6 weeks of observation
after the end of treatment. Neither dose of lenalidomide used alone eliminated tumors in any of the treated mice. Most recently,
we have demonstrated the benefits of combining SNS01-T with bortezomib. In a mouse model of human multiple myeloma, SNS01-T as
a monotherapy achieved 59% tumor growth inhibition, which exceeded that of bortezomib alone at either the 0.2 mg/kg dose (22% inhibition)
or at the 0.5 mg/kg dose (39% inhibition). However, the combination of SNS01-T with 0.5 mg/kg of bortezomib resulted in 89% tumor
inhibition, which was significantly more effective than either SNS01-T or bortezomib alone.
SNS01-T for other
B-cell cancers
We have demonstrated in mice that we can
inhibit the growth of both human mantle cell and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in a dose-dependent manner.
We have also demonstrated that the
combination of lenalidomide and SNS01-T performs better than either treatment alone in mouse xenograft models of human mantle
cell lymphoma. When SCID mice, implanted with an aggressive human mantle cell lymphoma cell line (JVM2), were treated with
either 15 mg/kg lenalidomide (5 times weekly by intra-peritoneal injection) or 0.375 mg/kg SNS01-T (twice weekly by
intravenous injection) there was a growth delay of 4 days and 14 days, respectively. Mice treated with a combination of both
drugs using the same dose levels and dosing regimens
exhibited a tumor growth delay of 27 days (p
value = 0.0008).
The median survival of mice treated with
control nanoparticles was 21 days. Mice treated with lenalidomide or SNS01-T had a median survival of 28 days (33 % increase) and
37 days (76 % increase), respectively. Mice treated with the drug combination had a median survival of 52 days, an increase in
survival of 148 %. Survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier method revealed that treatment of mice with the drug combination resulted
in statistically significant increases in survival compared to both SNS01-T (p value = 0.002) and lenalidomide (p value = 0.007)
alone. We believe that the results of these studies not only support moving forward in multiple myeloma, but also support extending
our clinical evaluation of SNS01-T in other B-cell cancers.
We may consider other human diseases in
order to determine the role of Factor 5A and SNS01-T.
We may further expand our research and
development program beyond the initiatives listed above to include other diseases and research centers.
Agricultural Applications
Our agricultural research
focuses on the discovery and development of certain gene technologies, which are designed to confer positive traits on fruits,
flowers, vegetables, forestry species and agronomic crops.
We have licensed this
technology to various strategic partners. We may continue to license this technology, as opportunities present themselves, to additional
strategic partners and/or enter into joint collaborations or ventures.
Our ongoing research
and development initiatives for agriculture include assisting our license partners to:
|
·
|
further develop and implement the DHS and Factor 5A gene technology in banana, canola, cotton,
turfgrass, rice, alfalfa, corn, soybean and trees; and
|
|
·
|
test the resultant crops for new beneficial traits such as increased yield, increased tolerance
to environmental stress, disease resistance and more efficient use of fertilizer.
|
Agricultural Development
and License Agreements
As of September 30, 2012,
we have nine (9) active license agreements with established agricultural biotechnology companies.
Intellectual Property
|
|
We have twenty-seven (27) issued patents from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or
PTO, and sixty-six (66) issued patents from foreign countries. Of our ninety-three (93) domestic and foreign issued patents, fifty-six
(56) are for the use of our technology in agricultural applications and thirty-seven (37) relate to human therapeutics applications.
|
In addition to our ninety-three (93) patents,
we have a wide variety of patent applications, including divisional applications and continuations
-in-part,
in process with the PTO and internationally. We intend to continue our strategy of enhancing these new patent applications through
the addition of data as it is collected.
Our agricultural patents are generally
set to expire in 2019 in the United States and 2025 outside the United States. Our core human therapeutic technology patents are
set to expire in 2021 in the United States and 2025 outside the United States, and our patents related to multiple myeloma are
set to expire, both in and outside the United States in 2029.
During our 2012 and 2011 fiscal years,
we reviewed our patent portfolio in order to determine if we could reduce our cost of patent prosecution and maintenance. We identified
several patents and patents pending that we believe we no longer need to maintain without having a material impact on the portfolio.
We determined that we would no longer incur the cost to prosecute or maintain those patents or patents pending.
Liquidity and Capital
Resources
Overview
For the three
months ended September 30, 2012, net cash of $636,454 was used in operating activities primarily due to a net loss of $2,085,454,
which was reduced by non-cash expenses, of $1,022,453. Cash used in operating activities was also reduced
by changes in operating assets and liabilities in the amount of $426,547.
The $426,547 change in operating assets
and liabilities was primarily the result of a decrease in prepaid expenses in the amount of $88,881 and an increase in accounts
payable and accrued expenses in the amount of $337,666.
During the three
months ended September 30, 2012, cash used for investing activities amounted
to $146,998,
which
was primarily related to patent costs incurred.
Cash provided by financing activities during
the three months ended September 30, 2012 amounted to $94,183 related to the placement of common stock through our $5,500,000 ATM
facility.
As of September 30, 2012, our cash balance
totaled $1,312,056, and we had working capital deficit of $664,562.
We expect our capital
requirements to increase significantly over the next several years as we commence new research and development efforts, increase
our business and administrative infrastructure and embark on developing in-house business capabilities and facilities. Our future
liquidity and capital funding requirements will depend on numerous factors, including, but not limited to, the levels and costs
of our research and development initiatives and the cost and timing of the expansion of our business development and administrative
staff.
We anticipate that, based upon our cash
balance as of September 30, 2012, we
will be able to fund our operations
through December 31,
2012.
However, we have the ability to utilize our unused line of credit and, if necessary, delay certain
costs. Over such period, we plan to fund our research and development and commercialization activities by:
|
·
|
utilizing our current cash balance and investments;
|
|
·
|
the placement of additional equity or debt instruments;
|
|
·
|
achieving some of the milestones set forth in our current licensing
agreements; and
|
|
·
|
the possible execution of additional licensing agreements for our technology.
|
We cannot assure you that we will be able
to raise money through any of the foregoing transactions on favorable terms, if at all.
Changes to Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
There
have been no changes to our critical accounting policies and estimates as set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2012, as amended.
Results of Operations
Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 and
Three Months Ended September 30, 2011
The net loss for the three months
ended September 30, 2012 was $2,085,454. The net loss for the three months ended September 30, 2011 was $1,038,983. Such a
change represents an increase in net loss of $1,046,471,
or 100.7%. This increase in net loss was the result of an
increase in non-operating expenses and general and administrative expenses, which was partially offset by a decrease in
research and development costs.
Revenue
There was no revenue during the three months
ended September 30, 2012 and September 30, 2011.
We anticipate that we will receive future
milestone payments in connection with our current agricultural development and license agreements. Additionally, we may receive
future royalty payments from our license agreements when our partners commercialize their crops containing our technology. However,
it is difficult for us to determine our future revenue expectations because our future milestone payments are primarily contingent
on our partners successful implementation of their development plan, we have no history of receiving royalties and the timing and
outcome of our experiments, the timing of signing new partner agreements and the timing of our partners moving through the development
process into commercialization is difficult to accurately predict.
General and Administrative
Expenses
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands, except % values)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payroll and benefits
|
|
$
|
141
|
|
|
$
|
137
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
Investor relations
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(13.0
|
)%
|
Professional fees
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
40.6
|
%
|
Director fees
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
28.0
|
%
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
12.3
|
%
|
Other general and administrative
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)%
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
604
129
|
|
|
|
530
116
|
|
|
|
74
13
|
|
|
|
14.0
11.2
|
%
%
|
Total general and administrative
|
|
$
|
733
|
|
|
$
|
646
|
|
|
$
|
87
|
|
|
|
13.5
|
%
|
|
·
|
Payroll and benefits for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was higher than for the three
months ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of salary increases.
|
|
·
|
Investor relations fees for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was lower than for the three
months ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of a reduction in investor relations consulting costs
|
|
·
|
Professional fees for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was higher than for the three months
ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of an increase in legal fees. Legal fees increased primarily due to fees incurred
in connection with the exploration of additional technologies and financing options during the three months ended September 30,
2012 which were not incurred during the three months ended September 30, 2011.
|
|
·
|
Director fees for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was higher than for the three months
ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of more meetings being held during the three months ended September 30, 2012.
|
|
·
|
Depreciation and amortization for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was higher than for
the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of an increase in amortization of patent costs.
|
|
·
|
Other general and administrative expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was lower
than for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to a decrease in office supplies and franchise taxes, which was
partially offset by an increase in consulting and travel costs.
|
|
·
|
Stock-based compensation for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was higher than for the
three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to the Black-Scholes value on a greater number of options vesting during the
three months ended September 30, 2012.
|
We expect cash-based general and administrative
expenses to remain relatively unchanged over the next twelve months.
Research and Development
Expenses
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands, except % values)
|
|
Payroll
|
|
$
|
42
|
|
|
$
|
40
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
Research contract with the University of Waterloo
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
152
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(5.3
|
)%
|
Other research and development
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
434
|
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
|
|
(30.4
|
)%
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
488
25
|
|
|
|
626
8
|
|
|
|
(138
17
|
)
|
|
|
(22.0
212.5
|
)%
%
|
Total research and development
|
|
$
|
513
|
|
|
$
|
634
|
|
|
$
|
(121
|
)
|
|
|
(27.9
|
)%
|
|
·
|
Payroll for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was higher than
for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of salary increases.
|
|
·
|
The cost associated with the research contract with the University of
Waterloo for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was lower than for the three months ended September 30 2011, primarily due
to a reduction in amount being funded for agricultural research.
|
|
·
|
Other research and development costs for the three months ended September
30, 2012 was lower than for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to a decrease in the costs in connection with
agricultural research programs and formulation studies, which was partially offset by an increase in costs associated with the
development of SNS01-T for multiple myeloma.
|
|
·
|
Stock-based compensation for the three months ended September 30, 2012
was higher than for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to the Black-Scholes value on a greater number of
options vesting during the three months ended September 30, 2012.
|
The breakdown of our research and development
expenses between our agricultural and human therapeutic research programs is as follows:
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands, except % values)
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
$
|
112
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
Human therapeutic
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
95
|
%
|
|
|
522
|
|
|
|
82
|
%
|
Total research and development
|
|
$
|
513
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
634
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
·
|
Agricultural research expenses for the three months ended September
30, 2012 was lower than for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to a reduction in the funding for agricultural
research at the University of Waterloo and the amendment to the Rahan Meristem agreement for the development of bananas. Effective
January 1, 2012, we amended the agreement whereby we no longer incur costs related to such development.
|
|
·
|
Human therapeutic research expenses for the three months ended September
30, 2012 was lower than for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of the timing of certain aspects of
the development of our drug candidate, SNS01-T, for treating multiple myeloma. Specifically, during the three months ended September
30, 2011, we incurred costs related to the formulation of SNS01-T, which we did not incur during the three months ended September
30, 2012.
|
We expect our human therapeutic research
program to increase as a percentage of the total research and development expenses as we continue our current research projects
and begin new human therapeutic initiatives, in particular as they relate to the clinical development of our drug candidate, SNS01-T,
for treating multiple myeloma and other cancers.
Other non-operating
income and expense
Fair value –
warrant liability
The amounts represent the change in the
fair value of the warrant liability for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.
Off Balance-Sheet
Arrangements
We do not have any off
balance-sheet arrangements.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures.
(a) Evaluation of disclosure controls
and procedures.
The principal executive officer and principal
financial officer have evaluated our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934) as of September 30, 2012. Based on this evaluation, they have concluded that our disclosure controls
and procedures were effective to ensure that the information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities
and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms, and to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that
we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal
executive and principal financial officers, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
(b) Changes in internal controls.
No change in our internal controls over
financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) occurred during the
three month period ended September 30, 2012 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
controls over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
.
Item 1. Legal Proceedings.
None
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
The more prominent risks and uncertainties
inherent in our business are described below. However, additional risks and uncertainties may also impair our business operations.
If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations may suffer.
Risks Related to Our Business
Recurring losses and negative cash
flows from operations raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern and we may not be able to continue
as a going concern.
Our recurring losses from operations and
negative cash flows from operations raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern and as a result, our
independent registered public accounting firm included an explanatory paragraph in its report on our consolidated financial statements
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012 and our unaudited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal quarter ended September
30, 2012 with respect to this uncertainty. Substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern may create negative
reactions to the price of the common shares of our stock and we may have a more difficult time obtaining financing.
We have prepared our financial statements
on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities and commitments in the
normal course of business. The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification
of recorded asset amounts or amounts of liabilities that might be necessary should we be unable to continue in existence.
We have a limited operating history
and have incurred substantial losses and expect to incur future losses
.
We are a development
stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history and limited assets and capital. We have incurred losses each year
since inception and had an accumulated deficit
of $70,149,918 at
September 30, 2012. We have
generated minimal revenues by licensing our technology for certain crops to companies willing to share in our development costs.
In addition, our technology may not be ready for commercialization for several years. We expect to continue to incur losses for
the next several years because we anticipate that our expenditures on research and development and administrative activities will
significantly exceed our revenues during that period. We cannot predict when, if ever, we will become profitable.
We will need additional capital to
fund our operations until we are able to generate a profit.
Our operations to date have required significant
cash expenditures. Our future capital requirements will depend on the results of our research and development activities, preclinical
and clinical studies, and competitive and technological advances.
We will need to obtain more funding in
the future through collaborations or other arrangements with research institutions and corporate partners, or public and private
offerings of our securities, including debt or equity financing. We may not be able to obtain adequate funds for our operations
from these sources when needed or on acceptable terms. Future collaborations or similar arrangements may require us to license
valuable intellectual property to, or to share substantial economic benefits with, our collaborators. If we raise additional capital
by issuing additional equity or securities convertible into equity, our stockholders may experience dilution and our share price
may decline. Any debt financing may result in restrictions on our spending.
If we are unable to raise additional funds,
we will need to do one or more of the following:
|
·
|
delay, scale-back or eliminate some or all of our research and product
development programs;
|
|
·
|
provide licenses to third parties to develop and commercialize products
or technologies that we would otherwise seek to develop and commercialize ourselves;
|
|
·
|
seek strategic alliances or business combinations;
|
|
·
|
attempt to sell our company;
|
We believe that
at the projected rate of spending we should have sufficient cash to maintain our present operations
through December 2012.
However, we have the ability to utilize our unused line of credit and, if necessary, delay certain costs which would provide us
with sufficient cash to maintain our present operations through March 2013.
We may be adversely affected by the
current economic environment.
Our ability to obtain financing, invest
in and grow our business, and meet our financial obligations depends on our operating and financial performance, which in turn
is subject to numerous factors. In addition to factors specific to our business, prevailing economic conditions and financial,
business and other factors beyond our control can also affect our business and ability to raise capital. We cannot anticipate all
of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.
Materials necessary
to manufacture some of our compounds currently under development may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all,
which may delay our development and commercialization of these compounds.
Some of the materials necessary for the
manufacture of our compounds under development may, from time to time, be available either in limited quantities, or from a limited
number of manufacturers, or both. Our contract manufacturers need to obtain these materials for our clinical trials and, potentially,
for commercial distribution when and if we obtain marketing approval for these compounds. Suppliers may not sell us these materials
at the time we need them or on commercially reasonable terms. If we are unable to obtain the materials needed to conduct our clinical
trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval could be delayed, adversely affecting our ability to develop the product
candidates. Similarly, if we are unable to obtain critical manufacturing materials after regulatory approval has been obtained
for a product candidate, the commercial launch of that product candidate could be delayed or there could be a shortage in supply,
which could materially affect our ability to generate revenues from that product candidate. If suppliers increase the price of
manufacturing materials, the price for one or more of our products may increase, which may make our products less competitive in
the marketplace. If it becomes necessary to change suppliers for any of these materials or if any of our suppliers experience a
shutdown or disruption at the facilities used to produce these materials, due to technical, regulatory or other reasons, it could
harm our ability to manufacture our products.
We depend on
a single principal technology and, if our technology is not commercially successful, we will have no alternative source of revenue
.
Our primary business is the development
and licensing of technology to identify, isolate, characterize and promote or silence genes which control the death of cells in
humans and plants. Our future revenue and profitability critically depend upon our ability, or our licensees’ ability, to
successfully develop apoptosis and senescence gene technology and later license or market such technology. We have conducted experiments
on certain crops with favorable results and have conducted certain preliminary cell-line and animal experiments, which have provided
us with data upon which we have designed additional research programs. However, we cannot give any assurance that our technology
will be commercially successful or economically viable for any crops or human therapeutic applications.
In addition, no assurance can be given
that adverse consequences might not result from the use of our technology such as the development of negative effects on humans
or plants or reduced benefits in terms of crop yield or protection. Our failure to obtain market acceptance of our technology or
the failure of our current or potential licensees to successfully commercialize such technology would have a material adverse effect
on our business.
We outsource
all of our research and development activities and, if we are unsuccessful in maintaining our alliances with these third parties,
our research and development efforts may be delayed or curtailed.
We rely on third
parties to perform all of our research and development activities. Our research and development efforts take place at the University
of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, where our technology was
discovered, at other commercial research facilities and with our
comme
rcial partners. At this time, we do not have the internal capabilities to perform our own research
and development activities. Accordingly, the failure of third party research partners to perform under agreements entered into
with us, or our failure to renew important research agreements with these third parties, may delay or curtail our research and
development efforts.
We have significant
future capital needs and may be unable to raise capital when needed, which could force us to delay or reduce our research and development
efforts.
As of September
30,
2012, we had a cash balance of $1,312,056 and a working capital deficit of $664,562. Using our available reserves as
of September 30, 2012, we believe that we can operate according to our current business plan through December 2012. However, we
have the ability to utilize our unused line of credit and, if necessary, delay certain costs, which would provide us with sufficient
cash to maintain our present operations through March 2013.
To date, we have generated minimal revenues
and anticipate that our operating costs will exceed any revenues generated over the next several years. Therefore, we will be required
to raise additional capital in the future in order to operate in accordance with our current business plan, and this funding may
not be available on favorable terms, if at all. If we are unable to raise additional funds, we will need to do one or more of the
following:
|
·
|
delay, scale back or eliminate some or all of our research and development
programs;
|
|
·
|
provide a license to third parties to develop and commercialize our
technology that we would otherwise seek to develop and commercialize ourselves;
|
|
·
|
seek strategic alliances or business combinations;
|
|
·
|
attempt to sell our company;
|
In addition,
in connection with any funding, if we need to issue more equity securities than our certificate of incorporation currently authorizes,
or more than 20% of the shares of our common stock outstanding, we may need stockholder approval. If stockholder approval is not
obtained or if adequate funds are not available, we may be required to curtail operations significantly or to obtain funds through
arrangements with collaborative partners or others that may require us to relinquish rights to certain of our technologies, product
candidates, products or potential markets. Investors may experience dilution in their investment from future offerings of our common
stock. For example, if we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, such an issuance would reduce the percentage ownership
of existing stockholders. In addition, assuming the exercise of all options and warrants outstanding and the conversion of the
preferred stock into common stock, as of September 30, 2012, we
had 154,447,092 shares
of common
stock authorized but unissued and unreserved, which may be issued from time to time by our board of directors. Furthermore, we
may need to issue securities that have rights, preferences and privileges senior to our common stock. Failure to obtain financing
on acceptable terms would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity.
Since our inception, we have financed all
of our operations through equity and debt financings. Our future capital requirements depend on numerous factors, including:
|
·
|
the scope of our research and development;
|
|
·
|
our ability to attract business partners willing to share in our development
costs;
|
|
·
|
our ability to successfully commercialize our technology;
|
|
·
|
competing technological and market developments;
|
|
·
|
our ability to enter into collaborative arrangements for the development,
regulatory approval and commercialization of other products; and
|
|
·
|
the cost of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing patent claims
and other intellectual property rights.
|
Our business
depends upon our patents and proprietary rights and the enforcement of these rights. Our failure to obtain and maintain patent
protection may increase competition and reduce demand for our technology.
As a result of the substantial length of
time and expense associated with developing products and bringing them to the marketplace in the biotechnology and agricultural
industries, obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection for technologies, products and processes is of vital importance.
Our success will depend in part on several factors, including, without limitation:
|
·
|
our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies and processes;
|
|
·
|
our ability to preserve our trade secrets; and
|
|
·
|
our ability to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of
other parties both in the United States and in foreign countries.
|
As of September 30, 2012, we have been
issued twenty-seven (27) patents by the PTO and sixty-six (66) patents from foreign countries
. We have
also filed numerous patent applications for our technology in the United States and in several foreign countries, which technology
is vital to our primary business, as well as several continuations in part on these patent applications. Our success depends in
part upon the grant of patents from our pending patent applications.
Although we believe that our technology
is unique and that it will not violate or infringe upon the proprietary rights of any third party, we cannot assure you that these
claims will not be made or if made, could be successfully defended against. If we do not obtain and maintain patent protection,
we may face increased competition in the United States and internationally, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
Since patent applications in the United
States are maintained in secrecy until patents are issued, and since publication of discoveries in the scientific and patent literature
tend to lag behind actual discoveries by several months, we cannot be certain that we were the first creator of the inventions
covered by our pending patent applications or that we were the first to file patent applications for these inventions.
In addition, among other things, we cannot
assure you that:
|
·
|
our patent applications will result in the issuance of patents;
|
|
·
|
any patents issued or licensed to us will be free from challenge and
if challenged, would be held to be valid;
|
|
·
|
any patents issued or licensed to us will provide commercially significant
protection for our technology, products and processes;
|
|
·
|
other companies will not independently develop substantially equivalent
proprietary information which is not covered by our patent rights;
|
|
·
|
other companies will not obtain access to our know-how;
|
|
·
|
other companies will not be granted patents that may prevent the commercialization
of our technology; or
|
|
·
|
we will not incur licensing fees and the payment of significant other
fees or royalties to third parties for the use of their intellectual property in order to enable us to conduct our business.
|
Our competitors
may allege that we are infringing upon their intellectual property rights, forcing us to incur substantial costs and expenses in
resulting litigation, the outcome of which would be uncertain.
Patent law is still evolving relative to
the scope and enforceability of claims in the fields in which we operate. We are like most biotechnology companies in that our
patent protection is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and technical questions for which legal principles are not yet
firmly established. In addition, if issued, our patents may not contain claims sufficiently broad to protect us against third parties
with similar technologies or products, or provide us with any competitive advantage.
The PTO and the courts have not established
a consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in biotechnology patents.
The allowance
of broader claims may increase the incidence and cost of patent interference proceedings and the risk of infringement litigation.
On the other hand, the allowance of narrower claims may limit the scope and value of our proprietary rights.
The laws of some foreign countries do not
protect proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and many companies have encountered significant
problems and costs in protecting their proprietary rights in these foreign countries.
We could become involved in infringement
actions to enforce and/or protect our patents. Regardless of the outcome, patent litigation is expensive and time consuming and
would distract our management from other activities. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent
litigation more effectively than we could because they have substantially greater resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation
and continuation of any patent litigation could limit our ability to continue our operations.
If our technology
infringes the intellectual property of our competitors or other third parties, we may be required to pay license fees or damages.
The current patent landscape surrounding
siRNA technology is unclear due to the recent proliferation of siRNA-related patent litigation and grants of third-party patents
encompassing this technology. If any relevant claims of third party patents that are adverse to us are upheld as valid and enforceable,
we could be prevented from commercializing our technology or could be required to obtain licenses from the owners of such patents.
We cannot assure you that such licenses would be available or, if available, would be on acceptable terms. Some licenses may be
non-exclusive and, therefore, our competitors may have access to the same technology licensed to us. In addition, if any parties
successfully claim that the creation or use of our technology infringes upon their intellectual property rights, we may be forced
to pay damages, including treble damages.
Our security
measures may not adequately protect our unpatented technology and, if we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary
information and know-how, the value of our technology may be adversely affected.
Our success depends upon know-how, unpatentable
trade secrets, and the skills, knowledge and experience of our scientific and technical personnel. As a result, all employees agreed
to a confidentiality provision in their employment agreement that prohibited the disclosure of confidential information to anyone
outside of our company, during the term of employment and for five (5) years thereafter. The employment agreements have since been
terminated, but the period of confidentiality is still in effect. We also require all employees to disclose and assign to us the
rights to their ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions. We also attempt to enter into similar agreements with our consultants,
advisors and research collaborators. We cannot assure you that adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary
information against unauthorized use or disclosure will be available.
We occasionally provide information to
research collaborators in academic institutions and request that the collaborators conduct certain tests. We cannot assure you
that the academic institutions will not assert intellectual property rights in the results of the tests conducted by the research
collaborators, or that the academic institutions will grant licenses under such intellectual property rights to us on acceptable
terms, if at all. If the assertion of intellectual property rights by an academic institution is substantiated, and the academic
institution does not grant intellectual property rights to us, these events could limit our ability to commercialize our technology.
As we evolve
from a company primarily involved in the research and development of our technology into one that is also involved in the commercialization
of our technology, we may have difficulty managing our growth and expanding our operations.
As our business grows, we may need to add
employees and enhance our management, systems and procedures. We may need to successfully integrate our internal operations with
the operations of our marketing partners, manufacturers, distributors and suppliers to produce and market commercially viable products.
We may also need to manage additional relationships with various collaborative partners, suppliers and other organizations. Although
we do not presently conduct research and development activities in-house, we may undertake those activities in the future. Expanding
our business may place a significant burden on our management and operations. We may not be able to implement improvements to our
management information and control systems in an efficient and timely manner and we may discover deficiencies in our existing systems
and controls. Our failure to effectively respond to such changes may make it difficult for us to manage our growth and expand our
operations.
We have no marketing
or sales history and depend on third party marketing partners. Any failure of these parties to perform would delay or limit our
commercialization efforts.
We have no history of marketing, distributing
or selling biotechnology products, and we are relying on our ability to successfully establish marketing partners or other arrangements
with third parties to market, distribute and sell a commercially viable product both here and abroad. Our business plan envisions
creating strategic alliances to access needed commercialization and marketing expertise. We may not be able to attract qualified
sub-licensees, distributors or marketing partners, and even if qualified, these marketing partners may not be able to successfully
market agricultural products or human therapeutic applications developed with our technology. If our current or potential future
marketing partners fail to provide adequate levels of sales, our commercialization efforts will be delayed or limited and we may
not be able to generate revenue.
We will depend
on joint ventures and strategic alliances to develop and market our technology and, if these arrangements are not successful, our
technology may not be developed and the expenses to commercialize our technology will increase.
In its current state of development, our
technology is not ready to be marketed to consumers. We intend to follow a multi-faceted commercialization strategy that involves
the licensing of our technology to business partners for the purpose of further technological development, marketing and distribution.
We have and are seeking business partners who will share the burden of our development costs while our technology is still being
developed, and who will pay us royalties when they market and distribute products incorporating our technology upon commercialization.
The establishment of joint ventures and strategic alliances may create future competitors, especially in certain regions abroad
where we do not pursue patent protection. If we fail to establish beneficial business partners and strategic alliances, our growth
will suffer and the continued development of our technology may be harmed.
Competition
in the human therapeutic and agricultural biotechnology industries is intense and technology is changing rapidly. If our competitors
market their technology faster than we do, we may not be able to generate revenues from the commercialization of our technology.
Many human therapeutic
and agricultural biotechnology companies are engaged in research and development activities relating to apoptosis and senescence.
The market for plant protection and yield enhancement products is intensely competitive, rapidly changing and undergoing consolidation.
We may be unable to compete successfully against our current and future competitors, which may result in price reductions, reduced
margins and the inability to achieve market acceptance for products containing our technology. Our competitors in the field of
plant senescence gene technology are companies that develop and produce transgenic plants and include major international agricultural
companies, specialized biotechnology companies, research and academic institutions and, potentially, our joint venture and strategic
alliance partners. These companies
include: Mendel Biotechnology, Inc.; Ceres, Inc., Archer Daniels Midland and Syngenta
International AG; among others. Some of our competitors that are involved in apoptosis research include: Celgene, Inc.; Takeda/Millennium;
ONYX Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Amgen Inc.; Janssen Biotech, Inc.; Novartis AG; and
Pharmacyclics,
Inc.
Many of these competitors have substantially greater financial, marketing, sales, distribution
and technical resources than us and have more experience in research and development, clinical trials, regulatory matters, manufacturing
and marketing. We anticipate increased competition in the future as new companies enter the market and new technologies become
available. Our technology may be rendered obsolete or uneconomical by technological advances or entirely different approaches developed
by one or more of our competitors, which will prevent or limit our ability to generate revenues from the commercialization of our
technology.
Our business
is subject to various government regulations and, if we or our licensees are unable to obtain regulatory approval, we may not be
able to continue our operations.
At present, the U.S. federal government
regulation of biotechnology is divided among three agencies:
|
·
|
the United States Department of Agriculture, or USDA, regulates the
import, field testing and interstate movement of specific types of genetic engineering that may be used in the creation of transgenic
plants;
|
|
·
|
the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, regulates
activity related to the invention of plant pesticides and herbicides, which may include certain kinds of transgenic plants; and
|
|
·
|
the FDA regulates foods derived from new plant varieties.
|
The FDA requires that transgenic plants
meet the same standards for safety that are required for all other plants and foods in general. Except in the case of additives
that significantly alter a food’s structure, the FDA does not require any additional standards or specific approval for genetically
engineered foods, but expects transgenic plant developers to consult the FDA before introducing a new food into the marketplace.
Use of our technology, if developed for
human therapeutic applications, is also subject to FDA regulation. The FDA must approve any drug or biologic product before it
can be marketed in the United States. In addition, prior to being sold outside of the United States, any products resulting from
the application of our human therapeutic technology must be approved by the regulatory agencies of foreign governments. Prior to
filing a new drug application or biologics license application with the FDA, we would have to perform extensive clinical trials,
and prior to beginning any clinical trial, we would need to perform extensive preclinical testing which could take several years
and may require substantial expenditures.
We believe that
our current agricultural activities, which to date have been confined to research and development efforts, do not require licensing
or approval by any governmental regulatory agency. However, we
are
performing clinical trials
in connection with our human therapeutic applications, which is subject to FDA approval. Additionally, federal, state and foreign
regulations relating to crop protection products and human therapeutic applications developed through biotechnology are subject
to public concerns and political circumstances, and, as a result, regulations have changed and may change substantially in the
future. Accordingly, we may become subject to governmental regulations or approvals or become subject to licensing requirements
in connection with our research and development efforts. We may also be required to obtain such licensing or approval from the
governmental regulatory agencies described above, or from state agencies, prior to the commercialization of our genetically transformed
plants and human therapeutic technology. In addition, our marketing partners who utilize our technology or sell products grown
with our technology may be subject to government regulations. If unfavorable governmental regulations are imposed on our technology
or if we fail to obtain licenses or approvals in a timely manner, we may not be able to continue our operations.
Preclinical
studies of our human therapeutic applications may be unsuccessful, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval.
Preclinical studies may reveal that our
human therapeutic technology is ineffective or harmful, and/or may be unsuccessful in demonstrating efficacy and safety of our
human therapeutic technology, which would significantly limit the possibility of obtaining regulatory approval for any drug or
biologic product manufactured with our technology. The FDA requires submission of extensive preclinical, clinical and manufacturing
data to assess the efficacy and safety of potential products. Any delay in receiving approval for any applicable IND from the FDA
would result in a delay in the commencement of the related clinical trial. Additionally, we could be required to perform additional
preclinical studies prior to the FDA approving any applicable IND. Furthermore, the success of preliminary studies does not ensure
commercial success, and later-stage clinical trials may fail to confirm the results of the preliminary studies.
Our success will
depend on the success of our clinical trials of our human therapeutic applications.
It may take several years to complete the
clinical trials of a product, and failure of one or more of our clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. We believe that
the development of our product candidate involves significant risks at each stage of testing. If clinical trial difficulties and
failures arise, our product candidate may never be approved for sale or become commercially viable.
There are a number of difficulties and
risks associated with clinical trials. These difficulties and risks may result in the failure to receive regulatory approval to
sell our product candidate or the inability to commercialize our product candidate. The possibility exists that:
|
·
|
we may discover that the product candidate does not exhibit the expected therapeutic results in humans, may cause harmful side effects or have other unexpected characteristics that may delay or preclude regulatory approval or limit commercial use if approved;
|
|
·
|
the results from early clinical trials may not be statistically significant or predictive of results that will be obtained from expanded advanced clinical trials;
|
|
·
|
institutional review boards or regulators, including the FDA, may hold, suspend or terminate our clinical research or the clinical trials of our product candidate for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or if, in their opinion, the participating subjects are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;
|
|
·
|
subjects may drop out of our clinical trials;
|
|
·
|
our preclinical studies or clinical trials may produce negative, inconsistent or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials; and
|
|
·
|
the cost of our clinical trials may be greater than we currently anticipate.
|
Clinical trials for our human therapeutic
technology will be lengthy and expensive and their outcome is uncertain.
Before obtaining regulatory approval for
the commercial sales of any product containing our technology, we must demonstrate through clinical testing that our technology
and any product containing our technology is safe and effective for use in humans. Conducting clinical trials is a time-consuming,
expensive and uncertain process and typically requires years to complete. In our industry, the results from preclinical studies
and early clinical trials often are not predictive of results obtained in later-stage clinical trials. Some products and technologies
that have shown promising results in preclinical studies or early clinical trials subsequently fail to establish sufficient safety
and efficacy data necessary to obtain regulatory approval. At any time during clinical trials, we or the FDA might delay or halt
any clinical trial for various reasons, including:
|
·
|
occurrence of unacceptable toxicities or side effects;
|
|
·
|
ineffectiveness of the product candidate;
|
|
·
|
negative or inconclusive results from the clinical trials, or results
that necessitate additional studies or clinical trials;
|
|
·
|
delays in obtaining or maintaining required approvals from institutions,
review boards or other reviewing entities at clinical sites;
|
|
·
|
delays in patient enrollment; or
|
|
·
|
insufficient funding or a reprioritization of financial or other resources.
|
Any failure or substantial delay in successfully
completing clinical trials and obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates could severely harm our business.
If our clinical
trials for our product candidates are delayed, we would be unable to commercialize our product candidates on a timely basis, which
would materially harm our business.
Planned clinical trials may not begin on
time or may need to be restructured after they have begun. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays
related to:
|
·
|
obtaining an effective IND or regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial;
|
|
·
|
negotiating acceptable clinical trial agreement terms with prospective trial sites;
|
|
·
|
obtaining institutional review board approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective site;
|
|
·
|
recruiting qualified subjects to participate in clinical trials
;
|
|
·
|
competition in recruiting clinical investigators
;
|
|
·
|
shortage or lack of availability of supplies of drugs for clinical trials
;
|
|
·
|
the need to repeat clinical trials as a result of inconclusive results or poorly executed testing
;
|
|
·
|
the placement of a clinical hold on a study
;
|
|
·
|
the failure of third parties conducting and overseeing the operations of our clinical trials to perform their contractual or regulatory obligations in a timely fashion; and
|
|
·
|
exposure of clinical trial subjects to unexpected
and unacceptable health risks or noncompliance with regulatory requirements, which may result in suspension of the trial
|
We believe that our product candidate has
significant milestones to reach, including the successful completion of clinical trials, before commercialization. If we have significant
delays in or termination of clinical trials, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates or any
other products that we may develop will be adversely impacted. In addition, our product development costs would increase and our
ability to generate revenue could be impaired.
Any inability
to license from third parties their proprietary technologies or processes which we use in connection with the development of our
technology may impair our business.
Other companies, universities and research
institutions have or may obtain patents that could limit our ability to use our technology in a product candidate or impair our
competitive position. As a result, we would have to obtain licenses from other parties before we could continue using our technology
in a product candidate. Any necessary licenses may not be available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. If we do not obtain
required licenses, we may not be able to develop our technology into a product candidate or we may encounter significant delays
in development while we redesign methods that are found to infringe on the patents held by others.
Even if we receive
regulatory approval, consumers may not accept products containing our technology, which will prevent us from being profitable since
we have no other source of revenue.
We cannot guarantee that consumers will
accept products containing our technology. Recently, there has been consumer concern and consumer advocate activism with respect
to genetically-engineered agricultural consumer products. The adverse consequences from heightened consumer concern in this regard
could affect the markets for agricultural products developed with our technology and could also result in increased government
regulation in response to that concern. If the public or potential customers perceive our technology to be genetic modification
or genetic engineering, agricultural products grown with our technology may not gain market acceptance.
We face potential
product liability exposure far in excess of our limited insurance coverage.
We may be held liable if any product we
or our collaborators develop causes injury or is found otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or
sale. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims could result in decreased demand for our product candidates,
injury to our reputation, withdrawal of patients from our clinical trials, substantial monetary awards to trial participants and
the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop. These claims might be made directly by consumers, health care
providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or testing our products. We have obtained limited product liability insurance
coverage for our clinical trials; however, our insurance may not reimburse us or may not be sufficient to reimburse us for expenses
or losses we may suffer. Moreover, if insurance coverage becomes more expensive, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage
at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If we obtain marketing approval for
any of our product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products, but we may
be unable to obtain commercially reasonable product liability insurance for any products approved for marketing. On occasion, juries
have awarded large judgments in class action lawsuits for claims based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. In addition,
the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, in general, have been subject to significant medical malpractice litigation. A
successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could harm our reputation and business and would decrease
our cash reserves.
We depend on
our key personnel and, if we are not able to attract and retain qualified scientific and business personnel, we may not be able
to grow our business or develop and commercialize our technology.
We are highly dependent on our scientific
advisors, consultants and third-party research partners. Our success will also depend in part on the continued service of our key
employees and our ability to identify, hire and retain additional qualified personnel in an intensely competitive market. Although
we have a research agreement with Dr. John Thompson, this agreement may be terminated upon short or no notice. Additionally, we
do not have employment agreements with our key employees. We do not maintain key person life insurance on any member of management.
The failure to attract and retain key personnel could limit our growth and hinder our research and development efforts.
Certain provisions
of our charter, by-laws, Delaware law and stock plans could make a takeover difficult.
Certain provisions of our certificate of
incorporation and by-laws could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us, even if the change in control
would be beneficial to stockholders. Our certificate of incorporation authorizes our board of directors to issue, without stockholder
approval, 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock with voting, conversion and other rights and preferences that could adversely affect
the voting power or other rights of the holders of our common stock.
In addition, we are subject to the Business
Combination Act of the Delaware General Corporation Law which, subject to certain exceptions, restricts certain transactions and
business combinations between a corporation and a stockholder owning 15% or more of the corporation’s outstanding voting
stock for a period of three years from the date such stockholder becomes a 15% owner. These provisions may have the effect of
delaying or preventing a change of control of us without action by our stockholders and, therefore, could adversely affect the
value of our common stock.
Furthermore, in the event of our merger
or consolidation with or into another corporation, or the sale of all or substantially all of our assets in which the successor
corporation does not assume our outstanding equity awards or issue equivalent equity awards, our current equity plans require the
accelerated vesting of such outstanding equity awards.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
We no longer meet the NYSE MKT continued
listing standards and therefore we expect to be delisted from the NYSE MKT. We may not be able to list on any other stock exchange
in the future.
The NYSE MKT requires companies listed
on its exchange to meet minimum financial requirements in order to maintain our listing. While we were listed on the NYSE MKT,
we received a notice of noncompliance from the NYSE MKT on October 20, 2011 that we did not meet the $6,000,000 minimum net worth
continued listing requirement of the NYSE MKT. We submitted a plan of compliance on November 17, 2011 to the NYSE MKT discussing
how we intended to regain compliance with the continued listing requirements. The NYSE MKT accepted our plan and granted us an
extension until July 20, 2012 to regain compliance with the NYSE MKT’s continued listing standards. On July 20, 2012, we
were still not in compliance with the NYSE MKT’s continued listing standards and we requested an extension of time to regain
compliance. On August 22, 2012, we received a notice from NYSE Regulation, Inc. on behalf of NYSE MKT providing notification that
NYSE MKT has determined not to grant us an extension of time to cure the non-compliance and that, therefore, the NYSE MKT intended
to file a delisting application with the Securities and Exchange Commission striking our common stock from the NYSE MKT. We requested
an appeal of the NYSE MKT’s determination and we were granted a hearing with a committee of NYSE MKT in accordance with
our rights as set forth in Sections 1203 and 1009(d) of the NYSE MKT Company Guide. The appeal hearing was held on October 24,
2012 and the NYSE MKT granted us an extension through November 5, 2012, which was subsequently extended through November 12, 2012
due to the effects of Hurricane Sandy, within which to regain compliance. As a result of our inability to regain compliance during
the extension period, we expect to be delisted from the NYSE MKT and our common stock will be considered a “penny stock”
following such delisting.
We intend to make every possible effort
to have our common stock quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board, or the OTC Bulletin Board, or an equivalent quotation
system. If our common stock was to be quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and related
SEC rules would impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers that sell our securities. These rules may adversely
affect the ability of stockholders to sell our common stock and otherwise negatively affect the liquidity, trading market and
price of our common stock.
We believe that
the listing of our common stock on a recognized national trading market, such as the NYSE MKT, is an important part of our business
and strategy and we intend to pursue such a listing again in the future. Such a listing would help our stockholders by providing
a readily available trading market with current quotations. Without that, stockholders may have a difficult time getting a quote
for the sale or purchase of our stock, the sale or purchase of our stock would likely be made more difficult and the trading volume
and liquidity of our stock would likely decline. Further, we are not able to file shelf registration statements. The absence of
such a listing may adversely affect the acceptance of our common stock as currency or the value accorded it by other parties.
In
that regard, the absence of a listing on a recognized national trading market also affects our ability to benefit from the use
of our operations and expansion plans, including for use in licensing agreements, joint ventures, the development of strategic
relationships and acquisitions, which are critical to our business and strategy and none of which is currently the subject of any
agreement, arrangement or understanding, with respect to any future financing or strategic relationship we may undertake.
Penny stock
regulations may impose certain restrictions on marketability of our securities.
The SEC has adopted regulations which generally
define a “penny stock” to be any equity security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share or an exercise
price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. As a result, our common stock is subject to rules that impose
additional sales practice requirements on broker dealers who sell such securities to persons other than established customers and
accredited investors (generally those with assets in excess of $1,000,000 or annual income exceeding $200,000, or $300,000 together
with their spouse). For transactions covered by such rules, the broker dealer must make a special suitability determination for
the purchase of such securities and have received the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to the purchase.
Additionally, for any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, the rules require the delivery, prior to the transaction,
of a risk disclosure document mandated by the SEC relating to the penny stock market. The broker dealer must also disclose the
commission payable to both the broker dealer and the registered representative, current quotations for the securities and, if the
broker dealer is the sole market maker, the broker dealer must disclose this fact and the broker dealer’s presumed control
over the market.
Finally, monthly statements must be sent
disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.
Broker-dealers must wait two business days after providing buyers with disclosure materials regarding a security before effecting
a transaction in such security. Consequently, the “penny stock” rules restrict the ability of broker dealers to sell
our securities and affect the ability of investors to sell our securities in the secondary market and the price at which such purchasers
can sell any such securities, thereby affect
ing the liquidity of the market for our common stock.
Stockholders should be aware that, according
to the SEC, the market for penny stocks has suffered in recent years from patterns of fraud and abuse. Such patterns include:
|
·
|
control of the market for the security by one or more broker-dealers that are often related to the promoter or issuer;
|
|
·
|
manipulation of prices through prearranged matching of purchases and sales and false and misleading press releases;
|
|
·
|
“boiler room” practices involving high pressure sales tactics and unrealistic price projections by inexperienced sales persons;
|
|
·
|
excessive and undisclosed bid-ask differentials and markups by selling broker-dealers; and
|
|
·
|
the wholesale dumping of the same securities by promoters and broker-dealers after prices have been manipulated to a desired level, along with the inevitable collapse of those prices with consequent investor losses.
|
Our management is aware of the abuses that
have occurred historically in the penny stock market.
Our management
and other affiliates have significant control of our common stock and could significantly influence our actions in a manner that
conflicts with our interests and the interests of other stockholders.
As of September
30, 2012, our executive officers and directors together beneficially own
approximately 28% of
the outstanding shares of our common stock, assuming the conversion of preferred stock and exercise of options and warrants which
are currently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days of September 30, 2012, held by these stockholders. As a result,
these stockholders, acting together, will be able to exercise significant influence over matters requiring approval by our stockholders,
including the election of directors, and may not always act in the best interests of other stockholders. Such a concentration of
ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of us, including transactions in which our stockholders
might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then-current market prices.
A significant
portion of our total outstanding shares of common stock may be sold in the market in the near future, which could cause the market
price of our common stock to drop significantly.
As of September
30 2012, we
had 116,753,185 shares of our common stock issued and outstanding and 995 shares of convertible preferred stock
outstanding which can convert into 3,826,923 shares of common stock. Approximately 34,164,431 of such shares are registered pursuant
to registration statements on Form S-3 and 86,415,677 of which are either eligible to be sold under SEC Rule 144 or are in the
public float. In addition, we have registered 35,890,007 shares of our common stock underlying warrants previously issued on Form
S-3 registration statements
and we registered
25,215,260
shares of
our common stock underlying options granted or to be granted under our stock option plan. Consequently, sales of substantial amounts
of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that such sales could occur, may have a material adverse effect on
our stock price.
Our common stock
has a limited trading market, which could limit your ability to resell your shares of common stock at or above your purchase price.
Our common stock is currently listed on the NYSE MKT, however we expect to be delisted from the NYSE MKT
and we intend to apply for quotation on an over-the-counter securities market, and our common stock currently has a limited trading
market. We cannot assure you that an active trading market will develop or, if developed, will be maintained. As a result, our
stockholders may find it difficult to dispose of shares of our common stock and, as a result, may suffer a loss of all or a substantial
portion of their investment.
The market price
of our common stock may fluctuate and may drop below the price you paid.
We cannot assure you that you will be able
to resell the shares of our common stock at or above your purchase price. The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly
in response to a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control. These factors include:
|
·
|
quarterly variations in operating results;
|
|
·
|
the progress or perceived progress of our research and development efforts;
|
|
·
|
changes in accounting treatments or principles;
|
|
·
|
announcements by us or our competitors of new technology, product and
service offerings, significant contracts, acquisitions or strategic relationships;
|
|
·
|
additions or departures of key personnel;
|
|
·
|
future offerings or resales of our common stock or other securities;
|
|
·
|
stock market price and volume fluctuations of publicly-traded companies
in general and development companies in particular; and
|
|
·
|
general political, economic and market conditions.
|
For example, during the quarter ended September
30, 2012, our common stock traded between $0.17 and $0.32 per share
.
Because we do
not intend to pay, and have not paid, any cash dividends on our shares of common stock, our stockholders will not be able to receive
a return on their shares unless the value of our common stock appreciates and they sell their shares.
We have never paid or declared any cash
dividends on our common stock, and we intend to retain any future earnings to finance the development and expansion of our business.
We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Therefore, our stockholders will
not be able to receive a return on their investment unless the value of our common stock appreciates and they sell their shares.
Our stockholders
may experience substantial dilution as a result of the conversion of convertible preferred stock, the exercise of options and warrants
to purchase our common stock, or due to anti-dilution provisions relating to any on the foregoing.
As of September 30, 2012, we have outstanding
995 shares of convertible preferred stock which may convert into 3,826,923 shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase
40,096,814 shares of our common stock. In addition, as of September 30, 2012, we have reserved 25,215,260 shares of our common
stock for issuance upon the exercise of options granted or available to be granted pursuant to our stock option plan, all of which
may be granted in the future. Furthermore, in connection with the preferred stock agreements, we are required to reserve
an additional 7,204,930 shares of common stock. The conversion of the convertible preferred stock and the exercise of these options
and warrants will result in dilution to our existing stockholders and could have a material adverse effect on our stock price.
The conversion price of the convertible preferred stock and certain warrants are also subject to certain anti-dilution adjustments.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity
Securities and Use of Proceeds.
None
Item 3. Defaults
Upon Senior Securities.
None
Item 4. Mine Safety
Disclosures.
None
Item 5. Other Information.
None
Item 6. Exhibits.
Exhibits.
Exhibit No.
|
Description
|
10.1
|
Form of Warrant Exchange Agreement (
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Senesco Technologies, Inc. current report on Form 8-K filed on August 10, 2012.)
|
31.1
|
Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. (filed herewith).
|
31.2
|
Certification of principal financial and accounting officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. (filed herewith).
|
32.1
|
Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. 1350. (furnished herewith).
|
32.2
|
Certification of principal financial and accounting officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. 1350. (furnished herewith).
|
101.1
|
Financial Statements
from the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Senesco Technologies, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, filed on November
14, 2012, formatted in XBRL: (i) the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets; (ii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations;
(iii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholder’s Equity; (iv) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows and (v) the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. (filed herewith).
|
SIGNATURES
In accordance with
the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
|
SENESCO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
|
|
|
DATE: November 14, 2012
|
By:
|
/s/ Leslie J. Browne
|
|
|
Leslie J. Browne, Ph.D., President
and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
DATE:
November 14, 2012
|
By:
|
/s/ Joel Brooks
|
|
|
Joel Brooks, Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary and
Treasurer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|