PART I

Preliminary Note Regarding Forward-Looking StatementsSPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Form 10-K and our 2015 Annual Report containAmendment contains or incorporates certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (Securities Act),or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange ActAct. Statements contained in this report that are not statements of 1934,historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Words or phrases such as amended (Exchange Act). Forward-looking“may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “potential,” “continue,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “project,” “likely,” “outlook,” or similar words or expressions or the negatives of such words or expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. We base these statements on our beliefs as well as assumptions we made using information currently available to us. Such statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and potentially inaccurate assumptions. Such statements give our current expectations or forecasts of future events; they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. All statements other than statements of historical fact could be deemed forward-looking statements,assumptions, including without limitation, any expectations of revenue, expenses, cash flows, earnings or losses from operations, capital, liquidity or other financial items; any statements of the plans, strategies and objectives of management for future operations; any statements concerning product and technology research, development, trials, trial results, regulatory requirements and approvals, reimbursement and commercialization; any other statements of expectations, estimations or beliefs; and any statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. We often, although not always, identify forward-looking statements by using words or phrases such as the following: “likely”, “expect”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “plan”, “project”, “forecast” and “outlook”.

We cannot guarantee that the results and other expectations expressed, anticipated or impliedthose identified in any forward-looking statement will be realized. The risks set forth under Item 1A of this“Risk Factors” in the Initial Form10-K, describe major risks as well as other matters not yet known to our business, and you should read and interpret any forward-looking statements together with these risks. A varietyus or not currently considered material by us. Should one or more of factors, including these risks could cause our actual results and other expectations to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed, anticipated or implied in our forward-looking statements. Should known or unknown risksuncertainties materialize, or should our underlying assumptions prove inaccurate,incorrect, actual results could differmay vary materially from past results and those anticipated, estimated or projected in theprojected. Given these risks and uncertainties, prospective investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. YouForward-looking statements do not guarantee future performance and should bearnot be considered as statements of fact. All information set forth in this in mind as you consider any forward-looking statements.

Our forward-looking statements speak onlyAmendment is as of the dates on which they are made. We dodate of filing this Amendment and should not undertakebe relied upon as representing our estimate as of any subsequent date. While we may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we specifically disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whetherdo so to reflect new information, future eventsactual results, changes in assumptions or otherwise. You are advised, however, to consult any further disclosures we may makechanges in our future reports to the SEC, on our website, www.psivida.com, or otherwise.

Introduction

We are a leader in the development of sustained-release drug-delivery products for treating eye diseases. Our products deliver drugs at a controlled and steady rate for months or years. We have developed three of only four sustained-release products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treatment of back-of-the-eye diseases. The most recent is ILUVIEN^® for diabetic macular edema (DME), sold by our licensee in the U.S. and three European Union (EU) countries. Our lead development product, Medidur™ for posterior uveitis, is in pivotal phase III clinical trials. Our pre-clinical development program is focused primarily on developing products for chronic ophthalmic diseases utilizing our core technology platforms.

ILUVIEN is an injectable, sustained-release micro-insert that provides treatment of DME for three years from a single administration. ILUVIEN is licensed to Alimera Sciences, Inc. (Alimera), and we are entitled to a share of the net profits (as defined in our agreement with Alimera) from Alimera’s sales of ILUVIEN. ILUVIEN was launched in late February 2015 in the U.S., where it is indicated for the treatment of DME in patients previously treated with a course of corticosteroids without a clinically significant rise in intraocular pressure. ILUVIEN has been commercially available in the United Kingdom (U.K.) and Germany since June 2013 and in Portugal since January 2015. ILUVIEN has marketing approvals in these and 14 other EU countries for the treatment of chronic DME considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Alimera sublicensed distribution, regulatory and reimbursement matters for ILUVIEN for DME in Australia and New Zealand in April 2014, in Canada in July 2015 and in Italy in August 2015.

Medidur, our lead development product, is an injectable, micro-insert designed to treat chronic non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye (posterior uveitis) for three years from a single administration. Medidur, which is the same micro-insert as ILUVIEN, is in Phase III clinical trials, with the filing of a new drug application (NDA) anticipated in the first half of 2017. We are developing Medidur independently.

Our FDA-approved Retisert^® provides sustained release treatment of posterior uveitis for approximately two and a half years. It is licensed to Bausch & Lomb, and we receive royalties from its sales.

Our pre-clinical development program is focused on developing products using our core platform technologies, Durasert™ and Tethadur™, to deliver drugs or biologics to treat wet and dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD), glaucoma, osteoarthritis and other diseases.

Durasert™, Medidur™, Tethadur™ and BioSilicon™ are our trademarks. Retisert^® and Vitrasert^® are Bausch & Lomb’s trademarks. ILUVIEN^® is Alimera’s trademark. This Annual Report also contains trademarks, trade names and service marks of other companies, which are the property of their respective owners.

Information with respect to ILUVIEN, including regulatory and marketing information, and Alimera’s plans and intentions, reflects information publicly disclosed by Alimera.

Fiscal 2015, fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2013 mean the twelve months ended June 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Strategy

Our strategy is to use our proprietary Durasert and Tethadur drug delivery technology platforms to independently develop new drug delivery products for already-approved drugs and biologics that will provide better treatment of ophthalmic and other diseases, while continuing to leverage our technology platforms through collaborations and licenses with leading pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies, institutions and others. We believe our technologies can provide sustained, targeted delivery of many already-approved therapeutic agents, resulting in improved therapeutic effectiveness and better patient compliance and convenience, with reduced product development risk and cost for us. We believe our proven track record of three approved products, all providing sustained release of previously approved drugs, demonstrates the potential of this strategy.

Market Opportunity for Delivery of Drugs and Biologics

We develop products to address issues inherent in the delivery of drugs and biologics. The efficacy of a therapeutic agent (small drug molecule or biologic) depends on its distribution to, and reaction with, the targeted tissue and other tissues in the body, duration of treatment and clearance from the body. In an ideal treatment, the appropriate amount of drug or biologic is delivered to the intended tissue at an adequate concentration and is maintained in the location with an appropriate concentration for a sufficient period of time to provide effective treatment without causing adverse effects to other tissues. Accordingly, the delivery of a drug or biologic can be an important element of its ultimate therapeutic value.

Drugs are frequently administered systemically by oral dosing, infusion or injection and subsequently dispersed throughout the body via the circulatory system. In the case of many drugs, systemic administration does not deliver them to the intended site with an appropriate concentration for a sufficient duration or the appropriate concentration disperses too quickly or unevenly, thereby failing to achieve the maximum potential therapeutic benefit. Because systemically delivered drugs disperse throughout the body, they often are administered at higher dosage levels to achieve sufficient concentrations at the intended sites. This is particularly true for the eyes, joints, brain and nervous system, which have natural barriers that impede the movement of drugs to those areas. These higher dosage levels can cause harmful side effects to the tissues beyond the intended site. To avoid these issues, drugs may be administered locally to the targeted site, typically by injection. However, maintaining a sufficient concentration at the targeted site over time typically requires timely and repeated administration of systemically and locally delivered drugs. The delivery methods themselves can have risks. Repeated administration by injection or infusion can result in serious infections and other complications.

Biologics generally cannot be administered orally, but instead are administered by injection or infusion and require repeated injections or infusions to maintain appropriate levels over the course of treatment. Due to their molecular size and complexity, it has been difficult to develop sustained-release formulations for biologics.

Drugs or biologics are often not administered on the optimal schedule or at all, because patients do not self-administer them as prescribed or do not get medical professional administration as required. The risk of patient noncompliance increases when treatment involves multiple products or complex or painful dosing regimens, as patients age or if they suffer cognitive impairment or serious illness, or when the treatment is lengthy or expensive.

Treating retinal diseases is a significant challenge for drug delivery. Due to the effectiveness of the blood-eye barrier, it is difficult for systemically administered drugs to reach the retina in sufficient quantities to have a beneficial effect without causing adverse side effects to other parts of the body. Injecting drugs or biologics in solution directly into the back of the eye can achieve effective, but often transient, dosage levels in the eye, requiring repeated injections. Ophthalmic biologics,affecting such as Macugen^® (pegaptanib sodium), Lucentis^® (ranibizumab) and EYLEA^® (afilbercept), require injection into the eye as frequently as every four weeks. In addition to the issues of inconvenience, cost and noncompliance, repeated intravitreal injections have medical risks, including intraocular infection, perforated sclera and vitreous hemorrhage.

Due to the drawbacks of traditional delivery, the development of methods to deliver drugs and biologics to patients in a more precise, controlled fashion over sustained periods of time has been a medical goal. Methods for sustained drug delivery include oral and injectable controlled-release products and skin patches that seek to improve the consistency of the dosage over time and extend the duration of delivery. However, most of these methods cannot provide constant, controlled dosage or sufficient duration of delivery, particularly in diseases thatforward-looking statements.

are chronic or require precise dosing. Moreover, skin patches and oral products still have issues of systemic delivery. There are currently very few approved sustained-delivery products for biologics.PSIVIDA CORP.

FORMOur Technology Systems and Products10-K/A

Our two core technology platforms, Durasert and Tethadur, have attributes designed to address the issues of sustained delivery for ophthalmic and other product candidates:FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2017

Durasert Technology System

Our three approved products, as well as our lead development product Medidur, use different generations of our Durasert technology platform to provide sustained, localized delivery of drugs to the back of the eye. In our Durasert products, a drug core is surrounded with one or more polymer layers, and the permeability of those layers and other aspects of the design of the product control the rate and duration of the drug release. By changing elements of the design, we can alter both the rate and duration of release to meet different therapeutic needs. Our later generation ILUVIEN and Medidur products are injected at the target site in an office visit, while early generation Retisert and Vitrasert are surgically implanted.

The portfolio of our Durasert approved products and late-stage product candidate includes:TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART III clinical trialsIndependent development

Approved Product: ILUVIEN for DME

ILUVIEN is an injectable, sustained-release micro-insert delivering the off-patent corticosteroid fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) for treatment of DME. Injected in an office visit, ILUVIEN delivers 36 months of continuous, low-dose corticosteroid therapy with a single injection. ILUVIEN is approved in the U.S. for the treatment of DME in patients who have been previously treated with a course of corticosteroids and did not have a clinically significant rise in intraocular pressure (IOP). In the 17 EU countries where ILUVIEN has been approved, it is indicated for the treatment of vision impairment associated with chronic DME considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. DME is a disease suffered by diabetics where leaking capillaries cause swelling in the macula, the most sensitive part of the retina. DME is a leading cause of blindness in most developed countries in the working-age population.

ILUVIEN is licensed to Alimera, which launched ILUVIEN in the U.K. and Germany in the second quarter of 2013 and in Portugal and the U.S. in the first quarter of 2015. ILUVIEN has marketing authorizations in 14 additional EU countries. We are entitled to a 20% share in net profits on sales of ILUVIEN by Alimera on a quarter-by-quarter, country-by-country basis. See “Strategic Collaborations—Alimera” below.

Alimera has engaged in regulatory proceedings and negotiations with respect to the amount and/or process for reimbursement of ILUVIEN in various EU countries. In October 2013, the U.K.’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) issued a positive Final Appraisal Determination recommending ILUVIEN funding, utilizing a simple patient access scheme (PAS), for the treatment of pseudophakic eyes (eyes with an artificial lens) in chronic DME patients considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. In February 2014, the Scottish Medicines Consortium, after completing its assessment and review of a similar simple PAS, announced its acceptance of ILUVIEN for restricted use within the National Health Service (NHS) Scotland. In July 2014, Alimera reached agreement with INFARMED, the marketing authorization body of the Portuguese Ministry of Health, for the pricing and reimbursement of ILUVIEN for the public sector in Portugal.

Approved Product: Retisert for Posterior Uveitis

Retisert is approved in the U.S. for the treatment of posterior uveitis. Retisert is surgically implanted in the eye and delivers sustained levels of FAc for approximately 30 months. Retisert is licensed to Bausch & Lomb, which sells the product in the U.S. and pays sales-based royalties to us. Retisert is eligible for Medicare reimbursement.

Approved Product: Vitrasert for CMV Retinitis

Vitrasert, our first product, was approved in the U.S. and the EU for the treatment of CMV retinitis, a blinding eye disease that occurs in individuals with advanced AIDS. Vitrasert, which is surgically implanted, provides sustained delivery of the anti-viral drug ganciclovir for six to eight months. Vitrasert was licensed to Bausch & Lomb, which discontinued sales in fiscal 2013 following patent expiration.

Development Product: Medidur for Posterior Uveitis

Medidur, our lead development product, is an injectable, sustained-release micro-insert designed to treat posterior uveitis for three years. Medidur uses the same micro-insert as ILUVIEN for DME (same drug, same release rate, same polymer, same design), but we have redesigned the inserter to utilize a smaller gauge needle typically used for intra-ocular injections. Like ILUVIEN, Medidur also delivers a lower dose of FA, the same drug delivered by Retisert for posterior uveitis. However, Medidur is easier to administer than Retisert because it is injected in an office visit, while Retisert is implanted in a surgical procedure. We are developing Medidur independently and have not licensed the rights to Medidur for posterior uveitis to Alimera or any other third party.

Posterior uveitis is a chronic, non-infectious inflammatory disease affecting the posterior segment of the eye, often involving the retina, which is a leading cause of blindness in the developed countries. It afflicts people of all ages, producing swelling and destroying eye tissues, which can lead to severe vision loss and blindness. In the U.S., posterior uveitis is estimated to affect approximately 175,000 people, resulting in approximately 30,000 cases of blindness and making it the third leading cause of blindness in the U.S. Patients with posterior uveitis are typically treated with systemic steroids, but frequently develop serious side effects over time that can limit effective dosing. Patients then often progress to steroid-sparing therapy with systemic immune suppressants or biologics, which themselves can have severe side effects including an increased risk of cancer.

Medidur Phase III Trials. We are currently conducting two Phase III trials to assess the safety and efficacy of Medidur for the treatment of posterior uveitis. These are randomized, sham-controlled, double-masked trials.

The primary endpoint of both trials is recurrence of posterior uveitis, with patients in both trials followed for three years. The first Phase III Medidur trial is fully enrolled with 129 patients in 16 centers in the U.S. and 17 centers outside the U.S. The primary endpoint of this trial is recurrence of uveitis at 12 months and the last patient is scheduled to have their 12-month follow-up visit in March 2016, with top-line data expected in the second quarter of 2016. The second trial will enroll up to 150 patients in approximately 15 centers in India with a primary endpoint for the NDA filing of recurrence of disease at 6 months. We plan to seek FDA approval of Medidur based on 12-month data from the first Phase III trial, six-month data from the second Phase III trial and data from a short-duration utilization study of our redesigned proprietary inserter, together with data referenced from the Phase III trials of ILUVIEN for DME. Pending favorable results in our ongoing clinical trials and concurrence from the FDA regarding filing with the data package described, we expect to file an NDA in the first half of 2017.

In our ongoing assessment of masked safety data from our first Phase III trial, we compared elevated IOP (over 21 mm Hg) at three months of follow-up in study eyes (2/3’s of which received Medidur) to fellow non-study eyes (none of which received Medidur). At that time, for all 129 enrolled patients, only 5% more study eyes experienced elevated IOP than the fellow non-study eyes. Initial IOP elevation is an indication of the likelihood of subsequent clinically significant IOP increases. We believe that the minimal difference observed in elevated IOP in our assessment suggests favorable results for a key safety measure of the trials, the number of eyes that develop clinically significant increases in IOP after receiving Medidur relative to control eyes.

Investigator-Sponsored Study of Medidur. In July 2015, Dr. Glenn J. Jaffe, Robert Machemer Professor of Ophthalmology at Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, NC (who is also a principal investigator in our first Phase III trial), reported positive top-line results from his investigator-sponsored study of Medidur, reporting a statistically significant reduction in recurrence of uveitis and a statistically significant improvement in visual acuity in eyes treated with Medidur. In the three-year, ongoing study, patients with recurrent non-infectious intermediate, posterior or pan uveitis were randomized to receive either a low dose or a high-dose of Medidur (our Phase III trials are studying only the low dose and only in patients with posterior uveitis). One eye received Medidur (which for subjects with disease in both eyes, was the eye with the worse disease) and fellow diseased eyes were treated with standard of care, which included steroid eye drops. At the most recent follow-up visit reported, 11 of the 13 participants had been followed for between 12 and 24 months. Dr. Jaffe reported that through the last follow-up visit reported, none of the eyes treated with Medidur had any recurrence of uveitis, while fellow eyes treated with standard of care averaged 2.33 recurrences. The difference between treatment with Medidur and standard of care was statistically significant (p=0.014). Eyes treated with Medidur experienced a significant improvement in visual acuity, gaining an average of 17 letters from baseline at 12 months on the Snellen eye chart (p=0.014 at 12 months). At the last follow-up visit reported, the average gain from baseline in Medidur-treated eyes was over 20 letters, while eyes treated with standard of care declined an average of 10 letters. The most common adverse event in study eyes was elevated IOP. Through the last follow-up visit reported, three study eyes developed elevated IOP and were treated with eye drops, with filtering procedures subsequently performed in two of these eyes. However, those two eyes still gained an average of over 25 letters from baseline at the last observation. Because the study remains masked as to the dosage, results cannot yet be separated for the low and high doses of Medidur.

Based on the ongoing IOP assessment from our first Phase III trial and the top-line results from the investigator-sponsored study, we are optimistic that the Phase III trials for Medidur will show it to be as efficacious as Retisert was shown to be in treating posterior uveitis, but with IOP safety results that could be even better than those shown in the ILUVIEN and Retisert Phase III trials.

Tethadur Technology System

Our Tethadur technology system utilizes BioSilicon, a fully-erodible, nanostructured elemental silicon, designed to provide sustained delivery of large biologic molecules, including peptides, proteins and antibodies. The size of the pores and surface area of the BioSilicon is manufactured using nanotechnology to accommodate a

specific protein, peptide or antibody molecule. A suspension of the specific biologic loaded into BioSilicon in solution is injected into the subject. The BioSilicon erodes over a predetermined duration, and the biologic molecules are released from the pores on a sustained basis. We believe that by varying the pore size and surface area of Tethadur, the release rate of antibodies and other therapeutics loaded into Tethadur can be controlled, which could permit sustained delivery of antibodies and other therapeutics that currently must be delivered by frequent injections. The system is biocompatible and biodegradable. BioSilicon can also be designed to deliver smaller molecules.

Development Pipeline

Our pre-clinical research is focused on using our Tethadur and Durasert technology platforms to deliver therapeutic agents to treat wet and dry AMD, glaucoma and osteoarthritis, as well as to provide systemic delivery of biologics.

We expect that an IND will shortly be filed in the U.S. to commence an investigator-sponsored study of an implant utilizing our Durasert technology to treat pain associated with severe osteoarthritis of the knee. We have been collaborating with Hospital for Special Surgery, a leading specialty hospital for orthopedics and rheumatology, on the development of this product. It will be surgically implanted in the knee to provide approximately six months of sustained delivery of a corticosteroid directly to the joint. The product is designed to offer long-term pain relief and to delay or eliminate the need for knee replacement surgery.

Feasibility Study Agreements

We have entered into numerous feasibility study agreements (some of which are funded) to evaluate our Durasert and Tethadur (including BioSilicon) technology systems for the treatment of various ophthalmic and other diseases.

Strategic Collaborations

We have entered into a number of collaboration/license agreements to develop and commercialize our product candidates and technologies. In all of our collaboration agreements, we retain the right to use and develop the underlying technologies outside of the scope of the exclusive licenses granted.

Alimera

In a February 2005 collaboration agreement, as amended and restated in March 2008, we granted Alimera an exclusive worldwide license to manufacture, develop, market and sell ILUVIEN for the treatment and prevention of human eye diseases other than uveitis. We also granted Alimera a worldwide non-exclusive license to manufacture, develop, market and sell certain additional Durasert-based products (1) to deliver a corticosteroid and no other active ingredient by a direct delivery method to the back of the eye solely for the treatment and prevention of eye diseases in humans other than uveitis or (2) to treat DME in humans by delivering a compound by a direct delivery method through an incision no smaller than that required for a 25-gauge or larger needle. The non-exclusive license is limited to those products that, among other things, (i) have a drug core within a polymer layer (with certain limitations regarding chemically bonded combinations of active agents) and (ii) are approved, or designed to be approved, to deliver a corticosteroid and no other active ingredient by a direct delivery to the posterior portion of the eye, or to treat DME by delivering a compound by a direct delivery through an incision required for a 25-gauge or larger needle. We are not permitted to use, or grant a license to any third party to use, the licensed technologies to make or sell any products that are or would be subject to the non-exclusive license granted to Alimera.

Alimera has complete financial responsibility for the development of licensed products and regulatory submissions under the collaboration agreement.

In October 2014 Alimera paid us a one-time $25.0 million milestone upon FDA approval of ILUVIEN as provided in our collaboration agreement. We are entitled to receive 20% of any net profits (as defined) on sales by Alimera of each licensed product (including ILUVIEN), measured on a quarter-by-quarter and country-by-country basis. Alimera may recover 20% of previously incurred and unapplied net losses (as defined) for commercialization of each product in a country by offsetting up to 4% of the net profits earned in that country for that product each quarter, effectively reducing pSivida’s profit share to not less than 16% until those net losses are recouped. If Alimera sublicenses commercialization in any country, we are entitled to 20% of royalties and 33% of non-royalty consideration received by Alimera, less certain permitted deductions.

Either party may terminate the collaboration agreement for the other party’s uncured material breach under various conditions and upon various bankruptcy events. We may terminate the collaboration agreement with respect to a particular product if Alimera notifies us that it is abandoning or has abandoned such product, in which case the agreement provides for specific, exclusive remedies.

Bausch & Lomb

Under a 2003 amended license agreement, Bausch & Lomb has a worldwide exclusive license to make and sell our first-generation products (which, as defined in the agreement, includes Retisert) in return for royalties based on sales. We agreed with Bausch & Lomb not to develop, license or commercialize a product designed to receive regulatory approval to treat uveitis, but only for so long as (i) Bausch & Lomb is actively commercializing a product the net sales of which bear the base royalty payable to us that is not subject to any royalty reduction or offset and (ii) Bausch & Lomb has not developed or commercialized a uveitis product that does not bear such royalties. This agreement also covered Vitrasert prior to patent expiration. Bausch & Lomb can terminate its agreement with us without penalty at any time upon 90 days’ written notice.

Pfizer

Our June 2011 Amended and Restated Collaborative Research and License Agreement with Pfizer (the Restated Pfizer Agreement) provides Pfizer an exclusive option, under various circumstances, to license the development and commercialization of a sustained release bioerodible implant to deliver latanoprost by subconjunctival injection (the Latanoprost Product) worldwide for human ophthalmic disease or conditions other than uveitis. Under the Restated Pfizer Agreement, at our discretion and expense, we can develop the Latanoprost Product through Phase II clinical trials. If we cease development, or if we commence and complete Phase II clinical trials, Pfizer may exercise its option at either juncture in exchange for payments of prescribed, but different levels of, license fee and potential future milestones plus royalties. If Pfizer does not exercise any such option, the Restated Pfizer Agreement will automatically be terminated.

Either Pfizer or we may terminate the Restated Pfizer Agreement for various reasons, including in the event of a material breach of this agreement that is not cured within the applicable cure period or if the other party enters into bankruptcy or similar proceedings. Pfizer may terminate this agreement at its sole discretion on 60 days’ notice. In the event Pfizer so terminates, or if we terminate for Pfizer’s material breach, we have the right to develop and commercialize the Latanoprost Product.

The Restated Pfizer Agreement replaces all of the rights and obligations under a 2007 Research and License Agreement, except for confidentiality and indemnification provisions. We regained all rights to our intellectual property in ophthalmic applications previously included in the original Pfizer agreement other than pursuant to the Restated Pfizer Agreement.

Pfizer owned approximately 6.3% of our outstanding stock as of August 31, 2015.

Enigma Therapeutics

Under a December 2012 license agreement, amended and restated in March 2013, Enigma Therapeutics Limited (Enigma) acquired an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license for the development of BrachySil

(now named OncoSil™), a BioSilicon product candidate for the treatment of pancreatic and other types of cancer. We received an upfront fee of $100,000 and are entitled to an 8% sales-based royalty, 20% of sublicense consideration and milestones based on aggregate product sales. Enigma is obligated to pay an annual license maintenance fee of $100,000, creditable during each ensuing twelve-month period against reimbursable patent maintenance costs and sales-based royalties. Annual license maintenance fees of $100,000 were paid in January 2014 and January 2015. Enigma has the right to terminate its license upon 60 days prior written notice.

Research and Development

Our clinical and pre-clinical research programs primarily consist of ophthalmic applications of our technology systems. Our research and development expenses totaled $12.1 million in fiscal 2015, $9.6 million in fiscal 2014 and $7.0 million in fiscal 2013. Of these amounts, $10.6 million in fiscal 2015, $8.2 million in fiscal 2014, and $5.4 million in fiscal 2013 were incurred for costs of research and development personnel, clinical and pre-clinical studies, contract services, testing and laboratory facilities. The remaining expense of $1.5 million in fiscal 2015, $1.4 million in fiscal 2014 and $1.6 million in fiscal 2013 consisted of non-cash charges for amortization of intangible assets, depreciation of property, plant and equipment and stock-based compensation expense specifically allocated to research and development personnel.

Intellectual Property

Our intellectual property rights are crucial to our business. We hold or are licensed patents relating to our core technology systems in the United States and other countries. The following table provides general details relating to our owned and licensed patents (including both patents that have been issued and applications that have been accepted for issuance) and patent applications as of August 31, 2015:

Employees

We had 26 employees as of August 31, 2015. None of our employees is covered by a collective bargaining agreement.

Sales and Marketing

We have no marketing or sales staff. We currently depend on collaborative partners to market our products. Significant additional expenditures would be required for us to develop an independent sales and marketing organization.

Third Party Reimbursement and Pricing Controls

Sales of pharmaceutical products are significantly dependent on the availability and extent of reimbursement to consumers of the cost of the products from third-party payors, such as government health administration authorities and plans, private health insurers and other organizations, as well as on the timing and complexity of obtaining those reimbursements.

The passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003 imposed requirements for the distribution and pricing of prescription drugs, which may affect the marketing of our products by us or our

licensees. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively referred to as the ACA, is expected to significantly change the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. The ACA may result in downward pressure on pharmaceutical reimbursement, which could negatively affect market acceptance of new products, and the rebates, discounts, taxes and other costs resulting from the ACA may have a significant effect on our results of operations in the future. In addition, potential reductions of the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending under the ACA could potentially limit access to certain treatments or mandate price controls for our products.

In many foreign markets, including countries in the EU, pricing of pharmaceutical products is subject to governmental control. In the U.S., there have been, and there will likely continue to be, federal and state proposals to implement similar governmental pricing control.

Competition

The market for products treating back-of-the-eye diseases is highly competitive and is characterized by extensive research efforts and rapid technological progress. We face substantial competition for our products and product candidates. Pharmaceutical, drug delivery and biotechnology companies, as well as research organizations, governmental entities, universities, hospitals, other nonprofit organizations and individual scientists, have developed and are seeking to develop drugs, therapies and novel delivery methods to treat our targeted diseases. Most of our competitors and potential competitors are larger, better established, more experienced and have substantially more resources than we or our partners have. Competitors may reach the market earlier, may have obtained or could obtain patent protection that dominates or adversely affects our products and potential products, and may offer products with greater efficacy, lesser side effects and/or other competitive advantages. We believe that competition for treatments of back-of-the-eye diseases is based upon the effectiveness of the treatment, side effects, time to market, reimbursement and price, reliability, availability, patent position, and other factors.

Many companies have or are pursuing products to treat back-of-the-eye diseases that are or would be competitive with our products and product candidates. Some of these products and potential products include the following:

Revenues

We operate in one business segment. The following table summarizes our revenues by type and by geographical location. Revenue is allocated geographically by the location of the subsidiary that earns the revenue. For more detailed information regarding our operations, see our Consolidated Financial Statements commencing on page F-1.

Government Regulation

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and Comparable Foreign Laws.The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in foreign countries impose substantial requirements upon the clinical development, manufacture and marketing of pharmaceutical products. These agencies regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, labeling, storage, record-keeping, approval, distribution, advertising and promotion of drug products. The process required by the FDA under the new drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act before our products may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and varies substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product. We cannot be certain that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Pre-clinical tests include laboratory evaluation of the product, its chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and efficacy of the product. The results of the pre-clinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data and protocols for proposed human clinical trials, are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND, which must become effective before the IND sponsor may begin human clinical trials. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the proposed clinical trials as outlined in the IND, and imposes a clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before clinical trials can begin. There is no certainty that pre-clinical trials will result in the submission of an IND, or that submission of an IND will result in FDA authorization to commence clinical trials.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators. Clinical trials are conducted in accordance with protocols that detail the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used to monitor safety and any efficacy criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Further, each clinical study must be conducted under the auspices of an independent Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee (EC). The IRB/EC will consider, among other things, ethical factors, safety of human subjects and possible liability of the institution. Some clinical trials, called “investigator-sponsored” clinical trials, are conducted by third-party investigators responsible for the regulatory obligations associated with sponsorship of a clinical trial. The results of these trials may be used as supporting data by a company in its application for FDA approval, provided that the company has contractual rights to use the results.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases which may overlap:

In the case of products for life-threatening diseases such as cancer, or severe conditions such as blinding eye disease, or for products that require invasive delivery, initial human testing is often conducted in patients with the disease rather than in healthy volunteers. Since these patients already have the targeted disease or condition, these studies may provide initial evidence of efficacy traditionally obtained in Phase II trials, and so these trials are frequently referred to as Phase I/II or IIa trials.

We or our collaborative partners may not successfully complete Phase I, Phase II or Phase III testing of our product candidates within any specific time period, if at all. Furthermore, we, our collaborative partners, the FDA, the IRBs/ECs, foreign regulatory authorities or the sponsor, if any, may suspend clinical trials at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk.

Once a product approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the

approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability.

The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA) is designed to provide the public with more easily accessible information about the safety and efficacy of marketed drugs and the FDA with increased authority to ensure drug safety. The FDAAA requires that we register each controlled clinical trial, aside from a Phase I trial, on a website (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) administered by National Institutes of Health (NIH), including descriptive information (e.g., a summary in lay terms of the study design, type and desired outcome), recruitment information (e.g., target number of participants and whether healthy volunteers are accepted), location and contact information and administrative data (e.g., FDA identification numbers). Within one year of a trial’s completion, information about the trial, including characteristics of the patient sample, primary and secondary outcomes, trial results written in lay and technical terms and the full trial protocol must be submitted to the website, unless the drug has not yet been approved. In that case the information is posted shortly after product approval has been obtained. The FDA requires certification of compliance with all relevant FDAAA clinical trials reporting requirements during product development.

The results of product development, pre-clinical studies and clinical studies are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA for approval of the marketing and commercial shipment of the product. The FDA may deny an NDA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, or may require additional clinical data. Even if the additional data are submitted, the FDA ultimately may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a sponsor to conduct additional clinical trials to confirm that the drug is safe and effective for its intended uses.

Satisfaction of FDA requirements or similar requirements of foreign regulatory agencies typically takes several years or more, and varies substantially. Regulatory authorities may delay marketing of potential products for a considerable period of time or prevent it entirely, and may require costly procedures in order to obtain regulatory approval. The time and expense required to obtain FDA or foreign regulatory clearance or approval for regulated products can frequently exceed the time and expense of the research and development initially required to create the product. Success in pre-clinical or early stage clinical trials does not assure success in later stage clinical trials. Data from pre-clinical and clinical activities may not be conclusive, and may be susceptible to varying interpretations, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval. Even if a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be subject to significant limitations based on data from pre-clinical and clinical activities. The FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may also require surveillance programs to monitor approved products which have been commercialized and may require changes in labeling.

Once issued, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may withdraw product approval for non-compliance with regulatory requirements or if safety or efficacy problems occur or are demonstrated in subsequent studies after the product reaches the market. Any product manufactured or distributed under FDA or foreign regulatory approval is subject to pervasive and continuing regulation. All manufacturers must comply with regulations related to requirements for record-keeping and reporting adverse experiences with the product, and the FDA may also require surveillance programs to monitor approved products that have been commercialized. The FDA has the power to require changes in product labeling or to prevent further marketing of a product based on the results of these post-marketing programs. Even after initial FDA or other foreign regulatory approval has been obtained, we or our collaborative partners could be required to conduct further studies to provide additional data on safety or efficacy or, should we desire, to gain approval for the use of a product as a treatment for additional clinical indications. In addition, use of a product during testing and after marketing approval has been obtained could reveal side effects which, if serious, could limit uses, or in the most serious cases, result in a market withdrawal of the product or expose us to product liability claims. For certain drugs that the FDA determines pose risks that outweigh the benefits, FDA approval may be subject to the manufacturers’ continued adherence to a REMS program. REMS, which are tailored to specifically address the risks of a given drug, may contain elements that restrict distribution of the drug to certain physicians, pharmacists and patients, or that require the use of

communication tools such as letters to healthcare providers and patients detailing the risks associated with the drug. Foreign regulatory authorities also regulate post-approval activities.

Commercial drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register with the FDA and state agencies. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are also subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and state agencies for compliance with current good manufacturing practices (cGMP), which impose procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers.

Healthcare Law and Regulation.Healthcare providers, including physicians, and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of drug products that are granted marketing approval. Arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payors and other healthcare customers are subject to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the U.S. and in other countries and jurisdictions. Within the U.S., these laws generally apply to pharmaceutical companies once the companies have marketed products or marketed products reimbursable by federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. For the laws with such applicability, we could be subject to the laws if any of our product candidates in the future receive marketing approval and/or coverage under federal healthcare programs. Although the specific provisions of these laws vary, their scope is generally broad and there may not be regulations, guidance or court decisions that apply the laws to particular industry practices. Such U.S. federal healthcare laws and regulations include the following:

Within the U.S., analogous state laws and regulations, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws, may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by governmental as well as non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers. Foreign laws may also seek to prevent fraud and abuse.

Laws and regulations have been enacted by various states to regulate the sales and marketing practices of pharmaceutical companies with marketed products. The laws and regulations generally limit financial interactions between manufacturers and health-care providers; require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government; and/or require disclosure to the government and public of financial interactions. Many of these laws and regulations contain ambiguous requirements or require administrative guidance for implementation. Given the lack of clarity in laws and their implementation, any future reporting (if

we obtain approval and/or reimbursement from federal healthcare programs for our product candidates) could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent laws and regulations.

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and its implementing regulations, also imposes obligations on certain health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses (which are entities that processor facilitate the processing of nonstandard data elements of health information into standard data elements, or vice versa) and certain of their contractors with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. State and foreign laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Other Laws.We are also subject to numerous other federal, state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, environmental protection, fire hazard control and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances. We may incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations now or in the future. In addition, we cannot predict what adverse governmental regulations may arise from future U.S. or foreign governmental action.

Foreign Laws.We and our collaborative partners are also subject to regulatory requirements governing human clinical trials and marketing approval for pharmaceutical products sold in foreign countries. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary widely by country. Whether or not FDA approval is obtained, we or our collaborative partners must obtain approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before manufacturing or marketing the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country, and the time required for these approvals may differ substantially from that required for FDA approval. There is no assurance that clinical trials conducted in one country will be accepted by other countries, or that approval in one country will result in approval in any other country. For clinical trials conducted outside the U.S., the clinical stages generally are comparable to the phases of clinical development established by the FDA.

Corporate Information

pSivida Corp. was organized as a Delaware corporation in March 2008. Its predecessor, pSivida Limited, was formed in December 2000 as an Australian company incorporated in Western Australia. Our principal executive office is located at 480 Pleasant Street, Suite B300, Watertown, Massachusetts 02472 and our telephone number is (617) 926-5000.

Additional Information

Our website address is http://www.psivida.com. Information contained on, or connected to, our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Copies of our annual reports onForm 10-K, proxy statements, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and, if applicable, amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, are available free of charge through our website under “SEC Filings” as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file these materials with, or otherwise furnish them to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Information with respect to ILUVIEN has been derived from public disclosures by Alimera.

ITEM 1A.10.

RISK FACTORSDIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

RISKS RELATED TO OUR COMPANY AND OUR BUSINESS

We do not know if or when we will achieve profitable operations from product sales, royalties and net profits participations and we may need additional capital to fund our operations, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.

We have a history of operating losses, and at June 30, 2015, we had a total accumulated deficit of $270.7 million. During the past three fiscal years, we financed our operations from license fees, milestone payments, research and development funding and royalty income from our collaboration partners and sales of equity securities. We do not have any assured sources of revenue, and we expect negative cash flows from operations in subsequent quarters until we receive sufficient revenues from commercialization of ILUVIEN or one or more of our other product candidates achieve regulatory approval and provide us sufficient revenues. We believe that our capital resources of $28.5 million at June 30, 2015 should enable us to fund our operations as currently planned (including our Medidur clinical trials) into early calendar year 2017. This estimate excludes any potential net profits receipts from sales of ILUVIEN. We expect that our ability to fund our planned operations beyond then will depend on the amount and timing of those payments, as well as proceeds from any future collaboration or other agreements and/or financing transactions.

Whether we will require, or desire, to raise additional capital will be influenced by many factors, including, but not limited to:

If we determine that it is desirable or necessary to raise additional capital in the future, we do not know if it will be available when needed or on terms favorable to us or our stockholders. We have an at-the-market (ATM) facility, but we do not know whether and to what extent we will seek to sell shares pursuant to that program and, if we are able to do so, on what terms. The state of the economy and the financial and credit markets at the time or times we seek any additional financing may make it more difficult or more expensive to obtain. If available, additional equity financing may be dilutive to stockholders, debt financing may involve restrictive covenants or other unfavorable terms and potential dilutive equity, and funding through collaboration agreements may be on unfavorable terms, including requiring us to relinquish rights to certain of our technologies or products.

If the recorded value of our intangible assets under GAAP is further impaired, our financial results could be materially adversely affected.

At June 30, 2015, we had $1.9 million of intangible assets relating to our Durasert and BioSilicon (including Tethadur) technologies on our balance sheet following impairment charges of $14.8 million as of December 31, 2011. We conduct impairment analyses of our intangible assets as required under GAAP and could take additional impairment charges in the future if the recorded values for our intangible assets were to exceed our assessment of the recoverability of the fair market value of those assets. Adverse events relating to these technologies, including the clinical development, regulatory approval and success of commercialization of products using them, and significant changes in our market capitalization could result in impairment charges. Further impairment charges on our intangible assets could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the quarter of the impairment.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly from period to period.Directors

Our operating results have fluctuated significantly from periodBoard of Directors, or the Board, consists of seven (7) members. The term of each director expires each year at our Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Each director also continues to period in the past and may continue to do so in the future due to many factors, including:

Due to fluctuations in our operating results, quarterly comparisons of our financial results may not necessarily be meaningful, and investors should not rely upon such results as an indication of future performance. In addition, investors may react adversely if our reported operating results are less favorable than in a prior period or are less favorable than those anticipated by investors in the financial community, which may result in decreases in our stock price.

There is no assurance our Retisert royalty income will continue at current levels or at all.

Retisert royalty income, which totaled between $1.3 million and $1.4 million in each of the fiscal 2012, fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2014, declined to $1.2 million in fiscal 2015. We do not expect Retisert royalty income to grow materially, if at all, and it may continue to decline. There is no assurance that Bausch & Lomb will continue to market Retisert, which received marketing approval in 2005, and accordingly that we will continue to receive royalties from the sale of Retisert. Bausch & Lomb no longer markets Vitrasert.

RISKS RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIALIZATION OF OUR PRODUCTS AND PRODUCT CANDIDATES

There is no assurance that Alimera will successfully commercialize ILUVIEN for DME or that we will receive any significant revenues from its commercialization. If Alimera does not successfully commercialize ILUVIEN for DME, it would adversely affect our future results of operations and financial position.

Our future financial results depend heavily on Alimera’s ability to successfully commercialize ILUVIEN for DME. We do not know if, when, or to what extent we will receive future revenues from the commercialization of

ILUVIEN for DME. We are entitled to a net profit participation on a country-by-country and quarter-by-quarter basis on sales of ILUVIEN where Alimera markets ILUVIEN directly and to a percentage of royalties and non-royalty consideration where Alimera sublicenses the marketing of ILUVIEN. The amount and timing of any revenues we receive will be affected, among other things, by the manner in which Alimera markets ILUVIEN, the amounts and timing of sales of ILUVIEN, commercialization costs incurred by Alimera’s direct marketing efforts, and the terms of sublicense agreements.

The commercialization of ILUVIEN is a significant undertaking by Alimera, and ILUVIEN for DME is its first and only product. While Alimera believes that it has sufficient funds available to fund its operations for the continued commercialization of ILUVIEN in the U.S., Germany, Portugal and the United Kingdom, Alimera has reported that its negative cash flows from operations and accumulated deficit raise substantial doubt about its ability to continueserve as a going concern. Alimera may seek to raise additional financing to fund its working capital needs for the commercialization of ILUVIEN. We do not know whether Alimera will be successful in generating adequate cash flows, obtaining adequate capitaldirector until his or achieving additional marketing approvals for, obtaining adequate pricingher successor is duly elected and reimbursement for, successfully commercializing and achieving market acceptance of, and generating revenues to pSivida from, ILUVIEN for DME. Commercialization by Alimera in the U.S., Germany, Portugal and the U.K, including the transitioning from an outside provider of sales and marketing services in the U.K. and Germany and the provision of extended payment terms in the U.S., has required a significant expansion of Alimera’s commercial infrastructure and significant financial investments. Delays in the commercial launch in other EU countries where ILUVIEN has received marketing authorization could result in withdrawal of marketingqualified, or regulatory authorization for ILUVIEN in oneuntil he or more of those jurisdictions. Alimera’s efforts to commercialize ILUVIEN successfully will be affected, among other things, by:

If Alimera is not successful in commercializing ILUVIEN for DME and generating payments to us, it would adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

Sales of ILUVIEN for DME may be materially adversely affected by pricing and reimbursement decisions of regulatory bodies, insurers and others.

Prices, coverage and reimbursement to consumers of ILUVIEN for DME, like other drugs, are generally regulated by third-party payors, such as government health administration authorities and plans, private health

insurers and other organizations and affect ILUVIEN’s sales. The timing and complexity of those reimbursements also affect sales. Prices in the EU are generally lower and coverage and access to drugs more limited than in the U.S. For example, in the U.K. and Scotland, National Health Service coverage is limited to the treatment of the eyes of chronic DME patients unresponsive to existing therapies that have undergone cataract surgery, subject to simple patient access schemes. Alimera may not achieve satisfactory agreements with statutory or other insurers. We do not know what levels of pricing will be approved or reimbursed for ILUVIEN, or what restrictions will be placed on its use or reuse in countries where ILUVIEN is not currently sold. In the U.S., Alimera has offered extended customer payment terms. Future sales of ILUVIEN and, accordingly, our net profits share, may be adversely affected by pricing and reimbursement decisions, and such effects may be material.

The micro-insert for ILUVIEN and Medidur delivers FAc, a corticosteroid that has certain adverse side effects in the eye, which may affect the success of this micro-insert for treatment of DME and posterior uveitis.

The micro-insert for both ILUVIEN and Medidur delivers the non-proprietary corticosteroid FAc, which is associated with cataract formation and elevated IOP and may increase the risk of glaucoma and related surgery to manage those side effects. Although Retisert, which also delivers FAc to treat posterior uveitis, and ILUVIEN for DME have both been approved by the FDA, there is no assurance that Medidur will be determined to be safe for the treatment of posterior uveitis in light of its expected side effects from FAc. These side effects may limit the population for which marketing authorization is granted or for which reimbursement is provided in one or more jurisdictions and/or adversely affect sales of Medidur, if approved, and/or ILUVIEN.

There is no assurance that Medidur will be found to be safe and effective for the treatment of posterior uveitis.

While we are optimistic that the Phase III trials for Medidur will show it to be as efficacious as Retisert was shown to be in treating posterior uveitis, but with IOP safety results that could be even better than those shown in the ILUVIEN and Retisert Phase III trials, this is only a hypothesis, and there is no assurance that the ongoing Medidur Phase III clinical trials will demonstrate these results. Data from our ongoing IOP assessment from the Medidur Phase III trials and top-line results from the Medidur investigator-sponsored study may not accurately predict the results of our Medidur Phase III program. There is no assurance that the Phase III program for Medidur will provide the necessary evidence of safety and efficacy required to file an NDA or for approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities if an NDA is filed. Approvals of Retisert and ILUVIEN by the FDA and other regulatory authorities are not predictive of actions they may take with respect to Medidur.

There is no assurance that we will be able to file an NDA for Medidur as early as the first half of 2017, or that, if filed, the FDA will accept the NDA for review.

Filing an NDA for Medidur will require positive results from our two Phase III trials. Based on our most recent meeting with the FDA, we plan to seek approval of Medidur based on 12-month data from our first Phase III trial, six-month data from our second Phase III trial and data from a short-duration utilization study of our redesigned proprietary inserter, together with data referenced from the Phase III trials of ILUVIEN for DME. We will be filing an amendment with the Indian regulatory authority requesting to change the primary endpoint in the protocol of our second Phase III trial in India from twelve to six months consistent with the primary endpoint for filing the NDA in the U.S., although there is no assurance they will accept the amendment. Further, although enrollment is complete in our first Phase III trial, we do not expect enrollment to be completed in our second Phase III trial until the end of the second quarter of 2016. Many factors could affect the timing of filing any NDA for Medidur, including completion of enrollment in the second trial in the time frame we anticipate, utilizing the data on which we currently plan to base the NDA, analyzing the data in the time frame we anticipate, requirements from regulators that would affect our timing, and the actual results from the trials. As a result, there is no assurance that an NDA for Medidur will be filed on the basis of the data we currently plan to use or that it will be filed in the first half of 2017, if at all.

Even if we file an NDA for Medidur, there is no assurance that the FDA will accept the NDA for review. While we believe the FDA will accept the filing of an NDA for Medidur based on the data we currently plan to utilize, the FDA has significant discretion in determining whether to accept an NDA for review and there is no assurance that the FDA will find the design of our clinical trials or the data we include in an NDA to be sufficient to accept the NDA for review. Any delay in the filing of an NDA for Medidur or the FDA’s refusal to accept the NDA for review could materially and adversely affect our business and the price of our common stock.

We are currently conducting, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials for product candidates at sites outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations.

We are currently conducting a Phase III trial of Medidur in India, and may in the future choose to conduct one or more of our clinical trials outside the United States.

In general, the FDA accepts data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States; however, acceptance of this data is subject to, among other things, the clinical trials being conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with Good Clinical Practice principles. The trial population must also adequately represent the U.S. population, and the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to applicable locals laws, FDA acceptance of the data will depend on its determination that the trials also complied with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. If the FDA does not accept the data from any trial that we conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates.

There is no assurance that Pfizer will exercise its option with respect to the Latanoprost Product if we initiate and complete Phase II trials or cease development, in which case we will not receive any further financial consideration under the Restated Pfizer Agreement.

Pfizer has an option for an exclusive, worldwide license to develop and commercialize the Latanoprost Product upon our completion of Phase II clinical trials, which are at our option and expense, or upon our cessation of development of the Latanoprost Product at any time prior to completion of those trials. There is no assurance that we will commence or complete Phase II clinical trials for the Latanoprost Product; that, if completed, the trials will be successful; that Pfizer will, in any event, exercise its option; that, if exercised, Pfizer will commence Phase III clinical trials; or that the Latanoprost Product will achieve successful Phase III trial results, regulatory approvals or commercial success. As a result, there is no assurance that we will receive any further licensing, milestone or royalty payments under the Restated Pfizer Agreement.

We do not know if we will be able to deliver proteins (including antibodies) and peptides with our Tethadur technology or that we will be able to develop product candidates or approved products using this technology.

Although we are optimistic that our Tethadur technology platform can provide sustained delivery of proteins (including antibodies) and peptides, and our data from an in vitro study has shown that the long-term sustained release of antibodies such as Avastin is achievable using Tethadur, our research is at an early stage and we face challenges. Development of any product candidates is expected to require significant additional research. There is no assurance that our subsequent research will be successful or that we will be able to develop product candidates or approved products using Tethadur to deliver proteins and peptides.

Product development is very uncertain. If we do not develop product candidates to enter clinical trials, if we or any licensees do not initiate or complete clinical trials for our product candidates or if our product candidates do not receive the necessary regulatory approvals, neither we nor any licensees will be able to commercialize those product candidates and generate revenues for us.

Other than Medidur for posterior uveitis, for which pivotal Phase III trials are ongoing, all of our product development is at earlier stages. Product development at all stages involves a high degree of risk, and only a

small proportion of research and development programs result in product candidates that advance to pivotal clinical trials or result in approved products. There is no assurance that any feasibility study agreements we have, or enter into, with third parties, or our own research and development programs and collaborations will result in any new product candidates, or that we or any licensees will commence clinical trials for any new product candidates or continue clinical trials once commenced. If clinical trials conducted by or for us or any licensees for any product candidates do not provide the necessary evidence of safety and efficacy, those product candidates will not receive the necessary regulatory approvals, cannot be sold, and will not generate revenues for us. Initial or subsequent clinical trials may not be initiated by or for us or any licensees for product candidates or may be delayed, terminated or fail due to many factors, including the following:

Results from pre-clinical testing, early clinical trials, investigator-sponsored studies and other data and indications often do not accurately predict final pivotal clinical trial results. Data obtained from pre-clinical and clinical activities are susceptible to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Data from pre-clinical studies, other clinical trials and interim periods in multi-year trials are preliminary and may change, and final data from pivotal trials for such products may differ significantly. Adverse side effects may develop that delay, limit or prevent the regulatory approval of products, or cause such regulatory approvals to be limited or even rescinded. Additional trials necessary for approval may not be undertaken or may ultimately fail to establish the safety and efficacy of our product candidates. There is no assurance, for example, that the Durasert product candidate to treat pain associated with severe knee osteoarthritis will advance to Phase III trials or will be safe or effective.

The FDA or other relevant regulatory agencies may not approve our product candidates for manufacture and sale, and any approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by other regulatory agencies or vice versa (which could require us to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements, possibly including additional clinical testing). Any product approvals we or our licensees achieve could also be withdrawn for failure to comply with regulatory standards or due to unforeseen problems after the product’s marketing approval. In either case, marketing efforts with respect to the affected product would have to cease. In addition, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may impose limitations on the indicated uses for which a product may be marketed. The imposition by the FDA or other regulatory organizations of any such limitations on the indicated uses for which any of our products may be marketed would reduce the size of, or otherwise limit, the potential market for the product subject to such limitations.

In addition to testing, regulatory agencies impose various requirements on manufacturers and sellers of products under their jurisdiction, such as packaging, labeling, manufacturing practices, record keeping and reporting. Regulatory agencies may also require post-marketing testing and surveillance programs to monitor a product’s effects. Furthermore, changes in existing regulations or the adoption of new regulations could prevent us from obtaining, or affect the timing of, future regulatory approvals.

We do not currently have sales and marketing capacity. There is no assurance that we will have the financial resources to develop the capacity to, or be able to, successfully market and sell products if we seek to do so.

Our strategy includes independently developing and commercializing products. We do not know when or if we will seek to directly commercialize any products ourselves. We currently have no marketing and sales staff and no experience in commercializing products. Direct commercialization would require us to develop sales and marketing capability and to make a significant financial investment. If we decide to independently and directly commercialize a product, there is no assurance we will be able to hire and manage a successful sales and marketing capability or have the financial resources necessary to fund independent commercialization of any products.

The success of our current and possible future collaborative and licensing arrangements depends and will depend heavily on the experience, resources, efforts and activities of our licensees, and if they are not successful in developing and marketing our products, it will adversely affect our revenues, if any, from those products.

Our business strategy includes continuing to leverage our technology platforms by entering into collaborative and licensing arrangements for the development and commercialization of our product candidates, where appropriate. The success of current and future collaborative and licensing arrangements do and will depend heavily on the experience, resources, skill, efforts and activities of our licensees. Our licensees have had, and are expected to have, significant discretion in making decisions related to the development of product candidates and the commercialization of products under these collaboration agreements. Risks that we face in connection with our collaboration and licensing strategy include the following:

We currently have collaboration and licensing arrangements with various companies, most significantly Alimera and Bausch & Lomb. While Bausch & Lomb has significant experience in the ophthalmic field and substantial resources, there is no assurance whether, and to what extent, that experience and those resources will be devoted to Retisert, and we do not expect revenues from Retisert to increase materially and they may decline further. Although we believe potential revenues from ILUVIEN for DME are important to our future results of operations and financial condition, Alimera has limited experience and limited financial resources, and ILUVIEN for DME is Alimera’s first and only commercial product. Alimera has reported that its negative cash flows from operations and accumulated deficit raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Further, due to the limited revenue generated by Alimera to date, Alimera may not be able to maintain compliance with covenants under its loan agreement and, in the event of a default, we do not know whether Alimera will be able to obtain amendments or waivers of those covenants. We do not know if Alimera will be able to raise additional financing if and when required.

If our current and future licensees are not successful in developing and marketing our products, it will adversely affect our revenues, if any, from those products.

Our current licensees may terminate their agreements with us at any time or fail to fulfill their obligations under those agreements, and, if they do, we will lose the benefits of those agreements.

Our licensees have rights of termination under our agreements with them and could terminate those agreements without cause on short notice. Further, our licensees may fail to fulfill their obligations under their agreements, or we may disagree with them over the rights and obligations under those agreements, which could result in breach of the agreements and/or termination. Exercise of termination rights by one or more of our licensees or by us may leave us without the financial benefits and development, marketing or sales resources provided under the terminated agreement. It could be necessary for us to replace, or seek to provide ourselves, the services provided by the licensee, and there is no assurance we would be successful in doing so. It could delay, impair or stop the development or commercialization of products or product candidates licensed to them or require significant additional capital investment by us, which we may not have the resources to fund. If any of our licensees do not perform their obligations under our agreements or if any of those agreements are terminated, it could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If competitive products receive regulatory approval or reach the market earlier, are more effective, have fewer side effects, are more effectively marketed or cost less than our products or product candidates, our products or product candidates may not be approved, may not achieve the sales we anticipate and could be rendered noncompetitive or obsolete.

We believe that pharmaceutical, drug delivery and biotechnology companies, research organizations, governmental entities, universities, hospitals, other nonprofit organizations and individual scientists are seeking to develop drugs, therapies, products, approaches or methods to treat our targeted diseases or their underlying causes. For our targeted diseases, competitors have alternate therapies that are already commercialized or are in various stages of development, ranging from discovery to advanced clinical trials. Any of these drugs, therapies, products, approaches or methods may receive government approval or gain market acceptance more rapidly than our products and product candidates, may offer therapeutic or cost advantages, or may more effectively treat our targeted diseases or their underlying causes, which could result in our product candidates not being approved, reduce demand for our products and product candidates or render them noncompetitive or obsolete.

Many of our competitors and potential competitors have substantially greater financial, technological, research and development, marketing and personnel resources than we do. Our competitors may succeed in developing alternate technologies and products that, in comparison to the products we have and are seeking to develop:

Many of these competitors have greater experience in developing products, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals or clearances and manufacturing and marketing products than we do.

Our products and product candidates may not achieve and maintain market acceptance and may never generate significant revenues.

In both domestic and foreign markets, the commercial success of our products and product candidates will require not only obtaining regulatory approvals, but also obtaining market acceptance by retinal specialists and other doctors, patients, government health administration authorities and other third-party payors. Whether and to what extent our products and product candidates achieve and maintain market acceptance will depend on a number of factors, including demonstrated safety and efficacy, cost-effectiveness, potential advantages over other therapies, our and our collaborative partners’ marketing and distribution efforts and the reimbursement policies of government and other third-party payors. In particular, if government and other third-party payors do not recommend our products and product candidates, limit the indications for which they are recommended, or do not provide adequate and timely coverage and reimbursement levels for our products, the market acceptance of our products and product candidates will be limited. Both government and other third-party payors attempt to contain healthcare costs by limiting coverage and the level of reimbursement for products and, accordingly, they may challenge the price and cost-effectiveness of our products, or refuse to provide coverage for our products. If our products and product candidates fail to achieve and maintain market acceptance, they may fail to generate significant revenues and our business may be significantly harmed.

Guidelines, recommendations and studies published by various organizations could reduce the use of our products and potential use of product candidates.

Government agencies, professional societies, practice management groups, private health and science foundations and organizations focused on various diseases may publish guidelines, recommendations or studies that affect our or our competitors’ products and product candidates. Any such guidelines, recommendations or studies that reflect negatively on our products or product candidates, either directly or relative to our competitive products, could result in current or potential decreased use, sales of, and revenues from one or more of our products and product candidates. Furthermore, our success depends in part on our and our partners’ ability to educate healthcare providers and patients about our products and product candidates, and these education efforts could be rendered ineffective by, among other things, third-parties’ guidelines, recommendations or studies.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

We rely heavily upon patents and trade secrets to protect our proprietary technologies. If we fail to protect our intellectual property or infringe on others’ technologies, our ability to develop and market our products and product candidates may be compromised.

Our success is dependent on whether we can obtain patents, defend our existing patents and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of third parties. As of August 31, 2015, we had 238 patents and 116 pending

patent applications, including patents and pending applications covering our Durasert, Tethadur and other technologies. Intellectual property protection of our technologies is uncertain. We expect to seek to patent and protect our proprietary technologies. However, there is no assurance that any additional patents will be issued to us as a result of our pending or future patent applications or that any of our patents will withstand challenges by others. In addition, we may not have sufficient funds to patent and protect our proprietary technologies to the extent that we would desire, or at all. If we were determined to be infringing any third-party patent, we could be required to pay damages, alter our products or processes, obtain licenses, pay royalties or cease certain operations. We may not be able to obtain any required licenses on commercially favorable terms, if at all. In addition, many foreign country laws may treat the protection of proprietary rights differently from, and may not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as, laws in the U.S. and Patent Co-operation Treaty countries.

Prior art may reduce the scope or protection of, or invalidate, our patents. Previously conducted research or published discoveries may prevent our patents from being granted, invalidate issued patents or narrow the scope of any protection obtained. Reduction in scope of protection or invalidation of our licensed or owned patents, or our inability to obtain patents, may enable other companies to develop products that compete with our products and product candidates on the basis of the same or similar technology. As a result, our patents and those of our licensors may not provide any, or sufficient, protection against competitors. While we have not been, and are not currently, involved in any litigation over intellectual property, such litigation may be necessary to enforce any patents issued or licensed to us or to determine the scope and validity of third party proprietary rights. We may also be sued by one or more third parties alleging that we infringe their intellectual property rights. Any intellectual property litigation would likely result in substantial costs to us and diversion of our efforts, and could prevent or delay our discovery or development of product candidates. If our competitors claim technology also claimed by us, and if they prepare and file patent applications in the U.S. or other jurisdictions, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or the appropriate foreign patent office to determine priority of invention, which could result in substantial costs to us and diversion of our efforts. Any such litigation or interference proceedings, regardless of the outcome, could be expensive and time consuming. Litigation could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, requiring disputed rights to be licensed from third parties and/or requiring us to cease using certain technologies.

We have entered into many agreements that limit our or the third parties’ rights with respect to our intellectual property, including rights to use, options on rights to use, or prohibitions on rights to use (including noncompetition obligations) our or jointly developed intellectual property. Those rights could adversely affect our rights to develop and commercialize products utilizing our intellectual property.

We also rely on trade secrets, know-how and technology that are not protected by patents to maintain our competitive position. We try to protect this information by entering into confidentiality agreements with parties that have access to it, such as our corporate partners, collaborators, employees, and consultants. Any of these parties could breach these agreements and disclose our confidential information, or our competitors may learn of the information in some other way. If any material trade secret, know-how or other technology not protected by a patent were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position could be materially harmed.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS, INDUSTRY, STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS

If we fail to retain key personnel, our business could suffer.

We are dependent upon the principal members of our management and scientific staff. In addition, we believe that our future success in developing and marketing our products will depend on whether we can attract and retain additional qualified management and scientific personnel as well as a sales and marketing staff. There is strong competition for qualified personnel within the industry in which we operate, and we may not be able to attract and retain such personnel. As we have a small number of employees and we believe our products are

unique and highly specialized, the loss of the services of one or more of the principal members of our management or scientific staff, or the inability to attract and retain additional personnel and develop expertise as needed, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

If we are subject to product liability suits, we may not have sufficient insurance to cover damages.

The testing, manufacturing, marketing and sale of the products utilizing our technologies involve risks that product liability claims may be asserted against us and/or our licensees. Our current clinical trial and product liability insurance may not be adequate to cover damages resulting from product liability claims. Regardless of their merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims could require us to spend significant time, money and other resources to defend such claims, could result in decreased demand for our products and product candidates, or result in reputational harm, and could result in the payment of a significant damage award. Our product liability insurance coverage is subject to deductibles and coverage limitations and may not be adequate in scope to protect us in the event of a successful product liability claim. Further, we may not be able to acquire sufficient clinical trial or product liability insurance in the future on reasonable commercial terms, if at all.

Consolidation in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may adversely affect us.

There has been consolidation in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. Consolidation could result in the remaining companies having greater financial resources and technological capabilities, thus intensifying competition, and fewer potential collaboration partners or licensees for our product candidates. In addition, if a consolidating company is already doing business with any of our competitors, we could lose existing or potential future licensees or collaboration partners as a result of such consolidation.

If we or our licensees fail to comply with environmental laws and regulations, our or their ability to manufacture and commercialize products may be adversely affected.

Medical and biopharmaceutical research and development involves the controlled use of hazardous materials, such as radioactive compounds and chemical solvents. We and our licensees are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations in the U.S. and abroad governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of such materials and waste products. We and they could be subject to both criminal liability and civil damages in the event of an improper or unauthorized release of, or exposure of individuals to, hazardous materials. In addition, claimants may sue us or them for resulting injury or contamination, and the liability may exceed our or their ability to pay. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair the research, development or production efforts of our company or our licensees and harm our operating results.

If we or our licensees encounter problems with product manufacturing, there could be delays in product development or commercialization, which would adversely affect our future profitability.

Our ability and that of our licensees to conduct timely pre-clinical and clinical research and development programs, obtain regulatory approvals, and develop and commercialize our product candidates will depend, in part, upon our and our licensees’ ability to manufacture our products and product candidates, either directly or through third parties, in accordance with FDA and other regulatory requirements. The manufacture, packaging and testing of our products and product candidates are regulated by the FDA and similar foreign regulatory entities and must be conducted in accordance with applicable cGMP and comparable foreign requirements. Any change in a manufacturing process or procedure used for one of our products or product candidates, including a change in the location at which a product or product candidate is being manufactured or in the third-party manufacturer being used, may require the FDA’s and similar foreign regulatory entities’ prior review and/or approval in accordance with applicable cGMP or other regulations. Additionally, the FDA and similar foreign regulatory entities may implement new standards, or change their interpretation and enforcement of existing standards, for the manufacture, packaging and testing of products at any time.

There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP and other foreign regulations that are both capable of manufacturing our products and product candidates and are willing to do so. Alimera has contracted

with individual third-party manufacturers for the manufacture of ILUVIEN and its components. If any of Alimera’s third-party manufacturers breach their agreements or are unable or unwilling to perform for any reason or fail to comply with cGMP and comparable foreign requirements, Alimera may not be able to locate alternative acceptable manufacturers, enter into favorable agreements with them or get them approved by the applicable regulatory authorities in a timely manner. Delays in the commercial production of ILUVIEN could delay or impair Alimera’s marketing of ILUVIEN, which, in turn, could adversely affect Alimera’s generation of net profits for us.

Failure by us, our collaborative partners, or our or their third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable manufacturing requirements could result in sanctions being imposed on us or our collaborative partners, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, failure of regulatory authorities to grant marketing approval of our product candidates, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions. In addition, we or our collaborative partners may not be able to manufacture our product candidates successfully or have a third party manufacture them in a cost-effective manner. If we or our collaborative partners are unable to develop our own manufacturing facilities or to obtain or retain third-party manufacturing on acceptable terms, we may not be able to conduct certain future pre-clinical and clinical testing or to supply commercial quantities of our products. We manufacture supplies in connection with pre-clinical or clinical studies conducted by us and our licensees. Our licensees have the exclusive rights to manufacture commercial quantities of products, once approved for marketing. Our and our licensees’ reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks, including:

Problems associated with international business operations could affect our or our licensees’ ability to manufacture and sell our products. If we encounter such problems, our or their costs could increase and development of products could be delayed.

We currently maintain offices and research and development facilities in the U.S. and the U.K., and our goal is to develop products for sale by us and our licensees in major world healthcare markets. Manufacturing of pharmaceutical products requires us or our licensees to comply with regulations regarding safety and quality and to obtain country and jurisdiction-specific regulatory approvals and clearances. We or our licensees may not be able to comply with such regulations or obtain or maintain needed regulatory approvals and clearances, or may be required to incur significant costs in doing so. In addition, our operations and future revenues may be subject to a number of risks associated with foreign commerce, including the following:

Legislative or regulatory changes may adversely affect our business, operations and financial results.

Our industry is highly regulated and new laws, regulations and judicial decisions, and new interpretations of existing laws, regulations and judicial decisions, may adversely affect our business, operations and financial results.

U.S. federal and state governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (PPACA), represents one of the most significant healthcare reform measures in decades. The PPACA is intended to expand U.S. healthcare coverage primarily through the imposition of health insurance mandates on employers and individuals and expansion of the Medicaid program. Several provisions of the PPACA could significantly reduce payments from Medicare and Medicaid for any product candidates that obtain marketing approval in the future. Federal and state legislatures within the U.S. and foreign governments will likely continue to consider changes in existing healthcare legislation. We cannot predict the reform initiatives that may be adopted in the future or whether initiatives that have been adopted will be repealed or modified. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect the demand for any products for which we or our licensees may obtain regulatory approval; our or our licensees’ ability to set a price that we or they believe is fair for our products; our or our licensees’ ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement approval for a product; our or our licensees’ ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability; or the level of taxes that we are required to pay.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since PPACA. The Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 includes provisions to reduce the federal deficit. The BCA, as amended, resulted in the imposition of 2% reductions in Medicare payments to providers beginning in 2013. More recent legislation extends reductions through 2024. Any significant spending reductions affecting Medicare, Medicaid or other publicly funded or subsidized health programs that may be implemented, and/or any significant taxes or fees that may be imposed on us, as part of any broader deficit reduction effort or legislative replacement to the BCA, could have an adverse impact on our anticipated product revenues.

The FDAAA granted the FDA enhanced authority over products already approved for sale, including authority to require post-marketing studies and clinical trials, labeling changes based on new safety information and compliance with risk evaluations and mitigation strategies approved by the FDA. The FDA’s exercise of this relatively new authority could result in delays and increased costs during product development, clinical trials and regulatory review and approval, increased costs following regulatory approval to assure compliance with new post-approval regulatory requirements, and potential restrictions on the sale or distribution of approved products following regulatory approval.

Changes in the regulatory approval policy during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional regulations or statutes, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. For example, the July 9, 2012 reauthorization of the PDUFA extended by two months the period in which the FDA is expected to review and approve certain NDAs. Although the FDA has recently stated that it expects to meet PDUFA’s updated timing goals, it has in the past provided its managers discretion to miss them due to heightened agency workload or understaffing in the review divisions. Accordingly, it remains unclear whether and to what extent the FDA will adhere to PDUFA timing goals in the future, which could delay approval and commercialization of our product candidates.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR COMMON STOCK

The price of our common stock may be volatile.

The price of our common stock (including common stock represented by CHESS Depositary Interests (CDIs)) may be affected by developments directly affecting our business, as well as by developments out of our control or not specific to us. The biotechnology sector, in particular, and the stock market generally are vulnerable to abrupt changes in investor sentiment. Prices of securities and trading volumes of companies in the biotechnology industry, including ours, can swing dramatically in ways unrelated to, or that bear a disproportionate relationship to, our performance. The price of our common stock (and CDIs) and their trading volumes may fluctuate based on a number of factors including, but not limited to:

In addition, low trading volume in our common stock or our CDIs may increase their price volatility. Holders of our common stock and CDIs may not be able to liquidate their positions at the desired time or price. Finally, we will need to continue to meet the listing requirements of the NASDAQ Global Market, including the minimum stock price, and the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), for our stock and CDIs to continue to be traded on those exchanges, respectively.

If the holders of our outstanding warrants and stock options exercise their warrants and options, ownership of our common stock holders may be diluted, and our stock price may decline.

As of August 31, 2015, we had outstanding warrants and options to acquire approximately 6.1 million shares of our common stock, or approximately 17.1% of our shares on a fully diluted basis. The issuance of shares of our common stock upon exercise of these warrants and stock options could result in dilution to the interests of other holders of our common stock and could adversely affect our stock price.

We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock, and any return to investors is expected to come, if at all, only from potential increases in the price of our common stock.

At the present time, we intend to use available funds to finance our operations. Accordingly, while payment of dividends rests within the discretion of our board of directors, no cash dividends on our common shares have been declared or paid by us and we have no intention of paying any such dividends in the foreseeable future.

ITEM 1B.

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

We do not own any real property. We lease the following:

None.

Not applicable.

PART II

Market Information, Holders and Dividends

Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Market under the trading symbol “PSDV”.removed. The following table sets forth the highname, age, director service period and low prices per shareposition of each of our common stockcurrent directors, as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market for the periods indicated:of October 30, 2017:

On August 31, 2015, the last reported sale priceSet forth below for each current director is a list of Board Committee memberships and a description of his or her business experience, qualifications, education and skills that led our Board to conclude that such individual should serve as a member of our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market was $3.75. As of that date, we had approximately 20 holders of record of our common stock and, according to our estimates, approximately 4,960 beneficial owners of our common stock. In addition, as of that date, there were approximately 2,010 beneficial owners of our CDIs.Board:

We have never paid cash dividends, and we do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future.David J. Mazzo, Ph.D.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table provides information about the securities authorized for issuance under the Company’s equity compensation plans as of June 30, 2015:

On the first day of each fiscal year until July 1, 2017, the number of shares reserved for issuance under the Company’s 2008 Incentive Plan will be increased by the least of (i) 750,000 shares; (ii) 4%Chairman of the then outstanding sharesBoard, Chairman of common stock; and (iii) any such lesser number of shares as is determined by the Compensation Committee and member of the BoardGovernance and Nominating Committee and the Science Committee

Dr. Mazzo has been the Chief Executive Officer and a director of Directors. On July 1, 2015,Caladrius Biosciences, Inc., a Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, or NASDAQ, listed company, since January 2015. Caladrius is a clinical stage development company with a pipeline of cell therapy product candidates in autoimmune disease (type I diabetes) and select cardiovascular indications. Prior to joining Caladrius, Dr. Mazzo served from August 2008 to October 2014 as Chief Executive Officer and as a member of the numberboard of shares issuable underdirectors of Regado Biosciences, Inc., a NASDAQ-listed biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of novel antithrombotic drug systems for acute andsub-acute cardiovascular indications. Prior to his leading Regado, from March 2007 to April 2008, Incentive PlanDr. Mazzo was increasedPresident, Chief Executive Officer and a director of Æterna Zentaris, Inc., a publicly held international biopharmaceutical company. From 2003 until 2007, Dr. Mazzo served as President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of Chugai Pharma USA, LLC, a biopharmaceutical company which was the U.S. subsidiary of Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. of Japan. Dr. Mazzo has also held senior management and executive positions in research and development and/or directorships with the Essex Chimie European subsidiary at Schering-Plough Corporation, a publicly held pharmaceutical company that was subsequently acquired by 750,000 shares.Merck & Co., Inc.; Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., the U.S. subsidiary of Hoechst AG, which was subsequently acquired by Sanofi, a multinational pharmaceuticals company; and Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Inc., a subsidiary of Rhone-Poulene SA, a French pharmaceuticals company, which was subsequently acquired by Hoechst AG. He also previously served on the board of directors of Avanir Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a specialty pharmaceutical company, from 2005 until Avanir was sold to Otsuka Holdings in 2015. Dr. Mazzo earned a B.A. in the Honors Program (Interdisciplinary Humanities) and a B.S. in Chemistry from Villanova University. In addition, Dr. Mazzo received his M.S. in chemistry and his Ph.D. degree in analytical chemistry from the University of Massachusetts,

Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities

None.

The selected historical financial data set forth belowAmherst. He was also a research fellow at the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Switzerland. We believe Dr. Mazzo is qualified to serve on our Board because his extensive experience as of June 30, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012an executive officer and 2011 and for eachdirector in the life sciences industry, his understanding of the strategic and regulatory environment in which we conduct our business, his lengthy track record in global product development, his Ph.D. in analytical chemistry and his broad scientific and managerial background provide him expertise in the oversight of companies in this sector and the ability to guide such companies through varying operating climates.

Nancy Lurker

President and Chief Executive Officer

Ms. Lurker has been our President and Chief Executive Officer since September 2016. From 2008 to 2015, Ms. Lurker served as President and Chief Executive Officer and a director of PDI, Inc., a NASDAQ-listed healthcare commercialization company now named Interpace Diagnostics Group, Inc. From 2006 to 2007, Ms. Lurker was Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the U.S. subsidiary of Novartis AG. From 2003 to 2006, she served as President and Chief Executive Officer of ImpactRx, Inc., a privately held healthcare information company. From 1998 to 2003, Ms. Lurker served as Group Vice President, Global Primary Care Products and Vice President, General Therapeutics for Pharmacia Corporation (Pharmacia), now a part of Pfizer, Inc. She also served as a member of Pharmacia’s U.S. executive management committee. Previously, Ms. Lurker spent 14 years then ended have been derivedat Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, rising from our audited consolidated financial statements,a sales representative to Senior Director, Worldwide Cardiovascular Franchise Management. Ms. Lurker serves as chair of which the financial statementsboard of directors of X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and as a member of June 30,the board of directors of the Cancer Treatment Centers of America, both privately held companies. Ms. Lurker previously served as a member of the boards of directors of publicly held Auxilium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 2011 to 2015 and 2014Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, plc from 2013 to 2016, in addition to serving as a director of PDI, Inc. from 2008 to 2015. Ms. Lurker received a B.S. in Biology from Seattle Pacific University and an M.B.A. from the University of Evansville. We believe Ms. Lurker is qualified to serve on our Board because of her role as our President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as her broad ranging experience in the pharmaceutical industry and her track record of maximizing the potential of new therapies and successfully implementing innovative U.S. and global drug launches, which provide her with valuable expertise and perspective on our corporate strategy, management, operations and governance.

Michael Rogers

Chairman of the Audit and Compliance Committee and member of the Compensation Committee

Mr. Rogers served as the Chief Financial Officer of Acorda Therapeutics, Inc., a biotechnology company focused on neurological disorders, from October 2013 until October 2016. From June 2009 to October 2012, Mr. Rogers served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of BG Medicine, Inc., a company focused on the development of novel biomarker-based diagnostics. Mr. Rogers was Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Indevus Pharmaceuticals Inc., a specialty pharmaceutical company, from February 1999 until April 2009. Mr. Rogers was previously Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and Corporate Development Officer at Advanced Health Corporation, a health care information technology company, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of AutoImmune, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, and Vice President, Investment Banking at Lehman Brothers, Inc. and at PaineWebber, Inc. Mr. Rogers is the chairman of the board of directors of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company focused on bringing innovative medicines to people with renal disease. Mr. Rogers was previously a director of Coronado Biosciences, Inc. We believe Mr. Rogers is qualified to serve on our Board because of his significant experience as CFO of various companies and as an investment banker have provided him with expertise in strategic transactions, corporate operations, financial management, taxes, accounting, controls, finance and financial reporting in the life sciences industry as well as valuable insight into the strategy of our company.

Douglas Godshall

Chairman of the Governance and Nominating Committee and member of the Compensation Committee

Mr. Godshall serves as President and Chief Executive Officer at Shockwave Medical, a privately held company which is creating and commercializing interventional devices designed to better address patients with problematic cardiovascular calcification. Previously, he served as the Chief Executive Officer of HeartWare

International, Inc., a NASDAQ-listed company, and its predecessor HeartWare Limited, a medical device company focused on heart failure, from September 2006 until August 2016 and as director from October 2006 until August 2016. HeartWare was acquired by Medtronic PLC in August 2016. Prior to joining HeartWare Limited, Mr. Godshall served in various executive and managerial positions at Boston Scientific Corporation, where he had been employed since 1990, including as a member of Boston Scientific’s Operating Committee. From January 2005 he served as President, Vascular Surgery, and for the prior five years ended June 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 are included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The information set forth below should be read in conjunction with Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, and the audited consolidated financial statements, and the notes thereto, and other financial information included elsewhere herein. Our historical financial information may not be indicative of our future results of operations or financial position.

		As of June 30,
		2015				2014				2013				2012				2011
		(In thousands)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents		$	19,121			$	15,334			$	6,899			$	4,625			$	12,912
Marketable securities			9,414				2,944				3,374				9,946				11,216
Total assets			32,367				22,671				16,249				20,597				47,113
Total deferred revenue—current and long-term			5,629				5,722				5,984				5,959				7,847
Total stockholders’ equity			23,368				14,924				7,700				13,636				37,433

ITEM 7.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes beginning on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements, based on current expectations and related to future events and our future financial performance, that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ significantly from those anticipated or implied in these forward-looking statements as a result of many important factors, including, but not limited to, those set forth under Item 1A, “Risk Factors”, and elsewhere in this report.

Overview

We are a leader in the development of sustained-release drug-delivery products for treating eye diseases. Our products deliver drugs at a controlled and steady rate for months or years. We have developed three of only four sustained-release products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treatment of back-of-the-eye diseases. The most recent is ILUVIEN^® for diabetic macular edema (DME), sold by our licensee in the U.S. and three European Union (EU) countries. Our lead development product, Medidur™ for posterior uveitis, is in pivotal phase III clinical trials. Our pre-clinical development program is primarilyVice President, Business Development, focused on developing productsacquisition strategies for chronic ophthalmic diseases utilizing our core technology platforms.

ILUVIEN is an injectable, sustained-release micro-insertthe cardiology, electrophysiology, neuroradiology and vascular surgery divisions. Mr. Godshall has a Bachelor of Arts in Business from Lafayette College and Masters of Business Administration from Northeastern University. Mr. Godshall has served on the board of directors of Vital Therapies, Inc., a public company traded on NASDAQ that provides treatment of DME for three years from a single administration. ILUVIEN is licensed to Alimera Sciences, Inc. (Alimera), and we are entitled to a share of the net profits (as defined in our agreement with Alimera) from Alimera’s sales of ILUVIEN. ILUVIEN was launched in late February 2015 in the U.S., where it is indicateddevelops cell-based therapies for the treatment of DME in patients previously treatedliver disease, since May 2013, and the board of directors of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association, a national trade association, since May 2014. We believe Mr. Godshall is qualified to serve on our Board because his managerial experience at public, life sciences companies provides him insights as a successful life sciences entrepreneur with a coursein-depth knowledge of corticosteroids without a clinically significant rise in intraocular pressure. ILUVIENmedical product strategy and development.

James Barry, Ph.D.

Member of the Audit and Compliance Committee and the Science Committee

Dr. Barry has been commercially available in the United Kingdom (U.K.)President and Germany since June 2013 and in Portugal since January 2015. ILUVIEN has marketing approvals in these and 14 other EU countries for the treatmentChief Executive Officer of chronic DME considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Alimera has sublicensed distribution, regulatory and reimbursement matters for ILUVIEN for DME in Australia and New Zealand in April 2014, in Canada in July 2015 and in Italy in August 2015.

Medidur, our lead development product, is an injectable, micro-insert designed to treat chronic non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye (posterior uveitis) for three years fromInspireMD, a single administration. Medidur, which is the same micro-insert as ILUVIEN, is in Phase III clinical trials, with the filing of a new drug application (NDA) anticipated in the first half of 2017. We are developing Medidur independently.

Our FDA-approved Retisert^® provides sustained release treatment of posterior uveitis for approximately two and a half years. It is licensed to Bausch & Lomb, and we receive royalties from its sales.

Our pre-clinical development program isglobal medical device company focused on developing products using our core platform technologies, Durasert™ and Tethadur™, to deliver drugs or biologics to treat wet and dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD), glaucoma, osteoarthritis and other diseases.

Summary of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles, or U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these financial statements requires that we make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. We base

our estimates on historical experience, anticipated results and trends and various other factors believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily available from other sources. By their nature, these estimates, judgments and assumptions are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty, and management evaluates them on an ongoing basis for changes in facts and circumstances. Changes in estimates are recorded in the period in which they become known. Actual results may differ from our estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

While our significant accounting policies are more fully described in Note 2 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements, we believe that the following accounting policies are critical to understanding the judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements. It is important that the discussion of our operating results that follows be read in conjunction with the critical accounting policies discussed below.

Revenue Recognition

Our business strategy includes entering into collaborative license and development agreements for the development and commercialization of product candidates utilizing our technology systems. The termsvascular products, since June 2016 and has served on the board of these arrangements typically include multiple deliverables by us (suchdirectors of Inspired MD since January 2011. Prior to this, he served as grantingthe Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of license rights, providingInspireMD. Prior to joining InspireMD, Dr. Barry served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Arsenal Medical from August 2011 until September 2012, and as President and CEO and Director from September 2012 until December 2013. Dr. Barry has been the Principal Founder at Convergent Biomedical Group since September 2010. Dr. Barry served in various executive and managerial positions at Boston Scientific Corporation, where he had been employed from 1992 until 2010, including as a member of Boston Scientific’s Operating Committee. From 2007 through 2010 he served as Senior Vice President, Corporate Technology Development, responsible for the global research and development services, manufacturingfunction, and for the prior six years he served as Vice President, Corporate Research and Advanced Technology Development. Dr. Barry is also a director of clinical materialsAgNovos Healthcare LLC and participatingCardiac Implants and in the past also served as a director of MicroChips Corporation. Dr. Barry has a Bachelor of Arts in Chemistry from St. Anselm College and a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the University of Massachusetts. We believe Dr. Barry is qualified to serve on joint research committees) in exchange for consideration to us of some combination of one or more of non-refundable license fees, funding ofour Board because his significant experience developing products, leading research and development activities, paymentsteams and building successful businesses, coupled with his expertise in advising clients in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device industries, brings valuable technical expertise and commercial experience to our company.

Jay Duker, M.D.

Chairman of the Science Committee and member of the Governance and Nominating Committee

Dr. Duker is the Director of the New England Eye Center, where he has served in various capacities since 1992. He is also Professor and Chairman of Ophthalmology at Tufts Medical Center and Tufts University School of Medicine. He has published more than 200 journal articles related to ophthalmology and isco-author of Yanoff and Duker’s Ophthalmology, a best-selling ophthalmic text. Dr. Duker isco-founder of three companies, including Hemera Biosciences, Inc., a privately held company seeking to develop anti-compliment gene-based therapies for the treatment of dry and wetage-related macular degeneration. Dr. Duker serves as a director of Hemera and Eleven Biotherapeutics, a publicly held biopharmaceutical company advancing a broad pipeline of novel anti-cancer agents based upon achievementon its Targeted Protein Therapeutics. Dr. Duker received an A.B. from Harvard University and an M.D. from the Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University. We believe Dr. Duker is qualified to serve on our Board because his extensive clinical development, regulatoryand academic experience and expertise in ophthalmology coupled with his leadership asco-founder of other life sciences companies provide him with valuable clinical, scientific and commercial insight to bring to our company.

Kristine Peterson

Member of the Audit and Compliance Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee

Ms. Peterson has over 30 years of healthcare industry experience. She most recently served from 2009 to 2016 as Chief Executive Officer of Valeritas, Inc., a medical technology company focused on innovative drug delivery systems, and as a strategic advisor to Valeritas until August 2017. Prior to that, Ms. Peterson served as Company Group Chair of Johnson & Johnson’s biotech groups from 2006 to 2009, and as Executive Vice President of Johnson & Johnson’s global strategic marketing organization from 2004 to 2006. Prior to that, she served as Senior Vice President, Commercial Operations for Biovail Corporation, a pharmaceutical company, and President of Biovail Pharmaceuticals from 2003 to 2004. Ms. Peterson began her career at Bristol-Myers Squibb, holding assignments of increasing responsibility spanning marketing, sales and general management, including running a cardiovascular / metabolic business unit and a generics division. Ms. Peterson is also a director of Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Immunogen, Inc. and Amarin Corporation plc, and within the past five years also served as a director of Valeritas, Inc. Ms. Peterson earned a B.S. and M.B.A. from the University of Illinois at Champaign Urbana. We believe Ms. Peterson is qualified to serve on our Board because of her extensive executive management and sales milestones, royaltiesand marketing experience in the form of a designated percentage of product sales or participationboth large, multinational pharmaceutical and smaller biotechnology companies, in profits.

Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are divided into separate units of accounting if certain criteria are met, including whether the delivered element has stand-alone valueparticular as it relates to the collaborative partnerlater-stage development and based on the selling price of the deliverables. When deliverables are separable, consideration received is allocated to the separate units of accounting based on the relative selling price method using management’s best estimate of the standalone selling price of deliverables when vendor-specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of selling price is not available. Allocated consideration is recognized as revenue upon application of the appropriate revenue recognition principles to each unit.

The assessment of multiple deliverable arrangements requires judgment in order to determine the appropriate units of accounting, the estimated selling price of each unit of accounting, and the points in time that, or periods over which, revenue should be recognized.

For the year ended June 30, 2015, we reported $25.4 million of collaborative research and development revenue. Revenue is recognized when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the price is fixed and determinable and collection is reasonably assured.

We concluded that our deliverables under the Restated Pfizer Agreement are conducting the research and development program for the Latanoprost Product through completion of Phase II clinical trials (the “R&D program”) and participation on a Joint Steering Committee (“JSC”). We treat these as a single deliverable, having concluded that the JSC does not have standalone value separate from the R&D program.

The total arrangement consideration of the Restated Pfizer Agreement totaled $10.05 million, which consisted of $7.75 million of deferred revenue on our balance sheet at the effective date plus the $2.3 million upfront payment. The difference between the total arrangement consideration and the estimated selling price of the combined deliverables, or $3.3 million, was recognized as collaborative research and development revenue in the quarter ended June 30, 2011, the period of the modification. The remaining balance is being recognized as revenue using the proportional performance method over the estimated period of our performance obligations under the R&D program. Application of the proportional performance method in any fiscal period would result in an increase or decrease in revenue recognized to the extent that the aggregate projected costs to conduct the R&D program decreases or increases, respectively, compared to the previous period.

Recognition of Expense in Outsourced Clinical Trial Agreements

We recognize research and development expense with respect to outsourced agreements for clinical trials with contract research organizations (“CROs”) as the services are provided, based on our assessment of the services performed. We make our assessments of the services performed based on various factors, including evaluation by the third-party CROs and our own internal review of the work performed during the period, measurements of progress by us or by the third-party CROs, data analysis with respect to work completed and our management’s judgment. We have agreements with two CROs to conduct the Phase III clinical trial program for Medidur for posterior uveitis. Our financial obligations under the agreements are determined by the services that we request from time to time under the agreements. The actual amounts owed under the agreements and the timing of those obligations will depend on various factors, including changes to the protocols and/or services requested, the number of patients to be enrolled and the rate of patient enrollment, achievement of pre-defined direct cost milestone events and other factors relating to the clinical trials. As of June 30, 2015, our CRO agreements provided for two Phase III clinical trials and a utilization study of our proprietary inserter at an aggregate remaining cost of approximately $16.4 million. We can terminate the agreements at any time without penalty, and if terminated, we would be liable only for services through the termination date plus non-cancellable CRO obligations to third parties.

During fiscal 2015, we recognized approximately $6.1 million of research and development expense attributable to our Medidur Phase III clinical trial program. Changes in our estimates or differences between the actual level of services performed and our estimates may result in changes to our research and development expenses in future periods.

Results of Operations

Years Ended June 30, 2015 and 2014

Revenues

Collaborative research and development revenue totaled $25.4 million in fiscal 2015 compared to $2.2 million in fiscal 2014. This increase was primarily attributable to recognition of the one-time $25.0 million FDA approval milestone earned for ILUVIEN, partially offset by a $1.8 million reduction in revenues from funded technology evaluation agreements.

Retisert royalty income decreased by $164,000, or 12%, to $1.2 million in fiscal 2015 compared to $1.3 million in fiscal 2014. We do not expect Retisert royalty income to increase significantly in the next fiscal year, and it may decline further.

We are entitled to share in net profits, on a country-by-country basis, from sales of ILUVIEN by Alimera. Alimera initiated commercial sales of ILUVIEN in the U.K. and Germany in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 and in the U.S. and Portugal in the third quarter of fiscal 2015. We received $43,000 of ILUVIEN net profits during fiscal 2015 and none in fiscal 2014. We do not know when and if we will receive future net profit payments with respect to any country where Alimera sells ILUVIEN or payments with respect to countries where Alimera sublicenses the sale of ILUVIEN.

Research and Development

Research and development totaled $12.1 million in fiscal 2015, an increase of $2.5 million, or 26%, compared to $9.6 million in fiscal 2014. This increase was primarily attributable to a $2.0 million increase in CRO costs for the Medidur Phase III clinical development program and $240,000 of personnel related costs, including stock-based compensation. We currently expect costs of our ongoing Medidur clinical development program to increase by approximately $600,000, or 10%, during fiscal 2016 over fiscal 2015.

General and Administrative

General and administrative increased by $588,000, or 8%, to $8.1 million for fiscal 2015 from $7.5 million for fiscal 2014, primarily attributable to a $530,000 increase in professional fees and a $390,000 increase in stock-based compensation.

Other Income

Other income totaled $22,000 in fiscal 2015 compared to $5,000 in fiscal 2014, primarily due to interest income on higher average balances of marketable securities investments.

Income Tax (Expense) Benefit

Income tax expense of $96,000 in fiscal 2015 compared to an income tax benefit of $130,000 in fiscal 2014. During fiscal 2015, we paid $263,000 of federal alternative minimum taxes based upon U.S. taxable income for calendar year 2014, which was primarily attributable to the $25.0 million ILUVIEN FDA-approval milestone. Refundable foreign research and development tax credits totaled $167,000 in fiscal 2015 compared to $130,000 in fiscal 2014.

Years Ended June 30, 2014 and 2013

Revenues

Collaborative research and development revenue increased to $2.2 million in fiscal 2014, a 176% increase from $780,000 in fiscal 2013, primarily due to recognition of $1.5 million of arrangement consideration upon resolution of a contingency associated with completion of a feasibility study agreement.

Royalty income, predominantly related to Retisert, decreased by $45,000, or 3%, to $1.3 million in fiscal 2014 compared to $1.4 million in fiscal 2013.

Research and Development

Research and development totaled $9.6 million in fiscal 2014, an increase of $2.6 million, or 37%, compared to $7.0 million in fiscal 2013. A $3.3 million increase in CRO costs for the first Medidur Phase III clinical trial was partially offset by a $665,000 decrease in personnel costs, including stock-based compensation.

General and Administrative

General and administrative increased by $300,000, or 4%, to $7.5 million for fiscal 2014 from $7.2 million for fiscal 2013, primarily attributable to increased stock-based compensation and professional fees.

Other Income

Other income totaled $5,000 in fiscal 2014 compared to $14,000 in fiscal 2013 due to lower average balances of marketable securities investments.

Income Tax Benefit

Income tax benefit, which consisted of foreign research and development tax credits, increased by $13,000, or 11%, to $130,000 in fiscal 2014 from $117,000 in fiscal 2013.

Inflation and Seasonality

Our management believes inflation has not had a material impact on our operations or financial condition and that our operations are not currently subject to seasonal influences.

Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

New accounting pronouncements are issued periodically by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) and are adopted by us as of the specified effective dates. Unless otherwise disclosed below, we believe that the impact of recently issued and adopted pronouncements will not have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows or do not apply to our operations.

In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09,Revenue from Contracts with Customers(Topic 606) (“ASU 2014-09”), which requires an entity to recognize revenue in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for the transfer of promised goods or services to customers. The standard will replace most existing revenue recognition guidance in U.S. GAAP. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, which officially deferred the effective date of ASU 2014-09 by one year, while also permitting early adoption. As a result, ASU 2014-09 will become effective on July 1, 2018, with early adoption permitted on July 1, 2017. The standard permits the use of either the retrospective or cumulative effect transition method. We are evaluating the impact this standard will have on our financial statements.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15,Presentation of Financial Statements—Going Concern. ASU 2014-15 provides guidance around management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. For each reporting period, management will be required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the date the financial statements are issued. The new standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted. We are evaluating the potential impact of adopting this standard on our financial statements.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

During fiscal 2012 through fiscal 2015, we financed our operations primarily from the receipt of license fees, milestone payments, research and develop funding and royalty income from our collaboration partners, and from proceeds of sales of our equity securities. At June 30, 2015, our principal sources of liquidity consisted of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities totaling $28.5 million. Our cash equivalents are invested in an institutional money market fund, and our marketable securities are invested in investment-grade corporate debt with maturities at June 30, 2015 ranging from 0.5 to 8.5 months.

With the exception of net income in fiscal 2015 resulting from the $25.0 million ILUVIEN FDA approval milestone, we have generally incurred operating losses since inception and, at June 30, 2015, we had a total accumulated deficit of $270.7 million. We do not currently have any assured sources of future revenue and we generally expect negative cash flows from operations on a quarterly basis unless and until such time as we receive sufficient revenues from ILUVIEN for DME or one or more of our other product candidates achieve regulatory approval and provide us sufficient revenues. We believe that our capital resources of $28.5 million at June 30, 2015, together with expected cash inflows under existing collaboration agreements, will enable us to fund our operations as currently planned into early calendar year 2017. This estimate excludes any potential net

profits receipts under our Alimera collaboration agreement. Our ability to fund our planned operations beyond then, including completion of clinical development of Medidur, is expected to depend on the amount and timing of cash receipts from ILUVIEN net profits participation,commercialization, as well as proceeds from any future collaboration orher other agreements and/or financing transactions. There is no assurance that we will receive significant, if any, revenues from future sales of ILUVIEN or cash from any other sources. Accordingly, we expect to need additional resources to fund our planned operations. Whether we will require, or desire, to raise additional capital will be influenced by many factors, including, but not limited to:public company board experience.

Management currently believes that extending our cash position beyond early calendar year 2017 from operations depends significantly on possible cash flows from the successful commercialization of ILUVIEN for DME by Alimera. However, there is no assurance that ILUVIEN for DME will achieve market acceptance in the U.S. or the EU or that we will receive significant, if any, revenues from ILUVIEN for DME.

If we determine that it is desirable or necessary to raise additional capital in the future, we do not know if it will be available when needed or on terms favorable to us or our stockholders. Although we may be able to sell common shares under our existing ATM facility, we do not know whether and to what extent we will seek to do so and, if we are able to do so, on what terms. The state of the economy and the financial and credit markets at the time or times we seek additional financing may make it more difficult and more expensive to obtain. If available, additional equity financing may be dilutive to stockholders, debt financing may involve restrictive covenants or other unfavorable terms and potential dilutive equity, and funding through collaboration agreements may be on unfavorable terms, including requiring us to relinquish rights to certain of our technologies or products. If adequate financing is not available if and when needed, we may delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate research or development programs, postpone or cancel the pursuit of product candidates, including pre-clinical and clinical trials and new business opportunities, reduce staff and operating costs, or otherwise significantly curtail our operations to reduce our cash requirements and extend our capital.

Our consolidated statements of historical cash flows are summarized as follows:

Sources and uses of operating cash flows for the years ended June 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 are summarized as follows:

Operating cash inflows for each year consisted primarily of payments received pursuant to license and collaboration agreements. As a percentage of total license and collaboration cash inflows, amounts attributable to Alimera represented 99.3% in fiscal 2015, 5.8% in fiscal 2014 and 8.4% in fiscal 2013, amounts attributable to Enigma represented 0.4% in fiscal 2015, 6.9% in fiscal 2014 and 11.7% in fiscal 2013 and amounts attributable to various feasibility study agreements represented 0.2% in fiscal 2015, 86.6% in fiscal 2014 and 73.2% in fiscal 2013.

Operating cash outflows increased by $2.2 million, or 15.3%, from fiscal 2014 to fiscal 2015, primarily as a result of increases of (a) $2.1 million in Medidur clinical development; (b) $263,000 of federal alternative minimum taxes attributable to calendar year 2014 U.S. taxable income; and (c) a $370,000 increase in professional fees, partially offset by decreases of $255,000 in incentive compensation awards and $230,000 in facility costs. Operating cash outflows increased by $2.7 million, or 23.7%, from fiscal 2013 to fiscal 2014, primarily as a result of: (a) an increase of $1.4 million for Medidur clinical development; (b) $1.1 million of incentive compensation, which included awards for fiscal 2013 and awards for fiscal 2012 that were conditioned on events occurring in fiscal 2013; and (c) an increase of $205,000 of professional fees, partially offset by a $300,000 reduction of other personnel costs.

Cash flows from investing activities were primarily attributable to purchases of marketable securities, net of maturities, of $6.6 million for fiscal 2015 and maturities of marketable securities, net of purchases, of $386,000 for fiscal 2014 and $6.4 million for fiscal 2013. Purchases of property and equipment totaled $161,000 in fiscal 2015, $248,000 in fiscal 2014 and $68,000 in fiscal 2013.

Cash flows from financing activities in fiscal 2014 were primarily attributable to an underwritten public offering in July 2013, a registered direct offering in March 2014 and sale of shares pursuant to an ATM facility consummated in December 2013, resulting in aggregate gross proceeds of $19.3 million, net of $1.2 million of share issue costs. Cash flows from financing activities in fiscal 2013 were attributable to $5.4 million of gross proceeds from an August 2012 registered direct offering of shares and warrants, net of approximately $700,000 of share issue costs. In addition, cash flows from financing activities included proceeds from the exercise of stock options totaling $235,000 in fiscal 2015 and $987,000 in fiscal 2014.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that would be material to investors.

Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our minimum contractual obligations as of June 30, 2015:

Our operating lease obligations consist predominantly of office and lab space in Watertown, Massachusetts and Malvern, U.K. Our purchase obligations consist of non-cancellable purchase orders for supplies and services.

We have agreements with two CROs to conduct the clinical development program for Medidur for posterior uveitis. Our financial obligations under the agreements are determined by the services that we request from time to time under the agreements. The actual amounts owed under the agreements and the timing of those obligations will depend on various factors, including the number of patients and rate of patient enrollment, any protocol amendments and other factors relating to the clinical trials. We can change the services requested and thereby increase or decrease our obligations under the agreements from time to time. As of June 30, 2015, our CRO agreements provided for two Phase III clinical trials and a utilization study of the newly designed proprietary inserter at an aggregate remaining cost of approximately $16.4 million. We can terminate the agreements at any time without penalty.

We also have employment agreements with our three executive officers that would require us to make severance payments to them if we terminate their employment without cause or the executives resign for good cause. These payments are contingent upon the occurrence of various future events, and the amounts payable under these provisions depend upon the level of compensation at the time of termination of employment, are therefore not calculable at this time, and, as a result, we have not included any such amounts in the table above.

ITEM 7A.

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Foreign Currency Exchange Rates

We conduct operations in two principal currencies, the U.S. dollar and the Pound Sterling (£). The U.S. dollar is the functional currency for our U.S. operations, and the Pound Sterling is the functional currency for our U.K. operations. Changes in the foreign exchange rate of the Pound Sterling to the U.S. dollar impact the net operating expenses of our U.K. operations. The strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative to the Pound Sterling in fiscal 2015 compared to fiscal 2014 resulted in a net decrease in research and development expense of approximately $62,000. For every incremental 5% strengthening or weakening of the weighted average exchange rate of the U.S. dollar in relation to the Pound Sterling, our research and development expense in fiscal 2015 would have decreased or increased by $89,000, respectively. All cash and cash equivalents, and most other asset and liability balances, are denominated in each entity’s functional currency and, accordingly, we do not consider our statement of comprehensive income (loss) exposure to realized and unrealized foreign currency gains and losses to be significant.

Changes in the foreign exchange rate of the Pound Sterling to the U.S. dollar also impacted total stockholders’ equity. As reported in the statement of comprehensive income (loss), the relative strengthening of the U.S. dollar in relation to the Pound Sterling at June 30, 2015 compared to June 30, 2014 resulted in $95,000 of other comprehensive loss due to the translation of £503,000 of net assets of our U.K. operations, predominantly the BioSilicon (including Tethadur) technology intangible asset, into U.S. dollars. For every incremental 5% strengthening or weakening of the U.S. dollar at June 30, 2015 in relation to the Pound Sterling, our stockholders’ equity at June 30, 2015 would have decreased or increased, respectively, by approximately $40,000.

The information required by this item may be found on pages F-1 throughF-24 of this Annual Report.

None.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of June 30, 2015. The term “disclosure controls and procedures”, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), means controls and other procedures of a company that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their desired objectives, and our management necessarily applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures. Based on the evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of June 30, 2015, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.

(a)	Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) or 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act, as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by our board of directors, management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S., and includes those policies and procedures that:

All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations and may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluations of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2015. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (2013). Based on this assessment, our management concluded that, as of such date, our internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.

Deloitte & Touche LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm that audited our consolidated financial statements, has issued an attestation report on our internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2015, which is included below in this Item 9A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the last quarter of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of pSivida Corp.

Watertown, Massachusetts

We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of pSivida Corp. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of June 30, 2015, based on the criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the company’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the company’s board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2015, based on the criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended June 30, 2015 of the Company and our report dated September 10, 2015 expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

September 10, 2015

ITEM 9B.

OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III

Executive Officers

Each of our executive officers holds office until the first meeting of the board of directorsour Board following the next annual meeting of stockholders and until such officer’s respective successor is chosen and qualified, unless a shorter period shall have been specified by the terms of such officer’s election or appointment. Our current officers are listed below.The following table sets forth information about our executive officers:

Paul Ashton, 54

Nancy Lurker

PresidentPlease refer to the section entitled “Directors, Executive Officers and Chief Executive OfficerCorporate Governance – Directors” above for Ms. Lurker’s biographical information.

Dr. AshtonDeb Jorn

Ms. Jorn has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since January 2009 and was previously our Managing Director from January 2007 to January 2009 and our Executive Director of Strategy from December 2005 to January 2007. From 1996 until acquired by us in December 2005, Dr. Ashton was the President and Chief Executive Officer of Control Delivery Systems, Inc. (CDS), a drug delivery company that he co-founded in 1991. Dr. Ashton was previously a joint faculty member in the Departments of Ophthalmology and Surgery at the University of Kentucky, served on the faculty of Tufts University and worked as a pharmaceutical scientist at Hoffman-LaRoche.

Lori Freedman, 48

Vice President of Corporate Affairs, General Counseland Commercial Development since November 2016. From 2013 to 2016, Ms. Jorn was EVP and Company SecretaryChair at Valeant Pharmaceuticals, and previously served from 2010 to 2013 as Chief Marketing Officer at Bausch & Lomb. From 2004 to 2010, Ms. Jorn was Group VP of Women’s Healthcare and Fertility at Schering Plough. From 2002 to 2004, she served as the Worldwide VP of Internal Medicine and Early Commercial Input at Johnson & Johnson. She began her career at Merck and for more than twenty years held roles of progressive responsibility in a variety of functions including R&D, regulatory, sales, and marketing. Ms. Jorn is a member of the Board of Directors for Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc. and Viveve, Inc. Ms. Jorn holds a B.A. in Biochemistry from Rutgers University and an MBA from New York University’s Stern Graduate School of Business Administration.

Ms. Freedman

Dario Paggiarino

Dr. Paggiarino has served as our Vice President, of Corporate Affairs, General Counsel and SecretaryChief Medical Officer since May 2006, and held the same positions at CDS from 2001 to May 2006.August 2016. Prior to that, Ms. FreedmanDr. Paggiarino served since April 2013 as Senior Vice President and Chief Development Officer of Lpath, Inc., a biotechnology company focused on the discovery and development of lipidomic-based therapeutic antibodies that target bioactive signaling lipids to treat a wide range of human diseases. Dr. Paggiarino served as Vice President Businessand Therapeutic Unit Head for retina diseases at Alcon, a division of Novartis from 2011 to 2013. He served as Executive Director of Clinical Development and CounselMedical Affairs at Pfizer Global R&D, a division of Macromedia,Pfizer, Inc., from 2001 to 2011. Earlier in his career, he held research and development positions of increasing responsibility at Angelini Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an affiliate of Angelini S.p.A, a providerprivately-owned company, ultimately serving as president and later joined Pharmacia Global R&D, a division of software for creating Internet content and business applications, from March 2001 through September 2001. Ms. Freedman also served as Vice President, General Counsel, and SecretaryPharmacia Corporation, where he was clinical program director of Allaire Corporation, a provider of Internet infrastructure for building business applications, from 1999 until Allaire’s acquisition by Macromedia in 2001, as Corporate Counsel of Polaroid Corporation from May 1998 to December 1998 and with the law firm of McDermott, Will & Emery.ophthalmology.

Leonard S. Ross 65

Vice President, Finance and Principal Financial Officer

Mr. Ross has served as our Vice President, Finance and Chief Accounting Officer since July 2017, and was previously Vice President, Finance since November 2009 and was previouslybefore that our Corporate Controller from October 2006. Mr. Ross was designated as the Company’sour principal financial officer in March 2009. From 2001 through April 2006, Mr. Ross served as Corporate Controller for NMT Medical, Inc., a medical device company. From 1990 to 1999, Mr. Ross was employed by JetForm Corporation, a developer of workflow software solutions, where he served in various capacities, including Vice President, Finance and Vice President, International Operations. Mr. Ross received a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Tufts University, an M.B.A. from the Amos Tuck School at Dartmouth College and an M.S. in Taxation from Bentley College.

Family Relationships

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

Arrangements between Officers and Directors

There is no arrangement or understanding between any of our executive officers or directors and any other person, pursuant to which such person was selected to serve as an executive officer or director, as applicable.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our directors, executive officers and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of a registered class of our equity securities to file with the SEC initial reports of ownership and reports of changes in ownership of our common stock and other equity securities. Directors, officers and greater than 10% stockholders are required by SEC regulations to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file.

Based solely upon a review of Forms 3, 4 and 5 furnished to us during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017, we believe that the directors, executive officers and greater than 10% beneficial owners have complied with all applicable filing requirements during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

Stockholder Nominations for Director

The Governance and Nominating Committee will consider written stockholder recommendations for candidates for the Board, which recommendations should be delivered or mailed, postage prepaid, to:

Company Secretary

pSivida Corp.

480 Pleasant Street

Watertown, MA 02472

United States

Stockholder recommendations must include certain relevant information concerning the candidate, the stockholder making the recommendation and any beneficial owner on whose behalf the recommendation is made.

The required information is set forth in our Stockholder Nomination Policy, available on the “Investor” section of our website at www.psivida.com under “Corporate Governance – Governance Overview.”

The Governance and Nominating Committee will evaluate candidates for director who are recommended by stockholders on the same basis as candidates recommended by other sources. Considerations include the Governance and Nominating Committee’s discretionary assessment of the skills represented and required on the Board, and an evaluation of candidates against the standards and qualifications set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and criteria approved by the Board from time to time. We do not have a formal policy with respect to diversity, although we seek to have a Board that reflects a range of talents, ages, skills, viewpoints, professional experience, educational backgrounds, expertise, genders and ethnicities. The Governance and Nominating Committee will determine whether to interview any candidate in its sole discretion.

Code of Conduct

We have adopted a written Code of Business Conduct that appliesapplicable to alleach of our officers, directors and employees, officers and directors. This Code of Conduct is designedconsultants and contractors to, ensure thatus and our business is conducted with integritysubsidiaries, including our principal executive officer and in compliance with SEC

regulations and NASDAQ and ASX listing standards.principal financial officer. The Code of Business Conduct covers adherenceis a set of policies on key integrity issues that requires our representatives to lawsact ethically and regulations as well as professional conduct, including employmentlegally. It includes policies with respect to conflicts of interest, compliance with laws, insider trading, corporate opportunities, competition and fair dealing, discrimination and harassment, health and safety, record-keeping, confidentiality, protection and proper use of assets, payments to government personnel and reports to and communications with the SEC and the protection of confidential information. The Code of Conduct is available on the “Corporate Governance” section of our website at www.psivida.com.public.

We intend to disclose any future amendments to, or waivers from, the Code of Business Conduct that affect our directors or senior financial and executive officers within four business days of the amendment or waiver by filingposting such information on the website address and location specified above.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

None of our executive officers serves as a member of the board of directors or compensation committee, or other committee serving an equivalent function, of any other entity that has one or more of its executive officers serving as a member of our Board or Compensation Committee. None of the members of our Compensation Committee has ever been employed by us. For a description of transactions, if any, between us and members of our Compensation Committee and affiliates of such members, please see the section of Item 13 of this Form10-K/A entitled “Transactions with Related Persons.”

Board Leadership Structure

The Board has chosen to separate the roles of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and believes that such a separation of roles is in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders. Dr. Mazzo’s tenure as a member of our Board, extensive experience in the biotechnology industry and perspective as an independent director provide effective leadership for our Board and support for our executive team. Ms. Lurker’s track record of maximizing the potential of new therapies and successfully implementing U.S. and international drug launches position her to lead us in the execution of our strategy and in the daily management of our business.

Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

It is management’s responsibility to manage risk and bring to the Board’s attention risks that are material to the company. The Board has oversight responsibility for the systems established to report and monitor the most significant risks applicable to us. The Board administers its risk oversight role directly and through its committee structure. The Board reviews strategic and financial risks and exposures associated with our long-term strategy, development and commercialization of products and product candidates and other matters that may present material risk to our operations, strategy and prospects. The Audit and Compliance Committee reviews risks associated with financial and accounting matters, including financial reporting, accounting, disclosure and internal control over financial reporting. The Compensation Committee reviews risks related to executive compensation and the design of compensation programs, plans and arrangements. The Governance and Nominating Committee manages risks associated with corporate governance and Board composition and procedures. The Science Committee supports the Board’s oversight of risks related to our research and development, or R&D, organization.

Board Committees

The Board has four standing committees: the Audit and Compliance Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Governance and Nominating Committee and the Science Committee. Each standing committee has a written charter. Each of the Audit and Compliance Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee is comprised entirely of independent directors. The Science Committee is currently comprised entirely of independent directors, but may in the future include members of our R&D organization and other members of executive management in accordance with its charter. While each committee has designated responsibilities, the committees act on behalf of the entire Board and regularly report on their activities to the entire Board. Details concerning the role and structure of the Board and each Board committee are contained in the Corporate Governance Guidelines and the committee charters, available on the “Investor” section of our website at www.psivida.com under “Corporate Governance.”

Audit and Compliance Committee

The Audit and Compliance Committee is responsible for assisting the Board with oversight of our accounting and financial reporting processes, including but not limited to (i) our audit program; (ii) the integrity of our financial statements; (iii) the review and assessment of the qualifications and independence of our independent registered public accounting firm and (iv) the preparation of reports required of the Audit and Compliance Committee under the rules of the SEC. More specifically, the Audit and Compliance Committee’s responsibilities include:

Other Information

The other information

The members of the Audit and Compliance Committee are Mr. Rogers (chair), Dr. Barry and Ms. Peterson. Each of Mr. Rogers, Dr. Barry and Mr. Godshall was a member of the Audit and Compliance Committee for the entirety of fiscal 2017. Ms. Peterson has served on the committee since July 1, 2017, replacing Mr. Godshall.

The Board has determined that all current and fiscal 2017 members of the Audit and Compliance Committee are independent for purposes of service on the Audit and Compliance Committee as provided in SEC, NASDAQ and Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) rules, as applicable. The Board also has determined that Mr. Rogers and Ms. Peterson are audit committee financial experts.

The Audit and Compliance Committee met five times during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee is hereby incorporatedresponsible for (i) discharging the Board’s responsibilities relating to executive compensation, (ii) overseeing our compensation and employee benefits plans and practices, including incentive, equity-based and other compensatory plans in which executive officers and key employees participate and (iii) producing a report on executive compensation as required by referencethe SEC. More specifically, the Compensation Committee’s responsibilities include:

The members of the Compensation Committee are Dr. Mazzo (chair), Mr. Rogers and Mr. Godshall, each of whom was a member of the Compensation Committee for the entirety of fiscal 2017.

The Compensation Committee met seven times during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

Governance and Nominating Committee

The Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for (i) identifying and recommending to the Board individuals qualified to serve as directors, (ii) advising the Board with respect to the Board composition and procedures, (iii) overseeing the evaluation of the Board and (iv) developing and maintaining our corporate governance policies. The Governance and Nominating Committee has periodically engaged third parties to identify and evaluate candidates qualified to serve as our directors and may continue to do so in the future. More specifically, the Governance and Nominating Committee’s responsibilities include:

The members of the Governance and Nominating Committee are Mr. Godshall (chair), Dr. Mazzo, Dr. Duker and Ms. Peterson. Each of Mr. Godshall, Dr. Mazzo and Mr. Rogers was a member of the Governance and Nominating Committee for the entirety of fiscal 2017, with Mr. Godshall replacing Dr. Mazzo as Committee Chair on January 17, 2017. Dr. Duker was appointed to the Governance and Nominating Committee on January 17, 2017. Ms. Peterson was appointed to the Governance and Nominating Committee on July 1, 2017, replacing Mr. Rogers.

The Governance and Nominating Committee met six times during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

Science Committee

The Science Committee is responsible for reviewing the science, clinical and regulatory strategy underlying our research and development programs and making recommendations to the Board on key strategic and tactical issues relating to our research and development activities. More specifically, the Science Committee’s responsibilities include:

The members of the Science Committee are Dr. Duker (chair), Dr. Mazzo and Dr. Barry. Each of Dr. Mazzo and Dr. Barry was a member of the committee for the entirety of fiscal 2017. Dr. Duker was appointed to the Science Committee on January 17, 2017 as the Chair, replacing Mr. Godshall, who served as Chair of the committee during fiscal 2017 until January 16, 2017.

The Science Committee met one time during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

ITEM 11.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee has reviewed the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” below and discussed it with management. Based on this review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” as it appears below be included in thisForm 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

In the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis, or CD&A, we provide highlights of our performance for fiscal 2017, an overview of our compensation philosophy, program and decision-making process, including the Compensation Committee’s use of consultants and peer group information, and the material elements of compensation earned with respect to fiscal 2017 by each of the following individuals, who are our named executive officers for fiscal 2017, which we collectively refer to as our Named Executive Officers:

On September 14, 2016, Dr. Ashton’s employment with us terminated, and Nancy Lurker was appointed to serve as our President and Chief Executive Officer, effective September 15, 2016. On December 26, 2016, Ms. Freedman’s employment with us terminated in connection with the elimination of her position. Dario Paggiarino was appointed to serve as our Vice President, Chief Medical Officer on August 1, 2016 and Deb Jorn was appointed to serve as our Executive Vice President, Corporate and Commercial Development on November 2, 2016.

Fiscal 2017 Highlights

In fiscal 2017, we made significant progress in advancing our clinical andpre-clinical development programs and beginning to prepare our Company for its first commercial launch in the United States, which is planned for the first half of calendar year 2019 pending a positive regulatory review. These highlights of our business performance and accomplishments for fiscal 2017 were considered significant by the Compensation Committee:

•

Based on the statistical significance achieved in the primary efficacy analysis of our first Durasert three-year uveitis Phase 3 trial, we filed our marketing authorization approval, or MAA, in the European Union in June 2017. We subsequently withdrew our application upon licensing this product candidate to Alimera Sciences for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, or EMEA. In addition, we further amended our existing collaboration agreement with Alimera to convert the previous profit share arrangement for ILUVIEN® for diabetic macular edema, or DME, to a tiered sales-base royalty, providing the potential for improved and more predictable long-term revenue generation.

Compensation Philosophy

Our compensation program is designed to attract, retain and motivate executive officers to achieve our business objectives and build value for our stockholders and to reward them for that performance. Accordingly, our executive compensation program is weighted toat-risk incentive compensation earned on the basis of performance. Of the three principal elements in our program (base salary, annual cash performance bonuses and long-term equity incentive compensation), only one, base salary, is fixed. The other elements are variable: cash bonuses, which are earned based on the Compensation Committee’s assessment of annual performance, stock options, which deliver value only to the extent the value of our stock increases, restricted stock units, or RSUs, which deliver value only to the extent certain service-based vesting conditions are met, and performance stock units, or PSUs, which deliver value only to the extent certain performance conditions are met. Our mixture of cash and equity compensation is designed to incentivize and reward our executive officers to attain short and long-term goals and to encourage retention. Compensation takes into account Company performance, individual contributions and peer compensation.

The Board and the Compensation Committee are responsible for our executive officer compensation programs and practices and seek to provide compensation to our executive officers that over time is competitive with compensation paid by comparable companies for comparable responsibilities and positions. Our goal is that each of total compensation, base salary, total cash compensation and long-term equity incentives will generally, over time, achieve approximately the 50th percentile for executive officers in comparable positions at our peer group companies as well as other comparable companies, with the potential to earn total cash compensation and long-term equity incentives as high as the 75th percentile for outstanding performance.

The Board and the Compensation Committee seek to make compensation decisions transparent to our stockholders and executive officers and thereby to achieve our objectives by communicating openly with our stockholders and executive officers regarding our compensation process, pay structure and performance objectives.

Compensation Consultant

The Compensation Committee retained Radford, an Aon Hewitt company, as its independent consultant to assist in evaluating our executive compensation programs and practices and to make recommendations regarding fiscal 2017 compensation. For fiscal 2017, Radford prepared competitive market data for the compensation of our executive management team, evaluated the appropriateness of and made recommendations regarding our peer group, analyzed our short term and long term incentive plan designs, analyzed equity retention and reviewed our equity burn rate and dilution levels relative to market, assessed our compensation practices and levels against those of our peer group companies and other comparable companies, made recommendations regarding base salary, target bonus percentage and long-term incentive compensation for each Named Executive Officer, and updated the Compensation Committee on compensation trends and regulatory developments. None of Radford, Aon Hewitt or their affiliates provides other services to us. The Compensation Committee assessed the independence of Radford pursuant to the SEC rules and concluded that no conflict of interest existed that would prevent Radford from independently representing the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee has sole responsibility for the selection, engagement, removal and compensation of its compensation consultant.

Compensation Benchmarking

In February 2016, the Compensation Committee engaged Radford to conduct a new benchmarking study for fiscal 2017. In June 2016, following a review and analysis of our executive compensation program, Radford presented the Compensation Committee with a report and recommendations on executive compensation for fiscal 2017. Radford’s recommendations included a market analysis of base salaries, total cash compensation and equity compensation relative to a market consensus based on the peer group discussed below as well as peer data derived from the published Radford Global Life Sciences Survey representing public biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies with fewer than 150 employees, weighted equally. The Compensation Committee used Radford’s recommendations as a starting point to consider market competitiveness and ultimately set fiscal 2017 compensation after also considering individual and Company performance.

Peer Group

The peer group selected by the Compensation Committee for fiscal 2017 was composed of 19 public, biopharmaceutical companies selected based on a comparable business and financial profile to us, including stage of development, employee size and market value. The fiscal 2017 peer group, which had an average market cap of $76.9 million and average annual revenues of $3.2 million, included, Aerie Pharmaceuticals, Alimera Sciences, Anthera Pharmaceuticals, ArQule, BioDelivery Sciences International,CEL-SCI, Celsion, Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Cytori Therapeutics, CytRx, DURECT, Hemispherx BioPharma, Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Ocular Therapeutix, Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Proteon Therapeutics, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Vermillion and Vical. Our peer group was recommended by Radford and approved by the Compensation Committee. The fiscal 2017 peer group did not include the following five companies used in the fiscal 2016 peer group: Agenus, Curis, Heron Therapeutics and Ocothyreon, which no longer had a business or a financial profile comparable to ours, and Pozen, which merged with another company. The fiscal 2017 peer group added the following four new comparator companies to the fiscal 2016 peer group: BioDelivery Sciences International, Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Ocular Therapeutix and Paratek Pharmaceuticals.

Corporate Governance

We believe the following executive compensation practices and policies promote good corporate governance:

Say-on-Pay Feedback from Stockholders