UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

For the transition period from ____ to _____

Commission file number: 000-19871

MICROBOT MEDICAL INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

5 Hamada Street25 Recreation Park Drive, Unit 108

Yokneam 2069204 IsraelHingham, MA02043

(Address including zip code of registrant’s Principal Executive Offices)

(908) 938-5561(781)875-3605

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [  ] ☐ No [X] ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes [  ] ☐ No [X] ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data fileFile required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months/(ormonths (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes [X] ☒ No [  ]☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. [  ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company”, and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes [  ] ☐ No [X] ☒

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $43,048,260 at June 30, 2016approximately $34,521,094.

Common stock outstanding as of March 16, 2017: 27,251,33330, 2023: 8,130,628 shares

INFORMATION CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are projections in respect of future events or our future financial performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may”, “should”, “intends”, “expects”, “will”, “plans”, “anticipates”, “believes”, “estimates”, “predicts”, “potential”, or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, including the risks listed under the section entitled “Risk Factors” commencing on page 1220 of this report, which may cause our or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity or performance to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity or performance expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements.

Table of Contents

NOTE REGARDING REFERENCES TO OUR COMPANY

Throughout this Form 10-K, the words “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Company” and “Microbot” refer to Microbot Medical Inc., including our directly and indirectly wholly-owned subsidiaries and, unlesswholly owned subsidiary. Unless the context otherwise requires, the historical business, financial statements and operations of Microbot are ofinclude Microbot Medical Ltd., an Israeli corporation (“Microbot Israel”) which became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company on November 28, 2016. “StemCells” or “StemCells, Inc.” refers

Risk Factors Summary

The following is a summary of the principal risks that could adversely affect our business, operations, and financial results. A more thorough discussion of these and other risks are listed under the section entitled “Risk Factors” commencing on page 20.

Risks Relating to Microbot’s Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

Risks Relating to the Company priorDevelopment and Commercialization of Microbot’s Product Candidates

Risks Relating to its merger transaction with Microbot Israel.Microbot’s Intellectual Property

Risks Relating to Operations in Israel

Risks Relating to Microbot’s Securities, Governance and Other Matters

General Risks

PART I

Item 1.Description of Business.

The Company

We areMicrobot is a pre-clinical medical device company specializing in the research, design and development of next generation micro-robotics assisted medical technologiesrobotic endoluminal surgery devices targeting the minimally invasive surgery space. The CompanyMicrobot is primarily focused on leveraging its micro-roboticrobotic technologies with the goal of redefining surgical robotics while improving surgical outcomes for patients.

Microbot’s current technological platforms, LIBERTY^®, NovaCross™, One & Done^TM, ViRob^TM and TipCAT^TM, are comprised of proprietary innovative technologies. Utilizing the LIBERTY and One & Done platforms, Microbot is currently developing the first ever fully disposable robot for various endovascular interventional procedures. In addition, the Company is focused on the development of a Multi Generation Pipeline Portfolio utilizing all of its first two product candidates: the Self Cleaning Shunt, or SCS, for the treatmentproprietary technologies.

Microbot has a patent portfolio of hydrocephalus58 issued/allowed patents and Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus, or NPH; and TipCAT, a self-propelling, semi-disposable endoscope that is being developed initially for use in colonoscopy procedures. Microbot’s product candidates are being designed to bring greater functionality to conventional medical devices and to reduce the known risks associated with such devices. Microbot is currently aiming to complete pre-clinical studies required for regulatory submission for both product candidates within the next 24 months.

Microbot currently holds an intellectual property portfolio that comprises nine patent families, which include nine patents granted in the United States, twelve patents granted outside the United States, and fifteen51 patent applications pending worldwide. worldwide, of which 6 issued/allowed patents and 34 patent applications relate to the LIBERTY device.

We have an exclusive license to key components of our technology.

Our Company waswere incorporated on August 2, 1988 in the State of Delaware under the name Cellular Transplants, Inc. The original Certificate of Incorporation was restated on February 14, 1992 to change theour name of the Company to CytoTherapeutics, Inc. On May 24, 2000, the Certificate of Incorporation as restated was further amended to change theour name of the Company to StemCells, Inc. On November 28, 2016, C&RD Israel Ltd. (“Merger Sub”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company,ours, completed its merger with and into Microbot Medical Ltd. (“, or Microbot Israel”),Israel, an Israeli corporation that then owned our assets and operated our current business, with Microbot Israel surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of ours. We refer to this transaction as the Company (the “Merger”).Merger. On November 28, 2016, in connection with the Merger, the Companywe changed itsour name from “StemCells, Inc.” to Microbot Medical Inc., and each outstanding share of Microbot Israel capital stock was converted into the right to receive shares of our common stock. In addition, all outstanding options to purchase the ordinary shares of Microbot Israel were assumed by the Companyus and converted into options to purchase shares of the Common Stock.common stock of Microbot Medical Inc. On November 29, 2016, theour common stock of the Company began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “MBOT”. Prior to the Merger, the Company waswe were a biopharmaceutical company that operated in one segment, the research, development, and commercialization of stem cell therapeutics and related technologies. Substantially all of the material assets relating to the stem cell business were sold on November 29, 2016.

Technological Platforms and Product Pipeline

LIBERTY^®

On January 13, 2020, Microbot unveiled what it believes is the world’s first fully disposable robotic system for use in endovascular interventional procedures, such as cardiovascular, peripheral and neurovascular. The LIBERTY robotic system features a unique compact design with the capability to be operated remotely, reduce radiation exposure and physical strain to the physician, reduce the risk of cross contamination, as well as the potential to eliminate the use of multiple consumables when used with its “One & Done” capabilities, which would be based in part on our One & Done and NovaCross platforms or possibly other guidewire/microcatheter technologies.

LIBERTY is designed to maneuver guidewires and over-the-wire devices (such as microcatheters) within the body’s vasculature. It eliminates the need for extensive capital equipment requiring dedicated Cath-lab rooms as well as dedicated staff. In addition, when combined with our One & Done technology or possibly other guidewire/microcatheter technologies, it is being designed to streamline Cath-lab procedures with tools that combines guidewire and microcatheter into a single device. With control over tip curvature and stiffness for maneuverability and access – and without the need for constant tool exchanges – when integrated into the LIBERTY device, the device may drastically reduce procedure time and costs while enhancing the operator experience.

We believe LIBERTY’s addressable markets are the Interventional Cardiology, Interventional Radiology and Interventional Neuroradiology markets.

The unique characteristics of LIBERTY – compact, mobile, disposable and remotely controlled - open the opportunity of expanding telerobotic interventions to patients with limited access to life-saving procedures, such as mechanical thrombectomy in ischemic stroke.

LIBERTY is being designed to have the following attributes:

On August 17, 2020, Microbot announced the successful conclusion of its feasibility animal study using the LIBERTY robotic system. The study met all of its end points with no intraoperative adverse events, which supports Microbot’s objectives to allow physicians to conduct a catheter-based procedure from outside the catheterization laboratory (cath-lab), avoiding radiation exposure, physical strain and the risk of cross contamination. The study was performed by two leading physicians in the neuro vascular and peripheral vascular intervention spaces, and the results demonstrated robust navigation capabilities, intuitive usability and accurate deployment of embolic agents, most of which was conducted remotely from the cath-lab’s control room.

On December 22, 2021, we entered into a strategic collaboration agreement for technology co-development with Stryker Corporation, acting through its Neurovascular Division. Pursuant to the agreement, the collaborative development program between Stryker and us aims to integrate certain of Stryker’s instruments with our LIBERTY Robotic System to address certain neurovascular procedures. The activities contemplated by the Agreement shall be specified in one or more development plans derived from the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement. We are still determining scheduling to move the collaboration forward.

In the first quarter of 2022, we filed our pre-submission package for the LIBERTY Robotic System with the FDA, addressing the regulatory pathway for the LIBERTY^® Robotic System.

In March 2022, we held a laboratory session at a Boston-based academic center, at which several interventional radiologists attended. The session was designed to give the radiologists first-hand experience using the LIBERTY Robotic System. The system performed as expected on a vascular model and the positive real-time commentary provided to the Company’s clinical team was invaluable.

Industry Overview

Shunt Systems

Hydrocephalus isOn October 13, 2022, we announced the completion of a medical conditionpre-clinical animal study that was conducted in which there is an abnormal accumulationSeptember 2022. The study was performed by a team of cerebrospinal fluid, or CSF,Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) in the brain that can cause increased intracranial pressure. It is estimated that oneendovascular space at a research laboratory with FDA-required levels of planning, controlling, monitoring, and reporting (GLP standards), using a porcine model. During the animal study, the physicians conducted pre-determined 63 navigations to the targeted sites using the LIBERTY Robotic System and performed an equal number of procedures manually. The performance endpoint of the LIBERTY Robotic System after robotic navigation was successfully completed for 58 out of the 63 targets (92%), while 3 of the targets (4.8%) were not completed due to technical issues and 2 (3.2%) were not completed due to fluoroscopy related issues (non-device related). Post navigation intra-operative selective angiograms of the target vessels showed no definite evidence of acute vascular injury. Follow up angiograms of these vessels in every 500 babies are born with hydrocephalus, and over 1,000,000 peoplepost-procedure day-three showed normal vessel anatomy without signs of injury. Initial postmortem gross pathology examination of some of the target organs showed preliminary findings, which will be further investigated in the United States currently live with hydrocephalus.second quarter of 2023 in the pending histopathology analysis, and potentially an additional pre-clinical study.

Symptoms of hydrocephalus vary with age, disease progression and individual toleranceIn addition to the condition, but they can include convulsion, tunnel vision, mental disabilityobjective measurements, the performance and usability of the LIBERTY Robotic System were subjectively graded by each of the physicians, with their assessments accounting for features such as ease of navigation to the target, learning curve, and system stability. For the target sites reached, the physicians graded the LIBERTY Robotic system at the highest grade. The histopathology analysis of the target vessels was completed, and we are currently studying these results.

In October 2022, we submitted a follow-up pre-submission package for the LIBERTY^® Robotic System to ensure that we remain aligned with the FDA as we prepare for our Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) submission and first-in-human clinical trial with the system, expected in 2023.

We are continuously exploring and evaluating additional innovative guidewire/microcatheter technologies to be integrated and combined with the LIBERTY robotic platform.

One & Done^TM Technology

On April 8, 2018, we acquired a patent-protected technology from CardioSert Ltd., a privately-held medical device company based in Israel that was part of a technological incubator supported by the Israel Innovation Authorities. The CardioSert technology contemplates a combination of a guidewire and microcatheter, technologies that are broadly used for surgery within a tubular organ or dementia-like symptomsstructure such as a blood vessel or duct. The CardioSert technology features a unique guidewire delivery system with steering and even death. Normal Pressure Hypocephalus (“NPH”)stiffness control capabilities which when developed is expected to give the physician the ability to control the tip curvature, to adjust tip load to varying degrees of stiffness in a type of hydrocephalus that usually occursgradually continuous manner. The technology was originally developed to support interventional cardiologists in older adults. NPH is generally treated as distinct from other types of hydrocephalus because it develops slowly over time. In NPH,crossing chronic total occlusions (CTO) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures and has the drainage of CSF is blocked gradually and the excess fluid builds up slowly. This slow accumulation means that the fluid pressure may notpotential to be as high asused in other types of hydrocephalus. Itspaces and applications, such as peripheral intervention, and neurosurgery. Our CardioSert tool is estimated that more than 700,000 Americans have NPH, but less than 20% receive an appropriate diagnosis.now trademarked as “One & Done^TM”.

HydrocephalusMicrobot is most often treated bycurrently exploring the surgical insertion of a shunt system. The shunt system diverts the flow of CSF from the brain’s ventricles (or the lumbar subarachnoid space) to another partintegration of the body whereOne & Done^TM technology into the fluid can be more readily absorbed. Hydrocephalus shunt designs have changed little since their introductionLIBERTY endovascular robotic system for a range of potential applications in the 1950s. A shunt system typically consists of three parts: the distal tubing or shunt (a flexiblecardiovascular, peripheral vascular and sturdy plastic tube), the ventricular catheter (the proximal catheter), and a valve. The endneurovascular spaces.

NovaCross™

On October 6, 2022, we purchased substantially all of the shunt system with the proximal catheter is placed in the ventricles (within the CSF)assets, including intellectual property, devices, components and the distal catheter is placed in the siteproduct related materials of the body where the CSF can be drained. A valve is located along the shunt to maintainNitiloop Ltd., an Israeli limited liability company. The assets include intellectual property and regulate the rate of CSF flow. Current systems can be created from separate components or bought as complete units.

The treatment of hydrocephalus with existing shunt systems often includes complications as well. For example, approximately 50% of shunts used in the pediatric population fail within two years of placement and repeated neurosurgical operations are often required. Ventricular catheter blockage, or occlusions, is by far the most frequent event that results in shunt failure. Shunt occlusion occurs when there is a partial or complete blockage of the shunt that causes it to function intermittently or not at all. Such a shunt blockage can be caused by the accumulation of blood cells, tissue, or bacteria in any part of the shunt system. In the event of shunt occlusion, CSF begins to accumulate in the brain or lumbar region again and the symptoms of untreated hydrocephalus can reappear until a shunt replacement surgery is performed.

Although several companies are activetechnology in the field of hydrocephalus treatmentintraluminal revascularization devices with anchoring mechanism and integrated microcatheter, and the manufacturing of shunt systemsproducts or potential products incorporating the technology owned by Nitiloop and shunt components, Microbot believes thatdesignated by Nitiloop as “NovaCross”, “NovaCross Xtreme” and “NovaCross BTK” and any enhancements, modifications and improvements.

ViRob

The ViRob is an autonomous crawling micro-robot which can be controlled remotely or within the majority of those companiesbody. Its miniature dimensions are focusing onexpected to allow it to navigate and crawl in different natural spaces within the development of valves. The development of a “smart shunt” – a shunt that could provide data tohuman body, including blood vessels, the physician on patient conditionsdigestive tract and shunt function with sensor based controls, or correct the high failure rate of existing shunt systems – is for the most part at an academic and conceptual level only. Reports of smart shunt technologies are typically focused on a subset of components with remaining factors left unspecified,respiratory system as well as artificial spaces such as hardware, control algorithms or power management. Microbot does not believe that a smart shunt that can prevent functional failures has been developed to date. Because of the limited innovation in this area, Microbot believes an opportunity exists to provide patients suffering from hydrocephalus or NPH with a more effective instrument for treating their condition.

Endoscopic Equipment

Endoscopes are medical devices used to look inside a body cavity or organ with minimally invasive surgery. The North American flexible endoscopes market was valued at $1.27 billion in 2013, andshunts, catheters, ports, etc. Its unique structure is expected to reach $1.91 billion by 2018, at a CAGR of 8.5% duringgive it the period 2013ability to 2018.

Colonoscopy is a procedure that allows a physician to examine the colon using an endoscope. It is a commonly performed procedure for the diagnosismove in tight spaces and treatment of a range of conditions, including for the screening and surveillance of colorectal neoplasia, or colorectal cancer. Annually, between 15 and 20 million endoscopy procedures are conducted in the United States with reusable endoscope devices to screen various sections of a patient’s gastrointestinal, or GI, tract. However, according to data from the American Cancer Society, it is estimated that over 50,000 Americans will die from colorectal cancer and approximately 95,000 new cases of colon cancer will be diagnosed in 2016. It is the third leading cause of cancer deaths in spite of being highly preventable with early identification and removal of colorectal adenomas, or polyps. Colonoscopy with removal of colorectal polyps has been shown to be the most effective way of preventing colorectal cancer. And colonoscopy is generally considered the gold standard for the detection and treatment of adenomas. However, using current colonoscopic technology, approximately 30% of polyps are missed. In addition, the technique remains underutilized – less than 50% of eligible Americans, based on guidelines established by organizations including the American Cancer Society, United States Preventive Services Task Force, and U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, have undergone screening, with more than 45% of colon cancers being diagnosed at a time when the cancer has become incurable. This reluctance can be linked to patients’ general discomfort associated with the colonoscopy screening procedure, due to the use of mechanical force to insert the endoscope into the colon. The procedure is widely perceived to be uncomfortable, and it also can sometimes damage or perforate the bowel wall.

Colonoscopy techniques that improve the Adenoma Detection Rate, or ADR, and reduce patient discomfort could optimize the potential of colonoscopy for the prevention of colorectal cancer. Microbot believes that it has the potential to develop a robotic endoscope product that addresses this issue of patient discomfort, which it believes will improve patients’ willingness to get this important screening test – with the additional benefit of providing a new tool to health care practitioners for use in the identification and treatment of colorectal polyps.

Microbot’s Product Pipeline

Self-Cleaning Shunt (SCS)

The Self-Cleaning Shunt, or SCS, device is designed to actcurved passages as well as the ventricular catheter portion of a CSF shunt systemability to remain within the human body for prolonged time. The SCS product was developed using the ViRob technology.

On October 11, 2022, we announced that is usedwe are planning to relieve hydrocephalus and NPH. It is designed to work as an alternative to any ventricular catheter options currentlyfocus our strategic efforts on the marketgrowing endovascular space and advancing the LIBERTY Robotic System to connectachieve its regulatory and commercial milestones, as well as expanding the LIBERTY ecosystem, and made a strategic decision to all existing shunt system valves currently onsuspend the market; therefore, the successful commercializationcontinued research and development of the SCS is not dependent on any single shunt system. Initially, Microbot expects theproject, effective at that date. The SCS devicegenerally performed as expected during testing, both internally and externally, and we believe it continues to be an aftermarket purchase that would be deployed to modify existing productshave potential clinical value as evidenced by the end user. Microbot believes that the use of its SCS device will be able to reduce, and potentially eliminate, shunt occlusions, and by doing so Microbot believes its SCS has the potential to become the gold-standard ventricular shunt in the treatment of Hydrocephalus and NPH.

The SCS device embeds an internal robotic cleaning mechanism in the lumen, or inside space, of the ventricular catheter which prevents cell accumulation and tissue ingrowth into the catheter. The SCS device consists of a silicone tube with a perforated titanium tip, which connects to a standard shunt valve at its distal end. The internal cleaning mechanism is embedded in the lumen of the titanium tip. Once activated, the cleaning mechanism keeps tissue from entering the catheter perforations while maintaining the CSF flow in the ventricular catheter.

The internal cleaning mechanism of the SCS device is activated by means of an induced magnetic field, which is currently designed to be externally generated by the patient through a user-friendly headset that transmits the magnetic field at a pre-determined frequency and operating sequence protocol. The magnetic field that is created by the headset is then captured by a flexible coil and circuit board that is placed just under the patient’s scalp in the location where the valve is located. The circuit board assembly converts the magnetic field into the power necessary to activate the cleaning mechanism within the proximal part of the ventricular catheter.

Microbot has completed the development of an SCS prototype and is currently completing the safety testing, general proof of concept testing and performance testing for the device, which Microbot began in mid-2013. Microbot had a pre-submission meeting with the FDA in mid-2014. On January 27, 2017, Microbot entered into a research agreement with The Washington University in St. Louis to develop the protocol for and to execute the necessary animal study to determine the effectiveness of the Microbot’s SCS prototype. The initial research is expected to be completed within 6 months, with a comprehensive study to follow and be completed in 2018. Upon the completion of animal studies, Microbot may conduct clinical trials if they are requested by the FDA or if Microbot decides that thepre-clinical data from such trials would improve the marketability of the product candidate. Microbot believes that the study results of its first generation SCS device should be submitted to the FDA, which allowed us to successfully apply for the Early Feasibility Study program administered by late 2018. The proposed indication for usethe FDA. However, the conflicting commercialization pathways between LIBERTY and the SCS due to different hospital call points, and the anticipated lengthier regulatory process of the SCS, device would beled us to believe that focusing our strategic efforts on the LIBERTY Robotic System will provide us with a greater opportunity for success and future growth. We are exploring opportunities with the SCS assets with the focus on maximizing shareholders value, including seeking buyers for the treatment of hydrocephalus asassets, entering into joint ventures, licensing arrangements, spinning-off the assets into a component of a shunt system when drainingnew operating company or shunting of CSF is indicated.discontinue the project altogether.

Additionally, Carolyn Harris, PhD at Wayne State University (WSU) in Detroit, will run an in vitro study of our SCS device. The main objective of this study is to test and finalize the design of Microbot’s SCS, using Dr. Harris’ bio-reactor system that mimics human brain tissue three-dimensionally.

Microbot may also conduct clinical trials for the SCS in other countries where such trials are necessary for Microbot to sell its SCS device in such country’s market, although it has no current plans to do so.

TipCAT

The TipCAT is a semi-disposable, flexible,disposable self-propelled endoscope. Alocomotive device that is specially designed to advance in tubular anatomies. The TipCAT is a mechanism comprising a series of interconnected balloons at the device’s tip that provides the TipCAT with its forward locomotion capability. The device has the capability tocan self-propel within natural tubular lumens such as the colon, blood vessels, respiratory and the urinary tract.and GI tracts. A single channel of air/fluid supply sequentially inflates and deflates a series of balloons creating an inchworm like forward motion. The TipCAT is designed to be fully-equipped with a contemporary endoscope, including a high-quality camera, steering capability while maintainingmaintains a standard working channel for treatments. The TipCAT thus offers functionalityUnlike standard access devices such as guidewires, catheters for vascular access and visualization features equivalent to modern endoscopes, along with unique advantages associated with its physiologically adapted self-propelling mechanism, flexibility, and design.

The TipCAT consists of two parts:

In the self-propulsion module, the air to inflate the balloons is supplied from a single channel. The sequential inflating and deflating of the balloons creates an inchworm-like forward motion. Therefore, unlike standard endoscopes, the TipCAT does not need to be mechanically forcedpushed into the patient’s lumen using external pressure; rather, it will gently advance itself through the organ’s anatomy. As a result, the TipCAT is designed to be able to reach every part of the lumen under examination regardless of the topography, be less operator dependent, and greatly reduce the likelihood of damage to lumen structure. The TipCAT thus offers functionality features equivalent to modern tubular access devices, along with advantages associated with its physiologically adapted self-propelling mechanism, flexibility, and design.

Furthermore,Currently, Microbot believes thatis not pursuing the development of the TipCAT as a colonoscopy tool due to its focus on the endovascular intervention spaces, and as such it is currently exploring the use of the TipCAT will improve ADRfor minimally invasive neurosurgical and endovascular applications to complement its other technologies.

Industry Overview

Minimally Invasive Robot-Assisted Endovascular Interventions

Minimally Invasive Surgery, or MIS, refers to surgical procedures performed through tiny incisions instead of a single large opening. Because the incisions are small, patients tend to have quicker recovery times and experience less trauma than with conventional surgery. The global MIS surgery is expected to grow from $24 billion in 2020 to $42 billion in 2026, representing a CAGR of 9.85%. MIS involves three major categories of devices: surgical, monitoring and visualization, and endoscopy. The market for surgical devices, including ablation, electrosurgery and medical robotic systems, accounts for the largest share of revenue and is also expected to show the highest rate of growth. According to the Society of Robotic Surgery, the US market growth in endoluminal robotic surgery is projected to be 15-25% by straightening2025.

Vascular disease is the intestinal topography, smoothing colon topographymost common precursor to ischemic heart disease and improving tissue visualization.stroke, which are two of the leading causes of death worldwide. Advances in endovascular intervention in recent years have transformed patient survival rates and post-surgical quality of life. It is estimated that more than three million percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and over two million of peripheral vascular interventions are performed annually worldwide. The incidence of stroke in the US alone is estimated at 900,000 cases annually. Compared to open surgery, it has the advantages of faster recovery, reduced need for general anesthesia, reduced blood loss and significantly lower mortality. However, the current practice of endovascular procedures, which virtually has remained unchanged since the introduction of Intervention four decades ago, is limited by a number of factors, including physical strain and exposure to X-Ray radiation of the operator, and involves complex maneuvering of intervention tools, such as guidewires and catheters, to reach target areas in the vasculature. Despite recent advancements in technology and devices, manual procedures are still highly dependent on the technical skills and training of the operator, what makes the access to expert medical centers and advanced emergent treatments, such as endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke, geographically limited. In addition, we believe that demand for physicians continues to grow faster than supply.

Endovascular robotic systems are aimed to increase the stability and precision of guidewires and catheters, protecting the physicians from ionizing radiation and physical strain by incorporatingremoving them from the TipCATradiation source, helping in closing shortages of skilled physicians and skill gaps and enable tele-interventions (e.g. the Hub & Spoke hospital model).

Today, there are only a few commercially available robotic systems for endovascular interventions. We believe these systems have major drawbacks, such as limited maneuverability, the requirement to exchange and use multiple expensive surgical tools, being cumbersome to set-up and operate, and requiring significant capital expenditures.

Navigating and placing access devices through tortuous and highly delicate brain arteries is a complex procedure that requires high-level surgical skills with specialist training. In many procedures, surgeons exchange numerous access devices before reaching the target and applying the therapeutic procedures, agent or device, increasing the risk of adverse events and the exposure of both patient and physician to radiation. Adverse events, such as perforation of brain arteries or the release of embolies from a thrombus or atherosclerotic lesion can have devastating or even fatal results.

Microbot believes that with its portfolio of One & Done, NovaCross products and LIBERTY technologies, it is well-positioned to explore and develop such technologies as neurovascular access devices, with a focus on improving the inflated balloons will provideease and access and enhancing the additional benefitssafety of assisting the physician in centralizing endoscope optics and allowing for the colonoscope to be secured in each treatment position throughout the procedure, resulting in more efficient and effective procedures.endovascular interventions.

The TipCAT is also designed such that only disposable parts are in direct contact with the lumen tissue, which should eliminate the risk of cross contamination between patients and the need for post-use reprocessing. Reducing dependence on reprocessing procedures is important from a regulatory perspective because safety issues related to the reprocessing of reusable medical devices are a growing concern for regulatory authorities.Strategy

A TipCAT prototype was shown to self-propel and self-navigate in curved plastic pipes and curved ex-vivo colon. In addition, in its first feasibility study, the prototype device was tested in a live animal experiment and successfully self-propelled through segments of the animal’s colon, with no post-procedural damage. All tests were conducted at AMIT (Alfred Mann Institute of Technology at the Technion), prior to the licensing of TipCAT by Microbot. Microbot is currently reviewing the design and general proof of concept of the TipCAT and working closely with experts in the field to define the optimal design. Microbot expects animal studies for this device to begin in late 2017. Upon the completion of animal studies, Microbot may conduct clinical trials if they are requested by the FDA or if Microbot decides that the data from such trials would improve the marketability of the product candidate. Regulatory approval or clearance for marketing the TipCAT colonoscope in the United States is targeted to occur soon after the applicable animal or clinical trials are completed, depending on when the applicable premarket submission is finalized and filed with FDA, and Microbot’s ability to raise money and conduct the necessary trials for approval.

Microbot also plans to further develop the TipCAT for application for other diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic procedures outside of colonoscopy, such as Chronic Total Occlusion, or CTO, urethroscopy and catheterization.

Microbot may conduct clinical trials for the TipCAT in other countries where such trials are necessary for Microbot to sell its TipCAT device in such country’s market, although it has no current plans to do so.

Strategy

Microbot’s goal is to generate sales of its products, once they have received regulatory approval, by establishing, SCSLIBERTY and TipCATperhaps other devices from its technological platforms, as the standard-of-care in the eyes of doctors, surgeons,medical practitioners, patients and medical facilities, as well as getting the support of payors and insurance companies. Microbot believes that it can achieve this objective by working with hospitals to demonstrate the key benefits of its products. Microbot’s strategy includes the following key elements:

SCS Opportunities

The SCS is designedCompetition

LIBERTY Competitive Landscape

We believe the main competitor to prevent shunt occlusions in hydrocephalus and NPH patients who have undergone or are undergoing the surgical insertion of a shunt system. For purposes of its marketing strategy, Microbot has split the market for shunt systems into two sub-markets:

Microbot’s SCS device is universal (meaning that it is designed to be attachable to any valve on the market); therefore, Microbot’s initial go-to-market strategyLIBERTY system is the development of strategic partnerships with leading global medical device companies with ready salesCorPath GRX vascular robotics system by Corindus Vascular Robotics, a Siemens Healthineers company. To our knowledge, CorPath GRX system is FDA-approved and distribution channels. Outside ofCE-marked for percutaneous coronary and vascular procedures, is CE-marked for neurovascular interventions and is pending FDA approval for neurovascular interventions. Another competitor is Robocath (CE Marked for PCI only). We believe these systems have drawbacks, such as limited maneuverability, the requirement to exchange and use multiple expensive surgical tools, being cumbersome to set-up and operate, and requiring significant capital expenditures. We further believe that these systems have captured a strategic partnership, it is most likely that marginal market share to date.

Microbot’s SCS product willexisting and planned products could also be initially used in shunt replacement surgeries to replace occluded ventricular catheters. Accordingly, Microbot intends to establish key hospital and clinic relationships that will allow it to diffuse the technology among experts and other stakeholders. Microbot is also planning to apply for the SCS device to be covered under the current reimbursement codesrendered obsolete or uneconomical by technological advances developed in the United States for use in hydrocephalus and NPH shunt procedures.

TipCAT Opportunities

Microbot expects that its initial go-to-market strategy for the TipCAT will be to establish key hospital and clinic relationships in the field of colonoscopy that will allow Microbot to introduce and then diffuse the technology among colonoscopy experts and other stakeholders. Generally, Microbot expects the hospitals and clinics selected for the TipCAT clinical trials to also start using the product commercially, which will help to promote and support market uptake of the TipCAT product. Because Microbot expects the use of the TipCAT to increase the number of colonoscopy procedures that can be performed at any such facility, Microbot will seek to promote the technology among the doctors and experts involved in the distribution and buying groups within such selected partner hospitals.

Competition

SCS Competitive Landscape

Several academic research groups, such as at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, are currently researching sensing and obstruction-resistant catheter designs, and the Smart Sensors and Integrated Microsystems (SSIM) Program at Wayne State University has publicized that it is engaging in smart shunt development activity. However, based on its knowledge of the patented technologies, Microbot believes that these technologies are still early in the research and development cycle. The SCS also faces non-direct competition from Aqueduct Neurosciences, Inc., which is developing a non-shunt, electro-mechanical technology platform to control the draining of cerebrospinal fluid.

Microbot does not expect its SCS device to directly compete against shunt systems currently available in the market. The SCS device is designed to replace a component offuture by existing shunt systems and is expected to be an aftermarket purchase that would be used to modify existing products by the end user. However, there can be no assurance that Microbot’s product candidate will be accepted by the shunt market as an alternative component.

TipCAT Competitive Landscape

The market for endoscopy products is highly competitive with several players operating both at a global and regional level. The leading players in the colonoscopy space are Pentax, Fuji and Olympus, which dominate the U.S. market for reusable colonoscopes. However, Microbot believes that the most relevant competitors to TipCAT are smaller companies such as GI View and SMART Medical Systems, which produce disposable, self-propelled colonoscopes.

GI View produces a colonoscope with 360° omni-directional visualization and offers self-propelled intubation created using balloons and low pressure CO₂ gas. In addition, the GI View product is single use and disposable.

SMART Medical Systems’ product, which, according to publicly available information is being commercialized by Pentax, is introduced by a physician through a standard colonoscope’s tool channel and uses its balloon technology to anchor the bowel, which enables the colonoscope to be maneuvered beyond challenging lumen sections.

Microbot believes the TipCAT can successfully compete against its relevant competitors in that it offers all of the following attributes:

or new competitors. Some of Microbot’s competitors currently have significantly greater resources than Microbot does; have established relationships with healthcare professionals, customers and third-party payors; and have long-term contracts with group purchasing organizations in the United States. In addition, many of Microbot’s competitors have established distributor networks, greater resources for product development, sales and marketing, additional lines of products and the ability to offer financial incentives such as rebates, bundled products or discounts on other product lines that Microbot cannot provide.

Microbot’s products could also be rendered obsolete or uneconomical by technological advances developedOne & Done^TM Competitive Landscape

Competition includes moveable-core guidewires from companies such as Boston Scientific and Rapid Medical, and steerable and deflectable sheaths and catheters from companies such as Bendit Technologies, Agile Devices and Merit Medical. To our knowledge, the One & Done device is the only device that combines an inner moveable guidewire and an outer microcatheter, with the ability to control the shape and stiffness of the distal tip in a continuous, gradual manner, and intends to compete on that basis.

TipCAT Competitive Landscape

Microbot has not at this time completed its evaluation of the current competitive landscape in the future by existing or new competitors.endovascular space for potential uses of the TipCAT.

Intellectual Property

General

Microbot is currently developing its first two product candidates, theThe SCS and TipCAT are based on technological platforms licensed from The Technion Research and Development Foundation Ltd., or TRDF, as further discussed below,below. The LIBERTY platform core technology is co-owned by Microbot and TRDF. The One & Done^TM device is based on technologies acquired by Microbot from CardioSert. The NovaCross^® device is based on technologies acquired by Microbot from Nitiloop Ltd. Microbot plans to develop other micro-roboticmedical-robotic solutions through internal research and development, to strengthen its intellectual property position, and to continue exploring strategic collaborations and accretive acquisition opportunities. Microbot currently holds an intellectual property portfolio that includes 9of 58 patents issued/allowed and 48 patent families, which include 9applications pending worldwide. Microbot also holds 5 design patents grantedissued/allowed and 6 design patents pending worldwide. It also has registered trademarks in Israel, Europe and the US relating to its LIBERTY platform, and also has trademarks relating to its proprietary Microbot Medical tradename and logo registered in Israel, Europe, and the UK, and pending in the US 12 patents granted outsideand China, in addition to having registered trademarks for the “One & Done” name in Israel, Europe and Japan, and pending in the US, UK, China, and 15 patent applications pending worldwide.Japan. Microbot also has a registered trademark in the US for the newly acquired NovaCross trademark.

Microbot relies or intends to rely on intellectual property licensed or developed, including patents, trade secrets, trademarks, technical innovations, laws of unfair competition and various licensing agreements, to provide its future growth, to build its competitive position and to protect its intellectual property.technology. As Microbot continues to expand its intellectual property portfolio, it is critical for Microbot to continue to invest in filing patent applications to protect its technology, inventions, and improvements.

Microbot requires its employees and consultants to execute confidentiality agreements in connection with their employment or consulting relationships with Microbot. Microbot also requires its employees and consultants who work on its product candidates to agree to disclose and assign to Microbot all inventions conceived during the term of their service, while using Microbot property, or which relate to Microbot’s business.

Patent applications in the United States and in foreign countries are maintained in secrecy for a period of time after filing, which results in a delay between the actual discoveries andfiling date of the filing of related patent applications and the time when discoveriesthey are published in scientific and patent literature.published. Patents issued and patent applications filed relating to medical devices are numerous, and there can be no assurance that current and potential competitors and other third parties have not filed or in the future will not file applications for, or have not received or in the future will not receive, patents or obtain additional proprietary rights relating to product candidates, products, devices or processes used or proposed to be used by Microbot. Microbot believes that the technologies it employs in its products and systems do not infringe the valid claims of any third partythird-party patents. There can be no assurance, however, that third parties will not seek to assert that Microbot devices and systems infringe their patents or seek to expand their patent claims to cover aspects of Microbot’s products and systems.

The medical device industry in general has been characterized by substantial litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Any such claims, regardless of their merit, could be time-consuming and expensive to respond to and could divert Microbot’s technical and management personnel. Microbot may be involved in litigation to defend against claims of infringement by other patent holders, to enforce patents issued to Microbot, or to protect Microbot’s trade secrets. If any relevant claims of third-party patents are upheld as valid and enforceable in any litigation or administrative proceeding, Microbot could be prevented from practicing the subject matter claimed in such patents, or would be required to obtain licenses from the patent owners of each such patent, or to redesign Microbot’s products, devices or processes to avoid infringement. There can be no assurance that such licenses would be available or, if available, would be available on terms acceptable to Microbot or that Microbot would be successful in any attempt to redesign products or processes to avoid infringement. Accordingly, an adverse determination in a judicial or administrative proceeding or failure to obtain necessary licenses, could potentially prevent Microbot from manufacturing and selling its products.

IssuedMicrobot’s issued U.S. patents, which cover Microbot’s product candidates, will expire between 2026 and 2032, excluding2040, not including any patent term extensionsadjustments that mightmay be available following the grant of marketing authorization.available. Issued patents outside of the United States directed to Microbot’s product candidates will expire between 2026 and 2032.2040.

License Agreement with the Technion

In June 2012, Microbot entered into a license agreement with TRDF, the technology transfer subsidiary of The Technion Institute of Technology, pursuant to which it obtained an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing, sub-licensable license to certain patents and inventions relating to the SCS and TipCAT technology platforms invented by Professor Moshe Shoham, a former director of and an advisor to the Company, and in certain circumstances other TRDF-related persons. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreement, in order to maintain the license with respect to each platform, Microbot must use commercially reasonable efforts to develop products covered by the license, including meeting certain agreed upon development milestones. The milestone for the TipCAT include commencing first in human clinical trials in December 2023. The milestones for the SCS include commencing initial studiesfirst in humanshuman clinical trials by December 20182024, and commencing a full clinical trial, if necessary,pivotal study by December 2019. The milestones for TipCAT include commencing initial studies in humans, if needed, by December 2018 and commencing a full clinical trial, if necessary, by December 2020.June 2027. Failure to meet any development milestone will give TRDF the right to terminate the license with respect to the technology underlying the missed milestone. Although Microbot expects to meet the milestone requirements, TRDF has demonstrated flexibility with respect to amending the terms of the license to extend the milestone dates.

As partial consideration for the grant of the licenses under the agreement, Microbot issued a number of shares to TRDF equal to 3% of its issued and outstanding shares at such time on a fully diluted basis. Such shares were initially subject to antidilution protections but are no longer subject to adjustment. In addition, as partial consideration for the licenses granted, Microbot agreed to pay TRDF royalties of between 1.5% and 3.0% of net sales of products covered by the licenses, subject to certain reductions, and certain percentages of amounts received by Microbot in the event of sublicensing.

In the case of termination of the license by Microbot without cause or by TRDF for cause, TRDF has the right to receive a non-exclusive license from Microbot with respect to improvements to the licensed technologies made by Microbot. In such cases, TRDF would pay a royalty of 10% of the income received by TRDF in connection its sublicensing of such patent right and related intellectual property. If the license from TRDF were to be terminated with respect with either of the technology platforms underlying the SCS or the TipCAT, Microbot would no longer be able to continue its development of the related product candidate. However, Microbot believes that its current intellectual property portfolio, and its ongoing efforts to expand into other micro-robotic surgical technologies, will give it the flexibility to shift its resources towards developing and commercializing related products.

In addition to the licensed SCS and TipCAT technologies, the LIBERTY platform, which was invented by employees of Microbot together with Professor Moshe Shoham of the Technion, in his capacity as a consultant to Microbot, is co-owned by Microbot and TRDF, and the parties established the LIBERTY platform as a “Joint Invention” in accordance with the terms of the License Agreement. Once the Joint Invention is established, Microbot will have to pay TRDF royalties of between 1.5% and 3.0% of net sales of products covered by this Joint Invention.

Research and Development

Microbot’s research and development programs are generally pursued by engineers and scientists employed by Microbot in its offices in Israel on a full-time basis or as consultants, or through partnerships with industry leaders in manufacturing and design and researchers in academia. Microbot is also working with subcontractors in developing specific components of its technologies.

The primary objectives of Microbot’s research and development efforts are to continue to introduce incremental enhancements to the capabilities of its candidate products and to advance the development of proposed products.

Microbot Israel has received fundsgrants from the Israeli Innovation Authority (formerly known as the Office of the Chief Scientist(“IIA”) for participation in Israel), for research and development activities.since 2013 through December 31, 2022 totaling approximately $1,500,000. In addition, on January 4, 2018, Microbot received a grant fromIsrael assumed the repayment obligations under CardioSert’s IIA grants in the aggregate amount of approximately $530,000, and on October 6, 2022, Microbot Israel assumed the repayment obligations under Nitiloop’s IIA grants in the aggregate amount of approximately $925,000.

In relation to the IIA grants described above, we are obligated to pay royalties amounting to 3.0%-3.5% of our future sales of the products relating to such grants. The grants are linked to the exchange rate of the dollar to the New Israeli Innovation Authority in 2012, which grant reimbursed Microbot for 50%Shekel and bear interest of itsLibor per annum.

The repayment of the grants is contingent upon the successful completion of the Company’s research and development expenses, upprograms and generating sales. The Company has no obligation to $764,466. This first grantrepay these grants, if the project fails, is unsuccessful or aborted or if no sales are generated. The financial risk is assumed completely by the Government of Israel. The grants are received from the Israeli Innovation Authority ended in 2014. After the expiration of the first grant, Microbot received approval for an additional grant from the Israeli Innovation Authority which reimbursed Microbot for 50% of its research and development expenses for the period from May 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015, up to $924,166. After the expiration of the second grant, Microbot received an approval forGovernment on a third grant from the Israeli Innovation Authority which reimbursed Microbot for 50% of its research and development expenses for the period from May 1, 2016 through April 30, 2017, up to $1,026,050. project-by-project basis.

Microbot expects to continue to access government funding in the future.

For the fiscal yearyears ended December 31, 2016,2022 and 2021, respectively, Microbot incurred research and development expenses of approximately $901,000 compared$7,736,000 and $6,153,000.

Strategic collaboration agreement with Stryker

On December 22, 2021, the Company entered into a strategic collaboration agreement for technology co-development with Stryker Corporation, acting through its Neurovascular Division. Pursuant to the agreement, the collaborative development program between the Company and Stryker aims to integrate certain of Stryker’s instruments with the Company’s LIBERTY® Robotic System to address certain neurovascular procedures. The parties conducted discussions to define the development plan and are considering next steps.

LIBERTY

The LIBERTY prototype system was tested at our laboratories in an in-vitro silicone model, using off-the-shelf guidewires and microcatheters, and showing an ability to successfully provide linear and rotational movements of the guidewires and linear motion of the microcatheters. During 2022, we conducted several simulated trials using silicone models as well as animal trials to validate the design and obtain valuable feedback.

The LIBERTY prototype is designed to control the One & Done^TM tool; however, the One & Done^TM tool is not currently expected to be integrated into the current version of the LIBERTY device. Future versions are expected to control the NovaCross products that were acquired by us in 2022. Additionally, we are exploring and evaluating additional innovative guidewire/microcatheter technologies to be integrated and combined with the LIBERTY robotic platform to further enhance the performance of the system.

Since the One & Done^TM tool was originally designed for chronic total occlusion, we are currently working with subcontractors and guidewire design-houses to perfect the performance of the One & Done^TM tool to the indication that will be selected for the LIBERTY platform. These may include procedures in the peripheral, coronary or neurovascular spaces.

SCS

See “–Technological Platforms and Product Pipeline–ViRob” above with respect to the SCS technology and research and development expenses of $823,000 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.status.

Microbot has already made plans to develop a second version of its SCS device that will have an embedded controller and battery. This alternative design will allow the cleaning mechanism to be automatically activated, without the need for the patient’s involvement in the activation process.Manufacturing

On January 27, 2017, Microbot entered into a research agreement with The Washington University in St. Louis to develop the protocol for and to execute the necessary animal study to determine the effectiveness of the Microbot’s SCS prototype. The initial research is expected to be completed within 6 months, with a comprehensive study to follow and be completed in 2018. Upon the completion of animal studies, Microbot may conduct clinical trials if they are requested by the FDA or if Microbot decides that the data from such trials would improve the marketability of the product candidate.

Manufacturing

Microbot does not have any manufacturing facilities or manufacturing personnel. Microbot currently relies, and expects to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacturing of its product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacturing if its product candidates receive marketing approval.

CommercializationDuring 2022 Microbot initiated the transfer to production by means of designing and building molds for plastic injection of parts which is a more cost-effective method for producing high quantities compared to conventional machined production of these parts. Some molds are already operative while others are being designed and built. We expect completing the molds during 2023.

Also, Microbot Medical initiated discussions with subcontractor that we believe are suited to assemble and test our products under applicable regulatory requirements and regulations.

Commercialization

Microbot has not yet established a sales, marketing or product distribution infrastructure for its product candidates, which are still in development stages. Microbot plans to access the U.S. markets for hydrocephalus, NPH, and colonoscopy with its initial device offerings through strategic partnerships but may develop its own focused, specialized sales force or distribution channels once it has several commercialized products in its portfolio. Microbot has not yet developed a commercial strategy outside of the United States.

Government Regulation

General

Microbot’s medical technology products and operations are subject to extensive regulation in the United States and other countries. Most notably, if Microbot seeks to sell its products in the United States, its products will be subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) as implemented and enforced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA regulates the development, bench and clinical testing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, promotion, marketing, sales, distribution and post-market support and reporting of medical devices in the United States to ensure that medical products distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses. Regulatory policy affecting its products can change at any time.

Advertising and promotion of medical devices in the United States, in addition to being regulated by the FDA, are also regulated by the Federal Trade Commission and by state regulatory and enforcement authorities. Recently, promotional activities for FDA-regulated products of other companies have been the subject of enforcement action brought under healthcare reimbursement laws and consumer protection statutes. In addition, under the federal Lanham Act and similar state laws, competitors and others can initiate litigation relating to advertising claims.

Foreign countries where Microbot wishes to sell its products may require similar or more onerous approvals to manufacture or market its products. Government agencies in those countries also enforce laws and regulations that govern the development, testing, manufacturing, labeling, advertising, marketing and distribution, and market surveillance of medical device products. These regulatory requirements can change rapidly with relatively short notice.

Other regulations Microbot encounters in the United States and in other jurisdictions are the regulations that are common to all businesses, such as employment legislation, implied warranty laws, and environmental, health and safety standards, to the extent applicable. In the future, Microbot will also encounter industry-specific government regulations that would govern its products, if and when they are developed for commercial use.

U.S. Regulation

The FDA governs the following activities that Microbot performs, will perform, upon the clearance or approval of its product candidates, or that are performed on its behalf, to ensure that medical products distributed domestically or exported internationally are safe and effective for their intended uses:

There are numerous FDA regulatory requirements governing the approval or clearance and subsequent commercial marketing of Microbot’s products. These include:

Unless an exemption applies, before Microbot can commercially distribute medical devices in the United States, Microbot must obtain, depending on the classification of the device, either prior 510(k) clearance, 510(k) de-novo clearance or premarket approval (PMA), from the FDA. The FDA classifies medical devices into one of three classes based on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of regulatory controls needed to ensure the device’s safety and effectiveness:

Microbot expectexpects the medical products in its pipeline currently to be classified as Class II. Class II devices are those for which general controls alone are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness and there is sufficient information to establish special controls. Special controls can include performance standards, post-market surveillance, patient histories and FDA guidance documents. Premarket review and clearance by the FDA for these devices is generally accomplished through the 510(k) or 510(k) de-novo premarket notification process. As part of the 510(k) or 510(k) de-novo notification process, FDA may require the following:

Clinical trials involve use of the medical device on human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with current Good Clinical Practices (GCPs), including the requirement that all research subjects provide informed consent for their participation in the clinical study. A written protocol with predefined end points, an appropriate sample size and pre-determined patient inclusion and exclusion criteria, is required before initiating and conducting a clinical trial. All clinical investigations of devices to determine safety and effectiveness must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s Investigational device Exemption, or IDE, regulations that among other things, govern investigational device labeling, prohibit promotion of the investigational device, and specify recordkeeping, reporting and monitoring responsibilities of study sponsors and study investigators. If the device presents a “significant risk,” as defined by the FDA, the agency requires the device sponsor to submit an IDE application, which must become effective prior to commencing human clinical trials. The IDE will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA denies the application or notifies the company that the investigation is on hold and may not begin. If the FDA determines that there are deficiencies or other concerns with an IDE that requires modification, the FDA may permit a clinical trial to proceed under a conditional approval. In addition, the study must be approved by, and conducted under the oversight of, an Institutional Review Board (IRB) for each clinical site. If the device presents a non-significant risk to the patient, a sponsor may begin the clinical trial after obtaining approval for the trial by one or more IRBs without separate approval from the FDA, but it must still follow abbreviated IDE requirements, such as monitoring the investigation, ensuring that the investigators obtain informed consent, and labeling and record-keeping requirements. 510(k) clearance typically involves the following:

After a device receives 510(k) clearance from FDA, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use or technological characteristics, requires a new 510(k) clearance or could require a PMA. The FDA requires each manufacturer to make the determination of whether a modification requires a new 510(k) notification or PMA in the first instance, but the FDA can review any such decision. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s decision not to seek a new 510(k) clearance or PMA for a particular change, the FDA may retroactively require the manufacturer to seek 510(k) clearance or PMA. The FDA can also require the manufacturer to cease U.S. marketing and/or recall the modified device until additional 510(k) clearance or PMA approval is obtained.

The FDA and the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, will also regulate the advertising claims of Microbot’s products to ensure that the claims Microbot makes are consistent with its regulatory clearances, that there is scientific data to substantiate the claims and that product advertising is neither false nor misleading.

To obtain 510(k) clearance, Microbot must submit a notification to the FDA demonstrating that its proposed device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device (i.e., a device that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976, a device that has been reclassified from Class III to Class I or Class II, or a 510(k)-cleared device). The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process generally takes from three to 12 months from the date the application is submitted but also can take significantly longer. If the FDA determines that the device or its intended use is not substantially equivalent to a predicate device, the device is automatically placed into Class III, requiring the submission of a PMA.

There is no guarantee that the FDA will grant Microbot 510(k) clearance for its pipeline medical device products, and failure to obtain the necessary clearances for its products would adversely affect Microbot’s ability to grow its business. Delays in receipt or failure to receive the necessary clearances, or the failure to comply with existing or future regulatory requirements, could reduce its business prospects.

Devices that cannot be cleared through the 510(k) process due to lack of a predicate device but would be considered low or moderate risk may be eligible for the 510(k) de-novo process. In 1997, the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, or FDAMA added the de novo classification pathway now codified in section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. This law established an alternate pathway to classify new devices into Class I or II that had automatically been placed in Class III after receiving a Not Substantially Equivalent, or NSE, determination in response to a 510(k) submission. Through this regulatory process, a sponsor who receives an NSE determination may, within 30 days of receipt, request FDA to make a risk-based classification of the device through what is called a “de novo request.” In 2012, section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act was amended by section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), in order to provide a second option for de novo classification. Under this second pathway, a sponsor who determines that there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination of substantial equivalence can submit a de novo request to FDA without first submitting a 510(k).

In the event that Microbot receives a Not Substantially Equivalent determination for either of its device candidates in response to a 510(k) submission, the Microbot device may still be eligible for the 510(k) de-novo classification process.

Devices that cannot be cleared through the 510(k) or 510(k) de-novo classification process require the submission of a PMA. The PMA process is much more time consuming and demanding than the 510(k) notification process. A PMA must be supported by extensive data, including but not limited to data obtained from preclinical and/or clinical studies and data relating to manufacturing and labeling, to demonstrate to the FDA’s satisfaction the safety and effectiveness of the device. After a PMA application is submitted, the FDA’s in-depth review of the information generally takes between one and three years and may take significantly longer. If the FDA does not grant 510(k) clearance to its products, there is no guarantee that Microbot will submit a PMA or that if Microbot does, that the FDA would grant a PMA approval of Microbot’s products, either of which would adversely affect Microbot’s business.

Foreign Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, Microbot will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials, marketing authorization and commercial sales and distribution of its products in foreign countries. The approval process varies from country to country, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval or clearance. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country.

International sales of medical devices are subject to foreign governmental regulations which vary substantially from country to country. Whether or not Microbot obtains FDA approval or clearance for its products, Microbot will be required to make new regulatory submissions to the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before Microbot can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in such countries. The time required to obtain certification or approval by a foreign country may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA clearance or approval, and the requirements may differ. Below are summaries of the regulatory systems for medical devices in Europe and Israel, where Microbot currently anticipates marketing its products. However, its products may also be marketed in other countries that have different systems or minimal requirements for medical devices.

Europe. The primary regulatory body in Europe is the European Union, or E.U., which consists of 2827 member states and has a coordinated system for the authorization of medical devices.

The E.U. has adopted legislation, in the form of directives to be implemented in each member state, concerning the regulation of medical devices within the European Union. The directives include, among others, the Medical Device Directive,Regulation, or MDD,MDR, that establishes certain requirements with which medical devices must comply before they can be commercialized in the European Economic Area, or EEA (which comprises the member states of the E.U. plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland). Under the MDD,MDR, medical devices are classified into four Classes, I, IIa, IIb, and III, with Class I being the lowest risk and Class III being the highest risk. However, the E.U. authorities, including

In order to commercialize medical devices in the European Commission, do not have directUnion, a CE Mark certificate is needed. This certification verifies that a device meets all regulatory overrequirements for medical device manufacturersdevices under the MDD. Rather, the MDD directs E.U. Member States to implement laws and regulations consistent with the provisions set forth in the directive.

Under the MDD, to demonstrate compliance of a medical device with the essential requirements, manufacturers must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its classification. An accredited body known as a “Notified Body”, which is an entity designated by an E.U. Member State (or competent authority) to perform conformity assessments, will typically audit and examine the manufacturer’s quality system for the production, quality, design and final inspection of the medical devices and review a Technical File containing technical documents regarding the device, including but limited to, detailed device description, manufacturing information, preclinical and clinical tests, risk analysis, compliance with essential requirements, etc., before issuing a certification demonstrating compliance with the essential requirements. Medical devices that comply with the essential requirements are entitled to bear the Conformité Européene, or CE Mark. Medical devices properly bearing the CE Mark may be commercially distributed throughout the EEA. Under the MDD, notified bodies are also charged with performing periodic inspections to verify that a manufacturer’s quality system, particularly the production and quality controls, is adequately executed and maintained.

In addition, the MDD requires all medical device manufacturers to inform the competent authorities of their respective Member States of the address(es) of any business facilities and descriptions of any certified medical device products. The MDD also requires manufacturers to file vigilance reports in the event a device malfunction, deterioration in performance, or inadequate instructions or labeling results in, or could lead to, death or serious harm to a patient.

In September 2012, the European Commission published proposals for the revision of the EU regulatory framework for medical devices. The proposal would replace the MDD with a new regulation, the Medical Devices Regulation or MDR. Unlike the MDD that must be implemented into national laws, the Medical Devices Regulation would be directly applicable(MDR 2017/745). The CE approval process in all EEA member states and soEurope is intended to eliminate current national differences in regulation of medical devices. E.U. lawmakers published a revised draft of the proposed MDR in June 2016, which continues to be discussed within the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament.summarized below:

Final formal adoption is expected both by the European Council and the European Parliament during the second quarter of 2017. If finally adopted, the MDR is expected to become applicable three years thereafter. The adoption of the MDR may, however, be materially delayed due to disagreements about specific portions of the regulation, as well as the implementation process. In its current form it would, among other things, impose additional reporting requirements on manufacturers of high risk medical devices, impose an obligation on manufacturers to appoint a “qualified person” responsible for regulatory compliance, and provide for more strict clinical evidence requirements. These new rules and procedures will likely result in increased regulatory oversight of all medical devices marketed in the E.U., and this may, in turn, increase the costs, time and requirements that need to be met in order to place a medical devices on the EEA market.

Microbot intends to apply for the CE Mark for each of its medical device products. There is no guarantee that Microbot will be granted a CE Mark for all or any of its pipeline products and failure to obtain the CE Mark would adversely affect its ability to grow its business.

Israel. Israel’s Medical Devices Law generally requires the registration of all medical products with the Ministry of Health, or MOH, Registrar as a precondition for production and distribution in Israel. Special exemptions may apply under limited circumstances and for purposes such as the provision of essential medical treatment, research and development of the medical device, and personal use, among others.

Registration of medical devices requires the submission of an application to the Ministry of Health Medical Institutions and Devices Licensing Department, or AMAR. An application for the registration of a medical device includes the following:

If the application includes a certificate issued by a competent authority of one of the following “recognized” countries: Australia, Canada, European Community (CE) Member States (MSs), Japan, or the United States, the registration process is generally expedited, but could still take 6-9 months for approval. If such certificate is not available, the registration process will take significantly longer and a license is rarely issued. Furthermore, the MOH will determine what type of testing is needed. In general, in the case of Israeli manufactured devices that are not registered or authorized in any “recognized” country, the application requires presentation of a risk analysis, a clinical evaluation, a summary of the clinical trials, and expert opinions regarding the device’s safety and effectiveness. Additional requirements may apply during the registration period, including follow-up reviews, to improve the quality and safety of the devices.

According to regulations issued by Israel’s Minister of Health in June 2013, a decision on a request to register a medical device must be delivered by AMAR within 120 days from the date of the request, although this rarely occurs. The current rules for the registration of medical devices do not provide for an expedited approval process.

Once granted by the MOH, a license (marketing authorization) for a medical device is valid for five years from the date of registration of the device, except for implants with a life-supporting function, for which the validity is for only two years from the date of registration. Furthermore, the holder of the license, the Israeli Registration Holder, or IRH, must do the following to maintain its license:

Comply with post-marketing requirements, including reporting of adverse and unexpected events occurring in Israel or in other countries where the device is in use.

Getting a device listed on Israel’s four major Sick Funds (health insurance entities) is also necessary in order for Israeli hospitals and health care providers to order such products.

Microbot intends to apply for a license from the MOH for each of its medical devices. There is no guarantee that Microbot will be granted licenses for its pipeline products and failure to obtain such licenses would adversely affect its ability to grow its business.

Employees

Human Capital

Employees

As of March 30, 2023, we had 21 employees (including full-time and hourly employees)

Microbot’s Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman, Harel Gadot, isalong with 4 full-time employees, are based in the United States, with Microbot’s U.S. office located in Hingham, Massachusetts. Additionally, Microbot currently has sixhad 14 full-time employees and one part time employee2 hourly employees based in its office located in Yokneam, Israel. These employees oversee day-to-day operations of the Company supporting management and leading engineering, manufacturing, intellectual property and administration functions of the Company. As required, Microbot also engages consultants to provide services to the Company, including regulatory, legal and corporate services. We are subject to labor laws and regulations within our locations in the U.S. and Israel. These laws and regulations principally concern matters such as pensions, paid annual vacation, paid sick days, length of the workday and work week, minimum wages, overtime pay, insurance for work-related accidents, severance pay and other conditions of employment. Microbot has no unionized employees.

Microbot currently plansWe believe we are able to hire an additional 4-6 full-timeattract and retain top talent by creating a culture that challenges and engages our employees, within the next 12 months subjectoffering them opportunities to the availability of funds, whose principal responsibilities will be the support of its operational, researchlearn, grow and achieve their career goals.

Compensation, Benefits and Wellbeing

We provide competitive compensation for our employees. We offer annual bonuses and stock-based compensation for eligible employees.

Leadership, Training and Development

We aim to provide our employees with advanced professional and development skills, so that they can perform effectively in their roles and clinical development activities.build their capabilities and career prospects for the future.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

We strive to encourage a diversity of views and to create an equal opportunity workplace. During the past year, we have increased the total number of women in management positions.

Item 1A.Risk Factors

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our business, operating results, financial performance, and share price may be materially adversely affected by a number of factors, including but not limited to the following risk factors, any one of which could cause actual results to vary materially from anticipated results or from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by us in this Annual Report on Form 10-K or in other reports, press releases or other statements issued from time to time. Additional factors that may cause such a difference are set forth elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this report. We do not undertake any obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements.

Risks Relating to Microbot’s Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

There is substantial doubt regarding on our ability to continue as a going concern.

As stated elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we have not generated any revenues, have sustained losses and have accumulated a significant deficits since our inception. Also, we estimate that our cash resources are only sufficient to fund our operations for approximately 4 months from the date of this Annual Report and as a result, our continued existence is dependent upon our ability to obtain additional debt or equity financing and to ultimately become a commercially viable organization.

There can be no assurance that the additional necessary debt or equity financing will be available, or will be available on terms acceptable to us, in which case we may be unable to meet our obligations or fully implement our business plan, if at all, beyond such 4 month period. Additionally, should we be unable to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities in the normal course of business, the net realizable value of our assets may be materially less than the amounts recorded in our financial statements. As a result of the foregoing and our current cash position, these conditions raise substantial doubt about Microbot’s ability to continue as a going concern beyond approximately the next 4 months, which could adversely affect our ability to raise capital, expand our business and develop our planned products.

We are subject to litigation, which may divert management’s attention and, in the event of an adverse judgment or settlement for some or all of the $6,750,000 being litigated, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and our ability to continue our operations.

We are the defendant in a lawsuit captioned Empery Asset Master Ltd., Empery Tax Efficient, LP, Empery Tax Efficient II, LP, Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd., Plaintiffs, against Microbot Medical Inc., Defendant, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York (Index No. 651182/2020). The complaint alleged, among other things, that we breached multiple representations and warranties contained in the Securities Purchase Agreement (the “SPA”) related to our June 8, 2017 equity financing (the “Financing”), of which the Plaintiffs participated. The complaint seeks rescission of the SPA and return of the Plaintiffs’ $6.75 million purchase price with respect to the Financing.

Management is unable to assess the likelihood that we would be successful in any trial with respect to the SPA or the Financing, having previously lost another lawsuit with respect to the Financing. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that if we go to trial and ultimately lose, or if we decide to settle at any time, such an adverse outcome would not be material to our consolidated financial position. Additionally, in any such case, we will likely be required to use available cash, or the proceeds from future offerings, towards the rescission or settlement, that we otherwise would have used to build our business and develop our technologies into commercial products. In such event, we would be required to raise additional capital sooner than we otherwise would, of which we can give no assurance of success, or delay, curtail or cease the commercialization of some or all of our product candidates.

Microbot has had no revenue and has incurred significant operating losses since inception and is expected to continue to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future. The Company may never become profitable or, if achieved, be able to sustain profitability.

Microbot has incurred significant operating losses since its inception and expects to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future as Microbot continues its preclinical and clinical development programs for its existing product candidates, SCS and TipCAT;primarily the LIBERTY device; its research and development of any other future product candidates; and all other work necessary to obtain regulatory clearances or approvals for its product candidates in the United States and other markets. In the future, Microbot intends to continue conducting micro-robotics research and development; performing necessary animal and clinical testing; working towards medical device regulatory compliance; and, if SCS, TipCATLIBERTY or other future product candidates are approved or cleared for commercial distribution, engaging in appropriate sales and marketing activities that, together with anticipated general and administrative expenses, will likely result in Microbot incurring further significant losses for the foreseeable future.

Microbot is a development-stage medical device company and currently generates no revenue from product sales, and may never be able to commercialize SCS, TipCATLIBERTY or other future product candidates. Microbot does not currently have the required approvals or clearances to market or test in humans SCS, TipCATthe LIBERTY or any other future product candidates and Microbot may never receive them. Microbot does not anticipate generating significant revenues until it can successfully develop, commercialize and sell products derived from its product pipeline, of which Microbot can give no assurance. Even if Microbot or any of its future development partners succeed in commercializing any of its product candidates, Microbot may never generate revenues significant enough to achieve profitability.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with its product development pipeline and strategy, Microbot cannot accurately predict when it will achieve profitability, if ever. Failure to become and remain profitable would depress the value of the Company and could impair its ability to raise capital, which may force the Company to curtail or discontinue its research and development programs and/or day-to-day operations. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that profitability, if achieved, can be sustained on an ongoing basis.

Microbot’s business depends on the success of the SCS and the TipCAT, both of which are still in pre-clinical development. If Microbot is unable to obtain regulatory approval for or to successfully commercialize these products, its business will be materially harmed.

To date, the primary focus of Microbot’s product development has been on SCS, for the treatment of hydrocephalus and normal pressure hydrocephalus, or NPH, and TipCAT, a self-propelling, semi-disposable endoscope being developed initially for use in colonoscopy procedures. Successful continued development and ultimate regulatory approval or clearance of both SCS and TipCAT are critical to the future success of Microbot’s business. Microbot has invested, and will continue to invest, a significant portion of its time and financial resources in the development, pre-clinical and clinical testing of and obtaining regulatory authorization for SCS and TipCAT. Microbot will need to raise sufficient funds to successfully complete its development of these products. The future regulatory and commercial success of SCS and TipCAT is subject to a number of risks, including the following:

If Microbot is unable to successfully navigate these risks and achieve commercial success for its products, its business will be significantly harmed and Microbot may never become profitable.

Microbot has a limited operating history outside of being a development-stage, pre-clinical, research and development company, which may make it difficult to evaluate the prospects for the Company’s future viability.

Microbot has a limited operating history upon which an evaluation of its business plan or performance and prospects can be made. The business and prospects of Microbot must be considered in the light of the potential problems, delays, uncertainties and complications that may be encountered in connection with a newly established business. The risks include, but are not limited to, the possibility that Microbot will not be able to develop functional and scalable products, or that although functional and scalable, its products will not be economical to market; that its competitors hold proprietary rights that may preclude Microbot from marketing such products; that its competitors market a superior or equivalent product; that Microbot is not able to upgrade and enhance its technologies and products to accommodate new features and expanded service offerings; or the failure to receive necessary regulatory clearances or approvals for its products. To successfully introduce and market its products at a profit, Microbot must establish brand name recognition and competitive advantages for its products. There are no assurances that Microbot can successfully address these challenges. If it is unsuccessful, Microbot and its business, financial condition and operating results could be materially and adversely affected.

Microbot’s operations to date have been limited to organizing the company, entering into licensing arrangements to initially obtain rights to its technologies, developing and securing its technologies, raising capital, developing regulatory and reimbursement strategies for its product candidates, and preparing for pre-clinical and clinical trials of product candidates from time to time and, most recently, commencing pre-commercialization planning for the SCS and TipCAT.LIBERTY device. Microbot has not yet demonstrated its ability to successfully complete development of any product candidate, obtain marketing clearance or approval, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on its behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions made about Microbot’s future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if Microbot had a longer operating history.

Microbot will need substantial additional funding. If Microbot is unable to raise capital when needed, it could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate its product development programs or commercialization efforts.

To date, Microbot has funded its operations primarily through private placement offerings of debt and equity securities grants and loans.grants. Microbot does not know when, or if, it will generate any revenue, but does not expect to generate significant revenue unless and until it obtains regulatory clearance or approval of and commercializes one of its current or future product candidates. It is anticipated that the Company will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and that losses will increase as it continues the development of, and seeks regulatory review of, its product candidates, and begins to commercialize any approved or cleared products following a successful regulatory review.

Microbot expects the research and development expenses of the Company to continue to increase substantially in future periods as it conducts pre-clinical studies in large animals and potentially clinical trials for its product candidates, and especially if it initiates additional research programs for future product candidates. This is the case even with the recent suspension of the research and development program relating to the SCS device. In addition, if the Company obtains marketing clearance or approval for any of its product candidates, it expects to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing and sales. Microbot may also require additional funds for operations if it loses its current lawsuit with Empery and Hudson Bay, discussed in great detail elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Furthermore, Microbot expects to incur additionalincurs substantial costs associated with operating as a public company in the United States. Accordingly, the Company willmay need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with its continuing operations.operations through its projected profitability, of which it can give no assurance of success. If the Company is unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, it could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate its research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts.

Microbot believes that the net cash of theThe Company will be sufficient to fund the Company for at least 12 months and fund operations necessaryintends to continue development activities of the SCS and TipCAT.

The Company may need to raiseopportunistically strengthen its balance sheet by raising additional funds through equity offerings, including possibly through its existing At-the-Market offering, or otherwise in order to meet expected future liquidity needs, including the introduction of the SCS device into the hydrocephalus and NPH market, and introducing the TipCAT as a next-generation colonoscope.LIBERTY. The Company’s future capital requirements, generally, will depend on many factors, including:

Raising additional capitalWe may still be subject to significant disruptions to our clinical trials or other business operations as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Although we have not yet commenced clinical trials, in the event the coronavirus pandemic or another pandemic is continuing when we are prepared to commence such trials, the coronavirus disease may cause dilutionsignificant delays and disruptions to our clinical trials and our interactions with the Company’s investors, restrict its operations or require it to relinquish rights to its technologies or product candidates.

UntilFDA. If the patients involved with any such time,clinical trials become infected with the coronavirus disease, we may have more AEs and deaths in our clinical trials as a result. We may also face difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials if ever, as the Company can generate substantial product revenues, it expects to finance its cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements, grants and debt financings. The Company does not have any committed external source of funds. Topatient populations that are eligible for our clinical trials are impacted by the extent that the Company raises additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of its stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidationcoronavirus or other preferences that adversely affectdisease. Additionally, if our clinical trial patients are unable to travel to our clinical trial sites as a result of quarantines or other restrictions resulting from the rightscoronavirus or other disease, we may experience higher drop-out rates or delays in our clinical trials, and some patients may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services, which could impact our ability to determine the efficacy or safety of holderour LIBERTY device. Site initiation and patient enrollment may also be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the coronavirus disease outbreak.

Additionally, travel restrictions and expanded screenings may be implemented locally or worldwide in an effort to contain the coronavirus or other disease. As such, we and our contract research organizations may be unable to visit our trial sites and monitor the data from our trials on timely basis. Our employees may also face travel restrictions, which would impact our business. Furthermore, some of our manufacturers and suppliers are in Europe and Asia and may be impacted by port closures and other restrictions resulting from any such outbreak, which may disrupt our supply chain or limit our ability to obtain sufficient materials for our products.

The ultimate impact of the Company’s common stock. Debt financing,coronavirus disease outbreak or a similar health epidemic is highly uncertain and subject to change, and we cannot presently predict the scope and severity of any further potential business shutdowns or disruptions, but if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limitingwe or restrictingany of the Company’s abilitythird parties with whom we engage, including the suppliers, clinical trial sites, contract research organizations, regulators, including the FDA health care providers and other third parties with whom we conduct business, were to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividendsexperience shutdowns or other distributions, selling or licensing intellectual property rights, and other operating restrictions that could adversely affect the Company’sbusiness disruptions, our ability to conduct its business.our business and operations could be materially and negatively impacted, which could prevent or delay us from obtaining approval for our LIBERTY device.

If the Company raises additional funds through licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements, it may have to relinquish valuable rights to its technologies, future revenue streams, research and development programs or product candidates or to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to the Company. If the Company is unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings or other arrangements when needed, it may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate its product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that it would otherwise prefer to develop and market itself.

Risks Relating to the Development and Commercialization of Microbot’s Product Candidates

Microbot’s business depends heavily on the success of its lead product candidates, the SCS and the TipCAT. If Microbot is unable to commercialize the SCS or the TipCAT or experiences significant delays in doing so, Microbot’s business will be materially harmed.

On January 27, 2017 Microbot entered into a research agreement with The Washington University to develop the protocol for and to execute the necessary animal study to determine the effectiveness of the Microbot’s SCS prototype. The initial research is expected to be completed within 6 months, with a comprehensive study to follow and be completed in 2018. Upon the completion of animal studies, Microbot may conduct clinical trials if they are requested by the FDA or if Microbot decides that the data from such trials would improve the marketability of the product candidate. The TipCAT is expected to enter animal studies in 2018. Upon the completion of animal studies, Microbot may conduct clinical trials if they are requested by the FDA or if Microbot decides that the data from such trials would improve the marketability of the product candidate. After all necessary clinical and performance data supporting the safety and effectiveness of each product candidate are collected, Microbot must still obtain FDA clearance or approval to market the device and those regulatory processes can take several months to several years to be completed. Therefore, Microbot’s ability to generate product revenues will not occur for at least the next few years, if at all, and will depend heavily on the successful commercialization of SCS and TipCAT in their respective intended markets. The success of each of these product candidates will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

If Microbot does not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, it could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize SCS and/or TipCAT, which would materially harm its business.

Microbot’s product candidates are subject to an uncertain and potentially lengthy domestic regulatory review process. If Microbot does not obtain and maintain the necessary regulatory authorizations from the Food and Drug Administration, Microbot will not be able to sell its product candidates in the United States.

Microbot’s product candidates and operations are subject to extensive regulation in the United States by the FDA under the agency’s medical device authorities. The FDA regulates the development, bench and clinical testing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, promotion, marketing sales, distribution and post-market support and reporting of medical devices in the United States to ensure that medical products distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses. Microbot expects its product candidates to be classified as Class II. In order to market Class II products for use in the United States, Microbot must first obtain clearance from the FDA pursuant to Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Clearance under Section 510(k) requires a demonstration that a new device is substantially equivalent to another device with 510(k) clearance or grandfathered status or to a device that was reclassified from Class III to Class II or Class I.

If the FDA determines that the device or its intended use is not substantially equivalent to a predicate device, the device is automatically placed into Class III, requiring the submission of a premarket approval application (PMA). There is no guarantee that the FDA will agree with Microbot’s determination that a 510(k) notification is the appropriate regulatory pathway for its products, or that FDA will grant Microbot 510(k) clearance for its pipeline medical device products even if that pathway is accepted. Failure to obtain the necessary clearances for its products would adversely affect Microbot’s ability to grow its business. Delays in receipt or failure to receive the necessary clearances, or the failure to comply with existing or future regulatory requirements, could reduce our business prospects.

Devices that cannot be cleared through the 510(k) process due to lack of a predicate device but would be considered low or moderate risk (in other words, they do not rise to the level of requiring the approval of a PMA) may be eligible for the 510(k) de novo classification process. If FDA determines that either of Microbot’s product candidates is not eligible for a traditional 510(k), the Microbot device may still be eligible for the 510(k) de novo process.

Even if one or both of Microbot’s product candidates receives 510(k) clearance from FDA, under either the traditional pathway or the de novo 510(k) pathway, any subsequent modification that could significantly affect the device’s safety or effectiveness, or that would cause them to be marketed for additional indications for use, may require a new 510(k) clearance or a PMA for the modified products before Microbot will be permitted to market them in the United States. The FDA can require a manufacturer to cease U.S. marketing and/or recall the modified device until it is satisfied that the appropriate 510(k) clearance or PMA approval is obtained.

The FDA may not act favorably or quickly in its review of Microbot’s 510(k), de novo 510(k), or PMA submissions, as applicable, or Microbot may encounter significant difficulties and costs in its efforts to obtain FDA clearance or approval, any of which could delay or preclude its sale of its product candidates in the United States. Furthermore, the FDA may request additional data or require Microbot to conduct further testing, or compile more data, including clinical data and clinical studies, in support of its 510(k) submission or potentially a de novo 510(k).

Moreover, the regulatory policies affecting Microbot’s proposed product candidates can change at any time. The changes and their potential impact on Microbot’s business cannot be accurately predicted. For example, in 2011, the FDA announced a Plan of Action to modernize and improve the FDA’s premarket review of medical devices, and has implemented, and continues to implement, reforms intended to streamline the premarket review process. In addition, as part of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act of 2012, Congress enacted several reforms through the Medical Device Regulatory Improvements and additional miscellaneous provisions which will further affect both pre- and post-approval medical device regulation. Changes in the FDA 510(k) process could make clearance more difficult to obtain, increase delay, add uncertainty and have other significant adverse effects on Microbot’s ability to obtain and maintain clearance for its product candidates.

The FDA may also, instead of accepting any kind of 510(k) submission, classify a product as high-risk and require Microbot to submit a PMA for the initial clearance, which is typically a much more complex, lengthy and burdensome application than a 510(k) submission. To support a PMA, the FDA would likely require that Microbot conduct one or more clinical studies to demonstrate that the device is safe and effective. In some cases such studies may be requested for a 510(k) or de novo 510(k) as well. Microbot may not be able to meet the requirements to obtain 510(k) clearance or PMA approval, in which case the FDA may not grant any necessary clearances or approvals. In addition, the FDA may place significant limitations upon the intended use of its product candidates as a condition to a 510(k) clearance or PMA approval. Product applications can also be denied or withdrawn due to failure to comply with regulatory requirements or the occurrence of unforeseen problems following clearance or approval. Any delays or failure to obtain FDA clearance or approval of new products Microbot develops, any limitations imposed by the FDA on new product use or the costs of obtaining FDA clearance or approvals could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to comply with the regulations or obtain the approvals described above could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business, financial condition and results of operations. There can be no assurance that clinical trials will meet desired endpoints, produce meaningful or useful data and be free of unexpected adverse effects, and such uncertainty could preclude or delay market clearance or authorizations resulting in significant financial costs and reduced revenue.

At this time, Microbot does not know whether the FDA will require it to submit clinical data in support of its future marketing applications for either product candidate.

Microbot anticipates that each of its existing product candidates, SCS and TipCAT, will be classified by the FDA as Class II and thus be eligible for marketing pursuant to a cleared 510(k) notification. However, there is no guarantee that the FDA will agree with the Company’s determination or that the FDA would accept the predicate devices that Microbot intends to submit in its 510(k) notifications in order to establish that its new device product is substantially equivalent to one or more predicate devices. The FDA also may request additional data in response to a 510(k) notification, or require Microbot to conduct further testing or compile more data in support of its 510(k) submission or de novo 510(k), as appropriate. Such additional data could include clinical data that must be derived from human clinical studies that are designed appropriately to address the potential questions from the FDA regarding a proposed product’s safety or effectiveness.

In order to conduct a clinical investigation involving human subjects for the purpose of demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of a medical device, a company must, among other things, apply for and obtain Institutional Review Board, or IRB, approval of the proposed investigation. In addition, if the clinical study involves a “significant risk” (as defined by the FDA) to human health, the sponsor of the investigation must also submit and obtain FDA approval of an Investigational Device Exemption, or IDE, application. Microbot may not be able to obtain FDA and/or IRB approval to undertake clinical trials in the United States for any new devices Microbot intends to market in the United States in the future. Any type of clinical study in humans requires the investment of substantial expense, professional resources and time. Moreover, the timing of the commencement, continuation and completion of any future clinical trial may be subject to significant delays attributable to various causes, including scheduling conflicts with participating clinicians and clinical institutions, difficulties in identifying and enrolling patients who meet trial eligibility criteria, failure of patients to complete the clinical trial, delay in or failure to obtain IRB approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective site, and shortages of supply in the investigational device.

The addition of one or more mandatory clinical trials to the development timeline for one or both Microbot product candidates would significantly increase the costs associated with developing and commercializing the product and delay the timing of U.S. regulatory authorization.

Unsuccessful animal studies, clinical trials or procedures relating to product candidates under development could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s prospects.

The regulatory approval process for new products and new indications for existing products requires extensive data and procedures, including the development of regulatory and quality standards and, potentially, certain clinical studies. Unfavorable or inconsistent data from current or future clinical trials or other studies conducted by Microbot or third parties, including the studies now being performed by The Washington University or perceptions regarding such data, could adversely affect Microbot’s ability to obtain necessary device clearance or approval and the market’s view of Microbot’s future prospects.

Failure to successfully complete thesethe studies or trials in a timely and cost-effective manner could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s prospects.prospects with respect to the LIBERTY device or other product candidates. Because animal trials, clinical trials and other types of scientific studies are inherently uncertain, there can be no assurance that these trials or studies will be completed in a timely or cost-effective manner or result in a commercially viable product. Clinical trials or studies may experience significant setbacks even if earlier preclinical or animal studies have shown promising results. Furthermore, preliminary results from clinical trials may be contradicted by subsequent clinical analysis. Results from clinical trials may also not be supported by actual long-term studies or clinical experience. If preliminary clinical results are later contradicted, or if initial results cannot be supported by actual long-term studies or clinical experience, Microbot’s business could be adversely affected. Clinical trials also may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA or other regulatory authorities at any time if it is believed that the trial participants face unacceptable health risks. The FDA may disagree with our interpretation of the data from our clinical trials, or may find the clinical trial design, conduct or results inadequate to demonstrate safety and effectiveness of the product candidate. The FDA may also require additional pre-clinical studies or clinical trials which could further delay approval of our product candidates.

Microbot’s business depends heavily on the success of its sole lead product candidate, the LIBERTY. If Microbot has no prior experienceis unable to commercialize the LIBERTY, or experiences significant delays in conductingdoing so, Microbot’s business will be materially harmed.

Generally, after all necessary clinical and performance data supporting the safety and effectiveness of the LIBERTY device, or any other product candidate, are collected, Microbot must still obtain FDA clearance or approval to market the device and those regulatory processes can take several months to several years to be completed. Therefore, Microbot’s ability to generate product revenues will not occur for at least the next few years, if at all, and will depend heavily on the successful commercialization of the LIBERTY device, or any of our other product candidates from time to time. The success of commercializing any of our product candidates, include the LIBERTY device, will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

We recently suspended our SCS research and development program as a result of, among other things, some of the above factors, and our short and medium term success is no longer tied to multiple product candidates but rather just the LIBERTY device. If Microbot does not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, it could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize the LIBERTY or any other product candidate, which would materially harm its business.

The results of Microbot’s research and development efforts are uncertain and there can be no assurance of the commercial success of Microbot’s product candidates.

Microbot believe that its success will depend in part on its ability to expand its product offerings and continue to improve its existing product candidates in response to changing technologies, customer demands and competitive pressures. As such, Microbot expects to continue dedicating significant resources in research and development. The product candidates and services being developed by Microbot may not be technologically successful. In addition, the length of Microbot’s product candidates and service development cycle may be greater than Microbot originally expected.

Microbot’s ability to expand its technology platforms for other uses may be limited.

After spending time working with experts in the field, Microbot has decided to no longer pursue the use of TipCAT in colonoscopy and has instead committed to focus on expanding all of its technology platforms for use in segments of the endovascular, cardiovascular and neurosurgery markets. Microbot’s ability to expand its technology platforms for use in such markets will be limited by its ability to develop and/or refine the necessary technology, obtain the necessary regulatory approvals for their use on humans, and the marketing of its products and otherwise obtaining market acceptance of its product in the United States and in other countries.

At this time, Microbot does not know the extent of the clinical trial that the FDA will require it to submit in support of its future marketing applications for its LIBERTY product candidate, which creates uncertainty for Microbot as well as the possibility of increased product development costs and time to market.

Microbot has identified a predicate device for the LIBERTY device, which it intended to use in its 510(k) application. However, , there is no guarantee that the FDA will agree with the Company’s determination or that the FDA would accept the predicate device that Microbot intends to submit in its 510(k). The FDA also may request additional data in response to a 510(k) or require Microbot to conduct further testing or compile more data in support of its 510(k). It is unclear at this time whether and how various activities initiated or announced by the FDA to modernize the U.S. medical device regulatory system could affect the marketing pathway or timeline for our product candidate, given their nature.

The FDA requires clinical data to be submitted as part of the LIBERTY marketing submission, any type of clinical study performed in humans will require the investment of substantial expense, professional resources and time. In order to conduct a clinical investigation involving human subjects for the purpose of demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of a medical device, a company must, among other things, apply for and obtain Institutional Review Board, or IRB, approval of the proposed investigation. In addition, the sponsor of the investigation must also submit and obtain FDA approval of an Investigational Device Exemption, or IDE, application. Microbot may not be able to obtain FDA and/or IRB approval to undertake clinical trials in the United States for any new devices Microbot intends to market in the United States in the future. Moreover, the timing of the commencement, continuation and completion of any future clinical trial may be subject to significant delays attributable to various causes, including scheduling conflicts with participating clinicians and clinical institutions, difficulties in identifying and enrolling patients who meet trial eligibility criteria, failure of patients to complete the clinical trial, delay in or failure to obtain IRB approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective site, and shortages of supply in the investigational device.

Thus, the addition of one or more mandatory clinical trials to the development timeline for the LIBERTY or any other product candidate would significantly increase the costs associated with developing and commercializing the product and delay the timing of U.S. regulatory authorization. The current uncertainty regarding near-term medical device regulatory changes by the FDA could further affect our development plans for the LIBERTY or any other product candidate, depending on their nature, scope and applicability. Microbot and its business, financial condition and operating results could be materially and adversely affected as a result of any such costs, delays or uncertainty.

Microbot’s One & Done technology is subject to a buy-back clause which, if triggered, could cause us to lose rights to the technology and delay or curtail the development of our products.

Pursuant to the agreement we entered into in January 2018 to acquire the One & Done technology, we are required to meet certain commercialization deadlines or CardioSert may terminate the agreement and buy back the technology for $1.00, subject to certain limited exceptions. One of the exceptions in the agreement is if “The First Commercial Sale does not occur within 50 months of the Effective Date” of the contract. 50 months have expired in 2022 and Microbot did not meet the commercialization deadlines.

Our failure to meet the applicable commercialization deadline could therefore result in the sale back of the technology to CardioSert. Although we have not yet been notified of any such election, any such sale could materially adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize, or materially delay the development and commercialization of, our planned One & Done technology.

Microbot will depend upon the ability of third parties, including contract research organizations, collaborative academic groups, future clinical trial sites and investigators, to conduct or to assist the Company in conducting clinical trials for its product candidates, if such trials become necessary.

As a development-stage, pre-clinical company, Microbot has no prior experience in designing, initiating, conducting and monitoring human clinical trials, if data from such trials become necessary in order to obtain regulatory clearance or approval of our product candidates. Should the FDA or another regulatory agency in a foreign market request clinical data to support the safety and effectiveness of Microbot’s product candidates,trials. Microbot will depend upon its ability and/or the ability of future collaborators, contract research organizations, clinical trial sites and investigators to successfully design, initiate, conduct and monitor such clinical trials.

Failure by Microbot or by any of these future collaborating parties to timely and effectively initiate, conduct and monitor a future clinical trial could significantly delay or materially impair Microbot’s ability to complete those clinical trials and/or obtain regulatory clearance or approval of its product candidates and, consequently, could delay or materially impair its ability to generate revenues from the commercialization of those products.

If the commercial opportunity for SCSLIBERTY and TipCATany other commercial products that may be developed by Microbot is smaller than Microbot anticipates, Microbot’s future revenue from SCSLIBERTY and TipCATsuch other products will be adversely affected and Microbot’s business will suffer.

If the size of the commercial opportunities in any of Microbot’s target markets is smaller than it anticipates, Microbot may not be able to achieve profitability and growth. Microbot is developing SCS as a device for the treatment of hydrocephalus and NPH and is developing TipCAT as an endoscopic tool, with colonoscopy as the most immediate application of the TipCAT technology. Microbot expects its future revenues to be primarily derived from the sales of the SCS and TipCAT, neither of which has undergone an FDA pre-market review process necessary to commercialize the product candidate in the United States. It is difficult to predict the penetration, future growth rate or size of the market for Microbot’s product candidates.candidate.

The commercial success of the SCS and TipCATLIBERTY or any other product candidates will require broad acceptance of the devices by the doctors and other medical professionals who specialize in the procedures targeted by each device, a limited number of whom may be able to influence device selection and purchasing decisions. If Microbot’s technologies are not broadly accepted and perceived as having significant advantages over existing medical devices, then it will not meet its business objectives. Such perceptions are likely to be based on a determination by medical facilities and physicians that Microbot’s product candidates are safe and effective, are cost-effective in comparison to existing devices, and represent acceptable methods of treatment. Microbot cannot assure that it will be able to establish the relationships and arrangements with medical facilities and physicians necessary to support the market uptake of its product candidates. In addition, its competitors may develop new technologies for the same markets Microbot is targeting that are more attractive to medical facilities and physicians. If doctors and other medical professionals do not consider Microbot product candidates to be suitable for application in the procedures we are targeting and an improvement over the use of existing or competing products, Microbot’s business goals will not be realized.

Customers will be unlikely to buy the SCSLIBERTY or the TipCATany other product candidates unless Microbot can demonstrate that they can be produced for sale to consumers at attractive prices.

To date, Microbot has focused primarily on research and development of the LIBERTY device and first generation versions of the SCSother current and the TipCAT.former product candidates. Consequently, Microbot has no experience in manufacturing its product candidates, and intends to manufacture its product candidates through third-party manufacturers. Microbot can offer no assurance that either it or its manufacturing partners will develop efficient, automated, low-cost manufacturing capabilities and processes to meet the quality, price, engineering, design and production standards or production volumes required to successfully mass produce its commercial products. Even if its manufacturing partners are successful in developing such manufacturing capability and quality processes, including the assurance of GMP-compliant device manufacturing, there can be no assurance that Microbot can timely meet its product commercialization schedule or the production and delivery requirements of potential customers. A failure to develop such manufacturing processes and capabilities could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business and financial results.

The proposed price of Microbot’s product candidates, once approved for sale, will be dependent on material and other manufacturing costs. Microbot cannot offer any assurances that its manufacturing partner will be able manufacture its product candidates at a competitive price or that achieving cost reductions will not cause a reduction in the performance, reliability and longevity of its product candidates.

Microbot will rely on third party design houses for the redesign of the One & Done guidewire to other specific indications.

Since the One & Done guidewire was originally designed for treating chronic total occlusions, the design will need to be modified to treat other indications. As we do not specialize in the design of guidewires and microcatheters, Microbot worked with two design houses that specialize in design and high volume production of guidewires and microcatheters to define the guidewire conceptual design. We are now exploring the option to progress with one of the two design houses to resume the next phases of the project. Such designs may require several design and regulatory iterations prolonging the product release and certification, which could delay the commercialization of our One & Done technology and possibly the LIBERTY device.

Microbot has relied on, and intends to continue to rely on, third-party manufacturers to produce its product candidates.

Microbot currently relies, and expects to rely for the foreseeable future, on third-party manufacturers to produce and supply its product candidates, and it expects to rely on third parties to manufacture the commercialized products as well, should they receive the necessary regulatory clearance or approval. Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks to which Microbot would not be subject if Microbot manufactured its product candidates or future commercial products itself, including:

If Microbot is not able to maintain its key manufacturing relationships, Microbot may fail to find replacement manufacturers or develop its own manufacturing capabilities, which could delay or impair Microbot’s ability to obtain regulatory clearance or approval for its product candidates and could substantially increase its costs or deplete profit margins, if any. If Microbot does find replacement manufacturers, Microbot may not be able to enter into agreements with them on terms and conditions favorable to it and there could be a substantial delay before new facilities could be qualified and registered with the FDA and other foreign regulatory authorities.

Additionally, the existing design of the CardioSert device was produced in very low quantities by the seller of the technology. Accordingly, the scaling-up to high volume production may require significant changes to the existing design and production methods. Microbot worked with two leading third party companies that specialize in design and high-volume production of guidewires and microcatheters to conceptually define the required changes and modifications, and we are considering to progress with one of these two design houses to define the next phases of the project. These design changes/modifications may have significant negative implications in price and time to market of the CardioSert system.

If Microbot’s product candidates are not considered to be a safe and effective alternative to existing technologies, Microbot will not be commercially successful.

The SCSLIBERTY and TipCATour other product candidates rely on new technologies, and Microbot’s success will depend on acceptance of these technologies by the medical community as safe, clinically effective, cost effective and a preferred device as compared to products of its competitors. Microbot does not have long-term data regarding efficacy, safety and clinical outcomes associated with the use of SCSLIBERTY or TipCAT.our other product candidates. Any data that is generated in the future may not be positive or may not support the product candidates’ regulatory dossiers, which would negatively affect market acceptance and the rate at which its product candidates are adopted. Equally important will be physicians’ perceptions of the safety of Microbot’s product candidates because Microbot’s technologies are relatively new. If, over the long term, Microbot’s product candidates do not meet surgeons’ expectations as to safety, efficacy and ease of use, they may not become widely adopted.

Market acceptance of Microbot’s product candidates will also be affected by other factors, including Microbot’s ability to convince key opinion leaders to provide recommendations regarding its product candidates; convince distributors that its technologies are attractive alternatives to existing and competing technologies; supply and service sufficient quantities of products directly or through marketing alliances; and price products competitively in light of the current macroeconomic environment, which is becoming increasingly price sensitive.

Microbot may be subject to penalties and may be precluded from marketing its product candidates if Microbot fails to comply with extensive governmental regulations.

Microbot believes that its medical device product candidates will be categorized as Class II devices, which typically require a 510(k) or 510(k) de-novo premarket submission to the FDA. However, the FDA has not made any determination about whether Microbot’s medical product candidates are Class II medical devices and may disagree with that classification. If the FDA determines that Microbot’s product candidates should be reclassified as Class III medical devices, Microbot could be precluded from marketing the devices for clinical use within the United States for months, years or longer, depending on the specifics of the change in classification. Reclassification of any of Microbot’s product candidates as Class III medical devices could significantly increase Microbot’s regulatory costs, including the timing and expense associated with required clinical trials and other costs.

The FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authorities require that Microbot product candidates be manufactured according to rigorous standards. These regulatory requirements significantly increase Microbot’s production costs, which may prevent Microbot from offering products within the price range and in quantities necessary to meet market demands. If Microbot or one of its third-party manufacturers changes an approved manufacturing process, the FDA may need to review the process before it may be used. Failure to comply with applicable pre-market and post-market regulatory requirements could subject Microbot to enforcement actions, including warning letters, fines, injunctions and civil penalties, recall or seizure of its products, operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of its production, and criminal prosecution.

If Microbot is not able to both obtain and maintain adequate levels of third-party reimbursement for procedures involving its product candidates after they are approved for marketing and launched commercially, it would have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business.

Healthcare providers and related facilities are generally reimbursed for their services through payment systems managed by various governmental agencies worldwide, private insurance companies, and managed care organizations. The manner and level of reimbursement in any given case may depend on the site of care, the procedure(s) performed, the final patient diagnosis, the device(s) utilized, available budget, or a combination of these factors, and coverage and payment levels are determined at each payor’s discretion. The coverage policies and reimbursement levels of these third-party payors may impact the decisions of healthcare providers and facilities regarding which medical products they purchase and the prices they are willing to pay for those products. Microbot cannot assure you that its sales will not be impeded and its business harmed if third-party payors fail to provide reimbursement for Microbot products that healthcare providers view as adequate.

In the United States, Microbot expects that its product candidates, once approved, will be purchased primarily by medical institutions, which then bill various third-party payors, such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, which administers the Medicare program through Medicare Administrative Contractors, and other government health care programs and private insurance plans, for the healthcare products and services provided to their patients. The process involved in applying for coverage and incremental reimbursement from CMS is lengthy and expensive. Moreover, many private payors look to CMS in setting their reimbursement policies and amounts. If CMS or other agencies limit coverage for procedures utilizing Microbot’s products or decrease or limit reimbursement payments for doctors and hospitals utilizing Microbot’s products, this may affect coverage and reimbursement determinations by many private payors.

If a procedure involving a medical device is not reimbursed separately by a government or private insurer, then a medical institution would have to absorb the cost of Microbot’s products as part of the cost of the procedure in which the products are used. At this time, Microbot does not know the extent to which medical institutions would consider insurers’ payment levels adequate to cover the cost of its products. Failure by hospitals and surgeons to receive an amount that they consider to be adequate reimbursement for procedures in which Microbot products are used could deter them from purchasing Microbot products and limit sales growth for those products.

Microbot has no control over payor decision-making with respect to coverage and payment levels for its medical device product candidates, once they are approved. Additionally, Microbot expects many payors to continue to explore cost-containment strategies (e.g., comparative and cost-effectiveness analyses, so-called ”pay-for-performance”“pay-for-performance” programs implemented by various public government health care programs and private third-party payors, and expansion of payment bundling initiatives, and other such methods that shift medical cost risk to providers) that may potentially impact coverage and/or payment levels for Microbot’s current product candidates or products Microbot develops in the future.

As Microbot’s product offerings are used across diverse healthcare settings, they will be affected to varying degrees by the different payment systems.

Clinical outcome studies for the SCSLIBERTY may not provide sufficient data to make Microbot’ssuch product candidates the standard of care.

Microbot’s business plan with respect to the LIBERTY relies on the broad adoption by surgeons of the SCSproducts for primary shunt placement procedures to prevent shunt occlusions. Although Microbot believes the occurrence of shunt occlusion complications is well known among physicians practicing in the relevant medical fields, SCS may be adopted for replacement shunt surgeries only. Neurosurgeons may adopt SCS for primary shunt placement procedures only upon additional clinical studies with longer follow up periods, if at all. It may also be necessary to provide outcome studies on the preventative capabilities of the SCS in order to convince the medical community of its safety and efficacy. their respective planned applications.

Clinical studies may not show an advantage in SCSLIBERTY based procedures in a timely manner, or at all, and outcome studies have not been designed at this time, and may be too large and too costly for Microbot to conduct. Both situations could prevent broad adoption of the SCSLIBERTY and materially impact Microbot’s business.

Microbot products may in the future be subject to mandatory product recalls that could harm its reputation, business and financial results.

The FDA and similar foreign governmental authorities have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture that could pose a risk of injury to patients. In the case of the FDA, the authority to require a recall must be based on an FDA finding that there is a reasonable probability that the device would cause serious injury or death, although in most cases this mandatory recall authority is not used because manufacturers typically initiate a voluntary recall when a device violation is discovered. In addition, foreign governmental bodies have the authority to require the recall of Microbot products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. Manufacturers may, under their own initiative, recall a product if any material deficiency in a device is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by Microbot or one of its distributors could occur as a result of component failures, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any Microbot products would divert managerial and financial resources and have an adverse effect on Microbot’s financial condition and results of operations, and any future recall announcements could harm Microbot’s reputation with customers and negatively affect its sales. In addition, the FDA could take enforcement action, including any of the following sanctions for failing to timely report a recall to the FDA:

If Microbot’s future commercialized products cause or contribute to a death or a serious injury, Microbot will be subject to Medical Device Reporting regulations, which can result in voluntary corrective actions or agency enforcement actions.

Under FDA regulations, Microbot will be required to report to the FDA any incident in which a marketed medical device product may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or in which a medical device malfunctioned and, if the malfunction were to recur, would likely cause or contribute to death or serious injury. In addition, all manufacturers placing medical devices in European Union markets are legally bound to report any serious or potentially serious incidents involving devices they produce or sell to the relevant authority in whose jurisdiction the incident occurred.

Microbot anticipates that in the future it is likely that we may experience events that would require reporting to the FDA pursuant to the Medical Device Reporting (MDR) regulations. Any adverse event involving a Microbot product could result in future voluntary corrective actions, such as product actions or customer notifications, or agency actions, such as inspection, mandatory recall or other enforcement action. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending Microbot in a lawsuit, will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business, and may harm our reputation and financial results.

Microbot could be exposed to significant liability claims if Microbot is unable to obtain insurance at acceptable costs and adequate levels or otherwise protect itself against potential product liability claims.

The testing, manufacture, marketing and sale of medical devices entail the inherent risk of liability claims or product recalls. Product liability insurance is expensive and may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all. A successful product liability claim or product recall could inhibit or prevent the successful commercialization of Microbot’s products, cause a significant financial burden on Microbot, or both, which in any case could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business and financial condition.

The results of Microbot’s research and development efforts are uncertain and there can be no assurance of the commercial success of Microbot’s product candidates.

Microbot believe that its success will depend in part on its ability to expand its product offerings and continue to improve its existing product candidates in response to changing technologies, customer demands and competitive pressures. As such, Microbot expects to continue dedicating significant resources in research and development. The product candidates and services being developed by Microbot may not be technologically successful. In addition, the length of Microbot’s product candidates and service development cycle may be greater than Microbot originally expected.

If Microbot failfails to retain certain of its key personnel and attract and retain additional qualified personnel, Microbot might not be able to pursue its growth strategy effectively.

Microbot is dependent on its senior management, in particular Harel Gadot, Microbot’s Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Simon Sharon, its General Manager and Chief Technology Officer. Although Microbot believes that its relationship with members of its senior management is positive, there can be no assurance that the services of any of these individuals will continue to be available to Microbot in the future. Microbot’s future success will depend in part on its ability to retain its management and scientific teams, to identify, hire and retain additional qualified personnel with expertise in research and development and sales and marketing, and to effectively provide for the succession of senior management, when necessary. Competition for qualified personnel in the medical device industry is intense and finding and retaining qualified personnel with experience in the industry is very difficult. Microbot believes that there are only a limited number of individuals with the requisite skills to serve in key positions at Microbot, particularly in Israel, and it competes for key personnel with other medical equipment and technology companies, as well as research institutions.

Microbot does not carry, and does not intend to carry, any key man life insurance policies on any of its existing executive officers.

Risks Relating to International Business

If Microbot fails to obtain regulatory clearances in other countries for its product candidates under development, Microbot will not be able to commercialize these product candidates in those countries.

In order for Microbot to market its product candidates in countries other than the United States, it must comply with the safety and quality regulations in such countries.

In Europe, these regulations, including the requirements for approvals, clearance or grant of Conformité Européenne, or CE, Certificates of Conformity and the time required for regulatory review, vary from country to country. Failure to obtain regulatory approval, clearance or CE Certificates of Conformity (or equivalent) in any foreign country in which Microbot plans to market its product candidates may harm its ability to generate revenue and harm its business. Approval and CE marking procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval or CE Certificate of Conformity in other countries might differ from that required to obtain FDA clearance. The regulatory approval or CE marking process in other countries may include all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA clearance in the United States. Regulatory approval or the CE marking of a product candidate in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval or a CE Certificate of Conformity in one country may negatively impact the regulatory process in others. Failure to obtain regulatory approval or a CE Certificate of Conformity in other countries or any delay or setback in obtaining such approval could have the same adverse effects described above regarding FDA clearance in the United States.

Microbot cannot be certain that it will be successful in complying with the requirements of the CE Certificate of Conformity and receiving a CE Mark for its product candidates or in continuing to meet the requirements of the Medical Devices Directive in the European Economic Area (EEA).

Israel’s Medical Devices Law generally requires the registration of all medical products with the Ministry of Health, or MOH, Registrar through the submission of an application to the Ministry of Health Medical Institutions and Devices Licensing Department, or AMAR. If the application includes a certificate issued by a competent authority of a “recognized” country, which includes Australia, Canada, the European Community Member States, Japan or the United States, the registration process is expedited, but is generally still expected to take 6 to 9 months for approval. If certification from a recognized country is not available, the registration process takes significantly longer and a license is rarely issued under such circumstances, as the MOH may require the presentation of significant additional clinical data. Once granted, a license (marketing authorization) for a medical device is valid for five years from the date of registration of the device, except for implants with a life-supporting function, for which the validity is for only two years from the date of registration. Furthermore, the holder of the license must meet several additional requirements to maintain the license. Microbot cannot be certain that it will be successful in applying for a license from the MOH for its product candidates.

Microbot operations in international markets involve inherent risks that Microbot may not be able to control.

Microbot’s business plan includes the marketing and sale of its proposed product candidates internationally, and specifically in Europe and Israel. Accordingly, Microbot’s results could be materially and adversely affected by a variety of factors relating to international business operations that it may or may not be able to control, including:

Microbot’s financial results may be affected by fluctuations in exchange rates and Microbot’s current currency hedging strategy may not be sufficient to counter such fluctuations.

Microbot’s financial statements are denominated in U.S. dollars and the financial results of the Company are denominated in U.S. dollars, while a significant portion of Microbot’s business is conducted, and a substantial portion of its operating expenses are payable, in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Exchange rate fluctuations may have an adverse impact on Microbot’s future revenues or expenses as presented in the financial statements. Microbot may in the future use financial instruments, such as forward foreign currency contracts, in its management of foreign currency exposure. These contracts would primarily require Microbot to purchase and sell certain foreign currencies with or for U.S. dollars at contracted rates. Microbot may be exposed to a credit loss in the event of non-performance by the counterparties of these contracts. In addition, these financial instruments may not adequately manage Microbot’s foreign currency exposure. Microbot’s results of operations could be adversely affected if Microbot is unable to successfully manage currency fluctuations in the future.

Risks Relating to Microbot’s Intellectual Property

Microbot’s right to develop and commercialize its existingthe SCS and TipCAT product candidates are subject to the terms and condition of a license granted to Microbot by Technion Research and Development Foundation Ltd. and termination of the license with respect to one or both of the technology platforms underlying the product candidates would result in Microbot ceasing its development efforts for the applicable product candidate(s).

Microbot entered into a license agreement with Technion Research and Development Foundation Ltd., or TRDF, in 2012 pursuant to which Microbot obtained an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing, sub-licensable license to certain patents and inventions relating to the SCS and TipCAT technology platforms. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreement, in order to maintain the license with respect to each platform, Microbot must use commercially reasonable efforts to develop products covered by the license, including meeting certain agreed upon development milestones. TRDF has the option to terminate a license granted with respect a particular technology in the event Microbot fails to meet a development milestone associated with such technology. Therefore, the failure to meet development milestones may lead to a complete termination of the applicable license agreement and result in Microbot ceasing its development efforts for the applicable product candidate. The milestone for the TipCAT include commencing first in human clinical trials in December 2023. The milestones for the SCS include commencing initial studiesfirst in humanshuman clinical trials by December 20182024, and commencing a clinical trial, if necessary,pivotal study by December 2019. The milestones for TipCAT include commencing initial studies in humans by December 2018 and commencing a full clinical trial, if necessary, by December 2020.June 2027. Failure to meet any development milestone will give TRDF the right to terminate the license with respect to the technology underlying the missed milestone. Although Microbot expects to meet the milestone requirements, TRDF has previously demonstrated flexibility with respect to amending the terms of the license to extend the milestone dates.dates, although we can give no assurance at this time that TRDF will continue to be so flexible with respect to amending the terms of the license. We have informed TRDF of our suspension of our SCS research and development program and our plans exploring strategic alternatives for such product and technology. To-date, TRDF has not taken any action to so terminate the license, although we can give no assurance they will not do so.

Under the license agreement, Microbot is also subject to various other obligations, including obligations with respect to payment upon the achievement of certain milestones and royalties on product sales. TRDF may terminate the license agreement under certain circumstances, including material breaches by Microbot or under certain bankruptcy or insolvency events. In the case of termination of the license by Microbot without cause or by TRDF for cause, TRDF has the right to receive a non-exclusive license from Microbot with respect to improvements to the licensed technologies made by Microbot.

If TRDF were to terminate the license agreement or if Microbot was to otherwise lose the ability to exploit the licensed patents, Microbot’s competitive advantage with respect to its SCS and TipCAT technology platforms could be reduced or terminated, and Microbot will likely not be able to find a source to replace the licensed technology.

However,Additionally, if there is any future dispute between Microbot and TRDF regarding the respective parties’ rights under the license agreement, Microbot’s ability to develop and commercialize the SCS and TipCAT may be materially harmed.harmed, although at this time no material development or commercialization of either platform is in effect.

Microbot may not meet its product candidates’ development and commercialization objectives in a timely manner or at all.

Microbot has established internal goals, based upon expectations with respect to its technologies, which Microbot has used to assess its progress toward developing its product candidates. These goals relate to technology and design improvements as well as to dates for achieving specific development results. If the product candidates exhibit technical defects or are unable to meet cost or performance goals, Microbot’s commercialization schedule could be delayed and potential purchasers of its initial commercialized products may decline to purchase such products or may opt to pursue alternative products, which would materially harm its business.

Intellectual property litigation and infringement claims could cause Microbot to incur significant expenses or prevent Microbot from selling certain of its product candidates.

The medical device industry is characterized by extensive intellectual property litigation. From time to time, Microbot might be the subject of claims by third parties of potential infringement or misappropriation. Regardless of outcome, such claims are expensive to defend and divert the time and effort of Microbot’s management and operating personnel from other business issues. A successful claim or claims of patent or other intellectual property infringement against Microbot could result in its payment of significant monetary damages and/or royalty payments or negatively impact its ability to sell current or future products in the affected category and could have a material adverse effect on its business, cash flows, financial condition or results of operations.

If Microbot or TRDF are unable to protect the patents or other proprietary rights relating to Microbot’s product candidates, or if Microbot infringes on the patents or other proprietary rights of others, Microbot’s competitiveness and business prospects may be materially damaged.

Microbot’s success depends on its ability to protect its intellectual property (including its licensed intellectual property) and its proprietary technologies. Microbot’s commercial success depends in part on its ability to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection for its product candidates, proprietary technologies, and their uses, as well as its ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others.

Microbot currently holds, through licenses or otherwise, an intellectual property portfolio that includes U.S. and international patents and pending patents, and other patents under development. Microbot intends to continue to seek legal protection, primarily through patents, including the TRDF licensed patents, for its proprietary technology. Seeking patent protection is a lengthy and costly process, and there can be no assurance that patents will be issued from any pending applications, or that any claims allowed from existing or pending patents will be sufficiently broad or strong to protect its proprietary technology. There is also no guarantee that any patents Microbot holds, through licenses or otherwise, will not be challenged, invalidated or circumvented, or that the patent rights granted will provide competitive advantages to Microbot. Microbot’s competitors have developed and may continue to develop and obtain patents for technologies that are similar or superior to Microbot’s technologies. In addition, the laws of foreign jurisdictions in which Microbot develops, manufactures or sells its product candidates may not protect Microbot’s intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States.

Adverse outcomes in current or future legal disputes regarding patent and other intellectual property rights could result in the loss of Microbot’s intellectual property rights, subject Microbot to significant liabilities to third parties, require Microbot to seek licenses from third parties on terms that may not be reasonable or favorable to Microbot, prevent Microbot from manufacturing, importing or selling its product candidates, or compel Microbot to redesign its product candidates to avoid infringing third parties’ intellectual property. As a result, Microbot may be required to incur substantial costs to prosecute, enforce or defend its intellectual property rights if they are challenged. Any of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business, financial condition and resources or results of operations.

Microbot has the first right, but not the obligation, to control the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of the licensed patents from TRDF. However, there may be situations in which Microbot will not have control over the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of the patents that Microbot licenses, or may not have sufficient ability to consult and input into the patent prosecution and maintenance process with respect to such patents. If Microbot does not control the patent prosecution and maintenance process with respect to the TRDF licensed patents, TRDF may elect to do so but may fail to take the steps that are necessary or desirable in order to obtain, maintain and enforce the licensed patents.

Microbot’s ability to develop intellectual property depends in large part on hiring, retaining and motivating highly qualified design and engineering staff and consultants with the knowledge and technical competence to advance its technology and productivity goals. To protect Microbot’s trade secrets and proprietary information, Microbot has entered into confidentiality agreements with its employees, as well as with consultants and other parties. If these agreements prove inadequate or are breached, Microbot’s remedies may not be sufficient to cover its losses.

Dependence on patent and other proprietary rights and failing to protect such rights or to be successful in litigation related to such rights may result in Microbot’s payment of significant monetary damages or impact offerings in its product portfolios.

Microbot’s long-term success largely depends on its ability to market technologically competitive product candidates. If Microbot fails to obtain or maintain adequate intellectual property protection, it may not be able to prevent third parties from using its proprietary technologies or may lose access to technologies critical to our product candidates. Also, Microbot currently pending or future patent applications may not result in issued patents, and issued patents are subject to claims concerning priority, scope and other issues.

Furthermore, Microbot has not filed applications for all of our patents internationally and it may not be able to prevent third parties from using its proprietary technologies or may lose access to technologies critical to its product candidates in other countries.

Risks Relating to Operations in Israel

Microbot has facilities located in Israel, and therefore, political conditions in Israel may affect Microbot’s operations and results.

Microbot has facilities located in Israel. In addition, threeone of its seven directors, its General Manager and Chief Technology Officer, Chief Medical Officer and its Chief Financial Officer, as well as substantially all of its research and development team and non-management employees, are residents of Israel. Accordingly, political, economic and military conditions in Israel will directly or indirectly affect Microbot’s operations and results. SinceMost recently, for example, the current political situation in Israel where the ruling parties are attempting to implement laws that essentially allow the parliament to enact laws that are preemptively immune to judicial review could adversely affect our business and results of operations. In addition, since the establishment of the State of Israel, a number of armed conflicts have taken place between Israel and its Arab neighbors. An ongoing state of hostility, varying in degree and intensity has led to security and economic problems for Israel. For a number of years there have been continuing hostilities between Israel and the Palestinians. This includes hostilities with the Islamic movement Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which have adversely affected the peace process and at times resulted in armed conflicts. Such hostilities have negatively influenced Israel’s economy as well as impaired Israel’s relationships with several other countries. Israel also faces threats from Hezbollah militants in Lebanon, from ISIS and rebel forces in Syria, from the government of Iran and other potential threats from additional countries in the region. Moreover, some of Israel’s neighboring countries have recently undergone or are undergoing significant political changes. These political, economic and military conditions in Israel could have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth.

Political relations could limit Microbot’s ability to sell or buy internationally.

Microbot could be adversely affected by the interruption or reduction of trade between Israel and its trading partners. Some countries, companies and organizations continue to participate in a boycott of Israeli firms and others doing business with Israel, with Israeli companies or with Israeli-owned companies operating in other countries. Foreign government defense export policies towards Israel could also make it more difficult for us to obtain the export authorizations necessary for Microbot’s activities. Also, over the past several years there have been calls in the United States, Europe and elsewhere to reduce trade with Israel. There can be no assurance that restrictive laws, policies or practices directed towards Israel or Israeli businesses will not have an adverse impact on Microbot’s business.

Israel’s economy may become unstable.

From time to time, Israel’s economy may experience inflation or deflation, low foreign exchange reserves, fluctuations in world commodity prices, military conflicts and civil unrest. For these and other reasons, the government of Israel has intervened in the economy employing fiscal and monetary policies, import duties, foreign currency restrictions, controls of wages, prices and foreign currency exchange rates and regulations regarding the lending limits of Israeli banks to companies considered to be in an affiliated group. The Israeli government has periodically changed its policies in these areas. Reoccurrence of previous destabilizing factors could make it more difficult for Microbot to operate its business and could adversely affect its business.

Exchange rate fluctuations between the U.S. dollar and the NIS currencies may negatively affect Microbot’s operating costs.

A significant portion of Microbot’s expenses are paid in New Israeli Shekels, or NIS, but its financial statements are denominated in U.S. dollars. As a result, Microbot is exposed to the risks that the NIS may appreciate relative to the U.S. dollar, or the NIS instead devalues relative to the U.S. dollar, and the inflation rate in Israel may exceed such rate of devaluation of the NIS, or that the timing of such devaluation may lag behind inflation in Israel. In any such event, the U.S. dollar cost of Microbot’s operations in Israel would increase and Microbot’s U.S. dollar-denominated results of operations would be adversely affected. Microbot cannot predict any future trends in the rate of inflation in Israel or the rate of devaluation (if any) of the NIS against the U.S. dollar.

Microbot’s primary expenses paid in NIS that are not linked to the U.S. dollar are employee expenses in Israel and lease payments on its Israeli facility. If Microbot is unsuccessful in hedging against its position in NIS, a change in the value of the NIS compared to the U.S. dollar could increase Microbot’s research and development expenses, labor costs and general and administrative expenses, and as a result, have a negative impact on Microbot’s profits.

Funding and other benefits provided by Israeli government programs may be terminated or reduced in the future and the terms of such funding may have a significant impact on future corporate decisions.

Microbot participates in programs under the auspices of the Israeli Innovation Authority, for which it receives funding for the development of its technologies and product candidates. If Microbot fails to comply with the conditions applicable to this program, it may be required to pay additional penalties or make refunds and may be denied future benefits. From time to time, the government of Israel has discussed reducing or eliminating the benefits available under this program, and therefore these benefits may not be available in the future at their current levels or at all.

Microbot’s research and development efforts from inception until now have been financed in part through such Israeli Innovation Authority royalty bearing grants in an aggregate amount of approximately $901,000$1,500,000 through December 31, 2016. 2022, In addition, as a result of our 2018 agreement with CardioSert and our 2022 agreement with Nitiloop, we took over the liability to repay CardioSert’s and Nitiloop’s IIA grants in the aggregate amount of approximately $530,000 and $925,000, respectively.

With respect to such grants Microbot is committed to pay royalties at a rate of between 3% to 3.5% on sales proceeds up to the total amount of grants received, linked to the dollar, plus interest at an annual rate of USD LIBOR. In addition, as a recipient of Israeli Innovation Authority grants, Microbot must comply with the requirements of the Israeli Encouragement of Industrial Research and Development Law, 1984, or the R&D Law, and related regulations. Under the terms of the grants and the R&D Law, Microbot is restricted from transferring any technologies, know-how, manufacturing or manufacturing rights developed using Israeli Innovation Authority grants outside of Israel without the prior approval of Israeli Innovation Authority. Therefore, if aspects of its technologies are deemed to have been developed with Israeli Innovation Authority funding, the discretionary approval of an Israeli Innovation Authority committee would be required for any transfer to third parties outside of Israel of the technologies, know-how, manufacturing or manufacturing rights related to such aspects. Furthermore, the Israeli Innovation Authority may impose certain conditions on any arrangement under which it permits Microbot to transfer technology or development outside of Israel or may not grant such approvals at all.

If approved, the transfer of Israeli Innovation Authority -supportedAuthority-supported technology or know-how outside of Israel may involve the payment of significant fees, which will depend on the value of the transferred technology or know-how, the total amount Israeli Innovation Authority funding received by Microbot, the number of years since the funding and other factors. These restrictions and requirements for payment may impair Microbot’s ability to sell its technology assets outside of Israel or to outsource or transfer development or manufacturing activities with respect to any product or technology outside of Israel. Furthermore, the amount of consideration available to Microbot’s shareholders in a transaction involving the transfer of technology or know-how developed with Israeli Innovation Authority funding outside of Israel (such as through a merger or other similar transaction) may be reduced by any amounts that Microbot is required to pay to the Israeli Innovation Authority.

Some of Microbot’s employees and officers are obligated to perform military reserve duty in Israel.

Generally, Israeli adult male citizens and permanent residents are obligated to perform annual military reserve duty up to a specified age. They also may be called to active duty at any time under emergency circumstances, which could have a disruptive impact on Microbot’s workforce.

It may be difficult to enforce a non-Israeli judgment against Microbot or its officers and directors.

The operating subsidiary of the Company is incorporated in Israel. Some of Microbot’s executive officers and directors are not residents of the United States, and a substantial portion of Microbot’s assets and the assets of its executive officers and directors are located outside the United States. Therefore, a judgment obtained against Microbot, or any of these persons, including a judgment based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws, may not be collectible in the United States and may not necessarily be enforced by an Israeli court. It also may be difficult to affect service of process on these persons in the United States or to assert U.S. securities law claims in original actions instituted in Israel. Additionally, it may be difficult for an investor, or any other person or entity, to initiate an action with respect to U.S. securities laws in Israel. Israeli courts may refuse to hear a claim based on an alleged violation of U.S. securities laws reasoning that Israel is not the most appropriate forum in which to bring such a claim. In addition, even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law often involves the testimony of expert witnesses, which can be a time consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in Israel that addresses the matters described above. As a result of the difficulty associated with enforcing a judgment against Microbot in Israel, it may be impossible to collect any damages awarded by either a U.S. or foreign court.

Risks Relating to Microbot’s Securities, Governance and GovernanceOther Matters

Our executive officers and directors, through their ownershipIf we fail to comply with the continued listing requirements of The Nasdaq Capital Market, our common stock can substantially influencemay be delisted and the outcomeprice of matters requiring shareholder approvalour common stock and may prevent youour ability to access the capital markets could be negatively impacted.

Our common stock is currently listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market. In order to maintain that listing, we must satisfy minimum financial and other stockholders from influencing significantcontinued listing requirements and standards, including those regarding director independence and independent committee requirements, minimum stockholders’ equity, minimum share price, and certain corporate decisions, whichgovernance requirements. There can be no assurances that we will be able to comply with the applicable listing standards. In 2018, we effected a 1:15 reverse stock split to address our stock price falling below the minimum share price required by Nasdaq. Failure to again meet applicable Nasdaq continued listing standards could result in conflictsa delisting of interest thatour common stock. A delisting of our common stock from The Nasdaq Capital Market could materially reduce the liquidity of our common stock and result in a corresponding material reduction in the price of our common stock. In addition, delisting could harm our ability to raise capital on terms acceptable to us, or at all, and may result in the potential loss of confidence by investors, employees and fewer business opportunities. Additionally, if we are not eligible for quotation or listing on another exchange, trading of our common stock could be conducted only in the over-the-counter market or on an electronic bulletin board established for unlisted securities such as the OTC Marketplace. In such event, it could become more difficult to dispose of, or obtain accurate price quotations for, our common stock, and there would likely also be a reduction in our coverage by securities analysts and the news media, which could cause the Company’s stock price to decline.

Our executive officers and directors collectively beneficially own shares of Common Stock equal to approximately 41% of our outstanding shares of Common Stock. As a result, such individuals will have the ability, acting together, to substantially influence the election of our directors and the outcome of corporate actions requiring shareholder approval, such as: (i) a merger or a sale of our Company, (ii) a sale of all or substantially all of our assets, and (iii) amendments to our articles of incorporation and bylaws. This concentration of voting power and control could have a significant effect in delaying, deferring or preventing an action that might otherwise be beneficial to our other shareholders and be disadvantageous to our shareholders with interests different from those individuals. These individuals also have significant control over our business, policies and affairs as officers and/or directors of our Company. These stockholders may exert influence in delaying or preventing a change in control of the Company, even if such change in control would benefit the other stockholders of the Company. Lastly, the significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the market value of the Company’s common stock due to investors’ perception that conflicts of interest may exist or arise. Therefore, you should not invest in reliance on your ability to have any control over the Company.decline further.

We do not expect to pay cash dividends on our common stock.

We anticipate that we will retain our earnings, if any, for future growth and therefore do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our Common Stock in the future. Investors seeking cash dividends should not invest in our Common Stock for that purpose.

Anti-takeover provisions in the Company’s charter and bylaws under Delaware law may prevent or frustrate attempts by stockholders to change the board of directors or current management and could make a third-party acquisition of the Company difficult.

Provisions in the Company’s certificate of incorporation and bylaws may delay or prevent an acquisition or a change in management. These provisions include a classified board of directors. In addition, because the Company is incorporated in Delaware, it is governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the DGCL, which prohibits stockholders owning in excess of 15% of outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with the Company. Although the Company believes these provisions collectively will provide for an opportunity to receive higher bids by requiring potential acquirorsacquirers to negotiate with the Company’s board of directors, they would apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some stockholders. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by the Company’s stockholders to replace or remove then current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of the board of directors, which is responsible for appointing members of management.

General Risks

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to the Company’s investors, restrict its operations or require it to relinquish rights to its technologies or product candidates.

Until such time, if ever, as the Company can generate substantial product revenues, it expects to finance its cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, including possibly through its existing At-the-Market offering, licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements, grants and debt financings. The Company does not have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that the Company raises additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of its stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of holder of the Company’s common stock. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting the Company’s ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or other distributions, selling or licensing intellectual property rights, and other operating restrictions that could adversely affect the Company’s ability to conduct its business.

If the Company raises additional funds through licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements, it may have to relinquish valuable rights to its technologies, future revenue streams, research and development programs or product candidates or to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to the Company. If the Company is unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings or other arrangements when needed, it may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate its product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that it would otherwise prefer to develop and market itself.

Microbot operates in a competitive industry and if its competitors have products that are marketed more effectively or develop products, treatments or procedures that are similar, more advanced, safer or more effective, its commercial opportunities will be reduced or eliminated, which would materially harm its business.

Our competitors may develop products, treatments or procedures that directly compete with our products and potential products and which are similar, more advanced, safer or more effective than ours. The medical device industry is very competitive and subject to significant technological and practice changes. Microbot expects to face competition from many different sources with respect to the LIBERTY and other products that it is seeking to develop or commercialize with respect to its other product candidates in the future.

Competing against large established competitors with significant resources may make establishing a market for any products that it develops difficult which would have a material adverse effect on Microbot’s business. Microbot’s commercial opportunities could also be reduced or eliminated if its competitors develop and commercialize products, treatments or procedures quicker, that are safer, more effective, are more convenient or are less expensive than the LIBERTY or any product that Microbot may develop. Many of Microbot’s potential competitors have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than Microbot may have. Mergers and acquisitions in the medical device industry market may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of Microbot’s potential competitors.

Our business strategy in part relies on identifying, acquiring and developing complementary technologies and products, which entails risks which could negatively affect our business, operations and financial condition.

We have in the past and may again in the future pursue other acquisitions of businesses and technologies. Acquisitions entail numerous risks, including:

As part of our growth strategy, we may consider, and from time to time may engage in, discussions and negotiations regarding transactions, such as acquisitions, mergers and combinations within our industry. The purchase price for possible acquisitions could be paid in cash, through the issuance of common stock or other securities, borrowings or a combination of these methods.

We cannot be certain that we will be able to identify, consummate and successfully integrate acquisitions, and no assurance can be given with respect to the timing, likelihood or business effect of any possible transaction. For example, we could begin negotiations that we subsequently decide to suspend or terminate for a variety of reasons. However, opportunities may arise from time to time that we will evaluate. Any transactions that we consummate would involve risks and uncertainties to us. These risks could cause the failure of any anticipated benefits of an acquisition to be realized, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Microbot operations in international markets involve inherent risks that Microbot may not be able to control.

Microbot’s business plan includes the marketing and sale of its proposed product candidates internationally, and specifically in Europe and Israel. Accordingly, Microbot’s results could be materially and adversely affected by a variety of factors relating to international business operations that it may or may not be able to control, including:

Microbot’s financial results may be affected by fluctuations in exchange rates and Microbot’s current currency hedging strategy may not be sufficient to counter such fluctuations.

Microbot’s financial statements are denominated in U.S. dollars and the financial results of the Company are denominated in U.S. dollars, while a significant portion of Microbot’s business is conducted, and a substantial portion of its operating expenses are payable, in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Exchange rate fluctuations may have an adverse impact on Microbot’s future revenues or expenses as presented in the financial statements. Microbot may in the future use financial instruments, such as forward foreign currency contracts, in its management of foreign currency exposure. These contracts would primarily require Microbot to purchase and sell certain foreign currencies with or for U.S. dollars at contracted rates. Microbot may be exposed to a credit loss in the event of non-performance by the counterparties of these contracts. In addition, these financial instruments may not adequately manage Microbot’s foreign currency exposure. Microbot’s results of operations could be adversely affected if Microbot is unable to successfully manage currency fluctuations in the future.

The market price for our Common Stock may be volatile.

The market price for our Common Stock may be volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to factors including the following:

In addition, the securities market has from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are not related to the operating performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also materially and adversely affect the market price of shares of our Common Stock.

The issuance of shares upon exercise of outstanding warrants and options could cause immediate and substantial dilution to existing stockholders.

The issuance of shares upon exercise of warrants and options could result in substantial dilution to the interests of other stockholders since the holders of such warrantssecurities may ultimately convert and sell the full amount issuable on conversion.

Risks Relating to the Merger

Because our determination to purchase Microbot Israel was based in part on certain financial and other projections about future results, and projections are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties, the Merger consideration may be greater than the fair market value of Microbot Israel.

Microbot Israel provided financial and other projections to us in connection with the determination to purchase Microbot Israel and the consideration to be paid for Microbot Israel, and we relied in part on Microbot Israel’s projections for purposes of valuing Microbot Israel and agreeing on the purchase price. The valuation was not necessarily indicative of the actual value of Microbot Israel. Accordingly, if actual financial results in the future are lower than the projections we relied upon, the consideration may be greater than the fair market value of Microbot Israel, as acquired.

We can give no assurance that the financial and other projections we relied upon are accurate and will be met in the future because the projections reflect numerous estimates and assumptions with respect to industry performance, general business, economic, regulatory, market and financial conditions and other matters, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond Microbot Israel’s and our control. As a result, actual results may differ materially from these projections. It is expected that there will be differences between actual and projected results because the projections covered multiple years and such information by its nature becomes less reliable with each successive year.

If the benefits of the acquisition of Microbot Israel do not meet the expectations of the marketplace, or financial or industry analysts, the market price of our common stock may decline.

The market price of our common stock may decline as a result of the Merger if the Microbot Israel subsidiary does not perform as expected or we do not otherwise achieve the perceived benefits of the Merger as rapidly as, or to the extent anticipated by the marketplace or financial or industry analysts. Accordingly, investors may experience a loss as a result of a decreasing stock price and we may not be able to raise future capital, if necessary, in the equity markets.

Any weakness in internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures could result in a loss of investor confidence in our financial reports and lead to a stock price decline.

We are required to evaluate our internal control over financial reporting under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and report the results in our annual report on Form 10-K. We are also required to maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures. After the acquisition of Microbot Israel, our internal controls and our disclosure controls and procedures will need to expand to encompass activities related to those assets. If material weakness arise as a result and they are not remedied, we will be unable to assert that our internal controls are effective. Any failure to have effective internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures covering the combined business post-Merger could cause investors to lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, limit our ability to raise financing or lead to regulatory sanctions, any of which could result in a material adverse effect on our business or decline in the market price of our common stock.

Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments

Not Applicable.

Item 2.Description of Property.

Microbot’s principal executive office is located at 25 Recreation Drive, Unit 108, Hingham, MA 02043. Microbot also hasoccupies facilities in premises of approximately 1,8406,975 square feet at 5 Hamada Street, 2^nd Floor,6 Hayozma St., Yokneam, P.O.B. 242, Israel. Microbot plansThis facility is expected to relocate to a larger facility in Israel within the next 8-18 months, which will provide the space and infrastructure necessary to accommodate its development work based on its current operating plan. Microbot does not own any real property.

Item 3.Legal Proceedings.

From time to time, we may become involved in various lawsuits and legal proceedings, which arise in the ordinary course of business. However, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and an adverse result in these or other matters may arise from time to time that may harm business.

Litigation Resulting from 2017 Financing

We were named as the defendant in a lawsuit captioned Empery Asset Master Ltd., Empery Tax Efficient, LP, Empery Tax Efficient II, LP, Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd., Plaintiffs, against Microbot Medical Inc., Defendant, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York (Index No. 651182/2020). The complaint alleges, among other things, that we breached multiple representations and warranties contained in the SPA, of which the Plaintiffs participated, and fraudulently induced Plaintiffs into signing the Securities Purchase Agreement (the “SPA”) related to our June 8, 2017 equity financing (the “Financing”). The complaint seeks rescission of the SPA and return of the Plaintiffs’ $6.75 million purchase price with respect to the Financing. We are currently in the discovery phase. Management is unable to assess the likelihood that we will succeed at trial with respect to the SPA or the Financing, having previously lost another lawsuit with respect to the Financing.

Alliance Litigation

On April 28, 2019, we brought an action against Alliance Investment Management, Ltd. (“Alliance”), later amended to include Joseph Mona (“Mona”) as a defendant, in the Southern District of New York under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78p(b), to compel Alliance and Mona to disgorge short swing profits realized from purchases and sales of our securities within a period of less than six months. The case is Microbot Medical Inc. v. Alliance Investment Management, Ltd., No. 19-cv-3782-GBD (SDNY). The amount of profits was estimated in the complaint to be approximately $468,000.

On October 28, 2019, Alliance filed a motion for summary judgment requesting that the Court dismiss the claims against Alliance. On February 4, 2020, Mona answered the 16(b) claim we asserted against him by claiming various equitable defenses, and filed a counterclaim against Microbot under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, claiming a net loss on trading Microbot stock of $150,954.

On September 17, 2020, the Court issued a Memorandum Decision & Order that, among other things, granted Alliance’s summary judgment motion.

On March 30, 2021, the Court issued an Order; and on March 31, 2021, the Clerk entered Judgement against Joseph Mona and in favor of Microbot in the amount of $484,614.30. On April 27, 2021, Mona filed an appeal of the Court’s Judgment, which is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

In June 2021, the Magistrate issued an order permitting Mona to file an Amended Counterclaim Complaint, and rejected our request to execute on the Judgment. We filed a response to Mona’s amended counterclaim on July 21, 2021, and in February 2023 filed a motion for summary judgment on Mona’s fraud claim on the basis of inability to demonstrate reliance or loss causation. The motion is scheduled to be fully briefed and submitted on May 1, 2023.

Other than the foregoing, we are not currently a party in any legal proceeding or governmental regulatory proceeding nor are we currently aware of any pending or potential legal proceeding or governmental regulatory proceeding proposed to be initiated against us that would have a material adverse effect on us or our business.

Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

��

Our common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “MBOT” since November 29, 2016. Prior to that, our common stock was traded under the symbol “STEM.” The following table sets forth for the periods indicated, the high and low closing prices of our common stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market.

(1) The Company effected a 1-for-12 reverse stock split on May 6, 2016.

(2) The Company effected a 1-for-9 reverse stock split on November 28, 2016.

As of March 16, 201728, 2023, there were approximately 245102 holders of record of our common stock, and the closing sales price of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Capital Market was $6.11.$2.25.

Dividend Policy

We have never paid cash dividends on our common stock and we do not anticipate paying cash dividends on common stock in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends on our common stock will depend on earnings, financial condition, debt covenants in place, and other business and economic factors affecting us at such time as our Board of Directors may consider relevant. If we do not pay dividends, our common stock may be less valuable because a return on a stockholders’ investment will only occur if our stock price appreciates.

Equity Compensation Plan Information Table

The following table provides information about shares of our common stock that may be issued upon the exercise of options under all of our existing compensation plans as of December 31, 2016.2022.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

In connection with the Merger, the Company issued an aggregate of 26,644,979 shares of Common Stock to the existing shareholders of Microbot Israel and assumed options to purchase an aggregate of 2,614,916 shares of common stock to the existing optionholders of Microbot Israel. Additionally, the Company issued an aggregate of 7,802,639 restricted shares of its Common Stock or rights to receive Common Stock, to certain advisors. Such sales were exempt from registration under Section 4(a)(2) and Regulation D under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the rules promulgated thereunder.

On December 27, 2016, the Company exchanged approximately 9,735,925 shares or rights to acquire shares of its common stock, for approximately 9,736 shares of a newly designated class of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share. The issuance of the 9,736 shares of Preferred Stock was exempt from registration under Section 4(a)(2) and/or 3(a)(9) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the rules promulgated thereunder.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.[Reserved]

This item is not required for a smaller reporting company.

Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

Forward Looking Statements

Certain information contained in this MD&A includes “forward-looking statements.” Statements which are not historical reflect our current expectations and projections about our future results, performance, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations, prospects and opportunities and are based upon information currently available to us and our management and their interpretation of what is believed to be significant factors affecting our existing and proposed business, including many assumptions regarding future events. Actual results, performance, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations, prospects and opportunities could differ materially and perhaps substantially from those expressed in, or implied by, these forward-looking statements as a result of various risks, uncertainties and other factors, including those risks described in detail in the section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K entitled “Risk Factors” as well as elsewhere in this Annual Report.

Forward-looking statements, which involve assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies, and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words “may,” “should,” “would,” “will,” “could,” “scheduled,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “intend,” “seek,” or “project” or the negative of these words or other variations on these words or comparable terminology.

In light of these risks and uncertainties, and especially given the nature of our existing and proposed business, there can be no assurance that the forward-looking statements contained in this section and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K will in fact occur. Potential investors should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Except as expressly required by the federal securities laws, there is no undertaking to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, changed circumstances or any other reason.

Overview

Microbot is a pre-clinical medical device company specializing in the research, design and development of next generation micro-robotics assisted medical technologiesrobotic endoluminal surgery devices targeting the minimally invasive surgery space. Microbot is primarily focused on leveraging its micro-roboticmedical-robotic technologies with the goal of redefining surgical robotics while improving surgical outcomes for patients.

Microbot’s current technological platforms, LIBERTY^®, One & Done^TM, NovaCross™, ViRob^TM and TipCAT^TM, and, are comprised of proprietary innovative technologies. Utilizing the LIBERTY and One & Done^TM platforms, Microbot is currently developing the first ever fully disposable robotic system for various endovascular interventional procedures. In addition, the Company is focused on the development of a Multi Generation Pipeline Portfolio utilizing all of its first two product candidates: the Self Cleaning Shunt, or SCS, for the treatment of hydrocephalus and Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus, or NPH; and TipCAT, a self-propelling, semi-disposable endoscope that is being developed initially for use in colonoscopy procedures. Microbot’s product candidates are being designed to bring greater functionality to conventional medical devices and to reduce the known risks associated with such devices. Microbot is currently aiming to complete pre-clinical studies required for regulatory submission for both product candidates within the next 24 months.proprietary technologies.

Microbot has no products approved for commercial salea patent portfolio of 58 issued/allowed patents and has not generated any revenues from product sales since its inception in 2010. From inception to December 31, 2016, Microbot has raised cash proceeds51 patent applications pending worldwide, of approximately $6,300,000 to fund operations, primarily from government grants, loans,which 6 issued/allowed patents and private placement offerings of debt and equity securities.

Microbot has never been profitable and has incurred significant operating losses in each year since inception. Net losses for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were approximately $9,663,000 and $921,000, respectively. Substantially all of Microbot’s operating losses resulted from expenses incurred in connection with its research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with its operations. As of December 31, 2016, Microbot had a net working capital of approximately $2,532,000, consisting primarily of cash and cash equivalents. Microbot expects to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years as it continues the clinical development of, and seeks regulatory approval for its product candidates. Accordingly, Microbot will continue to require substantial additional capital to continue its clinical development and potential commercialization activities, however, at this time it believes that its net cash will be sufficient to fund its operations for at least 12 months and fund operations necessary to continue development activities of the SCS and TipCAT. The amount and timing of Microbot’s future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including the timing and results of its clinical development efforts.

Estimated completion dates and costs for Microbot’s clinical development and research programs can vary significantly for each current and future product candidate and are difficult to predict. As a result, Microbot cannot estimate with any degree of certainty the costs it will incur in connection with development of its product candidates at this point in time. Microbot anticipates it will make determinations as to which programs and product candidates to pursue and how much funding to direct to each program and product candidate on an ongoing basis in response34 patent applications relate to the scientific success of early research programs, results of ongoing and future clinical trials, its ability to enter into collaborative agreements with respect to programs or potential product candidates, as well as ongoing assessments as to each current or future product candidate’s commercial potential.LIBERTY device.

Financial Operations Overview

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of salaries and related expenses and overhead for Microbot’s research, development and engineering personnel, prototype materials and research studies, obtaining and maintaining Microbot’s patent portfolio. Microbot expenses its research and development costs as incurred.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of the costs associated with management costs ,salaries and benefits, professional fees for accounting, auditing, consulting, and legal services, and allocated overheadinsurance expenses.

Microbot expects that its general and administrative expenses will increase over the long-term, even if a period-to-period comparison may increase in the futureshow a decrease, as it expands its operating activities, maintains and expands its patent portfolio and incurs additional costs associated with the Merger, the preparation of becoming a public company and maintaining compliance with exchange listing and SEC requirements. Microbot expects these potential increases will likely include management costs, legal fees, accounting fees, directors’ and officers’ liability insurance premiums and expenses associated with investor relations.

Income Taxes

Microbot has incurred net losses and has not recorded any income tax benefits for the losses. It is still in its development stage and has not yet generated revenues, therefore, it is more likely than not that sufficient taxable income will not be available for the tax losses to be fully utilized in the future.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

Microbot’s management’sManagement’s discussion and analysis of itsMicrobot’s financial condition and results of operations are based on its consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires Microbot to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements. On an ongoing basis, Microbot evaluates its estimates and judgments, including those related to accrued research and development expenses. Microbot bases its estimates on historical experience, known trends and events, and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

While Microbot’s significant accounting policies are described in more detail in the notes to its consolidated financial statements, Microbot believes the following accounting policies are the most critical for fully understanding and evaluating its consolidated financial condition and results of operations.

Contingencies

Management records and discloses legal contingencies in accordance with ASC Topic 450 Contingencies. A provision is recorded when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company monitors the stage of progress of its litigation matters to determine if any adjustments are required.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company measures the fair value of certain of its financial instruments on a recurring basis.

Foreign Currency Translation

A fair value hierarchy is used to rank the quality and reliability of the information used to determine fair values. Financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value will be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:

Microbot’s functional currency is the U.S. dollars,

Level 1 - Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets and its reporting currency is the U.S. dollar.liabilities.

Government GrantLevel 2 - Inputs other than Level 1 that are observable, either directly or indirectly, such as unadjusted quoted prices for similar assets and Input Tax Credit Recoveries

Microbot from time to time has received, and mayliabilities, unadjusted quoted prices in the future continue to receive, grants frommarkets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the Israeli Innovation Authority to cover eligible company expenditures. These are presented as other income in the statement of operations and comprehensive loss as the grant funds are used for or applied towards a number of Microbot’s operating expenses, such as salaries and benefits, research and development and professional and consulting fees. The recoveries are recognized in the corresponding period when such expenses are incurred.

Research and Development Expenses

Microbot recognizes research and development expenses as incurred, typically estimated based on an evaluationfull term of the progress to completion of specific tasks using data such as clinical site activations, manufacturing steps completed,assets or information providedliabilities.

Level 3 - Unobservable inputs that are supported by vendors on their actual costs incurred. Microbot determines the estimates by reviewing contracts, vendor agreementslittle or no market activity and purchase orders, and through discussions with internal clinical personnel and external service providers asthat are significant to the progress or stage of completion of trials or services and the agreed-upon fee to be paid for such services. These estimates are made as of each balance sheet date based on facts and circumstances known to Microbot at that time. If the actual timingfair value of the performance of servicesassets or the level of effort varies from the estimate, Microbot will adjust the estimate accordingly. Nonrefundable advance payments for goods and services, including fees for process development or manufacturing and distribution of clinical supplies that will be used in future research and development activities, are capitalized as prepaid expenses and recognized as expense in the period that the related goods are consumed or services are performed.liabilities.

Microbot may pay fees to third-parties for manufacturing and other services that are based on contractual milestones that may result in uneven payment flows. There may be instances in which payments made to vendors will exceed the level of services provided and result in a prepayment of the research and development expense.

Results of Operations

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 20162022 and 20152021

The following table sets forth the key components of Microbot’s results of operations for the years ended December 31, 20162022 and 20152021 (in thousands):

Research and Development Expenses. Microbot’s research and development expenses were approximately $948,000$7,736,000 for the year ended December 31, 2016,2022, compared to approximately $823,000$6,153,000 for the same period in 2015.2021. The increase in research and development expenses of approximately $78,000$1,583,000 in 20162022 as compared to 2021 was primarily due to an increase inincreased salaries and recruitment of employees, professional services and material expenses relating to the costLIBERTY project, minimally offset by savings resulting from the suspension of materials.our SCS research program. Microbot expects its research and development expenses to continue to increase over time as Microbot advances its development programs and begins pre-clinical and preparations for clinical trials for SCS and TipCAT.the LIBERTY.

General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses were approximately $8,734,000$5,545,000 for the year ended December 31, 2016,2022, compared to approximately $92,000$5,204,000 for the same period in 2015.2021. The substantial increase in general and administrative expenses of approximately $8,642,000$341,000 in 20162022 as compared to 2021 was primarily due to share basedincreased salaries, share-based compensation, and travel of $676,000, and shares for services issued to consultants relating to our merger with Microbot Medical Ltd., an Israeli company,$777,000, partially offset by a decrease of $436,000 in November 2016 of approximately $7,258,000, as well as legalgovernment fees and professional services paid mainly due to the merger activities.services. Microbot believes its general and administrative expenses may increase over time as it advances its programs, increases itsrequiring additional investments in headcount, facilities and other general and administrative operating activities to support its growth, and incursas it continues to incur expenses associated with being a public company.public-company compliance.

Financing ExpensesIncome. Financing expenses wereincome was approximately $28,000$118,000 for the year ended December 31, 2016,2022, consisting of, income from interest, net totaling $54,000 and an exchange rate gain of $64,000, compared to income of approximately $6,000$44,000 for the same period in 2015. The net increase in financialyear ended December 31, 2021, which consisted mainly of the reversal of $131,000 of other liability stemming from our 2016 merger with StemCells, offset by exchange rate expenses of $87,000.

Capital loss was primarily dueapproximately $5,000 for the year ended December 31, 2022, relating to revaluation and interestassets disposal related to SCS suspension, compared to $0 of Microbot’s convertible loans and changes in fair value of derivative warrants and currency exchange differences.capital loss for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Microbot has incurred losses since inception and negative cash flows from operating activities for the years ended December 31, 20162022 and 2015.2021. As of December 31, 2016,2022 and 2021, Microbot had a net working capital of approximately $2,495,000,$6,745,000 and $13,895,000, respectively, consisting primarily of cash, cash equivalents and cash equivalents.marketable securities. Microbot anticipates that it will continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future as it continues research and development efforts of its product candidates, hires additional staff, including clinical, scientific, operational, financial and management personnel, and incurs additionalcontinues to incur costs associated with being a public company.

Microbot has funded its operations through the issuance of capital stock, grants from the Israeli Innovation Authority, and convertible debt. As ofSince inception (November 2010) through December 31, 2016,2022, Microbot has raised totalnet cash proceeds of approximately $6,300,000, had a shareholders’ deficit of approximately $9,663,000$59,094,000, and incurred a total cumulative loss of approximately $13,035,000$68,761,000. Microbot returned $3,375,000 (before interest) of such proceeds to an investor as a result of an adverse outcome in a litigation that concluded in the first quarter of 2020 and is still subject to an additional lawsuit seeking the return of an additional $6,750,000 of such proceeds. This litigation is in its discovery stages, and we cannot project what the eventual outcome will be, though management is vigorously defending its position that no return of capital is warranted.

Microbot Israel obtained from inception (November 2010) tothe Israeli Innovation Authority (“IIA”) grants for participation in research and development for the years 2013 through December 31, 2016.2022 in the total amount of approximately $1,500,000 and, in return, Microbot Israel is obligated to pay royalties amounting to 3%-3.5% of its future sales up to the amount of the grant. The grant is linked to the exchange rate of the dollar to the New Israeli Shekel and bears interest at an annual rate of USD LIBOR. Under the terms of the grant and applicable law, Microbot is restricted from transferring any technologies, know-how, manufacturing or manufacturing rights developed using the grant outside of Israel without the prior approval of the Israel Innovation Authority. Microbot has no obligation to repay the grant, if the SCS project fails, is unsuccessful or aborted before any sales are generated. The financial risk is assumed completely by the IIA. In addition, in February 2023, Microbot Israel was awarded an NIS 300,000 grant from Israel’s Ministry of Economy to encourage the Company’s marketing activities and enhance the commercialization of the LIBERTY Robotic System in the US market, within the scope of its “Smart Money” program.

To date, we have not generated revenues from our operations. As of December 31, 2022, we had unrestricted cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of approximately $8,202,000, excluding encumbered cash, which management believes is sufficient to fund our operations for less than four months from the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. However, in the event we are unsuccessful in our current litigation discussed above, pursuant to which certain investors are seeking the return of $6,750,000 in proceeds we received from them in a 2017 stock offering, we will not have funds to continue our operation. As a result of the sale of certain of the assets of StemCells, on November 29, 2016, Microbot raised approximately $2.8 million inforegoing and our current cash after taking into account the payment of $495,000 to certain StemCells employees but excluding $400,000 held in escrow to satisfy any indemnification claims of the buyer of the assets. Additionally, subsequent to December 31, 2016, we sold an aggregate of 700,000 shares of our common stock for net proceeds, after deducting placement agent fees and expenses, of approximately $3.25 million. As a result of such cash, Microbot believes that its net cash will be sufficient to fund its operations for at least 12 months and fund operations necessaryposition, these conditions raise substantial doubt about Microbot’s ability to continue development activities ofas a going concern beyond approximately the SCSnext 4 months, which could adversely affect our ability to raise capital, expand our business and TipCAT.develop our planned products.

Microbot plans to continue to fund its research and development and other operating expenses, other development activities relating to additional product candidates, and the associated losses from operations, through its existing cash and possibly additional grants. Microbot intends to also raise capital through future issuances of debt and/or equity securities and possibly additional grantsincluding registered offerings under its existing Registration Statement on Form S-3 for up to $75 million of securities, which it may draw down from the Israeli Innovation Authority.time to time subject to limitations on our use of Registration Statements on Form S-3 as a result of our public float. The capital raises from issuances of convertible debt and equity securities could result in additional dilution to Microbot’s shareholders. In addition, to the extent Microbot determines to incur additional indebtedness, Microbot’s incurrence of additional debt could result in debt service obligations and operating and financing covenants that would restrict its operations. Microbot can provide no assurance that financing will be available in the amounts it needs or on terms acceptable to it, if at all. If Microbot is not able to secure adequate additional working capital when it becomes needed, it may be required to make reductions in spending, extend payment terms with suppliers, liquidate assets where possible and/or suspend or curtail planned research programs. Any of these actions could materially harm Microbot’s business.

Cash Flows

The following table provides a summary of the net cash flow activity for each of the periods set forth belowpresented (in thousands):

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 20162022 and 20152021

Cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 20162022 was approximately $786,000, calculated by adjusting$11,549,000, compared to $9,354,000 in 2021. The increase was primarily from higher net loss from operations by approximately $9,663,000losses in 2022, mostly related to eliminate non-cashincrease in research and expense items not involvingdevelopment relating to LIBERTY.

Net cash flows such as depreciation and accumulated interest on convertible loans, as well as other changesfrom investing activities increased in assets and liabilities resulting2022 compared to 2021 primarily from the net purchases of marketable securities in non-cash adjustments in the income statement. Cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2015 was approximately $765, similarly adjusted by approximately $921,000. 2022.

Net cash provided byflows from financing activities of approximately $3,083,000 for the year ended December 31, 2016 consisted of proceeds from the sale of convertible promissory notes to existing shareholders of Microbot and net proceeds from assets and liabilities acquired as a result of the merger which was accounted for as a reverse capitalization, comparedincreased in 2022 to approximately $2,002,000$4,324,000 due to the issuance of common stock and warrants to an institutional investor in the year ended December 31, 2015.

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

Microbot has no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changesOctober 2022. The Company did not raise capital in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.2021.

Contractual Obligations

In the table below, we set forth our legally binding and enforceable contractual cash obligations at December 31, 2016 (in thousands).

Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Interest Rate Risk

Microbot’s cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 20162022 consisted of readily available checking and money market funds. Microbot’s primary exposure to market risk is interest income sensitivity, which is affected by changes in the general level of U.S. interest rates. However, because of the short-term nature of the instruments in Microbot’s portfolio, a sudden change in market interest rates would not be expected to have a material impact on Microbot’s financial condition and/or results of operations. Microbot does not believe that its cash or cash equivalents have significant risk of default or illiquidity. While Microbot believes its cash and cash equivalents do not contain excessive risk, Microbot cannot provide absolute assurance that in the future its investments will not be subject to adverse changes in market value. In addition, Microbot maintains significant amounts of cash and cash equivalents at one or more financial institutions that are in excess of federally insured limits.

Foreign Exchange Risks

Our financial statements are denominated in U.S. dollars and financial results are denominated in U.S. dollars, while a significant portion of our business is conducted, and a substantial portion of our operating expenses are payable, in currencies other than the U.S. dollar.

Exchange rate fluctuations may have an adverse impact on our future revenues, if any, or expenses as presented in the financial statements. We may in the future use financial instruments, such as forward foreign currency contracts, in its management of foreign currency exposure. These contracts would primarily require us to purchase and sell certain foreign currencies with or for U.S. dollars at contracted rates. We may be exposed to a credit loss in the event of non-performance by the counterparties of these contracts. In addition, these financial instruments may not adequately manage our foreign currency exposure. Our results of operations could be adversely affected if we are unable to successfully manage currency fluctuations in the future.

Effects of Inflation

Inflation generally affects Microbot by increasing its clinical trial costs.research and development expenses. Microbot does not believe that inflation and changing prices had a significant impact on its results of operations for any periods presented herein.herein, but may have a significant, adverse impact in 2023.

Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

The consolidated financial statements and supplementary data required by this item are included in this Annual Report on FromForm 10-K immediately following Part IV and are incorporated herein by reference.

Item 9.Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

None.

Item 9A.Controls and Procedures.

Disclosure Controls and Procedures. We maintain a system of disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act). As required by Rule 13a-15(b) under the Exchange Act, management of the Company, under the direction of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, reviewed and performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of December 31, 2016.2022. Based on that review and evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, along with the management of the Company, have determined that as of December 31, 2016,2022, the disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance 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 were effective to provide reasonable assurance 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 disclosures.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a – 15(f) of the Exchange Act). There are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any internal control, including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls. Accordingly, even effective internal controls can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation. Further, because of changes in conditions, the effectiveness of internal control may vary over time. We have assessed the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a -15(f) of the Exchange Act) as of December 31, 2016,2022, and have concluded that, as of December 31, 2016,2022, our internal control over financial reporting was effective.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of our registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by our registered public accounting firm pursuant to the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit us to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting, identified in connection with the evaluation of such internal control that occurred during our last fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Item 9B. Other Information.

None.

Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections.

None.

Item 9B.Other Information.

None.

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance.